Contested Possession Count - Perhaps its deliberate?

[vinum coupe]

I posted something about this in another thread.

"Also heard Mooney talk about it today.

He said contested footy stats are not just at the ball up etc.
He said they are winning that.

It's the loose ball that is also considered a contested possession. And that's what Geelong are losing. Which points to them not spreading properly."


Can someone tell me what our average clearances were last year compared to this year?
That's the critical stat. You can't win big games if you're getting smashed in that area.

 

[Aussiemac82]

2011 Stats
Avg CP 151
3rd

Avg CL 37
13th

2012 Stats
Avg CP 140
13th

Avg CL 37
10th

I think they include our finals.

http://www.afl.com.au/stats/tabid/73/default.aspx#page=team

AFL stats page

 

[vinum coupe]

So there you go. Clearances haven't changed.
Thanks for that.

 

[Farmer2Goggin]

2011 Stats
Avg CP 151
3rd

Avg CL 37
13th

2012 Stats
Avg CP 140
13th

Avg CL 37
10th

I think they include our finals.

http://www.afl.com.au/stats/tabid/73/default.aspx#page=team

AFL stats page

This pretty much backs up what Scott said in 2011 - was concerned about our clearances but we were strong in contested possession. So whilst we were 13th in clearances we were strong in contested possession and in points for and points against.
Translated into 3 losses and a Flag - take that every day of the week.

Switch to 2012 and we are still crap at clearances ( 10th) but now we are 13th for contested possession and well down on points for and points against. Translates into 4 losses so far and more to come if we don't reverse these trends.

Off the top I'd say our mids are under more pressure and this has affected delivery to Pods and Hawkins ( less contested marks) , the output of our small forwards is down ( winning less ball) , missing Otto and Ling big time, playing more kids as opposed to hardened bodies ( winning less contests)
Not sure about our performance on the spread - I would have thought this was more an indicator of uncontested possession?

As far as the OP is concerned I doubt this is deliberate as winning CP is so vital in winning the game , as we have seen to date.

 

[you pick one]

This pretty much backs up what Scott said in 2011 - was concerned about our clearances but we were strong in contested possession. So whilst we were 13th in clearances we were strong in contested possession and in points for and points against.
Translated into 3 losses and a Flag - take that every day of the week.

Switch to 2012 and we are still crap at clearances ( 10th) but now we are 13th for contested possession and well down on points for and points against. Translates into 4 losses so far and more to come if we don't reverse these trends.

Off the top I'd say our mids are under more pressure and this has affected delivery to Pods and Hawkins ( less contested marks) , the output of our small forwards is down ( winning less ball) , missing Otto and Ling big time, playing more kids as opposed to hardened bodies ( winning less contests)
Not sure about our performance on the spread - I would have thought this was more an indicator of uncontested possession?

As far as the OP is concerned I doubt this is deliberate as winning CP is so vital in winning the game , as we have seen to date.

The other thing that must be hurting us to go with the above, from the same stats sheet, is we are second as far as clangers go behind the Lions.
And I reckon a good few have been down back this year resulting in those easy turn over goals that I thought we had well and truly under control in 2011.

 

[kanyewest]

So there you go. Clearances haven't changed.
Thanks for that.

What does that mean?

For one, year to year stats are almost completely misleading. Obviously, they don't give any indication of the games in which we won or lost the clearances, and they also don't account for the fact that the number of average stoppages in any given year is different. What matters is the statistic in each game v the opposition, which I understand is available on the AFL site.

At any rate, even if our clearance work hasn't changed much, doesn't that show it's a pretty misleading statistic to begin with? That is, if we aren't playing as well this year as we did last year, and we are having the same number of clearances, it must be something else causing the decline in the performance? For example, contested possessions...

For what it's worth, agree with you pick one about our poor disposal / turn over goals this year. Clearly that is one other part of the problem.

Edit: I re-read your first post and figured your point was that our clearance work is still the same as last year, and therefore the contested possession stat is reflective of our inability to win the loose ball. On that point, I would simply say (sitting in my comfortable armchair) that Mooney is wrong. The problem is deeper than simply our inability to spread.

 

[footscore]

Stephenson showed more last week. Confident he can give more around the stoppages and get his hands on the ball a bit more. I love the way Maric has gone about it this year and think Orren can do the same. If he can raise his avg from 3ish up to around 7 or 8sh that would be a big help.

agree and in his past 2 matches he's averaged 11 disposals (5 contested), 73% disposal efficiency, 5 marks & 23 hitouts

May just have been a case of finding the right match fitness in order to compete at the highest level.
If he can keep improving....he's not going to be an average good ruckman, he could very well become our no.1 ruck by finals time.

