Roscommon Vs Galway

Team Possessions Shots Shot Rate Scores Success Rate
Galway 40 32 80% 18 56%
Roscommon 32 21 66% 10 48%
avg 41.8 28.3 67.7% 14.1 49.8%

To the naked eye Joe Bergin appeared to lord over midfield once Finneran went off and the above table would support this. Roscommon’s shot & success rate was almost bang on average but the number of possessions they had was relatively small – they were starved of ball inside Galway’s 45m line.

Galway on the other hand used what ball they had excellently. In the 36 games charted in 2010 (that are currently being used to provide the averages in the tables) no team had greater than a 77% shot rate – we might not see another team hit 80% again this year.

When you see an outlier like this something exceptional has happened. A lot of people will recognise the outlier as Galway’s direct style of play and quality of foot passing into the forward line. Yes this will be part of the equation however how many times, from here on in, will they meet a defence as compliant as Roscommon’s? Galway have good forwards however if that shot rate drops due to (a) teams screening in front of Conroy or (b) stopping the likes of Bradshaw & O’Donnell attacking will the 56% accuracy hold up?

From play

Team Shots Scores Success Rate Vs Expected
Galway 28 15 54% +2.59
Roscommon 14 6 43% -0.36
avg 21.1 9.3 44.0% 0.00

From deadballs

  Shots Scores Success Rate Vs Expected
G Sice (Gal) 2 2 100% +0.55
M Meehan (Gal) 1 1 100% +0.14
M Hehir (Gal) 1 0 0% -0.55
D Shine (Ros) 5 2 40% -1.50
S Kilbride (Ros) 2 2 100% +0.55
team avgs 7.3 4.8 66.5% 0.00

Again Galway were good from play but maybe not as good as thought – compare their return (+2.22) with that of Donegal’s on the same day (+3.32). Both had low to mid 50s success rate – it was just that Donegal converted more of the difficult scores. Galway can only beat what is put in front of them so the arguement can be made that they didn’t need to take on the difficult shots – if that is the case then a 52% success rate was pretty poor. Galway were good on Sunday; just not excellent.

Players with >= 2 shots from play

  Shots Scores Success Rate Vs Expected
P Conroy (Gal) 9 5 56% +1.06
D Shine (Ros) 4 0 0% -1.80
D Cummins (Gal) 3 0 0% -1.30
G Bradshaw (Gal) 2 2 100% +1.25
J Bergin (Gal) 2 2 100% +1.17
D O’Gara (Ros) 2 2 100% +1.04
G Sice (Gal) 2 2 100% +0.82
S Armstrong (Gal) 2 1 100% +0.11
M Hehir (Gal) 2 1 50% 0.07
G O’Donell (Gal) 2 0 0% -0.83

Conroy showed very well and produced the goods – both success rate and expected returns were above average. He was ably supported by a cast of Bradshaw, Bergin & Sice. Cummins only came on in the 63rd minute – we’ll put that showing down to over exuberance!

As for Roscommon …. we need to talk about Donie

I was on the verge of writing a seperate post altogether on Donie Shine as I’m not sure I’ll do it justice here – I don’t mean to be over critical but it is what it is. Shine had 9 shots in total on the day scoring with two of them. It was a poor outing with a combined (deadball & play) expected return of -3.30. We have however seen this before. Below are Shine’s results for the 4 games charted (3 in 2010 & this game). On 3 of the 4 occassions he returned a negative expected return and in all games his deadball striking has been below average.

Game   Shots Scores Success Rate Vs Expected
Cork V Roscommon from play 4 2 50% +0.06
  deadballs 5 3 60% -0.33
Leitrim Vs Roscommon from play 4 1 25% -0.64
  deadballs 11 7 64% -1.10
Sligo Vs Roscommon from play 3 3 100% +1.63
  deadballs 13 7 54% -0.36
Roscommon Vs Galway from play 4 0 0% -1.80
  deadballs 5 2 40% -1.50

The deadball returns go against the perception of Shine as an excellent free taker. I would argue that he is a taker of excellent frees rather than an excellent free taker – we remember the booming kicks he hits to win games but forget the two 45s he misses in the same game.

The arguement can (will) be made that Shine is the only quality forward Roscommon has. He knows this and thus takes the responsibility on his shoulders to shoot on sight or take the difficult shots.This might also explain his poor return from play. It is an arguement that has some validity however this is where the expected return comes into play – he is below average in converting those shots he does take on. Whether they are easy or hard he’s simply not converting enough.

In doing this I knew I would come across players/teams that did not meet the perceived wisdom. I had hoped to unearth this team/player in a positive manner – one who outperforms their general image. Unfortunately the opposite has occurred

Advertisements

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: