(I think this may be the first time in over 15 years on BigFooty that I've started a thread, so apologies in advance if something goes wrong…)
I've seen a few comments on various threads about the functioning of our forward line. For the most part, these comments are negative, and focus on perceived inefficiency (e.g., that despite dominating inside-50s, we often fail to score when going forward) and organisation (e.g., that we struggle to isolate targets in the forward line to the same extent that the teams we play are able to). Intuitively, I buy both these arguments, since it feels like it's often harder for us to score than is the case for our opponents. However, I'm also aware that how something feels to me, as a massively biased supporter who's very emotionally involved in the outcome of our matches, isn't necessarily going to reflect the reality of things. Thus, I was sort of surprisingly unsurprised when a poster on the main board put up some statistics relating to inside-50 scoring efficiency a few weeks ago, which had us toward the top end of the table rather than the middle or bottom---where my intuition would've expected us to fall.
I didn't think about this a lot more at the time, but as I'm presently on (northern hemisphere) summer holidays I thought I'd look into the numbers a bit further and see if anything jumped out at me. Below is a table containing per-game averages for a number of relevant statistics for each team in 2024, obtained from the stats page on afl.com.au. (I've added some zeroes at the front end of some of the averages so that all the significant figures line up.)
Looking at the raw numbers, our rankings on the relevant forward-line statistics are as follows:
- 5th for inside-50s (behind Brisbane, Gold Coast, Essendon, and Sydney)
- 4th for shots on goal (behind Sydney, Port Adelaide, and Brisbane)
- Equal 3rd for goals (with GWS, Geelong, and Brisbane; behind Sydney and Carlton)
- Equal 4th for behinds (behind Port Adelaide, Brisbane, and Sydney)
- 8th for marks inside 50 (behind Port Adelaide, GWS, Brisbane, Fremantle, Essendon, Geelong, and Sydney)
Essentially, according to most of these measures it looks like our forward line is pretty effective, such that we are placed in the top handful of teams on each of them. Marks inside 50 is a possible exception, where we are just middle-of-the-road, averaging 1.8 per game fewer than the top side on this measure (Port Adelaide). To get some feeling for the magnitude of this gap, the average difference between the bottom (Richmond) and top sides on this measure is 4.3.
This gives me the impression that we're relatively underperforming when it comes to marks inside 50. However, an alternative possibility is that this difference simply reflects a difference in game styles across teams, whereby relatively more of our disposals are handballs rather than kicks. Since you can't mark a handball (unless you listen to the journalists and commentators who think this is what Toby Greene was doing when he kicked Luke Dahlhaus in the face), this would provide a natural explanation for the discrepancy. This is why I've also included total marks per game in the above table. It turns out that we rank 2nd for total marks (Brisbane have way more than any other team, whereas a number of other teams come close behind us in 3rd, 4th, etc.), meaning that our inside-50 mark count is proportionally low too [i.e., 12.3% of our total marks are taken inside 50, which is a fair bit lower than teams like Sydney (13.3%), Port Adelaide (14.3%), Geelong (14.8%), GWS (15.2%), and Hawthorn (13.7%)]. In other words, this doesn't explain the relatively low number of marks we take inside 50.
What do I take from this overall? Well, we're pretty effective at getting the ball inside 50, and at converting inside 50s to shots on goal---and to goals. By contrast, we're not great at taking marks inside 50. Given the height and marking prowess of some of the players in our forward line, my lay conclusion is that this is an area where we have substantial room for improvement. So, it seems like our forward line is actually functioning pretty well, but perhaps not in a way that is playing to one of our team's strengths.
I'd be interested to hear others' impressions of this issue. As I mentioned above, I'm located in the northern hemisphere so I haven't been able to see any games live this year (actually not since 2015, unfortunately), which means my own impressions have to come from what's played on the television broadcast and the stats that are collected and made publicly available. Those who are actually able to attend games and see the "big picture" on the field may have better insights here.
I've seen a few comments on various threads about the functioning of our forward line. For the most part, these comments are negative, and focus on perceived inefficiency (e.g., that despite dominating inside-50s, we often fail to score when going forward) and organisation (e.g., that we struggle to isolate targets in the forward line to the same extent that the teams we play are able to). Intuitively, I buy both these arguments, since it feels like it's often harder for us to score than is the case for our opponents. However, I'm also aware that how something feels to me, as a massively biased supporter who's very emotionally involved in the outcome of our matches, isn't necessarily going to reflect the reality of things. Thus, I was sort of surprisingly unsurprised when a poster on the main board put up some statistics relating to inside-50 scoring efficiency a few weeks ago, which had us toward the top end of the table rather than the middle or bottom---where my intuition would've expected us to fall.
