Cork Footballers

[CORK1990]

So proud yet nothing but a loss again end result
Now if this team can back this up in the All Ireland series
we would match any team in the country
special mention of some of the new players
Sean McDonnell and the outstanding fielding of Sean Walsh
One other thing can you imagne if this county of ours took football serious i mean realy serious
Where we could get to sleeping giant
Its time now to back this performance and see where it takes us
Rebela Abu.

 

[JimmyBarrySmurph]

So proud yet nothing but a loss again end result
Now if this team can back this up in the All Ireland series
we would match any team in the country
special mention of some of the new players
Sean McDonnell and the outstanding fielding of Sean Walsh
One other thing can you imagne if this county of ours took football serious i mean realy serious
Where we could get to sleeping giant
Its time now to back this performance and see where it takes us
Rebela Abu.

Excellent post 1990
I think we take football very seriously in Cork though. It’s the most popular team sport in Cork, more people play in and are involved in football teams than at anything else.
We just need to buy a few pairs of shooting boots and that would take us a long way.
Our conversion rate is shocking for years.
About 50% on Saturday versus the animals 60%. That’s some difference

 

[Ogre Moran]

Joe Brolly had become unhinged. Turn on the TV to watch a match and Brolly would be doing a self indulgent meandering party political broadcast on his self anointed soapbox. It had become totally nonsensical in the context of the GAA coverage and I suspect the GAA as owners probably had a word with RTE.

True but all the current panelists are hinged. I don't bother listening to RTE analysis any more because it's just dull. It's even more acute with the soccer. Ten years ago, you had John Giles; now you have Richie Sadlier.

 

[JimmyBarrySmurph]

True but all the current panelists are hinged. I don't bother listening to RTE analysis any more because it's just dull. It's even more acute with the soccer. Ten years ago, you had John Giles; now you have Richie Sadlier.

I don’t want to say too much and incriminate myself but the whole thing has gone to pot..
I mean why are we being subjected to “expert analysts” who’ve never even played the game. I posted on here last night about last nights Sunday Game.. ffs enough is enough.. I hardly watch it anymore

 

[peopleluas]

About 50% on Saturday versus the animals 60%. That’s some difference

There are some reasons for that difference JBM which perhaps you might not be considering(?):

1. Cork had a clear strategy of shooting for 2 pointers, whereas Kerry didn't. Cork accumulated 10 more points from 2-pointers than Kerry - and that's also some difference. A 2-point attempt is far more risky, but if you have more than half the chance of scoring with it (half compared to a shot for a one pointer) then it's worth taking the risk while understanding that you'll have a higher number of wides.
2. Cork's highest number of wides was at a time when Cork were almost totally dominant on the Kerry KO, and at the same time Kerry had turned over Cork a lot in the match. The Cork shooters knew both of those things, and so were more inclined to take riskier shots rather than risk turnovers.
3. The Kerry shooters knew it too - i.e. that Cork (after first 20 mins) were winning about two thirds of their own KOs - so it was more important for Kerry to take lower-risk shots.

While we could improve on all facets of the game, shooting included, I suspect that more attention in the Cork setup will be paid to the KO and turnover situation in the first 20 minutes.

All that said - whenever I say the above to anybody, they agree with you and not me!

 

[JimmyBarrySmurph]

There are some reasons for that difference JBM which perhaps you might not be considering(?):

1. Cork had a clear strategy of shooting for 2 pointers, whereas Kerry didn't. Cork accumulated 10 more points from 2-pointers than Kerry - and that's also some difference. A 2-point attempt is far more risky, but if you have more than half the chance of scoring with it (half compared to a shot for a one pointer) then it's worth taking the risk while understanding that you'll have a higher number of wides.
2. Cork's highest number of wides was at a time when Cork were almost totally dominant on the Kerry KO, and at the same time Kerry had turned over Cork a lot in the match. The Cork shooters knew both of those things, and so were more inclined to take riskier shots rather than risk turnovers.
3. The Kerry shooters knew it too - i.e. that Cork (after first 20 mins) were winning about two thirds of their own KOs - so it was more important for Kerry to take lower-risk shots.

While we could improve on all facets of the game, shooting included, I suspect that more attention in the Cork setup will be paid to the KO and turnover situation in the first 20 minutes.

All that said - whenever I say the above to anybody, they agree with you and not me!

Good post in fairness.
Corks poor shooting is not new though. Theyve been down around 50% since stats became available 7/8 years ago.
To put some context on the figures 50%-52% conversion would be the standard target for an intermediate club football team. It’s 60% for a senior club team.
All these figures do is verify what an auld lad will always say, that at the end of the day it nearly always boils down to scoring forwards.

