08-17-2023, 04:21 AM
There are a few threads with discussions about hitouts to advantage but I think this is where it started.
Lods has suggested that hitouts to advantage occur so rarely as to be largely inconsequential. Two research projects, one from Swinburne and one from Victoria University, have shown that Lods is correct. But, first of all, what exactly is a hitout to advantage?
Champion Data’s current official AFL glossary states:
Hitout-To-Advantage: A hitout that reaches an intended teammate.
However ...
It seemed remarkable that Champion Data provides one definition of hitout to advantage but apparently uses another. But, no, I managed to find an article in the Herald Sun of 16 Jun 2017 in which Champion Data provided another definition; “A hitout-to-advantage is a hitout that leads to a teammate gaining direct possession of the ball with the opportunity to dispose of it.” This tallies with the clarification Champion Data gave Kruddler.
The article is behind the paywall so perhaps someone with a subscription may like to see what other revelations it contains.
The second definition is markedly different to the first one. The player who gathers the ball no longer has to be the intended target and he/she has to have the opportunity to dispose of the ball. In fact, if a ruckman tapped the ball into space and it was gathered by a teammate who tried a don’t argue before being free kicked for holding the ball, it would count as a hitout to advantage.
According to a Champion Data spokesperson in the Roar of 08 Jul 2014, a “gather from hitout to advantage” is a contested possession. That’s a bit like classing a handball receive as a contested possession and suggests that there’s not a lot of advantage to a hitout. Either way, it’s hard to reconcile the hitouts to advantages statistics with what’s apparent from watching replays and it seems to me that it’s a very subjective and fluid statistic. That led me to explore the validity of Champion Data’s statistics.
First of all, their data collection is first rate and cannot be faulted. Their statistical categories, definitions, weightings and analyses are a different matter.
Victoria University’s Sam McIntosh, Stephanie Kovalchik and Samuel Robertson undertook a study to validate Champion Data’s AFL player ratings in 2018. Their results generally validate the player ratings and found that there is a correlation between player ratings and match outcomes. However, kick-ins, 50m penalties and hitouts have the least bearing on match outcomes. In its player ratings process, Champion Data awards five points for a hitout to advantage, no points for a neutral hitout and minus one for a sharked hitout. That compares to four points for effective long and short kicks. Given that hitouts to advantage don’t always result in the ruckman’s team gaining an advantage, possession, the clearance or metres, it would seem that five points for a hitout to advantage is generous.
In 2016, Karl Jackson completed a PhD at Swinburne University in which he used spatial data to assess AFL player performance. Jackson provides a detailed account of the processes and roles of Champion Data’s data “capture team”. The capture team comprises the Main Caller, At-Ground Support, Back Caller, Keyboarder, Spotter, Interchange Capture, Match-up Operator, Graphical Capture, Pressure Caller and Pressure Capture and, in the 2015 season, more than 3000 events were logged for each game. Ruck contests made up 3% of those events and hitouts were 2.6%. It should be noted that the third man up was still permitted when Jackson completed his study [and most third man up hitouts went to the opposition!].
Interestingly, Jackson introduces another definition of hitout to advantage, presumably provided by Champion Data; “which occurs when the ruckman knocks the ball from the stoppage to an unopposed teammate”.
Jackson proposes an equity system to provide more accurate and relevant player ratings than those produced by Champion Data. I’ll reproduce Jackson’s hitout equity proposal in full here as I think it’s an improvement over the current system:
“When players are awarded with a hitout at a stoppage it can fall in one of three categories – to advantage, sharked, or neutral. Hitouts to advantage direct the ball straight to a teammate, hitouts sharked direct the ball to an opposition player and neutral hitouts result in a ball that is still in dispute.
At each stoppage it is assumed that both teams have an equal chance of winning possession. For this reason, the ground-level contest phase is used to grade the equity for each team at the stoppage. Neutral hitouts are given no value since the possession phase has not changed.
