All Ireland club final (Kilcoo v Kilmacud) Preview

Keys to the game

• Can Kilcoo break down that Kilmacud defence? Conversely can Kilmacud stay in their shape for ~65minutes and not fall victim to a late goal?
• If forced out how efficient can Kilcoo be on higher variance shooting?
• Can Kilmacud continue to get a higher percentage of their shots off from the central channel?
• Kickouts; will Kilmacud press and if they do will Kilcoo continue to force them in? What do Kilmacud do? A Kilcoo hammer blow awaits on anything that drops short of the 65.
• And finally, the referee. Kilcoo had 17 shots from frees in their three games. But gave up 20. If this turns into a tight possession driven game – with both teams prodding for an opening – how the players shape the referees view of their tackling could be the decider

When Kilcoo have the ball

Kilcoo are very (very) patient with the ball. Of their 118 possessions in the three games under review (v Glen and Derrygonnelly in the Ulster campaign and St. Finbarrs in the semi-final) they strung ten or more passes together on 46% of them. All other club teams in this year’s review (13 non Kilcoo games – 26 different team performances) combined for 23%.

Their patience is not to be mistaken for passivity. They continuously probe with 25% of all their individual possessions being inside the opposition’s 45 and about a quarter of all possessions involving multiple entries into the 45 … they gain possession, bring it up to the 45 and start to probe right using Shealin Johnston’s speed to cut in to goal, down the middle primarily with Daryl Branagan or on the left with Eugene Branagan or Ceilum Doherty. If it is a quick break from a turnover Ryan Johnston picks up the ball on the 65 and runs at speed at you. They prod and thrust looking for the weak shoulder to attack or the cut in towards goal. If it does not come, they are happy to recycle back out to the 45 and go again. And again.

It must be absolutely draining to defend against. And this is shown up somewhat in two ways. The first is the volume of shots from frees they have attained with 17 across the three games – Kilmacud, in their three games under review, have only had eight.

Secondly, they have manufactured ten attempts at goal but only two of the ten have come before the 40^th minute. The constant prodding and poking eventually leads to defences opening up. And that opening up, alloyed to Kilcoo’s willingness to go over and back, leads to the attempts landing at various players’ feet … eight different players have attempted those ten shots at goal. And they have been clinical with those attempts scoring 5-03.

Does the approach help their attack? Given their patience, and probing, their scoring efficiency is aided by where they shoot from rather than by excellent shooting. There is nothing wild. Nothing from more than ~35m out.

But is it predictable? By being so patient, and not shooting from the 45, they let teams set their defensive block deep on top of the D. Kilcoo have not gotten shots off in the pocket straight in front of goal (red above) … instead it is in an arc around the D (blue above). There is no real lean to either side; on the attacking left they are 45% (0 – 09 from 20) whilst on the right they are better (0 – 11 from 18) but that is probably due to more shots being closer to centre.

Deadball efficiency is as expected – probably a touch below average just given the propensity to miss those on the D

The template is simple enough. Control the ball. Control the game. Pull teams back and forth until there is a gap then pull the trigger in closer to goal or force the opposition to foul. As teams tire, they may not be able to close those gaps, or keep up to foul. Go for the jugular.

But that is just one side of the coin. How have the Kilmacud defence performed with these points in mind?

They have allowed six attempts at goal with four of those coming from St. Judes. In their last two games Padraig Pearses did not get an attempt off whilst Naas had two – both taken under severe pressure with the second coming late in the game (58^th minute). Kilmacud have been particularly good at protecting that goal of late.

That is also shown up in the combined shot chart for Pearses & Naas … look how clean that area (known as the McGowan/O’Carroll zone) directly in front of goal is.

That is what every defence in the country wants their chart to look like. They do give up those shots around the D but that is high variance stuff – if they keep Kilcoo shooting from out there they will be more than happy.

One further point on the possession is where it emanates from. Kilcoo have gone short on 31 of their 38 kickouts. They want primary possession and are willing to fit the ball in to get it … only six of those 31 short kickouts were received uncontested or under no pressure. 11 were received under pressure, or with a man draped over the receiver, whilst another 14 were received whilst the opposition were pressing. And none were lost.

They have been clinical on the opposition’s kickout. They have faced 48 and won ten … getting their hands on one in five. But of the ten they won they produced nine shots scoring 2-04.

When Kilmacud Crokes have the ball

Kilmacud can be patient on the ball as well. Within the three games under review (v St Judes in the Dublin final, Naas in Leinster & Padraig Pearses in the semi-final) the percentage of possessions with ten or more passes came in at 32%. Not as high a proportion as Kilcoo but still higher than the average.

Their shooting is much the same as Kilcoo’s, but they are more willing to shoot from further out with that pocket at the top of the D being quite productive.

