|
Replying To Belclare1: "Galway kicked 11 wides most in the first half. Tgeir conditioning and fitness levels were far superior to the Roszies and it showed mistly in the last 20. Wides by Roscommon didnt cost them , Galway were just better on the day , the same against Mayo.." 5/6 point lead at the begining of the 2nd half would possibly have resulted in Galway throwing in the towel.
You do have a history of doing in the replay last year against the Ros,, and most noteably in Croke park against tipp and kerry.
Vishred (Mayo) - Posts: 303 - 19/06/2018 15:29:46
2113098
Link
2
|
|
Replying To Belclare1: "Galway kicked 11 wides most in the first half. Tgeir conditioning and fitness levels were far superior to the Roszies and it showed mistly in the last 20. Wides by Roscommon didnt cost them , Galway were just better on the day , the same against Mayo.." Galway and Roscommon created more or less the same number of scoring chances on Sunday with Galway scoring 16 times and Roscommon just 8 times. That is the very definition of kicking it away as they only needed to score 4 more points from their 14 wides they kicked to earn a draw.
Galway were better on the day 2nd half only but going into this game it was build as a top 3 team while Roscommon are long way from that level. The jury remains out on Galway as they beat Roscommon in 2016 and flopped badly after that if they are as good as some pundits say (a top 3 team) then they should stroll into the semi finals. Uphill task for Roscommon now to reach the last eight but i thought the same about their promotion hopes when Down beat them and held them to 0-7 earlier this year. Roscommon remain a very inconsistent team as both halves proved on Sunday.
Gaa_lover (USA) - Posts: 3336 - 19/06/2018 16:55:17
2113143
Link
1
|
|
Replying To Vishred: "5/6 point lead at the begining of the 2nd half would possibly have resulted in Galway throwing in the towel.
You do have a history of doing in the replay last year against the Ros,, and most noteably in Croke park against tipp and kerry." Sure every team has history of bad luck, poor displays and for yourselves flopping miserably on the big day!
Belclare1 (Galway) - Posts: 1626 - 19/06/2018 17:26:27
2113147
Link
1
|
|
Replying To Gaa_lover: "Galway and Roscommon created more or less the same number of scoring chances on Sunday with Galway scoring 16 times and Roscommon just 8 times. That is the very definition of kicking it away as they only needed to score 4 more points from their 14 wides they kicked to earn a draw.
Galway were better on the day 2nd half only but going into this game it was build as a top 3 team while Roscommon are long way from that level. The jury remains out on Galway as they beat Roscommon in 2016 and flopped badly after that if they are as good as some pundits say (a top 3 team) then they should stroll into the semi finals. Uphill task for Roscommon now to reach the last eight but i thought the same about their promotion hopes when Down beat them and held them to 0-7 earlier this year. Roscommon remain a very inconsistent team as both halves proved on Sunday." Sure Galway only needed to score 4 more from there wides to win by 8.. Coulda shoulda whatever... Galway won well in the end..
Belclare1 (Galway) - Posts: 1626 - 19/06/2018 17:28:01
2113148
Link
1
|
|
Replying To Belclare1: "Sure Galway only needed to score 4 more from there wides to win by 8.. Coulda shoulda whatever... Galway won well in the end.." With 75 mins played the game was still in balance at 0-15 to 2-6 (a one score game)
Here is a little more detail for you. From one of the well informed stats websites
Roscommon had a total of 25 shots on Sunday, scoring just 2-6 - that's a shooting efficiency of 32% overall.
To break this down further, at half-time Roscommon had a shooting efficiency of 43% but their second-half shooting efficiency was 18% and it looks even worse when you compared to Galway 2nd half shooting efficiency of 85%.
It was game with a four point winning margin if Roscommon had shooting efficiency of say 30% 2nd half they would have won.
Gaa_lover (USA) - Posts: 3336 - 19/06/2018 20:26:07
2113190
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Gaa_lover: "With 75 mins played the game was still in balance at 0-15 to 2-6 (a one score game)
Here is a little more detail for you. From one of the well informed stats websites
Roscommon had a total of 25 shots on Sunday, scoring just 2-6 - that's a shooting efficiency of 32% overall.
