Preview Rd 10 Geelong v Gold Coast Sat 25th May 725pm @Metricon

[BlakeyNoFlakey]

Showed some interesting stats on "On the Couch" last night that shows over the last few weeks our i50 turnovers has us ranked 14th, this is not a good result for a team that was determined to keep the ball inside our i50 with forward pressure from game 1. The ball has been coming back out way too easily for the last few weeks. There were some others showing our midfield is not doing too well either. The premise of the Couch guys being that only our forward efficiency has won us games recently, however, when we face the top 4 sides in the future (finals) that won't be enough because they'll have the manpower and gameplan to make us pay like Norf & the Bulldogs couldn't.

 

[Grimoz]

Showed some interesting stats on "On the Couch" last night that shows over the last few weeks our i50 turnovers has us ranked 14th, this is not a good result for a team that was determined to keep the ball inside our i50 with forward pressure from game 1. The ball has been coming back out way too easily for the last few weeks. There were some others showing our midfield is not doing too well either. The premise of the Couch guys being that only our forward efficiency has won us games recently, however, when we face the top 4 sides in the future (finals) that won't be enough because they'll have the manpower and gameplan to make us pay like Norf & the Bulldogs couldn't.

When you go at 82% disposal efficiency (a record for any team since 2008) i doubt many teams can stop that, you only have to look at Hawthorns premiership teams and how good they were by foot, that's been our real strength this year. If they say that we are ranked 14th in inside 50 turnovers then we are doing a bloody good job the other times we get in there because we aren't a high inside 50 team, its our efficiency and accuracy that makes us potent. Stats dont tell a true tale, if we were that bad we wouldn't be 8-1.

 

[Play it Sam]

Quinton

Thanks, yes, I'm a dumb cluck who should know, say no more.

 

[BotsMaster]

https://m.afl.com.au/match-centre/2018/23/geel-v-gcfc

Has the team flown up yet?

 

[bulletproof]

Showed some interesting stats on "On the Couch" last night that shows over the last few weeks our i50 turnovers has us ranked 14th, this is not a good result for a team that was determined to keep the ball inside our i50 with forward pressure from game 1. The ball has been coming back out way too easily for the last few weeks. There were some others showing our midfield is not doing too well either. The premise of the Couch guys being that only our forward efficiency has won us games recently, however, when we face the top 4 sides in the future (finals) that won't be enough because they'll have the manpower and gameplan to make us pay like Norf & the Bulldogs couldn't.

You can’t maintain the intensity we had early in season for whole year, particularly in games when we are comfortable. They need a tougher opponent and the big stage. The Richmond game should be the target, set that as a mini final.

 

[FredLeDeux]

Showed some interesting stats on "On the Couch" last night that shows over the last few weeks our i50 turnovers has us ranked 14th, this is not a good result for a team that was determined to keep the ball inside our i50 with forward pressure from game 1. The ball has been coming back out way too easily for the last few weeks. There were some others showing our midfield is not doing too well either. The premise of the Couch guys being that only our forward efficiency has won us games recently, however, when we face the top 4 sides in the future (finals) that won't be enough because they'll have the manpower and gameplan to make us pay like Norf & the Bulldogs couldn't.

Sorry, are we 14th at giving turnovers in the I50, or at forcing them?

 

[fpm84]

Sorry, are we 14th at giving turnovers in the I50, or at forcing them?

Giving them. The point of the discussion was to highlight our forward efficiency and discuss how we may not get away with being so efficient - ergo needing to generate more inside 50s - against better teams.

 

[winty]

I'm confused. So we are efficient going inside 50, meaning we don't need to force turnovers there (presumably because we are usually retaining possession) - how is this a poor reflection on our ability to lock the ball inside 50?

I thought we were efficient because we're averaging one scoring shot every 2 inside 50s, when the league average is about 1 shot per every 3 or 4.

 

[BlakeyNoFlakey]

Sorry, are we 14th at giving turnovers in the I50, or at forcing them?

Giving turnovers, or the ball turning over in our forward 50. Look I may not have used the right terminology but the point was the ball has been rebounding too easily from our forward entries in recent weeks.

 

[Hamingja]

Hard to turnover the ball in our forward 50 when we are winning the ground balls and kicking goals instead.

