Footy in 2011 Vs. Footy in 2009

[Johnny Member]

Is anyone worried that our style of play is outdated? That focussing on defence ahead of offence is sooo 2009?

I stumbed across these stats in relation to 'Goals For'. I think they're interesting.

In 2009, we were the best team throughout the year and were a couple of sitters in front of goal away from winning the flag. I mean f***, we very nearly went through the whole season undefeated!

Here are the 'Goals For' averages for 2009...

1 Western Bulldogs 15.4
2 Geelong Cats 15.2
3 Carlton Blues 15.1
4 Adelaide Crows 14.3
5 St Kilda Saints 14.1
6 Collingwood Magpies 13.5
7 Essendon Bombers 13.6
8 Brisbane Lions 13.4
9 Port Adelaide Power 13.2
10 Hawthorn Hawks 13


Here are the stats for 2010......

1 Geelong Cats 16.5
2 Collingwood Magpies 15.2
3 Carlton Blues 14.3
4 Fremantle Dockers 14.1
5 Western Bulldogs 13.9
6 Hawthorn Hawks 13.3
7 Sydney Swans 13.2
8 Kangaroos 12.7
9 Essendon Bombers 12.6
10 St Kilda Saints 12.5


And here they are for this year.......

1 Collingwood Magpies 17.5
2 Geelong Cats 15.1
3 Carlton Blues 14.7
4 Hawthorn Hawks 14.9
5 Essendon Bombers 14.9
6 West Coast Eagles 14.1
7 Richmond Tigers 13.9
8 Melbourne Demons 13.2
9 Kangaroos 13.2
10 Fremantle Dockers 12.9

13 St Kilda Saints 11.8



So clearly, in 2009 we were scoring better than we are now. But we're only averaging one less goal than we were in the year when we Drew a Grand Final.


So, what do these figures tell us? Do they tell us that kicking lots of goals is overrated?
The team that has averaged the most goals hasn't won the flag - yet the team that has been horribly close for two years in a row (ie. us!) hasn't been in the top 4 in the 'Goals For' stat at all.


Or....do they tell us that perhaps if we'd been able to squeeze one more goal out a week, that that would have been the difference between being painfully close to winning the flag - and actually winning the flag?



The biggest change between us in 2009-2010, to us now is clearly our 'Goals Against'.

In 2009 we conceded the least amount of goals. Geelong were 2nd and Collingwood were 3rd.

In 2010, again, we conceded the least amount of goals. But Collingwood were 2nd and Geelong slipped to 3rd.

In 2011, Collingwood have moved to No. 1 on the list, and we've slipped to 7th!

[Johnny Member]

Note:

2008 Goals Against Average...
1. Geelong
2. Hawthorn

2009 Goals Against Average...
1. Saints
2. Geelong

2010 Goals Against Average...
1. Saints
2. Collingwood

2011 Goals Against Average...
1. Collingwood
2. Sydney
3. Geelong



Unless something dramatic changes in AFL footy this year, having the least amount of goals kicked against you still seems to be the most powerful and influential stat there is.

[dragit]

The progression of 'the press' has exposed our backline's poor disposal, in the past Dawson, Blake, Baker & Raph had more time to get the ball into the hands of our better user's. Now it has become nearly impossible to find space to get the ball out, therefor most teams are kicking it long down the line just to get it out of the area. This is usually to a contested situation, where we have been losing all year, hence the ball goes back in more often and = more goals.

In 09 when we were the only ones 'pressing' the ball spent a lot more time in our 50, now the tables have turned. The backline has held up pretty well in most games considering the lop-sided forward 50 entries in most games.

I don't believe we are going to be able to restrict teams to less than 10 goals most weeks, so the answer is - YES - we need to kick more goals to win, which can only happen if we can get the ball in there more and keep it in…

[Johnny Member]

I don't believe we are going to be able to restrict teams to less than 10 goals most weeks, so the answer is - YES - we need to kick more goals to win, which can only happen if we can get the ball in there more and keep it in…

But I guess what these stats tell us is, that it doesn't matter how many goals we kick. If we aren't in the top 2-3 in 'Least Goals Against' we don't have a hope of winning anything anyway!