While we’ve had some success off ours as we struggle to penetrate the opposition defense Shooting for 2 so often is not a long term strategy for success. It’s more a survival strategy, as you say a kind of desperation. The conversion rates are too low, especially for teams that have the firepower to score inside 30m. The stats verify that. You won’t normally see the Kerry, Dubs etc purposely building an attack for a 2 pointer.
The top teams are still figuring out how to defend the 2 pointer, especially late in the games , lots of innovation to come over the next couple of years I’d say.
On Kerry’s dominance I heard on a podcast last night that Kerry did serious damage and scored an outrageous amount directly from winning kickouts, 2-10 I think.
We scored less than half off kickouts. By the end of game after we deserted Walsh’s daft box kickouts, we worked out roughly the same as Kerry on winning kick outs but just couldn’t convert that possession on the score board.

 

[Shabby]

There are some reasons for that difference JBM which perhaps you might not be considering(?):

1. Cork had a clear strategy of shooting for 2 pointers, whereas Kerry didn't. Cork accumulated 10 more points from 2-pointers than Kerry - and that's also some difference. A 2-point attempt is far more risky, but if you have more than half the chance of scoring with it (half compared to a shot for a one pointer) then it's worth taking the risk while understanding that you'll have a higher number of wides.
2. Cork's highest number of wides was at a time when Cork were almost totally dominant on the Kerry KO, and at the same time Kerry had turned over Cork a lot in the match. The Cork shooters knew both of those things, and so were more inclined to take riskier shots rather than risk turnovers.
3. The Kerry shooters knew it too - i.e. that Cork (after first 20 mins) were winning about two thirds of their own KOs - so it was more important for Kerry to take lower-risk shots.

While we could improve on all facets of the game, shooting included, I suspect that more attention in the Cork setup will be paid to the KO and turnover situation in the first 20 minutes.

All that said - whenever I say the above to anybody, they agree with you and not me!

Kerry were/are far more direct than Cork and most other teams, therefore a lot of their chances come inside the arc in a 1v1 situation. You’re hardly going to run back outside the arc when you’ve a 1v1 near goal. This happened an awful lot.

Cork are far slower and more methodical in the way they work the ball up to the arc. In the second half Kerry knew Cork weren’t going to kick it in so could press Cork really high and it lead to a lot of turnovers in the middle third. Cork have really lively inside forwards but they do need to kick the ball in sometimes just to keep teams guessing a bit more because it is very predictable.

Without the Clifford red, which was a tad harsh, Cork would have lost by approx 8-10 points. Kerry had fully taken over at that point and the burst after the red card saved the game. So there’s loads to be positive about but we shouldn’t gloss over some glaring issues.

 

[Barry K O Bama]

Kerry were/are far more direct than Cork and most other teams, therefore a lot of their chances come inside the arc in a 1v1 situation. You’re hardly going to run back outside the arc when you’ve a 1v1 near goal. This happened an awful lot.

Cork are far slower and more methodical in the way they work the ball up to the arc. In the second half Kerry knew Cork weren’t going to kick it in so could press Cork really high and it lead to a lot of turnovers in the middle third. Cork have really lively inside forwards but they do need to kick the ball in sometimes just to keep teams guessing a bit more because it is very predictable.

Without the Clifford red, which was a tad harsh, Cork would have lost by approx 8-10 points. Kerry had fully taken over at that point and the burst after the red card saved the game. So there’s loads to be positive about but we shouldn’t gloss over some glaring issues.

I'd pretty much agree with this.

But O Se's goal was huge and should not have stood.

We could easily have got another goal. We created more goal chances.

We didn't play for first 20 mins but were the better side thereafter IMO.

This side has shown huge character and no one will want to face us now.

We could be onto something here IMO

 

[peopleluas]

So there’s loads to be positive about but we shouldn’t gloss over some glaring issues.

Yes there's a difference in directness, but I think if we had David Clifford (who I'd consider to have been MOTM) playing for us, we'd also pull out the other forwards to give him space and deliver in direct ball to him. But we don't have him.

My post wasn't intending to be positive, nor to gloss over some glaring issues either. My point was that, in the context of the players we have, I thought that the KO and turnovers in the first 20 mins are where the most room for improvement is (for whatever reason there were a cases of players not coming for the ball), and by comparison I thought that the shooting wasn't really worse than Kerry's on a wet night. Of course we want it to be better!

 

[JimmyBarrySmurph]

We could be onto something here IMO

If a sentence ever captured Cork football.