To break this down further, at half-time Roscommon had a shooting efficiency of 43% but their second-half shooting efficiency was 18% and it looks even worse when you compared to Galway 2nd half shooting efficiency of 85%.
It was game with a four point winning margin if Roscommon had shooting efficiency of say 30% 2nd half they would have won." Yes we threw it away, blew it away, kicked it away.Galway deserved their win.Best of luck to them in the super 8s where we may or we may not see them again in the Summer of 2018.
endgame (Roscommon) - Posts: 2154 - 19/06/2018 21:17:13
2113199
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Gaa_lover: "With 75 mins played the game was still in balance at 0-15 to 2-6 (a one score game)
Here is a little more detail for you. From one of the well informed stats websites
Roscommon had a total of 25 shots on Sunday, scoring just 2-6 - that's a shooting efficiency of 32% overall.
To break this down further, at half-time Roscommon had a shooting efficiency of 43% but their second-half shooting efficiency was 18% and it looks even worse when you compared to Galway 2nd half shooting efficiency of 85%.
It was game with a four point winning margin if Roscommon had shooting efficiency of say 30% 2nd half they would have won." Here is a little detail for you , Roscommon scored 1 1 from placed balls with the wind in the second half. The point was from a free against David Wynne that wasnt a free in a million years. The goal a penalty which kept them in it.. No score from play. In fact Roscommon went 24 mins without scoring... 24 minutes!! To break this down further no team wins any game with a half of football like that...
Belclare1 (Galway) - Posts: 1626 - 19/06/2018 21:24:20
2113200
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Gaa_lover: "With 75 mins played the game was still in balance at 0-15 to 2-6 (a one score game)
Here is a little more detail for you. From one of the well informed stats websites
Roscommon had a total of 25 shots on Sunday, scoring just 2-6 - that's a shooting efficiency of 32% overall.
To break this down further, at half-time Roscommon had a shooting efficiency of 43% but their second-half shooting efficiency was 18% and it looks even worse when you compared to Galway 2nd half shooting efficiency of 85%.
It was game with a four point winning margin if Roscommon had shooting efficiency of say 30% 2nd half they would have won." Hmmm. I read a very similar article to that. One line seems to be missing. Mainly Galway having a shooting efficiency of only 33% in the first half against Roscommons 43%. What would of happened if Galway took all their chances! Why all the focus on only the Roscommon wides? From memory (I haven't seen it on tv yet) Roscommon had a poor wide in the first half from a free. And a poor wide from number six in the second half. The rest were Maurice Fitzgerald attempts with no Maurice Fitzgerald on the pitch. In contrast to Galway. 13 scores were in the "scoring zone" the other three were all Shane Walsh. One from the sideline was exceptional. His first point I would class as being in his range but is classed as outside the scoring range. And a free off his left close to the sideline. If a team took a hundred shots from the half way line you wouldn't say they kicked it away. It's simply stupid shot selection.
SamandLiamSoon (Galway) - Posts: 588 - 19/06/2018 21:54:06
2113212
Link
0
|
|
Replying To SamandLiamSoon: " Replying To Gaa_lover: "With 75 mins played the game was still in balance at 0-15 to 2-6 (a one score game)
Here is a little more detail for you. From one of the well informed stats websites
Roscommon had a total of 25 shots on Sunday, scoring just 2-6 - that's a shooting efficiency of 32% overall.
To break this down further, at half-time Roscommon had a shooting efficiency of 43% but their second-half shooting efficiency was 18% and it looks even worse when you compared to Galway 2nd half shooting efficiency of 85%.
It was game with a four point winning margin if Roscommon had shooting efficiency of say 30% 2nd half they would have won." Hmmm. I read a very similar article to that. One line seems to be missing. Mainly Galway having a shooting efficiency of only 33% in the first half against Roscommons 43%. What would of happened if Galway took all their chances! Why all the focus on only the Roscommon wides? From memory (I haven't seen it on tv yet) Roscommon had a poor wide in the first half from a free. And a poor wide from number six in the second half. The rest were Maurice Fitzgerald attempts with no Maurice Fitzgerald on the pitch. In contrast to Galway. 13 scores were in the "scoring zone" the other three were all Shane Walsh. One from the sideline was exceptional. His first point I would class as being in his range but is classed as outside the scoring range. And a free off his left close to the sideline. If a team took a hundred shots from the half way line you wouldn't say they kicked it away. It's simply stupid shot selection."
