Heavy scoring myth

[Sedat]

Have noted with interest the media obsession with heavy scoring in the first 4 rounds of 2016. Our game style last year seems to mirror what the rest of the competition is doing in 2016, but we appear to have changed tack completely with our intense effort on defence in 2016 - we are conceding almost half the scores that the ladder leader has done so far, which is a staggering stat.

Are we ahead of the curve with our emphasis on clamping down on the opposition in 2016, or are we doing it by necessity because we are so down in forward personnel and goal scoring power so far this year? The game against Norf in 2 weeks will answer plenty I suspect.

[Bornadog]

Re: Heavy scoring myth

I think it is more the case we are missing Dickson (50 goals last yr) and Crameri (32). plus Stringer (56) hasn't kicked enough.

Last week against the Hawks at half time our disposal efficiency in the forward line was 18% compared to the Hawks more than 50%.

We are just not capitalising on the number of forward entries. I can't find the stats for inside 50, but we must be right near the top of all teams.

Edit: We are 6th for inside 50 but 10th in goals kicked.

[1eyedog]

Re: Heavy scoring myth

Its almost as if Bevo knew that teams would follow our lead from last year and he has turned it on its head to counter this by working out ways to limit teams (who are looking to score big), score against us. I don't mind if we don't score heavily, as long as the opposition scores less.

If he did this he's a genius.

We seem to have a three phase game at the moment. One which can go toe to toe with inside work with the best of them (the foundation of which must stem from Macca), a fast, free flowing style that scores quickly, and a lock down, highly defensive strategy that makes us extremely hard to score against.

What we need to get right is when to flick which button but it's not just our players who are highly versatile now it's the game plan as well. It can adjusted not just to suit the opposition but to suit the tempo of the game, although at this resolution it does seem to still be a work in progress.

[Mantis]

Re: Heavy scoring myth

I think it is more the case we are missing Dickson (50 goals last yr) and Crameri (32). plus Stringer (56) hasn't kicked enough.

Last week against the Hawks at half time our disposal efficiency in the forward line was 18% compared to the Hawks more than 50%.

We are just not capitalising on the number of forward entries. I can't find the stats for inside 50, but we must be right near the top of all teams.

Edit: We are 6th for inside 50 but 10th in goals kicked.

Sydney are 1st on 269... We are 9th on 216.

[Bornadog]

Re: Heavy scoring myth

Sydney are 1st on 269... We are 9th on 216.

I took the stats from this site. Perhaps they are not up to date.

[Mantis]

Re: Heavy scoring myth

I took the stats from this site. Perhaps they are not up to date.

They show us to be 9th.

[Bornadog]

Re: Heavy scoring myth

They show us to be 9th.

ok, my mistake.

[comrade]

Re: Heavy scoring myth

Perhaps Bevo looked at how our run at all costs game plan fell down in the final against Adelaide (just) and made adjustments to suit playing on wider grounds, including the slower, switching we do constantly.

Seriously, watch other teams. Only Hawthorn switch like we do. We're also very good at moving out zone across the field when the opposition does switch.

This is easily the best defense I've seen from a Bulldogs team and one that should hold up in September. The only thing I'm worried about is our high ball defending with Adams as our main key back. Interesting that Bevo chucked Roughy down there on the weekend, where he is much better suited to defending the high ball compared to on the lead. Had we done that against the Hawks, maybe we would have killed a few of those contests where their rucks marked instead.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Re: Heavy scoring myth

The 2 things concerning with our defense:

1: Lack of height: both Hawthorn and Carlton outmarked us with height on a few occasions - particularly the hawks
2: Getting caught out the back: A few times we have been caught too far up the field - as what happened in the EF against Adelaide and the losing goal against Hawks last week. I'm not sure why this happens but i've seen it a few times a game where our defenders have pushed up the ground, turnover occurs and we are left 2 or even 3 on 1 and chasing our tails.

