What They're Saying - The Bulldogs Media Thread - Part 2

[threenewpadlocks]

West coast get on average 8 more free kicks per game then their opponents. This is the biggest reason their record on the road isn't as good as at home.

How can you say that with such confidence? That's an empirical question, and would require a close review of their games. Other factors, including player mentality and ground shape may play as big if not a greater role in their home vs away game record.

Why - from a scientific perspective - home ground advantage actually exists is one of the most fascinating things that you can look at, if you're the type of person who likes to spend their free time learning and investigating why things are.

Officiating is no doubt the greatest single factor above all others individually - though me separating "travel" (ie the physical impact of time zones and physically having to be on a plane) and "home conditions" (the familiarity with the conditions) as two separate things, when it's kinda hard from a scientific perspective to separate the two as one comes with the other.

There's a book that came out this year, Footballistics, that basically looked at the two types of free kicks where play style doesn't have an impact (ie a team that tackles more or is first to the ball or whatever)- running too far, and deliberate rushed behinds/out of bounds - and found that the vast majority of these are paid toward the home team. Once you divide this by the impact that this has on the margin, they found that home-biased umpiring constitutes something like 30-40% - 3 to 4 points out of about an average 10 point home ground advantage the AFL has. Worth noting that this is the average of all games - no doubt some umpires are better than others, and it's not like 3 points happens every game, sometimes it'll be a goal or more impact, and sometimes none at all.

The most famous of these studies came in German soccer, where roughly half the grounds have an athletics track and the other half doesn't. They found that when controlling for the size of the crowd, there's a stronger home ground advantage in the grounds where there's no athletics track, as the crowd is closer to the ground and the noise is louder.

Another study looked at Ice Hockey players and their testosterone levels on home and away ice, and found it was higher at home - the primal nature of protecting your location helped their performance.

I'm inclined to think officiating has a lesser effect as a % of total home ground effect than all other sports - for a couple of reasons. One, we have three umpires. Two, we have different sized grounds, so the home advantage has an impact more than other sports with familiarity to the ground size - think Geelong at Kardinia playing the narrow ground more effectively. Three - because the game is more physical, requiring greater running and hits and the emphasis on recovery is greater than almost all other professional sports - the very nature of having to get on a plane and be in the air for a long time, is more significant than it is for other sports.

But all factors considered, officiating is still the main factor, even if it's less than 50%. The others combine to around 60-70% but in smaller factors in combination.

 

[DelRe]

Why - from a scientific perspective - home ground advantage actually exists is one of the most fascinating things that you can look at, if you're the type of person who likes to spend their free time learning and investigating why things are.

Officiating is no doubt the greatest single factor above all others individually - though me separating "travel" (ie the physical impact of time zones and physically having to be on a plane) and "home conditions" (the familiarity with the conditions) as two separate things, when it's kinda hard from a scientific perspective to separate the two as one comes with the other.

There's a book that came out this year, Footballistics, that basically looked at the two types of free kicks where play style doesn't have an impact (ie a team that tackles more or is first to the ball or whatever)- running too far, and deliberate rushed behinds/out of bounds - and found that the vast majority of these are paid toward the home team. Once you divide this by the impact that this has on the margin, they found that home-biased umpiring constitutes something like 30-40% - 3 to 4 points out of about an average 10 point home ground advantage the AFL has. Worth noting that this is the average of all games - no doubt some umpires are better than others, and it's not like 3 points happens every game, sometimes it'll be a goal or more impact, and sometimes none at all.

The most famous of these studies came in German soccer, where roughly half the grounds have an athletics track and the other half doesn't. They found that when controlling for the size of the crowd, there's a stronger home ground advantage in the grounds where there's no athletics track, as the crowd is closer to the ground and the noise is louder.

Another study looked at Ice Hockey players and their testosterone levels on home and away ice, and found it was higher at home - the primal nature of protecting your location helped their performance.

I'm inclined to think officiating has a lesser effect as a % of total home ground effect than all other sports - for a couple of reasons. One, we have three umpires. Two, we have different sized grounds, so the home advantage has an impact more than other sports with familiarity to the ground size - think Geelong at Kardinia playing the narrow ground more effectively. Three - because the game is more physical, requiring greater running and hits and the emphasis on recovery is greater than almost all other professional sports - the very nature of having to get on a plane and be in the air for a long time, is more significant than it is for other sports.

But all factors considered, officiating is still the main factor, even if it's less than 50%. The others combine to around 60-70% but in smaller factors in combination.

This is potentially flawed logic. How do you determine that the free kicks whether rightly or wrongly awarded were based on home ground effect v bad umpiring? You’d need to compare how the same umpire performed in respect of the same decision in as close as possible circumstances at a different ground. Perhaps the study did that but without it, it’s potentially not a reliable observation.

