View Full Version : Geelong weakness/improvement
Last year (structurally speaking) I would have said we had thrre major weaknesses:
In order:
1. Backline run & carry
2. Forward pressure
3. Midfeild class
It would seem fitness was a major part of all 3 weaknesses but we have also seen Wojak & Mackie lift the backlines run & carry while Varcoe & SJ have improved forward pressure, jnr has been a major part of Geelong improvement in the midfeild along with better ruckwork from Blake.
What are Geelongs current weaknesses? What do they need to improve to become a better team?
I can't see anything.
Of course certain players can improve foot skills, N.Ablett can take more marks, Enright give away less frees, but they are more micro improvements. I can't see any macro improvements that we can implement in to our side.
Any suggestions?
cats2rise
12 Jun 2007, 11:56
Our midfield is kicking goals which is a major asset to us. Our forward line is the weakest part of our team, and its good to see Ling, Bartel, Ablett etc kick goals when Nath/Mooney are not kicking 5 or 6 between them.
Mooney_d'King
12 Jun 2007, 12:07
Basic skills and decision making when the pressure is on. We experienced the return of the evil and dreaded half-back "long-bomb to nobody" on the weekend. I always get nervous then pissed off when they do that.
Our midfield is kicking goals which is a major asset to us. Our forward line is the weakest part of our team, and its good to see Ling, Bartel, Ablett etc kick goals when Nath/Mooney are not kicking 5 or 6 between them.
So you saw midfeilds goals as our biggest problem last year?
Fair call
I can see some problems comming up in the future in our forwardline; Hawkins will eventually push someone out which will either change our structure, which IMO is ideal now with 2 talls and Ottens occasionally resting forward, SJ creating play, while Varcoe & Stokes pressure opposition. The 6th forward pushing up the ground (Chapman).
Adding Hawkins will either change that or push out N.Ablett. Both seem undesirable options to me.
Basic skills and decision making when the pressure is on. We experienced the return of the evil and dreaded half-back "long-bomb to nobody" on the weekend. I always get nervous then pissed off when they do that.
Yeah I agree with that. We could do with a Gilbee who can direct play and act as a quarterback and kick goals from outside 50. There is only one Gilbee though, the closest we have is Josh Hunt.
someday-somehow
12 Jun 2007, 12:32
one word....disposal
haywood jablome
12 Jun 2007, 12:39
Main weakness: Disposal and bombing balls into the forward line.
Other weaknesses: Forward line inconsistency, which is alright atm because our midfielders are helping out.
crosby123
12 Jun 2007, 12:40
Footskills. Especially delivery inside fifty (Gaz, Mackie, Bartel, Chapman, Mooney, Stokes, SJ excepted)
crackerjacks
12 Jun 2007, 12:42
Agree with the gilbee type player but think our forward pressure is our bigest asset at the moment it gives our on ballers time to get down there hence reason why thy are kicking goals also, i would give n ablett a run on the ball he reads the play well and could create oportunities up forward ?
The main improvement is FITNESS. We would have won about 2-3 more games last year had we been half fit. Getting rid of Loris Betalochi (spell?) was the best thing we could have done. Also the injection of Gablett in the midfield, improvements of Bartel to superstar status and Nablett up forward and having quality draft picks come through like Hawkins, Selwood and Varcoe.
PoidaCat
12 Jun 2007, 15:45
Our weakness was our Inside 50 entry and our mental stability. Which we are improving on.
Masss#10
12 Jun 2007, 15:47
You need a class foward...no-one rates mooney and n. ablett
fishman
12 Jun 2007, 15:48
The main improvement is FITNESS. We would have won about 2-3 more games last year had we been half fit. Getting rid of Loris Betalochi (spell?) was the best thing we could have done.
Completely agree with this. Seems they are running all day now and seem mentally fitter as well.
