Swans last for inside 50's

[Thunder Shaker]

There's an article in the Daily Telegraph that says the Swans are ranked 16th (last) for inside 50's.

http://dailytelegraph.news.com.au/st...toryid=1873327

The speculation in that article is that the Swans are unlikely to win the premiership because we don't get the ball inside 50 often enough.

What are your thoughts on this?

[ScottH]

Another meaningless stat.

What would be more important is how many Inside 50's result in scores as a percentage of the Inside 50's.

How many times does our defence run the ball out of the D50??? That means the other team gets the ball in there but does nothing with it, so the Inside 50's is irrelevant unless you can score from those opportunities.

[no1swan]

Originally posted by ScottH
Another meaningless stat.

What would be more important is how many Inside 50's result in scores as a percentage of the Inside 50's.

How many times does our defence run the ball out of the D50??? That means the other team gets the ball in there but does nothing with it, so the Inside 50's is irrelevant unless you can score from those opportunities.

Exactly right..

How many goals have we kicked from outside 50? These are obviously not counted in the inside 50 stat.

[Cheer Cheer]

Originally posted by ScottH
Another meaningless stat.

What would be more important is how many Inside 50's result in scores as a percentage of the Inside 50's.

How many times does our defence run the ball out of the D50??? That means the other team gets the ball in there but does nothing with it, so the Inside 50's is irrelevant unless you can score from those opportunities.

I believe we are ranked 6th in the league for getting into inside 50 and scoring, so in terms of that percentage you are talking about, still we are about middle road.

It's not as meaningless to shrug off as you might think.

No matter how good we are in converting our chances when it gets in there, the more the better inside 50's - as it would mean more goals!

Just more evidence we need an A grade midfielder.

[sharpie]

Originally posted by Cheer Cheer
I believe we are ranked 6th in the league for getting into inside 50 and scoring, so in terms of that percentage you are talking about, still we are about middle road.

It's not as meaningless to shrug off as you might think.

No matter how good we are in converting our chances when it gets in there, the more the better inside 50's - as it would mean more goals!

Just more evidence we need an A grade midfielder.

exactly. the efficiency of our forwards is not affected by the number of I50s we get, i.e. they would be as effective as they are now, no matter how many more I50s we get. It is lucky that our forwards are so efficient, otherwise we would very rarely kick a winning score with the low I50s we have.

[Cheer Cheer]

Originally posted by sharpie
exactly. the efficiency of our forwards is not affected by the number of I50s we get, i.e. they would be as effective as they are now, no matter how many more I50s we get. It is lucky that our forwards are so efficient, otherwise we would very rarely kick a winning score with the low I50s we have.

I dare to dream of a quality midfield of the likes of Brisbane and Co feeding our forward line...I reckon we would see the swans kicking scores consistently in the 200's like 1986/1987!

[NMWBloods]

I included that stat in my finals preview article.

Here are some stats for the Swans:

Shots at goal - 14th (503), ave 557

Goals - 9th (287), ave 299

Conversion - 5th (57%), ave 54%

I50s - 16th (44), ave 49

I50s/goal - 5th (3.4), ave 3.7

Shots/I50 - 8th (52%), ave 52%

Disposals/I50 - 15th (6.5), ave 6.1

Disposals/goal - 7th (22), ave 22

Marks I50 as % of total I50s - 2nd (30%), ave 26%


Essentially that shows we don't go inside 50 that often and we spend a lot of time possessing the ball in defence and midfield setting up our attacks. However, this is obviously quite effective. Our high conversion reflects that, as does our high marks I50 as % of total I50 entries. It means our goal scoring is middle of the competition despite our limited number of entries.

So, our offensive play is reasonably effective, but could be better. With a better midfield we could get the ball inside 50 more often and kick more goals.

[midaro]

I've siad it before: we have the worst midfield in the league.

Honestly, I fully expect about 70% of Saturday night's game to be played in WC's forward half. That dosen't mean we're going to lose, however, because I expect that there'll be at least 26 players in that half for the entire game.

Here's a question for you: How many times will the channel 10 commentators point out that "there's now not a single player in Sydney's forward half". My guess is about half a dozen times, starting at about the 5 minute mark of the first quarter.

Love it or loathe it, you can't kid yourself that we don't flood, and that we don't do it because of our midfield.

[Snowy]

If the efficiency of the forward line falls off trouble is on the horizon, logic tells you that the more times you go in the more likely you are to be productive. It is symptomatic of the midfield woes. Until a couple of excellent players move into the middle the chances of winning a flag are greatly reduced. Well down to the forwards for being so effective.

[NMWBloods]

If the efficiency of the forward line drops off we are screwed basically!

[Thunder Shaker]

Originally posted by no1swan
How many goals have we kicked from outside 50? These are obviously not counted in the inside 50 stat.

I disagree - you can't get the ball through the goals in a manner conforming to the rules of the game without it crossing into F50 airspace at some point. There may be no possession inside F50 but that's not important, it's where the ball is that matters.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by no1swan
How many goals have we kicked from outside 50? These are obviously not counted in the inside 50 stat.

Yes they are.

[Rob-bloods]

Last year I think we had close to the best conversion inside 50s / goals, last time I looked, earlier this year we had less entries and also a poorer conversion!

I think we have gradually improved, but that remains a concern in finals.

[Ajn]

Our rebound from defensive 50 is the best in the league and is the reason why we often have move inside 50's against us, yet convert so much better than most

[chammond]

What I don't understand is, with such appalling stats, how do the Swans ever win a game?

There must be some stat(s) missing?

Surely, we must be doing something right?