Hits Outs and Ruckmen

[samoht]

What about the never talked about and statistically non-existent "hitouts to disadvantage"?
We can see with our own eyes that they do (exist).

For every hitout to advantage, I'm betting there'd be as many "hitouts to disadvantage."

And, as mentioned by someone in this thread. I bet there'd be hitouts that are in fact lineball that are counted as definite hitouts. They can't all be clear hitouts.

I remember one game in particular at Docklands where Sandilands was winning hitout after hitout, probably ended up with 70, yet we were coming away with the clearances more often than not ... via Lenny Hayes and co.

Some clear hitouts from Sandilands were landing flush onto Lenny's chest.

What about that famous/infamous clear hitout to Wanganeen by Knobel that lost us the final?
To top it off, Knobel had no possessions that day .... just plenty of useless hitouts.

Every so often, you get a game where things work out, where a ruckman's hitout advantage translates to a clearance advantage.
If you flip a coin 10 times, sometimes you might end up with 7 heads and three tails.or 6 heads and 4 tails... that can happen.
Marshall will do just fine, we're lucky to have him ... maybe Heath could help out.

[samoht]

Oops...

[St Dave]

What about the never talked about and statistically non-existent "hitouts to disadvantage"?
We can see with our own eyes that they do (exist).

For every hitout to advantage, I'm betting there'd be as many "hitouts to disadvantage."

And, as mentioned by someone in this thread. I bet there'd be hitouts that are in fact lineball that are counted as definite hitouts. They can't all be clear hitouts.

I remember one game in particular at Docklands where Sandilands was winning hitout after hitout, probably ended up with 70, yet we were coming away with the clearances more often than not ... via Lenny Hayes and co.

Some clear hitouts from Sandilands were landing flush onto Lenny's chest.

What about that famous/infamous clear hitout to Wanganeen by Knobel that lost us the final?
To top it off, Knobel had no possessions that day .... just plenty of useless hitouts.

Every so often, you get a game where things work out, where a ruckman's hitout advantage translates to a clearance advantage.
If you flip a coin 10 times, sometimes you might end up with 7 heads and three tails.or 6 heads and 4 tails... that can happen.
Marshall will do just fine, we're lucky to have him ... maybe Heath could help out.

I think we have to appreciate how chaotic a ruck contest is to appreciate how difficult and valuable a clean hit out is.

A ball up/throw in is the ultimate 50/50 ball, in a perfect world, the perfect ruckman/midfield can get first touch and retain possession every time and the would be no chance for the opposition to get their hands on it. That is the ultimate advantage of hit outs. Obviously we don't live in a perfect world.

Any team who isn't training set plays for stoppages (like in basketball), where you set blocks to free up a player and have the ruckman put it into their path as they break at speed, isn't really trying to take every available advantage.

BUT

In a bounce or throw in there is too much variability in where the ball is going to be when the ruckman can reach it, so you can't really set up to have a player loose and be able to hit them every time. If your target is running free but the bounce puts the ball on an angle where you can't see them, good luck hitting it back there with the right timing. This is why set plays around stoppages tend to come from around the ground ball ups where the ball is in a more predictable position to be tapped (but even then if you can't control the amount of players around the stoppage, it is very hard to execute).

SO

For most of their hit out opportunities the best ruckman have to get first hand on a ball that could be anywhere AND read the position of players at a stoppage to put the ball in the hands of a team mate who might have only half a step of separation. And we haven't even gotten in to the skill mids need to create separation at the right time to receive and get the ball out clean, or opposition trying to do the same or even deliberately try to punch your taps. Ultimately it is a pretty impossible task, so even a 10% success rate is more chance to get first use and be proactive with the ball.

One of my (least) favourite examples is the Ryder tap to Robbie Gray that sunk us with 10 seconds left. It is a throw in but the ball is coming short so the rucks are running straight at it. Gray starts in front of the rucks but as he realises it is coming short he breaks for around the back where the space is going to be as the rucks are running in. Ryder sees him and is good enough to hit it behind him in to his path as he speeds away, goal, game over.

