Review Round 5, 2019 vs West Coast

Remove this Banner Ad

I wonder if there was the old fashioned picture of McGovern put up in the rooms with a target and highlight how we are his bitch and time to change.
 
Here's some highlights from the 1st Quarter:

Riley Bonner

giphy.gif


Bonner the ball on the run because he's in motion in support of the midfield, delivers the ball to Ryder and most importantly keeps running to put pressure up the field and provide support to the forward line. This is the reason why Riley Bonner is in the team. This was a feature of all the players during the game - the constant run forward in support.

Sam Powell-Pepper

giphy.gif


Yeo gets crunched by Powell-Pepper from his blind side near goal, allowing Boak to pounce on the resulting crumb. This was due to Powell-Pepper leaving his man and going after a player who fumbled the ball (Yeo) instead of waiting for him to recover and trying to get the ball back by covering the outlet or simply waiting on the outside for an easy possession, which creates a scoring opportunity for Boak.

Sam Gray

giphy.gif


Notice the work rate of Gray in this passage. Sees that he's not going to be part of the play if he stays where he was trying to make the ground wider in case Lycett decided to switch, and so steams in to get near the fall of the ball and then put pressure on not one but two Eagles defenders which ends up in an intercept mark to Robbie Gray.

Todd Marshall

giphy.gif


Just want to highlight this. This is what Todd Marshall brings to the side when he's on his game - elite defensive pressure. He forced at least two or three changes of direction in this passage of play simply because he was chasing and harassing opponents. It is this sort of pressure that creates the implied pressure later in the game.

Zak Butters

giphy.gif


RussellEbertHandball talks about UFH - Useless ******* Handballs. Well, this is a case of EFH - Effective ******* Handballs. Instead of kicking the ball into the line of defenders that are setup behind the play, Butters handballs to Ebert who handballs on to Powell-Pepper running in support. Notice that Howard is also running forward in this passage of play next to Powell-Pepper. The handball from Butters meant that Powell-Pepper's resulting kick could be chipped over to a waiting Duursma - who only started to work off of Jetta once he knew we had the ball, because he trusted his teammates to do the right thing. Defending is important, but the purpose is to get the ball back. Once you've got the ball back, it's time to run and spread.

Dougal Howard

giphy.gif


This play shows you why he can be an All Australian defender if he applies himself. One handed trap and gather of the ball on the run and a calm delivery of the ball. The defensive version of Marshall.
What on earth was Jetta doing? As Duursma works off of him, he is jogging along leisurely ball watching! Totally smashed by a 5-game, first-year player!
 

Log in to remove this ad.

That Riley Bonner run through the middle was great. Only problem was, Ebert was playing behind his man when Bonner made a perfect pass to him.
If Ebert is going to play as a forward he must get in front of the player standing him.
 
Following on from REH's post about Duursma's goal. In the article/video it shows Gaff and Jetta not giving Duursma the respect.

David King highlights vision of West Coast’s poor defensive running hinting at a premiership hangover

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/da...r/news-story/6cdc29fbf000c273d90f15ab3c141fdb

The still vision in the article above and the the vision in Janus' GIF

1556028536460.png


giphy.gif



and the vision of the video from both side angles in the video below, first from side on and then from behind the goal, it highlights nicely what I wrote about Duursma in his thread the other day that he winds up and runs 50+ metres to get the ball and then ends up kicking the goal from 30-50m out. Here he has probably run nearly 60m from when Butters gives a little handball to Drew, to get the ball from the Sam Gray kick to take the mark, then runs another 15m - or probably a bit more, and then kicks the goal from 20m out.

But what is great is the chain in the passage of play and who gets involved and the double efforts.
1. Butters scoops up the ball and gives a handball to Drew, you see Duursma hold his left arm up calling for the ball on the move, continues going forward,
2. Drew does a nice long handball, a bit loopy to
3. Marshall - 100m from the goal line and getting involved in the play - takes the hit from Duggan but gives off the short handball to
4. Butters who then does his slicing up according to Huddo, great long handball to
5. Ebo who handballs to
6. SPP who stormed forward but was behind Butters when he did his little side step, SPP looks up and doesn't blaze away, nice chip to
7. Sammie, who looks both up and to his right to see the
8. X man free and having left Jetta and Gaff behind in his wake.

