A lot's been said about our terrible inaccuracy this year and it's directly cost us games v's West Coast and Adelaide.

But what about our opposition's incredible accuracy this year:

Geelong 20.6

Essendon 20.10

St Kilda 15.5

Hawthorn 11.8

GC 9.6

WC 13.7

GWS 14.10

Adelaide 14.6

We have currently conceded an aggregate total of 150.98 which is an accuracy of 61%, a full 2 per cent ahead of St Kilda and a whopping 16 per cent ahead of Adelaide, the team that incidentally benefited from our gross inaccuracy on the weekend.

If this kind of accuracy continues, we are on pace to concede 301.196 which is a 60.6% conversion - which would be the most accurate against/conceded score in a season since 2000 (I didn't research any earlier). Brisbane hold the highest opposition accuracy of 59% in 2017.

Is this a coincidence or there something in our game plan or lack of execution of it, that is allowing us to concede such accurate scores? Will Lever and May assist in our opposition kicking less accurately?

Will the data correct itself and we can enjoy more sides kicking inaccurately against us, and hence win some more games on the run home. 

The opposition's accuracy cost us wins over West Coast and Adelaide. We had equal scoring shots to St Kilda (15.5.95) in a 40 point loss and Hawthorn and GC were in the game in the last minute due to their accuracy.

Not enough pressure in the backline

We don’t work hard enough for long enough. 

That is why we are in the Cellar again

3 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Is this a coincidence or there something in our game plan or lack of execution of it, that is allowing us to concede such accurate scores? Will Lever and May assist in our opposition kicking less accurately? 

One certainly hopes so.

The continuation of the zone defence with second string players has without doubt been a tactical error by Goodwin. Would it have made a difference.. maybe we would have won two more games... WCE and Adelaide but the lack of scoring ability has perhaps been our main problem in most games.

With at least two (and at times 5) 1st choice defenders out injured in each game and poor midfield defence early in the season makes it tough to pressure the ops into errors:  there have been quite a few clean snaps and relatively few rushed behinds.  Both a sign of low pressure close to goal.

Having said that it is not a good look and must improve with the key defenders coming back.

It will be quite exciting when Lever, May, Hibberd, Jetta, Salem, Hore, Frost are on the field together! 

Edited June 5, 20195 yr by Lucifer's Hero

3 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

It will be quite exciting when Lever, May, Hibberd, Jetta, Salem, Hore, Frost are on the field together! 

That array of backmen will be a terrific choke of opposition scoring. Up until now, we have had a highway of opposition traffic tracking someone's presence on the ground and finding a way past him to freely score, repeatedly. 

Opposition forwards hold no fears about Oscar and Frost and are able to demand and receive ball in the corridor of goal. That would account for a good deal of those scoring accuracy stats. Maybe they just also practice more than our guys do and have better line coaches.

Key defender Troy Chaplin has been our forward line coach. Why not someone who truly understands forward craft and goal kicking mechanics? Surely it’s not that hard. 

Edited June 5, 20195 yr by Matsuo Basho

31 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

With at least two (and at times 5) 1st choice defenders out injured in each game and poor midfield defence early in the season makes it tough to pressure the ops into errors:  there have been quite a few clean snaps and relatively few rushed behinds.  Both a sign of low pressure close to goal.

Having said that it is not a good look and must improve with the key defenders coming back.

It will be quite exciting when Lever, May, Hibberd, Jetta, Salem, Hore, Frost are on the field together! 

You should expect a call from Matthew Richardson's lawyers. I think he's claiming copyright over that expression which he uses as his most stringent form of criticism without actually being critical.

1 hour ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

A lot's been said about our terrible inaccuracy this year and it's directly cost us games v's West Coast and Adelaide.

But what about our opposition's incredible accuracy this year:

Geelong 20.6

Essendon 20.10

St Kilda 15.5

Hawthorn 11.8

GC 9.6

WC 13.7

GWS 14.10

Adelaide 14.6

We have currently conceded an aggregate total of 150.98 which is an accuracy of 61%, a full 2 per cent ahead of St Kilda and a whopping 16 per cent ahead of Adelaide, the team that incidentally benefited from our gross inaccuracy on the weekend.