In the case of other hitouts, the change in equity is shared between the ruckman and the midfield.
• For hitouts to advantage, two-thirds of the change inequity is given to the ruckman and one-third to the midfielder. See Equations [omitted]
• For hitouts sharked, this is reversed, with two-thirds of the change given to the midfielder (positive value) and one-third to the ruckman (negative value). See Equation [omitted]
This two-thirds allocation is arbitrary, but it was felt that the ruckman deserves more credit than the midfielder for hitouts to advantage. Likewise, the midfielder sharking a ruckman’s hitout is given more credit than the sharked ruckman receives as a penalty.”
This is a crucial factor, hitouts to advantage rely on both the ruckman and the midfielder, not just the ruckman. On the other hand, a sharked hitout may well be affected by the opposing ruckman, but Jackson gives no credit for that.
On 18 June 2018, HPN reviewed an ABC piece “Gawn or Grundy” (topical given Grundy’s recent poor form). At the time of the article, and based on HPN’s own player rating Player Approximate Value (PAV) and the official AFL Player Ratings, Gawn and Grundy were recognised as the two stand out rucks in the game.
The HPN review has this to say about hitouts to advantage:
“The [ABC] piece relied on hitouts to advantage, and described the difficulty in sending the ball to a teammate directly. After crunching hours of video over the last week, HPN is of the opinion that the measure is good, definitely better than just counting hitouts, but still not infallible.
For those interested, the official definition of “hitout to advantage” is “a hit-out that reaches an intended teammate.” [there it is again]
Like all judgement based statistics, a call has to be made on what “reaches” means, and whether the player needs to gather the ball or merely have some opportunity to grab it. In short, it’s a gut call, and while it seems right more often than not, there’s fuzziness at the margins and it doesn’t tell the full picture.
Some hitouts to advantage are logged as such despite bouncing several times in unpredictable ways beforehand, others go the other way.
Gawn had several HTAs that followed this course, but bounced the right way then the wrong way.
It’s not perfect, but it’s better than nothing. It could possibly be improved or added to by a more precise measure distinguishing a controlled tap from one that ends up being to advantage because of chaotic bounces.
With the movement of modern midfielders at stoppages, not to mention the crowding, it’s very hard to direct the ball to the incredibly small window of a teammate’s hands. It’s probably more important for a ruck to control the ball to a non-damaging situation than get a fluky win with a risky hit. At the very least, these are evidence of two different strategies.”
Another issue that struck me while I was looking into hitouts to advantage is that ruckmen don’t get credited with a hitout when they take clean possession during a ruck contest. A clean possession from the ruck is, presumably, a contested possession and, if the ruckman disposes of the ball, a disposal and, potentially, a clearance. Taking clean possession and getting a disposal, regardless of whether it’s an effective disposal, is generally more advantageous than a hitout to advantage.
So, if hitouts to advantage, whatever the definition, are hard to quantify, happen very rarely in relation to the other facets of the game, may or may not have much bearing on who wins the clearance, and contribute little to final result, what’s the point of ruckmen?
It is largely to work with the midfielders to get clearances and stop the opposition getting clearances. That's done by neutralising the opposition ruck, attempting defensive or attacking hitouts, taking possession at stoppages wherever possible, setting blocks for teammates, and tackling opposition players. Then there's advancing the ball so that the next stoppage is easier to defend and harder for the opposition to gain an advantage or defend.
When not contesting hitouts, ruckmen should fill holes in defence, drift forward to provide another forward option or temporarily play as a key forward, present as a marking target for long exit kicks, take marks around the ground, spoil opposition marking attempts and get involved in chains of possessions.
Pitto is very competitive at ruck contests but not so useful in the other aspects of a ruckman's role.
Lods has suggested that hitouts to advantage occur so rarely as to be largely inconsequential. Two research projects, one from Swinburne and one from Victoria University, have shown that Lods is correct. But, first of all, what exactly is a hitout to advantage?