 

[hamG]

If you listen to the SEN interview with CS he makes almost the point of the OP.

Not withstanding that if you lose the CP count by a massive margin, you will probably lose the game consistently.

However, you can have a CP that goes straight to an opposition player for a clearance - so what real value is that stat in regards to direct team success.

CS mentioned - in a round about way - that whilst the CP is something they recognise they are not selling out the game plan just to increase the CP stat count - rather they are focusing on efficiency of ball use.

He would go further than that but I reckon there is something they are doing - and its a work in progress but just like the forward press, zone and the phone box, it takes times to enforce and even longer for the opposition to pick up on.

Its an interesting tactic and with CS's approach to everything else, I for one am certain to give him the latitude and time to test his theory. Especially if he is training up the new breed of Geelong players with under 20 games in how whatever it is works...

Just a theory from a tired old prick on the other side of the world but might be right...

Go Catters

Bringing more attention to your post because this is the reason why.

Frankly if the media wasn't so obsessed with reporting the contested possession stat I wouldn't even notice we were 'losing' it.

Also we are ruining Fox Footy's formula for success thing by losing the contested possession count each week.

 

[vinum coupe]

What does that mean?

For one, year to year stats are almost completely misleading. Obviously, they don't give any indication of the games in which we won or lost the clearances, and they also don't account for the fact that the number of average stoppages in any given year is different. What matters is the statistic in each game v the opposition, which I understand is available on the AFL site.

At any rate, even if our clearance work hasn't changed much, doesn't that show it's a pretty misleading statistic to begin with? That is, if we aren't playing as well this year as we did last year, and we are having the same number of clearances, it must be something else causing the decline in the performance? For example, contested possessions...

For what it's worth, agree with you pick one about our poor disposal / turn over goals this year. Clearly that is one other part of the problem.

Edit: I re-read your first post and figured your point was that our clearance work is still the same as last year, and therefore the contested possession stat is reflective of our inability to win the loose ball. On that point, I would simply say (sitting in my comfortable armchair) that Mooney is wrong. The problem is deeper than simply our inability to spread.

Fair enough you don't agree with Moons. I've been looking for answers too.

And though it was pertinent. Especially as Scott was probed about the contested stat. And sort of said they are working on 'other' stuff. And didn't think contested stats we the be all, end all.

 

[kanyewest]

Frankly if the media wasn't so obsessed with reporting the contested possession stat I wouldn't even notice we were 'losing' it.

Also we are ruining Fox Footy's formula for success thing by losing the contested possession count each week.

The media is only obsessed with it because just about every AFL coach and player has stressed the importance of the statistic for the last 5 years - including Geelong. I agree with the thing about Fox Footy though. Those formulas are just inane. Still, I do love watching David King pretend like he is some kind of hero for coming up with something so obvious.

Fair enough you don't agree with Moons. I've been looking for answers too.

And though it was pertinent. Especially as Scott was probed about the contested stat. And sort of said they are working on 'other' stuff. And didn't think contested stats we the be all, end all.

I understand why Chris Scott is trying to explain the statistic away. It makes sense to say things aren't actually as bad as they seem. But at the end of the day, I just don't think this whole disposal efficiency thing will stack up. If the better teams are winning the first possession, we won't be getting the ball back, and it doesn't matter about how good we are on the outside of the contest. As Chris Scott has said himself, I'd just rather the ball go our way more often than not.

Incidentally, on AFL 360 they are talking about this very issue now. Suggesting Geelong are focusing more on creating turnovers and pressuring the opposition players who win the ball first. At least, I think that's what they are saying. All these theories are too complicated for me. I'm more of a get-ball, kick-ball, kind of guy.

 

[witsend]

There is no way we have a deliberate tactic of not getting the ball first.
It's just oo many kids...not enough hard bodies.
That will change for the better soon, but won't be as good as last year without Ottens and Ling.
Watch the Finals DVD from 2011 and see how many times Ling just muscles a kick out of congestion or Ottens fires a handpass out on his knees.
Come finals you will see Chapman, Corey, Selwood, Bartel, Kelly, SJ and Bundy rotating through the middle constantly with T. Hunt as the tagger. Put Wojo, Varcoe and Menzel in the 22 and the entire dynamic changes.
At the moment we are not using those older players as battering rams. It's too early. I think CS and MC has decided that we must risk losing a few more games if it means the 28+ brigade is in shape for one last Finals hurrah!

 

[vinum coupe]

I understand why Chris Scott is trying to explain the statistic away. It makes sense to say things aren't actually as bad as they seem. But at the end of the day, I just don't think this whole disposal efficiency thing will stack up. If the better teams are winning the first possession, we won't be getting the ball back, and it doesn't matter about how good we are on the outside of the contest. As Chris Scott has said himself, I'd just rather the ball go our way more often than not.