[dragit]

I don't believe we are going to be able to restrict teams to less than 10 goals most weeks, so the answer is - YES - we need to kick more goals to win, which can only happen if we can get the ball in there more and keep it in…

But I guess what these stats tell us is, that it doesn't matter how many goals we kick. If we aren't in the top 2-3 in 'Least Goals Against' we don't have a hope of winning anything anyway!

Perhaps, what about a ten year sample, is it always the 2 best defensive sides?

[Johnny Member]

Perhaps, what about a ten year sample, is it always the 2 best defensive sides?

2000
1. Essendon
2. Carlton
3. Melbourne
4. Richmond

2001
1. Carlton
2. Essendon
3. Sydney
4. Port
5. Brisbane

2002
1. Brisbane
2. Essendon
3. Port
4. Collingwood

2003
1. Port
2. Adelaide
3. Brisbane
4. Collingwood

2004
1. Port
2. Sydney
3. Brisbane
4. Geelong

2005
1. Adelaide
2. Sydney
3. West Coast
4. Saints

2006
1. Adelaide
2. Sydney
3. Saints
4. West Coast

2007
1. Geelong
2. Adelaide
3. Sydney
4. Brisbane
..
8. Port

2008
1. Geelong
2. Hawthorn
3. Adelaide
4. Sydney

2009
1. Saints
2. Geelong
3. Collingwood
4. Adelaide

2010
1. Saints
2. Collingwood
3. Cats
4. Bulldogs

[dragit]

From 2000 to about 2005 it was two sides from the top 4 of the 'Least Goals Against' that played off, and since then it's pretty much been the top 2.

Port in 08 were the exception.

Remarkably though we are only 40 points off the 2nd best defensive side this year,

Check this out:
Ranking Scores Against
Collingwood 924
West Coast Eagles 1114
Geelong Cats 1142
Sydney Swans 1142
Carlton 1154
St Kilda 1158
Hawthorn 1164

We have played a game less than most of those, but considering the form we have been showing I find it amazing that we are so close here… only 50 points separating 6 sides…
I am clinging to any hope at this stage… so if we can turns the screws on a few sides at the dome where we play the best then we could still be one of the least scored against sides for the season.

[samoht]

A false hope is still better than no hope

[dragit]

Seriously - try and enjoy this year while we are in any form of contention, next year could be even worse, our stars aren't getting any younger…

[SainterK]

Forward line (with the exclusion of Milne) as been horribly out of form this year, we are also missing a pretty good score involver in Lenny.

[Johnny Member]

Forward line (with the exclusion of Milne) as been horribly out of form this year, we are also missing a pretty good score involver in Lenny.

But we're only 1 goal a match off where we were last year. So maybe that's actually not the issue afterall.

But as I've shown above, we're well off our 'goals against' stat from previous years.

[Johnny Member]

Forward line (with the exclusion of Milne) as been horribly out of form this year, we are also missing a pretty good score involver in Lenny.

Did you think that Gamble played a Roo sort of role on Sunday, and Roo played a more Kosi sort of role?

[Old Mate]

We played our best footy from round 1 - 14 (thereabouts) in 2009. It was manic, Filth like. What is our average goals between that time? I think that will be telling. Maybe we just had a stellar pre season that year and were a step above all other teams then came back to the pack. It seems like we have slowly become less offensive since that period.

[To the top]

We had 2 class ruckmen in 2009.

Plus we are basically relying on players who are now 2 years older and some recruited from other sides.

I subscribe to the theory that you need to improve 20% each year, thru personal improvement or by way of replacement.

We have not achieved the required improvement.

In 2009 the best player awards were littered with St Kilda players - but who appears on those lists now, or on the goal kicking lists?

So even our elite players have dropped off in form (plus the injuries to Hayes and Gardiner), putting more pressure on the remainder and where age and form have caught up with the likes of Blake, Baker, McQualter etc.

We have 14 top 20 Draft picks on our list - and 4 of them have been recruited from other clubs.

So we are on a wing and a prayer in terms of players drafted in the 30's, 40's, 50's, 60's and 70's stepping up to the mark.

