Are our forwards one legged?

[the ranter]

SUMMARY : READ ONLY THE FIRST 4 PARAGRAPHS.
If we want to play the game in the oppositions half then our forwards 'defensive' abilities are the key.

Each time the opposition backmen, quickly, easily and efficiently moves the ball out of their defence, it shows our forwards as being only one dimensional and half a player having 'attacking skills' but no 'defensive skills'.

OBVIOUSLY……..
Their BACK MEN want to win the contest and get the ball out quickly.
Our forwards want to win the contest and kick a goal or if we lose the contest stop them from moving the ball out of their defensive zone.

These are the two halves of a forward – the 'attacking ability' and 'defensive ability'.


FULL ITEM:

WE DON'T WANT FORWARDS THAT ARE HALF A PLAYER.

Two quotes about our grand final performance……..

"The back 6 didn't fall apart in the GF at all. The midfield was killed and the forwards were ineffective and played very little defense. The backs stood up reasonably well in the circumstances. Presti beat Brown yet again and Wakelin, while beaten, competed 1 on 1 as well as anyone ever does against Lynch - especially the way ball flowed forward. A couple of the smalls were disappointing. We didn’t lose because of the Brisbane forwards dominance we lost because we couldn’t create scoring opportunities and when we did we couldn't do anything with them."

"The set plays from the kick out were smothered by Brisbane. The sent numbers down to guard every space and then fought like men possessed to keep the ball in. They were brilliant and we once again had no plan B."

How could you blame our forwards when our defence couldn't get the ball out of our 50 metre zone?

That comes down to the fact that we have some forwards who have only half a forwards skills.

What abilities do forwards need?

Mark and goal, running into space to mark, crunching the pack and taking a mark, beating your man one on one and snapping for goal, taking a speccy over the pack, sharking for crumbs and snapping a goal.
These are some of the "attacking" skills of the forward 6.

But these 'attacking skills' are the skills of half a player. Half a forward.
Good forwards also must have 'defensive skills'.

Our forward six in 1990 - apart from when Daic's was up forward you would realistically say that our forwards 'attacking skills' were pretty average.

However their 'defensive skills were above average'. When the ball was in the oppositions defensive zone we locked it in there till they panicked and stuffed up or the ball bounced our way.

I don't think the Lions forward six possess the 'attacking skills' of individual champions (there not going to make all time greatest lists). But their 'defensive skills' can be superb. (Leigh did coach our forwards into a similar pattern in 1990).

They lock the ball into your defensive zone until one of your players stuffs up or keeping it there gives them repeated shots till they get a goal.

The idea of the game is to play it in your opponents defensive zone for the majority of the game in order to maximize your opportunities to score.

How do your forward 6 develop their defensive skills?

One way is to sit down and study tapes of the oppositions defensive unit –
Some defensive units actually have familiar patterns or routines they consciously (or unconsciously) revert to when bringing the ball out of defence.

Human nature dictates that when you do something in a tight situation that's successful – individuals and the group are likely to keep doing it, often unconciously.

When you scrutinize an opposition back 6, watch how and when they switch from man on man to zone.
Study their zone pattern and the way they work it (if they have the talent to be able to switch from man on man to zone).

Why do all this? So that when their defence grab's the ball the forwards can anticipate what their opponents are likely to do and use their 'defensive' skills to lock the ball up in the our forward zone. To make it as difficult as possible for them to get it out of their defensive zone.

We all know that when you are coaching forwards you will develop plans, patterns, strategies, a method to beat the defence –
"we'll exploit their lack of height and keep the forward line open"
" we'll create space, kick to it and have our speedsters run on to it"
"we'll isolate one match up which we can win most of the time".
Many forward coaches and players don't put under the microscope the opposing backmen's defensive patterns, and strategies that they often revert to when they get the ball, or are under pressure.

A forwards defensive role is to counter a defence's 'SYSTEM' (or method), in order to keep the ball in the forward zone.

As I said above Brisbanes forwards generally across the season, are average in their offensive ability but consistent in their defensive ability. That defensive ability to counter and frustrate an opposing defensive units 'system'.

If we want to play the game in the oppositions half then our forwards 'defensive' abilities are the key.

Each time the opposition backmen, quickly, easily and efficiently move the ball out of their defence, it shows our forwards as being only one dimensional and half a player having 'attacking skills' but no 'defensive skills'.