More importantly how do you determine there is a ten point average advantage from a home ground so that 30-40% can be attributed to the umpiring? There is a potential circularity here as it’s premised in having already worked out what the total advantage is to then allocate it to individual contributing factors - but you’ve already acknowledged you don’t know the precise impact of all the potential contributing factors are so how can you know the total? How can you say how much the team scored or stopped the other team from scoring from crowd noise, testosterone effect you mention etc etc? If you can’t then you don’t know the total.

 

[Dogs Rule]

But what about Caro? Can we hate on her too? Please.

The Melbourne lunch snub was hilarious.

 

[gangsta deluxe]

Why - from a scientific perspective - home ground advantage actually exists is one of the most fascinating things that you can look at, if you're the type of person who likes to spend their free time learning and investigating why things are.

Officiating is no doubt the greatest single factor above all others individually - though me separating "travel" (ie the physical impact of time zones and physically having to be on a plane) and "home conditions" (the familiarity with the conditions) as two separate things, when it's kinda hard from a scientific perspective to separate the two as one comes with the other.

There's a book that came out this year, Footballistics, that basically looked at the two types of free kicks where play style doesn't have an impact (ie a team that tackles more or is first to the ball or whatever)- running too far, and deliberate rushed behinds/out of bounds - and found that the vast majority of these are paid toward the home team. Once you divide this by the impact that this has on the margin, they found that home-biased umpiring constitutes something like 30-40% - 3 to 4 points out of about an average 10 point home ground advantage the AFL has. Worth noting that this is the average of all games - no doubt some umpires are better than others, and it's not like 3 points happens every game, sometimes it'll be a goal or more impact, and sometimes none at all.

The most famous of these studies came in German soccer, where roughly half the grounds have an athletics track and the other half doesn't. They found that when controlling for the size of the crowd, there's a stronger home ground advantage in the grounds where there's no athletics track, as the crowd is closer to the ground and the noise is louder.

Another study looked at Ice Hockey players and their testosterone levels on home and away ice, and found it was higher at home - the primal nature of protecting your location helped their performance.

I'm inclined to think officiating has a lesser effect as a % of total home ground effect than all other sports - for a couple of reasons. One, we have three umpires. Two, we have different sized grounds, so the home advantage has an impact more than other sports with familiarity to the ground size - think Geelong at Kardinia playing the narrow ground more effectively. Three - because the game is more physical, requiring greater running and hits and the emphasis on recovery is greater than almost all other professional sports - the very nature of having to get on a plane and be in the air for a long time, is more significant than it is for other sports.

But all factors considered, officiating is still the main factor, even if it's less than 50%. The others combine to around 60-70% but in smaller factors in combination.

Will have to read Fooballistics now - the old man bought it for me a couple of months ago and I haven’t yet had the chance to read it

 

[NBates]

Just happened to see Ed Richards on Bounce. Won best getting smashed in the mouth on the end of someone's kick annual award. Duds kept pressing the poor guy on who he's going for in the GF (der, who do ya reakon?). "You're doing alright at the Bullies at the moment, but who will you be going for tomorrow?").
It'll be a sad day when Eddie poached him

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[ScragCity]

Just happened to see Ed Richards on Bounce. Won best getting smashed in the mouth on the end of someone's kick annual award. Duds kept pressing the poor guy on who he's going for in the GF (der, who do ya reakon?). "You're doing alright at the Bullies at the moment, but who will you be going for tomorrow?").
It'll be a sad day when Eddie poached him

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Why do miserables like yourself love to believe that Richards will leave us for Collingwood one day? If you'd seen him dancing to Who Let the Dogs Out the other night you'd know he's gonna be a Dog for life.

 

[Beasley]

Not a gentleman. Just a former English teacher. I'll spare you the Religious Education teacher biblical quotes. God bless.

Hey Chicago. Was thinking about you a couple of days ago on our holiday in Hawaii. We were in a sports bar and they had an autographed photo on the wall of the Cubs winning the baseball in 2016.

Was telling my friends of your great year getting both the Doggies and Cubs in one year!

 

[Chicago1]

Hey Chicago. Was thinking about you a couple of days ago on our holiday in Hawaii. We were in a sports bar and they had an autographed photo on the wall of the Cubs winning the baseball in 2016.

Was telling my friends of your great year getting both the Doggies and Cubs in one year!

It's two years but it seems like yesterday. I do miss the Cubs, but I try to watch as many games as I can online. They're clinched a spot in the playoffs, but the next couple of games will determine if it's 1st place in the Central or a wildcard berth. Those smelly Brewers better not ruin it for me. Three years ago next month I went to the decider for the National League Championship against the nasty Mets. That was almost as hard to take as Richmond's premiership last year. Almost.

