Our Failure to Crush Teams

[Skuit 9,382]

There are of course fluctuations in games, and ‘putting the cue in the rack’ to conserve energy or guard against injuries, but we just can’t seem to put our foot on the throat of the opposition when they’re down – a mark of a ruthless, champion team, and so important as to % with the competition evening out. And junk-time goals against are a serious %-killer.

We also seem to have some strange 40-point barrier, and I know this well, as the only time I ever really have a flutter is when I have a sense we might unexpectedly dominate and take the big-odds 39+ option (it’s been killing me, although we got across the magical line against Adelaide with a last-minute goal to Kent).

The past two seasons; lead progression points and final margins (I’ve left out 2015 but it’s a similar pattern in our wins). Outside of these matches, we only capitalised against GC and Brisbane to record larger winning margins, while the Bulldogs this season was a reasonable example of cue in the rack.

2017

Port

20.46 2^nd – 43  /  Final – 23

Western

25.24 2^nd – 40  /  32.29 3^rd – 50  /  Final – 57

Gold Coast

18.37 4^th – 34  /  25.22 4^th – 41  /  Final – 35

Adelaide

6.56 4^th – 39  /  Final – 41

Essendon

3.59 4^th – 45  /  Final – 38

Saints

8.33 3^rd – 34  /  8.08 4^th – 42  /  Final – 30

2016

Port

17.53 2^nd – 43  /  Final – 40

Freo

16.20 2^nd – 43  /  12.47 3^rd – 50  /  Final – 32

Collingwood

20.55 4^th – 55  /  Final – 46

Richmond

30.34 4^th – 39

  /  Final – 33

Collingwood

10.26 2^nd – 42  /  18.22 3^rd – 39  /  Final – 35

 

[Salems Lot 2,392]

Gee we have changed as a supporter base when we are worrying about this.  As Dory said in Finding Nemo, "just keep winning, just keep winning..."

[Trisul 649]

Perhaps our manic running and heavy contested work doesn't allow for it yet?  In those new stats we're generally as a team travelling further and faster than our opposition.   One aspect anyway.

[TeamPlayedFine39 8,187]

1 minute ago, Salems Lot said:

Gee we have changed as a supporter base when we are worrying about this.  As Dory said in Finding Nemo, "just keep winning, just keep winning..."

2013 me would slap 2017 me in the face.

[Demon Jack 6,388]

A lot of players are still building their tanks. Our game plan is very demanding over four quarters. The big wins will come, hopefully in the form of a ten goal win this weekend against North.

For what its worth, I'm pretty content with just winning these days after only 17 wins between the start of 2012 and the end of 2015.

EDIT: Sorry, did I say 17 wins? I meant 15....Ouch.

Edited July 25, 2017 by Demon Jack

[Nasher 33,166]

24 minutes ago, Salems Lot said:

Gee we have changed as a supporter base when we are worrying about this.  As Dory said in Finding Nemo, "just keep winning, just keep winning..."

Far out. Without a word of a lie, I wrote that Dory joke on here the other day then decided it was probably too obscure for people to get, so I didn't post it. Hope nobody laughs at it now!

[Go the Biff 3,208]

2 minutes ago, Nasher said:

Far out. Without a word of a lie, I wrote that Dory joke on here the other day then decided it was probably too obscure for people to get, so I didn't post it. Hope nobody laughs at it now!

If it makes you feel better, I didn't.
 

Sorry SL

[praha 10,368]

Good thread.  Mentioned something similar in another thread.

Consistently winning by 30-40 points leads to a healthy percentage.  The problem is that we had a string of a month and a half where only one win was truly percentage boosting (Bulldogs) but two losses (Sydney and Adelaide) essentially undid the percentage gains. 

If we close out the season with 3-4 wins of 30-40 points and keep our losses to less <20 then we stand to be close to the 120% mark.

At the end of the day, big winning margins mean squat if you can't defend as well as you attack. That is why percentage is such an important metric. 

[John Crow Batty 8,314]

It a been a hard slog in the past two months. Lots of travel, good opposition and short breaks. Be thankful we won more than we lost in that period. 

Edited July 25, 2017 by america de cali

[bush demon 1,915]

when was the last time we were this deep in the season and never lost by more than six seven goals?

[deelete my account 1,194]

Its possible to not take anything for granted AND point out an issue we have. People are either met with 'Too negative!'' or 'Too over-confident!' Whenever a subject is broached on DL

Edited July 25, 2017 by DominatrixTyson

[Lord Travis 10,277]

I think it will come with maturity. We definitely don't have the killer instinct yet, evidenced by the fact we have the lowest percentage of any team in the top 8.

We often dominate periods of games but don't convert that dominance into scoring. The fact we were only 5 goals up at half time against Port on the weekend was pretty poor. Based on the stats we should've been 80 points up. I think with more maturity and synergy between young core players we will start to win by bigger margins that more reflect our dominance in games. At this stage in our development though it's good we are managing to stick tough and win close games. Even a few months ago we were losing close games constantly so there's clear improvement already being shown.

[Undeeterred 2,883]

Sorry, did you miss the bit where we won 2-5 games a year for a decade?

FCS.

[Nasher 33,166]

The only team we've played near the bottom end of the ladder was Carlton, and that was during our horror stretch of 6 day breaks and half the team out injured. Most sides just don't allow themselves to be crushed - we certainly haven't.

We've got North and Brisbane in the run home. Let's revisit this then.

[Deestroy All 14,262]

Too disciplined is my theory. We don't have many "cheats" that leave the contest early running forward of the ball. Like Port, Bulldogs WC for example. That's usually what leads to big scores once a team is on top. You never see our core mids leave the contest early. 

[Skuit 9,382]

21 minutes ago, Undeeterred said:

Sorry, did you miss the bit where we won 2-5 games a year for a decade?

FCS.

MFCSSFCS

[hardtack 10,158]

We're learning to win more than we lose... foot on the throat can come later.

[Skuit 9,382]

Jeepers. Half you folk are in need of some counseling or a quiet session with Tammy Roos.

Developing maturity, building tanks, our manic game-plan, and, left-field - a high level of discipline -  are all interesting responses to what wasn't a complaint but an examination of where we might still be lacking.

From my perspective, we tend to get out to a big lead quite often and then start fiddling around with it a bit, which allows the opposition an opportunity to put pressure back in our direction and brings them into the game.

I don't know why this is. Maybe we run out of legs a fraction from the manic approach and don't spread as well? Or perhaps we just don't know what to do when the opposition gives up and allows us so many free options?

[Deestroy All 14,262]

2 minutes ago, Skuit said:

Jeepers. Half you folk are in need of some counseling or a quiet session with Tammy Roos.

Developing maturity, building tanks, our manic game-plan, and, left-field - a high level of discipline -  are all interesting responses to what wasn't a complaint but an examination of where we might still be lacking.

From my perspective, we tend to get out to a big lead quite often and then start fiddling around with it a bit, which allows the opposition an opportunity to put pressure back in our direction and brings them into the game.

I don't know why this is. Maybe we run out of legs a fraction from the manic approach and don't spread as well? Or perhaps we just don't know what to do when the opposition gives up and allows us so many free options?

The Port win should've been a 123 point win. We should've been up by 80 at half time without the god awful umpiring. And continued the domination in the 2nd half if Gawn wasn't  injured and on and off. 

[Skuit 9,382]

4 minutes ago, Deestroy All said:

The Port win should've been a 123 point win. We should've been up by 80 at half time without the god awful umpiring. And continued the domination in the 2nd half if Gawn wasn't  injured and on and off. 

I was thinking at least 80 points, but I assume you've factored Watts being able to hold onto a mark into your final equation.

[Biffen 12,433]

We are controlling time ,space ,scorers without ever looking truly beaten.

We are mastering tempo.

The big margin has only ever been a concern for my harem.

[Demon trucker 1,779]

The reason is most of our games have had really bad qtrs , when you came from 4 to 5 goals behind in 6 out of 10 wins you need to kick 14 goals more the the opp to have a big win

[DemonWA 3,536]

Think this is a reflection of how even the comp is rather than any issue of our own.

 

We've shown the ability to come back form being 3-4 goals down on many occasions - so have the teams we've played.

[Skuit 9,382]

Another question:

At half-time against Port, the commentators were banging on about how the Port players were up and about in the change-rooms and brimming with confidence - even though they had absolutely no right to be.

Throw back to 2016 vs. Port: Melbourne go 43 points up near the 18-minute mark of the second quarter, while Port have managed only the single goal, the first of the game.

Are teams aware of our inability to put the contest beyond reach?

[Trisul 649]

27 minutes ago, Skuit said:

From my perspective, we tend to get out to a big lead quite often and then start fiddling around with it a bit, which allows the opposition an opportunity to put pressure back in our direction and brings them into the game.

I don't know why this is. Maybe we run out of legs a fraction from the manic approach and don't spread as well? Or perhaps we just don't know what to do when the opposition gives up and allows us so many free options?

Coaching directives could also be at play here.  We've had trouble stopping opposition run-ons and it's less costly to attempt to improve on our tempo control when we have a decent lead.