Incidentally, on AFL 360 they are talking about this very issue now. Suggesting Geelong are focusing more on creating turnovers and pressuring the opposition players who win the ball first. At least, I think that's what they are saying. All these theories are too complicated for me. I'm more of a get-ball, kick-ball, kind of guy.

It's exactly what I think they are doing.

And they would obviously want to win the ball first.
Mut maybe they have looked at the pattern of scoring (guessing) and said "right, scoring from turnovers has gone up 20% across the league. Scoring from XXXX has dropped 20%. Let's concentrate on it. As it would seem that by next year it will have gone up another 10%"

Like I say, guessing. But that would certainly be ahead of the curve thinking.

 

[Vdubs]

There is no way we have a deliberate tactic of not getting the ball first.
It's just oo many kids...not enough hard bodies.
That will change for the better soon, but won't be as good as last year without Ottens and Ling.
Watch the Finals DVD from 2011 and see how many times Ling just muscles a kick out of congestion or Ottens fires a handpass out on his knees.
Come finals you will see Chapman, Corey, Selwood, Bartel, Kelly, SJ and Bundy rotating through the middle constantly with T. Hunt as the tagger. Put Wojo, Varcoe and Menzel in the 22 and the entire dynamic changes.
At the moment we are not using those older players as battering rams. It's too early. I think CS and MC has decided that we must risk losing a few more games if it means the 28+ brigade is in shape for one last Finals hurrah!

Agree with all your points.
We still have 5 wins despite our inglorious stats. Though we have lost more games already now than we did all last season, some of our wins last year were fortunate rather than deserved, and it is perhaps balancing out this year.
Roos said we're winning because of the talent we still have rather than great teamwork, so when we finally do start to click, we will be formidable.
Even I am not worried, yet. We are performing very much according to our available personnel . CS strikes me as very innovative and academic when it comes to trends in football, and would not be surprised if he is hatching something that is again ahead of the pack.

 

[AM]

Agree with all your points.
We still have 5 wins despite our inglorious stats. Though we have lost more games already now than we did all last season, some of our wins last year were fortunate rather than deserved, and it is perhaps balancing out this year.
Roos said we're winning because of the talent we still have rather than great teamwork, so when we finally do start to click, we will be formidable.
Even I am not worried, yet. We are performing very much according to our available personnel . CS strikes me as very innovative and academic when it comes to trends in football, and would not be surprised if he is hatching something that is again ahead of the pack.

Will it have hatched before the final 8 is settled?

The coach is clearly concerned about our clearance work. He’s spoken extensively about that concern for a long time now. And in his comments he’s not only referred to hard ball gets but other contested and uncontested elements too. Throw in him taking the players aside immediately after the Doggies game to again emphasise his unease about our efforts around the action and you can see he is extremely concerned about that key area of our game.

As you say he’s a thinker and I’d be confident he’s working on other strategies too but for people to hint that our poor return around the action isn’t front and centre in Chris’s mind is misreading the situation IMO.

 

[Vdubs]

Will it have hatched before the final 8 is settled?

The coach is clearly concerned about our clearance work. He’s spoken extensively about that concern for a long time now. And in his comments he’s not only referred to hard ball gets but other contested and uncontested elements too. Throw in him taking the players aside immediately after the Doggies game to again emphasise his unease about our efforts around the action and you can see he is extremely concerned about that key area of our game.

As you say he’s a thinker and I’d be confident he’s working on other strategies too but for people to hint that our poor return around the action isn’t front and centre in Chris’s mind is misreading the situation IMO.

It was a concern last year to a lesser extent. Is there anything that can be done about it? We have lost 4 games, and are virtually last in CP and clearances this year. So far. So if and when it improves, we should see some more wins. Otherwise status quo. As I see it, very simplistically of course, we only have one Selwood that can play seniors, Bundy and Kelly have been missing, Bartel plays elsewhere a lot, Corey has become less potent, and we just don't have mature enough gun mids that can immediately change this situation. It's clearly not a tactic, and it would be a concern for MC, but we are slowly starting to become more like 2011 Cats, and once we have Kelly and Bundy back, let alone, TV, Wojo etc, things will have to improve.

And if not, stiff, we look at the 8 from outside it.

 

[witsend]

Will it have hatched before the final 8 is settled?

The coach is clearly concerned about our clearance work. He’s spoken extensively about that concern for a long time now. And in his comments he’s not only referred to hard ball gets but other contested and uncontested elements too. Throw in him taking the players aside immediately after the Doggies game to again emphasise his unease about our efforts around the action and you can see he is extremely concerned about that key area of our game.

