Mathews Boyds efficiency

[Doc26]

Would like to see Boyd's efficiency stats split by hand and by foot.

Unfortunately the typical efficiency stats provided to the general public are a combination of total disposals.

My perception at least is that his efficiency by hand is far more superior to his disposal by foot, as would be expected.

Does anyone have access to short and long kick efficiency stats as this could help put the topic to bed ?

[bornadog]

Would like to see Boyd's efficiency stats split by hand and by foot.

Unfortunately the typical efficiency stats provided to the general public are a combination of total disposals.

My perception at least is that his efficiency by hand is far more superior to his disposal by foot, as would be expected.

Does anyone have access to short and long kick efficiency stats as this could help put the topic to bed ?

I don't have those stats, but on kicking he is ranked 5th in the AFL for inside 50 and 10th in scoring assists, so he is dangerous.

As I mentioned a few posts ago, most posters are basing his performance on perception rather than fact.

[LostDoggy]

I'm as frustrated as any when Boyd bangs it onto his boot but he is far, far, far from the problem at Bulldogs.
Maybe we expect too much from a mere mortal? I remember Judd missing a couple shots against Essendon on the weekend. If only those around Boyd showed the same character traits.

[Doc26]

I don't have those stats, but on kicking he is ranked 5th in the AFL for inside 50 and 10th in scoring assists, so he is dangerous.

As I mentioned a few posts ago, most posters are basing his performance on perception rather than fact.

BD, I think this is a fair point you make and I would be one of those guilty on judging Matthew's kicking efficiency on what I see each week rather than having it broken down for me by more objective numerical data.

In reference to the inside 50 stat., I'm not surprised by Matthew being ranked very high in this metric. There is no question at all on his work rate or ability to win a clearance, the question is on ball use by foot, short and long, which I'm hoping we can ascertain to gain a better understanding. Hey, it's not like anyone is really suggesting that he isn't part of our top 5.

[bornadog]

BD, I think this is a fair point you make and I would be one of those guilty on judging Matthew's kicking efficiency on what I see each week rather than having it broken down for me by more objective numerical data.

In reference to the inside 50 stat., I'm not surprised by Matthew being ranked very high in this metric. There is no question at all on his work rate or ability to win a clearance, the question is on ball use by foot, short and long, which I'm hoping we can ascertain to gain a better understanding. Hey, it's not like anyone is really suggesting that he isn't part of our top 5.

I have checked prostats and they don't have those stats. The other stat that is relevant is skill errors per game. - 3.4

Of his average of 18.1 kicks per game, 4.7 were considered long, so I assume his average short kicks are the difference. Efficiency disposal is 63% but no break down.

[stefoid]

(as requested by the powers that be) split from 2nd player with ward to GWS thread.

Boyd gets the job done through sheer weight of numbers. He wins so much ball, and a lot of it contested, that he leads our team in a fair number of useful stats, BUT also in all the stats that indicate dodgy disposal.

If his disposal improved somewhat he would be mentioned in the same breath as Pendlbury, Judd, Swan and Ablett.

He is easilly our best player and we are lucky to have him. And I agree with a previous poster that maybe we attach too much importance to his occasional high-profile stuff-ups.

I tend to think that with a couple of better ball users surrounding him, his turnover count would drop by the 15% required to match those elite players mentioned above.

Although it should be mentioned that they often play with a hard tag all day and still manage to perform at the level they do.

[Maddog37]

Does he ever get tagged?

[Doc26]

Thanks Stefoid for posting up this separate thread as was requested.

btw There's a moderator request to merge / strip out the page and a half currently devoted to this topic embedded in the 'A 2nd Dog to GWS with Ward' thread.

[1eyedog]

Does he ever get tagged?

Irrelevant, he shanks so many kicks when under seemingly little pressure (i.e. at critical times field passing into our forward line). I know he gets a lot of ball, but so does Carazzo...

[Maddog37]

Answer the question.

[stefoid]

Irrelevant, he shanks so many kicks when under seemingly little pressure (i.e. at critical times field passing into our forward line). I know he gets a lot of ball, but so does Carazzo...

Yeah, you may have hit the nail on the head there. If you look at sheer numbers of turnovers vs posessions etc.. Boyds stats dont look too far off the mark. Its the context of pressure the turnover is made in that makes all the diffrence. With a tagger hanging off a player, its understandable, whereas 20m in the clear is a bad look.

[Dancin' Douggy]

It also speaks volumes if no other teams bother to tag you.
Makes it a lot easier to rack up possessions as well.

[Topdog]

Answer the question.

Do you not know the answer?

[Maddog37]

Do you not know the answer?

Wouldn't ask if I did.

[divvydan]

Was tagged 6 times (by my count) this season. Rich, WCE, Hawks, Ade, Nth, Ess.

[Go_Dogs]

I've just grabbed a post I had in another thread about this topic as well.

Quite possibly we are too hard on him. He wins a lot of the ball and usually does the harder stuff that others seem reluctant to do. He lets himself down with his disposal though, and I'd go as far to say that a lot of his 'effective' disposals aren't perhaps as 'effective' as they could be.

He needs to either:-

a) Continue to work on his disposal (especially in tight by hand) and consistency of disposal; or

b) Go back to a more defensive role. Having a fit Cooney would assist a lot in this aspect, as without Boyd playing a ball winning role we'll basically be reliant on Griff and Libba to be our prime ball winners/clearance players.

[Jasper]

It was one of my bigger criticisms of Eade was that Boyd's turnovers and style of play that created them was rewarded with B & F votes (indicating he was playing to instruction).Boyd can be very valuable if he can adjust his style to play within his limitations. Too quote Top Gun, at the moment Boyd's 'ego is writing cheques his body can't cash.'


Its too late for Boyd to improve his disposal efficiency. Its too late to trade him (even if there was a will to). Boyd has exceptional durability, ability to win hard ball, and the ability to go all day (all fantastic qualities). the negative that leaps out about Boyd is how he disposes of the ball when the heat is on in games. My belief is that Boyd turns it over significantly more often when the game is hot. Given most teams obtain a large part of their scoring from turnovers, this fault has become more noticeable (and damaging) in recent years.

Realistically the new coach will need to change how Boyd plays to:

1 - A predominantly handballing in close mid
2 - A mid who is very accountable for an opponent (ie a defensive mid).
3 - A mid who does not try to drill 50m passes

In fact Boyd needs to turn into Daniel Cross....the question is then can we have two D Crosses in the one team...