CatmanForever
12 Jun 2007, 15:53
You need a class foward...no-one rates mooney and n. ablett
no we have no class forwards, that's why we have kicked more score than any other team and have a 150% on the table. Mooney is in the top 10 goal Kickers for the season. Come back when you have a clue.:rolleyes:
You need a class foward...no-one rates mooney and n. ablett
If by class you mean superstar like a Pav, Brown etc then we don't have one. But no one in the competition has the combined talent of Geelongs forward 6.
Mooney
Nablett
S Johnson
Chapman/Stokes
GAblett/Varocoe
Ottens/Hawkins
You need a class foward...no-one rates mooney and n. ablett
Mooney - 84 mark, 27 goals, 9 frees against
Barry Hall - 78 marks, 22 goals, 23 frees against
If you don't rate Mooney, you must reall think Barry Hall has been is playing like a bag of shit then.
tiredcat
12 Jun 2007, 16:47
I put our improvement down to lack of injury allowing a full preseason to all players and to Ottens in particular. Last year couldnt run onto the field without puffing now looks like ruckman again and is more than usefull down forward
G Ablett who I reckon had groin or op problems last year not allowing him to run at full pace or kick freely now showing what he can really do.
Getting Corey back to the middle where he belongs has improved our clearances. Forgive Joel his 9 stuffups and count his 11 tackles and 9 clearances and hardness at the contest against the crows.
Ling doing what he did best previously, shut down best opposition midfielder
Wojcinski back to form and running freely after missing a year
Kelly looking like a footballer again (Hasn't been run down once this year and is hitting targets) again after missing a year
Mackie looking like he has found a spot
Most players have improved and all seem to have great committment
May it long continue
I think we owe D Haines (fitness guru) and whoever his offsiders are plus whoever was responsible for recruiting him a big thanks
MmkMrMackie
12 Jun 2007, 16:51
I think one of our biggest problems last year was our clearances from the middle. People love to hate him due to his decision making, but Joel Corey, along with Jimmeh has been carving it up out of the middle.
Our forward structure was pretty woeful (if not, non-existant) over the past few years.
So, whilst alot of the rejuvenation of said forward line can be attributed to individual improvements (see Nathan) and various additions (a fit Dog, appearance of Tomahawk etc), there is still something to be said of the appearanace of a cohesive, working, logical forward structure this year.
Having Moons as an all-important glue guy and foundation at CHF, a more defined role for Nathan (and I guess Otto too), the expansion in rotating of small fowards (Varcoe & Stokesy's addition to Chappy and, to a lesser extent, Gazza)...etc. The result? More avenues to goal, which, amongst other things, plays a big part in securing the dubya's.
I wonder why they didn't think of it earlier..
tiredcat
12 Jun 2007, 19:50
Our forward structure was pretty woeful (if not, non-existant) over the past few years.
So, whilst alot of the rejuvenation of said forward line can be attributed to individual improvements (see Nathan) and various additions (a fit Dog, appearance of Tomahawk etc), there is still something to be said of the appearanace of a cohesive, working, logical forward structure this year.
Having Moons as an all-important glue guy and foundation at CHF, a more defined role for Nathan (and I guess Otto too), the expansion in rotating of small fowards (Varcoe & Stokesy's addition to Chappy and, to a lesser extent, Gazza)...etc. The result? More avenues to goal, which, amongst other things, plays a big part in securing the dubya's.
I wonder why they didn't think of it earlier..
Still gets back to injury, Mooney played as stopgap ruckman because of injury to King and Blake not ready.
2 back from long term leg injuries.
N Ablett not ready Garry struggling with injury and complete reliance on kingsley/Gardiner/Playfair as focal forwards with Ottens in out with groin problems and the aerobic capacity of a flea
Still gets back to injury, Mooney played as stopgap ruckman because of injury to King and Blake not ready.
2 back from long term leg injuries.
N Ablett not ready Garry struggling with injury and complete reliance on kingsley/Gardiner/Playfair as focal forwards with Ottens in out with groin problems and the aerobic capacity of a flea
Our structural problems were existant way back before any of the above excuses took place.
cats2rise
12 Jun 2007, 21:03
So you saw midfeilds goals as our biggest problem last year?
