Late goals and seeing games out

[JonWallsend]

In light of a few comments on here that we are unable to see games out and Grant should have made changes once Billy had scored, I have looked at our record  this season and the reality  is, unlike previous  seasons, we do not concede pivotal goals late on and generally  see games out.
We have scored 11 goals from 80 mins onwards (9 of them from 84+) 4 of those  goals turned potential  draws into wins.

We have also  fought back from behind on 6 occasions  to turn potential  losses  into draws. All our equalisers coming between 73 and 82  minutes

From 83 mins onwards we have conceded 4 goals and last nights is the only one to cost us any points. The others just made it uncomfortable or in the case of Chesterfield away, reinforced  their victory

We have only been pegged back 3x this season, to impact on the final result, after taking the lead.
Colchester away and the two recent home.games v Swindon  and Walsall.  ( we did score on 85+ last night too)

Late goals scored, points gained 14
Late goals conceded- or indeed any pivotal  goals conceded- points dropped 6.

We have never been beaten after taking the lead and conversely  have never won after falling behind this season.
( PV and Barrow cup games not included- balance each other out with a late winner and a late loss)

So we are not fragile at the back and concede late on. It just seems like it

[MachoMadness]

I feel like we had a run where we were conceding more at the beginning of games or just after half time. Maybe our organisation at kick-off isn't quite right, especially given we conceded twice just minutes after going ahead last night.

Don't know if the data backs this up or disproves it but it does feel like a recurring problem for us.

[Pancho Regan]

Good information JonWallsend, thanks for that.

[JonWallsend]

I feel like we had a run where we were conceding more at the beginning of games or just after half time. Maybe our organisation at kick-off isn't quite right, especially given we conceded twice just minutes after going ahead last night.

Don't know if the data backs this up or disproves it but it does feel like a recurring problem for us.

I'll  have a look but I agree off the top of my head, that  we did seem to concede  quite a bit in the first 5-10 mins of the second half

[DonnyBazR0ver]

I feel like we had a run where we were conceding more at the beginning of games or just after half time. Maybe our organisation at kick-off isn't quite right, especially given we conceded twice just minutes after going ahead last night.

Don't know if the data backs this up or disproves it but it does feel like a recurring problem for us.

I'll  have a look but I agree off the top of my head, that  we did seem to concede  quite a bit in the first 5-10 mins of the second half

Yes, by far, it's our worst period of games in the 15 mins after half time.

Goals scored  6
Conceded       15

We're in profit in every other period.

I was pleased we got through that last night, keeping things very basic, keeping possession even though that might mean playing it across the back line and being more patient.

[BillyStubbsTears]

I feel like we had a run where we were conceding more at the beginning of games or just after half time. Maybe our organisation at kick-off isn't quite right, especially given we conceded twice just minutes after going ahead last night.

Don't know if the data backs this up or disproves it but it does feel like a recurring problem for us.

I'll  have a look but I agree off the top of my head, that  we did seem to concede  quite a bit in the first 5-10 mins of the second half

We have the worst record in the division for the 15 mins immediately following half time. We have a +ve goal difference for every other 15 minute spell, and in particular, we are the best side in the division from 60 mins on (Scored 27, conceded 12).

But it's the start of the second half that's held us back. We've scored 6 between 46-60mins and conceded 15.

Two recent matches really highlight that.

At Chesterfield, we were well on top as the first half ended and pulled a goal back. All set for a barnstorming 2nd half. Except we came out like puddings and barely troubled them for that first 15 mins, while they were all over us and scored another 2.

Then at home to Swindon, we came out sluggish after half time and got hit by two quick goals after absolutely dominating the first half.

For this squad to have a GD of -9 for the 15 minutes after half time suggests there is something not working right in how we are dealing with half time. And it's not just the numbers - we've all seen us being not at the races at the start of the second half - last night was another example. Took us ages to start probing their defence seriously in the second half. I'm struggling to remember us having a touch in their box in the second half prior to us scoring. The only shots were two high and wide speculative efforts from Molyneux.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Sorry DBR - you beat me to it!

