Analysis Close losses

[Crow_Magnon]

Noticed on Talking Footy last night that we are 1W and 5L for games decided by under two goals this year. The worst record in the AFL. After thinking about it a bit I note that in 4 of the 5 losses we were jumped early, only to claw our way back into potentially winning positions, then run out of petrol tickets and lose. The only game where we were not well behind early was against Carlton at the MCG (but we were deplorable that day). The question is what do we do about it?

Seems to me that we probably start with our 'best' midfield options at the start of the game, so would it be worth changing it up and throwing some kids in there from the start (thinking of Lyons, Crouch - could be Crouch x 2 this week, and maybe even Charlie), and leaving our supposed guns like Danger, Thommo and Sloane to bide their time, before bringing them into the mix. Reason being that these younger blokes are playing for their spots in the team and just may offer something different to start games / and give the opposition something to think about.

As an aside - they roasted Sanderson about his whinge on the Brisbane heat the previous week - intimating that he gave his team an excuse if they were to lose - which they dutifully managed to do!

 

[Smoooothy]

yep, we are weak as piss

 

[1990crow]

Mentally weak. Have been saying it for years. Don't turn up when the heat is on.

 

[SugarShane]

Seems to me that we probably start with our 'best' midfield options at the start of the game, so would it be worth changing it up and throwing some kids in there from the start (thinking of Lyons, Crouch - could be Crouch x 2 this week, and maybe even Charlie), and leaving our supposed guns like Danger, Thommo and Sloane to bide their time, before bringing them into the mix. Reason being that these younger blokes are playing for their spots in the team and just may offer something different to start games / and give the opposition something to think about.

If the problem is being jumped early, I don't think starting the game with a lower quality midfield is the answer.

 

[Crow_Magnon]

If the problem is being jumped early, I don't think starting the game with a lower quality midfield is the answer.

Not really suggesting that....just offering an alternative that may stop this from happening. There may be other reasons...i.e. Sauce not getting the hit outs to advantage during early stages, the oppostion reading the ball better even if he does, etc....all of which could point to us having a lower quality midfield to begin with. Do Thommo and Danger take a few minutes to get warmed up to the action for instance?

 

[Elder van Berlo]

We have dropped 4 games that we have led in the last quarter this year. Only Carlton and Melbourne have lost more (5 each).

 

[Heafy83]

Lots of young players with not much experience in tight ones. I think we had a similar record last year. Lost a majority of our games by 3 goals or less. It will improve. Its not being mentally weak its all about learning to handle the situation and confidence. It will come!

 

[fabs33]

Yep, I agree with some of the above comments. Having some cool, experienced heads in the team, as well as not having to spend too much energy getting back into games we let slip away early, will help immensely in solving the problem.

 

[douglyzia]

On a side note, Geelong have won all 7 of their games decided by 2 goals or less.

 

[Iron]

Look at Geelong, Fremantle, Hawthorn and Sydney right now. They win when they're supposed to because they're experienced, finals hardened sides. Fremantle less so, but they've got a gun coach who knows what's what.

Then you look at teams like Carlton and North. These teams have an age profile that should put them up around those top four teams, and yet they often lose close contests. They have a lot to worry about because their experienced players don't know how to handle the heat.

After that you've got sides like us. A young team without much experience in those situations. Only natural that we're going to lose a good deal of them. 1-5 is not pretty, but it's not disastrous. When you get a bit of luck go your way - see 2012 - you can make the most out of it. As we get older we'll start making our own luck and we'll start winning those close ones.

Unless we become Carlton or North, in which case we're not very good.

 

[Elder van Berlo]

North have not lost a game in which they've led in the last quarter this year.

 

[little graham]

Not that anyones wrong, in fact they'll all issues. but not the issues

Earlier in the year we played like our coach. A psychological mess, but once the anxiety had passed we had spirit and pain. this sought of football effected our match fitness. We play a game where teams will consistently get away in the first half, relying on aerobic fitness for a structure.

The Richmond game had many influences. If we'd had the same break as Richmond before the game, we wouldn't of lost.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

We should be losing by more

 

[little graham]

We should be losing by more

Did anyone ever work out why Norf melbourne lost so many close ones last year?

 

[DD#23]

On a side note, Geelong have won all 7 of their games decided by the umpires.

EFA

 

[little graham]

Look at Geelong, Fremantle, Hawthorn and Sydney right now.

Oldest lists in the league BTW

 

[Iron]

Oldest lists in the league BTW

Which is why I said this straight after:

They win when they're supposed to because they're experienced, finals hardened sides. Fremantle less so, but they've got a gun coach who knows what's what.

 

[little graham]

We're none of that.

 

[The Sloane Ranger]

Geelong has won 6 games this year under 10 pts

We have lost 4-5 games by couple of goals

There is the difference in our seasons

 

[Sanders]

Geelong has won 6 games this year under 10 pts

We have lost 4-5 games by couple of goals

There is the difference in our seasons

Might be the difference in our cultures too

 

[Smoooothy]

Might be the difference in our cultures too

you forgetting how awful geelong were at choking in big games prior to 2007?

thats how i see us at the moment. geelong circa 2003-2006

 

[Elder van Berlo]

you forgetting how awful geelong were at choking in big games prior to 2007?

thats how i see us at the moment. geelong circa 2003-2006

Ding ding ding... We have our first mention of Geelong 2006 on this board for the year.

This is the 4th time in 5 years we have been "Geelong circa 2006".

 

[ManInTheArena]

Stats are deceiving. Just off the top of my head we kept getting smashed early, clawed our way back and then just lost the games. I'm not sure if it was mental weakness late that cost us the games.

 

[Smoooothy]

Ding ding ding... We have our first mention of Geelong 2006 on this board for the year.

This is the 4th time in 5 years we have been "Geelong circa 2006".

yeah thanks buddy..

it's campaigners like yourself that make this board completely intolerable. getting made to feel like a ****** everytime i dare to say something remotely positive

 

[Elder van Berlo]

yeah thanks buddy..

it's campaigners like yourself that make this board completely intolerable. getting made to feel like a ****** everytime i dare to say something remotely positive

Sorry, it was meant to be light hearted. Maybe it didn't come across that way. For what it's worth, I do think we're headed broadly in the right direction and agree that these close losses are, to an extent, a byproduct of inexperience.

I do think it's funny though that "Geelong 2006" is such a beacon of hope - I honestly do reckon every year since 2009 someone on here has compared us to Geelong 2006.