Analysis Tackling

[Lsta062]

Hi guys,

I know that most of us know that tackling is an issue at Richmond. Having looked at some stats on footywire though, I think that it is more of an issue than what I have previously thought it was. My hypothesis is that our low numbers in tackling when comparing us to other teams is a reason why we have not been performing well.

In 2001, the year we finished in the 4th in tackling, this is how we rank in tackling from 2001 onwards:

2001 - 4th/16
2002 - 11th/16
2003 - 14th/16
2004 - 12th/16
2005 - 13th/16
2006 - 13th/16
2007 - 16th/16
2008 - 16th/16
2009 - 12th/16
2010 - 12th/16
2011 - 15th/17
2012 - 10th/18
2013 - 18th/18
2014 - 13th/18
2015 - 17th/18

If you ask me, those are pretty low standards in this area for over a decade. The highest we finished in tackling since our Preliminary Final appearance in 2001 is 10th in 2012. I wouldn't have made a big fuss about it if we were not trying to emulate a defensive side in recent years, but since we are, I like to draw attention to this.

Some may point to Hawthorn finishing 18th in the tackle count in 2014 and West Coast being 15th in 2015, but those are two attacking sides (even then, a lot of top 8 sides have a decent tackling rank whether or not they are defensive or attacking). Therefore, I do realise that we had more problems other than tackling between 2002-2012. But from 2013 onwards, we fixed a lot of our issues and started to follow a more defensive approach under Hardwick. Except, I found that our tackling rank hasn't increased even though we were taking a defensive approach. It in fact has slipped. Let's have a look at where defensive teams have ranked over the last few years in tackling.

Sydney:

2012 - 1st/18
2013 - 1st/18
2014 - 1st/18
2015 - 3rd/18

Fremantle:

2012 - 3rd/18
2013 - 6th/18
2014 - 10th/18
2015 - 13th/18

Fremantle's tackle count started to slip as the years went by, and so did their performance in the finals. They have only won 1 final against an injury-depleted Sydney last year out of the 4 finals they have played in 2014/2015 compared to 3 finals wins out of 4 they played in during the 2012 and 2013 seasons.

What about the defensive St Kilda in 2009?

2009 - 1st/16

What about Sydney in 2005/2006?

2005 - 1st/16
2006 - 1st/16

Of course, this does not always seem to be the case. St Kilda in 2010 reached a Grand Final as a defensive side, but ranked 9th in tackles, and Adelaide in 2005 ranked 8th in tackles although they ended up making a Prelim. But they did pick it up in 2006 and finished 4th in tackles in what was arguably a more dominant season for Adelaide. Conversely, Port Adelaide and Collingwood were the two teams with the highest tackling count in 2015, yet both missed finals. So obviously doing a lot of tackling is not going to give you a Premiership alone.

Having said that, the ranking in tackles is something I noticed that defensive sides improved on when shooting up the ladder the following year. For instance, Sydney ranked 6th in tackles in 2004 (which is quite decent) and were 6th on the ladder. In 2005, they ranked 1st in tackles and won the Premiership.
In 2008, St Kilda finished 4th on the ladder and ranked 8th in tackles. In 2009, they finished 1st in tackles (increased their tackle count from 1175 to 1587!) in a dominant season.

My point is that I think that it is important for a good defensive side to out-tackle most of the competition in rankings, especially if they are one that struggles offensively like Sydney in 2005. Yet, when it became clear that we were going down that defensive path, our tackling slipped further on average in comparison with the rest of the competition instead of going up. Yeah, we lost Jackson and Tuck throughout those years, but our tackling numbers have not looked fantastic since 2001 anyway, so I am starting to think that there may not be enough emphasis on this problem. Now that Townsend and Moore have come, I really hope that this is addressed. I believe that they were brought in for this reason, and especially Moore given that he participated a lot in the Port Adelaide side in 2014 that ranked 3rd/18 in tackling. We could jump up to 1st or 2nd on the ladder too if we improve our tackling like St Kilda and Sydney did in 2009 and 2005 respectively, and given that we finished 17th in that area, there is a lot of room for improvement.

