Absolute rot.
-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Certified Legendary Thread Squiggle 2017
- Thread starter Final Siren
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
What stage is Denial? That dude is still at that stage.
- Oct 5, 2008
- 9,873
- 25,050
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
Prophetic words.
- Banned
- #1,854
It's not a dig at Richmond. They play to their strengths. Do you seriously think you play free flowing positive footy? No you try to stop other teams doing that, you make the game a scrap and punish teams.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
- Banned
- #1,855
Adelaide played like shit but they play open attacking footy when they aren't playing like shit.
Richmond's game plan is to force teams to play like shit, make the game scrappy and then punish a team that can't break out of their back 50.
It's not a dig at Richmond it's just what they do.
Their fans have been chAmpioning exactly this all week.
Dr Tigris
Brownlow Medallist
Richmond Tigers
Premiers 2017
Well holy ******* shit. I am dead set serious about retiring. This is the final Squiggle thread.
In animated form:
In Flagpole form:
Obviously I'm posting the above just for the enjoyment of Richmond fans, not because it offers any kind of analytical insight. That much is clear, because if there's one thing Squiggle has been consistent on this year, it's that THE TIGERS WILL NOT WIN THE PREMIERSHIP. It didn't rate them as a team until late, and even then was confident that somewhere, sometime, the defensive gameplan would unravel as a more balanced side got hold of them and shook until all their mediocre players fell out.
Instead, for reasons that leave me equal parts baffled and tumescent, Adelaide turned up on Grand Final Day and played listless football. At no point did it look like an Adelaide game; instead, it always resembled a Richmond game: close and scrappy, with Tigers outworking and outrunning their opponents, taking risks, swarming, and halving and winning contests one by one until the weight of numbers was too great to resist.
In this way, it was the same story as the two previous Richmond finals - moreso, if anything, than the preliminary final, where GWS at least occasionally managed to look like a team not playing Richmond. Where Squiggle expected the Tigers inevitably to break down, they barely showed a crack.
Why this happened requires a closer look at game style than I can provide. But we can examine how unusual it is, and how it fits (or doesn't) with other modern premierships.
Richmond's triumph replaces the 20-year-old 1997 Adelaide premiership on the chart, leaving something of a two-island effect, with four defence-oriented flag teams set a short distance away from 16 balanced or attacking ones. On its face, that still looks like evidence that low-scoring teams do worse, especially if you consider the number of wrecks of premiership campaigns located here, most of which belong to Sydney, Fremantle and St. Kilda. But it's very noticeable that it now hosts the two most recent flags. In fact, by the time next season rolls around, you will have to go back seven years to find a premier that wasn't either defensively-oriented or Hawthorn.
So is it still better to be attacking? Plenty of evidence remains for the benefits of attacking football, but it stops rather abruptly at the end of 2015. In 2016, the four most defensive teams made prelims, while Adelaide, a high-rated attacking team, fell out unexpectedly in the semi-finals. 2017 has been more ambiguous, with another finals failures from defensive specialists Sydney (and, to a lesser extent, Port Adelaide), but a dominant finals campaign from the Tigers. Whether this means the game has evolved, it's a temporary aberration, or squiggle has no freaking idea what it's talking about, I leave to you.
In terms of raw dominance, the 2017 Tigers are rated tenth of those 20 flags, so pretty much bang in the middle, but 2nd for defence and 18th for attack.
The Tigers didn't come from as far back ahead of finals as the Bulldogs did last year - no-one has - but they did move a long way by thrashing all three opponents. They also moved a long way over the course of the season, after a lacklustre 2016 that ended with an 88-point loss to the Giants and a 113-point belting at the hands of the Swans. Some travelled further, but no modern premier has started the year as far back as Richmond did in 2017.
On balance, the Bulldogs 2016 premiership remains the greater anomaly, given how poor they were leading into finals, the need to win 4 straight games, two of which were interstate, and the strength of their opposition, which was greater in 2016 than offered by the top four this year. But the Tigers are up there, particularly (from squiggle's point of view) since they found success with a low-scoring game style that has a terrible historical strike rate.
