Matt Crouch is just a plodder.

[Nelso]

The other posters have said it all already.

More possessions = more turnovers.

Without also looking at total possession numbers, level of risk vs reward on the plays, and other stats that look at positive effect of the remaining possessions, this is completely useless.

Provide a stat that has any meaning, and then I'll 'provide some evidence to prove otherwise'. There currently is nothing to 'prove otherwise'.

Bye bye Meltso

Still waiting for the evidence to prove otherwise.

Can't be that hard to find Madflog?

Or just come out and admit that the stats don't lie and the plodder brothers are turnover kings

 

[Maddogmetro]

Still waiting for the evidence to prove otherwise.

Can't be that hard to find Madflog?

Or just come out and admit that the stats don't lie and the plodder brothers are turnover kings

Having trouble reading now Meltso? You should seriously consider taking a break for a while, you are being embarrassed all over the place.

And if you want to try to prove a point, go for it. Actually do at least some primary school level analysis of statistics. I'm not going to spend any more effort disproving something that anyone with half a brain can see you have provided no useful evidence for.

 

[RonSon]

Considering the fact that you are both completely unable to provide any useful information, I'll do some anaylsis for you.

Crouch total possessions this year: 383
Crouch total clangers this year: 47
Total: 1 clanger per 8.15 disposals

DBJ total possessions this year: 174
DBJ total clangers this year: 29
Total: 1 clanger per 6 disposals

Considering the fact that Crouch has MORE THAN DOUBLE the possessions than DBJ, this is pretty amazingly bad by DBJ. So, as you said flogs, 'the stats speak for themselves'.

You can see yourselves out now thanks.

Total clangers? Not unforced turnovers? Shoddy stats.

You said also said that level of risk vs reward was important. According to your own statements the stats you just posted are pointless.

 

[Maddogmetro]

Total clangers? Not unforced turnovers? Shoddy stats.

You said also said that level of risk vs reward was important. According to your own statements the stats you just posted are pointless.

You are truly an idiot. Just like your mate Meltso.

You have now cornered yourself. Either you must admit that the stats you relied on are useless, or you agree that my analysis of those stats proves Crouch is significantly better than DBJ. Which is it?

 

[Nelso]

You are truly an idiot. Just like your mate Meltso.

You have now cornered yourself. Either you must admit that the stats you relied on are useless, or you agree that my analysis of those stats proves Crouch is significantly better than DBJ. Which is it?

But this is all about the Plodder brothers being in the top 5 for turnovers

 

[RonSon]

You are truly an idiot. Just like your mate Meltso.

You have now cornered yourself. Either you must admit that the stats you relied on are useless, or you agree that my analysis of those stats proves Crouch is significantly better than DBJ. Which is it?

The level of statistical analysis you have provided, according to your own standards is wanting. Please provide the analysis using the unforced turnover stats for each along with a risk vs reward weighting to go with them or we can continue to use:

TOP FIVE

1. Tom Mitchell Hawthorn 22

2. Matt Crouch Adelaide 21

3. Andrew Gaff West Coast 20

4. Brad Crouch Adelaide 20

5. Gary Ablett Gold Coast 20

 

[Maddogmetro]

The level of statistical analysis you have provided, according to your own standards is wanting. Please provide the analysis using the unforced turnover stats for each along with a risk vs reward weighting to go with them or we can continue to use:

TOP FIVE

1. Tom Mitchell Hawthorn 22

2. Matt Crouch Adelaide 21

3. Andrew Gaff West Coast 20

4. Brad Crouch Adelaide 20

5. Gary Ablett Gold Coast 20

So are you holding me to your standards? Or mine? If you are holding me to mine, then I'll wait for your analysis first so that I can respond to it. I'm not the one pushing the agenda. If you are holding me to yours, then my analysis above (although to a significantly higher level than your pathetic attempt) destroys your argument.

The status quo is not your starting position. My analysis is several steps above that. Provide a deeper analysis if you wish to displace it.

Just give up, you lose either way.

 

[subaru]

The other posters have said it all already.

More possessions = more turnovers.

Without also looking at total possession numbers, level of risk vs reward on the plays, and other stats that look at positive effect of the remaining possessions, this is completely useless.

