Olympics: Field Goals v PC Goals

keely 11
Mr Bean 8
johncoxon 8
bigmick 8
NicfromSweden 7
John 6
redumpire 6
Snoody 5
controller 5
foozbear 5

 The Field Hockey Forum is the resource for players, coaches and umpires of Field Hockey. Join FHF now to have full access to all that we have to offer! Don't be satisfied with lurking when you can interact with thousands of other FHF’rs, take part in Competitions, win Prizes, download Coaching Papers, discover our vast Photo library and get rid of this message - Register Now!

[keely]

I do see your point, NITW. But let's look at the numbers from Day 2 of women's competition:

PC 15
FG 8
PS 1
65% are PC goals

So the running total is:

PC 27
FG 27
PS 1

That's definitely 50% as you pointed out. My prediction was 60%. Even the AUS ladies scored 4 of their 6 goals today on PCs - a conversion rate I'm sure they're much happier with. We're still waiting for the second day of men's games but I expect to see the stats to move definitively towards 60% as well.

So that might be a lot of weight, but the numbers don't lie!

[Wassie]

Maybe as games get tighter field goal opportunities will get more difficult to come by thus favouring more goals from PCs ....or a higher overall percentage.

Here is something on PS....could a PS that comes from field play be credited toward a field play goal and a PS that comes from a PC be credited toward a PC goal?

[keely]

I think you're right, Wassie.

For official purposes, it appears that PS goals are held statistically separate from FG or PS goals regardless of when they arose - as you can see here.

[NE14HOCKEY]

Latest Stats brought to you by NE14HOCKEY 

18 Games (2 Score Draws)
74 Goals (46 FG, 37 PC, PS 1)
42 Cards (35 Green, 7 Yellow, 0 Red)

A few little fun statistics:

In the Womens Pool A all the matches have been won by the first name side:
http://www.ne14hockey.com/index.php?page=119&event=151

And in fact ignoring the draws only the Great Britain Men and the New Zealand Men have won as the second name team which is a little freaky out of the 18 matches played so far.

Top Goal Scorers Men:

Abbott D     Australia         3
Shaw H       New Zealand    3
Keller F       Germany         2
Taekema T     Netherlands    2

Top Goal Scorers Women:

Paumen M        Netherlands      4
Hudson N     Australia         2
Fu B                China            2
Eastham C     Australia         2
Rebecchi C     Argentina       2
F Rinne       Germany        2
Liddelow S     Australia         2
Hoffmann E    Germany     2
Lambert A     Australia         2
Lee S O      South Korea       2

Enjoy 

[deegum]

AUS are traditionally poor PC finishers

Yea one of the  the last ones I saw them score was 4 years ago_ won Olympic Gold   


( Still think it involved deliberate back of stick- would love to see a high definition slo mo replay.-but that's another story.)

[Mo79]

I haven't included todays men's games:

Some interesting stats i.t.o, when goals are scored.

The green heading relates to the 1st 5min;last 5min principle.
The orange relates to the same side scoring a goal,then scoring again within 5minutes.
The grey relates to scoring,then conceding within 5minutes.Statistically occurs often based on past research from men's world cup & champions trophy.I posted an article way back on the site.

Food for thought




[attachment deleted by admin]

[keely]

Very interesting. From an umpiring perspective, it's useful to focus on the trends of when goals are scored, and when a team scores consecutively versus scoring and conceding because it helps us be prepared to make big decisions and anticipate when pressure situations are going to arise in the game.

I hope you continue to update these stats throughout the tournament and repost at the end - I really appreciate you sharing your work on the forum.

[Mo79]

Its a pleasure.

Im a student of the game and sharing doesn't hurt.

Maybe one day,I'll be on that platform coaching.

Touch wood

[Feral]

After the pool games the Men's looks like this

FG = 79 (60%)
PC = 53 (40%)

At this stage Grumpy is spot on Is that no surprise?


Interestingly (excluding PS) the conversion rate from attempts on goals are;

FG = 79 from 432 = 18%
PC = 53 from 221 = 24%

For the Women;

FG = 55 (49%)
PC = 57 (51%)

Conversion rate;

FG = 55 from 343 = 16%
PC = 57 from 289 = 20%

So given these stats why did the attacking teams not create more PC opportunities from field play?
Was this down to good defending or poor attacking tactics/skills?

Why would the Women's stats be lower than the Men's?

[keely]

Why would the Women's stats be lower than the Men's?

Without a powerful drag flick, a PC unit lacks the big weapon that can be relied on in big games and opens some other options on variations. Drag flicks are a very specific skill that takes years to develop and master, and they simply came to the women's game later than the men's.

Maartje Paumen has it, but she's the only one who can score on drag flicks consistently against the best teams in the world. Of the rest of the top teams, Crista Cullen shows all signs of getting there in the next quadrennial, Angie Lambert has been close for a few years, Anke Kuhn may get there, Noel Barrionuevo (ARG) shows promise in the coming years but is still young. Below that level, there may be others like Andie Ruston of CAN who gets a nice flick away but not a lot of opportunities to do so.

I believe that in London, we'll see identical stats between the genders or perhaps the men's game will have gotten away from the drag flick a bit as the PC defensive units around the world find that little edge that reduces their efficacy.

[Feral]

After the pool games the Men's looks like this

FG = 79 (60%)
PC = 53 (40%)

At this stage Grumpy is spot on Is that no surprise?

Sorry guys. I got this incorrect.  Grumpy has the right %'s but the wrong way round. 

[keely]

Well then, that kinda shoot down my thoughts now, doesn't it!

Oh well, leave out the comparisons to the men's side and I think my comments about female dragflickers still hold some water.

[Feral]

I tend to agree with you about the females. However I think there is also the factor of physical strength to consider. I think the ladies are not able to have the same level of pace in the drag so the ball is not as fast through the air. Therefore maybe it's easier to intercept the ball.

As for the men, I think that they are getting better at defending the drag flick. PC variations that work around the defenders/GK will become more finely developed.

[keely]

Wouldn't it stand to reason then that women are also slower to close the gap which has a profound effect on the angles and ability to intercept the ball, and also slower reflexes to react to the ball in the air?

[Feral]

For the ladies I think that the distances to be covered in defending the PC (left - right movement) we are not talking of much needed to close the angles. But the pace of the ball from the push in and the drag are more relevant.  Perhaps the reflex/reaction time is also important.

A defensive technique that allows the drag/shot from the top of the D but limits the slip/change of direction options may be the way forward.
The result is that the GK has lots of visibility of ball and can react accordingly. With lots of players in or close to the line of ball travel there are lots of possibilites for errors. I think that was the case in the NED v AUS mens game in which TT got two PCs.