Richmond had a generous draw in 2017, with only one double against a top-8 opponent (GWS) and three doubles against the bottom 5 (Carlton, Brisbane, Fremantle). It was also a good year to be thereabouts, with a very even competition and no dominant team; probably the least competitive top end field since 2009. But they were also unlucky not to have another close game or two fall their way, deserved to finish top 4, and were emphatic in dismantling each opponent once they got there.
On a personal note, thank you for following Squiggle 2017, and the earlier ones, if you've been on board for that. It's been an amazing ride. But I think this is a good place to leave it, with the team I love obliterating my algorithm and demonstrating how much greater the game is than all the bullshit I do here. So I will stick around BigFooty but not start a squiggle thread next year. In the words of a great man, I am going to spend some time on my novel.
And again, holy ******* shit. I remember complaining about how bad the Tigers were with a guy on my bus, and him saying don't worry, we'd come good in a couple years. That was around 1986. We were on our way to school. I've followed this team through the 29-year period where we missed the finals 27 times. People don't appreciate that; the numbers are too big to really comprehend what it's like to be bad year after year and have that go on almost without break for three decades. Until this year, I'd never seen Richmond win a final in person - I have seen us get smashed from the opening bounce twice - and was too young to remember the last time we made a Grand Final. But now. Holy ******* shit.
I was expecting to be able to report here my experience on which is really worse: being bad forever or losing a Grand Final. All I can say is I still suspect it's the first one.
I like football because it's so divorced from reality, it doesn't matter what else is going on in your life, everyone's on common ground. It doesn't matter who you are. You can connect to people and everything about the two of you is irrelevant except what you think of the teams, or how badly the AFL are managing the rules. It strips us all down to something simple and clean. That's a great thing.
May your off-season be brief, your trades fruitful, and your spuds delisted.
Much love,
Max.
Don't go. The squiggle is the only sensible reason to go the main board. It's a fantastic part of the AFL season to me. I like the numbers. But it's the thinking about why what is happening that makes it awesome for me. Love the squiggle.
And this year has been amazing. End of the season has been awesome. relatively high scoring and total defensive shut downs. Feeling very happy.
gavaniacono
Cancelled
Richmond Tigers
Premiers 2017
Well holy ******* shit. I am dead set serious about retiring. This is the final Squiggle thread.
In animated form:
In Flagpole form:
Obviously I'm posting the above just for the enjoyment of Richmond fans, not because it offers any kind of analytical insight. That much is clear, because if there's one thing Squiggle has been consistent on this year, it's that THE TIGERS WILL NOT WIN THE PREMIERSHIP. It didn't rate them as a team until late, and even then was confident that somewhere, sometime, the defensive gameplan would unravel as a more balanced side got hold of them and shook until all their mediocre players fell out.
Instead, for reasons that leave me equal parts baffled and tumescent, Adelaide turned up on Grand Final Day and played listless football. At no point did it look like an Adelaide game; instead, it always resembled a Richmond game: close and scrappy, with Tigers outworking and outrunning their opponents, taking risks, swarming, and halving and winning contests one by one until the weight of numbers was too great to resist.
In this way, it was the same story as the two previous Richmond finals - moreso, if anything, than the preliminary final, where GWS at least occasionally managed to look like a team not playing Richmond. Where Squiggle expected the Tigers inevitably to break down, they barely showed a crack.
Why this happened requires a closer look at game style than I can provide. But we can examine how unusual it is, and how it fits (or doesn't) with other modern premierships.
Richmond's triumph replaces the 20-year-old 1997 Adelaide premiership on the chart, leaving something of a two-island effect, with four defence-oriented flag teams set a short distance away from 16 balanced or attacking ones. On its face, that still looks like evidence that low-scoring teams do worse, especially if you consider the number of wrecks of premiership campaigns located here, most of which belong to Sydney, Fremantle and St. Kilda. But it's very noticeable that it now hosts the two most recent flags. In fact, by the time next season rolls around, you will have to go back seven years to find a premier that wasn't either defensively-oriented or Hawthorn.
