Kick more goals!

[NMWBloods]

Just revisiting a theme of mine in the past few years on goalkicking. It seems obvious, but we need to do a little better with the number of goals we kick per game. We have a great forward line, but we need to utilise it a little more effectively.

In the past two and a bit seasons we have kicked 13 goals or more 30 times, winning 29 of those games. We have kicked 12 goals 5 times, going 2-3. And when we have kicked 11 goals or less we are 6-13. Of those 16 losses, if we had kicked just a couple of extra goals we would have won possibly half of those games. So, that could mean a difference of perhaps 2 wins per year, which could mean 2 higher places on the ladder. In a close competition every win is crucial.

Simple message is play good defence and reasonable offence, kick 13 goals, and we should win. Now locking down the game is part of the reason why we limit the opposition from scoring, which naturally has an impact on our own scoring. However, we do get the ball Inside 50 enough to score more goals, but we waste opportunities, often through poor delivery to the forwards.

In 2006 we were 6th in most goals kicked, 14th in 2005, 9th in 2004 and 6th in 2003.

Not kicking many goals per game and then requiring us to suddenly kick a lot when losing is a big ask and sometimes, unsurprisingly, we fall short. Even when it appears we've made a great comeback, we don't kick many goals (eg: second half against WC in GF 06 = 8 goals, second half against WC rd 1 = 7 goals).

We need to kick more goals!

[liz]

I don't think its been through lack of trying. 18 behinds yesterday attests to them creating a decent - though not excessive - number of realistic chances. Nailing the relatively straightforward chances is something Sydney have failed to do for around 3 seasons now.

[hammo]

I don't think its been through lack of trying. 18 behinds yesterday attests to them creating a decent - though not excessive - number of realistic chances. Nailing the relatively straightforward chances is something Sydney have failed to do for around 3 seasons now.

Do you think it would be worthy going down the corridor a bit more. Again, our game plan hardly lends itself to it, but I can't see the point of caressing passes to Spida 40 metres out tucked right in the forward pocket. No wonder he's missing!

Baz and MOL will win most of their one on ones. If we move the ball more quickly we can go inside 50 before teh opposition fills the space.

On a related issue, having watched and been enthralled by the Essendon - Carlton game on Saturday, I was wondering when the last time we were involved in a genuine shoot-out?

[Lucky Knickers]

We need more Dead-eye Dicks.
Didn't we have first place in some stat around "effectiveness" = least inside 50s per goal ?
Agree Bloods that there has been a marked increase in fussing about in the F50 in the last couple of games. Stop pfaffing about and Kick IT!

[giant]

There were 50+ I50s yesterday which is a good (not brilliant) day out. Which suggests that the problem is an efficiency issue not an opportunity one. Which as we've discussed in the past is not just about missing set shots but also about bringing the ball into too slowly & being forced too wide with our shots.

We'll get better.

PS Should also note we've had some good results in goal shooting from outside 50 (Leo, ROk yesterday, Bolton & Dempster in past weeks) which makes our "efficency" rating even worse.

[NMWBloods]

I think working the ball too widely and shooting from the pockets is a major factor. In 2003 when we were super accurate, most of shots came within 45 degrees.

Working the ball slowly and allowing the opposition to clog up our forward 50 is another factor.

Poor conversion of set shots is maybe another (not just the angle ones).

Possibly inefficient crumbing is another.

[Chow-Chicker]

Restrict the interchange and all will be fine!

[NMWBloods]

On a related issue, having watched and been enthralled by the Essendon - Carlton game on Saturday, I was wondering when the last time we were involved in a genuine shoot-out?

I was actually thinking the same thing earlier. We've had one game in total under Roos' coaching when both sides have scored over 100 points - that was the infamous Kangaroos game in 2004 (112-118). Only about 1 in 5 games under Roos have the combined scores been greater than 200.

[stellation]

But when will we?

[cruiser]

Why has our accuracy in front of goal been so poor at the start of the last three or four seasons? It was deja vu again yesterday, especially when we kicked 6 (or 7?) consecutive behinds at a time when we critically needed goals. Some of our missed set shots at goal have been attrocious. Kicking the ball to players at a tight angle to the goal doesnt help but there were some missed easy ones yesterday.

[ROK Lobster]

Why has our accuracy in front of goal been so poor at the start of the last three or four seasons? It was deja vu again yesterday, especially when we kicked 6 (or 7?) consecutive behinds at a time when we critically needed goals. Some of our missed set shots at goal have been attrocious. Kicking the ball to players at a tight angle to the goal doesnt help but there were some missed easy ones yesterday.

As part of the extended entourage of the club, the football department have employed (on a purely contractual basis - it's a post-WorkChoices world) a meterologist to work with the kicking coaches. Using complex computer simulations (running software adapted from that provided by John Buchanon) the Swans have developed a kicking style that is best suited to the meterological conditions of late winter/early spring. The aim is that goal kicking accuracy will peak at the pointy end of the season. The technique developed, and employed, in not as well suited to the balmy autumnal conditions of yesterday, or to the more typical early winter conditions. Marking and handballing tecniques have also been modified in the same way, hence the perception of poor skills early in the season generally. Kicking, handballing and marking tecniques predispose us to a poor start to the season, but bring us home well. They can be adapted for front-running, but as it is I think we would all agree that we don't want to peak to early.

[liz]

As part of the extended entourage of the club, the football department have employed (on a purely contractual basis - it's a post-WorkChoices world) a meterologist to work with the kicking coaches. Using complex computer simulations (running software adapted from that provided by John Buchanon) the Swans have developed a kicking style that is best suited to the meterological conditions of late winter/early spring. The aim is that goal kicking accuracy will peak at the pointy end of the season. The technique developed, and employed, in not as well suited to the balmy autumnal conditions of yesterday, or to the more typical early winter conditions. Marking and handballing tecniques have also been modified in the same way, hence the perception of poor skills early in the season generally. Kicking, handballing and marking tecniques predispose us to a poor start to the season, but bring us home well. They can be adapted for front-running, but as it is I think we would all agree that we don't want to peak to early.

LOL. But now explain why the kicking for goal in week 3 of the finals was against the Dockers kept them in the game for so long.

Or for that matter, what happened with Hall and Bolton on GF day?

[ROK Lobster]

LOL. But now explain why the kicking for goal in week 3 of the finals was against the Dockers kept them in the game for so long.

Or for that matter, what happened with Hall and Bolton on GF day?

1. Unseasonal conditions. A home PF is not a good idea, better to play in Melbourne.

2. Hall had the yips.

3. Bolton's skills suck.

[NMWBloods]

Excellent work there Lobster - a far better special comments man than the Ox!

[Bleed Red Blood]

Possibly inefficient crumbing is another.

I was thinking about that when I noticed we had five rushed behinds against the Lions.

I didn't see the game so I'm not sure if that was due to lack of crumbing or what but it seemed fairly high.