 

[TheWoodenSlug]

I thought we were efficient because we're averaging one scoring shot every 2 inside 50s, when the league average is about 1 shot per every 3 or 4.

I deleted my post because I thought it was referring to us not forcing turnovers inside our 50, whereas fpm84 pointed out that we are giving up too many turnovers in there.

But now I'm even more confused! If we are generating more scoring shots per inside 50 than other teams, how are we also giving up a lot of turnovers in there?

My head is hurting - I think I might just need to find the On The Couch segment and watch it for myself!

 

[FredLeDeux]

Giving turnovers, or the ball turning over in our forward 50. Look I may not have used the right terminology but the point was the ball has been rebounding too easily from our forward entries in recent weeks.

I wasn't arguing about your terminology, I just wasn't clear on the stat.
I'm still not, actually.
Does it mean 13 teams give more turnovers than us in the I50, or 4 teams?

 

[TheWoodenSlug]

It's "turnovers created" in the forward half:



I don't think this says anything about our ability to lock the ball inside the forward 50; they were suggesting that we aren't generating enough inside 50s and creating turnoves in the forward half would obviously lead to more of them. Also that our efficiency when we do get it in there is masking our low number of entries, but we can't expect to keep up such a high level of efficiency all year.

 

[JohnZ]

If we are scoring efficiently in the FWD half, then naturally we would have less opportunity to turn it over in our FWD half, as our FWD 50 entries are resulting in not only scores, but goals which resets the ball to the middle of the ground, where as a behind or an ineffective kick would create a turnover thus giving us the opportunity to turn it back over.

From how I'm reading the stat, I think it says that most of our entries into the FWD 50 are generated from defence and centre clearances because forward of centre, we are so efficient at scoring that we're not turning the ball over that much in our FWD half. So I don't see it as much of a concern, and I back our guys in that if we were turning over the ball in FWD 50, that we would be able to turn it back over if needed.

I would be interested to see FWD half turnover efficency (turnovers / oppurtunity to turnover). I think that stat would have us #1 or #2.

edit: The pure I50s number is more the concern, however many teams waste I50s where the ball will bounce in and out multiple times before scoring, or bounce in and out with a couple of behinds, inflating the I50 count. See our EF v Melbourne (2018), where we had 70+ I50s, but the ball came out quicker than it went in.

End of the day, we're the top team for PF and the stingiest defence (least PA). Not much to complain about at the moment.

 

[Max Milburn]

Giving turnovers, or the ball turning over in our forward 50. Look I may not have used the right terminology but the point was the ball has been rebounding too easily from our forward entries in recent weeks.

I think you might be mistaking the umpires taking the ball back to the centre after a goal for a rebound.

 

[Max Milburn]

Turnovers...mmmmmm

 

[Stan The Caddy]

Can we play all of Stanley, Fort, Sav and of course Hawk in the same team? I wouldn't mind us having a look at it this weekend to see how it could possibly work...

 

[Max Milburn]

Can we play all of Stanley, Fort, Sav and of course Hawk in the same team? I wouldn't mind us having a look at it this weekend to see how it could possibly work...

Room for Smith and Buzza too, surely?

 

[Stan The Caddy]

Room for Smith and Buzza too, surely?

No Max. No.

 

[Tuggacat]

Pretty sure Gaz won't mind the whole 5 Suns members booing him..

Geelong fans have come close to outnumbering GC fans at the games I have attended. I will one of the ones drowning out any GC boos (IF he plays).

 

[Stan The Caddy]

This board is truly dead these days isn't it... Lol

 

[Max Milburn]

This board is truly dead these days isn't it... Lol

I don't know.
You could always go talk politics with the w***ers in the bulldogs thread.
That's a heap of fun.

 

[Strange Cat]

I don't know.
You could always go talk politics with the w***ers in the bulldogs thread.
That's a heap of fun.

Not nice

 

[frggr]

Surely Ablett gets a rest this game - no need to have him travel to the GC

 

[AlcoaCat]

I’ll have an early throw at the stumps:

In: Stanley, Atkins
Out: Abbott, PFD

I think they will find a way of giving Esava another week off, despite Scott’s comments last night.

I would also be tempted to drop Clark who looks a bit lost at the moment.

That's the one.