Crap first quarters/slow starts?

[Dry Rot]

Dogs have been shit in the first quarter/slow starters this year.

Why?

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

Good question DR.

Also right after the main break too.

Is it nerves? Is it not being mentally switched on?
I can't fathom it but to say we need to work on it is a massive understatement.

[LostDoggy]

We have also coneeded alot of goals in "Dead Time" too.

[LostDoggy]

Dogs have been shit in the first quarter/slow starters this year.

Why?

Too much emphasis on 'being the best fourth quarter team'. We showed tonight that we can play out four quarters, but if we started better we would have beaten the Cats tonight. It's a mental thing definitely -- it's like the guys need the game to get interesting before they really throw themselves about.

The Cats just throw themselves at every ball from first minute to last. If we did the same we would be as good, if not better. Too much talent, not enough application -- some of the stuff we do AFTER we get the ball into space is just as bad: Josh Hill's kick to no one (I think it was a shot on goal) when he was ten metres in the clear in the forward 50 that didn't even make the boundary and went up the other end for a Cats goal, just rubbish. If we played like we really wanted to be the best in the comp we would destroy teams.

[The Coon Dog]

It was the three weak goals the umpires kicked for Geelong in the first quarter and nothing else.
That did hurt, didn't it?

[LostDoggy]

That did hurt, didn't it?

And the mark paid to Gamble (the one where he hurt himself).. I thought you had to actually catch the damn thing to be paid a mark.

I know Aker got one as well in the third, but the ump was unsighted there.

I think the umps start with a mindset that Geelong are guns and are just too keen to reward their efforts.

[Dry Rot]

Swans on fire in the first quarter today.

7 goals to zip.

[Bulldog Revolution]

DR - astute observation

We have not hit the ground running in many of our games this year, perhaps aside from the Freo demolition

[angelopetraglia]

Bulldogs have won only two first quarters this year ... worst record in the league alongside Bombers.

Cats and Saints have both won 8 out of 9 first quarters, really stamping their authority on the game early.

We have won 6 out of 9 last quarters (equal 2nd best record with Cats and Saints). Bombers have the best last quarter record in the league with 7 out of 9.

No idea why we are starting so slow, but it is difficult when you are always playing catch up football.

It is something we do need to turn around if want to string multiple games together.

[Sedat]

Swans on fire in the first quarter today.

7 goals to zip.
They kicked the first 4 goals against us in Canberra late last year as well - I think they also got the jump on us earlier in the season at the SCG.

They are still a very capable team of experienced and tough campaigners (physically and mentally), and if we are even a fraction off the boil, it's going to be a very tough day at the office on Saturday.

[Rocket Science]

I'm reminded of our habitual slow starts from a couple of years back, a trait we rectified last season.

In 2006 we won 10 of 24 first terms (factors in two finals).

In 2007 we won just 6 of 22 first terms and the problem became more chronic. We know how that one ended.

Then in 2008, we won 16 of 22 first terms. Interestingly, both the Swans and Saints outscored us in opening quarters on two occasions each last season, while the Bomber & Kangas did so once each late in the year. We were also outscored in opening terms in all three finals played last year, but not drastically (8.7 to 11.12.)

As Signor Petraglia suggests, in 2009 we've won just 2 of 9 first quarters, against Freo and North in the opening two rounds of the season...however through our next seven games we've been convincingly outscored in opening terms to the tune of 13.27 to 30.27, with a resultant 3-4 record.

That the likes of Richmond, Melbourne and West Coast have jumped us early this season suggests interesting things about our attitude and mental readiness for games versus lower-quality opponents. That's an aspect of professionalism that simply needs to improve if we're serious about being an upper tier outfit.

While it's heartening to see us demonstrate some pluck to resurrect games from behind as required, it's certainly not a trait/pattern we want to be relying on, on a regular basis, and we're all freshly aware of the likely consequences of surrendering early leads to quality opposition. You might be able to reel the shit teams back in, but the good ones will make you pay.

FWIW, we've won 4 of 9 third terms this year, being outscored in the 'premiership' quarter by the Dockers, Eagles, Blues, Saints and Cats.

[LostDoggy]

Not to be desrespectful to the great man but is this any of Rockets making? He seems to struggle with the initial match ups and after qtr time the tactician is ready to execute his master plan...

We do seem to be a bit reactive this year.

[hujsh]

FWIW, we've won 4 of 9 third terms this year, being outscored in the 'premiership' quarter by the Dockers, Eagles, Blues, Saints and Cats.

So all the games we've lost bar the Freo one where they had an advantage with the wind.

[Dry Rot]

Bump to celebrate our fantastic first quarter tonight.....

[The Coon Dog]

Bump to celebrate our fantastic first quarter tonight.....

I thought we over committed going forward in the first quarter tonight & got hit with a sucker punch or 5 on the rebound.

You didn't think to bump this thread last week?

[Dry Rot]

I thought we over committed going forward in the first quarter tonight & got hit with a sucker punch or 5 on the rebound.

You didn't think to bump this thread last week?

Wasn't last week the only one really good first quarter performance this year?

Sadly not typical.

[The Coon Dog]

Just checked the stats:

Won 1st qtrs - 5
Lost 1st qtrs - 9
Drawn 1st qtrs - 1

Total scored in 1st qtrs - 53 goals, 51 behinds = 369 points
Total conceded in 1st qtrs - 53 goals, 49 behinds = 367 points.

You can take first quarters in isolation & it tells you 1/4 of what you really need to know.

Its as useful a stat as how we have gone in 2nd qtrs, 3rd qtrs or 4th qtrs in isolation.

[bulldogtragic]

Just checked the stats:

Won 1st qtrs - 5
Lost 1st qtrs - 9
Drawn 1st qtrs - 1

Total scored in 1st qtrs - 53 goals, 51 behinds = 369 points
Total conceded in 1st qtrs - 53 goals, 49 behinds = 367 points.

You can take first quarters in isolation & it tells you 1/4 of what you really need to know.

Its as useful a stat as how we have gone in 2nd qtrs, 3rd qtrs or 4th qtrs in isolation.
How many posters?

[Hot_Doggies]

I think it's got more to do with good oposition applying lots of pressure early on.

[GVGjr]

I think it's got more to do with good oposition applying lots of pressure early on.

I believe that Malthouse had the wood on us early on and it took a while for us to adjust.

[bulldogtragic]

I believe that Malthouse had the wood on us early on and it took a while for us to adjust.
Yeah, Matty Boyd was back pocket for a few minutes there....