Goal kicking - Pies players showing benefits of coaching

[stui magpie]

Bit of positive news in the Herald Sun.

[thompsoc]

Good to see you are still here Stui!
Interesting information.
We seem to be a lot better this year at kicking goals.
Maybe good weather has been a little bit of a help.

[Jez07]

It shows you the benefit of what happens when you appoint a dedicated coach for a particular area. Because of the football tax, we refused to employ a goal kicking coach prior to this year.

Now why isn't there a dedicated ruck coach?

[stui magpie]

[Piesnchess]

IF only we could unearth another Peter McKenna, still the most accurate and deadly goalkicker I have ever seen, he literally just about never missed. When lining up for goal, decades back at Vic Park, they used to change the Pies score on the scoreboard, before he had even kicked it, so sure were they hed get it, even from the boundary line. This happened several times, I recall.

[stui magpie]

[Pies4shaw]

Once or twice, they had to roll it back when he hit the post. Another time, as I remember it, he had a kick from such a tight angle that the ball literally got caught between the goalposts on the way through.

You and I are both fans of McKenna, PnC but I wonder whether we should really plan our goal-kicking strategy around trying to recruit someone who is the equal of the best shot for goal who ever walked the earth?

[Mugwump]

Interestingly, both Lockett and Hudson bettered McKenna for conversion ratio - Lockett goaled from about 70% of his shots, Hudson from 69% and McKenna from about 65%. Yet I, too, remember Macca as the greatest set shot I ever saw.

I think the reason is that Mckenna took many more shots from a distance,and on difficult angles, because his style of play was very different. Lockett relied on aerial power, and Hudson on body work and balance. As a result, both tended to shoot from in front of goal and often from close in (esp Hudson).

McKenna's play was built on fast leads, often toward the flank and nearly always 30m+ out from goal. So he often had to slot tight shots from 45m plus. Of course, that is just my theory, and it will probably remain unproven, since there is no data about where exactly he kicked his goals from, compared to the other two. Perhaps he was not quite as great a shot as we remember - but I think he was.

It's an interesting example of how statistics have to be treated carefully.

[didick]

[Pies4shaw]

You're right. Plugger was a much better kick than Hudson but Hudson generally kicked from close in and didn't often face the angles McKenna routinely faced. For those that didn't see him play, it is worth bearing in mind that, in those days, McKenna was very unusual in using the drop punt. Wade used torpedos or flat punts and Hudson almost always used the flat punt. My father describes Coventry as being strong, though not tall, and efficient, rather than spectacular, both as a player generally and as a kick. Although he generally favoured the players from the old days (eg, Fothergill over Daicos, Laurie Nash over Royce Hart), my father always said that McKenna was a more accurate kick than Coventry, so that's probably a reasonably reliable appraisal.

[Didaksgoal]

You've either got it, or you do not. That's it, it's what you're born with.

Go the Pies!

[didick]

You can be born with talent. But the best still have to work at it. I don't think there isn't a leading sportsmen in any sport that would say they don't work their backside off and give 110%. Golf, tennis, all codes of football, basketball etc. I dare say even Fabulous Phil Taylor in darts. To be a pro AFL player and be limited in how much you can practice your art, something you are paid big $ to do, is crazy. And it's not just about kicking ball after ball. Sounds like he hasn't even had a coach teaching him how to understand what he's supposed to be doing.

[Cam]

Plugger monstered alot of blokes in the goal square and kicked plenty from there.

[Piesnchess]

yes, and we came within a bees knee of getting Plugger to the Pies, one dumb guy on the board voted no, and that was that.

[E]