[Dutch Uncle]

Good stuff JonW. It was very early in the season but we did lose in the league after taking the lead at Newport.

However, as you say, we are more often gaining points from losing positions (6 draws) than losing them from winning positions (1 loss, 3 draws). The Walsall match is the first where the loss was late (Newport scored in 47,66,69 minutes, Colchester equalised after 51, and Swindon after 50 & 51), as DBR/BST have pointed out, our just after half-time vulnerability

And as you say, we have indeed done well overall with late goals (>80 minutes)

[JonWallsend]

Thanks Dutch. More than happy to be corrected by the stats guru. I had probably  tried to eridicate the Newport  game from my memory

[JonWallsend]

I'm sure the management  and players are aware of this  45-60 min nemesis that we have in games. ( I'd be disappointed  if they weren't) but what to do about bit is another  matter.
Is it that do not seem to react to opposition changes in personnel and or shape until it is evidently too late or I'd it  just one of those  things?
I played under the late great Colin Richardson -admittedly  he wasn't  too great when he was manager here in 97/98 but his input and  ability  to make any changes was severely limited and nearly every  half time, especially  if we were winning  or drawing, he'd  say, 'First 15 minutes  do not give these ***** any encouragement whatsoever. Don't  let them think they're  in the game. Clear your lines, get them turned' and we would often just match up man for man and scrap for 15 minutes. Now I appreciate  the game has changed, teams don't  willingly  give up possession and inviting teams on is fraught  with danger but basics do work, not always but it allows you a foothold in the game. The old mentality of pinning teams in and saying good luck scoring from your own 18 yard box
As BST alludes to, the stats and evidence of your own eyes suggests we are not at it straight after the break but i cant pinpoint why. I don't doubt  the players mentality, nor am I seeing any huge tactical  changes by the opposition.
Every team in the world naturally drops deeper when defending  a lead, I get that but sometimes  we seem a bit passive

[DonnyBazR0ver]

I'm sure the management  and players are aware of this  45-60 min nemesis that we have in games. ( I'd be disappointed  if they weren't) but what to do about bit is another  matter.
Is it that do not seem to react to opposition changes in personnel and or shape until it is evidently too late or I'd it  just one of those  things?
I played under the late great Colin Richardson -admittedly  he wasn't  too great when he was manager here in 97/98 but his input and  ability  to make any changes was severely limited and nearly every  half time, especially  if we were winning  or drawing, he'd  say, 'First 15 minutes  do not give these ***** any encouragement whatsoever. Don't  let them think they're  in the game. Clear your lines, get them turned' and we would often just match up man for man and scrap for 15 minutes. Now I appreciate  the game has changed, teams don't  willingly  give up possession and inviting teams on is fraught  with danger but basics do work, not always but it allows you a foothold in the game. The old mentality of pinning teams in and saying good luck scoring from your own 18 yard box
As BST alludes to, the stats and evidence of your own eyes suggests we are not at it straight after the break but i cant pinpoint why. I don't doubt  the players mentality, nor am I seeing any huge tactical  changes by the opposition.
Every team in the world naturally drops deeper when defending  a lead, I get that but sometimes  we seem a bit passive

Grant mentioned it a few weeks ago, after our 3-0 Home win over Newport with Rob Streets 19 second goal after half time....but then followed Swindon. Doh! But we've not conceded in that period in the three games since.