TLDR

I guess the difference between taps to advantage and to the opposition is the difference between a good ruckman/midfield and a bad ruckman/midfield. If you can create a clean possession for your team even a couple more times per game, from a chaotic situation, that is extra advantage to control the ball, even if it is only enough for a goal or two per game, that is still enough to swing a lot of games.

[samoht]

Thanks for a great post, St Dave,.

Given the degree of difficulty then, and numerous factors outside of the ruckman's control ... including the fact that they're trying to move across to the fall of the ball, anticipating where it will land, then (if and when they happen to get there), trying to outreach their opponent to tap/hit the ball, with their eyes looking upwards and their momentum directed upwards, as they're positioning themselves and jostling with one another.... meanwhile their clearance players and their direct opponents (i.e., the opposing clearance players) who are breathing down their necks are moving around trying to anticipate where the ball will end up and concentrating on what they need to do.
It's a very tight, chaotic and contested environment, all around.

There are a lot of variables involved.... including luck.

Hence a huge hitout advantage, let's say 70-23, often translating to 35 clearances apiece (that type of thing).

I think strong-bodied clearance players with lightning reflexes, who can get to the fall of the ball and make space for themselves, in tight contests, like a diesel Williams, say, but preferably with more leg speed ... are the key? A young, clearance player like Serong would be nice.

[St Dave]

Thanks for a great post, St Dave,.

Given the degree of difficulty then, and numerous factors outside of the ruckman's control ... including the fact that they're trying to move across to the fall of the ball, anticipating where it will land, then (if and when they happen to get there), trying to outreach their opponent to tap/hit the ball, with their eyes looking upwards and their momentum directed upwards, as they're positioning themselves and jostling with one another.... meanwhile their clearance players and their direct opponents (i.e., the opposing clearance players) who are breathing down their necks are moving around trying to anticipate where the ball will end up and concentrating on what they need to do.
It's a very tight, chaotic and contested environment, all around.

There are a lot of variables involved.... including luck.

Hence a huge hitout advantage, let's say 70-23, often translating to 35 clearances apiece (that type of thing).

I think strong-bodied clearance players with lightning reflexes, who can get to the fall of the ball and make space for themselves, in tight contests, like a diesel Williams, say, but preferably with more leg speed ... are the key? A young, clearance player like Serong would be nice.

Yeah, there is so much going on I couldn't imagine the skill it takes to do it effectively consistently. So saying hit outs are a bad stat is simplistic. Getting first touch on the ball is good if you can reliably do something effective with it, so having a ruck who can do that better than the opposition is an area of advantage. But if your ruck is getting a tap but just whacking it randomly what is the point?

Like you say, if your ruck is getting dominated and losing the hit outs, at some point you start looking to read the opposition ruck and try to level the clearances that way.

Hit outs to advantage are a combination of the skill of the ruck and the midfielders around them so yeah, having a guy or two like that are as much a part of equation as anything.

[samoht]

See next post ...

[samoht]

No better indicator of how ineffective the hitouts are is Xerri and Marshall taking it upon themselves, whenever the possibilty presents itself, to clear the ball themselves.

I think this speaks volumes.

Even a quick, blind kick is better/much more effective ... what does this tell us?

[Otiman]

No better indicator of how ineffective the hitouts are is Xerri and Marshall taking it upon themselves, whenever the possibilty presents itself, to clear the ball themselves.

I think this speaks volumes.

Even a quick, blind kick is better/much more effective ... what does this tell us?

Is it more effective though? Field position means nothing if you're not in possession or set up to defend it.

[Nick DalSanto Claus]

What about the never talked about and statistically non-existent "hitouts to disadvantage"?
We can see with our own eyes that they do (exist).

For every hitout to advantage, I'm betting there'd be as many "hitouts to disadvantage."

And, as mentioned by someone in this thread. I bet there'd be hitouts that are in fact lineball that are counted as definite hitouts. They can't all be clear hitouts.