No way, not by a long stretch.
- Body Language
- The Coach
- Skills
- Basic footy smarts/brain
- The way we went about things off field
- Our Forward Line
- Bias selection towards people who needed to be dropped.
And others were all worse problems, but our midfield kicking goals this year has taken pressure off our forwards. Take Wojac for instance... He would have kicked about 8 goals this year I would think. Thats 8 less goals we need Mooney/Nathan to kick, resulting in less bad F50 entries.
no we have no class forwards, that's why we have kicked more score than any other team and have a 150% on the table. Mooney is in the top 10 goal Kickers for the season. Come back when you have a clue.:rolleyes:
Took the words right out of my mouth :p
Disposal is a bit of a problem area. It's a good thing it didn't cost us on Sunday, though.
Kicking In from behinds. We suck against the Zone, so slow getting it out.
Decision Making under slightest bit of pressure. So often we want to handball it off when one player should take it under the arm and run then kick long (like Gazza did v Adelaide)
crosby123
12 Jun 2007, 22:20
Kicking In from behinds. We suck against the Zone, so slow getting it out.
Agreed. They need to practise kickout drills. That really hurt us against the Hawks, if I recall correctly.
Live in hope
12 Jun 2007, 23:52
Improvement
Definitely fitness - The team generally and Steve Johnson, Wojinski and Nathan A in particular. Think there is further upside with Selwood, Varcoe and (in particualr) Hawkins to build further fitness (although Hawkins really is a year away from being AFL match fit)
Injuries - (cross fingers) Ottens impact over last 6 weeks (and King out) has played more part in the wins than a lot of people would credit
Mooney - no suspension
Speed - Whilst not as good as the Dogs - Think Wojinski more game time plus Varcoe, Tenace has added more pressure.
Better forward pressure - partly as result of speed (refer above) but also good second effort skills (Nathan and Varcoe make up for their low possession stats in this area).
Game plan - more confidence. Few more set plays, especially with mid field slipping down ground to kick easy goals.
Weaknesses
Footskills are the big weakness, not just in the senior team but also in the 2nds. (This has the added problem that Hawkins and other forwards in the VFL take longer to develop because only 50% of kicks actually get to a spot that they develop contesting skills). The problem with footskills is that they have to be recruited, you can only make small imporivements in training, IMO. We are getting away with poor footskills at the moment due to fantastic mid field work rate, however a couple of injuries/tiredness/better opposition tagging/flooding will expose this.
Opposition - Small forwards - still miss a pacy/strong defender who can take on the Johnsons, Williams
In all - things are looking very good. Strong/expereinced/deep/confident list - I think we can give it a shake, although we will need to maintain the high possession rate/low injuries for most of the season and definitely throughout the final series.
Weaknesses
Opposition - Small forwards - still miss a pacy/strong defender who can take on the Johnsons, Williams
M. Scarlett - pacy/strong/can take on the players mentioned
Stripey PJs
13 Jun 2007, 04:11
M. Scarlett - pacy/strong/can take on the players mentioned
Disagree, disagree, not good enough. Sorry for the grumps, just came back from a bike ride, I'm f***in' freezing and I've stalactites growing in my sinuses.
Fugsy's signature line springs to mind here: "Geelong's defenders; accountable, attacking, short. Choose two." Though we've some of the best talls and mediums in the league, I agree with LIH that we're lacking a dependable small defender. Having 5 or 6 very good options on a Jukebox play-list does little for me, as it suggests none are really good enough, especially as most bags kicked against us in our losses come from players <185 cms*. I want to be able to examine an opposition's list and know exactly who I'd like to see marking their best small forward, without compromising Scarlett or Harley.
* At the risk of emulating Mark Stevens, players to kick >2 goals in our losses:
This year = B. Johnson 8, M Williams 3, B Harvey 3.