[1eyedog]

I've just grabbed a post I had in another thread about this topic as well.

Quite possibly we are too hard on him. He wins a lot of the ball and usually does the harder stuff that others seem reluctant to do. He lets himself down with his disposal though, and I'd go as far to say that a lot of his 'effective' disposals aren't perhaps as 'effective' as they could be.

He needs to either:-

a) Continue to work on his disposal (especially in tight by hand) and consistency of disposal; or

b) Go back to a more defensive role. Having a fit Cooney would assist a lot in this aspect, as without Boyd playing a ball winning role we'll basically be reliant on Griff and Libba to be our prime ball winners/clearance players.

Agreed. He also turns the contested ball over by hand too often when under a fair bit of pressure when those top tier players mentioned earlier seem to find targets.

I don't really have an issue with Boyd, I admire him for his professionalism, his dedication to the club and his fierce determination on the field.

[1eyedog]

Answer the question.

Sorry, I didn't think answering your question was relevant to what I wanted to say.


Was tagged 6 times (by my count) this season. Rich, WCE, Hawks, Ade, Nth, Ess.

Yes apparently so.

[Dancin' Douggy]

Was tagged 6 times (by my count) this season. Rich, WCE, Hawks, Ade, Nth, Ess.

6 times in 22 rounds counts as not being tagged in my book.
And thankyou for the research divvyvan

[1eyedog]

6 times in 22 rounds counts as not being tagged in my book.
And thankyou for the research divvyvan

So what happened during those six games?

[Maddog37]

So largely he is not tagged. Is that because he isn't damaging with the ball or because he is too in and under to tag?

I would say it is the former. He will still win the b and f though.

[stefoid]

Was tagged 6 times (by my count) this season. Rich, WCE, Hawks, Ade, Nth, Ess.

Wow. And for the grand prize, how did he do in those games efficiency / turnover wise?

[divvydan]

So what happened during those six games?

In tagged games (compared to untagged), Boyd averaged; 3.8 less kicks, 3.6 less disposals in total, 2.6 more contested possessions, 5.5 less uncontested possessions, about the same efficiency %, 1.2 less marks, 1 more clearance and 0.6 less clangers

This suggests that he did more inside work when being tagged, probably to make up for the fact that he wouldn't be able to get as much of the ball outside of contested situations.

Edit: Should also note, this suggests that tagging has little impact on the inside work of Boyd and is in line with the prevailing view in the football community that inside players are harder to successfully tag than outside players.

[stefoid]

OK then. cheers

[bornadog]

It was one of my bigger criticisms of Eade was that Boyd's turnovers and style of play that created them was rewarded with B & F votes (indicating he was playing to instruction).Boyd can be very valuable if he can adjust his style to play within his limitations. Too quote Top Gun, at the moment Boyd's 'ego is writing cheques his body can't cash.'


Its too late for Boyd to improve his disposal efficiency. Its too late to trade him (even if there was a will to). Boyd has exceptional durability, ability to win hard ball, and the ability to go all day (all fantastic qualities). the negative that leaps out about Boyd is how he disposes of the ball when the heat is on in games. My belief is that Boyd turns it over significantly more often when the game is hot. Given most teams obtain a large part of their scoring from turnovers, this fault has become more noticeable (and damaging) in recent years.

Realistically the new coach will need to change how Boyd plays to:

1 - A predominantly handballing in close mid
2 - A mid who is very accountable for an opponent (ie a defensive mid).
3 - A mid who does not try to drill 50m passes

In fact Boyd needs to turn into Daniel Cross....the question is then can we have two D Crosses in the one team...

A Few comments on your post:

* I don't think the coach is the only one voting.

* Your belief is not backed up by facts.

* Turn into Daniel Cross - as that a joke? Why the hell does he need to do that?

Boyd has to get his efficiency disposal from 63% to closer to 70%, thats his biggest issue. However, being the AFL's number one clearance and contested player, he is under more pressure than any other midfielder and is bound to make errors.

[MrMahatma]

He just needs to stop trying to kick like Nathan Buckley.

[Mantis]

He just needs to stop trying to kick like Nathan Buckley.

And handball like Greg Williams.

[Mofra]

Boyd has to get his efficiency disposal from 63% to closer to 70%, thats his biggest issue. However, being the AFL's number one clearance and contested player, he is under more pressure than any other midfielder and is bound to make errors.
I don't think the issue is that he makes errors (an inside mid with little time to dispose of it will always have a lower disposal efficiency).
The issue is that once or twice a game, the error will be with little pressure or one that you'd expect a player to not make. I still rate him as elite, but of he could remove the low-pressure clangers from his game he would be one of the stars of the competition.

[1eyedog]

So largely he is not tagged. Is that because he isn't damaging with the ball or because he is too in and under to tag?

I would say it is the former. He will still win the b and f though.

I think we need to factor in that the press has shrugged the 'hard' tag somewhat as well as the fact that if a hard tag is employed it goes to Cooney when he plays because of his ability to hurt the opposition on the scoreboard (both as goals scored and scoring assists). Obviously Griff is next in line because of his run and carry and over the past two seasons his ability to carry the ball away from stoppages.

I think you're right though, the opposition do not put a lot of energy into Boyd because of his inefficiency by hand and foot.

[1eyedog]

I don't think the issue is that he makes errors (an inside mid with little time to dispose of it will always have a lower disposal efficiency).
The issue is that once or twice a game, the error will be with little pressure or one that you'd expect a player to not make. I still rate him as elite, but of he could remove the low-pressure clangers from his game he would be one of the stars of the competition.

This is a bit skewed.

An outside mid is an outside mid usually because of his superior skills.

Marc Murphy is pretty inside these days (as are many others) and they are tracking at a much higher efficiency than Boyd. I don't think he is elite and I personally think he is overareted in the media.

I agree that if he could eliminate his low pressure clanger count he would be considered 'just about' elite.

[Mofra]

This is a bit skewed.

An outside mid is an outside mid usually because of his superior skills.
Not necessarily - it could also be due to pace/burst speed.

Gia is normally a very good user of the ball, but when he goes into the centre he plays an inside mid role simply because he doesn't have the pace to play outside.

[always right]

Typically he doesn't get tagged....niot because he isn't damaging but because others like Cooney and Griffen are more damaging.

