- Joined
- Aug 21, 2007
- Posts
- 34,790
- Reaction score
- 119,689
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Aston Villa, San Antonio Spurs
I think everyone would agree that we're doing a few things a bit differently this year.
People (even Ken) have repeatedly said that the inside 50 differential is something we really, really need to work on and correct. While I agree in general, I feel that it's been a deliberate move this year to soak up pressure and get everyone on the field in our back half so we can launch counter attacks.
The zone that we set up through the middle parts of the ground, that was reasonably effective in causing turnovers last year, has seemingly disappeared. We play a zone through the middle of the field reminiscent of the Choco days, what I like to call the "feel bad zone", where we feel bad and so give them an easy option up the field.
How many times did we seemingly have West Coast forced to kick to a contest yesterday, only for them to spot up a short to medium range leading target? It was infuriating. It was Choco/Primus era infuriating.
This all changes when we get to our defensive 50, and all of a sudden our zone seems to click and teams will have a lot more difficulty moving the ball. Theoretically there, the ball hits the ground, it's gathered by one of our back six and dished off to our runners.
As I said, I believe that this is a deliberate tactic, no different to a soccer counter attack style.
It's hit and miss, because trying to launch up the field is high risk high reward, and quite often we turn it over with the first kick out of the 50, but that's okay, because we're already set up to defend the subsequent kick in.
When it works, and we get the likes of Ebert, White, Mitchell, Boak involved, it is basically unstoppable.
Of course, to be effective, it requires you to work. You need to get more players at the drop of the ball, more players to the contest, more players everywhere. If the ball is hitting the ground and waiting for it are 3 opposition players, as with yesterday, you're in trouble.
West Coast were seemingly aware of this, and the second we had the ball in our own defensive 50, they had 6 or 7 players prepared to drop all the way back into our 50 and cut off the kick. They were prepared to leave their men, because they knew we were going long and direct. A chippy Hawthorn style doesn't suit us, and while it would have cut apart what West Coast were doing, we never made the adjustment. Often we didn't utilise the switch when we had Broadbent or Krakouer wide open and with acres of space on the opposite flank. We just went long and direct, over and over again to a forwardline where we were usually massively outnumbered.
Now, the slingshot is devastatingly effective when we execute it well. It's unstoppable when we execute it well. But West Coast yesterday came prepared, and pretty much set up all day waiting for us to slingshot. We need to be able to effectively move the ball up the field under pressure if opposition sides have parked 3 loose players in our forward 50. We need to be able to utilise the switch better than we did, obviously we need to be able to execute better than we did all over. We need to get the likes of Hammer, Broadbent and Pittard to ping some long goals early to open up the forward line. We need teams to be worried about things other than the switch.
It was all well and good recruiting Ryder, but with the gameplan we seem to be trying to execute at the moment, we're not making the most of our forward options. We all went into that game thinking that our tall forward line was going to dominate, but West Coast were ready and completely negated the effectiveness of our inside 50s.
Also, quickly, on clearances. A lot of us talked last week about how there are clearances, then there are clearances. We won the clearance stat yesterday, which for anyone who watched the game would be funny if it wasn't so frustrating. We were absolutely destroyed by the work of their inside midfielders and their clearances were a lot cleaner. They waltzed it out of stoppages too many times. I think we really miss the work of Wines in there, because not only does he throw his body around, but he reads the play and knows where to be. Priddis absolutely destroyed us. 3 votes. Boak completely unsighted for most of the game. That was a big difference. If you're winning clearances, teams can't set up any sort of defence. We got absolutely slaughtered.
I'm not sure if it's just Ollie missing or what, but on paper we should have smashed West Coast's midfield. They outworked us and out positioned us all day. They were cleaner and found the footy. When the couldn't find it, they locked it down and generated another clearance. Workrate.
People (even Ken) have repeatedly said that the inside 50 differential is something we really, really need to work on and correct. While I agree in general, I feel that it's been a deliberate move this year to soak up pressure and get everyone on the field in our back half so we can launch counter attacks.
The zone that we set up through the middle parts of the ground, that was reasonably effective in causing turnovers last year, has seemingly disappeared. We play a zone through the middle of the field reminiscent of the Choco days, what I like to call the "feel bad zone", where we feel bad and so give them an easy option up the field.
How many times did we seemingly have West Coast forced to kick to a contest yesterday, only for them to spot up a short to medium range leading target? It was infuriating. It was Choco/Primus era infuriating.
This all changes when we get to our defensive 50, and all of a sudden our zone seems to click and teams will have a lot more difficulty moving the ball. Theoretically there, the ball hits the ground, it's gathered by one of our back six and dished off to our runners.
As I said, I believe that this is a deliberate tactic, no different to a soccer counter attack style.
It's hit and miss, because trying to launch up the field is high risk high reward, and quite often we turn it over with the first kick out of the 50, but that's okay, because we're already set up to defend the subsequent kick in.
When it works, and we get the likes of Ebert, White, Mitchell, Boak involved, it is basically unstoppable.
Of course, to be effective, it requires you to work. You need to get more players at the drop of the ball, more players to the contest, more players everywhere. If the ball is hitting the ground and waiting for it are 3 opposition players, as with yesterday, you're in trouble.
West Coast were seemingly aware of this, and the second we had the ball in our own defensive 50, they had 6 or 7 players prepared to drop all the way back into our 50 and cut off the kick. They were prepared to leave their men, because they knew we were going long and direct. A chippy Hawthorn style doesn't suit us, and while it would have cut apart what West Coast were doing, we never made the adjustment. Often we didn't utilise the switch when we had Broadbent or Krakouer wide open and with acres of space on the opposite flank. We just went long and direct, over and over again to a forwardline where we were usually massively outnumbered.
Now, the slingshot is devastatingly effective when we execute it well. It's unstoppable when we execute it well. But West Coast yesterday came prepared, and pretty much set up all day waiting for us to slingshot. We need to be able to effectively move the ball up the field under pressure if opposition sides have parked 3 loose players in our forward 50. We need to be able to utilise the switch better than we did, obviously we need to be able to execute better than we did all over. We need to get the likes of Hammer, Broadbent and Pittard to ping some long goals early to open up the forward line. We need teams to be worried about things other than the switch.
It was all well and good recruiting Ryder, but with the gameplan we seem to be trying to execute at the moment, we're not making the most of our forward options. We all went into that game thinking that our tall forward line was going to dominate, but West Coast were ready and completely negated the effectiveness of our inside 50s.
Also, quickly, on clearances. A lot of us talked last week about how there are clearances, then there are clearances. We won the clearance stat yesterday, which for anyone who watched the game would be funny if it wasn't so frustrating. We were absolutely destroyed by the work of their inside midfielders and their clearances were a lot cleaner. They waltzed it out of stoppages too many times. I think we really miss the work of Wines in there, because not only does he throw his body around, but he reads the play and knows where to be. Priddis absolutely destroyed us. 3 votes. Boak completely unsighted for most of the game. That was a big difference. If you're winning clearances, teams can't set up any sort of defence. We got absolutely slaughtered.
I'm not sure if it's just Ollie missing or what, but on paper we should have smashed West Coast's midfield. They outworked us and out positioned us all day. They were cleaner and found the footy. When the couldn't find it, they locked it down and generated another clearance. Workrate.
