Opinion The Difference

[CoggaRules]

The grand plan was to make sure Mark Kneeld remains the coach...so they can be shithouse for a couple of more seasons, so we dont have to worry about getting the 4 points in those games..

 

[The Goon]

If another top 8 contender had that sort of statistical dominance against the Dees or another bottom 3 side, odds are they kick 4-6 goals for the quarter and make them pay. We on the other hand didn't take the opportunity to boost our % a little and come the end of the season it may well cost us, especially when we have only 4 cracks at the bottom 3 this year. Right now we have the 2nd worst % in the 8 and the 5th lowest of the top 13 sides with all bar Gold Coast a realistic chance of making the 8 this year.

Which makes us a side fighting for a spot in the bottom of the 8, which is about right IMO.

At the same point last year we were playing our best footy for the year, had a similar % and were 3-5 with wins against Port, Dees and Sydney (great win that last one). The problem was following the Hawks and Saints wins in rounds 9-10 we fell in a hole.

This year we're 5-3 but haven't played our best footy yet. If we get back on track playing the type of game we know we can we'll comfortably make the 8, if we even maintain our form of the first 8 rounds over the entire year we're still a good chance to make it.

So for mine it's how we go over the season that matters, not whether we put a team like the Dees to the sword. Seeing that killer instict would be nice, but all teams have good and bad weeks. We're no Geelong or Hawthorn where we can rightfully expect a % booster. We have to fight it out for one of those 6-8 spots.

Also, if we're up by 4 points with 1:20 to go next week and win it by chipping around (without the ****up) I'd gladly forgo the % from extra gaols in the Dees game.

 

[AGRESSION]

Funnily enough, the absence of an absolute belting could work in our favour from a psychological viewpoint. Consider the scenario if we had indeed smashed the Dees.
The media would have talked us up to no end going into dreamtime. As we are all well aware of, positive media pressure is something we don't adapt well to, and always seem to fall short of expectations.
Now, I know there are people who will say such things as "They are professionals" or "It's about time they dealt with such mental demons". These people might well be correct in there critiques, I am just voicing my opinions and analysis of the situation at hand.

GO TIGES !!!

 

[NUFC Tiger]

After the final siren, it definitely felt like the most hollow victory for the year. Not sure if it was picked up on the tv but a lot of our fans (especially at the PRE) booed when we kicked it sideways and backwards during the last quarter out of frustration.

Did anyone see Jacko's post match video on the website? From what he said, it sounded like the players knew the fans wanted them to attack endlessly but said at the end of the day, a win is a win and if you keep winning, the percentage takes care of itself.

I had mixed feelings about that personally. On the one hand it was good for the boys to ignore the crowd and focus on the team ethos and instructions from Dimma despite the pressure probably created by our own fans. On the other hand, come the end of the season, percentage is hugely vital as having better percentage effectively puts you ahead of other teams on the same number of points. I think winning is the most important thing for sure but even the best teams are able to be ruthless and destroy struggling teams.

To be fair though, Melbourne played their best game in weeks and we missed a large number of gettable chances.

 

[_RT_]

The mathematics don't work like that. Come end of year, and extra 20 or 30 points in a single game's margin does not make up a 5% margin.

Currently our for and against is 806-721 for a % of 111.79. Now lets say we kicked an extra 4 goals the spread is 830-721 and a % of 115.11. Now lets look at last year add an extra 5 goals to our for and against, out % goes from 111.63 to 113.22. Granted it's not a massive jump but add those 5 goals 3 times over and it adds up. This is what I'm talking about, it's not just this one game rather our ability to make sides pay when they give us the opportunity to do so.

1. Melbourne had a massive flood on in the last quarter to slow down the bleeding.
2. That was one of the best games Melbourne have played all year.
3. We beat bulldogs by 10 goals, Geelong beat them by 3 goals... So with your info we should beat Geelong by 7 goals. Oh wait, they beat us by 6 goals.

