Autopsy 2023 Rd 4 Tall Timber Too Good for Roos

[thylacine60]

I think north got lucky in that last little bit.
Think they were lucky to have the lead at any time also.
Most of the luck was from us being a metre or so off in kicks and handballs.
They never looked capable of beating us.

But be nice to see us start to bury opposition. It's coming.

As Einstein often said "luck schmuck".......

 

[Blue and Blue]

As Einstein often said "luck schmuck".......

He did...always banging on about his relatives

 

[T2B_]

He did...always banging on about his relatives

I'm glad the words 'on about' was in there

 

[gbatman]

Two things I liked in this game game plan wise.

1. We aren't all about getting it inside forward 50 as fast as we can like last year. You can't do that with AFL team's team defence. Go in fast when numbers are back, the forwards are gassed, they don't impact when the ball hits the ground and it comes out quickly and you get burnt on the rebound and all of a sudden your team's defence falls apart. We have become really good at holding that kick up, kicking it side ways, just eating up time, letting our side catch their breath then going in. Gives us the energy to defend and have an impact and apply proper pressure.

There were times though where we should have gone in quick, because the opposition's team defence wasn't all pushed back and we had a one on one miss match, Durdin in the first quarter, but can't hold it against him, he was playing team first and putting the game plan first.

2. This was the first game where we were happy to go back and go back inside D50 to get the ball in the middle of the ground. I've been on about us not doing this for a while now. It just opens the game up so much, makes us less predictable, brings the switch of play into play and forces the opposition to do more hard defensive running. There were a few times we did this and really opened the game up.


Both these aspects conserve energy and make the opposition run more defensively. Means we have more petrol in the tank later in games and quarters.

Really good to see us playing fisher and Durdin on the ball. We are too big slow and immobile in there at times, that quicker follower who can get on the outside quickly and swoop on the ball quickly is important as they are in general play. Neither of these guys are elite as mid/forwards but we need one and they are pretty reasonable.

I think in the off season we will be targeting a mid/forward type who has leg speed and can impact strongly in both positions.

 

[Blue__Balls]

Two things I liked in this game game plan wise.

1. We aren't all about getting it inside forward 50 as fast as we can. You can't do that with AFL team's team defence. Go in fast when numbers are back, the forwards are gassed, they don't impact when the ball hits the ground and it comes out quickly. We have become really good at holding that kick up, kicking it side ways, just eating up time, letting our side catch their breath then going in. Gives us the energy to defend and have an impact and apply proper pressure.

There were times though where we should have gone in quick, because the opposition's team defence wasn't all pushed back and we had a one on one miss match, Durdin in the first quarter, but can't hold it against him, he was playing team first and putting the game plan first.

2. This was the first game where we were happy to go back and go back inside D50 to get the ball in the middle of the ground. I've been on about us not doing this for a while now. It just opens the game up so much, makes us less predictable, brings the switch of play into play and forces the opposition to do more hard defensive running. There were a few times we did this and really opened the game up.


Both these aspects conserve energy and make the opposition run more defensively. Means we have more petrol in the tank later in games and quarters.

Really good to see us playing fisher and Durdin on the ball. We are too big slow and immobile in there at times, that quicker follower who can get on the outside quickly and swoop on the ball quickly is important as they are in general play. Neither of these guys are elite as mid/forwards but we need one and they are pretty reasonable.

I think in the off season we will be targeting a mid/forward type who has leg speed and can impact strongly in both positions.

Have felt for the last few years that we are one of the slowest sides to switch play. For some reason, we'll opt for 3 or 4 short chips across our defensive 50, probably miskick/drop one of them and waste a few valuable seconds as well, and by the time the final player in the chain is looking to kick up the opposite wing the opposition already have the space occupied.

Need to get better at pulling the trigger on a long switch kick, get from one wing to the other in 2 kicks at most, and have the mids drilled to run hard across the ground and make it an uncontested mark on the centre wing.

Carlton coming out of Defense:



1. Kick in to the 50m arc, probably a contest.
2. Chip back to the pocket.
3. Chip across the goalsquare (probably after the previous kick fell short/was dropped, and therefore this kick is under pressure).
4. Kick to opposite 50m arc.
5. Have no open options up-field, dump kick to a contest on the wing.
6. 50/50 contest, hope to mark or get ball across the boundary line.

