On SEN a few weeks ago, a caller mentioned a stat that I haven't heard of before that I'm not sure is true. Something along the lines of its been 5 or so years since we won after being more than 25 or 30 points down, at any stage of the game.
Does anyone know the true stat or is this all bull. If true, it says a lot about determination when down and front-running.
It certainly seems this year and last that when we lose, its usually (not always) by big margins.
Statistic about Saints losing games when coming from behind
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
Saints in 20??
- Club Player
- Posts: 99
- Joined: Wed 11 Jun 2008 10:39am
Not so much that we lose by big margins, but we generally dont come back when headed..
We were a few goals down v Adelaide at TD last year at one point..not sure of the exact margin
Its a relvevant stat though. More than ever, sides (cept us it appears) are reeling in big margins. An 8 goal lead at half time used to see you home safe. Not any more.
We were a few goals down v Adelaide at TD last year at one point..not sure of the exact margin
Its a relvevant stat though. More than ever, sides (cept us it appears) are reeling in big margins. An 8 goal lead at half time used to see you home safe. Not any more.
THE BUBBLE HAS BURST
2011 player sponsor
-
The_Dud
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13679
- Joined: Sun 27 May 2007 9:53pm
- Location: Bendigo
- Has thanked: 1312 times
- Been thanked: 2036 times
-
meher baba
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 7150
- Joined: Mon 14 Aug 2006 6:49am
- Location: Tasmania
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 488 times
It all makes sense. We have been racked by injuries for the past 5 seasons, so we have often lacked the fitness to come back. I think you would find that a lot of our larger defeats have come when we have lost one or more key player to injury during the first half of the game.
A further issue is our playing style.
Under GT, we tried consistently to outscore our opponents from the bounce of the ball to the final siren. It was only in 2006 that GT ever tried to shut things down for a while when we got significantly behind: which is surely the launching pad for any sort of a comeback.
Under RL, we are trying to lock down our opponents and create low scoring arm wrestles. Under this approach, a comeback is going to represent at most 2 or 3 goals in a row. So, as with GT (but for different reasons), we are hardly likely to be the comeback kings under RL.
However, that said, how far behind Carlton were we earlier this year? It must have been close to 25 points at one point?
A further issue is our playing style.
Under GT, we tried consistently to outscore our opponents from the bounce of the ball to the final siren. It was only in 2006 that GT ever tried to shut things down for a while when we got significantly behind: which is surely the launching pad for any sort of a comeback.
Under RL, we are trying to lock down our opponents and create low scoring arm wrestles. Under this approach, a comeback is going to represent at most 2 or 3 goals in a row. So, as with GT (but for different reasons), we are hardly likely to be the comeback kings under RL.
However, that said, how far behind Carlton were we earlier this year? It must have been close to 25 points at one point?
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."
- Jonathan Swift
- Jonathan Swift
-
Saints in 20??
- Club Player
- Posts: 99
- Joined: Wed 11 Jun 2008 10:39am
stats
so can any1 give me the exact stat?
I can think of quite a few times when we have been ahead by over 25 points + and lost ( thinking first game vs bulldogs and shivering) in the last year or two. (also recalling last game against richmond last year when you cant convince me the tigers tried to win and tanked so we ultimately won)
I rememember the most amazing thing during the 1997 season was that although we lost a few games, we weren't massacred. Even when we have been at our peak the last few years we have still been smashed such as the 1st final agst brisbane in brisbane.
I can think of quite a few times when we have been ahead by over 25 points + and lost ( thinking first game vs bulldogs and shivering) in the last year or two. (also recalling last game against richmond last year when you cant convince me the tigers tried to win and tanked so we ultimately won)
I rememember the most amazing thing during the 1997 season was that although we lost a few games, we weren't massacred. Even when we have been at our peak the last few years we have still been smashed such as the 1st final agst brisbane in brisbane.
-
saintspremiers
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 25303
- Joined: Tue 01 Feb 2005 4:25pm
- Location: Trump Tower
- Has thanked: 142 times
- Been thanked: 284 times
Dear Lackey Baba,GT-doll-worshipping-lackey-baba wrote:It all makes sense. We have been racked by injuries for the past 5 seasons, so we have often lacked the fitness to come back. I think you would find that a lot of our larger defeats have come when we have lost one or more key player to injury during the first half of the game.
A further issue is our playing style.
