I decided to break down the score timeline for each of our matches so far in 2021 to search for patterns. Enjoy!
While putting this together, I've defined Game Control as the time spent by a team who is slowly winning an arm-wrestling match by consistently pushing the scoreline in their direction. This looks like a slow trickle of goals in one team's favour over several quarters, and is meant to reflect the big picture battle. I assume 1-2 goals each way is statistical noise.
Game Control aims to answer the question "if we could remove all elements of luck and everything happened as it normally would, which team would be in control?". In some cases I've decided to overlook fast starts, as the opening 10 minutes of a game often seem to look very different to the rest of the game, and the purpose here is to capture a sense of control over the long game, but I've made notes when appropriate.
Here were some of the patterns I was looking for:
- Neutral. An extended period of time (~1 full quarter) where neither team has Game Control and the scores are close to level.
- Neutral Control. The same as Neutral, but one team is in front by enough of a margin to feel in control. This is to account for situations where the leading team would be content in holding the scoreline steady. They're not in Game Control, but the match is on their terms defensively, so I'll define this as Neutral Control.
- Avalanche. An Avalanche is a flurry of goals inside a significantly shorter period of time compared to the rest of the match, and it can cross quarters. On the score timeline, this looks like a sharp and unusual slide. In some cases, one team will have full control of a match while the other team dominates within a small window of time that goes against the norm of the match. Those situations were on my mind when looking for avalanches.
I've tried to subjectively take into account the total goals kicked by each team. For example, if 7 goals were kicked in 1 quarter, but 20 goals were kicked for the match, then you'd expect 5 goals per quarter on average, so 7 goals is not an avalanche. I also checked the length of the quarter, as sometimes a longer quarter gave the false impression of momentum, and whether the opposing team was scoring within and on the fringes of this window of time, including behinds.
Sometimes a flurry of goals is just reflective of luck-based factors, so ultimately I wanted to paint a subjective picture of our ability to control matches this season. Here we go:
Round 1
Carlton
Game Control: Richmond 80%+, mildly
Notes: Following a neutral start, Richmond scored 4 goals before half time, then held our ground. We kicked 3 goals in 5 minutes to close out the game, but we consistently controlled this game as reflected by our ability to quickly answer Carlton's scoring attempts.
Round 2
Hawthorn
Game Control: Richmond 100% dominant
Notes: We started fast then held a ~4 goal lead for the rest of the match.
Round 3
Sydney
Game Control: Sydney 100%, mildly
Notes: Sydney kicked an avalanche in the 15 minutes before half time. Outside this window, Sydney held a very small edge over us for the whole match.
Round 4
Port Adelaide
Game Control: Richmond, subjectively
Notes: A chaotic arm-wrestle characterised by Richmond dominating the overall match while Port Adelaide dominated in several small bursts. Our goals were consistently spread out and included every period where Port were in front, indicating that Port never had Game Control. Port threatened to kick an avalanche in the 15 minutes before half time, but kicked 4 behinds. Near the end of the 3rd quarter, Port succeeded in kicking 3 goals in 5 minutes. That's two avalanches near the end of quarters. Outside those flurries, everything looks to be under Richmond's control amidst a chaotic scoreline that potentially hints at vulnerabilities in the Richmond team defence.
Round 5
St Kilda
Game Control: Richmond 100% dominant
Notes: We dominated from the opening bounce, and started pulling away from about 15 minutes before half time.
Round 6
Melbourne
Game Control: Melbourne 100% on their terms, but not dominant
Notes: Melbourne kicked an avalanche of goals in the 15 minutes before half time. Outside this window, Melbourne held a very small, but steady control over the game, answering every time we kicked a goal after we kicked the opening 2 goals of the game.
Round 7
Footscray
Game Control: Richmond 75% dominant
Notes: Footscray controlled the first quarter, ending in a flurry of goals and behinds. After quarter time, Richmond held dominant, consistent control over the contest. We kicked an avalanche to open the 3rd, which represented close to 50% of our score inside a 15-minute window. Most pleasingly, we controlled the game outside this window as well, excluding the first quarter.
Round 8
Geelong
Game Control: Richmond 50% mild, then Geelong 50% very dominant
Notes: We kicked 3 of our 9 goals in the opening 15 minutes, then held our ground until half time by answering each of Geelong's goals with scoring attempts. We missed several of these responses kicking 6 of our 9 behind in just over 1 quarter. Geelong's dominance began 5 minutes after half time. From that point, we kicked 1 behind and 1 goal for the rest of the match, while Geelong posted a 5-goal avalanche in 10 minutes in the 3rd quarter, then a 4-goal avalanche in 9 minutes in the last quarter, representing 9 of the 10 goals they won by. Our lack of fight in between these 2 avalanches is why I've categorised this as Game Control to Geelong for the second half.