Whilst you can generally rely on him kicking to the opposition at least a couple of times each match, there is also another stat that no-one gives him credit for.....when he is getting the ball, the opposition isn't. There are up to 30 occasions in each game where his efforts mean the opposition isn't pumping the ball into their forward 50.

Certainly plenty of room for improvment but he is a terrific player.

[Maddog37]

No doubt he is a gun and his consistency really is amazing. Love the fact that when the chips are down he is always in there.

Both Boyd and Cross have weak parts in their game but thank god they have been in the team this year.

[stefoid]

Typically he doesn't get tagged....niot because he isn't damaging but because others like Cooney and Griffen are more damaging.

Whilst you can generally rely on him kicking to the opposition at least a couple of times each match, there is also another stat that no-one gives him credit for.....when he is getting the ball, the opposition isn't. There are up to 30 occasions in each game where his efforts mean the opposition isn't pumping the ball into their forward 50.

Certainly plenty of room for improvment but he is a terrific player.

yes. but turnovers are evil. Particualry turnovers outside of contested situations - thats when you are most likely to catch your own teammates out of position when you cough up the ball.

For the record, Boydy leads the league in turnovers and is 2nd for total number of critical errors (errors resulting in oppostion shost on goal).

but by god is he a monster at getting 1st posession!! Just needs more support to give it to...

[Topdog]

Typically he doesn't get tagged....niot because he isn't damaging but because others like Cooney and Griffen are more damaging.

Whilst you can generally rely on him kicking to the opposition at least a couple of times each match, there is also another stat that no-one gives him credit for.....when he is getting the ball, the opposition isn't. There are up to 30 occasions in each game where his efforts mean the opposition isn't pumping the ball into their forward 50.

Certainly plenty of room for improvment but he is a terrific player.

18 times after he turns it over (approx off 63%)

[The Doctor]

And handball like Greg Williams.

It is hard to be too critical when he gets it 35 times a game but the one thing that really bugs me about Boyd is the unnecessary handballs to players in worse positions or the one that hits the ground on the way when under no real pressure.

[The Doctor]

and is 2nd for total number of critical errors (errors resulting in oppostion shost on goal).


who is 1st?

[Nuggety Back Pocket]

Agreed. He also turns the contested ball over by hand too often when under a fair bit of pressure when those top tier players mentioned earlier seem to find targets.

I don't really have an issue with Boyd, I admire him for his professionalism, his dedication to the club and his fierce determination on the field.

You could never doubt Boyd's work ethic. As a midfield group however, I do not think our disposal efficiency is anywhere good enough compared to the likes of Selwood, Kelly, Bartel, Swan and Pendlebury. Perhaps it has been the style of game that was developed under Eade to play on at all costs, rather than the need to execute by hand or foot with the least number of errors. This is a critical area that needs to be refined under the new coach.

[GVGjr]

It is hard to be too critical when he gets it 35 times a game but the one thing that really bugs me about Boyd is the unnecessary handballs to players in worse positions or the one that hits the ground on the way when under no real pressure.


Against Fremantle that was quite prominent.

[bornadog]

Its evident from this thread that Boyd needs help in the midfield from some outside running mids. Collingwood, Carlton have midfielders that help each other and feed off the good clearance work of Swan and Judd.

[LongWait]

It is hard to be too critical when he gets it 35 times a game but the one thing that really bugs me about Boyd is the unnecessary handballs to players in worse positions or the one that hits the ground on the way when under no real pressure.

And these posessions which often result in turnovers are not counted against Boyd. I love his endeavour but Boyd is a very overrated player imo.

[LostDoggy]

And these posessions which often result in turnovers are not counted against Boyd. I love his endeavour but Boyd is a very overrated player imo.

Underated not overrated. If he played for most other clubs he would talked as one of the stars of the comp.

[stefoid]

who is 1st?

Scott Thompson

http://www.pro-stats.com.au/psw/web/player_stats_rankings?team_id=0&yr=2011&sp=SE&rt=LT&fc=D7

[Go_Dogs]

Against Fremantle that was quite prominent.

Agreed. Lot of handballs to players feet. If he could just get a bit cleaner.



Scott Thompson

Another major ball winner who is frequently hounded for average disposal.

Both are chances of being AA this year too.

[Bulldog4life]

Matty Boyd's value to our side is underated. If we were to play 6 or 8 weeks without him then we would all realise what an important cog he is to the team. We are just lucky that he is so fit and resilient that that scenario hasn't happened yet.

[Topdog]

Matty Boyd's value to our side is underated. If we were to play 6 or 8 weeks without him then we would all realise what an important cog he is to the team. We are just lucky that he is so fit and resilient that that scenario hasn't happened yet.

When he hurt himself last year and Gia went into the midfield we lost nothing.

[Bulldog4life]

When he hurt himself last year and Gia went into the midfield we lost nothing.

How long was he out for? I can't recall.

[Jasper]

A Few comments on your post:

* I don't think the coach is the only one voting.

* Your belief is not backed up by facts.

* Turn into Daniel Cross - as that a joke? Why the hell does he need to do that?

Boyd has to get his efficiency disposal from 63% to closer to 70%, thats his biggest issue. However, being the AFL's number one clearance and contested player, he is under more pressure than any other midfielder and is bound to make errors.

1 - The coach sets the agenda and match committee follows - so yes it is the coach, even if others vote

2 - I'd be interested in seeing Boyd's stats when the game is hot but I doubt they are kept, its just my obversation

3 - In saying turn into D Cross I believe he needs to play within his limitations more, Cross does this probably too well (eg floaty short kicks, easy handballs to stationary targets, a general refusal to a shot at goal, etc...)

[bornadog]

1 - The coach sets the agenda and match committee follows - so yes it is the coach, even if others vote

2 - I'd be interested in seeing Boyd's stats when the game is hot but I doubt they are kept, its just my obversation

3 - In saying turn into D Cross I believe he needs to play within his limitations more, Cross does this probably too well (eg floaty short kicks, easy handballs to stationary targets, a general refusal to a shot at goal, etc...)

I think this answers alot:


Its evident from this thread that Boyd needs help in the midfield from some outside running mids. Collingwood, Carlton have midfielders that help each other and feed off the good clearance work of Swan and Judd.

I think he tries to do too much and puts himself under pressure

[Jasper]

I think he tries to do too much and puts himself under pressure

I agree, but I also think Boyd has been encouraged to play that way by the coach. Hopefully this changes.