Opposition sides coming out of Defense:



1. Kick to an open man somewhere in the direction of the corridor.
2. Short chip to a hard lead on the wing.
3. Driving long kick across to an open player on the opposite corner of the centre square.
4. Driving long kick to the forward wing (maybe after a handball to overlap runner).
5. Chisel a pass inside 50.
6. Comfortable mark from a leading forward, 30m out.


Now this is all anecdotal, and probably influenced by a bit of confirmation bias. But holy s**t I hate seeing us trying to switch the play by going back deep into our defensive 50, while watching other sides quickly pull the trigger on a longer kick and have their players up-field already sprinting ahead of our guys to make an uncontested mark.

 

[skadoosh]

Have felt for the last few years that we are one of the slowest sides to switch play. For some reason, we'll opt for 3 or 4 short chips across our defensive 50, probably miskick/drop one of them and waste a few valuable seconds as well, and by the time the final player in the chain is looking to kick up the opposite wing the opposition already have the space occupied.

Need to get better at pulling the trigger on a long switch kick, get from one wing to the other in 2 kicks at most, and have the mids drilled to run hard across the ground and make it an uncontested mark on the centre wing.

Carlton coming out of Defense:

View attachment 1658410

1. Kick in to the 50m arc, probably a contest.
2. Chip back to the pocket.
3. Chip across the goalsquare (probably after the previous kick fell short/was dropped, and therefore this kick is under pressure).
4. Kick to opposite 50m arc.
5. Have no open options up-field, dump kick to a contest on the wing.
6. 50/50 contest, hope to mark or get ball across the boundary line.

Opposition sides coming out of Defense:

View attachment 1658413

1. Kick to an open man somewhere in the direction of the corridor.
2. Short chip to a hard lead on the wing.
3. Driving long kick across to an open player on the opposite corner of the centre square.
4. Driving long kick to the forward wing (maybe after a handball to overlap runner).
5. Chisel a pass inside 50.
6. Comfortable mark from a leading forward, 30m out.


Now this is all anecdotal, and probably influenced by a bit of confirmation bias. But holy s**t I hate seeing us trying to switch the play by going back deep into our defensive 50, while watching other sides quickly pull the trigger on a longer kick and have their players up-field already sprinting ahead of our guys to make an uncontested mark.

Great point. I remember Weitering used to switch the ball often with long kicks - but this hasn't been the case for some time now.

 

[gbatman]

Have felt for the last few years that we are one of the slowest sides to switch play. For some reason, we'll opt for 3 or 4 short chips across our defensive 50, probably miskick/drop one of them and waste a few valuable seconds as well, and by the time the final player in the chain is looking to kick up the opposite wing the opposition already have the space occupied.

Need to get better at pulling the trigger on a long switch kick, get from one wing to the other in 2 kicks at most, and have the mids drilled to run hard across the ground and make it an uncontested mark on the centre wing.

Carlton coming out of Defense:

View attachment 1658410

1. Kick in to the 50m arc, probably a contest.
2. Chip back to the pocket.
3. Chip across the goalsquare (probably after the previous kick fell short/was dropped, and therefore this kick is under pressure).
4. Kick to opposite 50m arc.
5. Have no open options up-field, dump kick to a contest on the wing.
6. 50/50 contest, hope to mark or get ball across the boundary line.

Opposition sides coming out of Defense:

View attachment 1658413

1. Kick to an open man somewhere in the direction of the corridor.
2. Short chip to a hard lead on the wing.
3. Driving long kick across to an open player on the opposite corner of the centre square.
4. Driving long kick to the forward wing (maybe after a handball to overlap runner).
5. Chisel a pass inside 50.
6. Comfortable mark from a leading forward, 30m out.


Now this is all anecdotal, and probably influenced by a bit of confirmation bias. But holy s**t I hate seeing us trying to switch the play by going back deep into our defensive 50, while watching other sides quickly pull the trigger on a longer kick and have their players up-field already sprinting ahead of our guys to make an uncontested mark.

Yes and I think the key to this is how we setup this play. This might mean someone like Weitering and/or Young, instead of staying deep and holding their ground there, they have to push up the ground to open that space inside D50 up. On one side, if there is a quick turnover we don't have that tall defender holding up play or intercepting marks but if they hand back there tall opponent stays there as well. This is where opposition analysis comes into play. How do you clear those players out of North Melbourne's D50, how do you clear those players out of Adelaide's D50 so there is space to setup a switch? Do we need Newman to take his man up the ground or Weitering or Newman? How much can we drag Walker out of the D50 and make him defend across half back? Will he follow or stay at home?

