Can someone please explain our gameplan?

[themidlandmaster]

This isn't a troll thread or anything, I'm honestly asking; what sort of game are we aiming to play?

Last night, the players seemed to be unprepared to use the corridor, they never thought of looking inboard. Instead, we preferred to play a slow game of chip kicks along the boundary. However, our players were so slow and didn't run very hard, so they're wasn't many uncontested marks. We don't have a great ruckman, so why were the playing this way?

Also, our it seems our preferred clearance is a hurried 30 metre kick off the boot. Why don't e set up to prepare for this?

Finally, what is our forward line supposed to look like? Why is there often no-one looking to crumb off Cloke given we kick to him so often?

 

[Peter Sidorkiewicz]

From what I have seen, this season Bucks wants the team to run and carry with handballs from defence rather than play 'tempo' football that we played last season with short kicks (backwards or side wards) if need be.

So far I think that is better than the short kicking game because we generally don't have great foot skills in the side.

As for the forward line. We are clearly playing with a 5 man forward line with Bucks wanting to free up Maxwell to play loose in defence. I don't mind that either because it obviously utilises Maxy strengths in this team. The 5 man forward line is similar to last year in height but should be more mobile and dangerous as White is faster than Lynch and Reid (when fit) is more of a marking threat than Goldsack. Goldsack and Reid will both swing. If Reid is playing forward, Goldsack will be in defence and vicsa versa. This team is clearly lacking a crumbling forward (Elliott is more of a marking player). Kennedy is the best fit of our players to do this IMO. He just needs to be given the opportunity.

 

[THATSGOLD]

Handball and run which is wrong because a pin point kick travels faster.

 

[jefffff34]

We were playing 5v7 in our forward line, and vice versa in defence.

This doesn't work for two reasons.... it ends up 1v3 on Cloke (the main target), and our 7 are genuinely not as good as the oppositions 7 defenders, and therefore we are playing catch up.

Notice how well we looked when we shared the focus target around (White, Elliott) last night.

 

[jerry springer]

locate the team mate with the most opposition players surrounding him and give him a dinky hand pass....

at least we have scrapped the 50m kick back to switch sides. That used to give the opposition 30 seconds to set up against us and then kill us on the rebound. Probably the worst coaching strategy Ive seen in the last 10 years if not ever

 

[Scodog10]

There has been much angst surrounding the game plan since Buckley took charge. It's there for all to see now though so a big hats off to those that kept the faith

With Buckley now in complete control he and the rest of the coaching staff have developed a structure that is sustainable and isn't personnel dependent!

Much like St Kilda and Port Adelaide as long as we bring the effort the result will come. We have 4 midfielders in the top 50 players league wide for rebound 50's so our defensive run has gone 180 to what it was in round 1. Our pressure on the ball carrier is through the roof and we're much more effective from scoring at stoppages.

Can anyone else pinpoint aspects of the gameplan that many were previously critical of?

 

[PieNSauce]

I'll confess to being a total nuffie when it comes to recognising specific strategies but an interesting thing I've noticed this year is our propensity to use two genuine rucks at stoppages (Grundy and Witts) which I haven't really noticed before the last few games. I'm not sure of the exact strategy behind it but it certainly seems completely different to what we were doing last year. Anybody want to have a stab at what the thinking is?

 

[SpongePie]

I think it is allowing us to have 2 permanent talls up forward with a third resting ruck. Will be interesting to see what it all looks like when Reid returns. For now, I like the 2 rucks.

 

[PieNSauce]

I think it is allowing us to have 2 permanent talls up forward with a third resting ruck. Will be interesting to see what it all looks like when Reid returns. For now, I like the 2 rucks.

I guess if you're going with a third man up it makes sense that he's no midget but I haven't seen too many other clubs specifically using a resting ruck for that purpose. Anyway, from what I've seen it hasn't necessarily been directly effective except that it does seem to negate the opposition ruck which in turn gives our on-ballers a better crack at it.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

Funyn enough, just by looking out on the field, I still can't tell what the structure is.

I'm sure I'd see if it was explained to me though. The press was more obviously visible. Whatever we're doing now, it may be working, but it does't seem obvious to the eye right away, at least to me.

 

[themidlandmaster]

Why is cloke being coached to stop and wrestle? He seemed so much more effective when be played like Riewoldt and ran all day. It was especially bad on ANZAC day playing on an opponent as slow as Hooker

 

[Scodog10]

I'll confess to being a total nuffie when it comes to recognising specific strategies but an interesting thing I've noticed this year is our propensity to use two genuine rucks at stoppages (Grundy and Witts) which I haven't really noticed before the last few games. I'm not sure of the exact strategy behind it but it certainly seems completely different to what we were doing last year. Anybody want to have a stab at what the thinking is?