[1eyedog]

How long was he out for? I can't recall.

I thought his hand kept him out for two.

[Bulldog4life]

I thought his hand kept him out for two.

Thanks I didn't think it was a substantional time out.

[Ghost Dog]

I think this answers alot:



I think he tries to do too much and puts himself under pressure

Just lacks class by foot. Even when not under a great deal of pressure, overcooks it or shanks it.
Needs to hand pass more.

[Mantis]

Its evident from this thread that Boyd needs help in the midfield from some outside running mids. Collingwood, Carlton have midfielders that help each other and feed off the good clearance work of Swan and Judd.

He also needs to learn to play within his limitations.

Why try to kick like Nathan Buckley or handball like Greg Williams when it's clearly evident that you can't.

[always right]

[B]1 - The coach sets the agenda and match committee follows - so yes it is the coach, even if others vote


Fascinating. I'm interested to hear more about your experience in the inner sanctum. Can you share your thoughts as to how the discussion typically took place. Did Eade express his thoughts and then ask for comments, did he open it up for general discussion before sharing his opinion, or did he tell them....this is how it is....the rest of you can all get stuffed? Please enlighten the rest of us who are simply looking in from the outside.

[LostDoggy]

He also needs to learn to play within his limitations.

Why try to kick like Nathan Buckley or handball like Greg Williams when it's clearly evident that you can't.

This.

There are lies, damn lies, and statistics. Boydy's averages are bloody incredible, and there's no doubt that he's a damn good player, but it's the nuance of the qualitative aspects of reality that quantitative statistics can't quite capture.

For example, a player like Murph or Rioli will only ever gather half the possessions Boydy does, but the quality of their decision-making is such that the impact of those possessions may well be match-winning. I mean, there's effective (a ball that's not a turnover), and then there's EFFECTIVE (imaginative, cross-field passes that hit a free teammate on the run without having to break stride), but cold stats will judge both to be the same. On the other extreme, some guys just accumulate stats but aren't really all that damaging so opposition coaches just let them rack it up while paying more attention to dangerous players.

Secondly, we know that our players can all turn it on here and there, but what most stat-sheets don't capture is WHEN they turn it on or off. It's all very well and good to rack up the stats when the game is lost -- that's why in some sports, statistics that take place late in games, or in important phases, actually get much more weighting than just your average stat. I think Champion Data tries to do this a bit. Boydy's biggest frustrations perception-wise is the inability to maintain momentum for the team when we're on the up. It's not that he has clangers (everyone has them, and yes, he will have more than most considering the type of position he plays), but it's when he has them, and the type of clanger he commits. The number of times I see him streaming forward and kicking over the heads of all his forwards, or trying to pinpoint a pass only to overcook it so that it is easily seen over the boundary by a defender, may not be truly captured on a stat sheet but translates poorly in real-time. Of course Juddy and Gablett and Hodge and Swan all commit turnovers too, but not these types of turnovers (even though they'll be recorded the same on a stat sheet).

Of course he gets it right regularly too. No one is saying that Boydy is a bad player -- I think what his detractors here are saying (as I am) is that he would be bloody nigh elite (he is almost, but not quite, most observers would agree) IF he was to be given a role well within his limitations that maximises his strengths, and minimises the harm his weaknesses cause to the team, which, in an era where a bad turnover more often than not leads to a goal, can be considerable.

[1eyedog]

This.

There are lies, damn lies, and statistics. Boydy's averages are bloody incredible, and there's no doubt that he's a damn good player, but it's the nuance of the qualitative aspects of reality that quantitative statistics can't quite capture.

For example, a player like Murph or Rioli will only ever gather half the possessions Boydy does, but the quality of their decision-making is such that the impact of those possessions may well be match-winning. I mean, there's effective (a ball that's not a turnover), and then there's EFFECTIVE (imaginative, cross-field passes that hit a free teammate on the run without having to break stride), but cold stats will judge both to be the same. On the other extreme, some guys just accumulate stats but aren't really all that damaging so opposition coaches just let them rack it up while paying more attention to dangerous players.

Secondly, we know that our players can all turn it on here and there, but what most stat-sheets don't capture is WHEN they turn it on or off. It's all very well and good to rack up the stats when the game is lost -- that's why in some sports, statistics that take place late in games, or in important phases, actually get much more weighting than just your average stat. I think Champion Data tries to do this a bit. Boydy's biggest frustrations perception-wise is the inability to maintain momentum for the team when we're on the up. It's not that he has clangers (everyone has them, and yes, he will have more than most considering the type of position he plays), but it's when he has them, and the type of clanger he commits. The number of times I see him streaming forward and kicking over the heads of all his forwards, or trying to pinpoint a pass only to overcook it so that it is easily seen over the boundary by a defender, may not be truly captured on a stat sheet but translates poorly in real-time. Of course Juddy and Gablett and Hodge and Swan all commit turnovers too, but not these types of turnovers (even though they'll be recorded the same on a stat sheet).

Of course he gets it right regularly too. No one is saying that Boydy is a bad player -- I think what his detractors here are saying (as I am) is that he would be bloody nigh elite (he is almost, but not quite, most observers would agree) IF he was to be given a role well within his limitations that maximises his strengths, and minimises the harm his weaknesses cause to the team, which, in an era where a bad turnover more often than not leads to a goal, can be considerable.

What are those qualitative aspects of reality? The empirical fact of how average Boyd can be and there simply being no quantitative stat for this (except for efficiency)?

I generally agree with your post, but I think people neglect to consider all the times when Boyd has physically gotten us back into a position to challenge across a number of matches this year.

[LostDoggy]

What are those qualitative aspects of reality?.

The rest of my post tries to explain them -- a pure 'percentage' number does not qualitatively differentiate between varieties of effectiveness or turnovers. Surely it's a relatively uncontroversial assertion that some 'effective' disposals are better than other 'effective' disposals. Same with turnovers.

I don't think there's any doubt that Boydy has played his share of fantastic games.

[1eyedog]

The rest of my post tries to explain them -- a pure 'percentage' number does not qualitatively differentiate between varieties of effectiveness or turnovers. Surely it's a relatively uncontroversial assertion that some 'effective' disposals are better than other 'effective' disposals. Same with turnovers.

I don't think there's any doubt that Boydy has played his share of fantastic games.

This makes sense. It would be a purely subjective exercise but I wonder how you would rank these. It would provide finer-grained data for assessing a player's effectiveness against the questions you were asking about them.