Under GT, we tried consistently to outscore our opponents from the bounce of the ball to the final siren. It was only in 2006 that GT ever tried to shut things down for a while when we got significantly behind: which is surely the launching pad for any sort of a comeback.
Under RL, we are trying to lock down our opponents and create low scoring arm wrestles. Under this approach, a comeback is going to represent at most 2 or 3 goals in a row. So, as with GT (but for different reasons), we are hardly likely to be the comeback kings under RL.
However, that said, how far behind Carlton were we earlier this year? It must have been close to 25 points at one point?
We did actually lose a few games in 2004 and 2005 as well as plenty in 06, and it seems even in our psuedo glory years we didn't manage decent comeback wins even when we had "premiership team" on the park.
So perhaps GT was a great front-runner coach when we were flying, but couldn't buck the trend when the chips were down?
Certainly RL hasn't made any progress either.
Perhaps this is one of those cultural St Kilda problems that no coach has been able to eradicate as yet???
Last edited by saintspremiers on Wed 25 Jun 2008 2:43pm, edited 2 times in total.
i am Melbourne Skies - sometimes Blue Skies, Grey Skies, even Partly Cloudy Skies.
-
degruch
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8948
- Joined: Mon 19 May 2008 4:29pm
- Location: Croydonia
- Has thanked: 146 times
- Been thanked: 237 times
I've heard of that stat too, but haven't got any examples. Sounds a bit of a flabby stat though...e.g. I'm sure Geelong could be accused of the same thing over the last couple of seasons, because they've been winning. So, what does it mean? We play tight games, we get thumped every week, we win every week, we're only good for 24 point comebacks? I don't think you can read much into it...unless you want to.
-
meher baba
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 7150
- Joined: Mon 14 Aug 2006 6:49am
- Location: Tasmania
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 488 times
WTF!!saintspremiers wrote:Dear GT Lackie,meher baba wrote:It all makes sense. We have been racked by injuries for the past 5 seasons, so we have often lacked the fitness to come back. I think you would find that a lot of our larger defeats have come when we have lost one or more key player to injury during the first half of the game.
A further issue is our playing style.
Under GT, we tried consistently to outscore our opponents from the bounce of the ball to the final siren. It was only in 2006 that GT ever tried to shut things down for a while when we got significantly behind: which is surely the launching pad for any sort of a comeback.
Under RL, we are trying to lock down our opponents and create low scoring arm wrestles. Under this approach, a comeback is going to represent at most 2 or 3 goals in a row. So, as with GT (but for different reasons), we are hardly likely to be the comeback kings under RL.
However, that said, how far behind Carlton were we earlier this year? It must have been close to 25 points at one point?
We did actually lose a few games in 2004 and 2005 as well as plenty in 06, and it seems even in our psuedo glory years we didn't manage decent comeback wins even when we had "premiership team" on the park.
So perhaps GT was a great front-runner coach when we were flying, but couldn't buck the trend when the chips were down?
Certainly RL hasn't made any progress either.
Perhaps this is one of those cultural St Kilda problems that no coach has been able to eradicate as yet???
Where in my post did I suggest that we didn't lose plenty of games in 2004-06? I thought we were talking about comeback wins, not about our losses.
It's "lackey" BTW. (Lackey Baba to you, if you please.)
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."
- Jonathan Swift
- Jonathan Swift
-
Winmar7Fan
- Club Player
- Posts: 756
- Joined: Thu 08 May 2008 5:31pm
- Location: Gold Coast
-
HarveysDeciple
-
Saints in 20??
- Club Player
- Posts: 99
- Joined: Wed 11 Jun 2008 10:39am
-
vacuous space
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3465
- Joined: Fri 29 Oct 2004 1:01pm
- Has thanked: 91 times
- Been thanked: 162 times
-
Mr Magic
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12737
- Joined: Fri 04 May 2007 9:38am
- Has thanked: 753 times
- Been thanked: 407 times
The relevance is that we have won games in the last 5 yearts or so when we have been behind by 24 points or less druing the game but not when we have been 25 points or more behind. (BUT i'm not certain that the 'number of 25 points' is factually correct as I'm only going on my memory)rodgerfox wrote:Why 25 points?
What's the relevance of that number?
Whether we have been 25 points or more behind in the first, second, third or last qtr is immaterial - the stat is that once we reach that level (25 points behind) we have not been able to win that particular game.