Attack v Defense - What wins you games?

[TheGriff__]

Hi!

I am doing just a basic survey on what you believe is more important to winning games of footy, a better attack or a better defense? If you can give a reason as well with an example it would be great, it's for a project I am completing so anything will be greatly appreciated!

Cheers.

 

[Chism]

A good offense or Attack as you put it will get you to the big game and maybe win a few finals etc but a better defense will always most likely win you a GF.

 

[Masqualero]

It's a flawed question because both are required.

A good defence is a good offence and visa versa.

 

[Trav 20]

Everything starts from defence. Scoring starts from defence and turnovers.

It's all about pressure/defence.

 

[scaryness]

The grand finalists just about every year are defensive teams. If you have a great defence and are not totally dysfunctional up forward you will win way more than you lose. Glass cannon teams that are all offense and little defence will rarely be successful long term in my opinion, I can't think of a team like that in recent years who won consistently.

 

[Procrastinator35]

A solid defence is mandatory, though it's the quality attacking players who will win you finals, most of the time.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

The grand finalists just about every year are defensive teams. If you have a great defence and are not totally dysfunctional up forward you will win way more than you lose. Glass cannon teams that are all offense and little defence will rarely be successful long term in my opinion, I can't think of a team like that in recent years who won consistently.

This isn't true.

It's a balance. Have a look at the The Sqiggles historical rating of premiership teams, whilst there is an ideal defence/attack range, typically the best, or one of the best couple of attacking teams win the flag.

This isn't always the case, but the spread of defensive teams on the ladder is usually broader, it's also easier to be a good defensive team than attacking.

 

[Chaisa]

This isn't true.

It's a balance. Have a look at the The Sqiggles historical rating of premiership teams, whilst there is an ideal defence/attack range, typically the best, or one of the best couple of attacking teams win the flag.

This isn't always the case, but the spread of defensive teams on the ladder is usually broader, it's also easier to be a good defensive team than attacking.

I guess what he's trying to say is that you don't generally see a side with a shaky defence and strong offence doing well, but you do see sides with a middling offence and a strong defence do well.

Balance o/c is the key factor. And it's fair to say that a good defence is a key factor to doing well, the winning edge is through a very strong offence.

 

[NUFC Tiger]

A good defence is a good offence if you can rebound effectively.
And a good offence is the best form of defence because your backline is less exposed if the ball is at the other end of the ground.

IMO, if you have the forward potency to kick big scores regularly, you'll be able to win more games than if you play a miserly, defensive style. Elite defences are great to have but I think any defence will eventually crack under sustained pressure. Not to mention, a lot of teams would now see their small forwards especially as the first line of defence. The less pressure your defence is exposed to, the less likely they will be to concede.

 

[Sea Bird]

I get the question, and as others have answered i think it’s really about getting the balance right.

This is an abstract, but if you wanted to be black and white about it the answer is: offense.

Even if you are perfect defensively and hold them to zero, you can’t win unless you score. By that rationale offense has to be a more valuable aspect of the game than defense - you can win without defense but you can’t win without offense.

For me though, I think the answer is who is more efficient wins the game.
- When offensive orientated teams win they are more efficient at creating & converting opportunities to score into points, and
- when defensive orientated teams wins they are more efficient at creating & converting opportunities to score into points

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

1992 Grand Final - Geelong's forward line contained Ablett Snr, Brownless, Stoneham, Mick Mansfield and the midfield contained Garry Hocking, Mark Bairstow, Paul Couch, Peter Riccardi and Robert Scott.

The defence was Sean Simpson, Tim Darcy, Andrew Rogers, Ken Hinkley, Tim McGrath and Trevor Poole.

That is your answer.

Geelong's success in the 2000s was built on the rock solid foundations of Scarlett, Harley and Milburn with Enright added a couple of years later.