Contested Possession

Remove this Banner Ad

DerpWerls

DerpWerls

Something
Veteran Pokemon is Life Richmond Tigers - Mark Coughlan 2009 Player Sponsor
Jan 5, 2009
3,921
3,159
WA
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Fremantle
I keep hearing about how low the Tigers are ranked in Contested Possessions - from memory we are 16th or 17th at the moment which is a HUGE stat.

So often commentators are saying that if you win the contested ball count and the tackle count, you will win the game. Our outside/running game is our strength so obviously the contested ball is the part of our game we need to improve to make the step up to being a top 8 side.

What makes us so bad at winning the contested ball? :confused:

Looking at our major ball winners, I would have thought we would be mid-range in this department - not dead last.

I would expect the 5 guys below to be great at winning the contested ball. IMO they are fairly hard players who have an inside game.

- Cotchin
- Martin
- Foley
- Jackson
- Newman

In the next category I would have:

- Grigg (I thought he was recruited as an inside mid?)
- Deledio (Makes up for it through his elite outside game)
- Riewoldt (Good on the ground but doesn't get enough 1 on 1)
- Houli (Tries hard but like Deledio is not a contested ball winner)
- Rance (improving every week)

New guys like Conca, Bachelor etc are not going to be contested ball winners in their first year.

How much of an impact does our poor ruck division have on this stat?

What about Shane Tuck, contested ball specialist? What does he need to do to break into the side?
 
Dusty's playing more of an outside role this year than last, Foley is still improving after coming back from injury. This is not too big a concern as I see it.

Turnovers are so high across the league this year, I'm happy we are working on our transitions (uncontested ball use). We brought the ball from defense to attack so easily against Brisbane last week, it was exciting.
 
Strange really i think the list is full of hard at it contesting players very few soft players eg houlie webberley only real soft ones .deledio is quite good in the contested possesion wen he goes there and riewolt is a contested player.Lack of a ruck certainly doesnt help and certain players r doing different roles.The game plan has changed since last year too wich has effected contested possession as well also young players need to mature too . Im confident our rates will improve as we develop the game plan further it has too and will.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Remember a cont poss doesn't mean you've fought of three guys and physically ripped the ball from another to gain possession, you just need to gain possession with an opponent within about a metre or so of you for it to be counted as a cont poss.
So doing a lot of handballs within traffic will inc your cont poss count. Though that's not our gameplan, we're very kicking orientated.

Cotch, Foley, Dusty, Jackson and Lids lead the way for us with them all having over 100 cont poss. Cont poss isn't the be all end all of winning games. Our mids are winning their own ball but they are also spreading a lot better meaning we can create uncontested possessions around the ground instead of doing 20 handballs in the space of 5 metres and then causing a turnover.

Also you don't really want our best ball users such as Newman and Houli getting a ton of cont poss. You want them in space with time to drill the ball 60m to HF.

Just to compare the top 4 teams. Here's the no. of players that have over 100 cont from each team.

Geelong:5
Collingwood (1 less game):4
Carlton:3
Hawthorn:2
 
My view of it is that, in 2010 many people were complaining about our lack of outside players and spread from stoppages, we were one of the best in the competition for Clearances/Contested possession.

In 2011 our outside run and uncontested spread from stoppages would be right up there with the best in the comp.

What that tells me is that our game-plan is different from last year and Dimma is teaching and setting up the team differently from last year, we all knew Martin and Cotchin were elite inside ball winners but they didn't provide much outside of that, both Cotchin and Martin are spending significant game time in the F50 and are playing a lot more outside then inside.

I think in 2012 we will see our 2010 and 2011 styles combined and we will be a lot more balanced rather then being extreme at either ends of the game-plan.

We were also told by the club at the end of 2010 that Dimma was going to teach the attacking style aspect of his game-plan in 2011, I think the issue with having a very young group of players and still in need of more quality players is that a) they aren't experienced enough yet to find the right balance between defence and attack and b) we are still in need of more quality players all through the team.

EDIT: Also forgot to add that, our quality of clearances compare to some other teams is much better, we rarely ever get a clearance by just bombing it blindly out of a contest any more.