[mjp]

No one is saying that Boydy is a bad player -- I think what his detractors here are saying (as I am) is that he would be bloody nigh elite (he is almost, but not quite, most observers would agree) IF he was to be given a role well within his limitations that maximises his strengths, and minimises the harm his weaknesses cause to the team, which, in an era where a bad turnover more often than not leads to a goal, can be considerable.

Actually, I think a lot of people are saying that.

- Unable to hit easy targets by foot.
- Continually handballs to his team-mates feet.
- Apparently he turns it over at critical times whereas Judd doesn't (which is complete tripe).
- Saying he needs to do a better job of 'playing within his "limitations"' to 'minimise the harm'...

...how else should these comments be interpreted?

I am obviously tired and grouchy, but I really believe that Boyd is the least of our problems. Having someone who wills himself to contest after contest and gets his hand on the ball before forcing it forward? Not a bad thing...

[1eyedog]

Actually, I think a lot of people are saying that.

- Unable to hit easy targets by foot.
- Continually handballs to his team-mates feet.
- Apparently he turns it over at critical times whereas Judd doesn't (which is complete tripe).
- Saying he needs to do a better job of 'playing within his "limitations"' to 'minimise the harm'...

...how else should these comments be interpreted?

I am obviously tired and grouchy, but I really believe that Boyd is the least of our problems. Having someone who wills himself to contest after contest and gets his hand on the ball before forcing it forward? Not a bad thing...

You've put forward a whole heap of assumptions without backing up any of it, don't worry neither can Boyd's detractors. Again, it would be interesting to see goals score from Boyd turnovers or marks taken by the opposition from Boyd's kicks against his effectiveness when he gets to the 'contest' as you say.

Captains are always marked harder and supporters have exaggerated expectations but I don't think anyone on this forum would say that Boyd is a bad player, they are saying (for one or perhaps many reasons) that they are expecting more from him in key areas.

[bornadog]

You've put forward a whole heap of assumptions without backing up any of it, don't worry neither can Boyd's detractors. Again, it would be interesting to see goals score from Boyd turnovers or marks taken by the opposition from Boyd's kicks against his effectiveness when he gets to the 'contest' as you say.

Captains are always marked harder and supporters have exaggerated expectations but I don't think anyone on this forum would say that Boyd is a bad player, they are saying (for one or perhaps many reasons) that they are expecting more from him in key areas.

You know what, how about we look at all the positives Boyd brings to the table.

This thread is so half glass empty.

[1eyedog]

I don't really have an issue with Boyd, I admire him for his professionalism, his dedication to the club and his fierce determination on the field.


You know what, how about we look at all the positives Boyd brings to the table.

This thread is so half glass empty.

Indeed, I revert to my original assertion.

[LostDoggy]

- Apparently he turns it over at critical times whereas Judd doesn't (which is complete tripe).


So you really think Boydy's disposal is as good as Judd's or Gablett's or Hodge's under any type of pressure?

This is what I mean about lies and statistics. I know what the comparison of their efficiency stats are, but I don't need stats to know that qualitatively Boydy's disposal is at least an order of magnitude below elite users of the ball, and I would be surprised if anyone can mount a credible case that it isn't.

[LostDoggy]

And it's not a 'slight' to say that a player should work within his limitations. Luke Ball is a far more effective player because he knows his limitations and works within them. I would suggest that that's what most are saying when they talk about Boydy knowing his limitations as well.

[Mantis]

You know what, how about we look at all the positives Boyd brings to the table.

This thread is so half glass empty.


This thread is titled 'Matthew Boyds efficiency'.... His efficiency as we know isn't great which is why the thread is on the negative side.

If you want us to slap him on the back start a new thread titled ' Matthew Boyd - Clearance King'.

[bornadog]

This thread is titled 'Matthew Boyds efficiency'.... His efficiency as we know isn't great which is why the thread is on the negative side.

If you want us to slap him on the back start a new thread titled ' Matthew Boyd - Clearance King'.

No point in a new thread that would go south as well.:rolleyes:

[mjp]

So you really think Boydy's disposal is as good as Judd's or Gablett's or Hodge's under any type of pressure?

This is what I mean about lies and statistics. I know what the comparison of their efficiency stats are, but I don't need stats to know that qualitatively Boydy's disposal is at least an order of magnitude below elite users of the ball, and I would be surprised if anyone can mount a credible case that it isn't.

As good as Judd's? Yes. Haphazard kicks and hand-balls to no-one (even over his head) have long been staples of his game.
As good as Ablett's? No. Truly elite and refuses to panic.
As good as Hodge's? Yes. Up and under kicks that give the opposition a chance - will force it into the corridor as well.

I would say that both Swan and Pendlebury are better with the ball than Boyd - though Pendlebury panicked a couple of times by hand vs WCE last week.

[The Pie Man]

For a player with some 'perceived' disposal issues, he has great penetration via foot - I'd like to see him 55-60 out on the run more often so he call pull the trigger. We'll need our midfield to hit the scoreboard more to be competitive in the next two years.

[immortalmike]

As good as Judd's? Yes. Haphazard kicks and hand-balls to no-one (even over his head) have long been staples of his game.
As good as Ablett's? No. Truly elite and refuses to panic.
As good as Hodge's? Yes. Up and under kicks that give the opposition a chance - will force it into the corridor as well.

I would say that both Swan and Pendlebury are better with the ball than Boyd - though Pendlebury panicked a couple of times by hand vs WCE last week.

I completely agree with this post. Judd and Hodge get by on reputation more than any player since James Hird.

[ledge]

So you really think Boydy's disposal is as good as Judd's or Gablett's or Hodge's under any type of pressure?

This is what I mean about lies and statistics. I know what the comparison of their efficiency stats are, but I don't need stats to know that qualitatively Boydy's disposal is at least an order of magnitude below elite users of the ball, and I would be surprised if anyone can mount a credible case that it isn't.

Cant even say it let alone understand it, is this another word invented by the americans? :)

[mjp]

I completely agree with this post. Judd and Hodge get by on reputation more than any player since James Hird.

Well - I think Judd and Hodge are super players. I just don't think they are as flawless as the media would have us think. Judd was terrible last night - just reluctant to contest...he will not be pleased to watch the tape of his movements around contested footy...

This is all about kicking though and anyone who watched would surely admit that Judd is not immaculate by foot and kicked a few 'unmarkable' balls...unmarkable by his team-mates in any case.

