Our low tackle count (and overall game plan this year)

[Arcassius]

It's been touched on in a few threads, and a few theories floated about changes to our game plan. I wanted to see what people thought has been adjusted in our game plan and structures this season, and how that has played out so far, and consolidate it all into one discussion.


One of the observations is that our tackle count is low. Do you think that our approach is to put physical pressure on the opponent with the ball, without necessarily bear hugging the guy and taking him to ground? Our guys keep their feet enabling them to shut down other avenues should the opponent dispose of the ball - a bit like the difference in soccer between a slide tackle and inferred pressure from running at someone.

What other changes have people observed or think has been made to our gameplan for this season? Whether it be roles, structure or overall strategy

How are our midfielders setting up differently, where do they rest, and where are they starting from? clogged observed Mundy playing more of a Sam Mitchell role, and Bluto observed that Barlow is playing more outside this season with Neale playing the inside role. What else?

 

[Lost_Deputy]

RTB has spoken about it a bit post Port. Was more focused on winning the ball and getting it into space. Potentially higher priority on contested possession than tackles?

 

[Bluto]

It's been touched on in a few threads, and a few theories floated about changes to our game plan. I wanted to see what people thought has been adjusted in our game plan and structures this season, and how that has played out so far, and consolidate it all into one discussion.


One of the observations is that our tackle count is low. Do you think that our approach is to put physical pressure on the opponent with the ball, without necessarily bear hugging the guy and taking him to ground? Our guys keep their feet enabling them to shut down other avenues should the opponent dispose of the ball - a bit like the difference in soccer between a slide tackle and inferred pressure from running at someone.

The tackling could also be in part an energy conservation strategy. Tackling would have to be the most exhausting process in footy right? The sheer energy expended bringing a hulking bloke to the ground must be immense. Perhaps the idea is centered on the combination of energy retention and the bolded idea above of shutting down more avenues.

It could also have something to do with the fact that guys are better than ever at effective disposals while being tackled, getting the arms up above the tackle etc. So tackles are incrementally less value. And you are WAY more likely to give away a free when you tackle than receive a HTB decision. So tackling is actually not a lot of reward for the effort involved.

Similar to the NBA trend towards points at the ring or three-pointers being the only value shots. Shooting a long two-pointer is becoming shunned because the reward on effort is lower than a three or a shot at the rim given the relevant odds of it going in the hoop. It is counter-intuitive but clearly more efficient.

I also felt like I noticed we do less gang tackling now, but that might be memory playing tricks. Much better to have one guy committed to a tackle than 2 or 3 in terms of stopping the ball post-disposal.

Or...it is just a random drop in tackling based off only two games. And given we are playing the Eagles all rationality will go out the window for a week.

 

[eastfreo75]

First to the ball usually gets tackled.

 

[clogged]

I think the side has switched from being player hunting to ball hunting. The possession count has gone up as well.

Oops, took to long to post. What L_D says:

RTB has spoken about it a bit post Port. Was more focused on winning the ball and getting it into space. Potentially higher priority on contested possession than tackles?

I think the beauty is the side can switch back to hunting the man in the future.

 

[Seppo]

I think the side has switched from being player hunting to ball hunting. The possession count has gone up as well.

Nailed it.

 

[purplepassion82]

So girl question then...

Does that translate to "playing the ball rather than the man" = to giving away less free kicks and receiving more themselves?

 

[freo84]

There is a definite strategy for quick ball movement and retention. So for example if a short option presents then it's taken. When no short option forward presents we went lateral for the switch. If the lateral kick wasn't an option then it was down the boundary line to where ever Sandilands/Clarke/Fyfe were waiting for it. We didn't want to give the ball up at all on the weekend. We starved Geelong of the ball in the 3rd and dominated them with elite, fast ball movement.

Our pressure is still there only now it's more implied. I wouldn't look at the tackle counts as a way of measuring our pressure on the ball carrier because we seemed to possess the ball more.

Mundy is having these 10 min midfield bursts where he dominates during both games this season. Otherwise he is playing more a HB link up player. Neale and Fyfe are playing as the clearance mids with Hilly and Pearce on the wings. Barlow has been playing more forward of the ball. Makes sense given his marking and ability to kick a goal.

