(08-04-2024, 06:31 AM)LoveNavy link Wrote:We had 8 points on the board q1. Nuff said.

(08-04-2024, 07:59 AM)kruddler link Wrote:I mentioned in game that our forward entries were poor and we were not kicking well to our forwards.

Looking a little bit deeper at that.
Overall, we won inside 50's - 58 - 51
Overall, we had more scoring shots (inc rushed) - 26 - 24

I broke down inside 50's per quarter.
I broke down scores per quarter
I broke down scoring shots per inside per quarter.

Carlton
Q# - G.B. - I50's - scoring / inside 50.
Q1 - 1.8 - 16 - 44%
Q2 - 2.3 -  9 - 56%
Q3 - 3.3 -  9 - 67%
Q4 - 5.1 - 24 - 25%
Tot -11.15 - 58 - 45%

Collingwood
Q# - G.B. - I50's - scoring / inside 50.
Q1 - 2.2 - 11 - 36%
Q2 - 4.4 - 15 - 53%
Q3 - 5.3 - 17 - 47%
Q4 - 1.3 -  8 - 50%
Tot -12.12 - 51 - 47%

What is shows is that we were actually very good at hitting the scoreboard for most of the game based on the amount of inside 50's we were getting.
Very efficient for 3/4's.
Also very inaccurate too.
However, despite dominating the last quarter with the most inside 50's and the most goals (for us) during that time. We REALLY struggled to convert it on the scoreboard.
To be on a par with the other 3/4's, (and collingwood) we should've had an extra 6 scoring shots in the last based on those inside 50's. Probably 5 more considering the last one didn't count (thanks gov).
If we did get the average conversion from inside 50's, thats the game, even if we missed them all!

Of course, this 4th quarter struggle to hit the scoreboard happened to coincide with Charlie being off the ground for 10 minutes.

Of course, we were also very inaccurate in front of goal early and could've put it beyond doubt well before the last quarter, but thats just another layer of the same slice of cake.

That is....
Our forwardline is not functioning correctly and we need to be smarter with our entries

(08-04-2024, 08:27 AM)Thryleon link Wrote:here ends the statistical lesson.

By my count we scored better and more efficiently from shots taken in the final quarter. 

Earlier we were wasteful when you said we were efficient.  Particularly for proper set shots inside 50.

Stats lie.  My eyes don't.

(08-04-2024, 08:34 AM)kruddler link Wrote:....and opinions are not wrong?

Some peoples opinions have changed from last night on a rewatch of the game. I suggest you do the same.

I already said that we were inaccurate in front of goal.

There is a difference between being accurate and being efficient.

Last quarter we were accurate.
1st quarter we were not.

Last quarter we were not efficient.
1st quarter we were.

(08-04-2024, 08:47 AM)Thryleon link Wrote:No this is a classic case of using stats to show efficiency from inside 50 entries.  That is conversion to scoring correct?

Yet, I'm talking about something different (but more important).  Taking your actual chances when you create them and get a mark in front or even on a slight angle, and im not talking about stuff like cripps 55 metre effort from the boundary, or Charlie trying to kick it from 60 at the mcc members stand.  I'm talking about Jessie 30 out directly in front.  Harry on a slight angle 45 metres out, hollands, 40 metres out, owies not making the distance from 45 directly in front. 

We needed the repeat entries to create the scoring opportunities and were forcing it in to keep it in and score.

(08-03-2024, 02:19 PM)kruddler link Wrote:I've been in Newmans position before and given away a free kick for the same thing.

The bloke who got a free kick for it against me was actually an old school mate.
We talked about it afterwards.

He essentially falls backwards into me, deliberately, and instinct makes you try and catch them. They keep pushing back into you and your instinct is to hold them otherwise they will fall into you and your legs, potentially causing injury.

Its smart play if you get a free kick out of it.

Next time someone tries that, you simply side step them and let them fall and they look like a goose.
It should only work once.

(08-04-2024, 02:11 AM)kruddler link Wrote:Not sure if its been mentioned or not, but i wouldn't be surprised if McGovern misses next week with concussion.

He copped a knee/shin to the back of the head, you can see the collingwood bloke holding his leg in pain.
He took a long time to take his shot and spent a lot of time rubbing and shaking his head.
Obviously, his kick was terrible.

Reminded me of when Robbie Warnock did similarly against Geelong many years ago after getting punched in the head. IIRC he missed everything too, or at least barely got a point. He was talked about as being soft on the night. Ended up spending the night in hospital.