AussieRulesBlog isn’t the first to mention this, and we’re sure we won’t be the last, but judgements on players’ and coaches’ performances can only properly be judged from the context of each club’s inner sanctum.

We’re moved to mention this after watching On the Couch last night. Chris Scott, rookie Geelong coach, was in the chair and was questioned by Mike Sheahan about his post-match comments about Steve Johnson.

Sheahan’s point was that Johnson had gathered 21 possessions and kicked seven goals. What, he wondered, could Scott have been upset about.

And here’s the nub of the problem. The media’s focus is on the tangible elements of the game. If Johnson had gathered only 7 possessions and kicked 7 goals, Sheahan and his media colleagues would still have been in raptures.

Scott prefaced his answer to Sheahan by making the point that, internally, the club judged players’ performance by measures other than raw possessions. It’s about the often-invisible, so-called “one-percenters” such as positioning at a stoppage, picking up a loose opponent, running to block a space, unrewarded running and the like.

The truth of the matter is that we cannot judge players or coaches because we aren’t privy to the detailed instructions and game planning, the training drills and team meetings, the match committee and boardroom discussions. Without that context, it’s all more-or-less uneducated guesswork.

Of course there’s a place for the media, but it would be nice if they were, generally, less obsessed with statistics and more concerned with context and nuance. Among the chief stat obsessors is (Captain Obvious) Robert Walls, and the standout for context and nuance is Dermott Brereton.

I would encourage AussieRulesBlog readers to take media hyperbole over stats with a very large pinch of salt and think about context and nuance.

Not for the first time, we at AussieRulesBlog find ourselves out of step with conventional wisdom.

Commentators, professional and otherwise, seem content to award  BOGs and other recognitions to the players garnering the most statistics, seemingly despite blemishes or stats-building passages where two or three players ‘wax’ for up to a dozen touches without achieving anything other than eating up time.

The recently-departed (and unlamented by us) Joel Bowden seemed to regularly feature in lists of best players although his major contribution was playing the role of sweeper and changing the side his team was attacking to. Nevertheless, having racked up his thirty possessions, Joel would duly be named among the Tigers’ best.

We wonder whether this situation follows from the popularity of assorted fantasy football competitions. For the uninitiated, if there are any such, mathematical algorithms allocate a numerical value to a player’s performance in a game based on numbers of possessions, goals, goal assists, and so on. Even media broadcasts are now replete with references to the top fantasy football points scoring players in a match.

Fantasy football is all well and good — if you like that sort of thing — but football is about more than just numbers. Perversely, this is exemplified by forwards who have only six kicks, but kick six goals.

As a consequence of the fantasy football boom, the football public are being overloaded with statistics and anyone is free to draw whatever conclusion they like from them. We are moved to recall British PM Benjamin Disraeli’s aphorism that there are three types of lies: lies; damned lies; and statistics. This was never more the case than when raw statistics have an unsophisticated analysis applied.

Already clubs are getting increasingly more sophisticated statistics supplied to them, and these are slowly leaking into the public consciousness.

An excellent example of a more sophisticated statistical analysis concerns hitouts. Once upon a time, it was sufficient to know that your ruckmen were getting their hands to the ball at ruck contests. Where the ruckman was John Nicholls or Polly Farmer, there was a very good chance that the deflected ball finished with your team’s rover.

As teams search for advantage, hitouts is morphing into Hitouts to advantage. In other words, it’s no longer enough to simply know that the ruckman is leaping high enough to touch the ball. Teams now want to know what he’s doing with it once he touches it.

Increasingly, crude statistics like possessions, kicks and marks will fall by the wayside as teams seek to better analyse how effectively their players use the ball once they have possession.

We can only hope that media pundits begin to use these more sophisticated analyses and that the general public learns the difference between ‘best on ground’ and ‘most possessions’ — but we won’t hang by our thumbs waiting.