Our goal scoring - analysis

[BigCat2]

Over the 2007, when we were hot we were hot, but we could be terrible too. I had a look at our avenues to goal in this past season.

                        Wins        Losses         Draws         Total
2007 Games                 9            11             2            22

Goals from marks          92            53            11           156
Goals from free kicks      9            12             3            24
Goals from 50m pen         2             3             1             6
Goals from play           49            49             5           103

The biggest stat there for me was goals from marks in our wins and losses. We scored 10.2 a game when we won, but only 4.8 a game when we lost. Goals from play were similar in wins and losses.

I guess this confirms what we already suspected, that we play well when we take marks inside 50 and kick goals from there. And with our strength in marking options (when supported by a functioning forward structure) and relative lack of crumbers and goal kicking midfielders who run forward and score, this isn't really surprising.

So while we look for improvement in 2008, in particularly our midfield, I don't think our goalscoring plan will be much different. We need to rely on our strengths in marking to ensure we win games. At the moment we simply haven't got the ability to score enough goals from general play. This can be a problem for us in wet games and heavily flooded games. This will probably remain the case until the likes of McGrath, Hooper, Harding and Sherman lift their goal output.

 

[Lehban]

From memory there were a lot of times we went inside 50 and did not shoot at goal. Does any one have each teams inside 50s stats for home and away games in 2007

 

[blackpowerlappin]

Over the 2007, when we were hot we were hot, but we could be terrible too. I had a look at our avenues to goal in this past season.

                        Wins        Losses         Draws         Total
2007 Games                 9            11             2            22
 
Goals from marks          92            53            11           156
Goals from free kicks      9            12             3            24
Goals from 50m pen         2             3             1             6
Goals from play           49            49             5           103

The biggest stat there for me was goals from marks in our wins and losses. We scored 10.2 a game when we won, but only 4.8 a game when we lost. Goals from play were similar in wins and losses.

I guess this confirms what we already suspected, that we play well when we take marks inside 50 and kick goals from there. And with our strength in marking options (when supported by a functioning forward structure) and relative lack of crumbers and goal kicking midfielders who run forward and score, this isn't really surprising.

So while we look for improvement in 2008, in particularly our midfield, I don't think our goalscoring plan will be much different. We need to rely on our strengths in marking to ensure we win games. At the moment we simply haven't got the ability to score enough goals from general play. This can be a problem for us in wet games and heavily flooded games. This will probably remain the case until the likes of McGrath, Hooper, Harding and Sherman lift their goal output.

There is no doubt that the leading marking forwards turned our season around when Copeland and Mills ran hard and fast on long leads. This combined with Adcock, Drummond and even JMac running the lines opened up our goal scoring. I can't help but think next year with Bradshaw back, and another year under the belt for Hooper, Clark and Leunberger our options are numerous. The inclusion of Travis Johnstone to the midfield, will definitely cause many teams matchup problems and I hope this will allow us to play Power in the forward line next to Brown and Bradshaw.

 

[dlanod]

The biggest stat there for me was goals from marks in our wins and losses. We scored 10.2 a game when we won, but only 4.8 a game when we lost. Goals from play were similar in wins and losses.

That's actually pretty interesting. That's the same scoring shots from both, it's just the accuracy that made the difference.

 

[BigCat2]

That's actually pretty interesting. That's the same scoring shots from both, it's just the accuracy that made the difference.

Quite possibly, I hadn't considered points from set shots (not that I would've been able to find the stats anyway).

Although sometimes you just put them through from wherever (eg vs Carlton at TD) or keep missing them whatever you do (eg Browny vs Kangaroos @ Carrara), generally speaking accuracy from set shots can be improved by taking marks in better positions. In the games where we owned the corridor, often marks were taken 30m out directly in front, which makes it a hell of a lot easier.

 

[dlanod]

Oh, you didn't mean 10 goals 2 behinds and 4 goals 8 behinds? That's the one horrible thing about our game's scoring system...

 

[BigCat2]

Oh, you didn't mean 10 goals 2 behinds and 4 goals 8 behinds? That's the one horrible thing about our game's scoring system...

Yeah sorry that's what I meant. 10 and a bit goals compared to a bit less than 5 goals. Maybe if I included 2 decimal places it would've avoided the confusion.