All I know is that this seriously needs to be addressed if we want to become a strong and defensive-minded unit that doesn't have a strong attack. I am sure that our failure in the finals series in the last 3 years is not solely because of our lack of tackling. I do feel however that it does play a role in our inability to do damage in the finals. That is one thing that really stood out to me when watching the 2015 Elimination Final against North Melbourne. I am not saying we should finish 1st in tackling or something like that. Just that we need to improve it greatly - especially if we continue to struggle offensively next year.

TL;DR - I think that if Richmond wants to be a strong defensive unit that is a Premiership threat, they should be looking to improve their tackling count while maintaining their good defence in the event that they continue to struggle offensively.

 

[Lsta062]

Extra Analysis:

Premiers of the last 10 years and their tackle and points For/Against rankings:

Season - | Premier | Tackle | Points For | Points Against
2015 - Hawthorn | 11th | 1st | 1st
2014 - Hawthorn | 18th | 1st | 6th
2013 - Hawthorn | 8th | 1st | 5th
2012 - Sydney | 1st | 5th | 1st
2011 - Geelong | 8th | 2nd | 2nd
2010 - Collingwood | 1st | 2nd | 2nd
2009 - Geelong | 6th | 2nd | 4th
2008 - Hawthorn | 11th | 3rd | 3rd
2007 - Geelong | 2nd | 1st | 1st
2006 - West Coast | 6th | 4th | 4th
2005 - Sydney | 1st | 14th | 2nd
2004 - Port Adelaide | 15th | 3rd | 4th
2003 - Brisbane Lions | 6th | 2nd | 5th
2002 - Brisbane Lions | 4th | 1st | 2nd
2001 - Brisbane Lions | 5th | 2nd | 6th
2000 - Essendon | 3rd | 1st | 3rd

Our numbers:

Season | Tackle | Points For | Points Against
2012- 10th | 8th | 10th
2013- 18th | 5th | 3rd
2014- 13th | 11th | 8th
2015- 17th | 9th | 3rd

It seems to me that those teams who rate low in terms of tackling (those underlined) have a good offensive style, so it seems that you can bypass not having high tackle figures if your offensive game is quite good (which ours is not at the moment).
Those who are ranked exceptionally well in terms of tackling that won the Premiership (the bolded) seem to have a really good ranking in terms of Points Against to go with it.

In terms of our number from 2013 to 2015, notice how every time we improve our defence, our tackle number drops? By doing this, we seem to have cancelled out any of the improvement we gained with improving our defence as all three of our Elimination Finals ended up with the same result - a loss. Either we improve our tackling while maintaining our defence at a high standard, or we ditch our defensive mindset and step up our offence to reach the top 2-3 of the competition if we don't want to improve our tackling. The numbers I posted of the Premiers in the last 15 years either had a good attack and an average tackle count, a good defence and tackle count (and an average attack) or a decent combination of all.

None got away with a really bad ranking in tackling and an average attack to go with it like we are displaying right now.

EDIT: Sorry about the formatting. It was decently spaced when I first typed it, but the spacings disappeared when I posted it. Hopefully the pseudo "table" I made still serves its intended purpose alright

 

[JAKLAUGHING]

The game has moved on from being fixated on tackling...

 

["The Roar Is Back"]

Got the ball you dont have to tackle

 

[partycorolla]

Got the ball you dont have to tackle

Maybe we need the ball more then....

 

[TheProwler]

Got the ball you dont have to tackle

It's one thing to use it correctly but another to win it back when the opposition get it.

I have been unable to understand how this is not a Hardwick non negotiable given he was great in this area as a player.

I worry that we put too much emphasis on beating the opposition in the coaches box but not enough on the field. Tackling is one of the first basics in footy and we suck at it!

 

[Lsta062]

The game has moved on from being fixated on tackling...

