Bring Back the Tsunami

[Fuzzyash]

This Geelong side has been taught a particular style of football over the last eight years - get numbers back, win possession, and break like hell. We are trying to change because other tactics are now fashionable.

This is a mistake.

I was watching last night from high up on the wing and as far as strategy goes it was amateur hour. The zone is working for St. Kilda and Adelaide, it isn't working for Geelong. Over and over the Bulldogs were kicking the ball out of the last line of defence and five seconds later were running into an open fifty. We never had sufficient numbers back. It didn't matter if our defenders won the contest because they had no support.

Here's the problem - the zone does not work for us in defence and destroys our attack. When the defenders won contests and got the ball at half-back there was not enough numbers there to run and share with. Over the last two years possessions at half-back would allow us to flip the ball around and run through the centre, but we can't do it anymore because the numbers are in front of the ball. Therefore our possessions around the defensive 50 are under a lot more pressure.

So I think we need to go back to the tsunami. I realise it is a trade off because it means we trade off a bit of 'frontal pressure', allow a few easy possessions down back for the opposition, but we need plenty of numbers backward of centre for the big wind-up. Then charge like hell like we used to.

There is another benefit to the tsunami - players love it. It's fun to play, makes the team feel they are really working together. The zone is not fun. Players are constantly pointing at each other to fill particular spots. They look harried and stressed.

THE ZONE: GETRIDOFIT!!
THE TSUNAMI: BRINGITBACK!!

 

[Pollywaffle]

The zone is not new for geelong we have been doing a form of zoning for the last couple of years. Perhaps the formation has altered a bit?

 

[Fuzzyash]

The difference is that we used to keep the defensive formation intact always. The six defenders stayed in place even when their opponents ran up the ground.

This worked wonderfully and didn't need to change. It only changed because everyone started copying the eighteen man zones that Hawthorn set up, which was a tactic especially designed for their circumstances, i.e. not having a good traditional defence.

Let the opposition forwards get their cheap kicks up the ground and win back possession once they try to get in inside. Then we've got the numbers to run it out, and we don't have to rely on midfielders to get back and block holes all of the time.

Keep the back six back!

 

[CATACK]

Well said too all

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Well said too all

Agreed with you fuzzyash...it's the way to go!
​

 

[ATSAM]

Great analysis fuzzyash.Hope that the brains trust that devise the game plan read this. Or perhaps the players should just do what they do best and revert to the winning formula.

 

[rightboot]

This sort of play needs to be adopted for us in september. It seems that we dont generate as much run from the backline as what we used to, and bringing back the six in defence. I feel as if this year we tried to copy hawthorn a bit with the zone, which isnt necessarily the best thing for us to play at our best. I get a sense that if the grand final was played again under the rushed behind rule, we would be looking for 3 in a row this september

 

[Fuzzyash]

Just some stats from the HS to back up my observations:

Since Rnd 15 Geelong has allowed teams to score 54.3 per cent of the time it penetrates the 50m paint.

Worse than Melbourne or Richmond.

The Cats have conceded 94.6 points a game in the past seven weeks.

12th in the comp.

True, the defence hasn't been at full strength through that time but I think the defenders are actually performing really well in contests and that the problem is mainly tactical:

The Bulldogs took 15 marks inside 50 on Friday night -- two more than the average conceded by Geelong this year.

But it is where the Dogs took the grabs that told the story.

All were within easy scoring range at 35m or closer as the Dogs kicked over zoning defenders.

I lost count of how many times our best defenders were zoning in the centre square or just backward of the wing when the Bulldogs kicked the ball inside 50.

Link to Herald-Sun

 

[cat in sydney]

Yeah, I've really noticed a big difference in one area particularly from 2007 to 2009.

In 2007, we had numbers back, tsuamied it forward, and always had a very open forward line with plenty of space for Mooney and Johnson to work in. When you get Mooney and Johnson in one-on-one contests, it works out well for us more often than not.

In 2009, other teams seem to be doing that to us. They have numbers back and crowd our forward line, Mooney never seems to get a one-on-one, and often our last resort is to bomb it to a Stokes-on-two contest, which he never wins. We then turn it over, and the opposition does exactly what we used to do, run it up to an open forward line for quick goals.

We need to change it back, quick smart.

 

[noclashjumpers]

Sounds good in theory. All the points made in the OP seem to make sense.

I'd just hope, and assume, that the club's brains-trust has thought through this and has an equally compelling argument for what they've been doing recently.

 

[ninjacat]

I seem to remember in 2007 in particular we were masters of locking the ball in the oppostion forward 50 from their kickouts - that's man on man football rather than this zone crap.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

spot on, let sides get cheap stats up the ground at the end of the day its all about kicking goals.

the fact that we have changed our game style makes no sense , our style of football had nothing to do with us losing last years GF.

unless the opposition has a gun forward , we should just keep our 5 or 6 defenders back and than move the ball at the spped of light out of defence.

although it must be said that if we turn the ball over we will still be caught out in defence.The biggest problem we have is that we have to always move the ball on quickly because we dont have a high quality KP forward.sides like st kilda, collingwood and hawthorn will hold on to the ball and play keepings off unless they can get you on the break which means they dont have as many turnovers.