[Filo]

I'm sure the management  and players are aware of this  45-60 min nemesis that we have in games. ( I'd be disappointed  if they weren't) but what to do about bit is another  matter.
Is it that do not seem to react to opposition changes in personnel and or shape until it is evidently too late or I'd it  just one of those  things?
I played under the late great Colin Richardson -admittedly  he wasn't  too great when he was manager here in 97/98 but his input and  ability  to make any changes was severely limited and nearly every  half time, especially  if we were winning  or drawing, he'd  say, 'First 15 minutes  do not give these ***** any encouragement whatsoever. Don't  let them think they're  in the game. Clear your lines, get them turned' and we would often just match up man for man and scrap for 15 minutes. Now I appreciate  the game has changed, teams don't  willingly  give up possession and inviting teams on is fraught  with danger but basics do work, not always but it allows you a foothold in the game. The old mentality of pinning teams in and saying good luck scoring from your own 18 yard box
As BST alludes to, the stats and evidence of your own eyes suggests we are not at it straight after the break but i cant pinpoint why. I don't doubt  the players mentality, nor am I seeing any huge tactical  changes by the opposition.
Every team in the world naturally drops deeper when defending  a lead, I get that but sometimes  we seem a bit passive

Grant mentioned it a few weeks ago, after our 3-0 Home win over Newport with Rob Streets 19 second goal after half time....but then followed Swindon. Doh! But we've not conceded in that period in the three games since.

Wasn’t Street’s 19 second goal in the first half?

[normal rules]

I’d be interested to see wimbledons stats for conceding late. Let’s hope their habit continues when they come to the km

[acacia94]

Some great facts and analysis on this post. In a game massively driven by data Grant&Co must be painfully aware of the vulnerabilities – as do the opposition of course.

[ForsolongaRover]

Some great facts and analysis on this post. In a game massively driven by data Grant&Co must be painfully aware of the vulnerabilities – as do the opposition of course.

As a manager with the game level, you obviously talk about how the game should be won, but there should surely be emphasis on avoiding conceding again and awareness of the said “vulnerabilities” that the opposition will have identified. That surely includes underperforming players but rarely does McCann substitute until half way through the second half, so is that a mistake? Is he also reluctant to substitute to change the shape or adjust the strategy thereby disturbing the opposition manager’s counter strategy?

[ncRover]

We have seen Grant go gung-ho in games late on to get a winner, but is all out attack harder to do when you’ve got Anderson and Wood at the back?
Yes Anderson was superb in the air last night, but him and Wood can’t execute a higher line to allow us push up the pitch and dominate in the same way that having Olowu allows us to do.

[DonnyBazR0ver]

I'm sure the management  and players are aware of this  45-60 min nemesis that we have in games. ( I'd be disappointed  if they weren't) but what to do about bit is another  matter.
Is it that do not seem to react to opposition changes in personnel and or shape until it is evidently too late or I'd it  just one of those  things?
I played under the late great Colin Richardson -admittedly  he wasn't  too great when he was manager here in 97/98 but his input and  ability  to make any changes was severely limited and nearly every  half time, especially  if we were winning  or drawing, he'd  say, 'First 15 minutes  do not give these ***** any encouragement whatsoever. Don't  let them think they're  in the game. Clear your lines, get them turned' and we would often just match up man for man and scrap for 15 minutes. Now I appreciate  the game has changed, teams don't  willingly  give up possession and inviting teams on is fraught  with danger but basics do work, not always but it allows you a foothold in the game. The old mentality of pinning teams in and saying good luck scoring from your own 18 yard box
As BST alludes to, the stats and evidence of your own eyes suggests we are not at it straight after the break but i cant pinpoint why. I don't doubt  the players mentality, nor am I seeing any huge tactical  changes by the opposition.
Every team in the world naturally drops deeper when defending  a lead, I get that but sometimes  we seem a bit passive

Grant mentioned it a few weeks ago, after our 3-0 Home win over Newport with Rob Streets 19 second goal after half time....but then followed Swindon. Doh! But we've not conceded in that period in the three games since.

Wasn’t Street’s 19 second goal in the first half?

Maybe I got mixed up...it was quick though...

"Rovers doubled their lead within a minute of the restart. Luke Molyneux's volley hit the post before falling to Street, who back-heeled the ball past Nick Townsend at the second attempt."

[Padge_DRFC]

We don't seem to fade after 70 minutes like we did 18 months ago that's for sure

[IDM]

Just bumping this thread as a timely reminder after today’s win..