That’s good stuff!
I don’t think too many clubs play run and gun anymore. Western Bulldogs and Richmond potentially (though more ‘forward at any costs’).
From the graph looks like Doggies are in the same boat as us and that Richmond are a bit of an outlier.
I don’t think it’s as simple as “win 5km” we win the game, I think it’s more that it’s a KPI for how successfully we are implementing our game plan.
It’s interesting to me that the only team in the same bracket as us who’s consistently getting out run and never vice versa is Adelaide, which is where Worsfold was last.
Just to repeat an earlier post of mine in a different thread.
A Richmond recruiter told a friend of mine (so second or third hand) that the attribute they look for most in recruiting anything but rd1 draft picks (where they take best available talent without restriction of criteria), and presumably have used in drafting in recent years. is ability to perform repeat sprints.
Total km run is one thing. Work rate is it’s more about finding space, leading, being first to the loose ball and staying in the contest without the ball
Sprint and average speed in attack and defence are 2 other stats they keep, together with repeat sprints. These need to be looked at also to assess work rate.
Agree about the total distance covered being misleading. If an opposition player runs hard to space and marks a pass, and our player jogs up after him to stand the mark, they both have covered the same distance.
Total km’s for the team has a lot to do with if/where teams use their spare/s and how they use their flankers.
Far too simplistic to say it’s more kms equals more fitness/commitment.
Repeat sprints is telling, as a standalone statistic though, for mine.
Data at an aggregate level is pretty meaningless- structure would have a lot to do with it
To the naked eye we were terrible. Richmond were able to create space in their forward line and we weren’t. They were running a lot harder defensively.
It’s interesting that we’ve been significantly outrun 7/10 games and we have not significantly outrun any other teams.
When we do get significantly outrun we lose 72% of the time. That’s significant but is it correlation or causation?
Given running significantly less does not seem to be working for us we could always give outrunning our opponents a shot and see if that helps.
It would be interesting to see what our results were for our last 14 games in 2018 as a comparison point.
Same excuse every week even though we are clearly outworked.
So noticeable if you are there in person
I’m basically at every Victorian match, and I honestly don’t think work rate is our biggest issue (or even a noticeable one). Actually, this year our ability to scramble back and contest when opposition teams go forward has been quite good I’ve thought.
Our ability to miss targets, and a game plan of bomb it forward and hope, is a much more noticeable issue.
Concur.
Irrespective of our work rate numbers it is abundantly clear our team does not work back to defensive set up hard or fast enough than the top teams.
The Geelong game its a as clear as can be, we matched then around the contest and breakaway from turnover, except when they got it we had holes everywhere, when we got it they set up and ensure we had no chance of scoring from the turnover.
IMHO Our three biggest problems are:
I’m not sure the second two are easy to fix, the first one should be easy with fitness and mental application.
Does this happen because of lack of targets up forward? i.e. not working hard enough to get forward to provide an option after working back?
Sick of excuses for this club when numbers don’t lie.
Have you ever seen a team walk in as many goals as Geelong did/could have in round 7? Yet they always outnumbered us by 2-3 players when we went forward in attack.
As I mentioned above there were so many times where Richmond had numbers streaming forward yet most of the time an easy goal didn’t eventuate because of the conditions
How does the data look for total sprints rather than total distance? i.e. when you have a 2:1 (or 1:2 in our case) ratio of sprints vs your opponent what is your win/loss?
Ran less than opposition in carlton, hawks, eagles games once more.
Sure working harder than opposition doesn’t equal victory but I reckon it improves performace (i.e. if we had worked harder than Hawks and Carlton we would have won by more). If we worked harder then we wouldn’t have got pumped by WCE.
It’s a worrying trend.
How long is this going to be ignored.
When we lose badly it’s so evident how much harder the opposition is working than us.
Eagles’ spread murdered us.
It will continue as long as the playing group aren’t held accountable for their lack of work rate
Essendon 270.20 kms
GWS 277.80 kms
Again, we are outworked.
Yes we won the game but will never be a top team until we lift our work rate!
Bewildering that it’s happening week in week out
Metres gained, or whatever, doesn’t tell the whole story. Yes, until the last 20 minutes I’d agree we were outworked, but after that…
It’s actually just as common for the losing team to run more. This is an irrelevant stat. The boys worked a lot harder than GWS last night. They clearly wanted it more and their pressure was a lot higher.
It ain’t easy keeping up high levels of workrate all season.
Port’s workrate against the Cats was brilliant… destroyed them… But they dropped slow/old blokes Ryder, Westhoff and Wines to help make it happen… and they’ve also been WLWLWLWLW like farking yo yos, all season. We ain’t dropping our older guys - they won it for us last night.
Sustained high workrate is bl**dy hard… so when workrate ain’t enough, you also need fallback options, tactical changes etc. like was ‘forced’ upon Woosh last night.
We need to continue with the clever positional changes if we’re any chance of making finals. Hartley, Smack, Hooker rotation through ruck/KPP fwd and back throughout a game might provide a headache for oppo backs and a fresh key fwd option that we’ve been lacking