So is it still better to be attacking? Plenty of evidence remains for the benefits of attacking football, but it stops rather abruptly at the end of 2015. In 2016, the four most defensive teams made prelims, while Adelaide, a high-rated attacking team, fell out unexpectedly in the semi-finals. 2017 has been more ambiguous, with another finals failures from defensive specialists Sydney (and, to a lesser extent, Port Adelaide), but a dominant finals campaign from the Tigers. Whether this means the game has evolved, it's a temporary aberration, or squiggle has no freaking idea what it's talking about, I leave to you.
In terms of raw dominance, the 2017 Tigers are rated tenth of those 20 flags, so pretty much bang in the middle, but 2nd for defence and 18th for attack.
The Tigers didn't come from as far back ahead of finals as the Bulldogs did last year - no-one has - but they did move a long way by thrashing all three opponents. They also moved a long way over the course of the season, after a lacklustre 2016 that ended with an 88-point loss to the Giants and a 113-point belting at the hands of the Swans. Some travelled further, but no modern premier has started the year as far back as Richmond did in 2017.
On balance, the Bulldogs 2016 premiership remains the greater anomaly, given how poor they were leading into finals, the need to win 4 straight games, two of which were interstate, and the strength of their opposition, which was greater in 2016 than offered by the top four this year. But the Tigers are up there, particularly (from squiggle's point of view) since they found success with a low-scoring game style that has a terrible historical strike rate.
Richmond had a generous draw in 2017, with only one double against a top-8 opponent (GWS) and three doubles against the bottom 5 (Carlton, Brisbane, Fremantle). It was also a good year to be thereabouts, with a very even competition and no dominant team; probably the least competitive top end field since 2009. But they were also unlucky not to have another close game or two fall their way, deserved to finish top 4, and were emphatic in dismantling each opponent once they got there.
On a personal note, thank you for following Squiggle 2017, and the earlier ones, if you've been on board for that. It's been an amazing ride. But I think this is a good place to leave it, with the team I love obliterating my algorithm and demonstrating how much greater the game is than all the bullshit I do here. So I will stick around BigFooty but not start a squiggle thread next year. In the words of a great man, I am going to spend some time on my novel.
And again, holy ******* shit. I remember complaining about how bad the Tigers were with a guy on my bus, and him saying don't worry, we'd come good in a couple years. That was around 1986. We were on our way to school. I've followed this team through the 29-year period where we missed the finals 27 times. People don't appreciate that; the numbers are too big to really comprehend what it's like to be bad year after year and have that go on almost without break for three decades. Until this year, I'd never seen Richmond win a final in person - I have seen us get smashed from the opening bounce twice - and was too young to remember the last time we made a Grand Final. But now. Holy ******* shit.
I was expecting to be able to report here my experience on which is really worse: being bad forever or losing a Grand Final. All I can say is I still suspect it's the first one.
I like football because it's so divorced from reality, it doesn't matter what else is going on in your life, everyone's on common ground. It doesn't matter who you are. You can connect to people and everything about the two of you is irrelevant except what you think of the teams, or how badly the AFL are managing the rules. It strips us all down to something simple and clean. That's a great thing.
May your off-season be brief, your trades fruitful, and your spuds delisted.
Much love,
Max.
Dr Tigris
Brownlow Medallist
On the Tigers playing ugly defensive football. Yes / No
Yes, the Tigers defense is brilliant, the midfield pressure is great and the forward pressure is amazing. So the Tigers stop other teams moving the ball freely, and cause pressure, real and implied, everywhere. So if that is ugly then OK. But it is not the old fashioned stacking the backline. In fact part of the game plan is to pull the forward line out at other teams move the ball to their forward line. By bringing numbers up around the ball the Tigers have been able to outnumber and pressure the opposition. Then, they can move the ball back in fast with a turnover. So it is an active contested football. Not the Ross Lyon scrum, scrum, scrum football. I like to watch it because so much is going on. It just is rarely the ball moving cleanly 150m that Adelaide and GWS like to do.