If you don't think that is the issue, feel free to share your opinion. I definitely agree that tackling is not the only problem that we have and that it is not alone the answer to get a premiership (Port were first in tackle count last year and missed finals). However, I think that is one facet of our game that I thought we were quite below average on not only in number, but while watching the game too. I see "missed tackles" often in crucial parts of games that I thought it was worthwhile to mention. Sometimes, it can be the difference between winning a game and losing one, or stopping opposition momentum and letting it flow on

Got the ball you dont have to tackle

And tackling helps you get the ball

 

[JAKLAUGHING]

I see "missed tackles" often in crucial parts of games that I thought it was worthwhile to mention.

Agree that missed tackles is an issue... and that is a case for improved technique and further training... learn to stick a tackle...
I just don't see tackling and more of it as the way to win premierships... too many variables in a game... for that magic solution...

 

[TigerImposter]

Maybe we need the ball more then....

Welcome back PC

 

[TigerImposter]

Extra Analysis:

Premiers of the last 10 years and their tackle and points For/Against rankings:

Season - | Premier | Tackle | Points For | Points Against
2015 - Hawthorn | 11th | 1st | 1st
2014 - Hawthorn | 18th | 1st | 6th
2013 - Hawthorn | 8th | 1st | 5th
2012 - Sydney | 1st | 5th | 1st
2011 - Geelong | 8th | 2nd | 2nd
2010 - Collingwood | 1st | 2nd | 2nd
2009 - Geelong | 6th | 2nd | 4th
2008 - Hawthorn | 11th | 3rd | 3rd
2007 - Geelong | 2nd | 1st | 1st
2006 - West Coast | 6th | 4th | 4th
2005 - Sydney | 1st | 14th | 2nd
2004 - Port Adelaide | 15th | 3rd | 4th
2003 - Brisbane Lions | 6th | 2nd | 5th
2002 - Brisbane Lions | 4th | 1st | 2nd
2001 - Brisbane Lions | 5th | 2nd | 6th
2000 - Essendon | 3rd | 1st | 3rd

Our numbers:

Season | Tackle | Points For | Points Against
2012- 10th | 8th | 10th
2013- 18th | 5th | 3rd
2014- 13th | 11th | 8th
2015- 17th | 9th | 3rd

It seems to me that those teams who rate low in terms of tackling (those underlined) have a good offensive style, so it seems that you can bypass not having high tackle figures if your offensive game is quite good (which ours is not at the moment).
Those who are ranked exceptionally well in terms of tackling that won the Premiership (the bolded) seem to have a really good ranking in terms of Points Against to go with it.

In terms of our number from 2013 to 2015, notice how every time we improve our defence, our tackle number drops? By doing this, we seem to have cancelled out any of the improvement we gained with improving our defence as all three of our Elimination Finals ended up with the same result - a loss. Either we improve our tackling while maintaining our defence at a high standard, or we ditch our defensive mindset and step up our offence to reach the top 2-3 of the competition if we don't want to improve our tackling. The numbers I posted of the Premiers in the last 15 years either had a good attack and an average tackle count, a good defence and tackle count (and an average attack) or a decent combination of all.

None got away with a really bad ranking in tackling and an average attack to go with it like we are displaying right now.

EDIT: Sorry about the formatting. It was decently spaced when I first typed it, but the spacings disappeared when I posted it. Hopefully the pseudo "table" I made still serves its intended purpose alright

Great work

 

[Coach_Required]

If you don't know how to tackle to cause a turnover then your dead. Those thinking Hawthorn aren't effective tacklers are kidding themselves.

Hawthorn tackle and get the ball back on their terms, crap tackling is when you tackle your opponents and their team still ends up with the ball.

 

[Lsta062]

If you don't know how to tackle to cause a turnover then your dead. Those thinking Hawthorn aren't effective tacklers are kidding themselves.

Hawthorn tackle and get the ball back on their terms, crap tackling is when you tackle your opponents and their team still ends up with the ball.

Hawthorn ranking 11th in 2015 in tackling is not because their tackling is average. They are ranked 2nd in amount of disposals and in 1st in effective disposals. Also, they are ranked 1st in uncontested possessions. This tells me that they are good at getting the ball, keeping the ball, and provided that they are ranked 1st offensively, they are good at converting. This sounds to me like a team that does not need to tackle as often as other teams. And, they sound like they are efficient tackles when they tackle.