Last year = C Brown 3, M Williams 3, R Murphy 3, B Hall 4, Schneider 4, L Davis 4, Swan 4, Rocca 4, Tarrant 3, Hyde 4, Pettifer 3, Simmonds 3, Stenglein 3, Burton 5, Riccuito 5, N Thompson 4, Gehrig 3, Yze 3 (Draw), M Williams 8, Crawford 3.
Only 6 of the 23 "bags" kicked were by players over 188 cms.
Another weakness, and I'll admit I'm nitpicking, is Key Position Depth.
Yet to be exposed thanks to a superb run of health and the removal of Loris' ammonium packets from the shower-heads. Select our 3 best forwards and 3 best defencemen, then play pooh sticks with the remaining deadwood floating about in our VFL side. Our starting KPs are all sleeping soundly at night, free from selection pressures, and there's an unhealthy reliance on Big Daddy Mooney thanks to the youthful inconsistency of Nathan & the Tomahawk. Should Cam go down....
Other teams are similarly lacking in tall talent, but at least their replacement "ins" are developing players who will benefit from time spent in the firsts, not football corpses on the verge of interment. Unfortunately after the broom sweeps the cupboard clean at season's end, our new VFL side will be filled with rangy twigs a couple of winters shy from sprouting, and ready replacements will be scarce. This could potentially sabotage a year in which you'd expect us to again be challenging for the flag. Grima's promotion should be strongly looked at to fill the gap, and I'll be watching Lonergan's hopeful development with interest. Best o' luck to Tommy this weekend too, I can't chomp into a bit of steak & kidney pie without remembering his collision.
a.f.k.a.y.o.p.
13 Jun 2007, 10:48
You need a class foward...no-one rates mooney and n. ablett
Wow.
You should be a selector with such stunning insight........
NO wonder no -one likes the swans when they have the support of morons such as yourself.......
catman2006
13 Jun 2007, 11:40
Geelong always looks good when we run in numbers and tackle and our skills have been better this year.
Partridge
13 Jun 2007, 13:04
I can see some problems comming up in the future in our forwardline; Hawkins will eventually push someone out which will either change our structure, which IMO is ideal now with 2 talls and Ottens occasionally resting forward, SJ creating play, while Varcoe & Stokes pressure opposition. The 6th forward pushing up the ground (Chapman).
Adding Hawkins will either change that or push out N.Ablett. Both seem undesirable options to me.
I don't see this as a problem; actually I think it will be a big improvement. Personally I would be very happy if Ottens wasn't part of our forward line and spent all his time rotating off the bench with Blake. He plays his best football as a ruckman, I'd love to see him there fulltime. Hawkins becoming a permanent member is only going to improve matters. I don't see a forward line containing Mooney, Nathan Ablett and Hawkins as too top heavy either, as the first two are very mobile for their size and I think Hawkins in a year or so will be fine.
I would imagine our starting 6 in a year or so being 3 talls (as above), 1 medium in Johnson and 2 crumbers - Chapman, Stokes, Varcoe etc. To me that looks a very good combination.
scooter75
13 Jun 2007, 15:17
Agree vehemently with Stripey PJs and others. Ability to handle the quick small forward always worries me. The stats shown in that post show it all. You just know that when you play the dogs Johnson will kick a bag, v hawks williams, etc etc. Its the only thing (well almost) thats keeping me up at night at the moment.
I don't see this as a problem; actually I think it will be a big improvement. Personally I would be very happy if Ottens wasn't part of our forward line and spent all his time rotating off the bench with Blake. He plays his best football as a ruckman, I'd love to see him there fulltime. Hawkins becoming a permanent member is only going to improve matters. I don't see a forward line containing Mooney, Nathan Ablett and Hawkins as too top heavy either, as the first two are very mobile for their size and I think Hawkins in a year or so will be fine.
I would imagine our starting 6 in a year or so being 3 talls (as above), 1 medium in Johnson and 2 crumbers - Chapman, Stokes, Varcoe etc. To me that looks a very good combination.