Cuckoosinging (Roscommon) - Posts: 992 - 19/06/2018 22:15:41
2113214
Link
0
|
|
Replying To SamandLiamSoon: " Replying To Gaa_lover: "With 75 mins played the game was still in balance at 0-15 to 2-6 (a one score game)
Here is a little more detail for you. From one of the well informed stats websites
Roscommon had a total of 25 shots on Sunday, scoring just 2-6 - that's a shooting efficiency of 32% overall.
To break this down further, at half-time Roscommon had a shooting efficiency of 43% but their second-half shooting efficiency was 18% and it looks even worse when you compared to Galway 2nd half shooting efficiency of 85%.
It was game with a four point winning margin if Roscommon had shooting efficiency of say 30% 2nd half they would have won." Hmmm. I read a very similar article to that. One line seems to be missing. Mainly Galway having a shooting efficiency of only 33% in the first half against Roscommons 43%. What would of happened if Galway took all their chances! Why all the focus on only the Roscommon wides? From memory (I haven't seen it on tv yet) Roscommon had a poor wide in the first half from a free. And a poor wide from number six in the second half. The rest were Maurice Fitzgerald attempts with no Maurice Fitzgerald on the pitch. In contrast to Galway. 13 scores were in the "scoring zone" the other three were all Shane Walsh. One from the sideline was exceptional. His first point I would class as being in his range but is classed as outside the scoring range. And a free off his left close to the sideline. If a team took a hundred shots from the half way line you wouldn't say they kicked it away. It's simply stupid shot selection."
Yondu (UK) - Posts: 845 - 19/06/2018 23:55:05
2113236
Link
0
|
|
Replying To SamandLiamSoon: " Replying To Gaa_lover: "With 75 mins played the game was still in balance at 0-15 to 2-6 (a one score game)
Here is a little more detail for you. From one of the well informed stats websites
Roscommon had a total of 25 shots on Sunday, scoring just 2-6 - that's a shooting efficiency of 32% overall.
To break this down further, at half-time Roscommon had a shooting efficiency of 43% but their second-half shooting efficiency was 18% and it looks even worse when you compared to Galway 2nd half shooting efficiency of 85%.
It was game with a four point winning margin if Roscommon had shooting efficiency of say 30% 2nd half they would have won." Hmmm. I read a very similar article to that. One line seems to be missing. Mainly Galway having a shooting efficiency of only 33% in the first half against Roscommons 43%. What would of happened if Galway took all their chances! Why all the focus on only the Roscommon wides? From memory (I haven't seen it on tv yet) Roscommon had a poor wide in the first half from a free. And a poor wide from number six in the second half. The rest were Maurice Fitzgerald attempts with no Maurice Fitzgerald on the pitch. In contrast to Galway. 13 scores were in the "scoring zone" the other three were all Shane Walsh. One from the sideline was exceptional. His first point I would class as being in his range but is classed as outside the scoring range. And a free off his left close to the sideline. If a team took a hundred shots from the half way line you wouldn't say they kicked it away. It's simply stupid shot selection."
Marooned (Galway) - Posts: 2206 - 19/06/2018 23:57:50
2113237
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Cuckoosinging: " Replying To SamandLiamSoon: "[quote=Gaa_lover: "With 75 mins played the game was still in balance at 0-15 to 2-6 (a one score game)
Here is a little more detail for you. From one of the well informed stats websites
Roscommon had a total of 25 shots on Sunday, scoring just 2-6 - that's a shooting efficiency of 32% overall.
To break this down further, at half-time Roscommon had a shooting efficiency of 43% but their second-half shooting efficiency was 18% and it looks even worse when you compared to Galway 2nd half shooting efficiency of 85%.
