View Full Version : Our 1 Goal Woes.
Am I wrong or are we having an exceptionally bad season when it comes to producing scoreboard pressure this year?
So far out of a possible 24 qtrs:
5 with one or less goals (20.8%)
and 4 where we only scored 2 goals (16.6%)
Seriously, we're a 1 in 5 chance of scoring 1 or less goals? That's rubbish. And we're seriously pushing the 40% (37.5%) mark for quarters where we only manage 2 goals. :eek:
Luckily our opponents have scored 11 qtrs with 2 or less goals (45%). But when you consider that we've played 2 teams without a win, and that 4 of our 6 games have been against sides which are currently struggling to stay in the 8 like we are, it's not exactly stellar stuff. :(
Bloods boy from the Bush
8 May 2007, 14:21
The only plus out of this season so far is that we are remowened slow starters and 3-3 isn't the end of the world. Kennelly is our only top player in form and now hes injured and Everitt & Jolly are just starting to learn to play together. Hall, O'Loughlin, Goodes, O'Keefe, and even Kirk need to improve quickly. As for our scoring problems our potent forward is a rabble. We need better delivery in the forward line and better scoring accuracy.
It could be down to the fact that opposition coaches are working ways around our gameplan. It is a problem, as is letting the opposition off to fast starts.
The only plus out of this season so far is that we are remowened slow starters and 3-3 isn't the end of the world.
Yes your right, but the thread is also correct, I dont think were travelling along as well as last year at this stage all things considerd, and I certainly want to see some more goals early against the Saints as I think they could hold an early blown out margin, but struggle to bring one in.
I also feel we aren't travelling as well as last year, but when I checked my Grand Final record after round 6 in 06, we where 8th on 12pts and had been beaten far more convincingly in 2 of the losses to teams that ultimatly failed for the year. Maybe this year, it was the pre-season carry on about not getting off to the slow start that has us feeling like this.
I also feel we aren't travelling as well as last year, but when I checked my Grand Final record after round 6 in 06, we where 8th on 12pts and had been beaten far more convincingly in 2 of the losses to teams that ultimatly failed for the year. Maybe this year, it was the pre-season carry on about not getting off to the slow start that has us feeling like this.
In fact checked my 05 stats and we did not really get going to round 11,
but you cant keep doing that, one season Injuries is going to get you and playing catch up through the last half of the year is going to be tiring.
I'm not concerned I just feel were not travelling quite as happily as last year and hope its just my nerves playing on me.
An interesting comment on the radio during last week's round was that maybe a subtle change had occurred in the nature of the game from last year. This was that in response to the tight contested footy practised by Sydney, West Coast and Adelaide; other clubs were delierately seeking to attack quicker and longer. The cooment also quiried that maybe the weaknesss for the Swans was that (unlike the eagles), we were not able to change from defence to offence quick enough.
I was at the North Melbourne game and saw some truth in that observation. Yes we were missing one fleet footed Fenian (Irishman) for rebound and we did turn it around in the second half to make the match more on our own terms. But I thought too often we seemed to lack pure forward options when it did come down. Part of this may have been due to using Nick Davis as the 'third' forward and he was out of sorts. I tend to believe he wasn't meant to be used as such and was more part of that extended mid-field which we use. On the shorter SCG in his first game back his lack of match practise didn't show up, but on the larger Dome he was caught out (his performance is dealt with in another thread). But I thought we lacked options as too often Hall was double teamed, MOL out of position etc. I think we needed and do need that third marking tall which Grundy was meant to be.
As a possible solution whilst Grundy is regaining match fitness and touch, I would suggest either we put Vogels in the team as a specilaist third tall; or perhaps more radically play Jolly in the goal sqaure as a marking, big body forward. Hall and MOL tend to play often up field a bit more and both tend to prefer to remain mobile. Jolly in the last couple of weeks has been taking some strong marks and kicking straight for goal. If he was to play more permannently up forward then a fit Doyle (is that a contradiction in terms?), would team in the ruck with Everitt. Doyle might show us that his form in the latter part of last year was no 'fluke' and he might learn more from playing with Everitt.