Autopsy Round 2, 2021: St.Kilda v Melbourne *SPUD'S GAME* *SINCLAIR 100TH*

[triggering bro]

Okay now that I have had time to settle down after this performance I can still say this was one of the most disgusting performances of the last 20 years. On par with the Injectors game after we flogged Richmond & the North Good Friday match. Some of the worst skills were on display under the roof in perfect conditions.

 

[mailman4]

Bad performance but not the end of the world. Had a second gamer against the number 1 ruck in the league, was always going to be messy in the middle. Kicking skills were unbelievably poor but most of it came from our 'good' kicks - I'm backing them to still be good kicks

Luckily we've got a heavily depleted Essendon this week, we'll beat them and all will be well again

 

[moirae42]

Perhaps.
On the other hand, if we lose then it's panic stations.

Essendon have no ruck to speak of or midfield group.

Anything less than an 80 point drubbing should be unacceptable.

 

[Diehard Saint]

Ratten thought the same

Ratten could never be seen to make excuses, so of course he’d say that.

 

[George]

Ratten could never be seen to make excuses, so of course he’d say that.

Yep would say worse to the players too. Standards have risen & expectations grown. Good.

 

[Significant]

Purposely stayed out of this thread (and board for that matter) these past few days because of the negative echo chamber that would ensue.

As a team, right now we are on a path to achieving a consistency of effort that is only achieved by the top echelon of teams.

On the journey, we are going to have stinkers. It's part and parcel of where we are at. We just have to live with it and learn.

I think this is one of those times, when players didn't have it their own way, and they would have learnt a lot about themselves and how to cope with that sort of pressure and still contribute to the performance.

I don't believe Essendon will be a pushover (there should be no such thing anymore), we need to be on our game and come to play with a consistent uncomprising attitude and relentless attack at the ball and the man.

That's what the top echelon of teams currently do.

 

[Veer Right]

I have been absolutely ropable the last few days so have held off posting to clear my head. Still honestly fuming at losing to such a pathetically average unit. Identical feelings to the Froe game last year actually!

With a slightly clearer head, I have just watched the game back - and specifically with these stats in mind. My 2 cents: Ratts got comprehensively outcoached, and his stubbornness in not making moves greatly contributed to us dropping the 4 points.

A couple of notes specifically regarding the above. Of Smacks three centre bounce ruck attendances, two led to clean St.Kilda clearances. One directly to a goal within 40 seconds.
This goal came during middle of the final quarter. At this bounce, Hunter was on the bench (Smack in the ruck), Clark was in the middle, Ross on a wing and Battle up forward. We held this structure for a grand total of 40 seconds while we kicked a goal straight from a Gresh clearance. At the next bounce, Hunter goes back into the ruck, Battle back on a wing, and Ross back to the defensive sweeper role in the middle standing Oliver. Gawn monsters Hunter, taps directly to Oliver who walks through the Ross tackle. The ball spends the next 5 minutes in the Melbourne half and the game is effectively over.

Anyone remember that 3-4 minute burst of momentum we got in the last quarter? That was McKernan in the ruck, Clark in the guts, Ross bursting from the outside (not defensive inside) and Battle as a forward target (King and Membery both with genuine 1v1). As soon as the structure was reset to the setup we overwhelmingly used for the night (Hunter 23 CBA's - Smack 3, Ross 16 in the middle 4 on the outside, Battle 14 on a wing and Clark in about 1 in 3 setups). Why would we reset to the structure that got our pants pulled down time and time again?

Round 1, Hunter rucked almost the entire first half. Our second half push was due in a big part to swinging McKernan into the ruck. The ruck contests ended up being shared 50/50 between Hunter and Smack last week. Why in the F**KING HELL were they 23 / 3 this week? Why is Battle ineffectively running up and down a wing all night, while Brayshaw did largely as he wanted? Why after Ross kicked two great goals last week, and he was probably our best at delivering the ball inside 50 all night (when given space on the outside) was Ross playing a defensive inside mid role on Oliver? Watch the replay. Oliver runs over the top of him again and again and again. Why are more then 90% of our kick-ins either going long to the side of the ground Gawn is standing, or short to the pocket? Hell, why is our 200cm KPP kicking the ball long to sub 6 foot targets in the first place?