I remember one game in particular at Docklands where Sandilands was winning hitout after hitout, probably ended up with 70, yet we were coming away with the clearances more often than not ... via Lenny Hayes and co.

Some clear hitouts from Sandilands were landing flush onto Lenny's chest.

What about that famous/infamous clear hitout to Wanganeen by Knobel that lost us the final?
To top it off, Knobel had no possessions that day .... just plenty of useless hitouts.

Every so often, you get a game where things work out, where a ruckman's hitout advantage translates to a clearance advantage.
If you flip a coin 10 times, sometimes you might end up with 7 heads and three tails.or 6 heads and 4 tails... that can happen.
Marshall will do just fine, we're lucky to have him ... maybe Heath could help out.

I think we have to appreciate how chaotic a ruck contest is to appreciate how difficult and valuable a clean hit out is.

A ball up/throw in is the ultimate 50/50 ball, in a perfect world, the perfect ruckman/midfield can get first touch and retain possession every time and the would be no chance for the opposition to get their hands on it. That is the ultimate advantage of hit outs. Obviously we don't live in a perfect world.

Any team who isn't training set plays for stoppages (like in basketball), where you set blocks to free up a player and have the ruckman put it into their path as they break at speed, isn't really trying to take every available advantage.

BUT

In a bounce or throw in there is too much variability in where the ball is going to be when the ruckman can reach it, so you can't really set up to have a player loose and be able to hit them every time. If your target is running free but the bounce puts the ball on an angle where you can't see them, good luck hitting it back there with the right timing. This is why set plays around stoppages tend to come from around the ground ball ups where the ball is in a more predictable position to be tapped (but even then if you can't control the amount of players around the stoppage, it is very hard to execute).

SO

For most of their hit out opportunities the best ruckman have to get first hand on a ball that could be anywhere AND read the position of players at a stoppage to put the ball in the hands of a team mate who might have only half a step of separation. And we haven't even gotten in to the skill mids need to create separation at the right time to receive and get the ball out clean, or opposition trying to do the same or even deliberately try to punch your taps. Ultimately it is a pretty impossible task, so even a 10% success rate is more chance to get first use and be proactive with the ball.

One of my (least) favourite examples is the Ryder tap to Robbie Gray that sunk us with 10 seconds left. It is a throw in but the ball is coming short so the rucks are running straight at it. Gray starts in front of the rucks but as he realises it is coming short he breaks for around the back where the space is going to be as the rucks are running in. Ryder sees him and is good enough to hit it behind him in to his path as he speeds away, goal, game over.

TLDR

I guess the difference between taps to advantage and to the opposition is the difference between a good ruckman/midfield and a bad ruckman/midfield. If you can create a clean possession for your team even a couple more times per game, from a chaotic situation, that is extra advantage to control the ball, even if it is only enough for a goal or two per game, that is still enough to swing a lot of games.

Great post, St Dave. As a former ruckman myself, your explanation hit several nails on the head. You stole my thunder, as I was about to attempt a similar explanation, but I doubt I could've put it as well as you did.

Ruck craft is much harder than it looks. A dominant ruckman, who also posesses the ability to win his own ball around the ground, such as Max Gawn, is pure gold.

[St Dave]

What about the never talked about and statistically non-existent "hitouts to disadvantage"?
We can see with our own eyes that they do (exist).

For every hitout to advantage, I'm betting there'd be as many "hitouts to disadvantage."

And, as mentioned by someone in this thread. I bet there'd be hitouts that are in fact lineball that are counted as definite hitouts. They can't all be clear hitouts.

I remember one game in particular at Docklands where Sandilands was winning hitout after hitout, probably ended up with 70, yet we were coming away with the clearances more often than not ... via Lenny Hayes and co.

Some clear hitouts from Sandilands were landing flush onto Lenny's chest.

What about that famous/infamous clear hitout to Wanganeen by Knobel that lost us the final?
To top it off, Knobel had no possessions that day .... just plenty of useless hitouts.