They want to win the contest and get the ball out quickly
We want to win the contest and kick a goal or if we lose the contest stop them from moving the ball out of their defensive zone.

These are the two halves of a forward – the 'attacking ability' and 'defensive ability'.

 

[GlovemanGayfer]

I think that we have a much better mix of attacking defenders than defensive attackers. I think we attack much better from defence and allow the ball out of attack to easily.

 

[Whisky_McKay]

You write some interesting thought provoking stuff.
However I think you over analyse the game.

Allan Jeans said on many occasions "Football is a very simple game either we have the ball, they have the ball or the ball is in dispute - football is not now, nor will it ever be, anything more than that".

I think Matthews has the very same KISS apporach.

Interesting tho.

 

[dan warna]

i would concur, i remember a game at the MCG, early 90s where st kilda with lockett, loewie, winmar, in perfect conditions were kept shut out by nearly 15 minutes of stop dead defensive football, kept getting punched over the boundary, runners couldn't break free, etc.

you watch brisbane now, when their midfielders are on top, they are raining goals on you, when their midfield is shut down (as we did to them mid season) they play a 17 man defense and shut down your attack, with relentless body work, then, when they strategically believe you're blunted, they'll wack a couple on, or get you on the rebound.

for such an attacking player, lethal is master defensive coach.

 

[the ranter]

perhaps our game is just chaos but would yabby tell you what he really teaches?

Originally posted by Whisky_McKay
You write some interesting thought provoking stuff.
However I think you over analyse the game.

Allan Jeans said on many occasions "Football is a very simple game either we have the ball, they have the ball or the ball is in dispute - football is not now, nor will it ever be, anything more than that".

I think Matthews has the very same KISS apporach.

Interesting tho.

Yeah I've had that arguement with a lot of folk.

Is it Chaos theory out there where any plays, strategies, patterns you develop on the training track ARE TOTALLY MEANINGLESS. or do good teams run systems which they adjust and adapt.

watching juniours you can see two teams where across the board they have the same level of ball skills.

One will devour the other though and win by 100 points displaying disciplined patterns and real positional competency.

I've seen the really good juniour coaches instilling basic patterns by running 'what if' scenarios slowly.

then bring the forwards and run them at real time speed.

A good basketball coach said to me...'it may look like chaos on the court but I teach patterns of play for every situation. SAme as grid iron where they have play books with strict strategies.

perhaps our game is just chaos and talking about strategies is a crock of dogs faeces. But i've seen some coaches create strict patterns with the right personnel which a) worked and b) he varied.

 

[the ranter]

Originally posted by GlovemanGayfer
I think that we have a much better mix of attacking defenders than defensive attackers. I think we attack much better from defence and allow the ball out of attack to easily.

plenty of matches over the past two years where our attack out of defence has been breathtaking.

but then it hurtles back in a micro second out of our forward zone.

creating the space and movement to do that is certainly a hallmark of a defence that is NOT MEDIOCRE.

 

[Jabso]

Barring the grand final I think our forwards are quite good at the defensive side of the game.
Tarrant chases and chases and covers the loose man in defence. In the game vs. Freo a freo defender gathered the ball, Bell was pushing up the wing and Tarrant saw this and covered Bell and the Freo player was forced to kick to a contest.
Didak is great at chasing and is very underated at the defensive side of the game. Rocca is also quite good at this however his job is more blocking and bullocking than chasing.

 

[GlovemanGayfer]

Quite good is not really good enough. Look at the flak our back line (BJ) cops when they turn the ball over by foot. The forwards should be just as accountable for turning the ball over by staying down after a contest, not chasing etc. Forwards get it too easy in the AFL in this area. That said there has been times when our forwards do a good job it just needs to happen 95 times out of 100 not 15.

 

[the ranter]

It would be easy enough for the forward coach to count up how many times a forward tackled but that means nothing.

its really about how many times a forward prevents a defender from getting away an effective/ successful disposal.

jjust sprinting into a defenders space could result in a defender stuffing up his disposal with the result that its kept in our forward zone.

though an effective tackle ( where the defender is ineffective int getting the ball away), a smother or even a spoil that results in a tap on to one of our players in the clear would also count.

anything that is 'pressure' that flips the ball over to our advantage and keeps it in our forward zone.

