SCORE 14.10.94: INSIDE 50S 51

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

That's the current AFL average outcome for a game of footy. Here are our last 5 weeks:

round-i50-score

r17 - 50 - 11.9

r16 - 19 - 4.6

r15 - 36 - 13.7

r14 - 56 - 15.13

r13 - 45 - 10.9

now clearly there is one big howler in there. I think most of us are intelligent enough to know what caused that howler and can accept it is the exception to the rule that the other 4 results provide.

the average outcome of the other 4 is:

12.10. 82 with 47 inside 50s

again, the AFL average is

14.10.94 with 51 inside 50s

so across 4 weeks of footy we average 4 less inside 50s and 2 less goals compared to the average side. I thought we were supposed to have the worst midfield in history.. right? You think next year maybe Hogan and Clark might turn a few more of those entries in to goals? cos I sure as hell do. You think that the 8 players tonight who have played 16 games or less just might have some improvement in them left? Yeah me too.

I just wanted to use the stats to paint the picture for all of you out there who are too dumb to have noticed our improvement because the only thing you can see in a football match is who got the 4 points

[Nasher 33,617]

Despite what many people say, the statistics usually do tell the story.

[Jaded No More 68,976]

Nobody here said we haven't dramatically improved since the dearly departed. Hand down 1000% improvement in every aspect.

And nobody here has complained about our forward line, which is good and will become sensational should Clark return and Hogan be the magic we expect him to be.

But our midfield is rubbish. We are dead last in the competition for clearances differential. And until we fix the midfield, we will confine to get beaten by good and average teams alike.

It's a credit to us that we have managed to get more inside 50s since Craig has come on board, and we are converting well. This is all the more reason to focus all our energies on the midfield, because once that comes together, we will actually be an OK team. Maybe even a good team. But nobody has ever done anything of note with a crap midfield. We don't even have a crap midfield, we actually just have no midfield outside of Jones and a kid with less than 10 games experience.

To think how many draft picks we have wasted away, and still, no midfield. None.

[Chook 15,026]

Despite what many people say, the statistics usually do tell the story.

I've said this before, but statistics are like people. If you get enough of the right ones in a room together, you can solve any problem.

[DeeSpencer 26,518]

I'd counter that with saying Brisbane, StKilda and Bulldogs produced the 3 good results.

But Of course I admit there has been significant improvement. We our now a competitive team against fellow bottom 8 opponents.

I'd also say our forward 50 needs improvement but has been decent and the improvement from the midfield will produce a higher quality of i50 and better defensive work.

Tonight was another step forward but also an opportunity missed with some crucial small decisions and skill errors and a bit of bad luck costing us a chance of victory.

[Ted Lasso 19,568]

I'd say tonights result reflects where we are at, we probably have one of the better defenses going around but it's put under way too much stress, and we will have a very handy forward line next year but we lack a midfield and overall skill and polish,

a good trade period and a pre season focus on skills and decision making rather than just getting our fitness up to scratch and i reckon we'll be alright

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

But our midfield is rubbish.

it's not great but obviously if we get it I50 47 times across 4 matches, when the average is 51, it can't be THAT bad. Don't forget that it includes Viney, Toumpas and Trengove, all who are a long way off their ceiling. Even Jones and Grimes haven't peaked yet.

[baysidedave 246]

l have been saying it for years, quote "we are going to get better next year" unquote, but we are because basically we couldn't get any worse than what we've had to put up with until Neeld got the flick and now the only way is up and it has started. Thank f@#$ing Christ

[Mickey 4,757]

I would hope (although I'm not too sure) that most would agree that we are quite efficient, once we get the ball inside 50. But it's the getting it inside 50 that's the problem. And you're right, once hogan and Clark come in, this efficiency will improve. I believe this is why people are so sure that, with 2-3 more good midfielders, we will improve dramatically

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

But it's the getting it inside 50 that's the problem.

again, for the third time, I've just demonstrated that our ability recently to get it inside is very close to league average

[BAMF 4,465]

Our conversation is amazing considering how many times I scream at the tv for bad delivery from our mids.

[Chook 15,026]

We conceded about 70 points from turnovers. That is why we lost. In fact, it's why we lose every week.

[RickyJ45 417]

I've said this before, but statistics are like people. If you get enough of the right ones in a room together, you can solve any problem.

statistics are like bikinis. what they reveal is suggestive but what they conceal is vital

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

sigh

for those of you who insist on ignorance by attempting to dispel the importance of the inisde-50 stat, here is a another lesson

On the left is average inside 50s. On the right is the ladder.

