Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Jim Park Analysis 2022
#20
AFL 2022 Rd 21 Carlton vs Melbourne
We came up 11 seconds short. What a disappointment.

Trends:
[1] There were 16 voters for this game, which is close to our turnout for the year. Pity we couldn’t quite finish it off. Last week there were 9: just over half as many.

[2] The rating was 8.94, which is effectively a B, for a loss, even when one voter rated the game an E. Obviously, we were much more impressive than we have been of late.

[3] Last week we barely had a contributor: this week we were very even and very strong. We had 13 significant contributors.

[4] The average vote was 29 for this week, compared to our lowest level last week.

[5] Sam Dochery had his 2nd BOG for the season, which has been his most consistent. Young was 2nd, his best effort to date.

[6] Jack Silvagni was probably our most effective ruck on the right, as he acted as an extra mid. However, Marc Pittonet was significantly improved. We need Pitto to be at his best if we are to be a threat.

[7] Only Doc got votes from everybody, but a number of guys attract most voters.

[8] Four players managed 100 votes or more.

[9] Doc continues his amazing job this year.

Votes:
Docherty, Sam 324
Young, Lewis 235
Cripps, Patrick 229
McKay, Harrison 134
Cottrell, Matthew 81
Setterfield, Will 81
Martin, Jack 70
Saad, Adam 61
Fisher, Zac 36
Silvagni, Jack 34
Walsh, Sam 28
McGovern, Mitchell 25
Curnow, Charles 3

Progressive Voting:
3833 - Cripps, Patrick (0)
3498 - Walsh, Sam (0)
2740 - Docherty, Sam (0)
2305 - Saad, Adam (0)
2014 - Curnow, Charles (0)
1962 - Hewett, George (0)
1720 - Kennedy, Matthew (0)
1146 - Cerra, Adam (0)
1135 - McKay, Harrison (0)
1024 - Weitering, Jacob (0)
834 - de Koning, Tom (0)
704 - Young, Lewis (0)
650 - Silvagni, Jack (0)
444 - Fisher, Zac (0)
272 - McGovern, Mitchell (0)
272 - O'Brien, Lochie (0)
257 - Durdin, Corey (0)
237 - Cottrell, Matthew (0)
231 - William, Zac (0)
216 - Pittonet, Marc (0)
149 - Martin, Jack (0)
110 - Setterfield, Will (0)
105 - Newman, Nicholas (0)
76 - Plowman, Lachlan (0)
72 - Boyd, Jordan (0)
66 - Motlop, Jesse (0)
48 - Newnes, Jack (0)
47 - Carroll, Jack (0)
29 - Stocker, Liam (0)
11 - Owies, Matthew (0)
4 - Kemp, Brodie (0)
Live Long and Prosper!
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Jim Park Analysis 2022 - by crashlander - 03-15-2022, 06:36 AM
Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022 - by crashlander - 03-26-2022, 05:33 AM
Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022 - by crashlander - 04-04-2022, 10:24 AM
Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022 - by crashlander - 04-11-2022, 12:34 AM
Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022 - by crashlander - 04-18-2022, 01:32 AM
Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022 - by crashlander - 04-24-2022, 03:49 AM
Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022 - by crashlander - 05-05-2022, 10:03 AM
Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022 - by crashlander - 05-12-2022, 10:18 AM
Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022 - by crashlander - 05-30-2022, 03:11 AM
Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022 - by crashlander - 05-30-2022, 03:55 AM
Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022 - by crashlander - 06-15-2022, 09:45 AM
Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022 - by crashlander - 07-08-2022, 02:01 AM
Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022 - by crashlander - 07-08-2022, 02:48 AM
Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022 - by crashlander - 07-14-2022, 11:28 AM
Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022 - by crashlander - 07-20-2022, 11:04 AM
Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022 - by crashlander - 07-24-2022, 10:48 AM
Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022 - by crashlander - 08-04-2022, 07:10 AM
Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022 - by crashlander - 08-12-2022, 10:15 AM
Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022 - by crashlander - 08-18-2022, 11:17 AM
Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022 - by crashlander - 08-19-2022, 11:04 AM
Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022 - by crashlander - 09-05-2022, 06:42 AM
Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022 - by dodge - 09-05-2022, 07:25 AM
Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022 - by pinot - 09-05-2022, 08:55 AM
Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022 - by percy - 09-05-2022, 09:13 AM
Re: Jim Park Analysis 2022 - by crashlander - 09-05-2022, 10:36 AM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)