There have been quarters when our forwards have worked their butts off and the opposing backmen have stuffed up big time trying to get the ball out

I can name other quarters or even halves when the ball kept firing out of their back line as if they were using a bazooka...

 

[MarkT]

A couple of factors I think are relevant:

It matters nothing how many goals you kick and how many the opposition kick. These are mere numbers for statisticians to muse over. It is the ration of goals for and against that is the only relevant stat. If we kick only 2 goals a game but concede only 1 we win the premiership.

As far as preventing run out of the forward line is measured you have to examine the forward set up. Two points are relevant to Collingwood.

Firstly we play a man (or two) short up forward. That means by definition there is more space when we need forwards to get the ball but also more space when the defenders have the ball. Countering that is the flood but quick ball movement is the anti flood weapon and we move it quickly enough often enough to score heavily enough to win games often enough at present.

Secondly, our strength up forward is the mark and kick aspect. We have 1 as yet inconsistent but talented small forward in Didak, 2 quality marking options and the rest are midfielders. The object for Tarrant is to be alone so on the rebound he will get caught out. Rocca has less focus on getting by him and more on body contest and he will more often be closer to his man. Didak is an attacking player. His fault in my eyes is not that he doesn't defend because I want him very attack orientated. His fault is he doesn’t score enough goals because he doesn’t get the ball enough.

Now add Cameron Cloke to our forward zone and I expect the opposition to rebound better than they do. That is not a bad thing if the attack is improved by a greater degree. Having the opposition have to man up Rocca Tarrant Cloke and a floating Fraser will make us a little cumbersome up forward. I don't care. We have a great contest winning midfield that can pick up the forward defensive slack.

If we are to beat Brisbane we can only ever possibly achieve it by beating them with marking forwards and outscore them. Sure we can ask more defensively of the forwards and no doubt that will be asked. I don’t actually think we have a particular problem in the regard but in any even my concern is that we need to be more dangerous not more defensive.

If we could add a quality tap ruckman to our team we would achieve all the aims in question. The ball would get forward quicker and more accurately and the forwards would be more often advantaged and less often disadvantaged. The opposition backs would spend more time worrying about our forwards and less time making position and running out.

 

[the ranter]

nice analysis...very rational.

I agree with just about every point in your summary.

Especially, our need if we are going to play forwards (whose greatest abilities are on the attack side of the ledger) of requiring that they convert more of the opportunites.

Mind you, as you point out, if the opportunites they get are rubbish that makes it easier for the opponents backmen.

Peter McKenna once commented that he never had to leave the ground. He'd just run into space and Barry Price would hit him on the chest every time which made it easy for him and made him look good.

I remember watching Couch and baristow contstantly hitting Ablett on the chest. They knew where he would be every time and made it look very easy.

that's were superb field kicking skills are invaluable.

Buckley has them the majority of the time.

He can Barry Price it to the forwards.

As you said though a good tap ruckman will give them more time.
because at the moment they spend all of their time sharking the ball as the other ruckmen kill us. that leaves little time or space for that killer delivery to our forwards.

 

[labrooy]

I am a huge fan of Bucks and think he will go down in history as one of the all time greats of Collingwood, BUT, to say he has Barry Price-like skills delivering to the forwards is not correct.

If there is one skill Bucks doesn't have in abundance is his delivery to the forwards. That is not to say he is bad at it but by the same token he is not brilliant at it either.

This is where we seem to fall down. Our midfielders seem to struggle with their delivery to the forward line. Tarrant and Rocca make up for a lot of it with strong marking but on days when they are well matched the ball hits the ground a lot. Our small forwards have often been disappointing in these circumstances resulting in the ball coming out of offense far too easily.

If the game against the Weagles is an indicator, and I sure hope its not, then the new generation of midfielders don't seem to possess great delivery skills either.

the ranter is right, the defensive skills of the forwards is probably the single major factor to determine if we can win the flag this year. Players like Didak, Davis etc need to learn to choke the defenders and keep the ball in the forward line until the opposition make a mistake.

 

[the ranter]

Originally posted by labrooy

If there is one skill Bucks doesn't have in abundance is his delivery to the forwards. That is not to say he is bad at it but by the same token he is not brilliant at it either.

Point taken....might watch that a little more closely this year, or go back through ten years of buck's tapes.........
can anybody lend me a life?