No: As richoatthedisco showed the Tigers out scored Adelaide in the last 10 games. That is, once the game plan became baked in, and the team got harder, the Tigers scored heavily. Ugly defensive football to me is the really low scoring pack football. The tigers play a tough hard style, but one in which they score heavily when on song. So, the style isn't that ugly if you like scoring. it is ugly if you like another team than the Tigers scoring though
Yes, the Tigers defense is brilliant, the midfield pressure is great and the forward pressure is amazing. So the Tigers stop other teams moving the ball freely, and cause pressure, real and implied, everywhere. So if that is ugly then OK. But it is not the old fashioned stacking the backline. In fact part of the game plan is to pull the forward line out at other teams move the ball to their forward line. By bringing numbers up around the ball the Tigers have been able to outnumber and pressure the opposition. Then, they can move the ball back in fast with a turnover. So it is an active contested football. Not the Ross Lyon scrum, scrum, scrum football. I like to watch it because so much is going on. It just is rarely the ball moving cleanly 150m that Adelaide and GWS like to do.
No: As richoatthedisco showed the Tigers out scored Adelaide in the last 10 games. That is, once the game plan became baked in, and the team got harder, the Tigers scored heavily. Ugly defensive football to me is the really low scoring pack football. The tigers play a tough hard style, but one in which they score heavily when on song. So, the style isn't that ugly if you like scoring. it is ugly if you like another team than the Tigers scoring though
- Aug 18, 2009
- 4,230
- 17,507
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Thread starter
- #1,859
The "Richmond outscored Adelaide in the last 10 games" thing is a touch misleading, I reckon, since the Tigers closed out the H&A season against Brisbane, GWS, Gold Coast, Hawthorn, Geelong, Fremantle, and St. Kilda -- that's 2 finalists, 2 average teams, and 3 bottom teams. They kicked 44 goals in 2 of those games (Freo & St Kilda) and averaged 12.2 goals against the rest.
Over the same period, Adelaide averaged 14.7 goals against Melbourne, Geelong, Collingwood, Port Adelaide, Essendon, Sydney, and West Coast -- 5 finalists and 2 mid-tier teams. Their lowest haul was 10 goals against West Coast, when they weren't especially motivated to go at 100%.
That said, the Tigers definitely went up a gear late in the season, and I wouldn't call them low-scoring based on the last bit alone.
Over the same period, Adelaide averaged 14.7 goals against Melbourne, Geelong, Collingwood, Port Adelaide, Essendon, Sydney, and West Coast -- 5 finalists and 2 mid-tier teams. Their lowest haul was 10 goals against West Coast, when they weren't especially motivated to go at 100%.
That said, the Tigers definitely went up a gear late in the season, and I wouldn't call them low-scoring based on the last bit alone.
- Aug 18, 2009
- 4,230
- 17,507
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Thread starter
- #1,860
Yeah I'll keep the site up. That runs itself.
What about the finals? Richmond scored 44 goals in three games against top-4 opposition, its opponents scored 22.
Not only do you not know what you're seeing, you don't know what you're saying. I saw one team own and attack through the corridor in every Richmond final. It wasn't Geelong, GWS (ok, it was for a quarter) and it sure as hell wasn't Adelaide.
iluvparis
Import Whisperer
- Apr 1, 2005
- 50,055
- 40,656
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Calgary Flames, Man Utd
A purist would suggest kicking and high marking are the basics of the game and if you have the ball you don't need to tackle.
