piglet
08-02-2006, 10:19 PM
The Aussie team can hold their heads up high. It was a great performance to come away third in the world. The Aussie's were the fittest and fastest at the Games & it was mainly our shhoting that let us down
Although we did not win we learn't some lessons. I have borrowed an email from a friend to elaborate where we can go from here.
G'day All,
For those of you who were not there [London Ontario] I'm sure you had had a chance to hear about the 2006 world games, talk to some players, spectators and others. Thought I would give you guys some thoughts and observations to think about and hear some of your feedback at the same time. Got to love email, no one can hide.
If you go to shop to buy a loaf of bread which costs $1.50 and you only have $1.37, then you are short. .13 cents short. It does not matter how much you wish you had enough money, or if the loaf of bread was cheaper you are still short. Numbers don't lie.
We had the most shots out of the blue division 350 and the most saves 113. We played one more game than the US but still had same shot count as them and more saves. We shot 32% they shot 38% and Canada almost 40%. We were the second highest team for fouls, 49 mins, Canada 55 mins. US, high 30's. We had
18-23 players score goals [not a bad stat], the Canadians had 20-23 goal scorers [even better one] and the US had 16-23 players score goals. Each game we had between 6-10 different players go to the cage each quarter. We had between 8-10 different point scores each game. Our man-up and man down opportunities were no better or worse than Canada's but much better than the US's.
Australia shot 113 goals 47 Assists, Canada 129 goals 84 Assists, the US 123 goals 72 Assists. Australia and Canada played one more game than the US.
We had 213 ground balls Canada, 215 and the US 151. Face offs we held our own but were called for false starts at crucial times during crucial games-as were other countries. After looking at the tapes we got the bad end of the stick so many times. Question: Are these stats the best that Australia has ever produced can anyone help out and let me know?
The website that has this information is called www.pointstreak.com
The one stat that killed us was our shot percentage. The conversion. Our guys had the most shots out of the big three, they were given plays and opportunities to put themselves in scoring positions which they executed as well as, if not better than, the US and Canada but shot poorly. Once the ball leaves the stick the coaches and team mates have no control over it [the ball].
This percentage problem needs to be addressed at our lowest levels-juniors-because it is very evident that bad habits hang around a life time. After talking with a lot of Aussies it appears that very little talk or emphasis is directed towards shot percentages. For those of you who do not know the industry standard the magic number is 33% or better. But not lower than 33% you can't win if you shoot below 33%. Numbers don't lie.
I was amazed by a comment by an Aussie spectator/official when I asked him if there is coaching information directed/forwarded to coaches [all levels] in Australia that speaks about shot percentages. His answer was no, and we [Aussies] should shoot as high as possible, he went on to say. I had to bite my tongue. He also added that percentages would differ between pro's, high schools, college club and so on. My tongue is very, very, very sore.
Do you have score sheets that includes shots, shots on goal and saves? Think you can do without one? If you think so then write back to me and explain why, fair enough?
When you do implement this new score sheet [if you already have not] make sure you direct your coaches [all levels all grades] to address their respective percentages to their respective teams pre-game after each quarter and post game. Give our kids the tools they need to become snipers. Good shooters. I heard a rumor that there were plenty of snipers back in Australia, how come they were not on the team?
Equally amazing was the refereeing. Numbers don't lie and neither do the tapes. 90% of the 2006 world lacrosse games ref's were completely out of their league, and too no fault of their own. They [90%] just don't have no where near enough experience at the elite level. Let's face how many of our ref's, Britt's, kiwi's, pom's German's etc. have been involved in DOT games, OT games, games decided in the last 4 seconds, games with more then 45,000 spectators and who do it for a living and ref other pro sports? Let me know what you find out.
The best story I heard was a ref asked the two face off guys to replace themselves with two new guys from their respective benches. The players explained to the ref that only their coaches can have them replaced. The ref continued to proceed with the game. Don't think that guy should be there next time.
Although we did not win we learn't some lessons. I have borrowed an email from a friend to elaborate where we can go from here.
G'day All,
For those of you who were not there [London Ontario] I'm sure you had had a chance to hear about the 2006 world games, talk to some players, spectators and others. Thought I would give you guys some thoughts and observations to think about and hear some of your feedback at the same time. Got to love email, no one can hide.
If you go to shop to buy a loaf of bread which costs $1.50 and you only have $1.37, then you are short. .13 cents short. It does not matter how much you wish you had enough money, or if the loaf of bread was cheaper you are still short. Numbers don't lie.
We had the most shots out of the blue division 350 and the most saves 113. We played one more game than the US but still had same shot count as them and more saves. We shot 32% they shot 38% and Canada almost 40%. We were the second highest team for fouls, 49 mins, Canada 55 mins. US, high 30's. We had
18-23 players score goals [not a bad stat], the Canadians had 20-23 goal scorers [even better one] and the US had 16-23 players score goals. Each game we had between 6-10 different players go to the cage each quarter. We had between 8-10 different point scores each game. Our man-up and man down opportunities were no better or worse than Canada's but much better than the US's.
Australia shot 113 goals 47 Assists, Canada 129 goals 84 Assists, the US 123 goals 72 Assists. Australia and Canada played one more game than the US.
We had 213 ground balls Canada, 215 and the US 151. Face offs we held our own but were called for false starts at crucial times during crucial games-as were other countries. After looking at the tapes we got the bad end of the stick so many times. Question: Are these stats the best that Australia has ever produced can anyone help out and let me know?
The website that has this information is called www.pointstreak.com
The one stat that killed us was our shot percentage. The conversion. Our guys had the most shots out of the big three, they were given plays and opportunities to put themselves in scoring positions which they executed as well as, if not better than, the US and Canada but shot poorly. Once the ball leaves the stick the coaches and team mates have no control over it [the ball].
This percentage problem needs to be addressed at our lowest levels-juniors-because it is very evident that bad habits hang around a life time. After talking with a lot of Aussies it appears that very little talk or emphasis is directed towards shot percentages. For those of you who do not know the industry standard the magic number is 33% or better. But not lower than 33% you can't win if you shoot below 33%. Numbers don't lie.
I was amazed by a comment by an Aussie spectator/official when I asked him if there is coaching information directed/forwarded to coaches [all levels] in Australia that speaks about shot percentages. His answer was no, and we [Aussies] should shoot as high as possible, he went on to say. I had to bite my tongue. He also added that percentages would differ between pro's, high schools, college club and so on. My tongue is very, very, very sore.
Do you have score sheets that includes shots, shots on goal and saves? Think you can do without one? If you think so then write back to me and explain why, fair enough?
When you do implement this new score sheet [if you already have not] make sure you direct your coaches [all levels all grades] to address their respective percentages to their respective teams pre-game after each quarter and post game. Give our kids the tools they need to become snipers. Good shooters. I heard a rumor that there were plenty of snipers back in Australia, how come they were not on the team?
Equally amazing was the refereeing. Numbers don't lie and neither do the tapes. 90% of the 2006 world lacrosse games ref's were completely out of their league, and too no fault of their own. They [90%] just don't have no where near enough experience at the elite level. Let's face how many of our ref's, Britt's, kiwi's, pom's German's etc. have been involved in DOT games, OT games, games decided in the last 4 seconds, games with more then 45,000 spectators and who do it for a living and ref other pro sports? Let me know what you find out.
The best story I heard was a ref asked the two face off guys to replace themselves with two new guys from their respective benches. The players explained to the ref that only their coaches can have them replaced. The ref continued to proceed with the game. Don't think that guy should be there next time.