If this kind of accuracy continues, we are on pace to concede 301.196 which is a 60.6% conversion - which would be the most accurate against/conceded score in a season since 2000 (I didn't research any earlier). Brisbane hold the highest opposition accuracy of 59% in 2017.

Is this a coincidence or there something in our game plan or lack of execution of it, that is allowing us to concede such accurate scores? Will Lever and May assist in our opposition kicking less accurately?

Will the data correct itself and we can enjoy more sides kicking inaccurately against us, and hence win some more games on the run home. 

The opposition's accuracy cost us wins over West Coast and Adelaide. We had equal scoring shots to St Kilda (15.5.95) in a 40 point loss and Hawthorn and GC were in the game in the last minute due to their accuracy.

The results are heavily skewed based on the first 3 rounds where the opposition practically walked in and kicked goals from the goal square. Its more a reflection of how easy we have been to score against early than anything the opposition were doing to us. 

Had Max or Weid kicked game saving goals vs Adelaide we'd probably not raise this.

Our set shot inaccuracy has been down right embarrassing this year, and much of it less than 40 out striaght in front! Petracca, Tmac, Weid, and just about all the rest.

That Preuss comes in for an occasional cameo and kicks a couple truly say much about our accuracy.

Edited June 5, 20195 yr by Moonshadow

2 hours ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

A lot's been said about our terrible inaccuracy this year and it's directly cost us games v's West Coast and Adelaide.

But what about our opposition's incredible accuracy this year:

Geelong 20.6

Essendon 20.10

St Kilda 15.5

Hawthorn 11.8

GC 9.6

WC 13.7

GWS 14.10

Adelaide 14.6

We have currently conceded an aggregate total of 150.98 which is an accuracy of 61%, a full 2 per cent ahead of St Kilda and a whopping 16 per cent ahead of Adelaide, the team that incidentally benefited from our gross inaccuracy on the weekend.

If this kind of accuracy continues, we are on pace to concede 301.196 which is a 60.6% conversion - which would be the most accurate against/conceded score in a season since 2000 (I didn't research any earlier). Brisbane hold the highest opposition accuracy of 59% in 2017.

Is this a coincidence or there something in our game plan or lack of execution of it, that is allowing us to concede such accurate scores? Will Lever and May assist in our opposition kicking less accurately?

Will the data correct itself and we can enjoy more sides kicking inaccurately against us, and hence win some more games on the run home. 

The opposition's accuracy cost us wins over West Coast and Adelaide. We had equal scoring shots to St Kilda (15.5.95) in a 40 point loss and Hawthorn and GC were in the game in the last minute due to their accuracy.

I wonder if it’s because they are getting easy shots at goal eg. Inside 20mts. 

We miss too many gettable set shots in front of goal and running shots when not under pressure. The opposition's game plan does not affect these simple mistakes. It's all our own fault.

If we score in proportion to the number of inside 50s we achieve then we will win. If we stop wasteful fancy shots (Jeffy's dribbles, Tracca's hurried play ons) our ratios will improve and we will win by even more.

It's time for the coaching panel to step in and coach.

It is pretty simple really. Once our opposition breaks out from their backline or midfield, they are able to move the ball faster than we can get back to help defence.

Big open spaces to lead into and lots of time for kickers to line up a target. Kicks running into an open goal don't often miss.

The other stat to consider here is how often inside-50s against us result in a goal or score.

We are ranked an uninteresting 10th for inside-50s against per game, with 51.4 . But we are ranked first for goals against at 13.7.

But these extra stats also support the 'opponents so accurate' point - the other teams with the same problem of goals against (Bulldogs and Kangaroos have basically the same figures for inside-50 -> goal against) also give away a few extra behinds compared to us. The most likely interpretation of this is that while they still let scores happen, they at least manage to clog up the space right in front and prevent some of the gimme goals.