The perfect example was the Essendon match, we lost the clearance count yet our quality of clearances was much better in that when we got the ball we ran with it from the centre and often hit a target in the F50 or a shot on goal.

Quality over Quantity.
 
MightyTiger said:
My view of it is that, in 2010 many people were complaining about our lack of outside players and spread from stoppages, we were one of the best in the competition for Clearances/Contested possession.

In 2011 our outside run and uncontested spread from stoppages would be right up there with the best in the comp.

What that tells me is that our game-plan is different from last year and Dimma is teaching and setting up the team differently from last year, we all knew Martin and Cotchin were elite inside ball winners but they didn't provide much outside of that, both Cotchin and Martin are spending significant game time in the F50 and are playing a lot more outside then inside.

I think in 2012 we will see our 2010 and 2011 styles combined and we will be a lot more balanced rather then being extreme at either ends of the game-plan.

We were also told by the club at the end of 2010 that Dimma was going to teach the attacking style aspect of his game-plan in 2011, I think the issue with having a very young group of players and still in need of more quality players is that a) they aren't experienced enough yet to find the right balance between defence and attack and b) we are still in need of more quality players all through the team.

EDIT: Also forgot to add that, our quality of clearances compare to some other teams is much better, we rarely ever get a clearance by just bombing it blindly out of a contest any more.

The perfect example was the Essendon match, we lost the clearance count yet our quality of clearances was much better in that when we got the ball we ran with it from the centre and often hit a target in the F50 or a shot on goal.

Quality over Quantity.
Click to expand...

Awesome post MT. :)
 
rammbo said:
Im confident our rates will improve as we develop the game plan further it has too and will.
Click to expand...

I'm not confident they will. In fact commentators say we are the only side bucking the contested footy / tackles equation to win games. When the hawks won their flag they were the lowest side for tackles and I think second lowest for contested football, Mr Hardwick was there then too. That side was also ahead of it's time with Clarko's cluster. Maybe it wasn't Clarko's cluster at all...

We are also I think (last time I looked) the most effecient kicking side in the competition according to the disposal effeciency stat. Perhaps the error is in the measure not the team. If we hit our targets and retain possession then it's not contested ball. Maybe the reason we don't operate a massive forward press and follow the flavor of the year tactic is because our long term game plan isn't a ripoff of something someone else had success with. He is picking the kids to suite his plan not building the plan to suite his team.
 
You would think the fact that our ruckmen don't provide the 'Dean Cox service' to our midfielders would have something to do with a low contested possession/clearance count. Hardwick did say last year that he wanted to see Cotch getting more 'easy ball' where he can do more damage with his foot skills so it makes sense that he (and some of his team mates) are doing just that under Hardwick's gameplan.
 
Strawbs said:
You would think the fact that our ruckmen don't provide the 'Dean Cox service' to our midfielders would have something to do with a low contested possession/clearance count.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't have thought so.

We have been very high up in contested possessions and clearances the last few years, haven't had a gun ruckman in that time.

More to do with a change in game plan + lack of Tuck. Also Martin is playing a lot forward leaving players like Edwards around the stoppages at times, etc and Foley isn't back to his clearance best.
 
HighFlyer said:
I'm not confident they will. In fact commentators say we are the only side bucking the contested footy / tackles equation to win games. When the hawks won their flag they were the lowest side for tackles and I think second lowest for contested football, Mr Hardwick was there then too. That side was also ahead of it's time with Clarko's cluster. Maybe it wasn't Clarko's cluster at all...

We are also I think (last time I looked) the most effecient kicking side in the competition according to the disposal effeciency stat. Perhaps the error is in the measure not the team. If we hit our targets and retain possession then it's not contested ball. Maybe the reason we don't operate a massive forward press and follow the flavor of the year tactic is because our long term game plan isn't a ripoff of something someone else had success with. He is picking the kids to suite his plan not building the plan to suite his team.
Click to expand...
yep could b a possibility but i still think we would still hav to improve in the contested area though .
 
Interesting to look the top three teams Collingwood, Geelong, Carlton and compare with the Tiges for players who have a ratio of contested ball greater than uncontested.