So it was smart play by looking up and be aware who was around them as well as up the ground in front of them, as opposed to the blind bombing of the last quarter against Richmond.


 
What am I missing about Dougal?

Just saw he was named in the AFL Team of the Week. I'll grant that he was much better this week, but it felt like he'd gone from a D- to maybe a C+. There were contests he didn't kill, fumbles he should have taken cleanly, targets he should have hit ...

Am I just marking him too harshly?
He was fantastic against WC. I also liked his last 3 qtrs against Richmond.
 
Late in Q3, Rozee goaled. The score then was Port 12.12:84, WC 4.3:27.

From that point on, WC outscored us: 4.2:26 to 1.5:11.

The best WC could all night was to play even to us for a bit more than a quarter, while having a better G:B ratio, when the game was already over (1 goal, literally). They scored half of their points in that period. Impressive!
 
I suspect the WA sports minister may be a Dockers supporter (commenting on WCE's constant wailing about the hardness of New Perth Stadium)...


"I think the Eagles have got to look at what really was the problem out there, I think they had a few elephants out there that were taking short steps ... that was the biggest problem they had."


https://www.watoday.com.au/sport/af...-at-eagles-turf-concerns-20190423-p51gl7.html
 
Apologies if this has been commented on extensively, but I gotta say:
The tactic to mongrel the ball i50 forward, deliberately, was extremely well-planned and executed. Ollie Wines let slip post-game it was a Coaching plan to take out WCE's intercept-marking defenders, especially McGovern (will Wines cop any flak for that?). Apparently, your forwards were told to get in front in the F50 and expect the ball to be coming in low, maybe even grubbed, which they executed really well. Chaos ball, coming in low, and your forwards exploited it.
Several footy shows commented on the tactic and even Nathan Buckley said on radio he was going to have a good look at that game. Hinkley & assistants might have worked out a tactic to beat WCE! :thumbsu:
Congrats on strong and tactically astute win. VERY hard to beat the Eagles at home.
 
Apologies if this has been commented on extensively, but I gotta say:
The tactic to mongrel the ball i50 forward, deliberately, was extremely well-planned and executed. Ollie Wines let slip post-game it was a Coaching plan to take out WCE's intercept-marking defenders, especially McGovern (will Wines cop any flak for that?). Apparently, your forwards were told to get in front in the F50 and expect the ball to be coming in low, maybe even grubbed, which they executed really well. Chaos ball, coming in low, and your forwards exploited it.
Several footy shows commented on the tactic and even Nathan Buckley said on radio he was going to have a good look at that game. Hinkley & assistants might have worked out a tactic to beat WCE! :thumbsu:
Congrats on strong and tactically astute win. VERY hard to beat the Eagles at home.

We didn't beat them. We smashed them in every conceivable statistic. +29 for disposals, +14 for clearances, +33 for inside 50s, +5 for marks inside 50s, +21 for contested possessions, +19 for intercept marks, +6 for tackles and +10 for hitouts.

You're looking at one part of the ground, when it was an all over ground performance.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

You're looking at one part of the ground, when it was an all over ground performance.
Maybe learn to take a compliment? :)

Yes, I did focus on that particular tactic. Yes, it was one of many.
I did say:
Congrats on strong and tactically astute win.
and, Crows supporter or not, I meant it.
 
Maybe learn to take a compliment? :)

Yes, I did focus on that particular tactic. Yes, it was one of many.
I did say:
and, Crows supporter or not, I meant it.
He took the compliment. He just warned that ONLY chaos-balling wouldn't have been enough.
 
Maybe learn to take a compliment? :)

Yes, I did focus on that particular tactic. Yes, it was one of many.
I did say:
and, Crows supporter or not, I meant it.