Champion Data’s current official AFL glossary states:
Hitout-To-Advantage: A hitout that reaches an intended teammate.
However ...
(07-05-2023, 06:45 AM)kruddler link Wrote:I contacted Champion Data directly and got their definition which have posted previously.
Its only a hitout to advantage if a player has enough time to dispose of the ball correctly.
If he gets tackled immediately, he does not have prior opportunity, no free kick tackle for a tackle is given because there was no advantage in getting him the ball as he didn't have an opportunity to do so.
It seemed remarkable that Champion Data provides one definition of hitout to advantage but apparently uses another. But, no, I managed to find an article in the Herald Sun of 16 Jun 2017 in which Champion Data provided another definition; “A hitout-to-advantage is a hitout that leads to a teammate gaining direct possession of the ball with the opportunity to dispose of it.” This tallies with the clarification Champion Data gave Kruddler.
The article is behind the paywall so perhaps someone with a subscription may like to see what other revelations it contains.
The second definition is markedly different to the first one. The player who gathers the ball no longer has to be the intended target and he/she has to have the opportunity to dispose of the ball. In fact, if a ruckman tapped the ball into space and it was gathered by a teammate who tried a don’t argue before being free kicked for holding the ball, it would count as a hitout to advantage.
According to a Champion Data spokesperson in the Roar of 08 Jul 2014, a “gather from hitout to advantage” is a contested possession. That’s a bit like classing a handball receive as a contested possession and suggests that there’s not a lot of advantage to a hitout. Either way, it’s hard to reconcile the hitouts to advantages statistics with what’s apparent from watching replays and it seems to me that it’s a very subjective and fluid statistic. That led me to explore the validity of Champion Data’s statistics.
First of all, their data collection is first rate and cannot be faulted. Their statistical categories, definitions, weightings and analyses are a different matter.
Victoria University’s Sam McIntosh, Stephanie Kovalchik and Samuel Robertson undertook a study to validate Champion Data’s AFL player ratings in 2018. Their results generally validate the player ratings and found that there is a correlation between player ratings and match outcomes. However, kick-ins, 50m penalties and hitouts have the least bearing on match outcomes. In its player ratings process, Champion Data awards five points for a hitout to advantage, no points for a neutral hitout and minus one for a sharked hitout. That compares to four points for effective long and short kicks. Given that hitouts to advantage don’t always result in the ruckman’s team gaining an advantage, possession, the clearance or metres, it would seem that five points for a hitout to advantage is generous.
In 2016, Karl Jackson completed a PhD at Swinburne University in which he used spatial data to assess AFL player performance. Jackson provides a detailed account of the processes and roles of Champion Data’s data “capture team”. The capture team comprises the Main Caller, At-Ground Support, Back Caller, Keyboarder, Spotter, Interchange Capture, Match-up Operator, Graphical Capture, Pressure Caller and Pressure Capture and, in the 2015 season, more than 3000 events were logged for each game. Ruck contests made up 3% of those events and hitouts were 2.6%. It should be noted that the third man up was still permitted when Jackson completed his study [and most third man up hitouts went to the opposition!].
Interestingly, Jackson introduces another definition of hitout to advantage, presumably provided by Champion Data; “which occurs when the ruckman knocks the ball from the stoppage to an unopposed teammate”.
Jackson proposes an equity system to provide more accurate and relevant player ratings than those produced by Champion Data. I’ll reproduce Jackson’s hitout equity proposal in full here as I think it’s an improvement over the current system:
“When players are awarded with a hitout at a stoppage it can fall in one of three categories – to advantage, sharked, or neutral. Hitouts to advantage direct the ball straight to a teammate, hitouts sharked direct the ball to an opposition player and neutral hitouts result in a ball that is still in dispute.
