Analysis Pies by 14 pts over the doggies - Round 4, 2019

[doppleganger]

You mean he gets on top at boundary throw ins? Because I thought around the grounds ball ups would be much the same as centre bounces then because I don't see them getting a big run up and using their body much in those either so they might be random in result largely as well?

Boundary throw ins and ball-ups are where the rucks do still use body work.

The CB has had that taken away.

 

[doppleganger]

Ok maybe vanilla is a little under rating of the dogs mids, not the point though. Posters on here are bagging Grundy for "missed" hit outs when clearly it's our supposed all conquering mids not taking advantage of our Ruckmans dominance.

They have good mids but not the calibre we have currently (supposedly), and their stoppage work is v good.

Plenty of the best stoppage players don’t play with good rucks - Cripps, Kennedy, T.Mitchell, Dangerfield - they dominate stoppage work despite their own ruck rarely dominating.

A few posters are being overly critical of Grundy as they have some silly concept that we should have basically walked the ball out of stoppages under no pressure because Grundy is that much better than English.

They overlook the fact that right now it is the Dogs who are the best stoppage team (in terms of clearance differential to date in 2019) as they have some mids who are great stoppage players - Bont, Libba, Macrae.

In R1, R2 and R3 the Dogs were obliterated in terms of HOs yet won the clearance battle each time!

In R3, the Suns with Witts had 70+ HOs ... yet it was the who Dogs won the stoppage clearances 30 v 22.

Grundy was great, and we beat the Dogs at stoppages the only team to do so in 2019 to date.

 

[Vicky Park]

Great discussion on here guys, thanks, BF at its best.

 

[Carringbush2010]

A few posters are being overly critical of Grundy as they have some silly concept that we should have basically walked the ball out of stoppages under no pressure because Grundy is that much better than English.

Yep agreed, this is basically a carbon copy of haw in their halcyon years pinching every tap win from Nic Nat (figuratively speaking - not every tap win), roving to the opp ruck. However in saying that I think we were a little disappointing in winning some grunt ball - despite the fact we were light on for coalface warriors compared to them (throwing JDG was evident of the lack beforehand).

We seem to work better with a swarm and spread method rather than try and play keeping's off. WC (& the old haw) make it look good because they have great transition speed and gain territory before the opp can guard that space. We aren't that.

Part of our success in 18 was a ground wide swarm - turnover - then burn em with ball speed - particularly in the mids battles. Wherever the oppo wasn't DE perfect we had em!

Let's go back to that please Nafe!

 

[Carringbush2010]

Plenty of the best stoppage players don’t play with good rucks - Cripps, Kennedy, T.Mitchell, Dangerfield - they dominate stoppage work despite their own ruck rarely dominating.

A few posters are being overly critical of Grundy as they have some silly concept that we should have basically walked the ball out of stoppages under no pressure because Grundy is that much better than English.

They overlook the fact that right now it is the Dogs who are the best stoppage team (in terms of clearance differential to date in 2019) as they have some mids who are great stoppage players - Bont, Libba, Macrae.

In R1, R2 and R3 the Dogs were obliterated in terms of HOs yet won the clearance battle each time!

In R3, the Suns with Witts had 70+ HOs ... yet it was the who Dogs won the stoppage clearances 30 v 22.

Grundy was great, and we beat the Dogs at stoppages the only team to do so in 2019 to date.

Here ya go,

Not a smashing but we bettered them in crucial numbers, contested possy, tackles and clearances (stoppage winning stuff)....................... my money's on we passed them on these in the last.

 

[ClaytonM]

What the hell was Stepho doing at half back? The boy is a forward at this stage of his career. Simples.

Perhaps just trying to get him in the game and build up his endurance. It’s a 120 minute game. Shorts stints around the ground to aid rotations, and being down a player probably make it necessary. We should be promoting versatility.

 

[ClaytonM]

B

No wonder our Mids been poor with Harvey as Midfield Coach

I assume this is based on your in-depth knowledge of his coaching abilities gain how exactly?

If I recall he coached a midfield to the final dance last year. How did he lose his capabilities over summer?

 

[jathanas]

I get the sense that some of us are reviewing our early 2019 performances with our "second half of 2018" goggles on.

We've had changes in defense, midfield, the forward line, and the game-plan. We saw in the 2nd half against the Dogs that we can return to that style of play, and it was exciting. Keepings off football is like nails on a whiteboard but it was effective against Richmond. It will be interesting to see what we get in round 5.

