Opinion The 'Carlton related stuff that doesn't need it's own thread' thread Part 2

[thylacine60]

There are a few media personalities that despise us, but listening to Gerald Healy most nights, I don’t believe there is anyone with a bigger hatred.

Hatred? Why in earth would he have hatred towards a football club?

 

[Blue_Fusion]

They have been highlighting our poor scores from turnover stat for quite a while.

Again, generating more scores from turnover implies that we should allow the opposition to gain possession first in order to cause a turnover. Rather, we have been scoring heavily through clearances... as a result we are generating our own score through winning the ball.

 

[Arr0w]

I will keep banging on, scores from turnovers is a more sustainable model, compared to our 1 wood of scores from stoppages

30 centre bounces, win half, score goals in half 7-8 goals is still WAY above league average

What we have seen as a strength moreso a by-product of our winning streak is causing turnovers in our forward half.

So most of our goals have come from stoppages and repeat entries

The ideal balance isn't there yet, but it is better than any period over the last 2 years

 

[skadoosh]

I will keep banging on, scores from turnovers is a more sustainable model, compared to our 1 wood of scores from stoppages

30 centre bounces, win half, score goals in half 7-8 goals is still WAY above league average

What we have seen as a strength moreso a by-product of our winning streak is causing turnovers in our forward half.

So most of our goals have come from stoppages and repeat entries

The ideal balance isn't there yet, but it is better than any period over the last 2 years

Just clarifying, but doesn't a score from stoppage also include any ball up around the ground or any throw in from the boundary - and not just centre bounces?

 

[Arr0w]

Just clarifying, but doesn't a score from stoppage also include any ball up around the ground or any throw in from the boundary - and not just centre bounces?

Correct

 

[WalshistheGOAT]

Don't care if its sustainable long term as long as its sustainable for 4 more weeks. Thats something we've seen is possible twice now under Voss' tenure, we've had two 10 week patches of dominance and a lot of ordinary football in between. If we belt teams from stoppage theres nothing they can do to stop Charlie so I don't see anything wrong with that approach. Long term might run out of gas or break down from injuries but we can work on that in the off season.

 

[Blue_Fusion]

I will keep banging on, scores from turnovers is a more sustainable model, compared to our 1 wood of scores from stoppages

30 centre bounces, win half, score goals in half 7-8 goals is still WAY above league average

What we have seen as a strength moreso a by-product of our winning streak is causing turnovers in our forward half.

So most of our goals have come from stoppages and repeat entries

The ideal balance isn't there yet, but it is better than any period over the last 2 years

The pressure and intent they applied for about 7 games would have resulted in more goals from turnovers if they didn't get them through clearances imo.

 

[SkyhorseTamer]

Pressure causes fumbles or spoil oob score from ensuing stoppage.

Stoppage score or turnover?

Dumb stat.

 

[blues4flag]

I think part of the reasoning is that finals is a more contested brand, with numbers around the footy, making it harder to score from stoppages. Ala the Melbourne game where we didn't score a goal from stoppages for 3 quarters.

6-6-6 changes the equation a bit, and we've been brutal at times from centre clearances. Scoring 3-4 goals from centre clearances would go a long way to seeing us advance deep into September.

 

[Arr0w]

Pressure causes fumbles or spoil oob score from ensuing stoppage.

Stoppage score or turnover?

Dumb stat.

Not really

Stoppage may have occurred by us turning over the ball

Turnover scoring is completely different, which measures ball movement/scoring from non stoppages

 

[myblueroan]

Just clarifying, but doesn't a score from stoppage also include any ball up around the ground or any throw in from the boundary - and not just centre bounces?

These days you need the afl stats dictionary, thesauraus amd way too many wits about you to follow any of the footy shows.
They don't talk about what they see. They see, then translate through stats language. Like OTC last night. Gary wants to talk points scored for and against. It's like covid. People, including me, like the way First Crack go about it and learn.
But now, no one wants to stay in their own lane. They all want to be the stats experts. Example. Turnovers. It's caught fire and spread out from source, King on First Crack.
A stats pissing contest if you will.
I like a little stats talk but not every freaking footy show please.