Collingwood - Dawes, Cloke, Brown, Wood, Jolly, Krack, Fasolo, Toovey (even)

Carlton - Warnock, Hampson, O`Halpin, Judd, Betts, Ellard, McClean. Kruezer (1 under with limited games but from previous games will be in this list)

Geelong - Ottens, Podsiadly, Vardy, Hawkins (even)

Tigers - Jack (85-39) Vickery 69-58) Cotch (147-137)

There is an obvious pattern. Its clear contested ball favours the big man, and having individual mids dominate contested ball like some want Tucky back in for is false.

The Pies and Cats don’t have a (quality) mid who has a ratio favouring contested ball, and Carlton only have Judd (170-145) The one great thing for us is Cotch is our Judd. It takes a special player who can do it in the numbers they do for long periods (Note, in 2010 Tucky had a ratio of around 1.5 to 1 favouring uncontested ball)

The problem for us is we only have 2 big men in that group. We average 135 to the Pies 159 contested ball and uncontested is around 215 for both teams. To me that shows our mids are travelling ok going by those 3 teams mids, but it’s the big man contested ball we just don’t have to compete with the big boys.

It shows us what most of us already know, and that is Miller, Post, Gus and Browne are only half providing us with what we really need. I know Miller is good for structure and at this stage is our best option by far, but when the time comes for someone like Griff and hopefully a quality ruck to replace Gus and Browne, we will then be closer to a genuine top 6 team.

So the way we are travelling now with our mids seems to be on track with how our future game plan will be, maybe some tweaking so all our mids tighten the ratio a little bit more and bring our game ratio up like the top 3 have, and that’s what I reckon (hope) will happen next year with another pre-season to increase the gut running fitness base.

So the way i see it, dont blame our mids, blame our talls.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Watching the last few games it really dawned on me that we are a poor marking side. Tend to get killed around the ground in most marking contests. This can probably be attributed to a lack of KP players, and a dominant Cox / Sandy type ruckman.

Now our contested possie count is poor but we are leading the disposal efficiency in the comp, a stat that Gerard Healy conveniently left out on "on the couch" tonight, when comparing us to Melboring.

So this side is like the complete opposite of Richmond sides of the recent past. Remember how good a marking side we were when we had Richo and Benny! But lousy disposal. Id take efficiency first I reckon.
 
Some great posts.

To those who question the worth of high contested possession counts, have a look at the top 25 players for contested possessions. Source afl.com.au

Priddis -189
Boyd - 183
J. Kennedy (Syd) - 176
A. Swallow - 171
Judd - 170
Murphy - 162
Black - 156
Ablett - 153
Moloney - 152
O'Keefe - 151
Pavlich - 149
Cotchin - 147
Fyfe - 143
S. Thompson - 142
Bolton - 140
Watson - 138
Mitchell - 136
Pendlebury - 136
Swan - 134
Cox - 126
Mundy - 126
Griffen - 124
Kelly - 121
Corey - 121
Redden - 120

It tells me that quality players win contested ball.

Below is our top 10 players Contested Possession counts along with the % compared to total disposals.

Cotchin - 147 - 50.68%
Foley - 113 - 43.96%
Martin - 110 - 38.32%
Jackson - 107 - 46.72%
Deledio - 102 - 33.33%
Riewoldt - 85 - 71.42% - Outstanding
Nahas - 79 - 33.90%
Grigg - 77 - 27.69% - Not good enough
Vickery - 69 - 53.90%
Conca - 66 - 31.57%

As Bazzar alluded to, this is linked to a result of our developing talls and rucks. If we can maintain the good part of our game while developing our talls I believe we will become a quality side.
 
redwallis said:
Some great posts.

To those who question the worth of high contested possession counts, have a look at the top 25 players for contested possessions. Source afl.com.au

Priddis -189
Boyd - 183
J. Kennedy (Syd) - 176
A. Swallow - 171
Judd - 170
Murphy - 162
Black - 156
Ablett - 153
Moloney - 152
O'Keefe - 151
Pavlich - 149
Cotchin - 147
Fyfe - 143
S. Thompson - 142
Bolton - 140
Watson - 138
Mitchell - 136
Pendlebury - 136
Swan - 134
Cox - 126
Mundy - 126
Griffen - 124
Kelly - 121
Corey - 121
Redden - 120

It tells me that quality players win contested ball.

