Autopsy Dimma's Dissection Discussion Dhread

[wegetpumped]

http://www.richmondfc.com.au/video/...section-round-7?camefrom=EMCL_637847_27486777

 

[JAKLAUGHING]

My bad...when I read dimma's dissection...I thought the knives for him had finally come out...

 

[Mr Magic]

This post is about Round 9 Dimmas dissection, can't see the point raising another thread.

One thing I thought needed to be pointed out is when they were talking about defensive contested marks.

Apparently we had 5 contested marks against us from the Bombers which I think was a year high which was not great.

I am sure the coaches are aware of this but I thought I would like to express my thoughts anyway.

IMO it is okay to be bad in one stat on one day if it means you are better in other stats that are related so a true assessment IMO should consider the combination of defensive performance in this example.
What I mean by this is we lost out in the marking defensively probably because guys like Daniher and Carslise had a reach advantage apart from other aspects that are difficult to match. This is no excuse but, to give greater context, the greater reach advantage also can mean worse kicking for goal like with Carslise kicking for goal ineffectively. The point I am trying to make is we should not necessarily worry too much about a blip such as contested marking in this particularly case if it does not represent the norm and totality of the total defensive effort which includes goals kicking against us which would have been reduced due to Carslise inaccuracy. Furthermore, not ever team has a Carlsie contested mark and is a great kick for goal. So all I can suggest we should not over read too much about a specific stat in one match if it does not reflect the general competition and overall defensive as well as the attacking effectiveness of the defensive unit

 

[Hot tigers]

This post is about Round 9 Dimmas dissection, can't see the point raising another thread.

One thing I thought needed to be pointed out is when they were talking about defensive contested marks.

Apparently we had 5 contested marks against us from the Bombers which I think was a year high which was not great.

I am sure the coaches are aware of this but I thought I would like to express my thoughts anyway.

IMO it is okay to be bad in one stat on one day if it means you are better in other stats that are related so a true assessment IMO should consider the combination of defensive performance in this example.
What I mean by this is we lost out in the marking defensively probably because guys like Daniher and Carslise had a reach advantage apart from other aspects that are difficult to match. This is no excuse but, to give greater context, the greater reach advantage also can mean worse kicking for goal like with Carslise kicking for goal ineffectively. The point I am trying to make is we should not necessarily worry too much about a blip such as contested marking in this particularly case if it does not represent the norm and totality of the total defensive effort which includes goals kicking against us which would have been reduced due to Carslise inaccuracy. Furthermore, not ever team has a Carlsie contested mark and is a great kick for goal. So all I can suggest we should not over read too much about a specific stat in one match if it does not reflect the general competition and overall defensive as well as the attacking effectiveness of the defensive unit

Im guessing Dimmas all over that

 

[TheTigerArmy]

This post is about Round 9 Dimmas dissection, can't see the point raising another thread.

One thing I thought needed to be pointed out is when they were talking about defensive contested marks.

Apparently we had 5 contested marks against us from the Bombers which I think was a year high which was not great.

I am sure the coaches are aware of this but I thought I would like to express my thoughts anyway.

IMO it is okay to be bad in one stat on one day if it means you are better in other stats that are related so a true assessment IMO should consider the combination of defensive performance in this example.
What I mean by this is we lost out in the marking defensively probably because guys like Daniher and Carslise had a reach advantage apart from other aspects that are difficult to match. This is no excuse but, to give greater context, the greater reach advantage also can mean worse kicking for goal like with Carslise kicking for goal ineffectively. The point I am trying to make is we should not necessarily worry too much about a blip such as contested marking in this particularly case if it does not represent the norm and totality of the total defensive effort which includes goals kicking against us which would have been reduced due to Carslise inaccuracy. Furthermore, not ever team has a Carlsie contested mark and is a great kick for goal. So all I can suggest we should not over read too much about a specific stat in one match if it does not reflect the general competition and overall defensive as well as the attacking effectiveness of the defensive unit

 

[Achilles Heel]

This post is about Round 9 Dimmas dissection, can't see the point raising another thread.

One thing I thought needed to be pointed out is when they were talking about defensive contested marks.

Apparently we had 5 contested marks against us from the Bombers which I think was a year high which was not great.

I am sure the coaches are aware of this but I thought I would like to express my thoughts anyway.

IMO it is okay to be bad in one stat on one day if it means you are better in other stats that are related so a true assessment IMO should consider the combination of defensive performance in this example.
What I mean by this is we lost out in the marking defensively probably because guys like Daniher and Carslise had a reach advantage apart from other aspects that are difficult to match. This is no excuse but, to give greater context, the greater reach advantage also can mean worse kicking for goal like with Carslise kicking for goal ineffectively. The point I am trying to make is we should not necessarily worry too much about a blip such as contested marking in this particularly case if it does not represent the norm and totality of the total defensive effort which includes goals kicking against us which would have been reduced due to Carslise inaccuracy. Furthermore, not ever team has a Carlsie contested mark and is a great kick for goal. So all I can suggest we should not over read too much about a specific stat in one match if it does not reflect the general competition and overall defensive as well as the attacking effectiveness of the defensive unit

Wtf is all that about?

 

[Mr Magic]

Wtf is all that about?

Dimma went on about 5 contested marks against us in round 9 v Essendon I think.

All I am saying is one might accept that as the guys taking the marks regularly miss the goals so the overall defensive result is effective although it might not appear to be looking at one stat contested marks against inside 50m as one stat in isolation.


Or another way of looking at it without getting too simplistic about is a few more contested marks to Jake C is okay as he will miss his fair share but not Jack Gunston types that kick accurately for goal.

Thats why TV is very effective if he improves his contested marking over time. He is a very good shot for goal as a big guy that can ruck