#7 Zerrett in the beginning

https://twitter.com/JustineMB_29/status/781693107985199104

Wow, Zerret is shorter than I thought!!!

I think he’s on his knee

So are the two kids in front and there is still very little difference.

Does “metres gained” exclude clangers (e.g. 50m kicks to an opponent on their own)?

It’s one of the worst “buzz stats” going around and the commentators love it.

A 50 m bomb into the forward line gives you +50 even if it ends up coming back out, whereas a 50m switch across the ground that leads to an easy goal is worth 0 (or even negative if it goes slightly backwards!)

Obviously not perfect (and a better stat would be metres gained in continuous possession from your possession, so that the sideways kick you talk about that leads to a goal is counted and the 50m bomb directly to the opponent isn’t), but it’s a stat with some meaning in a game where territory matters.

Getting it forward then locking it in the forward half until you score matters, so in that context metres gained has some meaning. And it at least gives little value to the chipping around meaninglessly in defence, even if it undervalues the switch that breaks the game open.

There is no perfect set of stats for AFL, but it’s getting better, and as long as you understand what the stats mean (and it’s not always easy to know, since all of these stats that are quoted so often aren’t footnoted with “meaning” information) and what they don’t mean they can help with an understanding of how a game was won or lost.

I am pretty sure that a lot of times commentators don’t know what the stats mean or don’t mean!!

To answer my own question: yes, ineffective/clanger kicks count. Dustin Martin had 18 ineffective kicks (a new competition record) and still won metres gained against us earlier this year.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/afl/teams/richmond/10-quirky-stats-from-round-17-dustin-martins-record-ineffective-kicks-brent-harveys-unwanted-record/news-story/ece1c26b246d92fca5bfac42870c31e7

Unfortunately “metres gained” is a paid product of Champion Data, so you can’t make a more complete version of the graph above, to see how the choice of axis and players (not just midfielders) may be slanting things.

You watch the next genius stat to be rolled out next year, effective metres gained.

An ineffective kick is different to a clanger tho (right?).

This seems reasonable. A long kick into space or into a contested situation has still ‘gained’ those meters given your team is still a 50/50 chance of winning the ball back (obviously this will change given the context of the game).

Dangerfield loves to burst from the middle and bomb it into the forward 50, he knows that Hawkins will provide a contest most of the time and will even clunk his fair share (turning an ineffective kick into a goal assist) . This is what makes him such a dangerous player. That said, every now and then it will all go pear shaped (like it did vs the Swans) and he becomes, as someone on here put it, Clangerfield. The price you pay for taking the game on I suppose.

Really, any stat requires context. Clearances, a fairly basic stat, is still a murky… There’s a big difference between a Andrew Swallow shoveling out a handball to Dangerfield bursting 10 meters into the clear.

“Metres gained” is a useful stat in Rugby Union or even League — but Aussie Rules is neither.

"Metres gained" is a useful stat in Rugby Union or even League — but Aussie Rules is neither.

I’m not even convinced it’s that useful in league or union

You watch the next genius stat to be rolled out next year, effective metres gained.

It’ll be something retarded like distance per step.

“Oh I can see that little Zachy Merrett will be tiring a LOT quicker than Mumford. Zachy has taken three times as many steps and only traveled an extra 50m,” - D. King

Never mind that Mumford is three times taller than Zerrett.

That gets balanced out by David king being 3 x thicker than a whale omelette

Does “metres gained” exclude clangers (e.g. 50m kicks to an opponent on their own)?

What about clangers per disposal on the non-dominant side by hand in the back third of the ground on wet twilight games interstate against top eight sides?

Get on it Kingy you massive foreheaded barrel chested buffoon.

You watch the next genius stat to be rolled out next year, effective metres gained.

It’ll be something retarded like distance per step.

“Oh I can see that little Zachy Merrett will be tiring a LOT quicker than Mumford. Zachy has taken three times as many steps and only traveled an extra 50m,” - D. King

Never mind that Mumford is three times taller than Zerrett.

They have to spin the magnets, Dermie - maybe put Mummy on the wing …

That gets balanced out by David king being 3 x thicker than a whale omelette

It’s a good saying. But just saying - whales are mammals, yeah?

That gets balanced out by David king being 3 x thicker than a whale omelette

It’s a good saying. But just saying - whales are mammals, yeah?

I had a bacon omelette the other day, and I’ve never seen a pig lay an egg.

That gets balanced out by David king being 3 x thicker than a whale omelette

It’s a good saying. But just saying - whales are mammals, yeah?

We eat mammals, if we hungry enough we eat anything. Eating intelligence.

Bits of whale in the omlette innit

Bits of whale in the omlette innit

Fat bits, or bits of fat?

So....is Zerrett any good or not?

Going by that chart…I’m not sure. Oh wait, he’s closest to the bullseye so he’s the winner!

That gets balanced out by David king being 3 x thicker than a whale omelette

It’s a good saying. But just saying - whales are mammals, yeah?


Omelettes are versatile. King is not.

I assume Zerrett got a gig in Robbos top 50 - what no ?