Steve Hocking | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Steve Hocking

Ok, here's some more!

Average score has not really increased. If the rule changes were meant to be a revolution leading to more scores, this is looking like the Russian Revolution . . . of 1905!

View attachment 22376

Average score in 2023 was 83.4, which is around the mark for the years 2018 to 2022, In 2017 the average was 89.1 and prior to that was around the high 80s. No prize there for the morons looking for more scoring.

Goals per game a similar story.

View attachment 22377

As you can see, a drop after 2017 and pretty flat thereafter (note, this graph does include 2020, unlike most of the others).

A couple of other things I have looked at - we'll start with inside 50 efficiency, so here is what that looks like, scoring shots per inside 50 entry:

View attachment 22378

Again drops after 2017 and does not recover.

It occurred to me that the game is always evolving in terms of possessions and scores, so I thought I'd look at Possessions per point scored, a simple measure but indicative - how many possessions does it take to score a point:

View attachment 22379

So we are seeing more possessions needed for each score, which reflects the more defensive game these days. The rule changes have done nothing to help this, in fact, it is worse than ever if you take the AFL line that they want more scoring. If they want more scoring then their rule changes should have, and even look like they may have been aiming for, more efficiency in terms of more scores for a similar or lower number of possessions. Fail again.

DS
Nicely done Triple S Datsun. The most relevant graph is your last one of possessions per point scored. Started a mostly constant upward trend since around the year 2000. More n more interchange players and constant interchange rotations simply means that players are much fresher and able to sprint from contest to contest thereby forcing a much more congested and defensive game. Simply because the old fashioned fatigue factor no longer exists. Grumpy old fossil K.B. has been banging on about this major aspect of the game for probably the entire twenty odd years it's been in vogue. Who'da possibly thunk he could actually be right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Ok, here's some more!

Average score has not really increased. If the rule changes were meant to be a revolution leading to more scores, this is looking like the Russian Revolution . . . of 1905!

View attachment 22376

Average score in 2023 was 83.4, which is around the mark for the years 2018 to 2022, In 2017 the average was 89.1 and prior to that was around the high 80s. No prize there for the morons looking for more scoring.

Goals per game a similar story.

View attachment 22377

As you can see, a drop after 2017 and pretty flat thereafter (note, this graph does include 2020, unlike most of the others).

A couple of other things I have looked at - we'll start with inside 50 efficiency, so here is what that looks like, scoring shots per inside 50 entry:

View attachment 22378

Again drops after 2017 and does not recover.

It occurred to me that the game is always evolving in terms of possessions and scores, so I thought I'd look at Possessions per point scored, a simple measure but indicative - how many possessions does it take to score a point:

View attachment 22379

So we are seeing more possessions needed for each score, which reflects the more defensive game these days. The rule changes have done nothing to help this, in fact, it is worse than ever if you take the AFL line that they want more scoring. If they want more scoring then their rule changes should have, and even look like they may have been aiming for, more efficiency in terms of more scores for a similar or lower number of possessions. Fail again.

DS
Be careful. AFL will make a goal worth 9 points and a behind 2 then tell us scores have increased.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 3 users
The man used his power to help his own team stay relevant, blatant cheating. He beat the Richmond game plan with rule changes, he started in 2017 and when the 6,6,6 didn't work as intended, he came up with stand.
 