[chef]

Well - I think Judd and Hodge are super players. I just don't think they are as flawless as the media would have us think. Judd was terrible last night - just reluctant to contest...he will not be pleased to watch the tape of his movements around contested footy...
This is all about kicking though and anyone who watched would surely admit that Judd is not immaculate by foot and kicked a few 'unmarkable' balls...unmarkable by his team-mates in any case.

He looked to me like he was carrying an injury.

[ledge]

How old is Judd now?
They were saying on radio he has lost his burst, maybe age and all the tagging is catching up?

[AndrewP6]

How old is Judd now?
They were saying on radio he has lost his burst, maybe age and all the tagging is catching up?

Recently turned 28

[Topdog]

I think they erred in not resting him late in the season.

[Mantis]

I think they erred in not resting him late in the season.

I think he erred by not checking the calendar before knocking up Mrs Judd.

His form has certainly dropped away since the sleepless nights began.

[ledge]

I think he erred by not checking the calendar before knocking up Mrs Judd.

His form has certainly dropped away since the sleepless nights began.

Maybe he thought back then finals and blues dont mix.

[immortalmike]

Well - I think Judd and Hodge are super players. I just don't think they are as flawless as the media would have us think. Judd was terrible last night - just reluctant to contest...he will not be pleased to watch the tape of his movements around contested footy...

This is all about kicking though and anyone who watched would surely admit that Judd is not immaculate by foot and kicked a few 'unmarkable' balls...unmarkable by his team-mates in any case.

Yep they are very, very good players but they are also far from perfect and do sometimes put in a shocker (especially disposal wise) when their teams need them. This finals series has exemplified this perfectly.

[1eyedog]

They are in the top 5 in the competition behind Ablett and Franklin. I wish one of our players was in the top 10.

You will never find a player close to perfect. I'm not sure what you are saying except that even the top 5 players in the AFL are not perfect.

[immortalmike]

They are in the top 5 in the competition behind Ablett and Franklin. I wish one of our players was in the top 10.

You will never find a player close to perfect. I'm not sure what you are saying except that even the top 5 players in the AFL are not perfect.

Simple. Boyd is not very far away from them.

[LostDoggy]

Simply said though, Judd and Hodge (if playing in the middle) gets the best tagger every day of the week. Boydy never gets tagged except by teams near the bottom, yet Boydy's efficiency still ranks below them. It's not rocket science here.

Pendlebury made a mistake in a qualifying final under crazy pressure. I'm sure Federer has hit a double fault or two in Grand Slam finals too -- it's the pressure of the situation. Boydy makes the same mistakes in Round 3 against Richmond.

People are going overboard in trying to defend Boydy here. No one says Luke Ball is a bad player for playing within his limitations. Saints fans were livid when he was traded away. Boydy is better than Ball, but to say he's in the same class as any of the players mentioned is just being blinkered and bloody minded about overrating our own.

ps. "Qualitative" when referring to stats simply means the quality of a stat -- it's not an Americanism (!), it's integral to the entire discussion of statistics, which we should probably understand if we want to throw them around to back up our arguments. We tend to talk about stats quantitatively (the quantity of stats) on WOOF -- ie. how MANY handballs, how MANY marks, rather than the quality of stats (how good was the handball, did the receiver have to bend down to pick it up), which is where the interpretation of stats come into play and is where real statisticians earn their money (anyone can look up numbers, interpreting them is the real skill). We do have stats to try to measure things qualitatively: the efficiency stat is one, another is clangers, or 'kicks to advantage', or 'involved in a scoring chain', but even these are relatively crude approximations, and even then require the statistician to 'interpret' what he's seeing (what makes a mark 'contested', what's 'under pressure' etc). This is why stats always have to be balanced with observation, otherwise we can just get a computer to figure out who should win B&Fs and the Brownlow (which seems to be what the AFL do with the NAB Rising Star!)

[1eyedog]

Simple. Boyd is not very far away from them.

Not really, he is approximately 10% less than them in efficiency. That's a fair stretch with no where to hide out there.

[MrMahatma]

Elite ball winner. Clearance machine. Running machine. For me, it's the frustration that he COULD be up there with Hodge et al if not for his disposal.

I probably underrate him and judge him harshly. No doubt. But be can be Very frustrating!

[immortalmike]

Not really, he is approximately 10% less than them in efficiency. That's a fair stretch with no where to hide out there.

Actually he is 5% (about 1 possie a game) less than Judd and 8% (about 2 a game) less than Hodge in DE and wins more contested ball and clearances than both. And get's a hell of a lot more of the ball than Hodge to boot.

Oh and he's a 2011 All Australian...but yeah he's average.:rolleyes:

[chef]

How old is Judd now?
They were saying on radio he has lost his burst, maybe age and all the tagging is catching up?

He had it earlier in the year, he was carrying an injury IMO.

[LostDoggy]

Actually he is 5% (about 1 possie a game) less than Judd and 8% (about 2 a game) less than Hodge in DE and wins more contested ball and clearances than both. And get's a hell of a lot more of the ball than Hodge to boot.

Oh and he's a 2011 All Australian...but yeah he's average.:rolleyes:

Who said he's average? Geez, so he's perfect then?

Even one of the first things our new coach said was to highlight both Boydy and Crossy as players that he wants to tighten one or two things up on. Does this mean that he thinks Boydy is 'average', or that he's realistic and wants to improve Matthew? It's a good thing McCartney comes in with fresh eyes, as an opposition coach he would have been part of analysing Boydy's impact, and has been on two coaching panels that never tagged Boydy, so he knows exactly what his strengths and weaknesses are.

I mean, are you saying that we should just sit in awe of his performances every week and be completely blinkered to the one or two percent he could improve (with not much tweaking) to become truly elite? This is exactly what Chris Grant was talking about at his retirement speech, where individuals become bigger than the club at the Dogs and any criticism of our sacred cows is sacrosanct, whereas at a successful club coaches are more than happy to drop absolute superstars to make a point if they aren't contributing to the gameplan.

Geez we're a precious lot.

[immortalmike]

Who said he's average? Geez, so he's perfect then?

Even one of the first things our new coach said was to highlight both Boydy and Crossy as players that he wants to tighten one or two things up on. Does this mean that he thinks Boydy is 'average', or that he's realistic and wants to improve Matthew? It's a good thing McCartney comes in with fresh eyes, as an opposition coach he would have been part of analysing Boydy's impact, and has been on two coaching panels that never tagged Boydy, so he knows exactly what his strengths and weaknesses are.

