- Jul 14, 2005
- 18,723
- 29,562
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Chelsea FC
- Banned
- #1,751
Huge respect for Arrow for getting into the Christmas spirit and trying to help out the less fortunate during the festive season.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ill just stick to the facts thanks anyway
Let's look at those facts prior to this year
Flag winners and where they ranked for tackles
2013 Hawks 8th
2014 Hawks 16th
2015 Hawks 10th
2016 Dogs 12th
2017 Tigers 7th
2018 Eagles 15th
2019 Tigers 11th
2020 Tigers 8th
So your statement was that higher tackles were critical and a function on a better gameplan
Does that mean these side should not have won the flag and had a bad gameplan?
No one is saying that. You keep avoiding the issue which is your tackle numbers are poor and that is not what should be happening.
No, no, never avoided that our tackle numbers were poor, just like the Demon tackle numbers were poor in 2019-20.
What i am stating is that you don't need elite tackle numbers to play finals nor win a flag and or improving those tackle numbers in one offseason with a more adequate gameplan, rather than having to teach men how to tackle
Thank goodness glad to see we can finally agree.
If you can improve your numbers by 6-10 per game you will be heaps more competitive.
Defensive pressure the length of the ground seems to be pretty crucial nowadays. Forcing turnovers in the midfield and the forward line is vital to creation of second and third chances for forwards. I expect all 18 teams committed to this with greater or lesser success.
My eyes told me that Carlton were simply not good enough at applying pressure and poor at resisting it. Whether it is the attitude of some Carlton players, lack of aerobic fitness or carrying injury or the unknown combination of the above it was clear, to me at least, the better teams enjoyed playing Carlton.
I am aware plenty of Carlton fans have high hopes for younger players like Dow, Setterfield, Kennedy and LOB. Attitude and/or absence of aerobic capacity and general ability limits have cooled the jets of their careers.
Martin, Williams and McGovern are seniors on the list but are not renowned for their ability to apply pressure.
I really expect 2022 will be a key transition year for the Blues. Voss will rightly demand sharp improvements in defensive pressure as well as contested ball. I do not think it unreasonable to suggest there may be a clean out at season's end of those who fail to improve.
Defensive pressure the length of the ground seems to be pretty crucial nowadays. Forcing turnovers in the midfield and the forward line is vital to creation of second and third chances for forwards. I expect all 18 teams committed to this with greater or lesser success.
My eyes told me that Carlton were simply not good enough at applying pressure and poor at resisting it. Whether it is the attitude of some Carlton players, lack of aerobic fitness or carrying injury or the unknown combination of the above it was clear, to me at least, the better teams enjoyed playing Carlton.
I am aware plenty of Carlton fans have high hopes for younger players like Dow, Setterfield, Kennedy and LOB. Attitude and/or absence of aerobic capacity and general ability limits have cooled the jets of their careers.
Martin, Williams and McGovern are seniors on the list but are not renowned for their ability to apply pressure.
I really expect 2022 will be a key transition year for the Blues. Voss will rightly demand sharp improvements in defensive pressure as well as contested ball. I do not think it unreasonable to suggest there may be a clean out at season's end of those who fail to improve.
Think you missed the most important factor, a contested focused gameplan, rather than attack first and foremost gameplan
So, in 2017 the Eagles averaged 63.4 tackles per game (3rd worst in the league - nobody averaged less than 61). They finished 8th on the ladder and lost in the semis.Thank goodness glad to see we can finally agree.
If you can improve your numbers by 6-10 per game you will be heaps more competitive.
So, in 2017 the Eagles averaged 63.4 tackles per game (3rd worst in the league - nobody averaged less than 61). They finished 8th on the ladder and lost in the semis.
In 2018 they averaged less tackles (61 - 4th worst in the league). They finished 2nd on the ladder and won the flag, yet according to your theory (which you seem reluctant to budge on despite the growing mountain of proof), West Coast should have done better in 2017.
Conversely, in 2018 Gold Coast averaged 69.3 tackles per game (2nd best) and came 2nd last with 4 wins. That's 8 more per game than the previous year when they also finished 2nd last with 6 wins. According to your theory they should've been more competitive in 2018 with all those extra tackles.
