We all know we're averaging 70.5 tackles a game....

[Mike]

but did you know that our players have averaged 12.26 tackles each over the past 4 games? you probably did, but i thought i'd tell you anyway.
with the least amount of players used and the most amount of tackles laid, this is an extraordinary figure.
i figured out a ladder based on amount of tackles and players used, a club average tackle ladder if you will.

Club - Tackles - Players Used - Average Tackles Per Player

St Kilda - 282 - 23 - 12.26
North - 268 - 25 - 10.72
Swans - 252 - 25 - 10.08
Footscray - 229 - 24 - 9.54
Lions - 255 - 27 - 9.44
Blues - 222 - 24 - 9.25
Pies - 240 - 28 - 8.57
Cats - 219 - 27 - 8.11
Freo - 226 - 28 - 8.07
Crows - 213 - 27 - 7.89
Dons - 220 - 29 - 7.59
Dees - 200 - 27 - 7.41
Hawks - 213 - 29 - 7.34
Tiggers - 217 - 30 - 7.23
Port - 195 - 27 - 7.22
Eagles - 190 - 28 - 6.79



Amazing that West Coast have used 5 more players than us yet they are just a bit over half of our average tackle count...
interesting... sorta.

also interesting to compare it to the real ladder... sorta.

[Otiman]

Port is interesting, defying the tackle stats to be 4th.

[benengel14]

I dont understand the significance between those 2 stats?
I mean; to get the aggregate number of tackles, there is still only 22 players selected each week. How does the volatility of the playing list really affect the tackle count?
i.e. How is the number of players used that important in the tackle count?

(AFL is going stats crazy more and more. Discuss)

[BelfastSaint]

Port is interesting, defying the tackle stats to be 4th.

Port will collapse under the tackle pressure and we will win well .....

[Quixote]

^^^ Concur. I cannot believe the bookies have Port as favourite. We will win and win easily. Tredrea to be Dawsoned - X Clarke to star.

[cowboy18]

I dont understand the significance between those 2 stats?
I mean; to get the aggregate number of tackles, there is still only 22 players selected each week. How does the volatility of the playing list really affect the tackle count?
i.e. How is the number of players used that important in the tackle count?

(AFL is going stats crazy more and more. Discuss)

think it might have to be some sort of tackle/player/game stat - otherwise it isn't all that meaningful?

Or does consistency among playing 22 enhance tackling efficiency/impact?

[InkerSaint]

Port Adelaide
Tackles Against
R1 = 62
R2 = 47
R3 = 44
R4 = 52

Interesting figure from Essendon in round 1. They laid plenty of tackles but still got thumped.

[benengel14]

Or does consistency among playing 22 enhance tackling efficiency/impact?

That's about the only conclusion I could draw and even then its a pretty weak one.

[Thinline]

Perhaps they spend a long time in possession so, by deduction, don't have to tackle? They definitely like a bit of perimeter keepings off wait for a path to goal type stuff...

Or maybe they deliberately unclutter clearances?

Dunno. Just speculating.

[Foz]

Port spend a lot of time in possession - in fact they are the no 1 side for possessions. They are +253 or averaging over 63 more possessions a game. Its not just short passing as they handpass relatively more than the average AFL side.

Port rank no 16 for contested % as a part of their overall disposal. So its obviously keepings off and wait for the entry into 50.

Port are ranked 2nd in AFL for scoring shots once inside 50 compared to the number of inside 50's. This means they are effective at shots for goal once they get the chance to score. Pressure in the midfield will be paramount.

Tackles are an interesting one. There is no real correlation between scoring and tackle count. Yes tackles lead to turnovers but in its purest form, a tackle isnt reliable. How so ? Of the 32 games so far, 17.5 have been won by the team having greatest tackles, 14.5 not so. (there has been 1 game with an equal count)

Putting pressure on Port and then being able to kick effectively under pressure, keeping the ball off them and to score early will be the keys.