what forward line ?

[swansrule100]

even without hall we should be able to get at least 15 goals a game

magic/okeefe/davis should be able to get at least 6-8 between them minimum

someone like mcveigh barlow or goodes kicking 2

then a few others get 1

we have the scoring capabilities but they are forced to flood back constantly

we have far too many shots from wide positions

[ScottH]

even without hall we should be able to get at least 15 goals a game

magic/okeefe/davis should be able to get at least 6-8 between them minimum

someone like mcveigh barlow or goodes kicking 2

then a few others get 1

we have the scoring capabilities but they are forced to flood back constantly

we have far too many shots from wide positions

Trouble is when those 3(4 goals yesterday) have very quiet games where do those 6-8 come from?

ROK's goal kicking this year has been ordinary. (4.12 from 6 games)
MOL (13.5 from 6 games)
Davis(3.4 from 3 games)

[Dogberry]

Longmire isn't our forwards coach, though. He is our midfield coach.

Wasn't John Blakely the forward coach??? I tried to check on Swans website but they haven't got Mark Stone or Johnny Blakely.

Our forward line does seem a bit lost at the moment, especailly when played against teams that could put some pressure on them, but, in accurate goal-kicking doesn't exactly help either.

Cheers.

[swansrule100]

Trouble is when those 3(4 goals yesterday) have very quiet games where do those 6-8 come from?

ROK's goal kicking this year has been ordinary. (4.12 from 6 games)
MOL (13.5 from 6 games)
Davis(3.4 from 3 games)

well i think if the gameplan was focused more on attack you could get 2-3 from each of those easily.

the issue to me is not so much whos going to get the goals like if those three dont fire but at least creating the opportunity, if that makes any sense (not explaining very well)

our forwards are forced to work very hard to get a goal due to poor service. The last 4-5 minutes yesterday we didnt get a mountain of goals, but we created opportunities. Kick it in there quickly to okeefe magic and davis and give them a chance to beat their opponent rather than compete against 9-12 defenders blocking space.

[NMWBloods]

With less than 10 minutes to go we'd had just 33 Inside 50s for the game. Forwards can't kick enough goals without more I50s. Teams typically score 25%-30% (35% if they're really effective) they get it I50 - that's only 8-10 goals to be expected.

[swansrule100]

With less than 10 minutes to go we'd had just 33 Inside 50s for the game. Forwards can't kick enough goals without more I50s. Teams typically score 25%-30% (35% if they're really effective) they get it I50 - that's only 8-10 goals to be expected.

i think it was you who had a stat on our % of wins when we kick over 13 goals and when we kick under or something like that

i think it showed that when we are more attacking we generally win

[NMWBloods]

i think it was you who had a stat on our % of wins when we kick over 13 goals and when we kick under or something like that

i think it showed that when we are more attacking we generally win

Yep - in the past 3 and a bit seasons, when we kick 13 goals or more we've lost only 4 games (and in each case we had less than 10 goals at 3QT). Our record is ~39-4.

When kicking less than 12 goals we've won only 7 games. Our record is ~7-22 (+ 2 draws).

At 12 goals we are 2-3.

Another benchmark is 10 goals by 3QT.
If we have 9 goals or less at 3QT we are 14-28 (+ 2 draws).
If we have 10 goals or more at 3QT we are 34-1.
(The only loss was 10.6 at 3QT against Essendon rd 1, 2006 and we finished with only 12 goals).

(And 10 goals is not a high score by 3QT - works out to just 13.3 goals per full game).


(There may be some slight errors in the summing as I did it quickly, but that won't change the overall message).

[DST]

Yep - in the past 3 and a bit seasons, when we kick 13 goals or more we've lost only 4 games (and in each case we had less than 10 goals at 3QT). Our record is ~39-4.

When kicking less than 12 goals we've won only 7 games. Our record is ~7-22 (+ 2 draws).

At 12 goals we are 2-3.

Another benchmark is 10 goals by 3QT.
If we have 9 goals or less at 3QT we are 14-28 (+ 2 draws).
If we have 10 goals or more at 3QT we are 34-1.
(The only loss was 10.6 at 3QT against Essendon rd 1, 2006 and we finished with only 12 goals).

(And 10 goals is not a high score by 3QT - works out to just 13.3 goals per full game).


(There may be some slight errors in the summing as I did it quickly, but that won't change the overall message).

In summary we play a brand of football that restricts the opposition so well that 13 goals a game is good enough to win almost all our games.

It is such a fine line, but I don't think we need to change the plan all that much other than making sure we maximise our F50 entries to make sure we get the opportunity to kick 13 goals.

DST

[DST]

i think it was you who had a stat on our % of wins when we kick over 13 goals and when we kick under or something like that

i think it showed that when we are more attacking we generally win

That's not entirely correct, all it shows is that when we kick 13 goals our defensive game plan is so effective that we will most probably win.

Take the shackles off and kick more goals, does not mean we will win more games as we give the opposition more of an opportunity to out score us.

As I said earlier, it's a fine line between generating enough opportunities while sticking to our effective game plan of denying and restricting the opposition of the football.

DST

[swansrule100]

That's not entirely correct, all it shows is that when we kick 13 goals our defensive game plan is so effective that we will most probably win.

Take the shackles off and kick more goals, does not mean we will win more games as we give the opposition more of an opportunity to out score us.

As I said earlier, it's a fine line between generating enough opportunities while sticking to our effective game plan of denying and restricting the opposition of the football.

DST

true but it illustrates we have to break the shackles and at least aim to be reaching a reasonable score, about 80-90 points

[NMWBloods]

Take the shackles off and kick more goals, does not mean we will win more games as we give the opposition more of an opportunity to out score us.

As I said earlier, it's a fine line between generating enough opportunities while sticking to our effective game plan of denying and restricting the opposition of the football.

Of course it's a fine line, but the rubbish we saw yesterday and in rd 1 is nowhere near what we should be doing.

Still, how do we know that "taking the shakles off" will mean we will lose less games? When has that happened? Remember that in 2003 we averaged nearly 15 goals per game, finished 4th and made a preliminary final.

[goswannie14]

With less than 10 minutes to go we'd had just 33 Inside 50s for the game. Forwards can't kick enough goals without more I50s. Teams typically score 25%-30% (35% if they're really effective) they get it I50 - that's only 8-10 goals to be expected.

How many was it by the end of the game? How many did the Roos have?

[NMWBloods]

How many was it by the end of the game? How many did the Roos have?

We had 43. They had 50.

[DST]

Of course it's a fine line, but the rubbish we saw yesterday and in rd 1 is nowhere near what we should be doing.

Still, how do we know that "taking the shakles off" will mean we will lose less games? When has that happened? Remember that in 2003 we averaged nearly 15 goals per game, finished 4th and made a preliminary final.

Most of the rubbish we serve up is away and if it means we get the 4 or 5 wins out of 11 that we need to finish top 4 then I can live with it.

What will be of concern is if we start playing like that on the SCG. At the SCG we still like to get numbers around the ball but we are much better at then moving it from defence and generally score much more freely.

DST

[swansrule100]

Most of the rubbish we serve up is away and if it means we get the 4 or 5 wins out of 11 that we need to finish top 4 then I can live with it.

What will be of concern is if we start playing like that on the SCG. At the SCG we still like to get numbers around the ball but we are much better at then moving it from defence and generally score much more freely.

DST

but the grand final is not played at the scg

does the ground hinder our overall performance?