It was more a comment on the media and others focusing on one particular aspect as if it was luck or the Eagles having an off day. Even in Ebert's interview people were talking about 'dirty ball' as if this was some new tactic going into the forward line, when all it is is just creating contested situations from which the team could apply pressure. Dirty possession (halving the contest and then using the small forwards/midfielders to crumb) as opposed to clean possession (kicking lace out to the forwards).

Pretty much exactly what we didn't do against Richmond the week before because our key forwards couldn't get to a contest in the last quarter.

But the thing was - when the forwards were in space, it wasn't like we weren't targeting them. So it was actually a combination of clean and dirty ball.
 
He took the compliment. He just warned that ONLY chaos-balling wouldn't have been enough.
Fair point :thumbsu:.
The numbers he quoted are very impressive for sure (eg + 33 i50s is phenomenal), but I did not mean to imply the win was based on ONLY chaos-balling.
I got one letter wrong. I should have said:
VERY hard to beLt the Eagles at home. :)
 
It was more a comment on the media and others focusing on one particular aspect as if it was luck or the Eagles having an off day. Even in Ebert's interview people were talking about 'dirty ball' as if this was some new tactic going into the forward line, when all it is is just creating contested situations from which the team could apply pressure. Dirty possession (halving the contest and then using the small forwards/midfielders to crumb) as opposed to clean possession (kicking lace out to the forwards).

Pretty much exactly what we didn't do against Richmond the week before because our key forward couldn't get to a contest in the last quarter.

But the thing was - when the forwards were in space, it wasn't like we weren't targeting them. So it was actually a combination of clean and dirty ball.
No 'S' required on the end of that.
 
It was more a comment on the media and others focusing on one particular aspect as if it was luck or the Eagles having an off day.
OK, I see.
It really got my attention because I thought it was unusual/clever, a terrific plan, well-executed.
Smart enough and effective enough to get the attention of the media and Buckley, publicly. I'll bet other Coaches are scrutinising that game too.
 
OK, I see.
It really got my attention because I thought it was unusual/clever, a terrific plan, well-executed.
Smart enough and effective enough to get the attention of the media and Buckley, publicly. I'll bet other Coaches are scrutinising that game too.
A lot was involved, but essentially you are correct. The "dirty-ball" tactic was the spine of it. It threw WC off from the opening bounce, and they never recovered. However it did call for the entire squad to buy into it, and to implement it it effectively, especially after our rusted-on tactic of "Kick it high to Dixon" that we have failed at for the last two years!

I would love to know who was the architect of this plan! If it was Hinkley, then wow, kudos to him, and he would have redeemed himself a bit. But good chance it came from Schofield, Montgomery, or even Bassett. Possibly input from Lycett, with insider knowledge of any weaknesses they had or feared.

Dont know how successful it will be if another team tries it though, they will be training for this eventuality, and will be better prepared in the future.
 
Brad Sheppard was given the job on Robbie Gray and whilst he did a good job, this is a classic case of stats watching and worrying about Robbie not getting a goal recorded on him. Look how he is worried so much about Robbie rather than going and putting pressure on Duursma.


man butters the creator, follow up efforts in this goal. our best passages of play this season have mostly involved all young bloods
 
A lot was involved, but essentially you are correct. The "dirty-ball" tactic was the spine of it. It threw WC off from the opening bounce, and they never recovered. However it did call for the entire squad to buy into it, and to implement it it effectively, especially after our rusted-on tactic of "Kick it high to Dixon" that we have failed at for the last two years!

I would love to know who was the architect of this plan! If it was Hinkley, then wow, kudos to him, and he would have redeemed himself a bit. But good chance it came from Schofield, Montgomery, or even Bassett. Possibly input from Lycett, with insider knowledge of any weaknesses they had or feared.

Dont know how successful it will be if another team tries it though, they will be training for this eventuality, and will be better prepared in the future.
Given our past results against WCE and the sameness of our losses, I highly doubt it was Hinkley.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top