3 hours ago, Nelo said:

I wonder if it’s because they are getting easy shots at goal eg. Inside 20mts. 

And lacking.,  'them Not worrying, about Not winning'...   because we've been so poor in many games.   (non scoreboard pressure)  A stroll in the park, if you will.

Our poor defence earlier this year allowed our opponents to kick easy goals. It's not as if we have been torched by miracle goals, or even flukey goals. And when sides bust us open after a turnover, they are also kicking easy goals.

The best example is the StKilda game. In 2019 the Saints have kicked 115 -122 , yet against us they kicked 15-5, mostly because the kept strolling in for sitters after burning us with our turnovers.

7 hours ago, Deemania since 56 said:

That array of backmen will be a terrific choke of opposition scoring. Up until now, we have had a highway of opposition traffic tracking someone's presence on the ground and finding a way past him to freely score, repeatedly. 

Personnel won't change the opposition getting out the back due to our high press which results in multiple inside 50s but no scores. Once they get out they just stroll into open space which contributes to their accuracy.

Most teams are scoring from the back half this year I think whereas we are still playing a forward press type game. Sometimes it might be better to allow the opposition easier exit from our 50 but choke then further upfield instead of pushing everyone up to cause repeat entries but then clogging our forward line so we can't score and the opposition having half a ground of free space when they eventually break through the press.

A high press with low leg speed in defence is the cause of this problem. Once they're through we can't stop them scoring. Its a bad game plan.

If we kicked straight ourselves and forced scoreboard pressure onto opposition then that also would make a factor to how well they are scoring.

10 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Personnel won't change the opposition getting out the back due to our high press which results in multiple inside 50s but no scores. Once they get out they just stroll into open space which contributes to their accuracy.

Most teams are scoring from the back half this year I think whereas we are still playing a forward press type game. Sometimes it might be better to allow the opposition easier exit from our 50 but choke then further upfield instead of pushing everyone up to cause repeat entries but then clogging our forward line so we can't score and the opposition having half a ground of free space when they eventually break through the press.

I agree Doc

Our high press zoned space occupying defense system doesn't work.Either the plan is wrong the personell are wrong or the personell cant or wont play to the coaches expectation.

 

14 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Personnel won't change the opposition getting out the back due to our high press which results in multiple inside 50s but no scores. Once they get out they just stroll into open space which contributes to their accuracy.

Most teams are scoring from the back half this year I think whereas we are still playing a forward press type game. Sometimes it might be better to allow the opposition easier exit from our 50 but choke then further upfield instead of pushing everyone up to cause repeat entries but then clogging our forward line so we can't score and the opposition having half a ground of free space when they eventually break through the press.

Good thoughts, Dr. G, that is often the case and is one that we should be addressing. Perhaps the returning personnel will contribute to ameliorate several of the 'evils' of our present game. Alternatively, these personnel might interpret the messages more clearly. 

Spoke to a marathon runner today, who is a Dees fan and he believes it is to do with fitness.

We tire late in games and allow teams to run over us, without much pressure and the lack of fitness also affects our kicking for goal.

Now you can add Collingwood to the list.

15.8 including 9.0 in the second half.

Since the round 7 game v's Hawthorn, the stats are horrifying:

Melbourne 56.80 - 41%

Opposition - 76.43- 64%

We've had 14 more scoring shots than the opposition.

If we're accurate against Freo, we win. Pure and simple.

Edited June 13, 20195 yr by Bring-Back-Powell

On 6/5/2019 at 9:24 PM, Dr. Gonzo said:

Personnel won't change the opposition getting out the back due to our high press which results in multiple inside 50s but no scores. Once they get out they just stroll into open space which contributes to their accuracy.

Most teams are scoring from the back half this year I think whereas we are still playing a forward press type game. Sometimes it might be better to allow the opposition easier exit from our 50 but choke then further upfield instead of pushing everyone up to cause repeat entries but then clogging our forward line so we can't score and the opposition having half a ground of free space when they eventually break through the press.

I think you'll find its actually the opposite and has been for a few years.