To prevent the third man up

Hawthorn use it very effectively against us by hitting it out into space to their outriders who then feed to their game breakers.

Witts and Grundy also set up 10 metres from the drop zone of the ball at boundary throw ins. It means they have to run up to the contest creating space in behind them.

 

[Scodog10]

Why is cloke being coached to stop and wrestle? He seemed so much more effective when be played like Riewoldt and ran all day. It was especially bad on ANZAC day playing on an opponent as slow as Hooker

I'd be genuinely surprised if he's being coached to do that. I hazard a guess that it's a work rate issue. Also White is presenting a very solid lead up option for us ATM.

Reid coming into the line up should make a significant difference. No matter which role he plays. With Reid as a forward Cloke will get more one out opportunities and as a defender he has that extra 10 metres on his kicking so Cloke's work rate can be reduced and he can still provide that outlet.

 

[PieNSauce]

To prevent the third man up

Hawthorn use it very effectively against us by hitting it out into space to their outriders who then feed to their game breakers.

Witts and Grundy also set up 10 metres from the drop zone of the ball at boundary throw ins. It means they have to run up to the contest creating space in behind them.

Agree. That's another take on what I said a couple of posts up from yours. Pretty much negates the opposition ruck and creates opportunities for our on-ballers. Neither Witts nor Grundy have seemed to me to be consistently getting the ball into collingwood hands so I guess with that being the case, it makes sense to just screw with the opposition's ability to do it.

 

[HeavyPop]

Why is cloke being coached to stop and wrestle? He seemed so much more effective when be played like Riewoldt and ran all day. It was especially bad on ANZAC day playing on an opponent as slow as Hooker

As I see it, Cloke staying in our 50 essentially means the opposition will ensure they have a player back there to help out as we all know good Cloke is in a 1v1 situation. When the opposition sacrifice a player to help out against Cloke, it allows us to play a spare man at the back, which is vital when rebounding off the half back line which has been done well so far this season.

 

[piedpiper32]

We have 4 midfielders in the top 50 players league wide for rebound 50's so our defensive run has gone 180 to what it was in round 1.

Our new game plan definitely relies on - Rebound 50's coming from the midfield, much improved two-way running

I've noticed this season that our mids have been getting back to help the back line all the time and watching the last few games a second time backed this up. Then I checked the numbers and they are revealing to say the least (2014 stats quoted first):

Lumumba
Rebound 50's 5.0 avg (7th in the league) vs. 3.0 (57th) in 2013
Inside 50's 4.0 vs. 3.1 in 2013

Swan
Rebound 50's 3.3 (38th) vs. 2.1 in 2013
Inside 50's 3.5 vs. 5.2 in 2013

Sidebottom
Rebound 50's 3.2 (41st) vs. 1.6 in 2013
Inside 50's 3.3 vs. 2.5 in 2013

Beams
Rebound 50's 2.2 vs. 1.0 in 2013
Inside 50's 3.8 vs. 4.4 in 2013

Pendlebury
Rebound 50's 2.0 vs. 1.7 in 2013
Inside 50's 4.0 vs. 4.1 in 2013

Young
Rebound 50's 3.3 (38th) vs. 2.5 in 2013 (only 2 matches)

Ball
Rebound 50's 1.3 vs. 0.9 in 2013
Inside 50's 2.2 vs. 3.0 in 2013

2014 R50 leaders
Lumumba, Langdon, Swan, Young, Sidebottom, Maxwell, Beams

2013 R50 leaders*
Shaw, Russell (only 9 games), Lumumba, Williams, Maxwell, Seedsman
* Young and Johnson excluded for playing only 2 and 3 games respectively.

League-wide in 2013 apart from Lumumba at 57th not a single one of our other mids could crack the Top 100 in Rebound 50's (Swan was the best at 143rd). From a team perspective none of our gun mids could make the Top 6 last year.

BUT 2014 is a completely different story. Every single one of them has upped their Rebound 50 numbers, some significantly. Look at the numbers for Sidebottom, Lumumba, Swan, and Beams Apart from Maxy the other 5 of the top 6 are now mids.

On the flipside their Inside 50 numbers are all down although overall nowhere near as much as the increase in Rebound 50's.

That shows the mids are running defensively MUCH better than last year, helping out the back line immensely, but also still work forward as well. Don't think anyone can accuse them of being front runners this season.

Also Davoren and the new fitness program seems to have facilitated and supported this style too.
Definitely exciting to see this new game plan unfold

EDIT: Langdon should also be in our Top 6 R50 guys this year (14th overall in the league).