I didn't think about this a lot more at the time, but as I'm presently on (northern hemisphere) summer holidays I thought I'd look into the numbers a bit further and see if anything jumped out at me. Below is a table containing per-game averages for a number of relevant statistics for each team in 2024, obtained from the stats page on afl.com.au. (I've added some zeroes at the front end of some of the averages so that all the significant figures line up.)
| Team | Inside 50s | Shots on goal | Goals | Behinds | Marks inside 50 | Marks |
| Adelaide | 50.7 | 23.2 | 12.2 | 10.2 | 10.8 | 089.4 |
| Brisbane | 57.7 | 28.0 | 13.4 | 12.9 | 13.4 | 111.5 |
| Carlton | 52.1 | 26.7 | 14.8 | 11.0 | 11.7 | 089.8 |
| Collingwood | 49.6 | 25.8 | 12.4 | 11.2 | 10.8 | 079.8 |
| Essendon | 56.3 | 25.3 | 12.4 | 10.6 | 12.8 | 097.6 |
| Fremantle | 51.3 | 26.0 | 12.4 | 11.4 | 12.9 | 097.1 |
| Geelong | 54.3 | 25.9 | 13.4 | 10.3 | 12.8 | 086.7 |
| Gold Coast | 57.7 | 24.7 | 12.4 | 10.6 | 10.6 | 086.1 |
| GWS | 51.2 | 24.8 | 13.4 | 09.7 | 13.7 | 090.2 |
| Hawthorn | 52.3 | 25.5 | 11.9 | 10.4 | 12.2 | 088.9 |
| Melbourne | 49.7 | 23.4 | 11.4 | 10.4 | 11.2 | 095.3 |
| North Melbourne | 45.1 | 18.9 | 10.7 | 06.7 | 09.9 | 088.7 |
| Port Adelaide | 54.3 | 28.4 | 12.2 | 13.6 | 14.1 | 098.7 |
| Richmond | 46.9 | 19.9 | 09.2 | 10.3 | 09.8 | 082.9 |
| St Kilda | 49.8 | 22.6 | 10.6 | 09.9 | 11.3 | 097.3 |
| Sydney | 55.9 | 28.7 | 15.0 | 12.8 | 12.6 | 094.9 |
| West Coast | 46.1 | 21.5 | 09.6 | 09.6 | 10.3 | 085.6 |
| Western Bulldogs | 55.4 | 27.6 | 13.4 | 11.9 | 12.3 | 099.8 |
Looking at the raw numbers, our rankings on the relevant forward-line statistics are as follows:
- 5th for inside-50s (behind Brisbane, Gold Coast, Essendon, and Sydney)
- 4th for shots on goal (behind Sydney, Port Adelaide, and Brisbane)
- Equal 3rd for goals (with GWS, Geelong, and Brisbane; behind Sydney and Carlton)
- Equal 4th for behinds (behind Port Adelaide, Brisbane, and Sydney)
- 8th for marks inside 50 (behind Port Adelaide, GWS, Brisbane, Fremantle, Essendon, Geelong, and Sydney)
Essentially, according to most of these measures it looks like our forward line is pretty effective, such that we are placed in the top handful of teams on each of them. Marks inside 50 is a possible exception, where we are just middle-of-the-road, averaging 1.8 per game fewer than the top side on this measure (Port Adelaide). To get some feeling for the magnitude of this gap, the average difference between the bottom (Richmond) and top sides on this measure is 4.3.
This gives me the impression that we're relatively underperforming when it comes to marks inside 50. However, an alternative possibility is that this difference simply reflects a difference in game styles across teams, whereby relatively more of our disposals are handballs rather than kicks. Since you can't mark a handball (unless you listen to the journalists and commentators who think this is what Toby Greene was doing when he kicked Luke Dahlhaus in the face), this would provide a natural explanation for the discrepancy. This is why I've also included total marks per game in the above table. It turns out that we rank 2nd for total marks (Brisbane have way more than any other team, whereas a number of other teams come close behind us in 3rd, 4th, etc.), meaning that our inside-50 mark count is proportionally low too [i.e., 12.3% of our total marks are taken inside 50, which is a fair bit lower than teams like Sydney (13.3%), Port Adelaide (14.3%), Geelong (14.8%), GWS (15.2%), and Hawthorn (13.7%)]. In other words, this doesn't explain the relatively low number of marks we take inside 50.
What do I take from this overall? Well, we're pretty effective at getting the ball inside 50, and at converting inside 50s to shots on goal---and to goals. By contrast, we're not great at taking marks inside 50. Given the height and marking prowess of some of the players in our forward line, my lay conclusion is that this is an area where we have substantial room for improvement. So, it seems like our forward line is actually functioning pretty well, but perhaps not in a way that is playing to one of our team's strengths.
I'd be interested to hear others' impressions of this issue. As I mentioned above, I'm located in the northern hemisphere so I haven't been able to see any games live this year (actually not since 2015, unfortunately), which means my own impressions have to come from what's played on the television broadcast and the stats that are collected and made publicly available. Those who are actually able to attend games and see the "big picture" on the field may have better insights here.
. 