I mean, are you saying that we should just sit in awe of his performances every week and be completely blinkered to the one or two percent he could improve (with not much tweaking) to become truly elite? This is exactly what Chris Grant was talking about at his retirement speech, where individuals become bigger than the club at the Dogs and any criticism of our sacred cows is sacrosanct, whereas at a successful club coaches are more than happy to drop absolute superstars to make a point if they aren't contributing to the gameplan.

Geez we're a precious lot.

Of course he can improve. But if you read my earlier posts some other so-called elite players can also. Basically my point is his mistakes are over-magnified and his good points are
almost completely ignored. The fact of the matter is we have the number 1 contested ball and clearance winning player in the league, who when tagged only ends up getting more contested ball and clearances and whose disposal efficiency (while not being anywhere near perfect) is fairly close to players regarded as elite. Am I going crazy or is this not a good thing.

On the point of him not being tagged often. Is it possible other teams just see Griff as more tag-able i.e., "don't bother tagging Boydy he'll just get more hard ball, tag Griff or Coons instead". Maybe they don't tag Boyd in the same way some teams rarely tag Judd (we often tag Murphy). Am I the only one who remembers when teams gave up on tagging Judd because he was too inside? Is it possible Boyd's the same? Let me reiterate my point he is not even close to perfect but he is also nowhere near a problem and certainly not enough of one for there to be a 5 page thread dedicated to it.

As for the cult of the individual stuff, with all due respect. Bullshit! Dogs supporters are the most critical, self-loathing, inferiority complex having supporters this side of Richmond. There are still some out there that will swear to you that Chris Grant wasn't a champion and that Glenn Archer was.

[1eyedog]

Actually he is 5% (about 1 possie a game) less than Judd and 8% (about 2 a game) less than Hodge in DE and wins more contested ball and clearances than both. And get's a hell of a lot more of the ball than Hodge to boot.

Oh and he's a 2011 All Australian...but yeah he's average.:rolleyes:

No, he is about 10-12% less than the elite ball users, Pendlebury et al. about 4-5 possesions a game. If those 4-5 result in turnovers there is every possibility they will result in inside D50s.

I have never said that Boyd is average, the discusssion was around Boyd being elite in relation to his numbers. Nothing more, nothing less.

Someone was talking about qualitative and quantative data the other day and I agree with them that the qualitataive aspects of Boyd's game cannot be easily measured, he is surely an elite quantative accumulator of the contested ball and his stoppage work is first class, but there is no taking away from the amount of times I have been frustrated by sloppy disposal that has inevitably hurt us in the past. He is not clean as they say.

He is a great player and I have posted elsewhere how much I admire his aggression, passion and determination as well as his numbers in many areas.

[KT31]

In such a dismal year to be Captain, All Australian 3rd in the Brownlow and most likely our BF.
I would say is pretty efficient.
Sometimes it would seem he is rated higher by outsiders than his own club's supporters.

[AndrewP6]

In such a dismal year to be Captain, All Australian 3rd in the Brownlow and most likely our BF.
I would say is pretty efficient.
Sometimes it would seem he is rated higher by outsiders than his own club's supporters.

It's a tremendous achievement, no doubt. But it's not an efficiency award.

[Mantis]

Sometimes it would seem he is rated higher by outsiders than his own club's supporters.

Which group of people get to watch him every week?

[bornadog]

Which group of people get to watch him every week?

The umpires and they rated him in top 5 in AFL.

[Greystache]

The umpires and they rated him in top 5 in AFL.

They also rated Griffen's season worth a mere 5 votes, Murphy's even less, and rated Chris Judd the best player in the AFL last year. They have no idea.

[bornadog]

They also rated Griffen's season worth a mere 5 votes, Murphy's even less, and rated Chris Judd the best player in the AFL last year. They have no idea.

7 but who is counting:D

May be thats all it was worth compared to other players.

[Topdog]

The umpires and they rated him in top 5 in AFL.

and every year we complain about how they rate players because they just give it to the bloke that gets the ball a lot.

[Topdog]

7 but who is counting:D

May be thats all it was worth compared to other players.

Dangerfield had a similar impact this year in your opinion then?

[bornadog]

Dangerfield had a similar impact this year in your opinion then?

Didn't see much of Dangerfield.

[Topdog]

Didn't see much of Dangerfield.

Did you see much of anyone other than the Bulldogs?

[bornadog]

Did you see much of anyone other than the Bulldogs?

Not sure what you are getting at with this questioning.

This thread is about Boyd and its very clear from many Bulldogs posters that he is not regarded very highly, yet he is praised by many outside the club, including commentators, umpires through their voting etc etc.

Yes his efficiency disposal needs to improve from 63% to 70%. So what, he gets the ball more than any one, he is a contested ball and clearance king. He needs help in the midfield from some outside runners so he can feed the ball to them.

On a statistical basis he matches Dane Swan line by line except as follows:

*Turnovers are 2 more on average per game
* Disposal efficiency is 63.4% compared to Swan at 70.1% - this is actually two disposals per game (see above)

* They both average around 32 disposals per game.
* Swan is surrounded by guys like Pendulburry, Thomas etc making him look good.


These are facts not fiction posted by most of the negative replies in this thread.

[OLD SCRAGGer]

Not sure what you are getting at with this questioning.

This thread is about Boyd and its very clear from many Bulldogs posters that he is not regarded very highly, yet he is praised by many outside the club, including commentators, umpires through their voting etc etc.

Yes his efficiency disposal needs to improve from 63% to 70%. So what, he gets the ball more than any one, he is a contested ball and clearance king. He needs help in the midfield from some outside runners so he can feed the ball to them.

On a statistical basis he matches Dane Swan line by line except as follows:

*Turnovers are 2 more on average per game
* Disposal efficiency is 63.4% compared to Swan at 70.1% - this is actually two disposals per game (see above)

* They both average around 32 disposals per game.
* Swan is surrounded by guys like Pendulburry, Thomas etc making him look good.


These are facts not fiction posted by most of the negative replies in this thread.

BRAVO, I couldn't agree more !!

[LostDoggy]

It goes without saying that every player has room for improvement.

Just why there is such concentration on Boyd's capacity to improve is beyond me, particularly given his achievements over the past three years.