The thing is we setup well, we had lose players to kick to so we could go back inside D50 and instigate that switch or coridor play or bluff switch play to open the field up ahead of us. It's this part of our game we haven't done well. Opposition have probably put work into stopping us doing that, beating Carlton is about stopping our tall forwards, you do that by stopping our fast ball movement, by stopping us coming inside and by having numbers back in defence.

Opposition team meeting would be all about Carlton have to be made to kick up the line, they can't be allowed to come inside, we have to slow the game down so we can get numbers back, double team the tall forwards, close up their space etc. Take those guys out then it becomes more about opening up the game, forward running, spreading the field etc. Those two are intimidating.

I would expect the Crows to work harder on preventing us switching play and moving it quick, you would think they will work hard on pushing numbers back to help their defence after seeing what we did to North and how well our talls went.

Other sides don't have the two talls we have so teams put more effort into stopping our fast ball movement and getting the ball inside. Scores against us are low, this is part of the reason for it, teams sacrifice their attacking run to add more to defensive run because of the talls. There is no doubt McKay and Curnow change how the opposition structure up, how much they run defensively and how they defend. If teams were to open it up, run forward against us and allow us to do the same our big boys would kick 10-15 a game between them so our slow ball movement and backwards kicking is not all us.

That might mean we have to kick backwards further, setup better for that so the switch is quicker. Having Acres back should help here. Wingers have a lot to do with how well teams switch the play.

You would also push McKay/Curnow or Silvagni up the the half forward flank/Wing on the opposite side of the ground to the play so that when we do switch we can go quickly from half back to wing or from wing to half forward.

 

[JustaBattler]

We've had a depleted midfield and lacked Walsh's transition running so far this year. Voss has compensated by having the team be one of the best sides in scoring from defensive 50 as well as turnovers - even though scores from clearances have fallen significantly - no doubt due to weakened midfield. Kennedy back in frees up Cripps whilst Walsh back in gives the side the first receiver dash through teh guts it has lacked.

I don't think we've seen the best football Carlton will be playing through the year- yet.

 

[gbatman]

I think Carlton's game plan has evolved in a massive way. Because teams defend so hard against us and we have a slower midfield, I think this has encouraged us to develop a pretty defensive game plan. Coming from where we were game plan wise last year, defensively it was chock full of holes, immaturity and ill discipline.

I'll list a few things where we were no good last season that has been solved.

1. Defending the corridor. There were games last year, the Port Adelaide game being one that stands out where we didn't defend the corridor properly and teams switched the play and switched high and went up the middle easily. It was even a problem late in the season, Melbourne and Collingwood when the game was on the line got us, going into the middle late. A lot of that has had to do with our forwards pushing up better and our mids being more vigilant at blocking up the inside space.

2. Intercept defenders murdering us. It's just not the massive issue it was. We are more accountable forward of the ball. When we kick blindly forward we also kick the ball high.

3. Our pressure midfield game. we can apply heat in the middle by playing close and when teams do it do us we don't crumble so easily. Gold Coast suns were the first team to do it to us last year and they beat us.

4. Switching the play, we don't do it. Under Voss we haven't done it. Teams do it to us and it opens us up as it does to all sides. Against North we did it. Against Geelong we did it. You get the ball into the middle of the ground or to the other side of the field it puts huge pressure on the defending team, it opens the game up, we are one of the poorer sides at switching play. We are starting to do it.

5. Unnecessary fast play. Playing on from marks or frees is done and dusted. It kills us when we play on and miss. Those quick misses are quick turnovers, it gasses our team as they scramble to transition from attacking to defending. We don't go inside 50 when the flood is back, we wait, we eat up time, let our team catch it's breath and go in, then we can impact when it does and defend. We make sure we don't have to transition from attacking to defending too quickly, which is what happens if you move the ball quickly from end to end and turn it over straight away in the forward 50.

6. And just a point on all this. We aren't going to be a super high scoring side who blows teams away. We are a defensive team, a contested team, we use a lot more of the cluck up resting and taking time. Teams also go to extra effort to defend against us so there is that as well. I think if we can improve our ball movement, keep getting the moments right to go in quick or hold up play, switching the play more, getting our kicking and ball handling better our game plan is becoming pretty sound.