What They're Saying - The Bulldogs Media Thread - Part 4

[LittleG]

Have you posted this in the Yelling at Clouds thread?

Please direct me to the right place.

 

[JTCWBFC]

Bains said on radio yesterday the membership numbers are because there's a lot of 'admiration' for the way the teams playing.

What are these ppl chuffing at WO. The team is infuriating to follow.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Bains said on radio yesterday the membership numbers are because there's a lot of 'admiration' for the way the teams playing.

What are these ppl chuffing at WO. The team is infuriating to follow.

We're third in the league on average with 27.4 shots on goal ourselves per game. As good as a metric as any combining attacking play and general competitiveness. It's not a completely invalid statement. We could be supporting a team averaging 22 or 23 shots per game only (Melbourne, St. Kilda etc.)

 

[MYOB]

 

[fred cook]

Bains said on radio yesterday the membership numbers are because there's a lot of 'admiration' for the way the teams playing.

What are these ppl chuffing at WO. The team is infuriating to follow.

Go watch the GG Suns V Saints game from last week that was so bad to watch

 

[CarnTheScray]

Bains said on radio yesterday the membership numbers are because there's a lot of 'admiration' for the way the teams playing.

What are these ppl chuffing at WO. The team is infuriating to follow.

If we were playing something worth admiring we would've been over 60k last year.

 

[grassman75]

Bains said on radio yesterday the membership numbers are because there's a lot of 'admiration' for the way the teams playing.

What are these ppl chuffing at WO. The team is infuriating to follow.

Membership is up because they include all the 1 and 3 game and pet memberships

 

[SPower]

Go watch the GG Suns V Saints game from last week that was so bad to watch

Gerard said last evening on 360 , the game was unwatchable and turned it off !!!

 

[Oliver G]

I don’t follow the expected score…..how can it even be a thing when we don’t even know how accurately we will kick, who will be injured etc….looks like garbage to me…a bit like fixture, quarterbacks and meters gained

The expected score isn't calculated prior to the match, it's calculated after the match. Every shot on goal is analysed, based on where on the ground it was taken (distance and angle) and how much pressure the player was under, using the competition average over the last 10 seasons.

For example, a set shot from 30 metres out on a 45-degree angle has an expected accuracy of 50 per cent. So a team would be expected to score three points (reflecting the 50-50 chance of a goal).

If they kick the goal, their expected score would be 3, but their actual score would be 6.

If they kick a behind instead, their expected score would still be 3, with their actual score being 1.

As another example, a snap in general play from 40 metres out on the boundary has an expected score of 0.6 points (10 per cent accuracy).

Over the course of a game these are added up to create an expected score for the match.

The expected score of each shot does not take into account the individual player’s records, nor the team’s records. It always uses the league-wide average.

If the actual score is more than expected, you've kicked well, and vice versa, it's become a key metric for clubs over the past 5-10 years as it's a useful indicator of how the team is performing regardless of accuracy and if you are getting enough good shots (shot quality) at goal.

People often misinterpret a win on expected score but a loss on actual score as a match that the team "should've won", which of course is ridiculous, it's essentially just a way of analyzing a team's shot at goal profile compared to the competition average. Just using goals and behinds doesn't tell the full story and can be misleading as some teams may tend to use the corridor more often, or get shallow entries, etc, etc.

You can find a detailed explanation here...

 

[grassman75]

The expected score isn't calculated prior to the match, it's calculated after the match. Every shot on goal is analysed, based on where on the ground it was taken (distance and angle) and how much pressure the player was under, using the competition average over the last 10 seasons.

For example, a set shot from 30 metres out on a 45-degree angle has an expected accuracy of 50 per cent. So a team would be expected to score three points (reflecting the 50-50 chance of a goal).

If they kick the goal, their expected score would be 3, but their actual score would be 6.

If they kick a behind instead, their expected score would still be 3, with their actual score being 1.

As another example, a snap in general play from 40 metres out on the boundary has an expected score of 0.6 points (10 per cent accuracy).

Over the course of a game these are added up to create an expected score for the match.

The expected score of each shot does not take into account the individual player’s records, nor the team’s records. It always uses the league-wide average.

If the actual score is more than expected, you've kicked well, and vice versa, it's become a key metric for clubs over the past 5-10 years as it's a useful indicator of how the team is performing regardless of accuracy and if you are getting enough good shots (shot quality) at goal.

