Over the last couple of years, I've constantly bemoaned our frustrating delivery to difficult targets inside 50, wondering why the players, and the coach, seem to continually invest in this plan.
My understanding is that Dimma likes the 'percentage option'. He's interested in probabilities, to the extent that he wants to manoeuvre the ball in such a way, that we are a low percentage chance of being scored against. Even when in attack. I believe that he backs this logic up with the idea that a short kick from inside fifty, even on an angle, is a better chance than a bomb from outside fifty.
That's the idea that I want the coaching staff to really think about. Are you a better chance of scoring from a shot inside fifty than out? Probably. Are you a better chance to score by taking that option? Probably not. At least not by what I understand of probability.
Let's say Griff or Deledio mark the ball 55 out. For whatever reason, they seem to be instructed to look inside for a forward option in a better position.
So, in terms of probability, there's a couple of situations here.
1. Griff takes the shot.
2. Griff passes to someone (maybe Cotchin), who then takes the shot.
My issue, is that the second option requires 2 successful disposals. The first only requires one.
Let's say Griff is a 50% chance of nailing the goal from 55. Let's say Cotchin is a 60% chance of kicking the goal, because he's in a slightly better position. Football logic says, give it to the guy with the higher percentage chance of kicking the goal.
But I would suggest that this leads to a lower overall chance of getting a goal. Let's say the Cotchin gets on the move, and Griff tries to hit him on the chest. Let's say he's a 75% chance of completing this pass.
In situation 1, Griff is a 50% chance of scoring. In situation 2 he's a 75% chance of hitting his Cotchin, who is then a 60% chance of kicking a goal - leading to an overall possibility for scoring of 45%.
Yes, Griff's pass to the Cotchin is a higher percentage pass than the shot. Yes, Cotchin is a higher percentage chance of scoring from that position. But overall, we are less likely to score.
Now these percentages are made up and a bit random. But the logic is, trying to hit up multiple options, even if they're good ones, is often going to lead to a lower chance of scoring.
Obviously, if it was Morris lining up from 55, who would be a 0% chance of scoring, then, you need to pass it off. But in the situation where a player is 50/50 to snag one from distance they should be having a ping. It's extremely unlikely they're going to increase our chance of scoring by trying to hit up a target. Obviously, the more congested the forward line is, the less likely that initial pass is. And our forward line is always congested.
So no, I don't think this is pointing out anything of massive importance about our gameplan, but as Hardwick is such a stats man, I'd like to see the directive given to every player that if you're within range HAVE A CRACK.
It's why I didn't really mind Vickery marking that ball and immediately taking responsibility for making the kick. I reckon he'll nail that shot 9 times out of ten, and probably be able to hit Grigg running into goal about 9 times out of ten. Grigg is probably going to then kick that goal 98 times out of a hundred, but put the two together, and it's still less likely than Vickery just having the shot.
My understanding is that Dimma likes the 'percentage option'. He's interested in probabilities, to the extent that he wants to manoeuvre the ball in such a way, that we are a low percentage chance of being scored against. Even when in attack. I believe that he backs this logic up with the idea that a short kick from inside fifty, even on an angle, is a better chance than a bomb from outside fifty.
That's the idea that I want the coaching staff to really think about. Are you a better chance of scoring from a shot inside fifty than out? Probably. Are you a better chance to score by taking that option? Probably not. At least not by what I understand of probability.
Let's say Griff or Deledio mark the ball 55 out. For whatever reason, they seem to be instructed to look inside for a forward option in a better position.
So, in terms of probability, there's a couple of situations here.
1. Griff takes the shot.
2. Griff passes to someone (maybe Cotchin), who then takes the shot.
My issue, is that the second option requires 2 successful disposals. The first only requires one.
Let's say Griff is a 50% chance of nailing the goal from 55. Let's say Cotchin is a 60% chance of kicking the goal, because he's in a slightly better position. Football logic says, give it to the guy with the higher percentage chance of kicking the goal.
But I would suggest that this leads to a lower overall chance of getting a goal. Let's say the Cotchin gets on the move, and Griff tries to hit him on the chest. Let's say he's a 75% chance of completing this pass.
In situation 1, Griff is a 50% chance of scoring. In situation 2 he's a 75% chance of hitting his Cotchin, who is then a 60% chance of kicking a goal - leading to an overall possibility for scoring of 45%.
Yes, Griff's pass to the Cotchin is a higher percentage pass than the shot. Yes, Cotchin is a higher percentage chance of scoring from that position. But overall, we are less likely to score.
Now these percentages are made up and a bit random. But the logic is, trying to hit up multiple options, even if they're good ones, is often going to lead to a lower chance of scoring.
Obviously, if it was Morris lining up from 55, who would be a 0% chance of scoring, then, you need to pass it off. But in the situation where a player is 50/50 to snag one from distance they should be having a ping. It's extremely unlikely they're going to increase our chance of scoring by trying to hit up a target. Obviously, the more congested the forward line is, the less likely that initial pass is. And our forward line is always congested.
So no, I don't think this is pointing out anything of massive importance about our gameplan, but as Hardwick is such a stats man, I'd like to see the directive given to every player that if you're within range HAVE A CRACK.
It's why I didn't really mind Vickery marking that ball and immediately taking responsibility for making the kick. I reckon he'll nail that shot 9 times out of ten, and probably be able to hit Grigg running into goal about 9 times out of ten. Grigg is probably going to then kick that goal 98 times out of a hundred, but put the two together, and it's still less likely than Vickery just having the shot.