As you say he’s a thinker and I’d be confident he’s working on other strategies too but for people to hint that our poor return around the action isn’t front and centre in Chris’s mind is misreading the situation IMO.

My reading of CS stems from a statement he made in this week's Tweet The Coach.
Essentially he is saying that we are planning to peak in September no matter what.
He pretty much said he would rather fail to make the 8 whilst planning to win a Flag than make the 8 and not be able to truly challenge. You can do that when you win 3 from 5 and have an awesome list of kids!

 

[Goggin Our Best]

There are far too many stats-you were supposed to have so many tackles in a game -when Blight was in the commentary last year he said that was garbage -because if you had the ball -then your focus wouldnt be tackling

I think why we aernt winning the contested possession -comes down to human nature-if you were 28 or 29 and had 3 premierships to your name -you would tend to cruise a bit in the early part of the season -and just do enough to win these games-theve been there done that . You contrast that to say Richmond -30 years of nothing, Essendon -10 years in the wilderness, West Coast -humilated with a wooden spoon -its only human nature that these sides are going to be more desperate in the early part of the season

Come September -you need Class players which Geelong has got -i think Scott knows exactly what he is doing -because the Brisbane team use to time their run -i dont think they won the minor premiership -in any of their flag winning years

 

[you pick one]

Will it have hatched before the final 8 is settled?

The coach is clearly concerned about our clearance work. He’s spoken extensively about that concern for a long time now. And in his comments he’s not only referred to hard ball gets but other contested and uncontested elements too. Throw in him taking the players aside immediately after the Doggies game to again emphasise his unease about our efforts around the action and you can see he is extremely concerned about that key area of our game.

As you say he’s a thinker and I’d be confident he’s working on other strategies too but for people to hint that our poor return around the action isn’t front and centre in Chris’s mind is misreading the situation IMO.

I thought Scott said that wasn't the reason he took them aside after the game Friday night,it was simple to reinforce what was expected of them with the weekend off.

 

[AM]

I thought Scott said that wasn't the reason he took them aside after the game Friday night,it was simple to reinforce what was expected of them with the weekend off.

Well you didn't pay attention to the full explanation or to the post game comments of the players, picky.

 

[you pick one]

Well you didn't pay attention to the full explanation or to the post game comments of the players, picky.

4 minutes 10 into Scotts post match presser still up on bigpond says you are wrong.

 

[AM]

4 minutes 10 into Scotts post match presser still up on bigpond says you are wrong.

The coach said in a media interview after the game -not sure whether it was radio or TV – that he wanted to grab the players immediately after the game due to there being a long break to the next meeting because of it being a Friday game. He mentioned a reason was to focus on the contested ball issue not only the negative but the positive – the way it was turned around in the last quarter.

Harry Taylor confirmed that as being the major focus in an interview on 774 post game.

You’re beginning to sound like your alter ego. It’s not a good look. Snap out of it!

 

[you pick one]

The coach said in a media interview after the game -not sure whether it was radio or TV – that he wanted to grab the players immediately after the game due to there being a long break to the next meeting because of it being a Friday game. He mentioned a reason was to focus on the contested ball issue not only the negative but the positive – the way it was turned around in the last quarter.

Harry Taylor confirmed that as being the major focus in an interview on 774 post game.

You’re beginning to sound like your alter ego. It’s not a good look. Snap out of it!

http://bigpondvideo.com/afl/453296/chris scott post-match (rd9)/

Thats all I got to work on If he's said something different somewhere else I didn't hear it.

 

[AM]

http://bigpondvideo.com/afl/453296/chris%20scott%20post-match%20(rd9)/

Thats all I got to work on If he's said something different somewhere else I didn't hear it.

One of the disadvantages of being located in Brisbane I guess. The coach, players and officials generally do more interviews than one post match presser. Many more.

Following is the Harry Taylor post match interview where he mentions the contested ball matter being the discussion point.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-05-25/interview-harry-taylor/4034542

 

[you pick one]

One of the disadvantages of being located in Brisbane I guess. The coach, players and officials generally do more interviews than one post match presser. Many more.

Following is the Harry Taylor post match interview where he mentions the contested ball matter being the discussion point.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-05-25/interview-harry-taylor/4034542

Thanks for the link interesting Chris and Harries version of the meeting are so at odds.Time to move on Have a nice day Ammo.

 

[AM]

Thanks for the link interesting Chris and Harries version of the meeting are so at odds.Time to move on Have a nice day Ammo.

In the interview I heard Chris was on the same page as Harry. He confirmed clearance work was spoken about in the post match meeting. Just can't readily recall who was interviewing him when he said it. If the interview comes to mind I'll see if I can find it and post the link as I don't think it's fair on either to leave the impression that player and coach were at odds.