Below is our top 10 players Contested Possession counts along with the % compared to total disposals.

Cotchin - 147 - 50.68%
Foley - 113 - 43.96%
Martin - 110 - 38.32%
Jackson - 107 - 46.72%
Deledio - 102 - 33.33%
Riewoldt - 85 - 71.42% - Outstanding
Nahas - 79 - 33.90%
Grigg - 77 - 27.69% - Not good enough
Vickery - 69 - 53.90%
Conca - 66 - 31.57%

As Bazzar alluded to, this is linked to a result of our developing talls and rucks. If we can maintain the good part of our game while developing our talls I believe we will become a quality side.
Click to expand...

If a ruckman taps the ball straight down your throat now it's cosidered a contested possesion.

Before you use statistics like these you need to compare what the percentage of the whole team is. Then you need to ask yourself what roles on the footy field exposes you to more contested possessions. Cotchin will always get more contested poss... then Grigg or Conca or Newman. The fact is playing off half back gets you alot of uncontested poss due the ball being moved from side to side.

UNCONTESTED POSSESSIONS IS WHAT WE WANT!!!! the game is a game of keepings off. We want to beable to move the ball from the backline through the sticks without 1 contested possession.
 
The definition of contested possession is a lot different to what a lot of people perceive the stat means, including media commentators.

When jack marks the ball with a player behind him on a lead... that is a contested possession.

When the umpire bounces the ball to our advantage and Browne gently taps the ball down to Cotch ..... that is a contested possession.

When Edwards dives into the pack and forces the ball out to our advantage... that is not a contested possession. If one of our players picks the ball up in the clear from Edwards knock on then thats an uncontested possession.... but we won the ball!!! from a contested situation.

Before you all crap on about the importance of contested possessions you need understand what the actual stat is.
 
nut said:
When Edwards dives into the pack and forces the ball out to our advantage... that is not a contested possession. If one of our players picks the ball up in the clear from Edwards knock on then thats an uncontested possession.... but we won the ball!!! from a contested situation.
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but picking up the ball after an Edwards knock on would register as a loose ball get, which is a contested posession.
 
Nut I appreciate your comments which are certainly thought provoking.

Regarding the definition of a contested possession, this is something I am still struggling to understand and I should have pointed this out in my OP. Handballing out of a pack... this has to be a contested possession!

I can't help but feel that on Grand Final day, contested possession counts. There is little to no keepings-off in monster games... there is simply too much pressure on the ball carrier.

Refer Leon Davis on Grand Final day - USELESS!
 
Spluff said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but picking up the ball after an Edwards knock on would register as a loose ball get, which is a contested posession.
Click to expand...
Yep Lose ball get is a contested possesion??? wtf.... hmmmm just goes to show that a contested possession is not a reflection of someones hardness.
I was more pointing to the fact that Edwards who won the ball wont be rewarded with a contested possession and now it looks like the player who scoops the ball up does.
 
Spluff said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but picking up the ball after an Edwards knock on would register as a loose ball get, which is a contested posession.
Click to expand...

Thats how i under stand it as well. Also other definitions of contested footy are -


  • Frees “for” (except for out-of-bounds on the full and centre-square infringements) are categorised as contested possessions


  • A free kick awarded for an interchange infringement is counted as a contested possession.


  • A player awarded a free kick when an opponent runs more than 15m without bouncing the ball is credited with a contested possession


  • A player who has gained possession when the ball has fallen into open space (off the hands of a pack) and is credited with a contested possession.


  • A ruckman takes the ball from a ruck contest and handpasses off.

Its really is a silly stat when you see the definitions, and it backs up what I think that our big blokes are letting us down by not being in positions to be included in those stats like the top 3 teams big blokes.
 
Nice work M.T. Just shows you coaches focus on quality execution. Quantity will come as players develop physically & grow in confidence.
 
oh dear stats and what they actually mean does anyone really know. stats schmats make of them what you will in the main they are worthless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top