Yes our skills and decision making were diabolically poor at times (looking at you Hill, Coff, Long and Sincs). Yes we were flat for long, long periods. But Melbourne were actually pretty damn terrible (thought that at the ground, and reinforced watching the replay). For the record, they also have the most selfish and least team oriented forwardline I have ever seen! But for me, we lost this one in the coaches box by sticking to structures and positioning that time and time again did not work!

Is our season over? Of course not. Is this inflexibility something that needs to be fixed? Absolutely. A 10 goal belting of Essendon should not allow us to simply forget that.

Over to you Ratts...

Ps. Paul Hunter should never ever, under any circumstances, play for St.Kilda again. 3 goals in the first half against Carlton came directly from his mistakes. We only got momentum in the GWS game once he was moved out of the center (and as far away from the ball as humanly possible). Against Melbourne, we would have genuinely been better of playing with 4 mids and not even contesting the ruck. Smacks 4th quarter CBA attendances showed all we actually needed was a genuine contest, and Gresh / Clark / Steele can make things happen. Hunter did not even provide that. Bloke is 28. There is no short or long-term upside to playing him. Combine his traffic cone like efforts in the ruck with his skills around the ground, and I would honestly rather play with 17 then give Hunter a game next week.
I know he was playing state league a few weeks ago and he is 'trying his best'. But this is pro-league. Unless your name is Dan McKenzie, you don't get participation awards and a pat on the back (and a long contract) for simply trying really hard. I don't care if it is McKernan, Carlisle or Lonie in a pair of really really high heels. Anyone is a better ruck option then Hunter

Our problems are solved! Fire Ratten immediately and instate yourself! 2021 flag here we come!

On a serious note, i thank god Ratten does not see things the same way many on here do. Our skills were deplorable, both rucks were never going to be effective against Gawn and far, far to many turned up with their mental faculties 10% slower then normal, ditto physical abilities. Apart from Steele barely anyone turned up for the game to the standard we expect.

Also if we are going to be firing shots off the bow, then why not look at those with sub standard efforts? McKernan would be one who comes to mind.

Richmond put a shocker in against us then won the flag a few rounds later so it happens. Put a thick red line through the game and onto next week.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

If a couple of players play horribly , you dump them and try a couple of others.

If the whole team is playing horribly you need to work with that team, we don't have Richmond Football Club's list waiting in the wings.

If your 4th ruck option isn't as good as your 1st or 2nd , don't be surprised. Don't expect the 5th option to be better.

 

[t_94]

Robert Murphy thought it was a bit rich as an excuse at round 2. He seemed to think it wouldn't be that big a deal to pull up from. Seemed to suggest the Saints and GWS might just not be very good.

Ryder and Marshall are the defining point of the team. Without them it’s very much a case of back in the pack imo.

 

[gringo2011]

Perhaps.
On the other hand, if we lose then it's panic stations.

Essendon have no ruck to speak of or midfield group.

Anything less than an 80 point drubbing should be unacceptable.

You know that's really setting yourself up for disappointment. Just winning would be a start. Caldwell is like losing Bytel, they lose a developing ruck....so it's a neutral gain because we are shit in the ruck at the moment, Shiel is a huge loss but they still have players like Merrett and McGrath playing well. If they get Stringer back and 2MP can play a decent game they could stretch our defence who look shaky at best this season. They have nothing to lose and a coach under pressure. I just want us to turn up expecting a contest and not be pencilling in a win. We have a history of not turning up in "easy win" games under Ratts.

 

[LiterallyNobody]

If a couple of players play horribly , you dump them and try a couple of others.

If the whole team is playing horribly you need to work with that team, we don't have Richmond Football Club's list waiting in the wings.