Provide a stat that has any meaning, and then I'll 'provide some evidence to prove otherwise'. There currently is nothing to 'prove otherwise'.

Bye bye Meltso

He's got no idea. All over the shop. Incapable of mounting anything remotely resembling a cogent argument.
Probably why he constantly posts about posters!
Either way -
It's.....
Wah wah wah - M Crouch - turnovers - plays in the midfield under pressure
But
Yay yay yay - Port 111 Turnovers - even though it's because the can't kick, can't catch

It's just another diversions attempt from this

 

[Damp Squarie]

What do you expect? When you get the ball more than most players in the AFL, law of averages says they will have more turnovers.

What a stupid stat to post in this thread. Means absolutely nothing, and you have provided absolutely no analysis. Typical simple Meltso post.

Exactly - these puffing nimrods don't have a clue

 

[Nelso]

So are you holding me to your standards? Or mine? If you are holding me to mine, then I'll wait for your analysis first so that I can respond to it. I'm not the one pushing the agenda. If you are holding me to yours, then my analysis above (although to a significantly higher level than your pathetic attempt) destroys your argument.

The status quo is not your starting position. My analysis is several steps above that. Provide a deeper analysis if you wish to displace it.

Just give up, you lose either way.

My analysis is based upon the Champion data statistics used by all AFL clubs.

We are still yet to see any evidence that the Plodder brothers are anything but turnover kings

You would think that 2 plodders who only jog at the best of times would not turn the ball over regularly.

 

[Damp Squarie]

Read it and weep Smelso
Crouch total possessions this year: 383
Crouch total clangers this year: 47
Total: 1 clanger per 8.15 disposals

DBJ total possessions this year: 174
DBJ total clangers this year: 29
Total: 1 clanger per 6 disposals

Fred is right; Darcy Byrne-Jones>>>>>>Matt Crouch at clangers

 

[RonSon]

So are you holding me to your standards? Or mine? If you are holding me to mine, then I'll wait for your analysis first so that I can respond to it. I'm not the one pushing the agenda. If you are holding me to yours, then my analysis above (although to a significantly higher level than your pathetic attempt) destroys your argument.

The status quo is not your starting position. My analysis is several steps above that. Provide a deeper analysis if you wish to displace it.

Just give up, you lose either way.

Unforced Turnovers

TOP FIVE

1. Tom Mitchell Hawthorn 22

2. Matt Crouch Adelaide 21

3. Andrew Gaff West Coast 20

4. Brad Crouch Adelaide 20

5. Gary Ablett Gold Coast 20





You still haven't provided any facts that show the Crouch brothers aren't unforced turnover kings?

 

[Nelso]

Read it and weep Smelso
Crouch total possessions this year: 383
Crouch total clangers this year: 47
Total: 1 clanger per 8.15 disposals

DBJ total possessions this year: 174
DBJ total clangers this year: 29
Total: 1 clanger per 6 disposals

Fred is right; Darcy Byrne-Jones>>>>>>Matt Crouch at clangers

Keep up Flopjars.

We are discussing the plodder brothers.

Nothing to do with DBJ.

Although we are playing Brisbane again tomorrow and you are still yet to work out who DBJ's opponent was last time we played them

Maybe Madflog has worked out the answer by now?

 

[Damp Squarie]

Keep up Flopjars.

We are discussing the plodder brothers.

Nothing to do with DBJ.

Although we are playing Brisbane again tomorrow and you are still yet to work out who DBJ's opponent was last time we played them

Maybe Madflog has worked out the answer by now?

Look at the fred title fool...and stick to the far king thing instead of all your bullshit deflections.

 

[Nelso]

Look at the fred title fool...and stick to the far king thing instead of all your bullshit deflections.

Answer the question

Who was DBJ's opponent?

Or are you going to deflect again or go missing up Norf again?

 

[Maddogmetro]

Unforced Turnovers

TOP FIVE

1. Tom Mitchell Hawthorn 22

2. Matt Crouch Adelaide 21

3. Andrew Gaff West Coast 20

4. Brad Crouch Adelaide 20

5. Gary Ablett Gold Coast 20





You still haven't provided any facts that show the Crouch brothers aren't unforced turnover kings?

You haven't provided any that they are, *******. 'Total' stats mean nothing without context. Are you seriously so simple that you can't understand that concept? How sad.