I haven't been to Hawaii for about 25 years. It was a mandatory stop for me on the way back to Melbourne when I went home for Christmas. I had to thaw out there after two weeks in Chicago. I should post a oic of me in a grass skirt on Waikiki Beach, but...

 

[Fossie 32]

Just happened to see Ed Richards on Bounce. Won best getting smashed in the mouth on the end of someone's kick annual award. Duds kept pressing the poor guy on who he's going for in the GF (der, who do ya reakon?). "You're doing alright at the Bullies at the moment, but who will you be going for tomorrow?").
It'll be a sad day when Eddie poached him

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

He will be a Bulldog for life just like Picko

 

[NBates]

Why do miserables like yourself love to believe that Richards will leave us for Collingwood one day? If you'd seen him dancing to Who Let the Dogs Out the other night you'd know he's gonna be a Dog for life.

GFd. Have a look at my join date compared to yours mate - I've been bitten a few times more by the footy heartbreak than you have obviously. Geez. Just my opinion - no need to get personal.

No, I didn't see it (don't watch that footy show bogun crap - assuming that's what it was on). Hopefully he will stay. But the fact that they brushed aside the fact he's a Bulldog and played the 'Magpies, Magpies, family Magpies' card gives me the shites. And if Eddie needs him, he'll get him. Just like Callan Ward - 'cept the family/tradition factor is even more of a thing to be concerned about.

 

[Fossie 32]

Don't mess with NBates Scrag

 

[DroopStDanny]

 

[ScragCity]

GFd. Have a look at my join date compared to yours mate - I've been bitten a few times more by the footy heartbreak than you have obviously. Geez. Just my opinion - no need to get personal.

No, I didn't see it (don't watch that footy show bogun crap - assuming that's what it was on). Hopefully he will stay. But the fact that they brushed aside the fact he's a Bulldog and played the 'Magpies, Magpies, family Magpies' card gives me the shites. And if Eddie needs him, he'll get him. Just like Callan Ward - 'cept the family/tradition factor is even more of a thing to be concerned about.

This is the most silly thing ive read on here for ages. Have a good weekend mate. Enjoy the granny.

 

[NBates]

This is the most silly thing ive read on here for ages. Have a good weekend mate. Enjoy the granny.

Thanks for that. Karma to you. Watch out for mother as well

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

 

[_M_16_]

Big Bulldog gets a sniff from the Magpies
Mitch Cleary
Oct 1, 2018 4:34PM

Collingwood could be a new home for Marcus Adams



COLLINGWOOD has turned its attention to contracted Western Bulldogs defender Marcus Adams as it ramps up its efforts to bolster its key defensive stocks.

The Magpies remain firmly in the race for Steven May but, with Melbourne and Hawthorn also chasing the Gold Coast captain, they are keen to explore alternative options after West Coast spearheads Josh Kennedy and Jack Darling exposed their backline in the second half of last Saturday's Grand Final.

AFL.com.au understands the Pies are looking at Adams as they contemplate starting 2019 without injured defender Lynden Dunn and while uncertainty continues around Darcy Moore's future at the club.

WHO'S LEAVING YOUR CLUB? All the latest retirements and delistings

Signed to the end of 2020, Adams is on the radar of several Victorian clubs, with the West Australian considering a fresh start away from the Dogs.

It is believed the Western Bulldogs are aware of Adams' desire to explore a move, although the defender is yet to formally request a trade.

Adams, 25, was restricted to six games in 2018, his year disrupted by ankle and shoulder injuries.

Taken as a mature-age player in the 2015 NAB AFL Draft, the 192cm backman has played 27 games in three seasons, with foot problems disrupting his first two years.

Adams requested a trade home to Western Australia at the end of 2016 before agreeing to fulfill the final season of his initial two-year contract with the Bulldogs.

In May 2017, Adams re-signed with the Dogs for a further three years.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

So why did he sign for an extra 3 years if he's still wanting to go?

 

[mcgleereturns]

I just don’t get football contracts anymore.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Doggies7]

So why did he sign for an extra 3 years if he's still wanting to go?

Easy. Guaranteed $ on decent coin for an injury prone player who can also likely easily still get traded to where he wants to go the next trade period. Helps us also as he is contracted still and we can get more value if another team is interested. Makes sense for all parties.

 

[Struggle]

Yet to request a trade.