1. Agree that the Dees had a flood on, that still shouldn't have seen us go near on 16 minutes without a scoring shot.
2. Again agree that the Dees played their best footy for the season, but like they have all year they weren't able to maintain the intensity the whole way through and this is what I'm talking about, when we were given the opportunity to bury them we needed to capitalise on it.
3. There is a difference between us sides like Geelong Collingwood Essendon & Hawthorn. Geelong were 5 points up on us at half time. When given the opportunity in the second half to take advantage of us being unable to stop them they kick 11 goals to 5 and win by 44. Same applies for Hawthorn, against the Pies they were 4 goals up at 3/4 time, in the last when they had the chance to bury the Pies they did going on to win by 55. Essendon were 4 points up on the Pies on ANZAC day, when the opportunity presented itself in the second half to bury the Pies they did and won by 46. Collingwood were 3 points down against us in the second half when the opportunity to bury us was there they kicked 11.9 to 5.8 and won by 34.

This is the sort of thing I'm talking about and it's something that I can't recall us doing too often in recent memory. In fact the last time we did it was the Melbourne game in round 3 last year, where it was a scrap early on and then we broke the game open and kept the foot down the whole way. People will suggest the Hawks Lions and Dogs games later in the year as being the same but in those games we were in front early and simply extended the lead as we went. What I'm getting at is that killer instinct where we're in a tight game early and then are able to break it open and put a side away.

 

[Barnzy]

What really had me scratching my head was when quizzed about it in today's presser Dimma said he doesn't think % is that important and he's not worried about it.

News flash Dimma look how tight the comp is from positions 4-12. 1 win separates all these sides, well 1 and a half with the Sydney Freo draw.

 

[Cotcho]

4 points without any injury scares. Cotchin and Foley through a full game. Why on earth would we give it everything with 10 minutes to go against Melbourne when we have arguably the most important 4 weeks of footy coming up......

 

[_RT_]

What really had me scratching my head was when quizzed about it in today's presser Dimma said he doesn't think % is that important and he's not worried about it.

News flash Dimma look how tight the comp is from positions 4-12. 1 win separates all these sides, well 1 and a half with the Sydney Freo draw.

Only thing I can take from that is Dimma believes that we'll win enough games that we won't have to worry about %. Hope his right.

4 points without any injury scares. Cotchin and Foley through a full game. Why on earth would we give it everything with 10 minutes to go against Melbourne when we have arguably the most important 4 weeks of footy coming up......

Because come seasons end that 10 minutes of stat padding might be the difference between us being involved in finals or watching another early Jack Dyer count.

 

[Damo80]

Would've rathered one extra goal against Freo than 5 extra against Melbourne.

 

[Rayzorwire]

I think it's entirely defensible to play the last quarter the way we did.

Sure the percentage would have been nice, but fact was, it was good man management to have us fresh as possible for a 6-day break, avoid any unnecessary injuries and be at our best for a massive game this week. Makes even more sense if reports about half a dozen blokes playing with gastro are accurate.

 

[_RT_]

I think it's entirely defensible to play the last quarter the way we did.

Sure the percentage would have been nice, but fact was, it was good man management to have us fresh as possible for a 6-day break, avoid any unnecessary injuries and be at our best for a massive game this week. Makes even more sense if reports about half a dozen blokes playing with gastro are accurate.

Well obviously my thread was written before info about the gastro outbreak was known, but I still think the point I am trying to get across is valid, when the opportunity arises we need to be able to have that killer instinct to put sides away. All the good sides do it regardless if whether they are facing a 6 day break or not so why should we be any different.

 

[_RT_]

Would've rathered one extra goal against Freo than 5 extra against Melbourne.

Actually I would have rathered we conceded one fewer goal against Freo given they kicked the last goal.

 

[Livonski]

The mathematics don't work like that. Come end of year, and extra 20 or 30 points in a single game's margin does not make up a 5% margin.

Correct Damo...law of large numbers comes into play at seasons end...and it's only then that % means anything anyway. Melb game needs perspective...ie Cats loss of 40 odd is just as important to minimise as this one was to maximise.

