A legitimate question about the MFC gameplan/structure.

[saj_21]

Our game plan involves having a first gamer in strauss kicking out from a behind even after he has given it away twice drect from kickouts.

I just want one thing with the kick outs, whoever gets the ball first after the point is scored, FFS get on with the game. You'd think the way the player kicking out waddles over picks up ball, waits for options and then kicks it two a 4 on 1, we still think its under the old rules of waiting for the flags to be waved.

MEMO to all players get someone ready behind the goals to kick out and move the game along and restrict the time, the opposition has to implement their zone.

and Demon16, good analysis, whoever obviously Geelong were further developed to implement such and efftective game plan. The battle they had was between their ears! Once they got their mindset and attitude right the rest is history!

 

[Yabba]

He could play a more flarish, risk taking, attacking brand like say the bombers which would give us a little more excitement and optimism early, but when our kids are quality senior players we will have the all round game - defensive, and the ability to break zones without turning it over or taking wild risks.

Sorry to intrude on your board, but just input on this from my POV as an Essendon supporter is that Knights has his very visible game plan which will make us a hard side to beat when everything falls into place (development, Injuries, etc).

In his first year we had some big scores put up against us but he was intent on teaching the side how to attack and kick scores to defend, now he is starting to add the defensive side to the game plan which is starting to look more rounded and a much better side as a result.

Basically at least with Essendon I can really see the improvement over the past 2 seasons, where as I am not sure that you can with Melbourne. I dont really see a lot of Melbourne but talking to a couple of mates who are Melbourne supporters and they are not sure that there has been any improvement. That is what Bailey should be measured on, none of this 'competitve' stuff, it should be if they are better than where they were when he started.

 

[Opius]

Ok, here are my thoughts on the gameplan.

The aim from stoppages is to work the ball via handpasses out to a player who can get an accurate kick away. Often to do this players are told to peel off sideways or backwards. We rarely ever just kick the ball blindly out of a stoppage as Bailey knows it will almost certainly be turned over.

From a kickout we were trying something new on Saturday, kicking it low and hard to a man 35 from goal who gets a shepherd immediately so he can play on and kick it over the zone to a leading forward on the wing. It never really worked on the day though.

When we get the ball in our defence we are looking to switch play to the fat side and our forwards and midfielders are told to spread wide along there for a quick attack. We rarely go through the middle as with our poor foot skills and decision making the ball will come back twice as fast. When we do move it throughout the wings the aim is to run, carry and not to kick long to a contest, instead it is to hit a leading forward.

We play a zone when the opposition has a kick in and last year it worked very well. On Saturday players were lost as to where they should be and Hawthorn found targets with ease. The zone easily falls apart if not everyone is in the correct area.

The problems in executing this are:
- horrible decision making all over the ground
- players are too afraid to kick, especially in defense, Warnock, Frawley will always handpass, even if the handpass is not on.
- When carrying the ball under pressure the players rarely look up to see any leading forwards, they instead try to handpass out of trouble.
- None of our forwards can take a contested mark.
- Poor foot skills.

 

[cooney915]

Looking at the Hawthorn game Melbourne never seemed to have a forward line - with most players constantly pushed behind the ball.
I see that most people agree that Baileys game plan is to run and handball it out of defence, but against the Hawks this meant running into a brick wall of Hawthorn players and no one to kick to. This was in the middle of the ground, let alone no one in the forward line.

Therefore IMO the Dees need to focus more on building a forward line that the running backs can target and have confidence is not going to be rebounded straight back into our defence with ease.

With the forwards that Melbourne has I think they should try and emulate the Bulldogs of last year - with having having a Miller type out of the square as a tall target (similar to a Mitch Hann) and taking the best defender and going for a smaller speedy forward set up (Maric, Davey, Bennell, Jurrah when fit, Bate as a second option, Watts, Jetta, Wonna, even Sylva - all rotating through the forward line).
This will at least mean that there is some sort of movement in the forward line and with the speed of these players, would be hard for teams like Hawthorn to easily rebound the ball out.

 

[Demon 16]

Sorry to intrude on your board, but just input on this from my POV as an Essendon supporter is that Knights has his very visible game plan which will make us a hard side to beat when everything falls into place (development, Injuries, etc).

In his first year we had some big scores put up against us but he was intent on teaching the side how to attack and kick scores to defend, now he is starting to add the defensive side to the game plan which is starting to look more rounded and a much better side as a result.

Basically at least with Essendon I can really see the improvement over the past 2 seasons, where as I am not sure that you can with Melbourne. I dont really see a lot of Melbourne but talking to a couple of mates who are Melbourne supporters and they are not sure that there has been any improvement. That is what Bailey should be measured on, none of this 'competitve' stuff, it should be if they are better than where they were when he started.

I think you guys have half a forward line which is why you are able to get a few games away with the attacking, risk taking style in the moment. We however, do not.

You guys wont beat good teams in big games who are able to implement a solid zonal defense. Im hoping that when our young group of quality players evolve we will begin to penetrate zones with posession and have more options to kick to in our forward line than right now (ie/ Watts, Jurrah, Garland, Pettered, Bate.. ??)

 

[CM Sean]

Can someone do me the favour of explaining the differences between D.Bailey's G.P and Neal Daniher's Game plan. Cheers.

Daniher had one, Bailey doesn't lol

 

[davey_magik]

We try and play like Geelong but lack the skill to pull it off.

What shits me is no-one in the competition can replicate Geelongs gameplan at its best because they just have the perfect mix of skill/pace/strength/experience to do it. I just wish we'd play one on one football because we actually look OK when we do.