 

[clogged]

So girl question then...

Does that translate to "playing the ball rather than the man" = to giving away less free kicks and receiving more themselves?

Essentially, yes. No Crowley for the umps to watch like a hawk helps too. As Bluto said, you're more likely to give away a free in a tackle than win holding the ball. Even now with the new interpretation of holding the ball.

 

[Tony_Clifton]

The first two games have been exceptional. This idea that we're past it has evaporated and been replaced by a re-evaluation that we are improving at a fair rate. The strength of the midfield affects everything. It has allowed a defense minus Zac Dawson to hold a tall team like Geelong at bay. It has made us not notice Crowley's absence. I love Crowley and believe we'd be stronger if he were playing, but with our dominance we haven't noticed his missing so much. I like Matt De Boer coming on as a sub and jumping immediately into the fray. I like Pavlich's flexibility, he is quick to pull the trigger on inserting himself into the centre square and it's working.

Basically I think Fyfe's dominance has had a domino effect onto everything we do. Number one tag goes to Fyfe. He works through it via toughing it out in contested possesions, allows the rest of the crew to get the 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc best midfield opponent. It has made Danyle Pearce look like a star. Hell, the drip on effect has gone as far as Sheridan.

Another guy I love is Clancy, his kicking has carry on effect. I have noticed how the oppositions best player is bumped and scragged off the ball by everyone, helping Clancy in his energy expenditure.

I love Suban but he shits me to tears with his holding the ball, how long will it take him to learn he is doing more harm when he dives on it and doesn't try to get it out. I think its important to have him in there for his toughness and making the other guys (read Hill and Pearce) walk taller. Kinda like a John Worsfold ( forgive me on this one). He is the kinda guy I wouldn't mind if he got rubbed out due to suspension. Flies the flag so the others can concentrate on their stuff.

 

[Play by Numbers]

You tackle less if you possess the ball more.

Also, tackling is only one way to force a turnover. I imagine Fremantle would be amongst the highest for pressure acts.

Finally, the good teams are well structured and execute the gameplan under duress.. If the players are quickly and efficiently moving into position for the defensive setups and intercepting the ball, you will not need to tackle the opposition as often.

 

[Halfbaked]

Corbin Middlemas had an interesting theory about the Port game. He thought instead of tackling we were putting pressure on the next ball movement. He thought we were more worried about stopping their run. I may not have explained this very well. Golf day, a few beers have been had.

 

[samFFC]

Obviously more complexity to it than this, but a key key feature of our improved performance must be a more functional and effective forward line.

Round 1: most of the game is even, we trail for much of it. From late Q3 to mid q4 we kick 4 out of 5 goals. Arresting the momentum, taking lead and pushing clear.
No doubt Mundy and Fyfe lifted, no doubt the defence made some great plays, but the leading target of Pav, the forward pressure of the little guys (plus Clarkey!), and de Boer in front half; as well as better play when moving forward (hitting targets one out etc) and the game Turns

Round 2: Tabs back makes a huge difference. Cleans up some of the set up, provides a foil for Pav, ensures Walters and Ballaz not a leading target, and over course of game this becomes telling. A foot of the accelerator in the last means we only score 100, when more likely to have scored 130+ if pushing as per Q3.

For several years have had a quality defence, and a quality midfield. But forward line has held the side back, for one reason or another. If score 100 or so in most away games, guaranteed to be a Top 4, and maybe Top 2 side.

 

[Halfbaked]

Obviously more complexity to it than this, but a key key feature of our improved performance must be a more functional and effective forward line.

Round 1: most of the game is even, we trail for much of it. From late Q3 to mid q4 we kick 4 out of 5 goals. Arresting the momentum, taking lead and pushing clear.
No doubt Mundy and Fyfe lifted, no doubt the defence made some great plays, but the leading target of Pav, the forward pressure of the little guys (plus Clarkey!), and de Boer in front half; as well as better play when moving forward (hitting targets one out etc) and the game Turns

Round 2: Tabs back makes a huge difference. Cleans up some of the set up, provides a foil for Pav, ensures Walters and Ballaz not a leading target, and over course of game this becomes telling. A foot of the accelerator in the last means we only score 100, when more likely to have scored 130+ if pushing as per Q3.