Richmond however is ranked 8th in both number of disposals and disposal efficiency. Also, we rank 9th in uncontested possessions, and 7th in contested possessions. So, if our contested possessions ranking as well as our uncontested possessions, disposals and disposal efficiency are not ranking high, how are we ranked 17th in the league in the tackle count?

I don't understand this point. It isn't like we are getting a lot of the ball and amass a heap of uncontested possessions during the season. It isn't like we rank 1st in contested possessions either, so if we are ranked 17th in tackling to go with these figures, then no wonder we are ranked 9th in disposals - we are not getting enough of the ball. And with an effictive disposal ranking of 8th on top of all that, it doesn't surprise me why we have not gone near a grand final last year. We need to get more of the ball and improve our disposal efficiency. Struggle to increase disposal efficiency percentage? Then get more of the ball to increase the amount of effective disposals you do in a given match.

A team with an ordinary count in disposal efficiency like us needs a back up tactic in getting the ball if we are also not getting the ball as much as some others through contested possession. And, I think tackling more will give us this opportunity. Looking at these stats though, tackling is definitely not our only issue

 

[Charlie Pannam]

Can only think looking at those stats that we don't place a lot of importance in tackling otherwise we'd have tried to improve those numbers.
Hardwick and Smith are disciples of the Hawthorn game style perhaps that has something to do with it. Hawks also have low numbers in that area as did Port in 2004 when Choco was coaching

 

[theflea]

Pure tackle numbers must be read in conjunction with game styles in mind. The Swans/Freo play that style so they will naturally have high tackle numbers. We play a keeping off style and a zone defence in the back 50, to try to defend, which means we have low tackle numbers. Also remember the definition of a tackle to get it recorded (you tackle someone and it stops that player disposing of the ball, so if they get a handball away its not a tackle stat). However this still means we need to get better at tackling from behind on defence. How often do we our fwds tackle a bloke from the oppo when they are going fwd? We need more tackles from our fwds, and be better at tackling to stop the player. I still say have a tackle ladder with each player aiming for a tackle per quarter. We wont get there but it is a good target.

 

[tugga]

tackling and pressure causes turnovers and mistakes.
It's an area of our game that is frustratingly poor and the standards have not risen in years, which is a concern to me.

 

[Livonski]

Tackles inside f50 are pure gold. Problem is we always have one less player there so you have to guard space rather than commit as that lets them out too easy.
A small quick f50 tackler is crucial and is why they tried Morris there. So I'm sure the brains trust is all over the issue.

 

[Hounddd]

The thing that shits me is, we have way too many missed/broken tackles.

 

[have a RHG]

Takling can be the most over rated stat these days. Yeah it seems to be the only guide to pressure applied but its not be all and end all. Teams are more focused on a zone set up they dont like players rushing to takle as they may get brushed aside or drawn into a handball creating over lap and causing the defensive set up down the ground to fall apart. You'll find players will corral more forcing the player to kick over him as oppose to around him.
Pressure can be applied in many ways sometimes i think tackling can be overstated especially by old school thinkers.

 

[Lsta062]

Tackles inside f50 are pure gold. Problem is we always have one less player there so you have to guard space rather than commit as that lets them out too easy.
A small quick f50 tackler is crucial and is why they tried Morris there. So I'm sure the brains trust is all over the issue.

This is why I think Rioli will be a good fit for us. Not only is he quick, but I heard he loves a good tackle too. I am excited what he'll bring to our team

 

[TJTIGER]

As others have mentioned. The tackle stat cannot be read in isolation. I don't think we can say it's the be-all in winning games. The game has moved on with an emphasis on multiple areas if teams are to overcome the opposition. It seems to me that teams have gone on to have more than one game style with more of a full ground defence & attack. We see jack running the ball out of defence & defenders kicking goals. Players have been developed to have more well rounded games with an arsenal of weapons/versatility, so if one or 2 are shut down others can step up & exploit possible weaknesses.....

 

[sante]

The thing that shits me is, we have way too many missed/broken tackles.

This.