It was game with a four point winning margin if Roscommon had shooting efficiency of say 30% 2nd half they would have won." Hmmm. I read a very similar article to that. One line seems to be missing. Mainly Galway having a shooting efficiency of only 33% in the first half against Roscommons 43%. What would of happened if Galway took all their chances! Why all the focus on only the Roscommon wides? From memory (I haven't seen it on tv yet) Roscommon had a poor wide in the first half from a free. And a poor wide from number six in the second half. The rest were Maurice Fitzgerald attempts with no Maurice Fitzgerald on the pitch. In contrast to Galway. 13 scores were in the "scoring zone" the other three were all Shane Walsh. One from the sideline was exceptional. His first point I would class as being in his range but is classed as outside the scoring range. And a free off his left close to the sideline. If a team took a hundred shots from the half way line you wouldn't say they kicked it away. It's simply stupid shot selection."
Some people are saying Galway were expected to walk this. That certainly wasn't the consensus in any media I heard or read. The handicap for the game was 3 points. Galway won by 4.
While the performance was patchy, it was a good win in a Connacht final against a good team with proper threat.
The goal was to get to the Super 8s by the direct route, and that has been achieved. The next game we play will take on its own shape.
WanPintWin (Galway) - Posts: 2030 - 20/06/2018 01:08:33
2113248
Link
1
|
|
Replying To Belclare1: "Sure every team has history of bad luck, poor displays and for yourselves flopping miserably on the big day!" Never change Belcalre, never change!
The_DOC (Galway) - Posts: 705 - 20/06/2018 09:12:18
2113269
Link
1
|
|
Gaalover & Yondu are paying too much attention to the stats and not paying attention to where Roscommon took their shots from.
Look at where Galway's scores came from in the 2nd half and how many times we got inside the D in comparison to the Rossies. There was a stark difference. Galway got inside the D time and time again whilst the opposite simply didn't happen down the other end.
JDF (Galway) - Posts: 322 - 20/06/2018 09:40:24
2113282
Link
0
|
|
Replying To JDF: "Gaalover & Yondu are paying too much attention to the stats and not paying attention to where Roscommon took their shots from.
Look at where Galway's scores came from in the 2nd half and how many times we got inside the D in comparison to the Rossies. There was a stark difference. Galway got inside the D time and time again whilst the opposite simply didn't happen down the other end." We missed three shots right in front of the goal no more than 25 metres out . Fintan Cregg(No.6) ran straight through the middle and kicked a very poor wide even if he passed it off there was a goal chance on. Cathal cregg missed bad one right in front of the goal on the 65Minute and Kilroy 2 minutes later. All three should not be missed at Senior club level never mind county level
Cuckoosinging (Roscommon) - Posts: 992 - 20/06/2018 10:16:57
2113291
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Cuckoosinging: "We missed three shots right in front of the goal no more than 25 metres out . Fintan Cregg(No.6) ran straight through the middle and kicked a very poor wide even if he passed it off there was a goal chance on. Cathal cregg missed bad one right in front of the goal on the 65Minute and Kilroy 2 minutes later. All three should not be missed at Senior club level never mind county level" http://www.the42.ie/galway-roscommon-football-connacht-final-4077195-Jun2018/
Think you need to take a closer look at the shooting maps. None of them look right in front of the posts to me. In the 2nd half Galway defended with much more intensity, and forced Roscommon to shoot from low percentage areas. Take a look at Galway's shots in the 2nd half. They got into far better zones and took chances.
If you're really fixated on wides, why not look at Galway's from the first half? The wind was an awkward one. More crossfield into the corner than blowing from goal to goal. You can bank on Barry McHugh slotting his 2 frees if there was a more favourable wind, and maybe Brannigan might have used his 3 chances better. Those 3 chances were probably easier than anything Roscommon had in the 2nd half.
