Remove this Banner Ad

Analysis Inside 50s

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Killer_Mike said:
This is the score Sources from the game:

Clearly turnovers is a big issue for us and we were fortunate that Collingwood didn't capitalize on it.

Essendon Collingwood

(5.4) 34 Stoppage (4.5) 29
(1.1) 7 Bounce (2.2) 14
(3.3) 21 Throw In (2.2) 14
(1.0) 6 Ball Up (0.1) 1
(8.6) 54 Turnovers (7.11) 53
(2.0) 12 Kick-Ins (0.0) 0
Click to expand...
How many of those points were from turnovers when kicking the ball in? I'd say a good portion of their behinds were at the very least.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

blitzer said:
I think you raise a good point about the efficiency of the inside 50 entries. You can't just look at 66 inside 50s to Collingwood vs 43 to us and say we were lucky to win. Part of the reason they had so many was it kept going in and then they would either miss set shots or they would not be able to get past our defense but would be able to hold it in their forward zone for repeat entries. Nonetheless over 60 is a very high number of inside 50's and no matter how you spin it they had a lot of chances to kick goals. Certainly if we are looking for areas of improvement it would be penetrating the zone without allowing that repeat entry (I reckon poor handballing was the cause of a lot of turnovers yesterday). I believe statistically that if you reach 70 inside 50s you pretty much never lose. I don't think any of the other top sides would be conceding over 60 inside 50's too often.

On the other side of the coin I can think of reasons why our inside 50's were low. 28 shots from 43 entries suggests that every time we were getting scoring shots most of the time we entered which is really good. So there wasn't as much opportunity to get repeat entries because their defense wasn't winning the ball back to allow us to setup the zones. There was a few easy exits from their defense but most of the time it felt like we at least held them up significantly and I didn't see a lot of coast to coast play (mind you they have a weak rebounding backline compared to better sides).

Ultimately my assessment is that if we want to become a consistent side we do need to get a more favourable balance of inside 50s as a general rule (the balance is too skewed at present). More importantly though is the mechanism of being able to penetrate opposition zones when we win the ball back without turning it over, at present we are giving the opposition too many opportunities to regain possessions and potentially score (keeping in mind that Collingwood had more scoring shots than us which is partly due to all their points kicked and doesn't necessarily mean they played better). Likewise when its in our forward line we haven't been successful in holding it in - you only had to see that Adelaide game to know how easily they waltzed out of our forward line without us achieving repeat entries - each point or turnover against us turned into an inside 50 for them. Carlton has been the only game where I reckon we struggled to get it into our forward 50 to score which was due to us not handling the wet conditions well at all and their half backs being well on top of our half forwards.
Click to expand...


All good points which should be made here too.
 
20170123_Myers_H.jpg
 
I watched the replay again with the inside 50s in mind. Our inside 50s were in dangerous positions and when our press won the ball back it was often inside 50. We also moved the ball so well that when we turned it over inside 50 Collingwood defenders had space to hit a target and get the ball past centre.

Collingwood often had inside 50s 45m from goal near the boundary with a lot of numbers around the ball and our scruby kick would be slapped ir handballed back inside 50 by them. From up high in stands during the first half we looked in control of the midfield except for a 15 min burst in the 2nd quarter. I was surprised to see the stats.
 
http://www.essendonfc.com.au/video/2017-04-27/btv-john-worsfold-media-conference-apr-27

I posted this in the Hurley thread to highlight that its more than possible that Hurley was under instructions to kick to the packs forming on the flank rather than to a man on the fat side.

If you go to the 3:50 minute mark Woosha talks about us conceding I50's.

He states that although we want to see our I50's outweigh the opposition he's not as concerned about it as others because its more about the quality.

If Hurley kicks it to a huge pack on the HBF then their is a 50/50 chance(or better) we could win it. If the opposition win it the chances are its going to be a poor quality kick in to their forward line.

If you kick it to the fat side and you miss the target then the risk is greater because the opposition have time and space to work in.

So I think all the complaining about Hurley was unfounded as these guys are kicking to team structures.
 
Donakebab said:
As others have said, our conversion rate is one reason we don't have as many repeat entries.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-04-26/on-trend-the-stats-that-show-how-your-team-is-playing
Click to expand...
"The Bombers are averaging 91.4 points a game so far this year, placing them 10th overall in the competition".

If you take out the outlier being the Carlton game, we would be higher for ave points per game. Up around 103 and more akin to 5th in scoring.

Stats can be misleading...
 
donlav99 said:
"The Bombers are averaging 91.4 points a game so far this year, placing them 10th overall in the competition".