Who cares about tackle numbers. It's what happens after the tackle that matters. As Coach Required mentioned, does it result in a turnover or do the opposition retain the footy? That's what it comes down too. Stats are meaningless in a lot of ways.

 

[Lsta062]

Takling can be the most over rated stat these days. Yeah it seems to be the only guide to pressure applied but its not be all and end all. Teams are more focused on a zone set up they dont like players rushing to takle as they may get brushed aside or drawn into a handball creating over lap and causing the defensive set up down the ground to fall apart. You'll find players will corral more forcing the player to kick over him as oppose to around him.
Pressure can be applied in many ways sometimes i think tackling can be overstated especially by old school thinkers.

Good points, but my only problem is that I think we miss tackles way too often. In the EF, some Richmond players were hula-hooping around the North players while they were brushed aside and it was frustrating.

North laid more tackles than us (59-51) even though they had more disposals, and that wasn't because of some great gamestyle we were implementing, nor was it because we had more of the ball. Someone could probably go through the video and point out many occasions we missed tackles that day that would have gone a long way. Therefore, in our case, I think we should work on increasing our tackling work and sticking them when we decide to go for it.

Like I mentioned, tackling alone isn't going to get you a Premiership. But in our case, increasing our efficiency in tackling may give us that extra boost in the finals series.

 

[Lsta062]

As others have mentioned. The tackle stat cannot be read in isolation. I don't think we can say it's the be-all in winning games. The game has moved on with an emphasis on multiple areas if teams are to overcome the opposition. It seems to me that teams have gone on to have more than one game style with more of a full ground defence & attack. We see jack running the ball out of defence & defenders kicking goals. Players have been developed to have more well rounded games with an arsenal of weapons/versatility, so if one or 2 are shut down others can step up & exploit possible weaknesses.....

This.

Who cares about tackle numbers. It's what happens after the tackle that matters. As Coach Required mentioned, does it result in a turnover or do the opposition retain the footy? That's what it comes down too. Stats are meaningless in a lot of ways.

Yes, you guys are right. This game is so complex nowadays that hard to take one thing in isolation. While going through the things previous Premiers did well and did average in, in all honesty, I found a range of different combinations. So it can be tough figuring out what your team should do to get that Premiership (which is why I don't envy the coaches jobs).

I just am puzzled as to why Richmond keep failing come September time no matter how well they do in the season. I don't buy into the phrase that the Richmond players are chokers. They did not look like they were choking in the EF against North Melbourne. They were simply defeated.

What are some reasons you guys think that Richmond could improve in this season? This should be a thread of its own

 

[TJTIGER]

Yes, you guys are right. This game is so complex nowadays that hard to take one thing in isolation. While going through the things previous Premiers did well and did average in, in all honesty, I found a range of different combinations. So it can be tough figuring out what your team should do to get that Premiership (which is why I don't envy the coaches jobs).

I just am puzzled as to why Richmond keep failing come September time no matter how well they do in the season. I don't buy into the phrase that the Richmond players are chokers. They did not look like they were choking in the EF against North Melbourne. They were simply defeated.

What are some reasons you guys think that Richmond could improve in this season? This should be a thread of its own

Me neither . I do think the team had some deficiencies. Which I'm hoping to some degree have been addressed with the arrival of Moore & Townsend. This will also have a ripple effect on other players like Cotchin who will be able to spend more time being damaging on the outside along with others. This coupled with mature recruits, competition for spots & improvement from younger players will go a fair way to our improvement imho.....

 

[Lsta062]

Me neither . I do think the team had some deficiencies. Which I'm hoping to some degree have been addressed with the arrival of Moore & Townsend. This will also have a ripple effect on other players like Cotchin who will be able to spend more time being damaging on the outside along with others. This coupled with mature recruits competition for spots & improvement from younger players will go a fair way to our improvement imho.....

If one of Moore/Townsend actually end up helping Cotchin to reach his potential like some on here say they can, it would be like landing the elite recruit that we were initially after in the off-season.

We'll have to see though. Well, Moore at least played in Port Adelaide's finals campaign in 2014 (although he was the sub in two of those matches and was subbed out in one of them...)