Would be great at the Dome but seems a little top heavy for some conditions (like North & Hawthorn games).
I'd prefer it how it is with Ottens only going forward when there was a matchup we can exploit such as the one we got against Adelaide this week.
year of the cat
13 Jun 2007, 16:18
From a list management point of view I think our highest priorities should be for another ruckman and another key position backman. Grima may be an option for the later position.
Aside from those I would just be taking the best talent available with skill and leg speed.
With Hawkins development next year we are finally blessed with a trio of fantastic tall forwards that will be the envy of the competition in a couple of years. Hopefully Djerkurra will become a hard, pacy midfielder that we could also do with.
It will be interesting to see whether both Gamble and Owen are able to get a game next year. Either may end up being earmarked to eventually replace Milburn. Just can't see them playing forward unless SJ gets injured.
Stripey PJs
16 Jun 2007, 12:02
Agree vehemently with Stripey PJs and others. Ability to handle the quick small forward always worries me. The stats shown in that post show it all.
Afterwards I wondered whether the KP dominated goal-kicking chart was disguising a counter-intuitive truth in today's footy; a pattern that more smalls on the field = more smalls kicking 'bags' in rotation. So to put Geelong in context, not isolation, I examined other teams with a comparable defence over the same period of time (firstly in terms of points conceded, secondly win/loss ratio) and shifted the height requirement to >186 cms to define mediums like Robbo and Rhino as non-smalls. I'll mention when taller 'small' forwards and midfielders bagged.
Geelong: increased to 7 of 23, or %30 (includes Yze in a draw.)
Collingwood: 10 of 23, or %43 (includes Judd & Yze.) Interestingly, no talls kicked bags without Clement.
Fremantle: 11 of 22, or %50.
St Kilda: 17 of 26, or %65 (includes Judd & Ling.)
Not the most exhaustive approach, but it does confirm that Geelong's ratio isn't following a league trend.
(Also, we're not losing because a star like Scarlett plays poorly.)
a.f.k.a.y.o.p.
16 Jun 2007, 12:53
Afterwards I wondered whether the KP dominated goal-kicking chart was disguising a counter-intuitive truth in today's footy; a pattern that more smalls on the field = more smalls kicking 'bags' in rotation. So to put Geelong in context, not isolation, I examined other teams with a comparable defence over the same period of time (firstly in terms of points conceded, secondly win/loss ratio) and shifted the height requirement to >186 cms to define mediums like Robbo and Rhino as non-smalls. I'll mention when taller 'small' forwards and midfielders bagged.
Geelong: increased to 7 of 23, or %30 (includes Yze in a draw.)
Collingwood: 10 of 23, or %43 (includes Judd & Yze.) Interestingly, no talls kicked bags without Clement.
Fremantle: 11 of 22, or %50.
St Kilda: 17 of 26, or %65 (includes Judd & Ling.)
Not the most exhaustive approach, but it does confirm that Geelong's ratio isn't following a league trend.
(Also, we're not losing because a star like Scarlett plays poorly.)
sorry Stripey, but WTF???
crosby123
16 Jun 2007, 15:03
sorry Stripey, but WTF???
I second that.
Just do something
16 Jun 2007, 15:21
I second that.
Oh my heads sore now. Is it stripey or Col Hutchinson???
Stripey PJs
16 Jun 2007, 15:37
LOL, sorry gang! It's an addendum to my last post (page 2) where I was arguing we needed a specialist small defender.
A little paracetamol: the number on the right is the total number of instances opposition players have kicked more than 2 goals during a team's losses in '06 and '07; in Geelong's case 23.
The number on the left is how many of those players were over 186 cms; only 7 against the Cats, the rest being smalls.
Because our tall and medium defenders are so good, the opposition scores largely through their small forwards. If we had an accountable small of quality we'd be able to restrict their scoring even further. Currently it's an area of weakness.
If Brisbane beat us tomorrow, it's more likely to be through the boot of Ash McGrath than J Brown.