[Bornadog]

Re: Heavy scoring myth

The 2 things concerning with our defense:

1: Lack of height: both Hawthorn and Carlton outmarked us with height on a few occasions - particularly the hawks
2: Getting caught out the back: A few times we have been caught too far up the field - as what happened in the EF against Adelaide and the losing goal against Hawks last week. I'm not sure why this happens but i've seen it a few times a game where our defenders have pushed up the ground, turnover occurs and we are left 2 or even 3 on 1 and chasing our tails.

1. My only concern with Adams is lack of height, but so far he is doing well. Hamling is good at leaping and punching the ball, so should stay in the team.

2. On getting caught out the back, Bevo puts the blame on the mids not defending, rather than the defenders pushing forward.

[Ghost Dog]

Re: Heavy scoring myth

The media tries to read the tea leaves, and say what's fashionable, but I reckon we can play a variety of styles at any given situation. That's what great teams need to be able to do. Adcock, Picken, Stevens, Bont, Wood, Suckling - could play all of them and more anywhere on the ground bar ruck. Our midfield has become very defensive minded, so we are getting more opportunities from turnovers. Great pressure team.

Despite being gutted at JJ doing his hammy, applaud his effort of simply trying to kick long over their defence. It's great if we can do that now and then, eg: Suckling and take some pressure off our high forwards

[stefoid]

Re: Heavy scoring myth

I dont think its new, we are just continuing to get better at the same plan bev had all along. Last season was very patchy in the regard.

Someone on BF noted that the ability to play on quickly and run and kick the ball out of the oppositions zone also helps _our_ defence because we dont find ourselves trapped in the oppositions forward half so much. Very difficult for the opposition to kick a goal when the ball is in our forward half.

Ross Lyon noted this in his press conference after we played freo that despite our 'famous' rebound we didnt actually score on the rebound very much against freo, but we scored a lot from getting the ball inside 50 and keeping it there and eventually scoring.

I was initially a bit 'meh' on recruiting suckling but if he is now playing back to cover JJ and murph, he becomes very important to this basic plan to get the ball into our F50 first and worry about scoring later, because he obviously has the ability to kick over or through the opposition zone despite not being a run and carry player.

Probably the difference between the hawks and us right now is their well oiled-machine can score on the rebound more than our helter-skelter, finding new ways to stuff up, F50 entries. But what we lack in composure in our forward half we make up with youthful defensive energy and some dynamite inside mids.

[Bornadog]

Re: Heavy scoring myth

Ross Lyon noted this in his press conference after we played freo that despite our 'famous' rebound we didnt actually score on the rebound very much against freo, but we scored a lot from getting the ball inside 50 and keeping it there and eventually scoring.
.

We are currently sitting on 17th in rebound 50s

[soupman]

Re: Heavy scoring myth

Perhaps Bevo looked at how our run at all costs game plan fell down in the final against Adelaide (just) and made adjustments to suit playing on wider grounds, including the slower, switching we do constantly.

Seriously, watch other teams. Only Hawthorn switch like we do. We're also very good at moving out zone across the field when the opposition does switch.

This is easily the best defense I've seen from a Bulldogs team and one that should hold up in September. The only thing I'm worried about is our high ball defending with Adams as our main key back. Interesting that Bevo chucked Roughy down there on the weekend, where he is much better suited to defending the high ball compared to on the lead. Had we done that against the Hawks, maybe we would have killed a few of those contests where their rucks marked instead.

This is actually the most impressive part of our defence for mine.

We cover the switch option so well that by halfway through games teams are not even trying to move the ball quickly out of defence because they haven't been able to do so to that point in the match. They'll look up the wing and see we outnumber them, go to switch and by the time the second kick lands on the other flank we have them all covered again.

[Mantis]

Re: Heavy scoring myth

Despite being gutted at JJ doing his hammy, applaud his effort of simply trying to kick long over their defence. It's great if we can do that now and then, eg: Suckling and take some pressure off our high forwards

But in doing so he is out for 3-4 months.. In hindsight would it have been a better option to not kick over the oppositions defence?