 

[blues4flag]

These days you need the afl stats dictionary, thesauraus amd way too many wits about you to follow any of the footy shows.
They don't talk about what they see. They see, then translate through stats language. Like OTC last night. Gary wants to talk points scored for and against. It's like covid. People, including me, like the way First Crack go about it and learn.
But now, no one wants to stay in their own lane. They all want to be the stats experts. Example. Turnovers. It's caught fire and spread out from source, King on First Crack.
A stats pissing contest if you will.
I like a little stats talk but not every freaking footy show please.

One day I'll sit down and write on the ontology of football. It's way too hard to convey what should be simple concepts using current footy vernacular, creating a divide between the layman and those within the industry.

I suspect if your average supporter were to sit in on a strategy session it'd be akin to a different language.

Spoiler - it's pressure all the way down.

 

[DangerousD]

Again, generating more scores from turnover implies that we should allow the opposition to gain possession first in order to cause a turnover. Rather, we have been scoring heavily through clearances... as a result we are generating our own score through winning the ball.

It doesn’t imply that we should allow the opposition to gain possession at all.

It highlights how much we score from turnovers in a game and compares us against other clubs.

We score great through clearances and are poor through turnover, but without looking I’d guess the amount of stoppages in a game to score from clearance is a lot less than the potential turnovers to score from.

If recent history shows that clubs with a poor scores from turnover can’t win the flag, then we will need to be the exception.

 

[Ezayyak]

I agree with Arrow for the long term.

Our forward pressure was our key, that's probably why we defended so high. In hindsight, the last two weeks of easy scores in open space inside 50 was a direct result of our forward pressure dropping off. The defence was setup no different, just looked exposed from what was happening up the field.

Just hoping the current plan is sustainable for the finals with the week off to regroup, it's a taxing game plan.

I can see why Pitto was dropped and they tried Harry. It didn't work. Thinking about it, reckon Voss would really hope SOS gets up.

 

[marcmurphy3]

Our scores from turnovers were actually going well in the first half of our winning run. As we lost classy ball users like Cerra, Walsh, McGovern it regressed. The last month was more about grunting our way to victory with lesser players filling their roles. With our personel now back it shouldn't be an issue for us provided they click.

 

[myblueroan]

One day I'll sit down and write on the ontology of football. It's way too hard to convey what should be simple concepts using current footy vernacular, creating a divide between the layman and those within the industry.

I suspect if your average supporter were to sit in on a strategy session it'd be akin to a different language.

Spoiler - it's pressure all the way down.

That would be great.
Admittedly I know more right now than I ever wanted to. I like understanding it, but I don't want it all the time. I want different takes from players who've been in the game. Putting it in their own language. Like Gaz. Don't put stats up during OTC. It's a different show. I can watch First Crack and get that perspective
And, with clearer explanation.

 

[JustaBattler]

Again, generating more scores from turnover implies that we should allow the opposition to gain possession first in order to cause a turnover. Rather, we have been scoring heavily through clearances... as a result we are generating our own score through winning the ball.

I will keep banging on, scores from turnovers is a more sustainable model, compared to our 1 wood of scores from stoppages

30 centre bounces, win half, score goals in half 7-8 goals is still WAY above league average

What we have seen as a strength moreso a by-product of our winning streak is causing turnovers in our forward half.

So most of our goals have come from stoppages and repeat entries

The ideal balance isn't there yet, but it is better than any period over the last 2 years

In an imaginary world - where a perfect team was able to keep possession 100% of the time and score in uniterrupted fashion - the stat would read 100% scoring from stoppages (CBB) and 0% from turnovers.

That is the mathematical proof of the silliness of stoppage V turnover stat - in plain language.

If you have the personel to beat the opposition and are able to control the ball better - meaning better use once in possession - it is a better way to win. IF you can't control the ball and or are a bad user in possession - then you give the opposition the so called 'turnover' - which basically means the benefit of your execution error.

However dominance in contested ball will usually provide more opportunity to use ball so it becomes a question of how much effective efficiency V how much ineffective use V how well you defend against turnover.

This is the system Voss has been training and playing since he arrived.

People have been calling for more leg speed more leg speed - when in fact the better equation for the type of system Voss is playing - is better execution given clearance and stoppage capability - you dont improve resuklts by losing stoppage winning capability.