Round 9
GWS
Game Control: GWS 80%
Notes: The pattern in this game suggests GWS was in control for a majority of the match. They quickly answered our goals. They kicked 3 goals in 5 minutes to open the 2nd quarter, then held ground while quickly answering our scoring attempts. In a 13-goal game, we kicked 4 goals in 10 minutes to end the 3rd quarter, but then GWS resumed the previous pattern until the 18-minute mark of the 4th quarter when we kicked 3 goals in 10 minutes.
We had 2 x 10 minute bursts in a game that was otherwise controlled by GWS.
Round 10
Brisbane
Game Control: Brisbane 100% dominant
Notes: We kicked 3 goals in the opening 12 minutes, then Brisbane comprehensively controlled this game, starting with 8 scoring shots in the first quarter after our fast start. Brisbane answered every single scoring attempt until we kicked an unanswered 1.2 in the closing 5 minutes. Brisbane consistently scored across the duration of the game, including on the fringes of their steepest rally at the end of the 3rd quarter, which I did not consider an avalanche because we scored several behinds during this window and they continued to score before and after this patch, indicating it was reflective of their general control over the game. Overall, this match was a concerning 4 quarter loss. Our fast start was not reflective of anything else that happened in this game.
Round 11
Adelaide
Game Control: Richmond 100% dominant
Notes: Almost a classic Richmond pattern. Adelaide had a fast start (4 goals in 9 minutes, and then 50% of their score by quarter time), but we scored within and on the fringes of this window. After quarter time, it was a one-way arm-wrestle dominated by Richmond including an avalanche in the 3rd quarter (4 goals in 7 minutes, plus more further away on the fringes), albeit with a slow, staggered 4-goal patch by Adelaide after the game was dead to open the 4th quarter. Nevertheless, Richmond controlled this game, but did allow the opposition to enjoy 2 x 4 goal patches.
Round 12
Essendon
Game Control: Richmond 100% dominant
Notes: We consistently dominated this scoreline and ended the match in a 7-goal avalanche over 15 minutes. However, we allowed the opposition a 7-minute avalanche of 4 goals to open the last quarter, which followed their 7-minute flurry of behinds late in the 3rd quarter. These quick blips have been a consistent theme for us this season. Outside those windows of fast scoring against the grain, the scoreline was consistently pushing in our direction.
Some general observations:
Subjectively, we have allowed opposition teams to control approximately 13 of 48 quarters of football until Round 12 this year (27%).
We've lost some games that we controlled due to a small window of fast scoring against the grain.
We've started fast in 4 matches (won 2 by large margins, lost 2 by large margins) and the opposition has started fast in 2 matches (we won both).
While putting this together, I've defined Game Control as the time spent by a team who is slowly winning an arm-wrestling match by consistently pushing the scoreline in their direction. This looks like a slow trickle of goals in one team's favour over several quarters, and is meant to reflect the big picture battle. I assume 1-2 goals each way is statistical noise.
Game Control aims to answer the question "if we could remove all elements of luck and everything happened as it normally would, which team would be in control?". In some cases I've decided to overlook fast starts, as the opening 10 minutes of a game often seem to look very different to the rest of the game, and the purpose here is to capture a sense of control over the long game, but I've made notes when appropriate.
Here were some of the patterns I was looking for:
- Neutral. An extended period of time (~1 full quarter) where neither team has Game Control and the scores are close to level.
- Neutral Control. The same as Neutral, but one team is in front by enough of a margin to feel in control. This is to account for situations where the leading team would be content in holding the scoreline steady. They're not in Game Control, but the match is on their terms defensively, so I'll define this as Neutral Control.
- Avalanche. An Avalanche is a flurry of goals inside a significantly shorter period of time compared to the rest of the match, and it can cross quarters. On the score timeline, this looks like a sharp and unusual slide. In some cases, one team will have full control of a match while the other team dominates within a small window of time that goes against the norm of the match. Those situations were on my mind when looking for avalanches.
I've tried to subjectively take into account the total goals kicked by each team. For example, if 7 goals were kicked in 1 quarter, but 20 goals were kicked for the match, then you'd expect 5 goals per quarter on average, so 7 goals is not an avalanche. I also checked the length of the quarter, as sometimes a longer quarter gave the false impression of momentum, and whether the opposing team was scoring within and on the fringes of this window of time, including behinds.
Sometimes a flurry of goals is just reflective of luck-based factors, so ultimately I wanted to paint a subjective picture of our ability to control matches this season. Here we go:
Round 1
Carlton
Game Control: Richmond 80%+, mildly
Notes: Following a neutral start, Richmond scored 4 goals before half time, then held our ground. We kicked 3 goals in 5 minutes to close out the game, but we consistently controlled this game as reflected by our ability to quickly answer Carlton's scoring attempts.
Round 2
Hawthorn
Game Control: Richmond 100% dominant
Notes: We started fast then held a ~4 goal lead for the rest of the match.
Round 3
Sydney
Game Control: Sydney 100%, mildly
Notes: Sydney kicked an avalanche in the 15 minutes before half time. Outside this window, Sydney held a very small edge over us for the whole match.