Rotating JDG will be the way forward, his time in the center made all the difference and it also gives Stephenson and Elliot more forward opportunities.

I love Pendles and he has never been a burst player but he is looking just a little "less fast" this year. Much of our discussion has focused on Aish, Brown, Maynard etc when we really ought to be looking at what the output of Pendles, Treloar, Beams (and Sidey) is. They need to be setting up our on-field success and will have to do more during the coming weeks.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

Teams with a greater centre clearance differential actually have a lower scoring equity from each clearance.

Does this appear to be on the upswing in 2019, given teams can’t have an extra man in defence at centre bounces any more?

 

[sr36]

I’d argue effective ruck work at its most rudimentary is simply beating your ruck opponent.

Yep, which is why a team like the Bulldogs can be the best stoppage team with ‘poor’ rucks.

Teams implemented 3rd man up strategies, or not even sending a ruck to contest a throw in etc.


All stats are simply descriptive stats. They are just telling us how many instances of each event occurred.

The only people who can really judge a players performance are those who are outlining their role and actual expectations...the coaches.

Supporters have our own preconceived ideas of what playing well looks like, and plenty try to use stats as an indicator...despite not actually understanding how the stat is defined or what the coaches instructions were.
l.

If you run that argument through, the coaches can't judge effectiveness either. Their instructions are simply future forecasts built on their own preconceptions about what events are effective.
Additionally, many of the events that both supporters and coaches judge by aren't about following or not following instructions, they're about winning contests where both parties have probably followed instructions. Following instructions is only one factor in assessing performance.

Yeah but that would be like saying you can only have an effective long kick if your team mate actually marks the ball. You can kick it long to the advantage of your team mate, but if they fumble the mark and turn it over...it is no longer effective??

That presently still counts as a effective long kick to the kicker.

the statistical modelling theory assumes that there isnt a huge gulf in ability between recievers and that the vagaries of luck will be washed away if the event is repeated enough times. Both pretty reasonable assumptions in my book.

Only fools believe that stats can give a particularly accurate measurement of performance. They are what they are - uncontextualised indicators. Grundys hit outs may be brilliant, but if he's got me competing at ground level with Patrick Dangerfield, he's not going to record a single hitout to advantage. However that scenario doesn't occur in the AFL, gulfs in ability between midfield groups aren't as vast as some seem to suggest, thus if more of his hitouts are collected by teammates than the opposition, it's a pretty reasonable indicator that his ruck work is effective, but the hitout to advantage stat doesn't show this and if looked at in isolation, where sharks are ignored, it seems a pretty useless indicator to me.

 

[Swooper18]

Collingwood secured their second win of the season against the Western Bulldogs. Both sides had high-possession styles of play in the first term when only one goal was kicked for the quarter. The game opened up a bit more in the second quarter to culminate the first half, before two significant momentum shifts made for an enthralling second half. The Bulldogs got the ascendancy in the third term, before the Magpies came home with a wet sail in the last quarter to close out the game with the points.

Both sides had various levels of superiority in certain statistical categories, yet the differentials were generally narrow in the scheme of raw numbers. Collingwood had positive differentials in contested possessions by +14 (146 - 132), tackles by +6 (64 - 58), hit-outs were +54 (60 - 6), clearances were +7 (33 - 26), centre clearances by +3 (10 - 7) and stoppage clearances were +4 (23 - 19). The Woods had further gains in Marks Inside 50 by +3 (13 - 10), Contested Marks were +5 (14 - 9) and Intercept Marks by +1 (74 - 73). The Bulldogs were +2 for disposals (398 - 396), +20 for uncontested possessions (269 - 249) and +2 for handballs (179 - 177). Kicks (219 each) and Inside 50’s (52 each) were level.