[Young Dee 1,303]

You can't just look at the inside 50's stat with out considering the effectiveness of those deliveries. Although since Neeld has left there has been a lot less bombing it inside 50 (as if their only job was to get the ball inside 50).

I think the new free flowing style of footy that Craig has brought in means the players in front of the ball are less stagnant. I hope I never have to witness that kicking long along the boundary to a stagnant group of players only to be thumped out of bounce or rebounded (so boring!). With this free flowing style we can actually create chains of possessions and therefore more inside 50's.

[P-man 13,367]

I just wanted to use the stats to paint the picture for all of you out there who are too dumb to have noticed our improvement because the only thing you can see in a football match is who got the 4 points

I get that you're an angry type, but I'm really not sure why you continually use phrases like this. Even when making a legitimate point, it makes you look foolish. There's enough hostility around the joint without you calling everyone "dumb". Personally I thought tonight was a pass, with contribution distributed across the team. However I also understand if some people are frustrated at a missed opportunity for a win. I'm not going to insult them for it.

But yeah, a marked improvement in i50s against teams around our level.

[beelzebub 23,390]

Despite what many people say, the statistics usually do tell the story.

in reality youre actually noting the ONLY stat that counts. The scoreboard.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

It's hardly groundbreaking to hear that if you get the ball in the forward line more you score more goals.

[CBDees 3,167]

You can't just look at the inside 50's stat with out considering the effectiveness of those deliveries. Although since Neeld has left there has been a lot less bombing it inside 50 (as if their only job was to get the ball inside 50).

I think the new free flowing style of footy that Craig has brought in means the players in front of the ball are less stagnant. I hope I never have to witness that kicking long along the boundary to a stagnant group of players only to be thumped out of bounce or rebounded (so boring!). With this free flowing style we can actually create chains of possessions and therefore more inside 50's.

I get that you're an angry type, but I'm really not sure why you continually use phrases like this. Even when making a legitimate point, it makes you look foolish. There's enough hostility around the joint without you calling everyone "dumb". Personally I thought tonight was a pass, with contribution distributed across the team. However I also understand if some people are frustrated at a missed opportunity for a win. I'm not going to insult them for it.

I agree with P-Man that C&B weakens an otherwise well-argued post by calling all other Demonlanders dumb. Statistics are very telling, such as the I50s that you quoted but can you rely on them to tell who is the better coach or how our team compares? On any weakend there are nine matches played between teams who are all unevenly matched to varying degrees (otherwise we would have nine drawn games).

Does the fact that the Dees scored 36 and 19 I50s in rounds 15 and 16, mean that Craig is a lesser coach than Neeld or that the Dees are the worst team in the competition. Does it prove that by making one team change between rounds 16 and 17 was in any way responsible for the 150% improvement in the number of I50s we gained (when one game was played in the wet at the Cattery and the other in the tropics)? I think most Demonlanders will agree that if you have to rely on statistics to prove an argument which is staring you in the face then you are never going to enjoy your footy, because most of us can that we are at last making some good decisions.

[Nasher 33,617]

It's hardly groundbreaking to hear that if you get the ball in the forward line more you score more goals.

It's ground breaking to know that in 5 weeks we've suddenly turned from miles off the pace to middle of the road. It's an interesting point in light of the almost universally accepted wisdom that our midfield is third world.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

It's ground breaking to know that in 5 weeks we've suddenly turned from miles off the pace to middle of the road. It's an interesting point in light of the almost universally accepted wisdom that our midfield is third world.

I've been saying for a while now we are only a couple of good midfielders short of being a decent team.

[What 18,810]

Clearances

Melbourne - 42

Brisbane - 38

Inside 50's

Melbourne - 50

Brisbane - 56

Considering we were down a rotation in stifling conditions right after subbing off Toumpas with Garland getting hurt, it was a gallant effort by the team last night.

[praha 11,253]

Silly OP.

If you're unable to match the average, that's NOT a good thing.

Also, it's all out of context: what's the average score and inside-50 count from the opposition in that period? That would be a better determining factor than the team's output, which is only as good as its capacity to counter the opposition.

[45HG 1,559]

sigh

for those of you who insist on ignorance by attempting to dispel the importance of the inisde-50 stat, here is a another lesson

On the left is average inside 50s. On the right is the ladder.

I like it.

You wouldn't be able to do an inside 50s differential stat would you? I'd expect it to match up even more closely.

[Redleg 42,053]

We conceded about 70 points from turnovers. That is why we lost. In fact, it's why we lose every week.

Bingo.

Our disposal is atrocious, has been for years and is killing us.

Yes some good mids would make us a fair side, if we improve our disposal.

The Lions had an ordinary side in yesterday, but beat us, why, because of our poor ball use.