At each stoppage it is assumed that both teams have an equal chance of winning possession. For this reason, the ground-level contest phase is used to grade the equity for each team at the stoppage. Neutral hitouts are given no value since the possession phase has not changed.
In the case of other hitouts, the change in equity is shared between the ruckman and the midfield.
• For hitouts to advantage, two-thirds of the change inequity is given to the ruckman and one-third to the midfielder. See Equations [omitted]
• For hitouts sharked, this is reversed, with two-thirds of the change given to the midfielder (positive value) and one-third to the ruckman (negative value). See Equation [omitted]
This two-thirds allocation is arbitrary, but it was felt that the ruckman deserves more credit than the midfielder for hitouts to advantage. Likewise, the midfielder sharking a ruckman’s hitout is given more credit than the sharked ruckman receives as a penalty.”
This is a crucial factor, hitouts to advantage rely on both the ruckman and the midfielder, not just the ruckman. On the other hand, a sharked hitout may well be affected by the opposing ruckman, but Jackson gives no credit for that.
On 18 June 2018, HPN reviewed an ABC piece “Gawn or Grundy” (topical given Grundy’s recent poor form). At the time of the article, and based on HPN’s own player rating Player Approximate Value (PAV) and the official AFL Player Ratings, Gawn and Grundy were recognised as the two stand out rucks in the game.
The HPN review has this to say about hitouts to advantage:
“The [ABC] piece relied on hitouts to advantage, and described the difficulty in sending the ball to a teammate directly. After crunching hours of video over the last week, HPN is of the opinion that the measure is good, definitely better than just counting hitouts, but still not infallible.
For those interested, the official definition of “hitout to advantage” is “a hit-out that reaches an intended teammate.” [there it is again]
Like all judgement based statistics, a call has to be made on what “reaches” means, and whether the player needs to gather the ball or merely have some opportunity to grab it. In short, it’s a gut call, and while it seems right more often than not, there’s fuzziness at the margins and it doesn’t tell the full picture.
Some hitouts to advantage are logged as such despite bouncing several times in unpredictable ways beforehand, others go the other way.
Gawn had several HTAs that followed this course, but bounced the right way then the wrong way.
It’s not perfect, but it’s better than nothing. It could possibly be improved or added to by a more precise measure distinguishing a controlled tap from one that ends up being to advantage because of chaotic bounces.
With the movement of modern midfielders at stoppages, not to mention the crowding, it’s very hard to direct the ball to the incredibly small window of a teammate’s hands. It’s probably more important for a ruck to control the ball to a non-damaging situation than get a fluky win with a risky hit. At the very least, these are evidence of two different strategies.”
Another issue that struck me while I was looking into hitouts to advantage is that ruckmen don’t get credited with a hitout when they take clean possession during a ruck contest. A clean possession from the ruck is, presumably, a contested possession and, if the ruckman disposes of the ball, a disposal and, potentially, a clearance. Taking clean possession and getting a disposal, regardless of whether it’s an effective disposal, is generally more advantageous than a hitout to advantage.
So, if hitouts to advantage, whatever the definition, are hard to quantify, happen very rarely in relation to the other facets of the game, may or may not have much bearing on who wins the clearance, and contribute little to final result, what’s the point of ruckmen?
It is largely to work with the midfielders to get clearances and stop the opposition getting clearances. That's done by neutralising the opposition ruck, attempting defensive or attacking hitouts, taking possession at stoppages wherever possible, setting blocks for teammates, and tackling opposition players. Then there's advancing the ball so that the next stoppage is easier to defend and harder for the opposition to gain an advantage or defend.
When not contesting hitouts, ruckmen should fill holes in defence, drift forward to provide another forward option or temporarily play as a key forward, present as a marking target for long exit kicks, take marks around the ground, spoil opposition marking attempts and get involved in chains of possessions.
Pitto is very competitive at ruck contests but not so useful in the other aspects of a ruckman's role.
“Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don’t you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?” Oddball