If you take out the outlier being the Carlton game, we would be higher for ave points per game. Up around 103 and more akin to 5th in scoring.

Stats can be misleading...
Click to expand...

Of course they can, but putting both stats and general observances together it's pretty clear that we aren't getting the ball in our F50 all that much, but when we do we're pretty effective at scoring. I'd hazard a guess that this season is the most effective we've been post Lloyd.
 
Donakebab said:
Of course they can, but putting both stats and general observances together it's pretty clear that we aren't getting the ball in our F50 all that much, but when we do we're pretty effective at scoring. I'd hazard a guess that this season is the most effective we've been post Lloyd.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately I can't confirm that, but it is the best since 2011 (where our rate was 27%)
 
eth-dog said:
Unfortunately I can't confirm that, but it is the best since 2011 (where our rate was 27%)
Click to expand...

After a quick look it's our best since 2008. Obviously there's a lot of football to go, but it still shows that finally our weakest area on the field over the last decade is finally on the mend.

2010 - 25.9%
2009 - 28.02%
2008 - 29.4%
 

Remove this Banner Ad

eth-dog said:
Basically so far our forward line and defence have been elite and our midfield poor. If we can get that midfield up to middling standard we will be laughing.
Click to expand...

That's an over simplification of our predicament.

A big part of the reason we have conceded so many i50s is because of our inability to move the ball out of the back line for extended periods of time.

There is no way our midfield deserves 100% of the blame
 
Ambrosia said:
That's an over simplification of our predicament.

A big part of the reason we have conceded so many i50s is because of our inability to move the ball out of the back line for extended periods of time.

There is no way our midfield deserves 100% of the blame
Click to expand...
We're bottom four in both contested possession differential and clearance differential. It's no secret that it's been our achilles heel so far this season.
 
eth-dog said:
We're bottom four in both contested possession differential and clearance differential. It's no secret that it's been our achilles heel so far this season.
Click to expand...

Our clearance numbers are heavily skewed by playing without a ruckman the first two games and the shitfest against Carlton. It's still something that needs working on, but we drew even with Adelaide and beat Collingwood, so it's definitely improving.
 
Ambrosia said:
That's an over simplification of our predicament.

A big part of the reason we have conceded so many i50s is because of our inability to move the ball out of the back line for extended periods of time.

There is no way our midfield deserves 100% of the blame
Click to expand...
I agree.

Hawthorns Premierships were not defined by contested football, but ball movement.

Our Scoring potential will not go up based on contested possessions alone but more how we move the ball into the forward line.

We are building an arsenal of fleeted footed players that can run up and down the ground all game and that lends itself to tactical flexibility.

By simplifying the game and saying we win the center clearance and kick it into the forward line doesn't mean we improve. We now have small forwards that wont contest in the air as well but work best in open space. Our chance of scoring a goal are also greatly improved by fast movement from the backline because generally their is more space to work in and thus better percentage of getting a goal.

Not to suggest though that increasing our contested possessions wont help, its just more that you need a balance and its usually tactics and "shot quality" that are more important.
 
Killer_Mike said:
I agree.

Hawthorns Premierships were not defined by contested football, but ball movement.

Our Scoring potential will not go up based on contested possessions alone but more how we move the ball into the forward line.

We are building an arsenal of fleeted footed players that can run up and down the ground all game and that lends itself to tactical flexibility.

By simplifying the game and saying we win the center clearance and kick it into the forward line doesn't mean we improve. We now have small forwards that wont contest in the air as well but work best in open space. Our chance of scoring a goal are also greatly improved by fast movement from the backline because generally their is more space to work in and thus better percentage of getting a goal.

Not to suggest though that increasing our contested possessions wont help, its just more that you need a balance and its usually tactics and "shot quality" that are more important.
Click to expand...
I was thinking it'd be more of a positive influence the other direction.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Donakebab said:
Our clearance numbers are heavily skewed by playing without a ruckman the first two games and the shitfest against Carlton. It's still something that needs working on, but we drew even with Adelaide and beat Collingwood, so it's definitely improving.
Click to expand...



Midfield personnel is also a problem.

Need more powerful ball winners.
 
BrunoV said:
Midfield personnel is also a problem.

Need more powerful ball winners.
Click to expand...

Oh definitely, which is why there is so much hope that a rampaging Myers will be a massive inclusion. Also that big left hoof of his might also be a positive for our i50's. All eyes on him today to see if he can back up last weeks effort.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Analysis Inside 50s

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top