Seán Moran on how goals tend to decide International Rules series and why Ireland therefore have to show a net profit if they are to claim victory

To an extent John O'Keeffe set himself and his team up in the week before last Sunday's first Test. He made no secret of the fact that he saw goals or - in International Rules six-pointers - as Ireland's most likely route to success. In the event and despite chances created, he had to be content with one and - in keeping with his prediction - defeat.

Since the international game began 18 years ago the availability of a goal has always been seen as a specific concession to Ireland. Australian Rules has neither netting nor goalkeepers and its players appear to regard goals warily, apprehensive about their opponents' potential to score them and pleased with the novelty when they manage to do so themselves.

In the nine matches played since the resumption in 1998, Ireland have outscored the Australians by only 16-12, not exactly a major advantage. Significantly, goals have largely determined the winners of Test matches. Maybe it's just a reflection of overall superiority but only once has a team lost after scoring more goals than the opposition - two years ago when Graham Geraghty's solitary goal failed to stop Ireland losing the first Test.

As in Gaelic games, goals have frequently been watershed moments in International Rules. Only last week, for example, Matthew Pavlich's third-quarter goal marked the moment when the first Test turned against Ireland. A year ago Kieran McGeeney's goal in Melbourne was the difference between the sides going into the second Test. In 1998, two second-half goals in the space of three minutes turned the series Ireland's way.

It is also noticeable that failure to take goal chances has frequently been a symptom of losing performances by Ireland. Brian McEniff managed Ireland in the 2000 and 2001 series. Failure to take goals the first year undermined his team just as availing of them 12 months ago was a crucial element in avenging the earlier defeat. He sees goals giving Ireland an edge.

"It's an advantage we didn't convert two years ago when we created about five chances and took one. It happened again last Sunday when if we'd taken the goals it would have given us an unassailable lead. In 2000 we set our stall out for the second Test, really went out to get goals but it just didn't happen.

"Having missed those chances we were determined the second day to put it right. After a training session the day before I felt we were really up for it and I fancied us to put away the chances but we never got them."

Despite O'Keeffe's confident prescription that Ireland would need four or five goals to win the Tests, the team managed only one last Sunday. In fact over the four years since the series resumed, four goals is the most that has been scored and on only one occasion - the second Test in 1998.

For Ireland when the goals are flowing the mood is upbeat and the Australians get a little panicky. Similarly, when chances are missed morale suffers and Australian hopes rise.

Clearly the challenge of scoring goals depends on creating the openings and exploiting them. The difference between football and rules is that maybe the tackle and physical aggression unsettle players in the split seconds when chances present themselves.

"Maybe there's a bit of a fear factor," says McEniff. "I wouldn't denigrate the lads but the Aussie defenders wouldn't be behind the ditch in taking a lump out of you. The Irish lads aren't used to the tackle and that can put them off just for a fraction because there isn't that physical contact in Gaelic football and they need the bit of space."

One of Ireland's top goal scorers since '98 is Galway's Jarlath Fallon. Along with three other players he has notched two, in the two series, 1998 and '99, he played. He feels the Australian tackle is actually an advantage for Ireland.

"The way they play the tackle gives you an opportunity. You can ride the challenge because they commit themselves completely to it - they're not standing off you."

Fallon also believes a good deal can be done to create the opportunities for goals. "We should definitely work on it. The way they commit, the extra hand pass will work openings. We are that bit cuter and more skilful."

However slickly the hand passing slices apart the cover there is the occasional problem as was seen last week that the players on the end of the move may not be the players you want in that position.

"Sometimes it happens that players who aren't finishers get the chance," says McEniff. "Last week Darragh Ó Sé and Joe Bergin were on the end of good moves. But you can't tell. Last year I had John Crowley, Padhraic Joyce and Mike Frank Russell - all proven goal scorers and they didn't get one between them."

Instead it was the captain Anthony Tohill who was top goal scorer with one in each Test. McEniff points out the Derry man had considerable experience of the game and the size to discomfit the opposition but ironically a substantial part of the success was owed to a tactical innovation.

Tohill's goal in the first Test and Geraghty's in the second had their origins in soccer, exploiting the Australians' unease with the ball on the ground. Brendan Devenney set up Tohill's goal by dribbling through the defence and taking out the goalkeeper with a pass across the square.

Whatever the tactics employed, Fallon believes Ireland have been under-performing in terms of goals.

"We should score more. They don't mark us as tightly even though they're more physical. You saw that last week in the two-on-one situations. Really we should be scoring about four in a match."