 

[Maddogmetro]

Answer the question

Who was DBJ's opponent?

Or are you going to deflect again or go missing up Norf again?

Still waiting for you to answer this you pissant flog. Confirmed you know nothing about your own team, let alone the rest of the AFL.

 

[Maddogmetro]

Keep up Flopjars.

We are discussing the plodder brothers.

Nothing to do with DBJ.

Although we are playing Brisbane again tomorrow and you are still yet to work out who DBJ's opponent was last time we played them

Maybe Madflog has worked out the answer by now?

Again proving you can't read. Have a look at the title of this thread you peanut.

 

[RonSon]

You haven't provided any that they are, *******. 'Total' stats mean nothing without context. Are you seriously so simple that you can't understand that concept? How sad.

Why are you using total clangers instead of total unforced turnovers in your defence of the Crouch brothers?

I would think unforced turnovers provides far more context than clangers.



Also Brad is doing exceedingly well considering he has only played 8 games. He'd have to be league leader avg/game?

 

[subaru]

Keep up Flopjars.



Nothing to do with DBJ.

 

[Maddogmetro]

Why are you using total clangers instead of total unforced turnovers in your defence of the Crouch brothers?

I would think unforced turnovers provides far more context than clangers.



Also Brad is doing exceedingly well considering he has only played 8 games. He'd have to be league leader avg/game?

Go ahead and provide that data for Crouch and DBJ then, please. Happy to do the analysis with COMPLETE data.

Also, are you saying Ablett, Mitchell and Gaff are bad players? How stupid can you be?

 

[Damp Squarie]

Answer the question

Who was DBJ's opponent?

Or are you going to deflect again or go missing up Norf again?

Still waiting for you to answer this you pissant flog. Confirmed you know nothing about your own team, let alone the rest of the AFL.
And for the record - Im going to Georgia on Monday. Try and behave yourself and stop deflecting while I'm gone.
Be back in 40 days...bookmark it.

 

[RonSon]

Go ahead and provide that data for Crouch and DBJ then, please. Happy to do the analysis with COMPLETE data.

Also, are you saying Ablett, Mitchell and Gaff are bad players? How stupid can you be?

I'm not going to feed it to you on a plate, if you are too lazy to obtain the stats yourself we will just run with this for now.


Unforced Turnovers

TOP FIVE

1. Tom Mitchell Hawthorn 22

2. Matt Crouch Adelaide 21

3. Andrew Gaff West Coast 20

4. Brad Crouch Adelaide 20

5. Gary Ablett Gold Coast 20


Cold, hard undeniable stats.




Also:

Unforced turnover: A turnover committed under little or no pressure, which directly results in an opposition possession.

A clanger in Australian rules football is a term coined by Champion Data founder Ted Hopkins which refers to a turnover or a silly mistake made by a player. Its vague description in statistical tables is "errors including frees against".

Unforced turnover seems a far more damning stat than the vanilla and vague clanger.

 

[Nelso]

Still waiting for you to answer this you pissant flog. Confirmed you know nothing about your own team, let alone the rest of the AFL.
And for the record - Im going to Georgia on Monday. Try and behave yourself and stop deflecting while I'm gone.
Be back in 40 days...bookmark it.

But all you flogs said it was Robbo but not one of you flogs have been able to provide any evidence of this even though it was completely wrong.

Why should I help you dumbass flogs when it is more fun watching you all melt about it.

Maybe you should ask your obsessed friend.

 

[Maddogmetro]

I'm not going to feed it to you on a plate, if you are too lazy to obtain the stats yourself we will just run with this for now.


Unforced Turnovers

TOP FIVE

1. Tom Mitchell Hawthorn 22

2. Matt Crouch Adelaide 21

3. Andrew Gaff West Coast 20

4. Brad Crouch Adelaide 20

5. Gary Ablett Gold Coast 20


Cold, hard undeniable stats.




Also:






Unforced turnover seems a far more damning stat than the vanilla and vague clanger.

You seriously are that stupid aren't you?

COMPLETE stats, means stats for everyone you idiot. Total number of one stat for 5 players is COMPLETELY USELESS. There is ZERO context.

Please go back to primary school and learn some basics, and gtfo this thread. You are embarrassing yourself.