If your 4th ruck option isn't as good as your 1st or 2nd , don't be surprised. Don't expect the 5th option to be better.

The most level headed post I’ve seen here.

I understand people don’t want Hunter playing but we need a ruckman. There was no sense in going up against Gawn with only one ruck. And if you’re expecting Paul Hunter to be anything less than ordinary given he couldn’t get a debut at the wooden spooners and he’s had virtually no pre-season then you deserve to be disappointed.

As for the others, put it down to a bad night - some worse than others. not panic stations just yet. If we have a second poor performance in a row against an opposition we should defeat, then we can start to panic.

one thing - if Callum Wilkie had such a bad night why was his disposal efficiency 90% for 20 disposals? Am I missing something there? Is it just that he took less marks? Was he less accountable?

 

[LiterallyNobody]

Also can someone please tell me what constitutes a pressure act? It annoys me when they have stats like this but don’t tell us what it means.

 

[Joffaboy]

Also can someone please tell me what constitutes a pressure act? It annoys me when they have stats like this but don’t tell us what it means.

You put your teammates under pressure, thats why Hill had 27 in one quarter

 

[StCicatriz]

Okay now that I have had time to settle down after this performance I can still say this was one of the most disgusting performances of the last 20 years. On par with the Injectors game after we flogged Richmond & the North Good Friday match. Some of the worst skills were on display under the roof in perfect conditions.

man we've had some bad ones in the last 5 years...

norf good friday
norf last year of richo
the essendon one you mentioned
the freo game last year
the melbourne game last year
the melbourne game last year

 

[LiterallyNobody]

man we've had some bad ones in the last 5 years...

norf good friday
norf last year of richo
the essendon one you mentioned
the freo game last year
the melbourne game last year
the melbourne game last year

this one hardly ever gets mentioned - I remember that match though. It was brutal. I was at the Carlton Melbourne game that same day, hopped in the car and I swear they had kicked like seven goals in the first quarter and were going on about how bad we were - I remember thinking we were MILES behind anyone and being soooooo jealous that Carlton had just scored a hundred points for the second time in three weeks and had gone 2-2 since Teague took over. At the time, they were considering approaching Ratts for the full time position too. God, how things have changed since then...

 

[Southseas]

Commiserations on the loss.

Here are the midfield frequency stats from the game - if you haven't seen these before this is an overall summary of how often your players were lining up as one of the mids (inside + wing) at bounces.

Overall Summary - 26 Bounces

Ross 20 (4w)
Steele 20
Billings 18 wing
Gresham 15
Battle 14 wing
Jones 13 (8i, 5w)
Clark 9
Hill 8 wing
Sinclair 7 (4i, 3w)
Bytel 6

Hunter 23
McKernan 3

Centre Clearances

Gresham 4
Sinclair 2
Hunter 2
Steele 1
Ross 1
Clark 1

Top 5 Pressure Acts (from that group)

Hill 27
Billings 21
Battle 20
Steele 19
Ross 19
Jones 19

Breakdown by Quarter - Q1

Ross 6 (1w)
Gresham 5
Steele 5
Billings 5 wing
Battle 4 wing
Jones 3 (2i, 1w)
Sinclair 2 (1i, 1w)
Hill 1 wing
Clark 1

Q2

Hill 7 wing
Steele 6
Ross 5
Gresham 5
Jones 4 (2i, 2w)
Clark 3
Billings 2 wing
Battle 2 wing
Sinclair 1 wing

Q3

Billings 6 wing
Ross 5 (3i, 2w)
Steele 4
Battle 4 wing
Jones 3
Clark 3
Gresham 2
Sinclair 2
Bytel 1

Q4

Steele 6
Billings 6 wing
Bytel 5
Ross 4 (1w)
Battle 4 wing
Gresham 3
Jones 3 (2w, 1i)
Clark 2
Sinclair 2 (1i, 1w)

Notes:
- Half as many starts as last week for Clark & Hill. Clark's TOG was also 6% lower than last week
- Much more inside this week from Ross (only 20% wing starts last night vs. 55% against GWS)

Thanks for the stats mate. Not sure if it's been pointed out yet but Bytel didn't play?