Round 4
Port Adelaide
Game Control: Richmond, subjectively
Notes: A chaotic arm-wrestle characterised by Richmond dominating the overall match while Port Adelaide dominated in several small bursts. Our goals were consistently spread out and included every period where Port were in front, indicating that Port never had Game Control. Port threatened to kick an avalanche in the 15 minutes before half time, but kicked 4 behinds. Near the end of the 3rd quarter, Port succeeded in kicking 3 goals in 5 minutes. That's two avalanches near the end of quarters. Outside those flurries, everything looks to be under Richmond's control amidst a chaotic scoreline that potentially hints at vulnerabilities in the Richmond team defence.
Round 5
St Kilda
Game Control: Richmond 100% dominant
Notes: We dominated from the opening bounce, and started pulling away from about 15 minutes before half time.
Round 6
Melbourne
Game Control: Melbourne 100% on their terms, but not dominant
Notes: Melbourne kicked an avalanche of goals in the 15 minutes before half time. Outside this window, Melbourne held a very small, but steady control over the game, answering every time we kicked a goal after we kicked the opening 2 goals of the game.
Round 7
Footscray
Game Control: Richmond 75% dominant
Notes: Footscray controlled the first quarter, ending in a flurry of goals and behinds. After quarter time, Richmond held dominant, consistent control over the contest. We kicked an avalanche to open the 3rd, which represented close to 50% of our score inside a 15-minute window. Most pleasingly, we controlled the game outside this window as well, excluding the first quarter.
Round 8
Geelong
Game Control: Richmond 50% mild, then Geelong 50% very dominant
Notes: We kicked 3 of our 9 goals in the opening 15 minutes, then held our ground until half time by answering each of Geelong's goals with scoring attempts. We missed several of these responses kicking 6 of our 9 behind in just over 1 quarter. Geelong's dominance began 5 minutes after half time. From that point, we kicked 1 behind and 1 goal for the rest of the match, while Geelong posted a 5-goal avalanche in 10 minutes in the 3rd quarter, then a 4-goal avalanche in 9 minutes in the last quarter, representing 9 of the 10 goals they won by. Our lack of fight in between these 2 avalanches is why I've categorised this as Game Control to Geelong for the second half.
Round 9
GWS
Game Control: GWS 80%
Notes: The pattern in this game suggests GWS was in control for a majority of the match. They quickly answered our goals. They kicked 3 goals in 5 minutes to open the 2nd quarter, then held ground while quickly answering our scoring attempts. In a 13-goal game, we kicked 4 goals in 10 minutes to end the 3rd quarter, but then GWS resumed the previous pattern until the 18-minute mark of the 4th quarter when we kicked 3 goals in 10 minutes.
We had 2 x 10 minute bursts in a game that was otherwise controlled by GWS.
Round 10
Brisbane
Game Control: Brisbane 100% dominant
Notes: We kicked 3 goals in the opening 12 minutes, then Brisbane comprehensively controlled this game, starting with 8 scoring shots in the first quarter after our fast start. Brisbane answered every single scoring attempt until we kicked an unanswered 1.2 in the closing 5 minutes. Brisbane consistently scored across the duration of the game, including on the fringes of their steepest rally at the end of the 3rd quarter, which I did not consider an avalanche because we scored several behinds during this window and they continued to score before and after this patch, indicating it was reflective of their general control over the game. Overall, this match was a concerning 4 quarter loss. Our fast start was not reflective of anything else that happened in this game.
Round 11
Adelaide
Game Control: Richmond 100% dominant
Notes: Almost a classic Richmond pattern. Adelaide had a fast start (4 goals in 9 minutes, and then 50% of their score by quarter time), but we scored within and on the fringes of this window. After quarter time, it was a one-way arm-wrestle dominated by Richmond including an avalanche in the 3rd quarter (4 goals in 7 minutes, plus more further away on the fringes), albeit with a slow, staggered 4-goal patch by Adelaide after the game was dead to open the 4th quarter. Nevertheless, Richmond controlled this game, but did allow the opposition to enjoy 2 x 4 goal patches.
Round 12
Essendon
Game Control: Richmond 100% dominant
Notes: We consistently dominated this scoreline and ended the match in a 7-goal avalanche over 15 minutes. However, we allowed the opposition a 7-minute avalanche of 4 goals to open the last quarter, which followed their 7-minute flurry of behinds late in the 3rd quarter. These quick blips have been a consistent theme for us this season. Outside those windows of fast scoring against the grain, the scoreline was consistently pushing in our direction.
Some general observations:
Subjectively, we have allowed opposition teams to control approximately 13 of 48 quarters of football until Round 12 this year (27%).
We've lost some games that we controlled due to a small window of fast scoring against the grain.
We've started fast in 4 matches (won 2 by large margins, lost 2 by large margins) and the opposition has started fast in 2 matches (we won both).