The stats that made the difference – Carlton vs Gold Coast
CARLTON got their new era under coach Mathew Buck off to the perfect start yesterday, surviving a final quarter Gold Coast fightback to win by two points.
The final margin in ways told the story of the match, but there were some stat areas that really told the story and showed where the game was one for the Blues.
THE FIRST HALF – the even half
1st | 2nd | |||
Carlton | Gold Coast | Carlton | Gold Coast | |
Disposals | 57 | 56 | 101 | 101 |
Kicks | 37 | 34 | 69 | 58 |
Handballs | 20 | 22 | 32 | 43 |
Disposal Efficiency % | 65 | 70 | 61 | 66 |
Efficiency Inside 50 % | 43 | 44 | 38 | 33 |
Inside 50s | 7 | 9 | 16 | 18 |
Rebound 50s | 8 | 6 | 26 | 24 |
Contested Possessions | 29 | 24 | 57 | 48 |
Uncontested Possessions | 27 | 32 | 43 | 52 |
Marks | 13 | 10 | 19 | 13 |
Marks Inside 50 | 4 | 1 | 4 | 1 |
Tackles | 21 | 10 | 47 | 26 |
Tackles inside 50 | 5 | 3 | 15 | 5 |
Turnovers | 17 | 14 | 28 | 26 |
Clearances | 6 | 3 | 16 | 19 |
Centre Clearances | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
Stoppage Clearances | 5 | 3 | 14 | 8 |
Hit Outs | 1 | 8 | 8 | 20 |
Free Kicks | 4 | 4 | 11 | 8 |
Scoring Shots | 3 | 3 | 6 | 4 |
The game was very even in the first half, with very little to split between the sides, which saw the Blues only have about a one goal lead at the main break.
Looking at the table above, both teams had a very similar amount of time with ball in hand, and also had a very similar number of times inside 50.
The two areas that were really telling were the tackle count and the marks inside 50 count.
Carlton really brought the intensity in the first half, and as such recorded almost double the number of tackles than the Suns did in the first half an hour of the game. This saw the Suns really rush it with ball in hand, making it easier for Carlton to intercept it in defensive situations.
Carlton also dominated the marks inside 50 tally, recording four marks to one inside 50 in the first half.
This translated to a higher scoring shot efficiency for the Blues as they had time and space to not rush their kicks at goal, unlike the Suns.
Third Quarter – Carlton start to take momentum
Carlton | Gold Coast | |
Disposals | 166 | 165 |
Kicks | 106 | 91 |
Handballs | 60 | 74 |
Disposal Efficiency % | 65 | 66 |
Efficiency Inside 50 % | 35 | 33 |
Inside 50s | 23 | 24 |
Rebound 50s | 22 | 19 |
Contested Possessions | 83 | 78 |
Uncontested Possessions | 84 | 89 |
Marks | 36 | 27 |
Marks Inside 50 | 6 | 4 |
Tackles | 68 | 57 |
Tackles inside 50 | 19 | 11 |
Turnovers | 47 | 43 |
Clearances | 22 | 17 |
Centre Clearances | 3 | 3 |
Stoppage Clearances | 29 | 14 |
Hit Outs | 21 | 32 |
Free Kicks | 14 | 12 |
Scoring Shots | 8 | 6 |
Carlton came out from half time, and started to finally put their foot down and take a bit of control of the match.
Much like the first half, both teams had roughly the same number of touches, but what they did with the ball was the telling difference.
Carlton absolutely dominated the stoppage clearances, led by the likes of Jessica Dal Pos, and also continued to dominate the tackle count and tackles inside 50, making possession difficult for the Suns.
The game also opened up in the third term, with the uncontested possession tally for both sides increasingly significantly more than the contested possession tally did.
Carlton were also more efficient with their scoring shots despite both sides having the same number of shots in the third term, scoring two goals to Gold Coast’s two behinds.
Fourth Quarter – The Suns fight back
Carlton | Gold Coast | |
Disposals | 211 | 224 |
Kicks | 136 | 120 |
Handballs | 75 | 95 |
Disposal Efficiency % | 62.1 | 65.6 |
Efficiency Inside 50 % | 36 | 38.9 |
Inside 50s | 25 | 36 |
Rebound 50s | 31 | 20 |
Contested Possessions | 104 | 108 |
Uncontested Possessions | 107 | 120 |
Marks | 41 | 38 |
Marks Inside 50 | 6 | 8 |
Tackles | 91 | 78 |
Tackles inside 50 | 21 | 14 |
Turnovers | 63 | 56 |
Clearances | 28 | 25 |
Centre Clearances | 6 | 5 |
Stoppage Clearances | 22 | 20 |
Hit Outs | 30 | 40 |
Free Kicks | 18 | 15 |
Scoring Shots | 9 | 12 |
The Suns put up an almighty fightback in the final quarter and almost pulled off the win. They had a fair percentage more disposals, their uncontested possessions was significantly higher than Carlton’s and finished the game with +11 inside 50s.
What really let them down was their scoring. They finished with 12 scoring shots compared to Carlton’s nine, but eight of those shots were behinds. If even only one of them had been a goal, that would have been all the difference.