 

[LiterallyNobody]

Thanks for the stats mate. Not sure if it's been pointed out yet but Bytel didn't play?

He came on in the last qtr as a sub.

 

[Southseas]

He came on in the last qtr as a sub.

Right yes of course, I was far too pissed by that stage. Anyway, off to JB HIFI to get a replacement tv

 

[LiterallyNobody]

Right yes of course, I was far too pissed by that stage. Anyway, off to JB HIFI to get a replacement tv

Go to Harvey Norman - that way you can get a microwave while you're at it.

 

[Billy Bob65]

Thanks for the stats.

But with Hill topping the pressure acts, one has to wonder what it measures as from a spectators view his game was very much the opposite of pressure on an opponent.

So quite amazing that he could be top of such a statistic.



It is was inducing pressure in fan's watching then I can relate to that.

Full disclosure whilst the majority is my work, I pull the "pressure acts" and centre clearances for that matter, from the AFL's match centre which get their stats from Champion Data, so here is their definition of what it measures:

There are 2 aspects under pressure acts:

Pressure Act (Physical): Applying direct physical contact to a player in the act of disposing of the ball or effecting a tackle that prevents an effective disposal from the ball carrier.

Pressure Act (Implied): Reducing an opponent’s decision making time without physical contact ‘via corralling, closing space or chasing from behind’.

They also have a more advanced stat called "pressure points", which allocates points to each act from the passive to the chase down tackles:

Pressure Points: Weighed sum of pressure acts. Physical pressure acts are worth 3.75 points, closing acts are worth 2.25 points, chasing acts are 1.5 points and corralling are 1.2.

That presumably gives a more accurate picture of how passive or effective their efforts were, but that is one of the many stats behind their pay wall.


So it could be that Hill did a lot of passive stuff - corralling, chasing without physically exerting himself - in which case he could rank high in the basic stat, but feature much lower overall in the weighted one. It is also very possible that as Saints fan see him week to week, whereas the CD guys would rotate club games that what they judged was pressure you judged wasn't compared to other efforts he'd put forth in the past - what constitutes a "chasing from behind" for example from their POV - jogging in their general direction if they're closest or actually trying to catch them?


Ultimately if people think its a rubbish stat, I'm happy not to use it.

 

[LiterallyNobody]

Full disclosure whilst the majority is my work, I pull the "pressure acts" and centre clearances for that matter, from the AFL's match centre which get their stats from Champion Data, so here is their definition of what it measures:

There are 2 aspects under pressure acts:

Pressure Act (Physical): Applying direct physical contact to a player in the act of disposing of the ball or effecting a tackle that prevents an effective disposal from the ball carrier.

Pressure Act (Implied): Reducing an opponent’s decision making time without physical contact ‘via corralling, closing space or chasing from behind’.

They also have a more advanced stat called "pressure points", which allocates points to each act from the passive to the chase down tackles:

Pressure Points: Weighed sum of pressure acts. Physical pressure acts are worth 3.75 points, closing acts are worth 2.25 points, chasing acts are 1.5 points and corralling are 1.2.

That presumably gives a more accurate picture of how passive or effective their efforts were, but that is one of the many stats behind their pay wall.


So it could be that Hill did a lot of passive stuff - corralling, chasing without physically exerting himself - in which case he could rank high in the basic stat, but feature much lower overall in the weighted one. It is also very possible that as Saints fan see him week to week, whereas the CD guys would rotate club games that what they judged was pressure you judged wasn't compared to other efforts he'd put forth in the past - what constitutes a "chasing from behind" for example from their POV - jogging in their general direction if they're closest or actually trying to catch them?


Ultimately if people think its a rubbish stat, I'm happy not to use it.

Really appreciate this thank you. INteresting stuff - I suppose it shows what's happening behind the scenes there.

Do any of these also constitute one percenters - what sorts of things make up them?