Longer

[dragit]

We had twice as many clearances as Longer had hitouts for most of the night, so it's an absolute furphy that the two are connected.

[CURLY]

We won the clearances because we had the better clearance/inside players.
At one stage of the game, the commentators were baffled as there were only 3 hitouts to advantage - and yet we had 20 or so more clearances.
They had the better outside players - quick slim bodied types - but we had the bigger bodied inside players who dominated the clearances.
Despite our clearance dominance, their outside players caused us headaches for three quarters.

If NicNat rucked like Longer did against us we’d be screaming.

[samoht]

How many hitouts to advantage did Longer have vs the Gold Coast ruckman.?

Their outside midfielders dominated the outside ball and the game for 3 quarters - but they didn’t have the strong bodied inside players to win the clearances.

That’s why you need the right balance - you need both outside and inside midfielders.

Ruckman influence 5% of clearances at best - 95% of clearances come from the clearance players themselves.

[dragit]

At one stage of the game, the commentators were baffled as there were only 3 hitouts to advantage - and yet we had 20 or so more clearances.

End of discussion - Longers' hitouts did not correlate to our clearance numbers …

We picked about 5 slow inside mids last night which meant we flogged them in clearances, but should have lost the game as we were flogged all around the ground for pace and skill… fortunately they have no heart, but try this selected side against any other AFL team and we will be absolutely smashed.

[dragit]

By the way, Richmond and Geelong are both bottom 3 with us for clearances per game… an absolutely meaningless stat in isolation as we saw first hand last night for 3 quarters.

[CURLY]

At one stage of the game, the commentators were baffled as there were only 3 hitouts to advantage - and yet we had 20 or so more clearances.

End of discussion - Longers' hitouts did not correlate to our clearance numbers …

We picked about 5 slow inside mids last night which meant we flogged them in clearances, but should have lost the game as we were flogged all around the ground for pace and skill… fortunately they have no heart, but try this selected side against any other AFL team and we will be absolutely smashed.

Another with no idea.

[dragit]

At one stage of the game, the commentators were baffled as there were only 3 hitouts to advantage - and yet we had 20 or so more clearances.

End of discussion - Longers' hitouts did not correlate to our clearance numbers …

We picked about 5 slow inside mids last night which meant we flogged them in clearances, but should have lost the game as we were flogged all around the ground for pace and skill… fortunately they have no heart, but try this selected side against any other AFL team and we will be absolutely smashed.

Another with no idea.

You don't like logic much do you curls…

[samoht]

By the same token, I didnt accept that Hickey’s ruckwork was why we had 7 more clearances vs West Coast and NicNat.
Once again, we had the better clearance players that day.

[CURLY]

By the way, Richmond and Geelong are both bottom 3 with us for clearances per game… an absolutely meaningless stat in isolation as we saw first hand last night for 3 quarters.

Both have fantastic midfielders but have rubbish tap ruckman. Put Longer in there teams and they would dominate clearances.

[samoht]

Well then Hickey dominated NicNat and got us 7 more clearances if we think that way - and our clearance players had nothing to do with it.
Imagine how West Coast would go with Hickey as their ruckman instead of NicNat.

[SydneySainter]

Longer had the odd nice hitout but overall, was beaten in his position.

GC still had 41 hitouts to the Saints 33 and Witts was named in the match report bests, whereas Longer wasn’t.

Longer 33 hit outs
StKilda 33 hit outs

Longer was easily better than Witts and in the end he won us the game.

Okay then,

Witts 40 hit outs
GC 41 hit outs

Hmm...

[Spinner]

We had twice as many clearances as Longer had hitouts for most of the night, so it's an absolute furphy that the two are connected.

This reasoning means you should play no ruckman at all and instead just another midfielder then.

[samoht]

This game was an anomaly - one team was top heavy with light-bodied outside players and the other was top heavy with relatively bigger-bodied and dour, inside midfielders. One wins the outside game but loses the clearances - and vice versa for the other. It was a nil-all draw at the end - well almost.

[CURLY]

Clearly most on here haven’t watched last nights game.

[samoht]

Or watched it with blinkers on.
How closely did you watch the game vs West Coast?
Hickey did not dominate NicNat either - our clearance players were just better with their clearance work.

[CURLY]

Or watched it with blinkers on.
How closely did you watch the game vs West Coast?
Hickey did not dominate NicNat either - our clearance players were just better with their clearance work.

That last quarter when Longer kept jumping over Witts and getting forward out of the middle is why we won.

[samoht]

Okay.. our clearance players were dominating the clearances to 3 quarter time, yet we were well behind on the scoreboard.
How do you account for this?
I think where Gold Coast stuffed up in the last quarter was they went defensive and stopped spreading and running - so they played into our hands, as they made it an inside game. Maybe they were tired - and our fitness was superior?
They have kicked 2 points in the last 4 quarters over their last 4 games = it says something about their fitness.

[CURLY]

So if Longer dominates and our half forwards didn’t capitalise his ruck work doesn’t count? As a bloke that’s done a hell of a lot of mid field work Longer was instrumental in our win.

[samoht]

When Gold Coast stopped running, their clearance work probably went back even further - it was already bad.
This game was an anomaly.

Do you agree then that West Coast would do even better -with their clearances - if they had Hickey?

[SydneySainter]

The reality is that we're desperately looking for one of our rucks to be clear No. 1 and what both Hickey and Longer have so far proved is that currently, neither are the answer.

Hickey's had a good chop out, done some nice things, but with the exception of the Giants game, has frequently been beaten by his opponent. Allegedly his strength is his work around ground, but I think that's a little overstated.

This is only Longer's third game, so he probably deserves a few more, but his strength is that he's allegedly a "bull" at the stoppages, but in his three senior matches so far, he's also been bested by all three of his opponents, so I think his hit out work is also a little overstated.

I really can't see either being a clear No. 1 solution moving forward.

[CURLY]

When Gold Coast stopped running, their clearance work probably went back even further - it was already bad.
This game was an anomaly.

Do you agree then that West Coast would do even better -with their clearances - if they had Hickey?

West Coast are a far better team with NicNat in it. Similar to last night they control the ruck.

[samoht]

Good and fair summation - sydneysainter. I agree.
They are both very average = we need a Grundy.

[skeptic]

The reality is that we're desperately looking for one of our rucks to be clear No. 1 and what both Hickey and Longer have so far proved is that currently, neither are the answer.

Hickey's had a good chop out, done some nice things, but with the exception of the Giants game, has frequently been beaten by his opponent. Allegedly his strength is his work around ground, but I think that's a little overstated.

This is only Longer's third game, so he probably deserves a few more, but his strength is that he's allegedly a "bull" at the stoppages, but in his three senior matches so far, he's also been bested by all three of his opponents, so I think his hit out work is also a little overstated.

I really can't see either being a clear No. 1 solution moving forward.

Nailed it

[dragit]

We had twice as many clearances as Longer had hitouts for most of the night, so it's an absolute furphy that the two are connected.

This reasoning means you should play no ruckman at all and instead just another midfielder then.

I would be happy with that.

Can someone explain how Longer was actually the reason for our clearance numbers when he was beaten in the ruck and we had nearly twice as many clearances than billy had hitouts?

53 does not go into 33. Did anyone else finish primary school here?

[samoht]

Longer had 33 hitouts, but 53 of them were hit to our clear advantage.
His hitouts go further - they are longer, better and defy logic (not everyone's, of course).