Every so often, you get a game where things work out, where a ruckman's hitout advantage translates to a clearance advantage.
If you flip a coin 10 times, sometimes you might end up with 7 heads and three tails.or 6 heads and 4 tails... that can happen.
Marshall will do just fine, we're lucky to have him ... maybe Heath could help out.

I think we have to appreciate how chaotic a ruck contest is to appreciate how difficult and valuable a clean hit out is.

A ball up/throw in is the ultimate 50/50 ball, in a perfect world, the perfect ruckman/midfield can get first touch and retain possession every time and the would be no chance for the opposition to get their hands on it. That is the ultimate advantage of hit outs. Obviously we don't live in a perfect world.

Any team who isn't training set plays for stoppages (like in basketball), where you set blocks to free up a player and have the ruckman put it into their path as they break at speed, isn't really trying to take every available advantage.

BUT

In a bounce or throw in there is too much variability in where the ball is going to be when the ruckman can reach it, so you can't really set up to have a player loose and be able to hit them every time. If your target is running free but the bounce puts the ball on an angle where you can't see them, good luck hitting it back there with the right timing. This is why set plays around stoppages tend to come from around the ground ball ups where the ball is in a more predictable position to be tapped (but even then if you can't control the amount of players around the stoppage, it is very hard to execute).

SO

For most of their hit out opportunities the best ruckman have to get first hand on a ball that could be anywhere AND read the position of players at a stoppage to put the ball in the hands of a team mate who might have only half a step of separation. And we haven't even gotten in to the skill mids need to create separation at the right time to receive and get the ball out clean, or opposition trying to do the same or even deliberately try to punch your taps. Ultimately it is a pretty impossible task, so even a 10% success rate is more chance to get first use and be proactive with the ball.

One of my (least) favourite examples is the Ryder tap to Robbie Gray that sunk us with 10 seconds left. It is a throw in but the ball is coming short so the rucks are running straight at it. Gray starts in front of the rucks but as he realises it is coming short he breaks for around the back where the space is going to be as the rucks are running in. Ryder sees him and is good enough to hit it behind him in to his path as he speeds away, goal, game over.

TLDR

I guess the difference between taps to advantage and to the opposition is the difference between a good ruckman/midfield and a bad ruckman/midfield. If you can create a clean possession for your team even a couple more times per game, from a chaotic situation, that is extra advantage to control the ball, even if it is only enough for a goal or two per game, that is still enough to swing a lot of games.

Great post, St Dave. As a former ruckman myself, your explanation hit several nails on the head. You stole my thunder, as I was about to attempt a similar explanation, but I doubt I could've put it as well as you did.

Ruck craft is much harder than it looks. A dominant ruckman, who also posesses the ability to win his own ball around the ground, such as Max Gawn, is pure gold.

I appreciate the kudos, I was never a ruckman but I played a bit of basketball so I have always had an appreciation for how good a tap ruckman needs to be given the levels of complexity above a basketball ball up it is. Good to know I was on the right track.

[B.M]

I think they are almost statistically insignificant

[samoht]

No better indicator of how ineffective the hitouts are is Xerri and Marshall taking it upon themselves, whenever the possibilty presents itself, to clear the ball themselves.

I think this speaks volumes.

Even a quick, blind kick is better/much more effective ... what does this tell us?

Is it more effective though? Field position means nothing if you're not in possession or set up to defend it.

Well it is still a clearance, I suppose. A desperate one, maybe in frustration? It might pay off, now and again, and the ball is going 30 metres your way, at least?
There's no guarantee that a clearance player who has managed to clear the ball won't get tackled or run down and end up turning over the ball, anyway.

There was a Richmond ruckman of yesteryear (was it Craig Mckellar?) who would bash the ball 20-30 metres forward, at every opportunity, especially from centre ruck contests.
Keeping it simple, by taking the clearance players and the ineffective/misdirected hitouts meant for them out of the equation.