[SainterK]

Forward line (with the exclusion of Milne) as been horribly out of form this year, we are also missing a pretty good score involver in Lenny.

Did you think that Gamble played a Roo sort of role on Sunday, and Roo played a more Kosi sort of role?

Roo was deeper, probably more his cousins role?

[desertsaint]

Forward line (with the exclusion of Milne) as been horribly out of form this year, we are also missing a pretty good score involver in Lenny.

But we're only 1 goal a match off where we were last year. So maybe that's actually not the issue afterall.

But as I've shown above, we're well off our 'goals against' stat from previous years.

last year we missed roo up forward for most of the year. played a very defensive game -" not as successful as 2009, but more defensive minded.

[Teflon]

I don't believe we are going to be able to restrict teams to less than 10 goals most weeks, so the answer is - YES - we need to kick more goals to win, which can only happen if we can get the ball in there more and keep it in…

But I guess what these stats tell us is, that it doesn't matter how many goals we kick. If we aren't in the top 2-3 in 'Least Goals Against' we don't have a hope of winning anything anyway!

No what these stats tell us is that Collingwood lead the list for both offense and defence and are miles ahead of any other side.

To suggest "goals for" is less important than goals against based on stats alone is dangerous. We restricted Collingwood in our last meeting to the point where Lyon touts "with 20 mins of footy left we were 18 pts away from them...we were right in the contest...".................what these stats don't demonstrate is that with devastating effect, in 20 minutes of offensive force Collingwood ended the contest and we could not stop that.

I think the game is different in that sides have all mirrored the defensive press - but few have the other "trump card" in offense to be completely lethal. We dont. Pies do.

As I mentioned elsewhere, IMHO we have a coach who is just about the best there is on the defensive side of the game....he has demonstrated he knows how to construct a style based on that. Gor Lyon, I just wonder does and can he adapt to introduce that offensive game style thats needed to compete with the bog boys cause the days of restricting Pies to 11 goals in a pure defensive game plan are over.

Time for focus on offense IMO. I can see us trying but we are not natural at it and movement of the ball fwd quickly a lot of times is still clumsy, littered with poor disposal and bad decisions under pressure.

We cant ignore personnel in all this. To adapt to a balanced offense/defense game style our player mix in style has to change - run/carry WITH footskill and decision making MUST be the requirement over "role players" - time for footballers to be recruited over athletes......I hope Rhys Stanley get going...

[jays]

difference is teams didnt no how to plqy us then

[Johnny Member]

No what these stats tell us is that Collingwood lead the list for both offense and defence and are miles ahead of any other side.

To suggest "goals for" is less important than goals against based on stats alone is dangerous. We restricted Collingwood in our last meeting to the point where Lyon touts "with 20 mins of footy left we were 18 pts away from them...we were right in the contest...".................what these stats don't demonstrate is that with devastating effect, in 20 minutes of offensive force Collingwood ended the contest and we could not stop that.

But does that tell us that our defence has dropped? As per the above stats? Maybe it isn't their offence that was the difference, but infact our slipping defence that's the issue.
Did they blow us away with great offence? Or did we allow them to blow us away with poor defence?

And I guess that's the debate - and I think Lyon might see things as the latter.


But I agree with you.

It's critical to defend. It's the cornerstone of any good side, and certainly the cornerstone of all Premiership teams.

But, you need to be able to score yourself. That's what cost us in two Grand Finals (poor kicking and some rough luck aside) - that inability to find a goal late in the game. To just manufacture one from nowhere. For a player to take the game on, and scrounge a goal when you need it.

Geelong beat us to the punch in 09 in that regard when the game was up for grabs, and Collingwood did it when Cloke goaled seconds after we'd finally hit the front in 2010.

I think the game is different in that sides have all mirrored the defensive press - but few have the other "trump card" in offense to be completely lethal. We dont. Pies do.

Yeah, true.

They've pinched the good part of our game (defence), but kept the good part of their game and bred a freak!