 

[Livonski]

Currently our for and against is 806-721 for a % of 111.79. Now lets say we kicked an extra 4 goals the spread is 830-721 and a % of 115.11. Now lets look at last year add an extra 5 goals to our for and against, out % goes from 111.63 to 113.22. Granted it's not a massive jump but add those 5 goals 3 times over and it adds up. This is what I'm talking about, it's not just this one game rather our ability to make sides pay when they give us the opportunity to do so.


1. Agree that the Dees had a flood on, that still shouldn't have seen us go near on 16 minutes without a scoring shot.
2. Again agree that the Dees played their best footy for the season, but like they have all year they weren't able to maintain the intensity the whole way through and this is what I'm talking about, when we were given the opportunity to bury them we needed to capitalise on it.
3. There is a difference between us sides like Geelong Collingwood Essendon & Hawthorn. Geelong were 5 points up on us at half time. When given the opportunity in the second half to take advantage of us being unable to stop them they kick 11 goals to 5 and win by 44. Same applies for Hawthorn, against the Pies they were 4 goals up at 3/4 time, in the last when they had the chance to bury the Pies they did going on to win by 55. Essendon were 4 points up on the Pies on ANZAC day, when the opportunity presented itself in the second half to bury the Pies they did and won by 46. Collingwood were 3 points down against us in the second half when the opportunity to bury us was there they kicked 11.9 to 5.8 and won by 34.

This is the sort of thing I'm talking about and it's something that I can't recall us doing too often in recent memory. In fact the last time we did it was the Melbourne game in round 3 last year, where it was a scrap early on and then we broke the game open and kept the foot down the whole way. People will suggest the Hawks Lions and Dogs games later in the year as being the same but in those games we were in front early and simply extended the lead as we went. What I'm getting at is that killer instinct where we're in a tight game early and then are able to break it open and put a side away.

Understand your point.

But if Melb had lost Jamar and Dawes/Gawn early in the third we would have beaten them by 10 goals minimum. It wasn't just that Geelong have a killer instinct, their opponents were critically wounded and helpless in centre bounces and stoppages.

 

[docko911]

We should have won and we did. Margin is irrelevant unless we only just scrape over the line and can't put away a lowly team like Melbourne. They played a similar game style to the one they brought against Essendon last year and well we all know what happened in that game. They were tackling as well as I've seen them and their defensive set-up made it difficult for us to score. It was really a good tough hit out coming in to the Essendon game and it doesn't overdo the hype which is something we can't seem to handle yet.

We need not worry ourselves about margins and percentage. Instead we should be focusing on 4 points regardless of whether it was by 1 point or 100 points.

 

[Cotcho]

Because come seasons end that 10 minutes of stat padding might be the difference between us being involved in finals or watching another early Jack Dyer count.

And it could have been the 10 minutes that we lost Cotchin and Deledio in a horror on field collision....

We won and won comfortably. The only reason we didnt win by 10+ goals was we missed a few shots. The scoreboard flattered the dees that's for sure. No stress. If we miss by 5 goals worth of %age i'll buy you a slab. I'm that confident it wont be a factor.

 

[docko911]

And it could have been the 10 minutes that we lost Cotchin and Deledio in a horror on field collision....

We won and won comfortably. The only reason we didnt win by 10+ goals was we missed a few shots. The scoreboard flattered the dees that's for sure. No stress. If we miss by 5 goals worth of %age i'll buy you a slab. I'm that confident it wont be a factor.

Correct if Vickery kicked straight like 3-1 instead of 0-4
Jack Kicked 3-3 when he should have kicked 4-2 or 5-1
Deledio missed a couple

Theres your 5 goals for 60 points. Plus our delivery inside forward 50 played into their flood and that won't happen against teams that are actually trying to win (with the exception of Sydney and Fremantle)

 

[Rayzorwire]

Well obviously my thread was written before info about the gastro outbreak was known, but I still think the point I am trying to get across is valid, when the opportunity arises we need to be able to have that killer instinct to put sides away. All the good sides do it regardless if whether they are facing a 6 day break or not so why should we be any different.

Had a busy weekend, RT, so I had missed the chronological side of things re. your OP and the gastro reports.

Instinct and what you can physically achieve on the day are different things.