Tom Phillips (29 disposals @ 69%, 530 metres gained, 8 contested possessions, 21 uncontested possessions, 3 intercept possessions, 19 kicks, 10 handballs, 8 marks, 5 tackles, 3 score involvements, 2 clearances, 2 stoppage clearances, 4 Inside 50’s, 5 Rebound 50’s & 2 goals) was heavily involved when the ball was in transition and impacted the scoreboard. Taylor Adams (28 disposals @ 46%, 413 metres gained, 11 contested possessions, 17 uncontested possessions, 3 intercept possessions, 18 kicks, 10 handballs, 4 marks, 8 tackles, 3 score involvements, 6 clearances, 2 centre clearances, 4 stoppage clearances, 5 Inside 50’s & 3 Rebound 50’s) found the footy a lot, however he had 10 turnovers. Halve those errors, Tay! Scott Pendlebury (27 disposals @ 70%, 204 metres gained, 9 contested possessions, 18 uncontested possessions, 5 intercept possessions, 11 kicks, 16 handballs, 2 marks, 3 tackles, 6 score involvements, 5 clearances, 3 centre clearances, 2 stoppage clearances & 2 Inside 50’s) made score involvements and clearances a priority, of which he performed adequately. Adam Treloar (26 disposals @ 92%, 218 metres gained, 3 contested possessions, 23 uncontested possessions, 9 kicks, 17 handballs, 2 marks, 5 tackles, 8 score involvements, 3 clearances, 2 centre clearances & 2 Inside 50’s) looked to play on frequently with several handpasses releasing his teammates into play. Steele Sidebottom (25 disposals @ 80%, 484 metres gained, 10 contested possessions, 15 uncontested possessions, 4 intercept possessions, 17 kicks, 8 handballs, 7 marks, 2 tackles, 5 score involvements, 2 clearances, 2 stoppage clearances, 5 Inside 50’s & 3 Rebound 50’s) provided a link-up option for his teammates all night, and Brodie Grundy (23 disposals @ 74%, 147 metres gained, 18 contested possessions, 5 uncontested possessions, 4 intercept possessions, 58 hit-outs, 9 kicks, 14 handballs, 4 marks, 2 Contested Marks, 8 tackles, 8 score involvements, 6 clearances & 5 stoppage clearances) played his most influential game of the season to will the troops over the line.

Tom Langdon (20 disposals @ 90%, 9 contested possessions, 11 uncontested possessions, 10 intercept possessions, 3 kicks, 17 handballs, 4 marks & 2 Rebound 50’s) chose the simple option at every opportunity when he dished off by hand. Darcy Moore (20 disposals @ 75%, 221 metres gained, 6 contested possessions, 14 uncontested possessions, 9 intercept possessions, 10 kicks, 10 handballs, 5 marks & 8 Rebound 50’s) got involved, but burnt the footy a bit too much with 8 turnovers. Jack Crisp (18 disposals @ 72%, 464 metres gained, 8 contested possessions, 10 uncontested possessions, 5 intercept possessions, 11 kicks, 7 handballs, 4 tackles, 4 score involvements, 3 clearances, 3 stoppage clearances, 5 Inside 50’s & 3 Inside 50’s) found a different method to contribute to Collingwood’s ball movement from defence. Jeremy Howe (17 disposals @ 76%, 309 metres gained, 6 contested possessions, 11 uncontested possessions, 6 intercept possessions, 9 kicks, 8 handballs, 3 marks & 6 Rebound 50’s) had a steady game without taking a lot of marks, while Jordan Roughead (14 disposals @ 93%, 114 metres gained, 6 contested possessions, 8 uncontested possessions, 9 intercept possessions, 9 kicks, 5 handballs, 9 marks & 2 Contested Marks) made a good impression against his former club.

Travis Varcoe (20 disposals @ 75%, 302 metres gained, 6 contested possessions, 14 uncontested possessions, 11 kicks, 9 handballs, 6 marks, 4 tackles, 8 score involvements, 6 Inside 50’s & 1 goal) responded extremely well after being dropped for the previous game. Jordan De Goey (19 disposals @ 63%, 328 metres gained, 8 contested possessions, 11 uncontested possessions, 2 intercept possessions, 14 kicks, 5 handballs, 7 marks, 3 Marks Inside 50, 4 tackles, 2 Tackles Inside 50, 9 score involvements, 3 clearances, 2 stoppage clearances, 4 Inside 50’s & 1 goal) had an impact when he was sent to the midfield. Jaidyn Stephenson (17 disposals @ 88%, 248 metres gained, 3 contested possessions, 14 uncontested possessions, 11 kicks, 6 handballs, 5 marks, 2 tackles, 5 score involvements, 3 Rebound 50’s & 2 goals) lifted in the second half with two crucial majors. Josh Thomas (13 disposals @ 85%, 298 metres gained, 5 contested possessions, 8 uncontested possessions, 9 kicks, 4 handballs, 3 marks, 3 tackles, 5 score involvements, 5 Inside 50’s & 2 goals) impacted the scoreboard when he was required. Brody Mihocek (13 disposals @ 54%, 330 metres gained, 3 contested possessions, 10 uncontested possessions, 3 intercept possessions, 10 kicks, 3 handballs, 6 marks, 2 Marks Inside 50, 4 score involvements & 6 Inside 50’s) provided a contest and target without scoring any goals. Mason Cox (13 disposals @ 85%, 161 metres gained, 11 contested possessions, 2 uncontested possessions, 2 intercept possessions, 7 kicks, 6 handballs, 6 marks, 2 Marks Inside 50, 2 tackles, 5 score involvements & 1 goal) stepped up in the final term with an important goal, and Jamie Elliott (11 disposals @ 64%, 179 metres gained, 4 contested possessions, 7 uncontested possessions, 5 marks, 3 Marks Inside 50, 5 score involvements & 2 goals) found his way in the second half, as did the team.