As I mentioned elsewhere, IMHO we have a coach who is just about the best there is on the defensive side of the game....he has demonstrated he knows how to construct a style based on that. Gor Lyon, I just wonder does and can he adapt to introduce that offensive game style thats needed to compete with the bog boys cause the days of restricting Pies to 11 goals in a pure defensive game plan are over.

Time for focus on offense IMO. I can see us trying but we are not natural at it and movement of the ball fwd quickly a lot of times is still clumsy, littered with poor disposal and bad decisions under pressure.

We cant ignore personnel in all this. To adapt to a balanced offense/defense game style our player mix in style has to change - run/carry WITH footskill and decision making MUST be the requirement over "role players" - time for footballers to be recruited over athletes......I hope Rhys Stanley get going...

The thing is, that I don't believe the above stats for Sydney when Lyon was there, and for us since he's been our coach are coincidence. It's clear that far more effort and focus goes into the 'Least Goals Against' stat than 'Most Goals For' (figuratively speaking).

It's almost as if Lyon does read the stats I've listed and interpret them as simply as 'We must be number 1-2 in 'Least Goals Against' and we'll be Ok'.

The bigger problem now is though, that we've recruited along those lines for a few years now. So I'm not sure how we can suddenly change.

And also on top of that, having coached at both Sydney and the Saints with an ultra-defensive mindset and strategy - is Lyon actually capable of coaching unpredictable and efficient offense?


I think the individual dominance and performance of Riewoldt have perhaps masked the fact that we can't score, over the past 2 years.
We may have kidded ourselves that we are actually able to score well, because Roo was up there and in career best form.
We may have confused a balanced game plan that relies on tight defence but also allows to kick goals - with freak individual efforts from a superstar player?


And even further to the discussion, is the slight chage in figures over the past 10 years.
Before 2008, the Grand Finalists weren't the top 2 defensive teams. They are always thereabouts in the 4-5, but since and including 2008 - it's been the top 2 defensive teams that have played off.

This season, we see Sydney at number 2 currently. So unless sydney play in the GF, maybe we've seen the last of the uber-defence strategy?

Maybe we'll start to find that you still need to be top 5-6 in 'Least Goals Against', but it's equally as important to be top 2 in 'Goals For'?


Maybe the game has changed again. And maybe we've missed the boat.

[Johnny Member]

Interestingly, we've 'fixed' the defence over the past month or so, and we're back in town!

[SainterK]

Johnny.

What's so 2009 about 2011, is the evenness of the performances.

Example, look at how many players laid inside 50 tackles on the weekend.

Dal, Joey, Jones, Steven, Polo, McEvoy, Roo, Peake, Gamble, Milne , Dempster....22 overall, and that's just inside 50, imagine if you could get figures for the forward half.

Sure Crows weren't much competition, but perhaps not enough credit is being given to St Kilda as to why?

If I was to be honest, at times last year, it was too easy to find 5 players for the best votes. It would usually would involve Roo, Lenny, Hayes....

This year, like in 2009, it's been hard to vote...and heaps of different guys feature....coaches votes also reflect that apart from Dal who regularly polls, it's been plenty of different guys.

I thought against the Crows, even though we have seen glimpses of each individually through the season, all the following clicked for the first time this year.

Even performance from the 22
4 quarter performance
Sustained forward pressure

Pleasing

[joffaboy]

Offence for the fans.
Defence for the flag.

[InkerSaint]

Yep, the good news is that over the last 5 games we are no. 1 for goals against.

The sobering news is that Collingwood are a very close no. 2 (IInet joke unintentional), and top 3 across every line - goals for and against, inside 50s for and against, tackles for and against.

We're defensively two goals better than Hawthorn and West Coast, three better than Geelong, and four better than Carlton.

As Teflon suggested - the problem is in offence where we are two goals behind Collingwood and Carlton, and three behind Geelong and Hawthorn.

On those numbers, we are, in theory if not reality, a genuine top 4 contender. What that is worth remains to be seen.

[SaintPav]

Offence for the fans.
Defence for the flag.

Not in 2009 and 2010.

[joffaboy]

Offence for the fans.
Defence for the flag.

Not in 2009 and 2010.

if you want a shot you have to be able to defend.