You can't go an entire half without scoring from play, and also not have any really guilt edged chances, and then claim the game got away from you. Galway upped the intensity, won more clean and dirty ball in midfield, and had a platform to attack in waves. Damo Comer missed the sitter of the day in front of the posts, maybe I should be saying Galway should have won by 5 points!! What about when Shane Walsh took a pot shot at goal instead of going for his point? As Belclare said, would coulda etc etc. Not the first time Roscommon struggled to take their points, think back to the drawn game v Mayo last year. Horrible display of shooting, but I think a lot of that was another case of taking on the stupid low percentage option.
Townee2018 (Galway) - Posts: 281 - 20/06/2018 12:45:09
2113324
Link
1
|
|
Replying To Townee2018: "http://www.the42.ie/galway-roscommon-football-connacht-final-4077195-Jun2018/
Think you need to take a closer look at the shooting maps. None of them look right in front of the posts to me. In the 2nd half Galway defended with much more intensity, and forced Roscommon to shoot from low percentage areas. Take a look at Galway's shots in the 2nd half. They got into far better zones and took chances.
If you're really fixated on wides, why not look at Galway's from the first half? The wind was an awkward one. More crossfield into the corner than blowing from goal to goal. You can bank on Barry McHugh slotting his 2 frees if there was a more favourable wind, and maybe Brannigan might have used his 3 chances better. Those 3 chances were probably easier than anything Roscommon had in the 2nd half.
You can't go an entire half without scoring from play, and also not have any really guilt edged chances, and then claim the game got away from you. Galway upped the intensity, won more clean and dirty ball in midfield, and had a platform to attack in waves. Damo Comer missed the sitter of the day in front of the posts, maybe I should be saying Galway should have won by 5 points!! What about when Shane Walsh took a pot shot at goal instead of going for his point? As Belclare said, would coulda etc etc. Not the first time Roscommon struggled to take their points, think back to the drawn game v Mayo last year. Horrible display of shooting, but I think a lot of that was another case of taking on the stupid low percentage option." Im not saying Roscommon should or could have won they didnt. But we did miss some terrible shots. That 42 article you quoted is a good bit off in many of the positions they give as Roscommon wides. Our first wide of the second half was between the 14 and 21 out at sideline and whoever produced the article has it about 20yards from where shot actually hit from. Seen here about 2 minutes in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdx6WdxRjx8
Our last wide he also has a good bit out happened in the 68 minute was about 25 yards out just to the right of the post. So i would question how accurate that article is i have watched whole match back and some of our misses were dire as were some of Galways in the first half.
Cuckoosinging (Roscommon) - Posts: 992 - 20/06/2018 13:46:48
2113351
Link
0
|
|
Replying To Townee2018: "http://www.the42.ie/galway-roscommon-football-connacht-final-4077195-Jun2018/
Think you need to take a closer look at the shooting maps. None of them look right in front of the posts to me. In the 2nd half Galway defended with much more intensity, and forced Roscommon to shoot from low percentage areas. Take a look at Galway's shots in the 2nd half. They got into far better zones and took chances.
If you're really fixated on wides, why not look at Galway's from the first half? The wind was an awkward one. More crossfield into the corner than blowing from goal to goal. You can bank on Barry McHugh slotting his 2 frees if there was a more favourable wind, and maybe Brannigan might have used his 3 chances better. Those 3 chances were probably easier than anything Roscommon had in the 2nd half.
You can't go an entire half without scoring from play, and also not have any really guilt edged chances, and then claim the game got away from you. Galway upped the intensity, won more clean and dirty ball in midfield, and had a platform to attack in waves. Damo Comer missed the sitter of the day in front of the posts, maybe I should be saying Galway should have won by 5 points!! What about when Shane Walsh took a pot shot at goal instead of going for his point? As Belclare said, would coulda etc etc. Not the first time Roscommon struggled to take their points, think back to the drawn game v Mayo last year. Horrible display of shooting, but I think a lot of that was another case of taking on the stupid low percentage option." Very good post, you'd think Galway didn't miss any chance the way some are going on. The wind played havoc with McHugh's & Brannigan's attempts and as you say Shane Walsh went for goal instead of tapping it over the bar whilst Comer hit a wide which he shouldn't and then took his point when a goal was on if we needed it.
JDF (Galway) - Posts: 322 - 20/06/2018 15:58:12
2113386
Link
2
|