That's all I need to hear for now

 

[ScragCity]

ADAMS AINT GOING NOWHERE. BEVO HAS PUT HIS FOOT DOWN AND SAID UR PLAYING FOR US NEXT YEAR OR YOURE SITTING OUT BIG BOY

 

[Freshwater]

Just happened to see Ed Richards on Bounce. Won best getting smashed in the mouth on the end of someone's kick annual award. Duds kept pressing the poor guy on who he's going for in the GF (der, who do ya reakon?). "You're doing alright at the Bullies at the moment, but who will you be going for tomorrow?").
It'll be a sad day when Eddie poached him

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

They can’t claim him and have pain to their number one draft talent Stephenson. Or if they were so loyal to family tradition they would have played Daicos, Brown and Moore on the weekend. They can’t have it both ways. And they are sons of legends. This kid is a grandson and great nephew of legends not quite direct descendant.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

They can’t claim him and have pain to their number one draft talent Stephenson. Or if they were so loyal to family tradition they would have played Daicos, Brown and Moore on the weekend. They can’t have it both ways. And they are sons of legends. This kid is a grandson and great nephew of legends not quite direct descendant.

If he turns out to be a champ which seems likely the Richards name will be enough for Eddie to try a claim.

 

[dogwatch]

They can’t claim him and have pain to their number one draft talent Stephenson. Or if they were so loyal to family tradition they would have played Daicos, Brown and Moore on the weekend. They can’t have it both ways. And they are sons of legends. This kid is a grandson and great nephew of legends not quite direct descendant.

True. Just as we chose not to draft Darcy McPherson and Jayden Foster.

If the Pies were really keen on the family tradition they would have snapped him up. Loyalty to that tradition only goes so far, doesn't it Eddie?

 

[bobby2]

Why - from a scientific perspective - home ground advantage actually exists is one of the most fascinating things that you can look at, if you're the type of person who likes to spend their free time learning and investigating why things are.

Officiating is no doubt the greatest single factor above all others individually - though me separating "travel" (ie the physical impact of time zones and physically having to be on a plane) and "home conditions" (the familiarity with the conditions) as two separate things, when it's kinda hard from a scientific perspective to separate the two as one comes with the other.

There's a book that came out this year, Footballistics, that basically looked at the two types of free kicks where play style doesn't have an impact (ie a team that tackles more or is first to the ball or whatever)- running too far, and deliberate rushed behinds/out of bounds - and found that the vast majority of these are paid toward the home team. Once you divide this by the impact that this has on the margin, they found that home-biased umpiring constitutes something like 30-40% - 3 to 4 points out of about an average 10 point home ground advantage the AFL has. Worth noting that this is the average of all games - no doubt some umpires are better than others, and it's not like 3 points happens every game, sometimes it'll be a goal or more impact, and sometimes none at all.

The most famous of these studies came in German soccer, where roughly half the grounds have an athletics track and the other half doesn't. They found that when controlling for the size of the crowd, there's a stronger home ground advantage in the grounds where there's no athletics track, as the crowd is closer to the ground and the noise is louder.

Another study looked at Ice Hockey players and their testosterone levels on home and away ice, and found it was higher at home - the primal nature of protecting your location helped their performance.

I'm inclined to think officiating has a lesser effect as a % of total home ground effect than all other sports - for a couple of reasons. One, we have three umpires. Two, we have different sized grounds, so the home advantage has an impact more than other sports with familiarity to the ground size - think Geelong at Kardinia playing the narrow ground more effectively. Three - because the game is more physical, requiring greater running and hits and the emphasis on recovery is greater than almost all other professional sports - the very nature of having to get on a plane and be in the air for a long time, is more significant than it is for other sports.

But all factors considered, officiating is still the main factor, even if it's less than 50%. The others combine to around 60-70% but in smaller factors in combination.

Really interesting post, but the likelihood of deliberate out of bounds/rushed behinds are heavily affected by other factors within the game. If the home team is outplaying the away team, the ball is more likely to spend more time at the defensive end for the away team, where you are more likely to give these frees away. Being under more pressure, having fewer options to kick to and using the boundary instead of the corridor would all have an effect as well- all things that are more likely to happen to a team that is being outplayed.

 

[Draft Pick]

GFd. Have a look at my join date compared to yours mate - I've been bitten a few times more by the footy heartbreak than you have obviously. Geez. Just my opinion - no need to get personal.

No, I didn't see it (don't watch that footy show bogun crap - assuming that's what it was on). Hopefully he will stay. But the fact that they brushed aside the fact he's a Bulldog and played the 'Magpies, Magpies, family Magpies' card gives me the shites. And if Eddie needs him, he'll get him. Just like Callan Ward - 'cept the family/tradition factor is even more of a thing to be concerned about.

Let’s just demand Stephenson or DeGoey if that happens.