The wrong mix of 6 players for us having gastro amounts to much more than a third of a side. It explains a few things that didn't make a lot of sense to people when we saw them on Sunday. Add in our injuries and at times it's starting to resemble the Wallace era in terms of key players stuck on the sidelines.

Maric is good enough to play I'm sure, but I doubt he's properly fit and niggle free. Nor is Cotchin, he'll carry a bit of schrapnel for a while yet. Tucky's busted up, he was the rock of our finals chances. Knights is gone. Conca out for an extended period. Petterd isn't good depth when he isn't available. Jackson is so hard at it whether it be contact or running (few players can do both) that he lives with niggles which never end. Foley's probably a month away from his genuine AFL form. Chaplin is not fully fit, he's labouring. Who knows where Lonergan is at? Stephenson's only scalp for the year may well be Port's non-ruckman. Astbury, Griffiths, the 'bad luck with injuries' list goes on.

We're not in a position to put away anybody ATM mate, least of all in the last quarter of last Sunday. We're into a place of hanging onto the cliff-face of our season by a couple of carefully wedged fingers and thumbs. I applaud any tactic which preserves what we have left.

The scoreboard from Sunday indicates we should have won by the margin which would make you happy if we'd only kicked straight in the first three quarters. I don't think we would have got any better at that deep in the last quarter.

It's a backs against the wall pride match this week. We have the firepower to torch Essendon, we need to use it well enough to compensate for the areas where we're covering our arses due to personnel issues.

 

[CoggaRules]

Are we capable of 100+ victories ?

I think we might fall short and only have 99 victories..and finish 9th.

 

[Final Siren]

I must be the only guy who thinks we were right to chip it around!

OK, there were two horror incidents where we turned it over, one with Jackson deciding not to look directly in front of him to see a free player and instead walking backwards. But Jacko can do that kind of thing any time. You don't say the whole game plan is bad every time Jackson trips over his shoelaces. That's just what he does sometimes.

The other was a ****-up that let Melbourne score their only goal of the last quarter.

But the rest of the time, we created scoring opportunities! I was there and the crowd would BOO, BOO, us chipping it around, then Houli or someone would break into space and we'd mark in the forward 50 and the crowd would be like, YAAAAY, AT LAST, WHY DIDN'T YOU DO THAT FROM THE BEGINNING. But the opportunity wasn't there in the beginning! It was moving the ball around that allowed us to create it.

My issue is with how we played out the final quarter, in particular the second half of that quarter. You could see that the Dees were ripe for the picking after putting up a decent effort for the first 3 quarters. However from 16.07 until 28.18 we failed to have 1 scoring shot in that time while we had players racking up possessions as we chipped the ball around the back line(along the way stuffing up and allowing the Dees a cheap goal).

I went back and watched that period (16.07 onwards). Here are the relevant plays (Inside 50s & backwards kicks):

• Quick kick forward by Cotchin - marked by melb
• Quick kick forward by Jackson - marked by melb
• 6:52 to go, we kick backwards - crowd boo - turn it over - melb goal. This was really poor play.
• Quick kick forward by Martin - easy melb clearance
• Quick kick forward, decent opportunity but Melb clear and rush it forward. Bail marks 30M out. Should have kicked a goal but misses, kicks a behind.
• Cotchin runs through the middle, scrubs his kick, Melb clear within moments
• Deledio wins stoppage, quick kick forward, decent opportunity but melb clear & rush it forward, Tapscott marks 50m out. Hits the post.
• 00:45 to go - kick backwards - crowd boo - morris creates space - jack makes a great lead, marks it easily 35m directly in front. Misses easy chance.

So even in this "worst" period, we chipped it around exactly twice, and one of those times created our best scoring opportunity. The other 6 times we went forward quickly, for no score, 2 times of which allowed Melbourne to immediately rebound and have scoring shots.

If you look at the stats below we certainly had the chance to turn a 6 goal win into that 10 goal win if we had of put the foot down rather than spend 12 minutes of chipping the ball around the back half.

We spent a grand total of about 30 seconds of that period chipping the ball around in the back half.

 

[Harmichael]

I guess if we're going to practice "icing the clock" in actual match conditions, Melbourne was the team to do it against.