Execution was poor because Carlton's forward line had only one tall target easily covered - so the stoppages werent hapenning because there was no ground ball being played to use small forward pressure ground ball gets. If you cant play your high pressure high contested game you cant win a clearandc or a stoppage or cause a turnover where you want it- closer to goals.

In allowing GWS to take away the contested ground ball game from Carlton you also deprived Carlton of field position.

It was the worst structured forward game I;ve seen from Carlton in months- and I think it was done purposefully by removing Harry from the forward equation and also limiting TDK up there as well. The whole game style chaged in Q2 from Carlton - I think Voss purposefully made things difficult for the team and his #1 objective was to see how players reacted to being on the back foot for 3 quarters as well as try Harry in CBB.

 

[Blue_Fusion]

It doesn’t imply that we should allow the opposition to gain possession at all.

It highlights how much we score from turnovers in a game and compares us against other clubs.

We score great through clearances and are poor through turnover, but without looking I’d guess the amount of stoppages in a game to score from clearance is a lot less than the potential turnovers to score from.

If recent history shows that clubs with a poor scores from turnover can’t win the flag, then we will need to be the exception.

It does. Simple fact, if we don't win the ball through clearance via centre bounce or stoppage... then the opponent has won it. How do you generate score from turnover? Well opposition need to have gained possession first.

Since our strong point is that we are a clearance team, we are winning the ball and hence generating our score from there. We've just been very efficient at doing that. If we win a clearance, then lose the ball (turn it over) then we have to pressure the opposition to turn it over back to us where we can generate our score. That is the only way we can "improve" that stat. I can't see how that makes us a better team.

Like I said, hypothetically, if we didn't score so much from clearances in our great patch of form, then I'd wager a big bet that we'd have generated more score from turnover simply because the application was there. The pressure and intent they applied would have generated more turnovers and that stat would read very differently.

Those "stat gurus" on their talk shows can't compute that we score so much through clearances so they call it unsustainable. I'm not going to worry about the fact that we have been able to clear the ball from centre or stoppage and use it efficiently when we go forward. Neither should anybody else.

 

[SkyhorseTamer]

Those "stat gurus" on their talk shows can't compute that we score so much through clearances so they call it unsustainable. I'm not going to worry about the fact that we have been able to clear the ball from centre or stoppage and use it efficiently when we go forward. Neither should anybody else.

It's very easy for even tertiary trained statisticians to struggle to contextualised wtf they've done. I think that's a massive issue in the afl and probably why most clubs are developing their own metrics with in house or contracted data guys that aren't CD

 

[RPCB]

Hatred? Why in earth would he have hatred towards a football club?

It’s not that far fetched, maybe not Gerard Healy tbf. But what would be the difference between a football personality hating a certain club and a supporter (let’s say a Carlton supporter) hating a certain club (*, Collingwood or Richmond)? With the amount of rivalries bordering on hatred since the VFL days, it isn’t far fetched at all.

 

[blues4flag]

It's very easy for even tertiary trained statisticians to struggle to contextualised wtf they've done. I think that's a massive issue in the afl and probably why most clubs are developing their own metrics with in house or contracted data guys that aren't CD

That's really the key. Data without context is meaningless. If the stats say that the premier is usually in the top 3 for scores from stoppages, and we're nowhere near that, I'd hope the club is trying to understand that in the context of our game plan. It might be the reported metrics aren't properly capturing the nuance of it, and we conclude that it's a non-issue, but it certainly deserves more consideration than "we win more stoppages; therefore, we have less opportunity to score from turnover".

 

[thylacine60]

It’s not that far fetched, maybe not Gerard Healy tbf. But what would be the difference between a football personality hating a certain club and a supporter (let’s say a Carlton supporter) hating a certain club (*, Collingwood or Richmond)? With the amount of rivalries bordering on hatred since the VFL days, it isn’t far fetched at all.

Why though?

 

[RPCB]

Why though?

Why what?

 

[thylacine60]

Why what?

What reason would he have? An ex Melbourne/Swans player?

 

[RPCB]

What reason would he have? An ex Melbourne/Swans player?

I said maybe Healy isn’t like that, so I wouldn’t know. Just using an example that football personalities are supporters as much as any of us on here are.