The above chart includes the St. Judes game when Paul Mannion was in the team. Despite being 13 he did not necessarily shoot from the offensive right that game … and his absence against Naas & Pearses hasn’t led to any huge pattern in their shooting. They were very balanced in those two non-Mannion games with seven point attempts from the right and seven from the left

Kilmacud have only (when compared to Kilcoo), attempted eight shots from frees across the three games and ten deadballs in total. Their returns have been a tad below average as Ferris has missed two 45s and a straight on free so it cannot be considered a strength.

But if Kilcoo continue to foul at the rate they have to date (eight against Glen in normal time; similarly nine to St. Finbarrs) then average may be good enough as the volume will aid their returns.

One major point of differential between the teams is the kickouts. Kilcoo went short 82% of the time (31 of 38). Kilmacud only went short on 33% (11 of 34) of theirs.

Part of the reason is that they are not as set to go short as Kilcoo are … they have lost three of those 11 which is a huge amount. And on top of that they have lost six of the 11 that have landed between the 45 and 65.

22 kickouts short of the 65 which should be prime retention ball – yet they’ve lost eight. And to date Ferris has not shown a propensity to be able to outkick any press. He can get them to the land between the 65s but not beyond.

Kilcoo are deadly when they get their hands on the opposition kickouts. Kilmacud have really struggled getting primary possession from their kickouts. How Kilmacud navigate this (or indeed what traps Kilcoo set them) will go a long way to determine the game.

Ballyboden St. Endas v Kilcoo 2019 All Ireland Club Final

A high level overview shows an incredibly close game that, on chances alone, Ballyboden edged. They had 21 shots, with an Expected return of 0 – 14; Kilcoo produced 20 shots expected to return 1 – 10. They were created off very similar Attack Rates (78% apiece), Shot Rates (68% v 69%) and Conversion Rates (52% v 50%).

And yet Ballyboden were scrambling at the end trying to claw back a five point deficit with ten minutes to go. How did Ballyboden return a similar Conversion Rate to that of Kilcoo, off roughly the same number of shots, but find themselves in that hole? In large part due to their shot type.

Ballyboden shooting

Disc = score, X= miss; yellow = deadball, red = attempt on goal, black = point attempt from play 1st half, black = 2nd half

13 (10x frees and 3x 45s) of Ballyboden’s 21 shots were deadballs. That accounts for 62% of all their attempts which is an incredibly high volume; both in absolute terms and as a percentage of a teams’ total shot count. In the four provincial finals the next highest was seven shots from deadballs for Padraig Pearses in the Connacht final which accounted for 41% of all their shots.

Given this high volume Ballyboden had to ensure accuracy on their deadballs to keep the scoreboard ticking over. Instead they were poor scoring just 0 – 07 (54%; Expt Pts of -2.43).

Looking at the shot chart calling that 54% poor would seem harsh as they scored 0 – 07 from the nine attempts closer to goal and missed the four “50:50” chances from around the 45. But if these were true “50:50” chances then the average for the four would have been 0 – 02. To not get any of them is very poor especially as all four were taken with the benefit of a noticeable wind.

That brings up another quirk in the Ballyboden game – their lack of long range shooting. With that wind in the second half the furthest they attempted a shot from was c25 metres. In the first half they only had one shot (from play) from outside the 20m line. They were very conservative in their shooting.

Compare that to Kilcoo

Kilcoo shooting

With the wind in the first half Kilcoo had ten shots with nine of them coming from “outside”. The tenth was Johnston’s goal which was worked off a turnover high up the pitch.

Kilcoo only managed to score 0 – 02 from those nine point attempts so it was not necessarily a very accurate ploy (22% Conversion Rate; Expt pts -1.76) but it is in stark contrast to how Ballyboden used the wind. The old Wayne Gretzky adage of “You miss 100% of the shots you don’t take” comes to mind.

Of course, the other difference with Kilcoo’s shooting was their goal attempts. Kilcoo created three scoring 2 – 00. Ballyboden only had the one shot at goal which was a tight angled attempt that ensued from a scramble deep into injury time.

Kilcoo were very good in this aspect in the Ulster final as well meaning that they have scored 4 – 01 from just seven attempts on goal in two games. This is well above what would be expected. Can they maintain this in the final? Generally, you would expect their returns on goal attempts to revert to the mean but that’s in a long run of games. Nothing is set for just one game.

Kickouts

Possession from kickouts was a wash. Both teams lost one short kickout whilst the possession was evenly split on those that landed past the 45 (Kilcoo won possession on 11 to Ballyboden’s 10). No great split by keeper either; Kilcoo won six of Ballyboden’s 13 kickouts past the 45 with Ballyboden winning four of Kilcoo’s eight

One slightly strange aberration was that Kilcoo didn’t manage a shot from any of the five Ballyboden kickouts they won. This wasn’t an apparent issue in the Ulster final against Naomh Conaill, when they scored
0 – 02, off two shots, from four Naomh Conaill kickouts. But one of those shots came from a short one that went wrong. Over their last two games that is seven opposition kickouts past the 45 they have claimed – but only produced one shot from same. If they get a toe hold in the final through Corofin’s kickout they’ll have to do more.