The next game for Collingwood will be against the Brisbane Lions at the Gabba on April 18. Wait and see on Dayne Beams overcoming his migraine, while a replacement for Chris Mayne will be known on Wednesday evening. Emphasis on a forward-half game for four quarters will be of utmost importance to get the points in Brisbane.

 

[jackcass]

Yeah, nobody sees it.

Probably has too much confidence if anything. Those round the corner set shots need to be curbed.

 

[nahnah]

Probably has too much confidence if anything. Those round the corner set shots need to be curbed.

Disagree, naturally they’re an easier shot for him and for many players

 

[sr36]

Disagree, naturally they’re an easier shot for him and for many players

Yeah, I reckon he nails a significantly higher percentage of them than set shots.

 

[sirlothie]

Collingwood secured their second win of the season against the Western Bulldogs. Both sides had high-possession styles of play in the first term when only one goal was kicked for the quarter. The game opened up a bit more in the second quarter to culminate the first half, before two significant momentum shifts made for an enthralling second half. The Bulldogs got the ascendancy in the third term, before the Magpies came home with a wet sail in the last quarter to close out the game with the points.

Both sides had various levels of superiority in certain statistical categories, yet the differentials were generally narrow in the scheme of raw numbers. Collingwood had positive differentials in contested possessions by +14 (146 - 132), tackles by +6 (64 - 58), hit-outs were +54 (60 - 6), clearances were +7 (33 - 26), centre clearances by +3 (10 - 7) and stoppage clearances were +4 (23 - 19). The Woods had further gains in Marks Inside 50 by +3 (13 - 10), Contested Marks were +5 (14 - 9) and Intercept Marks by +1 (74 - 73). The Bulldogs were +2 for disposals (398 - 396), +20 for uncontested possessions (269 - 249) and +2 for handballs (179 - 177). Kicks (219 each) and Inside 50’s (52 each) were level.

Tom Phillips (29 disposals @ 69%, 530 metres gained, 8 contested possessions, 21 uncontested possessions, 3 intercept possessions, 19 kicks, 10 handballs, 8 marks, 5 tackles, 3 score involvements, 2 clearances, 2 stoppage clearances, 4 Inside 50’s, 5 Rebound 50’s & 2 goals) was heavily involved when the ball was in transition and impacted the scoreboard. Taylor Adams (28 disposals @ 46%, 413 metres gained, 11 contested possessions, 17 uncontested possessions, 3 intercept possessions, 18 kicks, 10 handballs, 4 marks, 8 tackles, 3 score involvements, 6 clearances, 2 centre clearances, 4 stoppage clearances, 5 Inside 50’s & 3 Rebound 50’s) found the footy a lot, however he had 10 turnovers. Halve those errors, Tay! Scott Pendlebury (27 disposals @ 70%, 204 metres gained, 9 contested possessions, 18 uncontested possessions, 5 intercept possessions, 11 kicks, 16 handballs, 2 marks, 3 tackles, 6 score involvements, 5 clearances, 3 centre clearances, 2 stoppage clearances & 2 Inside 50’s) made score involvements and clearances a priority, of which he performed adequately. Adam Treloar (26 disposals @ 92%, 218 metres gained, 3 contested possessions, 23 uncontested possessions, 9 kicks, 17 handballs, 2 marks, 5 tackles, 8 score involvements, 3 clearances, 2 centre clearances & 2 Inside 50’s) looked to play on frequently with several handpasses releasing his teammates into play. Steele Sidebottom (25 disposals @ 80%, 484 metres gained, 10 contested possessions, 15 uncontested possessions, 4 intercept possessions, 17 kicks, 8 handballs, 7 marks, 2 tackles, 5 score involvements, 2 clearances, 2 stoppage clearances, 5 Inside 50’s & 3 Rebound 50’s) provided a link-up option for his teammates all night, and Brodie Grundy (23 disposals @ 74%, 147 metres gained, 18 contested possessions, 5 uncontested possessions, 4 intercept possessions, 58 hit-outs, 9 kicks, 14 handballs, 4 marks, 2 Contested Marks, 8 tackles, 8 score involvements, 6 clearances & 5 stoppage clearances) played his most influential game of the season to will the troops over the line.

Tom Langdon (20 disposals @ 90%, 9 contested possessions, 11 uncontested possessions, 10 intercept possessions, 3 kicks, 17 handballs, 4 marks & 2 Rebound 50’s) chose the simple option at every opportunity when he dished off by hand. Darcy Moore (20 disposals @ 75%, 221 metres gained, 6 contested possessions, 14 uncontested possessions, 9 intercept possessions, 10 kicks, 10 handballs, 5 marks & 8 Rebound 50’s) got involved, but burnt the footy a bit too much with 8 turnovers. Jack Crisp (18 disposals @ 72%, 464 metres gained, 8 contested possessions, 10 uncontested possessions, 5 intercept possessions, 11 kicks, 7 handballs, 4 tackles, 4 score involvements, 3 clearances, 3 stoppage clearances, 5 Inside 50’s & 3 Inside 50’s) found a different method to contribute to Collingwood’s ball movement from defence. Jeremy Howe (17 disposals @ 76%, 309 metres gained, 6 contested possessions, 11 uncontested possessions, 6 intercept possessions, 9 kicks, 8 handballs, 3 marks & 6 Rebound 50’s) had a steady game without taking a lot of marks, while Jordan Roughead (14 disposals @ 93%, 114 metres gained, 6 contested possessions, 8 uncontested possessions, 9 intercept possessions, 9 kicks, 5 handballs, 9 marks & 2 Contested Marks) made a good impression against his former club.

Travis Varcoe (20 disposals @ 75%, 302 metres gained, 6 contested possessions, 14 uncontested possessions, 11 kicks, 9 handballs, 6 marks, 4 tackles, 8 score involvements, 6 Inside 50’s & 1 goal) responded extremely well after being dropped for the previous game. Jordan De Goey (19 disposals @ 63%, 328 metres gained, 8 contested possessions, 11 uncontested possessions, 2 intercept possessions, 14 kicks, 5 handballs, 7 marks, 3 Marks Inside 50, 4 tackles, 2 Tackles Inside 50, 9 score involvements, 3 clearances, 2 stoppage clearances, 4 Inside 50’s & 1 goal) had an impact when he was sent to the midfield. Jaidyn Stephenson (17 disposals @ 88%, 248 metres gained, 3 contested possessions, 14 uncontested possessions, 11 kicks, 6 handballs, 5 marks, 2 tackles, 5 score involvements, 3 Rebound 50’s & 2 goals) lifted in the second half with two crucial majors. Josh Thomas (13 disposals @ 85%, 298 metres gained, 5 contested possessions, 8 uncontested possessions, 9 kicks, 4 handballs, 3 marks, 3 tackles, 5 score involvements, 5 Inside 50’s & 2 goals) impacted the scoreboard when he was required. Brody Mihocek (13 disposals @ 54%, 330 metres gained, 3 contested possessions, 10 uncontested possessions, 3 intercept possessions, 10 kicks, 3 handballs, 6 marks, 2 Marks Inside 50, 4 score involvements & 6 Inside 50’s) provided a contest and target without scoring any goals. Mason Cox (13 disposals @ 85%, 161 metres gained, 11 contested possessions, 2 uncontested possessions, 2 intercept possessions, 7 kicks, 6 handballs, 6 marks, 2 Marks Inside 50, 2 tackles, 5 score involvements & 1 goal) stepped up in the final term with an important goal, and Jamie Elliott (11 disposals @ 64%, 179 metres gained, 4 contested possessions, 7 uncontested possessions, 5 marks, 3 Marks Inside 50, 5 score involvements & 2 goals) found his way in the second half, as did the team.

The next game for Collingwood will be against the Brisbane Lions at the Gabba on April 18. Wait and see on Dayne Beams overcoming his migraine, while a replacement for Chris Mayne will be known on Wednesday evening. Emphasis on a forward-half game for four quarters will be of utmost importance to get the points in Brisbane.