People often misinterpret a win on expected score but a loss on actual score as a match that the team "should've won", which of course is ridiculous, it's essentially just a way of analyzing a team's shot at goal profile compared to the competition average. Just using goals and behinds doesn't tell the full story and can be misleading as some teams may tend to use the corridor more often, or get shallow entries, etc, etc.

You can find a detailed explanation here...

Thanks for that - i always thought it was done before the match so never paid any attention to it. Maybe now i will

 

[JTCWBFC]

We're third in the league on average with 27.4 shots on goal ourselves per game. As good as a metric as any combining attacking play and general competitiveness. It's not a completely invalid statement. We could be supporting a team averaging 22 or 23 shots per game only (Melbourne, St. Kilda etc.)

But we're horribly inconsistent & sitting 6 & 7 with a shit run home.

I don't really care about the other stats, I want wins, the end of this 2 good weeks, one dog shit week stuff + finals. That's all that matters.

 

[Thunderoad]

Johnno and Plough on The Two Dogs podcast if you're interested......

 

[MYOB]

 

[CarnTheScray]

Expected score ladder after R14...

View attachment 2021767

So Carlton are good at converting goals from difficult positions?

Half of it would be Curnow launching it from 50 out.

 

[Dogs Rule]

Bogans being bogans. Hope he gets slapped with the fully $11k and a lengthy ban.

 

[Sentinel]

That makes 1 appearance each for the Clarke brothers at Marvel. Talented family

 

[Next Waiting]

Breaking news. Dogs player incites brother to invade pitch in an attempt to derail Collingwood's winning comeback against Norf.

 

[geoffjennings79]

The sheer stupidity of running on to the ground, even if possibly fuelled by alcohol (or other substances) or egged on by 'mates'....

.... pails into insignificance against it being referenced as a "pitch" invasion!

FML, how many references from other sports do we need to "appropriate". Just **** off Morris, and take those other idiot journos with you who feel the need to replace our own terms that have evolved over a century!

(Temporary) end of rant about f-wit footy "journalists"...

 

[Next Waiting]

The sheer stupidity of running on to the ground, even if possibly fuelled by alcohol (or other substances) or egged on by 'mates'....

.... pails into insignificance against it being referenced as a "pitch" invasion!

FML, how many references from other sports do we need to "appropriate". Just **** off Morris, and take those other idiot journos with you who feel the need to replace our own terms that have evolved over a century!

(Temporary) end of rant about f-wit footy "journalists"...

In all likely the guy just got lost on his way to the bar.

 

[X_box_X]

It's very hard to form an assessment if they don't broadcast it. If no vision is available, I agree that the well intended patron just got lost when he was looking for the bar. I will maintain this opinion until I see vision that would coutneract my belief.

 

[Dog 36]

I wonder if the pitch invader rules and touching of players over the fence applies to Darwin games?

There was a pitch invader pretty sure in a recent Darwin game I think Gold Coast v Geelong and have not heard boo about it

 

[Mojorisin]

It's very hard to form an assessment if they don't broadcast it. If no vision is available, I agree that the well intended patron just got lost when he was looking for the bar. I will maintain this opinion until I see vision that would coutneract my belief.

He wanted to ask Sidebottom for directions to the toilet.

 

[Next Waiting]

I wonder if the pitch invader rules and touching of players over the fence applies to Darwin games?

There was a pitch invader pretty sure in a recent Darwin game I think Gold Coast v Geelong and have not heard boo about it

One man's pitch invasion is another man's walking about.

 

[bafl]

Interesting comments and footage on The First Crack (Fox/Kayo) about Rhylee West

14

Rhylee West

Age

24

Ht

183cm

Wt

82kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

12.3

3star

K

5.7

2star

HB

6.7

4star

M

2.5

3star

T

1.5

3star

G

0.5

3star

D

12.0

3star

K

6.0

2star

HB

6.0

3star

M

2.7

3star

T

2.0

3star

G

0.3

3star

D

13.0

4star

K

5.6

3star

HB

7.4

5star

M

2.2

3star

T

1.4

4star

G

0.6

3star

as ‘the best defuser of intercept markers in the competition’.

 

[geoffjennings79]

The sheer stupidity of running on to the ground, even if possibly fuelled by alcohol (or other substances) or egged on by 'mates'....

.... pails into insignificance against it being referenced as a "pitch" invasion!

FML, how many references from other sports do we need to "appropriate". Just **** off Morris, and take those other idiot journos with you who feel the need to replace our own terms that have evolved over a century!

(Temporary) end of rant about f-wit footy "journalists"...

"pales!" It's "pales" you idiot geoffjennings79 !

My kingdom for a sub-editor!