Kilcoo v Naomh Conaill 2019 Ulster Club Final

Kilcoo on the ball

Kilcoo’s start, up until the second goal which put them six points clear, was as clinical a display as you will find.

That is an 86%** Conversion Rate (2 – 10 from 14 shots – above) with 0.82 points per possessions. Everything was working; Conor Laverty was immense leading the line being directly involved in seven of those 14 shots. Darryl Branagan had scored 1 – 01 and was involved in the build up to the other goal. Everything was working; they scored immediately off a turnover inside Naomh Conaill’s 45, off a Naomh Conaill short
kickout that went awry as well as getting shots off after stringing 28 & 30 passes together.

**Technically it is 79% as Eugene Branagan’s point in the 12th minute was pushed over by McGrath

And then it wasn’t. From the Branagan goal in the 38th minute to his relieving point in the 59th Kilcoo only managed one shot. And that was again from Branagan. Indeed, from that second goal Kilcoo only managed three shots in total with Darryl Branagan taking two. The other was the breakaway in injury time where Ward tried to lob the keeper from 40 metres. No midfielder or forward had a point attempt for the guts of 30 minutes

The visual impression from the TV pictures (always the worst methodology from which to draw sweeping statements!) was that they went into their shell in that 20 minute period between the Branagan scores. Do the numbers support that?

Post the second goal they lost the possession count 12 – 8 after winning that particular battle 22-19 up to that point. Part of this reversal was the fact that Naomh Conaill got their hands on two of Kilcoo’s seven kickouts whilst Naomh Conaill held onto their only two. Nothing untoward there – except for what that means on turnovers. Kilcoo were 5 – 4 ahead on kickouts but 3 – 8 behind on turnovers. In 30 minutes, from the 10th minute to the 2nd goal, Kilcoo gave up a measly three turnovers. Then they gave up eight in 20 minutes.

Now part of all this is undoubtedly regression to the mean. No club team can keep the numbers Kilcoo were producing going. Part was undoubtedly Naomh Conaill stepping up. Desperation at going six behind propelled them forward. Given their travails in Donegal finals over the past few years they are far from meek lambs.

But part is also a change in how Kilcoo played and used the ball. Again, anecdotally Laverty seemed to be on the ball around the 45 and 65 a lot more in the closing 15 minutes. They also used the ball differently. The proportion of individual possessions inside and outside the 45 changed. It was roughly 3.8:1 (213 individual possessions outside the 45 to 56 inside) in the dominant period up until their 2nd goal. But thereafter it was 5:1; 100 possessions outside the 45 to 20 inside. They slowed up the delivery, invited Naomh Conaill on, and turned it over with less of a focal point up top.

Naomh Conaill on the ball

Naomh Conaill’s method of attack was very different to Kilcoo’s. Whereas Kilcoo were using Laverty at the head of the attack, alongside some hard running from Darryl Branagan and the Johnstons, Naomh Conaill much preferred the high ball into the full forward. Whilst an undoubted tactic and given the trend towards ball retention in recent years one, especially at club level, that defences are not used to dealing with, it is also quite volatile. How often does a high ball in result in a clean catch? In a goal? In a score from a flick on or a subsequent scramble?

The type of attack is not something I have tracked. Not because it is unimportant but mainly because we are viewing games on TV from one main camera angle. What happens pre the ball coming in (no. of forwards v defenders, the runs being made, has the full forward boxed out the full back etc.) is very hard to determine. So, the numbers here stand on their own without any context of what we would expect to happen.

Naomh Conaill launched ten high balls, on nine separate possession, into the square. Some were better than others but in the main they were on point into the square. Of those ten they manufactured four shots and scored 0 – 02 though the Expt Pts on those four shots was +3.14.

We know that “good” attacks will return 0.35 – 0.40 points per possession (ppp). On their high balls Naomh Conaill returned 0.20ppp but this was in part down to poor execution. They should have returned 0.31ppp which isn’t far off the average. That Expt Pts is very high for just four shots – and is part of the thought process behind using the high ball. You’ll get less shots but the ones you do get should be (will be?) much easier.

On the 26 possessions where they didn’t launch a high ball, they had 16 shots (a shot 62% of the time vs 40% on the high balls) scoring 2 – 07 or 0.50 ppp. The Expt Pts on these 16 shots was +9.98 or 0.38ppp
A muddled enough picture. Naomh Conaill definitely got more (much more) on those possessions they didn’t launch in. But a large part of that was from excellent shooting (+3.02 on Expt Pts on non-high balls v -1.14 on the high balls). When we look at the Expt Pts for both the gap is much narrower (0.31ppp for high balls vs 0.38ppp for non-high balls).

And this is where the volatility comes in. Naomh Conaill got less shots but one of them was a goal attempt from the edge of the small square which was blasted over. You get the sense that to make the constant frequent high ball tactic work you need a goal.