Autopsy Geelong lose to Richmond by 26 points.. but it really wasnt that close

[Spazz Cat]

If the game had been a ten goal loss then Richmond would have been unrealistically good at converting their opportunities.

Which also ignores that they are a relatively low skill and untidy attacking team. This was nothing like a ten goal win from their style.

Most of them can kick. They ain't too bad at all.

 

[My Tilly]

Do you know what disposal efficiency means in terms of the definition of the stat?

Oh' I see. Laugh away at my reply and yet your moronic statement that Richmond, who recently won a grand final by 15 goals, has relatively low skills compared to the rest of the competition

Yep your right, Houli, Martin, Edwards, Grimes, Broad, Short . . . low skilled and it is only their manic pressure which wins them games of football.
Quite an incredible statement by someone who I thought knew a bit about the game. Low skilled! lol.

 

[Landgraft]

Most of them can kick. They ain't too bad at all.

There's a wide gulf between low skill and can't kick.

Oh' I see. Laugh away at my reply and yet your moronic statement that Richmond, who recently won a grand final by 15 goals, has relatively low skills compared to the rest of the competition

Yep your right, Houli, Martin, Edwards, Grimes, Broad, Short . . . low skilled and it is only their manic pressure which wins them games of football.
Quite an incredible statement by someone who I thought knew a bit about the game. Low skilled! lol.

If you don't want laugh reacts then stop clowning around.

Richmond has never been a highly skilled side, not sure why you're treating this as a revelation at this point in time. Some players have better disposal, sure, this might surprise you but no team is homogenous.

 

[Spazz Cat]

Speed couldn't have less to do with it, we can't measure it anyway.

As for ball movement I think it comes down to the context quite a lot... when they get to slingshot of course they look much better. But often their offense didn't seem particularly menacing - so maybe it comes down to forward pressure, but more likely it comes down to having more teeth with our own attack.

When you're playing a counterpunch/gear-check team the most important thing is to make your own blows land. We didn't do that often enough on the weekend, but the surge in the fourth makes it pretty clear that doing so is in no sense unobtainable.

Velocity or speed as you call it can be measured many ways.
Dunno what Richmond team you've seen play in the last few years, but speed is the single No1 most important thing to why they win.
Ball is going forward as much as possible as fast as possible by any means possible.

 

[Spazz Cat]

How come they are currently ranked 1st for disposal efficiency?

Don't worry about that one yeah.
I just said they can't kick so they just can't ok!

 

[Landgraft]

Velocity or speed as you call it can be measured many ways.
Dunno what Richmond team you've seen play in the last few years, but speed is the single No1 most important thing to why they win.
Ball is going forward as much as possible as fast as possible by any means possible.

Speed in terms of players is the one we have no measure on. You can try and measure speed of ball movement in various ways, but without access to the CD metrics that are reserved for commercial sale to clubs it's very hard to break down meaningfully.

But yes, I largely agree with your point. And that's a key part of why they're not a high skill side in terms of execution - they aren't trying to play neatly most of the time, so commit skill errors (at a rate which clearly they find acceptable/hasn't hurt them too much).

 

[Spazz Cat]

There's a wide gulf between low skill and can't kick.



If you don't want laugh reacts then stop clowning around.

Richmond has never been a highly skilled side, not sure why you're treating this as a revelation at this point in time. Some players have better disposal, sure, this might surprise you but no team is homogenous.

Ok many of them can kick quite well. A few of their players I would have in the best ball user in the comp.

 

[frggr]

You think you get it tough, we haven’t played at our home ground since 1965!!

Fair call

Punt Road needs an update!

 

[Spazz Cat]

Fair call

Punt Road needs an update!

Damned if my taxes are paying for that.

 

[cats_09]

You think you get it tough, we haven’t played at our home ground since 1965!!

Boohoo

Now run along & whinge about that on your own board

 

[My Tilly]

If you don't want laugh reacts then stop clowning around.

You are the one who said Richmond are a lowly skilled side, not me.
It's complete nonsense.
I don't like Richmond either but I can at least see a brilliant football team when I see one.
Even their ruckman Nankervis is one the more highly skilled big men in the game.

Bizarre statement's all around after this loss on Friday night from Geelong supporters.

 

[Spazz Cat]

Speed in terms of players is the one we have no measure on. You can try and measure speed of ball movement in various ways, but without access to the CD metrics that are reserved for commercial sale to clubs it's very hard to break down meaningfully.

But yes, I largely agree with your point. And that's a key part of why they're not a high skill side in terms of execution - they aren't trying to play neatly most of the time, so commit skill errors (at a rate which clearly they find acceptable/hasn't hurt them too much).

It takes skill though. Might not look like it but it does. Executing at speed and quick hands, picking up ground balls.
Actually harder to do than chipping around the back line. That is just basically running and positioning. More coaching than skills.

 

[Landgraft]

It takes skill though. Might not look like it but it does. Executing at speed and quick hands, picking up ground balls.
Actually harder to do than chipping around the back line. That is just basically running and positioning. More coaching than skills.

Calling it low skilled is probably a bit pejorative, that's fair.

It's the execution that's untidy - no doubt the players could adapt to a different style (many certainly played very differently in previous years).

 

[MacStradbroke]

I will be extremely pissed off if we fail, yet again, in finals having promised so much in the H & A. Surely we have had the cattle multiple years now to get to a GF (and you can only win one if you make it that far). The buck stops at one place for ongoing failure in finals given that the team has been good enough to get there after H & A. Looking at you Chris Scott!!! As a great H&A record is simply to get you to finals, it isn't worth sh!t if you then fail miserably at the "pointy end" all the time...

But the h&a season has only Resulted in us being the 4th best team this year(if we beat Swans), so why is everyone getting so cranky about not delivering on what they’ve promised?

 

[RogerDean]

Damned if my taxes are paying for that.

My taxes paid for yours..so its only fair.

 

[Seeds]

Seeds, Ill start you off and then you can continue to reply to yourself. Who do you think the ball should have been kicked to and why do you think Grimes completely ignored him?

As I said, zero awareness - it was unacceptable play by Sav, and if he is unable to make a player like Grimes (about 10 cm shorter and 10 kgs lighter) accountable, then he is a liability - Grimes clearly read the play about two seconds earlier than Sav. There was nothing in that play that wasn't Sav's fault.

Now, Im not trying to throw him under the bus here - but there is a very common trend with all of those contests I listed, barring Paddy. Our young players where outwitted by more experienced defenders. Close probably sealed his fate with that performance, same with Fogarty, Jarvis should not get another run, and Sav's lack of awareness and defensive attributes do not outweigh his marking ability. Go for it.

wow. Just wow. what bizarre logic.

so you want sav to run to where hawkins is cos sav should know that geelong players wont kick it to him? sav getting too near hawkins is the exact argument some posters use to say sav shouldnt be in the team. And you argue he shouldnt be in the side because he is standing to far away from hawkins.

also just wow that you think our players should refuse to kick to him even though he probably has the best hands in the team when on.

if richmond players are running off sav to go to hawkins then the only player who has made the error is the player who kicked it. He should of kicked it to sav.

ps. After fridays game richmond players wont be running off sav before the ball is kicked anymore. So your point is now mute as ridiculous and illogical as it was.

 

[Goggin Our Best]

Calling it low skilled is probably a bit pejorative, that's fair.

It's the execution that's untidy - no doubt the players could adapt to a different style (many certainly played very differently in previous years).

Give it a spell mate

The opening minute of the 3rd qtr of last years PF ( where the 1st goal in the 2nd half was vital ) Prestia took the ball from the centre ball hitout and at a million miles an hour hit Lynch with a brilliant pass - unstoppable - Geel couldnt do a thing about it - and Richmond got that vital 1st goal

I would call that - high skill

 

[Spazz Cat]

My taxes paid for yours..so its only fair.