  • Like
  • Angry
Reactions: 7 users
The man used his power to help his own team stay relevant, blatant cheating. He beat the Richmond game plan with rule changes, he started in 2017 and when the 6,6,6 didn't work as intended, he came up with stand.
And achieved his aim (along with the recruiting of Cameron etc.) with 2022 premiership. It restored the Moggies' game to relevance, enabling them to keep carrying their older, less aerobically capable list and remain competitive through their emphasis on big-bodied, defensively-oriented, marking, solid-kicking types.
Until they had the time to inject some faster, more mobile running players over recent years.; to enact a list correction.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
The man used his power to help his own team stay relevant, blatant cheating. He beat the Richmond game plan with rule changes, he started in 2017 and when the 6,6,6 didn't work as intended, he came up with stand.
I recall reading an interview with Chris Scott where he said "Richmond were the best team in the comp for a few years, until we figured out how to beat them." You got your man at HQ to change the *smile* rules you contemptible *smile*!
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 7 users
I recall reading an interview with Chris Scott where he said "Richmond were the best team in the comp for a few years, until we figured out how to beat them." You got your man at HQ to change the *smile* rules you contemptible *smile*!
I heard him say something simliar to that.
He couldn't beat us during 17-2020 to save himself.
We beat them in a GF by a record margin considering the qtrs were only 20 minutes
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
And now the draft rules are changing and we will be the only club effected according to ralphy on mid week tackle lol. The afl forever *smile* us with this *smile* I hope the club actually protests and forfeits a game preferably an away one at the mcg to hit the afl where it hurts in the pocket it's about time the club stood up to the afl for us fans Im Tired of being bent over Branden Ellis compo they bent us over because Karen cornes and others, now this *smile* changing rules on the run mid year and wiping out a first rd pick for us basically by making our 3rd and 4th rd picks we acquired utterly useless!! Rant over
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
And now the draft rules are changing and we will be the only club effected according to ralphy on mid week tackle lol. The afl forever *smile* us with this *smile* I hope the club actually protests and forfeits a game preferably an away one at the mcg to hit the afl where it hurts in the pocket it's about time the club stood up to the afl for us fans Im Tired of being bent over Branden Ellis compo they bent us over because Karen cornes and others, now this *smile* changing rules on the run mid year and wiping out a first rd pick for us basically by making our 3rd and 4th rd picks we acquired utterly useless!! Rant over
Yep. It's happened again.
We will have apprantly up to 6 picks that might not be used.
Because we were going to bundle them up and try and get a 1st rounder.
It's crap because we off loaded pick after pick in last year's draft to set us up for the 2024 draft.
In turn we missed drafting kids like Logan Morris.
It's bullshiit
 
  • Like
  • Angry
Reactions: 2 users
Yep. It's happened again.
We will have apprantly up to 6 picks that might not be used.
Because we were going to bundle them up and try and get a 1st rounder.
It's crap because we off loaded pick after pick in last year's draft to set us up for the 2024 draft.
In turn we missed drafting kids like Logan Morris.
It's bullshiit
If graham leaves as a free agent the afl better give us overs for him that's all I'll say and I mean way overs 1st rd or end of 1st rd and same with dusty if he goes
 
Came across this on twitter.

View attachment 23184
Brilliant bit of finding Bin. That's the article that shows SHocking altered the rules to help shut our system down. There was a few AFL apologists strongly denied any of this existed or specifically targeted us when all the arguments over this was raging.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
It’s not exactly rock solid evidence but pretty obvious SHocking was the key instigator regardless of that article.

Like to see him take on this bloke. Got to love him smoking bangers during an interview.
Thanks Rhett for putting this up.

 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 9 users
Needs to go for a night walk in a dark alleyway up Ballarat way. Know a few blokes who would love to practise their soccer skills with Shocking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
sHocking set the gold plated standard for how to royally *smile* a club.
Grey Areas Kane said she was happy with how decisions are made
 
Like to see him take on this bloke. Got to love him smoking bangers during an interview.
Thanks Rhett for putting this up.

Riveting...hanged off every word...should be more of it!
How much interesting background detail is lost to the footy world by not mining into these past characters...not just RFC!
Really fleshes out the RFC...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Riveting...hanged off every word...should be more of it!
How much interesting background detail is lost to the footy world by not mining into these past characters...not just RFC!
Really fleshes out the RFC...

How did you like what he said about the 1980 grand final, " I wished that game would of went 3 days". Classic.
 
  • Like
  • Love
  • Haha
Reactions: 7 users
Like to see him take on this bloke. Got to love him smoking bangers during an interview.
Thanks Rhett for putting this up.

Brilliant. Very salient to the SHocking thread too. Caro was the only one who called out Shocking's conflict of interest, and she did it clearly and more than once. Nobody listened or took it up, even if they knew or cared it was dodgy, because it affected Richmond, so she read the play and dropped it. Chip off the old block.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7 users
Brilliant. Very salient to the SHocking thread too. Caro was the only one who called out Shocking's conflict of interest, and she did it clearly and more than once. Nobody listened or took it up, even if they knew or cared it was dodgy, because it affected Richmond, so she read the play and dropped it. Chip off the old block.
Hocking would have know he was going to the cats at least 12 months beforehand.
 
  • Like
  • Angry
Reactions: 3 users