- Jun 21, 2010
- 8,816
- 8,704
- AFL Club
- Richmond
They are basics, but they require skill, effort running and tackling does not require skill.
iluvparis
Import Whisperer
- Apr 1, 2005
- 50,055
- 40,656
- AFL Club
- Carlton
- Other Teams
- Calgary Flames, Man Utd
- Jun 21, 2010
- 8,816
- 8,704
- AFL Club
- Richmond
Sure, but pressure will always beat skill, always easy to execute skills and look good with minimal pressure, but a team that is elite at pressuring that doesn't give the other team time to execute how they like will always come out on top.That's the point
gavaniacono
Cancelled
Crows were soft.
Tiges hard.
Both mentally and physically.
That was the primary difference.
Next thing was, tiges created scoring opps off the back of hardness = their skills were better.
Harder, more skilled moving ball under pressure by hand and foot.
Thirdly, tiges were smarter on off the field. Hunted in packs. Got the match ups they wanted.
Comprehensive win in the end by the tougher, more skilled, smarter team.
48 points.
Tiges hard.
Both mentally and physically.
That was the primary difference.
Next thing was, tiges created scoring opps off the back of hardness = their skills were better.
Harder, more skilled moving ball under pressure by hand and foot.
Thirdly, tiges were smarter on off the field. Hunted in packs. Got the match ups they wanted.
Comprehensive win in the end by the tougher, more skilled, smarter team.
48 points.
gavaniacono
Cancelled
Wrong.
Everyone who has played coached the game knows that getting the ball is the basic skill of the game. It is such a basic skill that it is overlooked as a skill by many who only see kicks and marks.
- Jul 25, 2008
- 27,485
- 54,782
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Fighting Furies, Man Utd, Cavaliers
No. We grind them down in the first and blitz them off the park with hard running and fast ball movement in the second half.
All 3 finals were close at half time. After half time it was a complete domination. We put pressure on in a half of football, make them crack and sweat and then run over the top of them after half time.
- Banned
- #1,869
Correct. Not in dispute. You can word it anyway you like. You shut down the team and when they are on the ropes you go for the kill.
Can't fault that.
Unfortunately too many Richmond fans are salty and want to be known as an attacking team when it simply isn't the case. Attacking isn't more or less legitimate for a premiership side.
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Elton Johns Wig
Premiership Ruckman
- Moderator
- #1,870
Over the course of the season, the whole season, Adelaide clearly the more attacking side.
But to not acknowledge Richmonds increase in attacking output in the last 1/3 of the season and through the finals is either stubborness or stupidity.
- Banned
- #1,871
They definitely improved late and timed their run spectacularly. They are not a Ross Lyon coached team where they are trying to win by kicking 8 goals. I'm not suggesting they are that defensive.
To suggest they come out looking for a shootout is preposterous. If they did that vS AdelAide they'd lose.
They shut a game down for the first half, sap all of their opponents energy just trying to get out of their back half and create a scoring opportunity. In the second half if the opposition doesn't chAnge tack, then the Tigers run rampant.
Half of its surely mental - imagine how frustrating for Adelaide constantly putting effort into leaving their back half only to have Rance punch it dead or Houli (long may he be remembered as the real MVP) intercept it. No wonder Adelaide were screaming at each other.
I just find it hilarious that in the lead up to the Grand Final Tigers fans all over this forum were saying how Tigers pressure and shut down footy, in combination with the venue being the G would give them a real chance.
Ever since they won they have tried to debunk both things.
Strange
King Brown
Club Legend
- Aug 12, 2017
- 2,582
- 3,767
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Banned
- #1,872
It's funny how rolling mauls of tacklers with poor kicking efficiency is now attractive footy because Richmond won the premiership.
If you actually watch us, when we have the ball, our first action is to move the ball directly towards our goals as quickly as possible. It is only when we don’t have the ball that we defend and play ‘negative’ - mainly because before you can try to score, you have to get the ball back and therefore stop the other team from scoring. When you call our gameplan ‘ugly’ you are really just suggesting that when we don’t have the ball we try too hard to get it back.
- Banned
- #1,874
I agree with your first part that's what I'm getting at. Ugly is not meant as an insult as I've said many times.