 

[CoggaRules]

I must be the only guy who thinks we were right to chip it around!

OK, there were two horror incidents where we turned it over, one with Jackson deciding not to look directly in front of him to see a free player and instead walking backwards. But Jacko can do that kind of thing any time. You don't say the whole game plan is bad every time Jackson trips over his shoelaces. That's just what he does sometimes.

The other was a ****-up that let Melbourne score their only goal of the last quarter.

But the rest of the time, we created scoring opportunities! I was there and the crowd would BOO, BOO, us chipping it around, then Houli or someone would break into space and we'd mark in the forward 50 and the crowd would be like, YAAAAY, AT LAST, WHY DIDN'T YOU DO THAT FROM THE BEGINNING. But the opportunity wasn't there in the beginning! It was moving the ball around that allowed us to create it.



I went back and watched that period (16.07 onwards). Here are the relevant plays (Inside 50s & backwards kicks):

• Quick kick forward by Cotchin - marked by melb
• Quick kick forward by Jackson - marked by melb
• 6:52 to go, we kick backwards - crowd boo - turn it over - melb goal. This was really poor play.
• Quick kick forward by Martin - easy melb clearance
• Quick kick forward, decent opportunity but Melb clear and rush it forward. Bail marks 30M out. Should have kicked a goal but misses, kicks a behind.
• Cotchin runs through the middle, scrubs his kick, Melb clear within moments
• Deledio wins stoppage, quick kick forward, decent opportunity but melb clear & rush it forward, Tapscott marks 50m out. Hits the post.
• 00:45 to go - kick backwards - crowd boo - morris creates space - jack makes a great lead, marks it easily 35m directly in front. Misses easy chance.

So even in this "worst" period, we chipped it around exactly twice, and one of those times created our best scoring opportunity. The other 6 times we went forward quickly, for no score, 2 times of which allowed Melbourne to immediately rebound and have scoring shots.


We spent a grand total of about 30 seconds of that period chipping the ball around in the back half.

interesting, so for those who are now completely ****ed up in the mind..can you point us to the apparent "game plan" that we are supposed to be learning and have learnt? Because all i see here is a bunch of stuff that suggests we have NFI...and every now and then we do something twice and this is the "game plan"? ...sheeeesh...

 

[Final Siren]

Now I've watched the rest of the fourth quarter, and excluding the period discussed above (16.07 onwards), we chipped it around in the back half three times, two of which directly led to goals, and the other of which led to Jack almost taking mark of the year!

So 2 out of our 3 goals in the last quarter were created by chipping it around, and probably 4 of our 6 best scoring opportunities.

 

[CoggaRules]

Now I've watched the rest of the fourth quarter, and excluding the period discussed above (16.07 onwards), we chipped it around in the back half three times, two of which directly led to goals, and the other of which led to Jack almost taking mark of the year!

So 2 out of our 3 goals in the last quarter were created by chipping it around, and probably 4 of our 6 best scoring opportunities.

can you elaborate a little more man?...what happened around between 17.23 and 17:46? did that affect what went down between 18:34 and 18:56? when we chipped it around, did we mark it on even seconds? i.e. say the first kick was 17:24, did the next mark get taken at 17:26 and so on? we might yet make this look like a plan for the ages...

 

[Livonski]

Now I've watched the rest of the fourth quarter, and excluding the period discussed above (16.07 onwards), we chipped it around in the back half three times, two of which directly led to goals, and the other of which led to Jack almost taking mark of the year!

So 2 out of our 3 goals in the last quarter were created by chipping it around, and probably 4 of our 6 best scoring opportunities.

Good analysis FS. It shows the game plan that's required to respond to a full flood that Melb had on, especially in Q4. They've got 2 extra in our F50 which means we chip it around to create the overlap to set up the attack. Happens all the time. I think we got a little frustrated watching it because the Jacko one was a mistake (he didn't look forward at all. The overlap was in front of the mark!) and a couple went too deep backwards. But quick kicks into F50 or to a contest when there is a flood on just invites a rebound, which you described in the analysis of 16mins onwards.