- Dec 14, 2002
- 19,301
- 29,321
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Sturt, Liverpool
An afl.com.au article on the Giants piqued my interest in looking into our quarter-by-quarter performances.
The article says:
We won 53.5 of 88 quarters or 60.8% of our quarters, ranked #6 (the same as our percentage). I think this justifies the general thinking that we were a better team than our ladder position indicated. Of course, it's what the scoreboard says at the end of the game that counts. Take Collingwood for instance, who won only 43 quarters, plus 4 drawn quarters (51.14%) and ranked 10th on that list (similar to Carlton, 44 wins, plus two drawn quarters).
The quarter-by-quarter breakdown is interesting.
We won 18/22 first quarters (ranked 1st, next best being Hawthorn 16/22, then Richmond and Sydney 15 and 2 drawn quarters). When leading at quarter time, we went on to win 10/18 (6th best), which while not great, was certainly better than when trailing at quarter time; we lost all 4 of those games (only Demons and Giants below us, both 0 from 14). The best at converting first-quarter leads into wins were Hawks (15/16) and Dockers (13.5/15). The best at coming back was Geelong (6 wins from the 8 games they trailed at quarter-time).
We won 12.5/22 second quarters (ranked 9th, Sydney and Geelong on top with 15.5). Putting 1st and 2nd quarters together, we were leading in 15/22 games at half-time (ranked 5th), and went on to win 9 (60%) of them. On the flipside, we won only one game out of 7 when trailing at half time (#13). Hawks won 5/6 when trailing at half-time, Geelong 4/6 and Dockers 3.5/8. (We won 50% of our second halves, ranked 12th on %age with Hawks and Cats on top with 16/22).
We won 11/22 of our third quarters (ranked 10th). Geelong ranked first with 18.5/22 third quarters won, followed by Swans (15.5/22) and Blues (14.5/22). The good news is that we went on to win 10/14 games when leading at three-quarter time. The bad news is that we lost all 8 games when trailing at three-quarter time! To put it in some context, however, Richmond lost 7 of 7, and Sydney 4 of 4 when in the same boat and the best performed when in this position was Port 4/13 and *essendon 4/12, so it's not an easy task.
We won 12/22 last quarters (ranked 8th). Hawks (#1) were 17/22, Port (#2) were 15/22 and Crows and Richmond next best with 14/22. Dockers, *bombres and Weagles rounded off the top eight in last quarters won with 13/22. Interestingly, Pies, Cats and Swans won only 10/22 last quarters.
Another interesting comparison is with 2012. We won 53 quarters in 2012, with two drawn quarters (ranked 5th). That's one drawn quarter above 2013. What it does show is that in both of the last two years our W/L ratio and ladder position does not reflect number of quarters won, or by implication overall dominance. It does probably show what we all know; that when we leak goals and let the opposition get a run on, we do it very well.
The article says:
As far as I can tell, Hawthorn actually won 60.5 of 88, not 68. But, regardless, how did we do?
We won 53.5 of 88 quarters or 60.8% of our quarters, ranked #6 (the same as our percentage). I think this justifies the general thinking that we were a better team than our ladder position indicated. Of course, it's what the scoreboard says at the end of the game that counts. Take Collingwood for instance, who won only 43 quarters, plus 4 drawn quarters (51.14%) and ranked 10th on that list (similar to Carlton, 44 wins, plus two drawn quarters).
The quarter-by-quarter breakdown is interesting.
We won 18/22 first quarters (ranked 1st, next best being Hawthorn 16/22, then Richmond and Sydney 15 and 2 drawn quarters). When leading at quarter time, we went on to win 10/18 (6th best), which while not great, was certainly better than when trailing at quarter time; we lost all 4 of those games (only Demons and Giants below us, both 0 from 14). The best at converting first-quarter leads into wins were Hawks (15/16) and Dockers (13.5/15). The best at coming back was Geelong (6 wins from the 8 games they trailed at quarter-time).
We won 12.5/22 second quarters (ranked 9th, Sydney and Geelong on top with 15.5). Putting 1st and 2nd quarters together, we were leading in 15/22 games at half-time (ranked 5th), and went on to win 9 (60%) of them. On the flipside, we won only one game out of 7 when trailing at half time (#13). Hawks won 5/6 when trailing at half-time, Geelong 4/6 and Dockers 3.5/8. (We won 50% of our second halves, ranked 12th on %age with Hawks and Cats on top with 16/22).
We won 11/22 of our third quarters (ranked 10th). Geelong ranked first with 18.5/22 third quarters won, followed by Swans (15.5/22) and Blues (14.5/22). The good news is that we went on to win 10/14 games when leading at three-quarter time. The bad news is that we lost all 8 games when trailing at three-quarter time! To put it in some context, however, Richmond lost 7 of 7, and Sydney 4 of 4 when in the same boat and the best performed when in this position was Port 4/13 and *essendon 4/12, so it's not an easy task.
We won 12/22 last quarters (ranked 8th). Hawks (#1) were 17/22, Port (#2) were 15/22 and Crows and Richmond next best with 14/22. Dockers, *bombres and Weagles rounded off the top eight in last quarters won with 13/22. Interestingly, Pies, Cats and Swans won only 10/22 last quarters.
Another interesting comparison is with 2012. We won 53 quarters in 2012, with two drawn quarters (ranked 5th). That's one drawn quarter above 2013. What it does show is that in both of the last two years our W/L ratio and ladder position does not reflect number of quarters won, or by implication overall dominance. It does probably show what we all know; that when we leak goals and let the opposition get a run on, we do it very well.
. 