Yeah but we get A league praccy matches so at least your taxes went to good use.

 

[Landgraft]

Give it a spell mate

The opening minute of the 3rd qtr of last years PF ( where the 1st goal in the 2nd half was vital ) Prestia took the ball from the centre ball hitout and at a million miles an hour hit Lynch with a brilliant pass - unstoppable - Geel couldnt do a thing about it - and Richmond got that vital 1st goal

I would call that - high skill

There are so many rhetorical jumps in there I don't think I could even begin to meaningfully unpack it.

What does a typical Richmond attack look like? Not the absolute best case scenario, where pretty much every club in the league is identical (unless they hit that particularly often, which certainly isn't the case).

 

[Vdubs]

Anyone on this board trying to intimate that Tigers are not overly skilled is just plain jealous.
For starters, they are the best marking team in the comp. That is borne out in GF's.
They win games against the highly fancied contenders, every time- that requires skill.
Their tackling is ferocious, unrelenting and effective.
Their pressure creates errors in opposition teams that are often thought to be highly skilled.
They win at every ground.
They are super quick in reaction and effective disposal.
What more is needed? Of course, they keep kicking winning scores.
They have lost 2 very key players. How they cover them will be educational.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Do you know what disposal efficiency means in terms of the definition of the stat?

It's a wishy washy stat that's for sure.
A 40m+ kick to a contest for example is an effective kick, even if you do not retain possession.

 

[Landgraft]

Anyone on this board trying to intimate that Tigers are not overly skilled are just plain jealous.
For starters, they are the best marking team in the comp. That is borne out in GF's.
They win games against the highly fancied contenders, every time- that requires skill.
Their tackling is ferocious, unrelenting and effective.
Their pressure creates errors in opposition teams that are often thought to be highly skilled.
They win at every ground.
They are super quick in reaction and effective disposal.
What more is needed? Of course, they keep kicking winning scores.
They have lost 2 very key players. How they cover them will be educational.

Thanks for replying at me without actually bothering to reply at me... very considerate.

As I said to Spazz

Calling it low skilled is probably a bit pejorative, that's fair.

It's the execution that's untidy - no doubt the players could adapt to a different style (many certainly played very differently in previous years).

Their offensive method is frequently imprecise, because the focus is not on always hitting pinpoint passes but just on delivering the ball to any potentially advantageous spot when the opportunity exists.

Don't try to put s**t I never said in my mouth.

 

[Vdubs]

Thanks for replying at me without actually bothering to reply at me... very considerate.

As I said to Spazz



Their offensive method is frequently imprecise, because the focus is not on always hitting pinpoint passes but just on delivering the ball to any potentially advantageous spot when the opportunity exists.

Don't try to put sh*t I never said in my mouth.

Apologies Your Highness.
There are other posters here that have commented on such issues.

 

[Cosmic Energy]

Blicavs has played great as a ruckman/winger this year. It’s been one of the moves which has improved this team. Last night was the a great example of that. That mark in the last against vlaustin on the wing was fantastic. Imagine if the umpired payed the fifty. Only down by 10 if he kicks it. The intercepting he did was great last night and one player who played well. He’s really developed into the leadership role this year and been very effective in the ruck/wing role.

Well he has always played good games in the ruck, or on the wing, but in finals against the very best, I don’t think that’s his best position for this team. I’m not sure anyone can say we’ve improved yet until we see what we’ve got in finals. Against WC & Richmond this year we’ve been found wanting when the heat was really on, Collingwood similarly.

Maybe I’m a bit harsh or expect too much but there are a lot of players in this team with question marks over their ability to handle big games and fierce pressure. I’d much rather Blitz down back than Hendo.

 

[Landgraft]

Apologies Your Highness.
There are other posters here that have commented on such issues.

I'm open to the possibility of co-incidence, but this is less convincing then the years you spent insisting that Essendon would come good.