I live in hope that the rest of the players on the list improve to the point where they are level wih Boyd's shortcomings.

THEN my fellow Bulldog supporters we will be talking about nothing other than our injuries on this day, four days before our appearance in the Grand Final.

[AndrewP6]

It goes without saying that every player has room for improvement.

Just why there is such concentration on Boyd's capacity to improve is beyond me, particularly given his achievements over the past three years.

I live in hope that the rest of the players on the list improve to the point where they are level wih Boyd's shortcomings.

THEN my fellow Bulldog supporters we will be talking about nothing other than our injuries on this day, four days before our appearance in the Grand Final.

He's captain, hence the microscope.

[LostDoggy]

He's captain, hence the microscope.

And he has just scored 24 votes in the Brownlow with our nearest to him accumulating seven. One might even call that a Captain's knock.

TIme to move on.

[Topdog]

Not sure what you are getting at with this questioning.
.

What Im getting at is back to Mantis point. How many outsiders watch him every game? You replied stating the umpires do, which is false.

Then the topic moved onto Griffin and you made a comment which you obviously can't qualify so I called you up on it. If you don't watch other teams much how can you assume that the umpires have gotten assessments of players correct?

You want to know what else is a fact? Our new coach believes that Boyd needs to improve certain aspects of his game. Also when he was surrounded by Cooney (fit and firing) and Griffin his disposal efficiency wasn't any better so it really is disingenuous to claim Swan is helped by Pendles and Thomas.

[bornadog]

What Im getting at is back to Mantis point. How many outsiders watch him every game? You replied stating the umpires do, which is false.

Then the topic moved onto Griffin and you made a comment which you obviously can't qualify so I called you up on it. If you don't watch other teams much how can you assume that the umpires have gotten assessments of players correct?

You want to know what else is a fact? Our new coach believes that Boyd needs to improve certain aspects of his game. Also when he was surrounded by Cooney (fit and firing) and Griffin his disposal efficiency wasn't any better so it really is disingenuous to claim Swan is helped by Pendles and Thomas.

The reply to Mantis was just a tongue in cheek.

Our new coach believes every player in the AFL can be improved. When he was at Essendon he spoke to Fletcher and said he had room to improve, at age 36, and you know what Fletch was happy to listen and learn. So I have no doubt Boyd can improve.

You may or may not agree with the umpires assessment, but when you look back at the list of Brownlow winners, there are very few who are not a very good player.

[azabob]

What Im getting at is back to Mantis point. How many outsiders watch him every game? You replied stating the umpires do, which is false.

Then the topic moved onto Griffin and you made a comment which you obviously can't qualify so I called you up on it. If you don't watch other teams much how can you assume that the umpires have gotten assessments of players correct?

You want to know what else is a fact? Our new coach believes that Boyd needs to improve certain aspects of his game. Also when he was surrounded by Cooney (fit and firing) and Griffin his disposal efficiency wasn't any better so it really is disingenuous to claim Swan is helped by Pendles and Thomas.

Come on Topdog you can't have a go at Boyd for missing targets when your efficiency is down on spelling our players names right! ;)

[Topdog]

ffs im pretty sure i even spelt it right and then went back and changed it :)

Are we all clear that no one thinks Boyd is a dud. He is a very very good player but his disposal and accountability stop him from being great in my mind.

[Greystache]

The reply to Mantis was just a tongue in cheek.

Our new coach believes every player in the AFL can be improved. When he was at Essendon he spoke to Fletcher and said he had room to improve, at age 36, and you know what Fletch was happy to listen and learn. So I have no doubt Boyd can improve.

You may or may not agree with the umpires assessment, but when you look back at the list of Brownlow winners, there are very few who are not a very good player.

*Cough* Shane Woewodin *cough*

[bornadog]

*Cough* Shane Woewodin *cough*

I did say very few.

[bornadog]

Are we all clear that no one thinks Boyd is a dud. He is a very very good player but his disposal and accountability stop him from being great in my mind.

Name a player who you think is great in the AFL today.

PS: and when you do, I will pick holes in them;)

[LostDoggy]

Not sure what you are getting at with this questioning.

This thread is about Boyd and its very clear from many Bulldogs posters that he is not regarded very highly, yet he is praised by many outside the club, including commentators, umpires through their voting etc etc.

Yes his efficiency disposal needs to improve from 63% to 70%. So what, he gets the ball more than any one, he is a contested ball and clearance king. He needs help in the midfield from some outside runners so he can feed the ball to them.

On a statistical basis he matches Dane Swan line by line except as follows:

*Turnovers are 2 more on average per game
* Disposal efficiency is 63.4% compared to Swan at 70.1% - this is actually two disposals per game (see above)

* They both average around 32 disposals per game.
* Swan is surrounded by guys like Pendulburry, Thomas etc making him look good.


These are facts not fiction posted by most of the negative replies in this thread.

BRAVO, I couldn't agree more !!
Could not agree more, I admit I wear rose coloured glasses, but really hate reading so much critisism on someone who busts his guts for the team. I realise some don't agree, but I say that someone that gets so much of the ball is going to turn it over more than someone who doesn't get as much ball.

[Topdog]

Name a player who you think is great in the AFL today.

PS: and when you do, I will pick holes in them;)

What's the point? You are entitled to believe Boyd is in the top 15 players in the league

[BulldogBelle]

Not many Dogs players have scored 24 Brownlow votes in a year.........

[LostDoggy]

Not many Dogs players have scored 24 Brownlow votes in a year.........

Not even Cooney. Cousins won with 20 one year
Came 3rd in the Coaches voting behind only Marc Murph and Judd, both of whom he beat in the Brownlow. On wonder if anyone still whining about his AA selection?

[LostDoggy]

Well done Boydy and Cross on re-signing with the Dogs :)

http://www.westernbulldogs.com.au/westernbulldogsnewsfeatures/newsarticle/tabid/4112/newsid/124264/default.aspx

[Desipura]

The reply to Mantis was just a tongue in cheek.

Our new coach believes every player in the AFL can be improved. When he was at Essendon he spoke to Fletcher and said he had room to improve, at age 36, and you know what Fletch was happy to listen and learn. So I have no doubt Boyd can improve.

You may or may not agree with the umpires assessment, but when you look back at the list of Brownlow winners, there are very few who are not a very good player.

Some would say Tony Liberatore.

[immortalmike]

Some would say Tony Liberatore.

Some would be very, very wrong!