It's almost like there's no correlation at all between tackle numbers and success.
Nope. Totally different list, comparing 2017 eagles to 2021 Carlton is like a ferrari vs datsun. Carlton dont have the players to be a poor tackling team West Coast obviously did.
What?Nope. Totally different list, comparing 2017 eagles to 2021 Carlton is like a ferrari vs datsun. Carlton dont have the players to be a poor tackling team West Coast obviously did.
Now you are backtracking
This will end poorly if you keep going, it will be like changing feet
Compare whatever you want. Look at as many years as you want and look at top 4 teams vs bottom 4 teams and look at where they ranked for both average tackles and tackle differential. None of it will stack up. There will be no pattern to support a theory.Nope. Totally different list, comparing 2017 eagles to 2021 Carlton is like a ferrari vs datsun. Carlton dont have the players to be a poor tackling team West Coast obviously did.
Nope, I'm going fine, whereas solely blaming the coach's game plan for chronic under performing is really poor.
Compare whatever you want. Look at as many years as you want and look at top 4 teams vs bottom 4 teams and look at where they ranked for both average tackles and tackle differential. None of it will stack up. There will be no pattern to support a theory.
Enjoy.
Actually everyone sees your blaming Teague's game plan as a fail.You just contradicted yourself again. You stated that a better gameplan would allow higher tackle numbers, but we can't blame the poor gameplan. Told you, you would dig yourself deeper
All you did was look at the stats of this year, and made a claim, without any research.
Based on the facts that were presented, your claim is a massive fail, everyone in this thread knows it, BF would see it as a fail, the greater footy community would see it as a fail.
For your sack mate, just stop
That's not a thing.Some clubs have proved they have the ability and list composition to sustain low tackle numbers and still be successful, that's not you. Lack of tackles just exacerbates your list problem, further, it contributes to the lack of competitiveness because your not putting enough pressure on the ball carrier.
So, in 2017 the Eagles averaged 63.4 tackles per game (3rd worst in the league - nobody averaged less than 61). They finished 8th on the ladder and lost in the semis.
In 2018 they averaged less tackles (61 - 4th worst in the league). They finished 2nd on the ladder and won the flag, yet according to your theory (which you seem reluctant to budge on despite the growing mountain of proof), West Coast should have done better in 2017.
Conversely, in 2018 Gold Coast averaged 69.3 tackles per game (2nd best) and came 2nd last with 4 wins. That's 8 more per game than the previous year when they also finished 2nd last with 6 wins. According to your theory they should've been more competitive in 2018 with all those extra tackles.
It's almost like there's no correlation at all between tackle numbers and success.
And you generally need high tackle numbers to have a good tackle differential.Further to this;
2018 Eagles were first in the comp for average kicks and marks differential over their opponents but only mid-table for tackles. They were a team that played a kick-mark game to retain possession and make use of their strengths in that area around the ground, and their quality forward marking targets.
2019 & 2020 Tigers were #1 for average tackle differential in the comp, but bottom 4 for average clearance differential. They weren't a strong clearance or contested possession side, so they setup to apply tackle pressure to force turnovers to regain possession.
2021 Demons were #1 for i50s, hit-outs, contested possession, contested marks, marks i50 and metres gained. They were only mid-table for clearances and tackles though. They're a strong contested ball side so were able to win the disputed ball instead of tackling the opposition player.
If you want a stat the Premiers are consistently Top-4 in over the last few years? Turnover differential.
Demons were 2nd, Tigers were 2nd (2020), 3rd (2019) and 1st (2017), Eagles were 2nd, Hawks 4th.
Bulldogs 2016 was the only team not to be Top-4 in that stat since Footywire starts recording it in 2015 that won a Premiership, and their season was in many ways an anomaly.
Tackles are a good indicator of tackling, that's about it.
And you generally need high tackle numbers to have a good tackle differential.
Not hard enough in the eyes of Williams and Parkin I guess.Surprised we never gave it to Robert Harvey