For several years have had a quality defence, and a quality midfield. But forward line has held the side back, for one reason or another. If score 100 or so in most away games, guaranteed to be a Top 4, and maybe Top 2 side.

I agree with everything you write, I was more talking about the free kick count.

 

[Pusswah]

Ross has made mention of this before, tackles equals pressure is a touch simplistic. Watching the games you'd never say that our pressure was less than intense.

 

[Grandstan]

One of the observations is that our tackle count is low. Do you think that our approach is to put physical pressure on the opponent with the ball, without necessarily bear hugging the guy and taking him to ground? Our guys keep their feet enabling them to shut down other avenues should the opponent dispose of the ball - a bit like the difference in soccer between a slide tackle and inferred pressure from running at someone.

What other changes have people observed or think has been made to our gameplan for this season?

Whatever has changed as far as tackles go, this year is actually following the same path as 2013, when our tackle differential was the lowest in the AFL. Last year we were 14th.
This year's sample size is small, but seems to me as I've mentioned elsewhere, that there's been a real effort to address our problem giving away frees in the tackle, especially for high contact. Even Selwood only got about one on the weekend.

 

[greatgatsby]

Another contributor (unplanned) is that our two most defensively oriented players, and lowest possession winners, - Dawson and Crowley - are not out there at the moment. The (re)introduction into the side of Sheridan, Mzungu and Weller can only make the pressure and spread game plan even more effective.

 

[Mr Peabody]

Corbin Middlemas had an interesting theory about the Port game. He thought instead of tackling we were putting pressure on the next ball movement. He thought we were more worried about stopping their run. I may not have explained this very well. Golf day, a few beers have been had.

We appeared to adjust our positioning to flood back more rather than press forward in the Port game. Forced them to have to slow down and think their way through the maze and pressure ahead of the ball.

 

[E Shed]

They aren't being drawn to tackle the man with ball as much rather setting up to block the release, particularly in the forward half.
Hawthorn and Sydney particularly were masterful at flicking the ball around to draw our players in for the tackle then releasing the ball wide.
We aren't falling for it now.

 

[Fred Ziffel]

You don't tackle if you have the ball.
We are definitely having higher quality, possessions.

 

[samFFC]

I agree with everything you write, I was more talking about the free kick count.

Sorry didn't see yours whilst typing mine! Agree with you as well!

 

[Mr Peabody]

They aren't being drawn to tackle the man with ball as much rather setting up to block the release, particularly in the forward half.
Hawthorn and Sydney particularly were masterful at flicking the ball around to draw our players in for the tackle then releasing the ball wide.
We aren't falling for it now.

And one of the benefits in hunting the man less and being drawn to them as they flick it around would be to be less prone to fatigue later in matches. Better decision making.

 

[Mockcockpit]

In 20 years it will be called the "Fyfe Effect" where having the best player in the league on your team brings other players to levels of performance previously not attainable. But yeah obviously shifting your training focus to speed and endurance relative to strength and power by definition means the game plan is tweaked. The slow teams will cop hidings from us. Still only April but you can't help but like what you're seeing.

 

[Arcassius]

They aren't being drawn to tackle the man with ball as much rather setting up to block the release, particularly in the forward half.
Hawthorn and Sydney particularly were masterful at flicking the ball around to draw our players in for the tackle then releasing the ball wide.
We aren't falling for it now.

Spot on - we seem to have one player who pressures the ball carrier, while other players stream toward the receivers to intercept.

 

[Andy Brennan]

Spot on - we seem to have one player who pressures the ball carrier, while other players stream toward the receivers to intercept.

Thirded on this... seems like we're more than happy for the ball carrier to be able to dispose of the ball... with every possible kick going to a 50/50 or worse contest.

Also agree with earlier posts on Barlow. Stats show he isn't in the contest, and we all saw him being the link man between midfield and forward 50 against Port cause he kept fluffing the kicks up. Obviously he did a better job against Geelong getting in there and scoring goals!