SA Footy

looking at results from the weekend it is evident that kicking for goal is a major problem for even the elite level of football.

so far we've seen scores this year like;

4-17 - 41 R3, Collingwood (23.53% accuracy)
5-11 - 41 R3, Adelaide (31.25%)
7-15 - 57 R3, Melbourne (31.82%)
7-14 - 56 R3, Richmond (33.33%)
9-15 - 69 R2, Essendon (37.5%)
8-13 - 61 R1, Melbourne (38.1%)

granted there are rushed behinds but they should really be doing better than this...

in the field of play a player can pick out a teammate from 40-50m (some more) without their teammate moving at all, but put them in front of the big sticks where there's a 6.4m width to aim for and they struggle...

St Kilda, Fremantle, Sydney, Nth Melb have scored more goals than points in each of their games this season

2 of those sides are undefeated and Sydney's only loss came at the hands of the Saints because they kicked straighter!
(North kicked straight, but 9 scoring shots is pretty poor!!!)

so far there have been 24 scores which posted above 50% accuracy for the match (out of 48 scores for the year) and that doesn't take into account any shots on goals which ended up out on the full either!

so why hasn't it progressed?

why haven't coaches cottoned on to the fact that if they kicked straighter they would win more matches?!?


i think this is partly to do with the fact that AFL players are now athletes before they are footballers. key position players are fading away. it's been discussed before. there are hardly any 'out of the square FF's anymore' like the Tony Locketts, Jason Dunstalls etc. these days more emphasis is put into their fitness, which is obviously important, but it detracts from their specific role. even our specialist forwards of today are terrible! maybe they should be kicking goals for two nights a week and that's it...

i dunno what the answer is but the decline in accuracy in front of goals has gotten worse and worse. AFL clubs need to do something about it. And those that do, going by the obvious trend, will win more games because of it.

end rant!

maybe this needs to be movedto the AFL thread. i didn't realise it was in the crows section.

mods, move away...

nuggety goodness wrote:granted there are rushed behinds but they should really be doing better than this...

Should be less rushed behinds these days (and last year) given the new rule in relation to it.

BTW I agree, for such elite professionals, a stadium without enclosed roof, yes the conversion rate should probably be better.

I think it has a lot to do with the fact that players are running harder and are more physically spent when they are lining up on goal.
Obviously this is no excuse in the first 5 minutes of a match but as the game goes on you see blokes kicking for goal in a very tired manner - e.g. Matthew Pavlich in the last quarter against Geelong on Sunday.

Forwards in particular are expected to chase, tackle and work up the ground. But if you go back 20-30 years (when many people consider that goal-kicking accuracy was better) forwards would generally stay near the goals and just lead, mark and kick. Also midfielders and ruckmen would go to the forward line to have a rest.

all players are expected to get up and down the field now so everyone is f&*ked by the time they need to take a set shot...and the AFL decide to reduce the time taken to have a shot so that did not help.

I think it is as simple as the player being too spent by the time they stop to have a set shot after covering the whole ground.

Would people say that set shot goal kicking is worse than 'on the run'/snaps?

I have a method (when practiced) that takes most of the guess work out of set shot goalkicking, and anyone can achieve greater results with it.

It's around momentum (similar to what you do with 'on the run'/snaps), and running in a straight line to the goals but not focusing on the goals themselves.

Happy to share the idea with teams of Amateur status in the local area if they are interested.

Good posts ng and gadj.
Does anyone have the figures on how many set-shots compared to snaps now and 20 or 30 years ago?
With the stadiums, you would think there would less wind influence than at the old suburban grounds.
Whilst the Abletts, Dunstalls, Locketts etc were all specialised goal kickers, I would guess there were more goals kicked by the flankers and pockets back then due to the higher scoring and less defensive play, eg Leigh Matthews, Malaxos in WAFL, Roger Woodcock .

MW wrote:all players are expected to get up and down the field now so everyone is f&*ked by the time they need to take a set shot...a

Probably the reason. Maybe a club should look at the tactic of letting their star full forward/centre half forward do nothing but lead, mark, shoot.

Then u become predictable...

MW wrote:Then u become predictable...

talking about predictability... look at Carlton with Fev. he was THE option to go to and every side knew it. his goal tally was as follows;

2009 - 86 (won the Coleman)
2008 - 99 (r/up)
2007 - 59 (7th)
2006 - 84 (winner)

predictable, yes. he was very hard to stop still and if players get more shots at goal and are more accurate then their team is going to be in a better position to win the game...

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/ ... fault.aspx

some of the same ideas on this topic from one of the greats...

he kicked 105 from 141 kicks at goal... that's almost 75% accuracy...

in 2008 as an example.
Lloyd kicked 62 from 76 shots (81.5%)
Fev kicked 99 from 150 (66%)
Buddy kick 113 from 201 shots (56.21%)

imagine if Buddy or Fev could put through 4 out of 5 of their shots!!! that would make a major difference to their teams and could turn close losses into close wins...

so much more could be done about kicking for goal!!!

I reckon it is because a huge percentage of kicks now only go 20 to 30 metres in general play...So when they go to kick the ball 50 meteres it is probably the first time for the day. In the pre possesion game most kicks were long and to position and crumbers front and centre, most players were kicking long most of the time.
Before Graham from Geelong went to the USA he rarely unleashed the big bomb...just a 20 metre kick to the pocket.

Oh for the days of a big screwy to the centre, 6 blokes up for a hanger, the ball drops to shearman and he hits Mulvihill on the tit with a stab pass

Adelaide Crows 6-19... 24% accuracy...

more scoring shots but accuracy killed them!

2nd week in a row they have been terrible in front of goals!!!

edit: and after listening on the radio Burton missed two chances early... nothin to do with being tired, just bad skills!!!

Shouldn't the thread be renamed "one of the many areas our game has not progressed"?

Analysis breeds paralysis.
How many of you, when playing kick-to-kick with your mates, take soooooooo long to kick the effing ball?
I bet most of the time you hit your mate on the chest (or at least a metre each side)
but if you put two big white posts in front of you and have to kick it in between them ( a much larger target than your mate), then I know your accuracy % will dip sharply.
Simply, all players take too long to kick for goal.
Just go back, pick a target between the posts, then aim at it.
But this is, obviously, easier said than done.

Mr66 wrote:Analysis breeds paralysis.
How many of you, when playing kick-to-kick with your mates, take soooooooo long to kick the effing ball?
I bet most of the time you hit your mate on the chest (or at least a metre each side)
but if you put two big white posts in front of you and have to kick it in between them ( a much larger target than your mate), then I know your accuracy % will dip sharply.

Yep, because you're not aiming "at" anything.

Take that aspect away and magically your goalkicking % increases.