Thanks for the info but that is a very hard read lol.

 

[nahnah]

Yeah, I reckon he nails a significantly higher percentage of them than set shots.

Agreed, just because he miss kicks one doesn’t mean it was the wrong choice. Just like miss kicking a set shot 35 out directly in front

 

[jackcass]

It's pretty simple for me

We almost sneaked a flag playing inspired chaos football

Now we are playing '17 football all over again

Just plain dumb

I think we needed to improve our "go slow" footy so I don't mind that we give that a greater focus. It is just about getting the balance right now.

 

[jackcass]

Varcoe does so much that possession wise doesn’t show up.

1 of the few who can be relied upon for 2nd, 3rd and 4th efforts.

 

[sirlothie]

I think we needed to improve our "go slow" footy so I don't mind that we give that a greater focus. It is just about getting the balance right now.

Nah bin it. It's just a matter of time before we turn it over when we play possession footy and then don't seem to have any idea when to stop over possessing it and actually try to move forward. It just makes them look stupid.

We need less thinking, more taking the game on, I'd much rather see a proactive turnover trying to break the lines than see someone's dinky 15m kick get intercepted like happened so much Friday.

 

[jackcass]

Does the above suggest the glaring...

Wings Sidebottom and Phillips

Losing Mayne probably changed how we set up so I wouldn't read too much into it.

 

[No SPIN]

Plenty of the best stoppage players don’t play with good rucks - Cripps, Kennedy, T.Mitchell, Dangerfield - they dominate stoppage work despite their own ruck rarely dominating.

A few posters are being overly critical of Grundy as they have some silly concept that we should have basically walked the ball out of stoppages under no pressure because Grundy is that much better than English.

They overlook the fact that right now it is the Dogs who are the best stoppage team (in terms of clearance differential to date in 2019) as they have some mids who are great stoppage players - Bont, Libba, Macrae.

In R1, R2 and R3 the Dogs were obliterated in terms of HOs yet won the clearance battle each time!

In R3, the Suns with Witts had 70+ HOs ... yet it was the who Dogs won the stoppage clearances 30 v 22.

Grundy was great, and we beat the Dogs at stoppages the only team to do so in 2019 to date.

If the WB are the best stoppage team despite not having a dominant ruckman - then that clearly points to us having huge upside in our clearance work with a DOMINANT ruckman.
I agree with others we can do much better in exploiting the dominance of Grundy than we are doing at present.

 

[jackcass]

Nah bin it. It's just a matter of time before we turn it over when we play possession footy and then don't seem to have any idea when to stop over possessing it and actually try to move forward. It just makes them look stupid.

We need less thinking, more taking the game on, I'd much rather see a proactive turnover trying to break the lines than see someone's dinky 15m kick get intercepted like happened so much Friday.

Yet it worked so well against the Tigas. There's a time and place for all things.

 

[Quicky]

59 hit outs BUT only 17 to advantage. A lot of work needs to go into converting better numbers.

There was a post earlier that looked at the percentage of hitouts to advantage across the league. Grundy's percentage of hitouts to advantage was actually really high. I think that gives some context and illustrates that hitouts to advangtage are not easy to achieve.

 

[sr36]

I think we needed to improve our "go slow" footy so I don't mind that we give that a greater focus. It is just about getting the balance right now.

Good point, and that could be a definite positive to come out of this early season blip, but I do think that this was a definite style change that was devised over Summer. Hopefully the previous rumours of our coaches stubbornness don't occur again.

 

[loki04]

There was a post earlier that looked at the percentage of hitouts to advantage across the league. Grundy's percentage of hitouts to advantage was actually really high. I think that gives some context and illustrates that hitouts to advangtage are not easy to achieve.

They used an average to compare a game where Grundy had his way with his much weaker and younger opponent. Also I'd wager a good chunk of those 17 came in the last quarter.

Don't you think an average weighing which does not take in who or what degree of clean effective HO or clearances taken is misleading?

BTW my posts are relating not only with Grundy but also with the midfielders an their inability to connect with him too. I can see improvement from our centre set up as a group not only Grundy alone and the discussion was never just about him (but it became the focus of many's ire).

Doppleganger saying there is a lack of centre clearances translating to goals comes back to teams not having effective connection, creating space for mids to break from and then deliver inside 50 to good leading fwds.
Also it was data taken from old rules where teams could start extra players behind the ball effecting both the kicker and the the space for forwards to lead into.