 

[Scodog10]

Our new game plan definitely relies on - Rebound 50's coming from the midfield, much improved two-way running

I've noticed this season that our mids have been getting back to help the back line all the time and watching the last few games a second time backed this up. Then I checked the numbers and they are revealing to say the least (2014 stats quoted first):

Lumumba
Rebound 50's 5.0 avg (7th in the league) vs. 3.0 (57th) in 2013
Inside 50's 4.0 vs. 3.1 in 2013

Swan
Rebound 50's 3.3 (38th) vs. 2.1 in 2013
Inside 50's 3.5 vs. 5.2 in 2013

Sidebottom
Rebound 50's 3.2 (41st) vs. 1.6 in 2013
Inside 50's 3.3 vs. 2.5 in 2013

Beams
Rebound 50's 2.2 vs. 1.0 in 2013
Inside 50's 3.8 vs. 4.4 in 2013

Pendlebury
Rebound 50's 2.0 vs. 1.7 in 2013
Inside 50's 4.0 vs. 4.1 in 2013

Young
Rebound 50's 3.3 (38th) vs. 2.5 in 2013 (only 2 matches)

Ball
Rebound 50's 1.3 vs. 0.9 in 2013
Inside 50's 2.2 vs. 3.0 in 2013

2014 R50 leaders
Lumumba, Swan, Young, Sidebottom, Maxwell, Beams

2013 R50 leaders*
Shaw, Russell (only 9 games), Lumumba, Williams, Maxwell, Seedsman
* Young and Johnson excluded for playing only 2 and 3 games respectively.

League-wide in 2013 apart from Lumumba at 57th not a single one of our other mids could crack the Top 100 in Rebound 50's (Swan was the best at 143rd). From a team perspective none of our gun mids could make the Top 6 last year.

BUT 2014 is a completely different story. Every single one of them has upped their Rebound 50 numbers, some significantly. Look at the numbers for Sidebottom, Lumumba, Swan, and Beams Apart from Maxy the other 5 of the top 6 are now mids.

On the flipside their Inside 50 numbers are all down although overall nowhere near as much as the increase in Rebound 50's.

That shows the mids are running defensively MUCH better than last year, helping out the back line immensely, but also still work forward as well. Don't think anyone can accuse them of being front runners this season.

Also Davoren and the new fitness program seems to have facilitated and supported this style too.
Definitely exciting to see this new game plan unfold

Great stuff Pied it's also worth noting that the number of I50's we concede has increased and it appears to be inversely related to the drop in clearances we've experienced. I dare say that it's due to the trade off required at stoppages for those midfielders to push into the back half.

To counter that though the % of times we're scored against when we concede those I50's has dropped by 5-10% which is significant. In 2013 we were consistently winning the I50 count, but it felt like every time the opposition got it in there they'd score!

I think as the likes of Williams and Sinclair (IMO he's preferred to Fasolo down back) are transitioned back into the line up the R50's, I50's and clearances will find further balance. We just need that continuity in our back 6 first which seems to have worked for the midfield unit (at this stage last year none of Ball, Young or Beams had played a match)!

 

[piedpiper32]

Great stuff Pied it's also worth noting that the number of I50's we concede has increased and it appears to be inversely related to the drop in clearances we've experienced. I dare say that it's due to the trade off required at stoppages for those midfielders to push into the back half.

To counter that though the % of times we're scored against when we concede those I50's has dropped by 5-10% which is significant. In 2013 we were consistently winning the I50 count, but it felt like every time the opposition got it in there they'd score!

I think as the likes of Williams and Sinclair (IMO he's preferred to Fasolo down back) are transitioned back into the line up the R50's, I50's and clearances will find further balance. We just need that continuity in our back 6 first which seems to have worked for the midfield unit (at this stage last year none of Ball, Young or Beams had played a match)!

Yes I agree completely regarding the clearance numbers and I50's for the opposition. Playing the +1 back instead of at the clearance (as we did in Rd 1) has meant that we have actually lost the clearance numbers every game since that R1 Freo game. Our mids are pushing back hard.

BUT it's working. It's just shows that having numbers at clearances and at the contest can be overrated. It's meaningless if you're getting low quality possessions from that clearance which aren't to your advantage or go straight to the opposition spare.

Instead we are the ones allowing the opposition to fall into that trap and we are prepared to concede some ground to rebound from our defensive 50 with quality moves forward.

 

[UpTheMags]

Handball and run which is wrong because a pin point kick travels faster.

yeh then you have to get back off the mark and pick ur next target.......

 

[Scodog10]

Yes I agree completely regarding the clearance numbers and I50's for the opposition. Playing the +1 back instead of at the contest (as we did in Rd 1) has meant that we have actually lost the clearance numbers every game since that R1 Freo game. Our mids are pushing back hard.

BUT it's working. It's just shows that having numbers at clearances and at the contest can be overrated. It's meaningless if you're getting low quality possessions from that contest which aren't to your advantage or go straight to the opposition spare.

Instead we are the ones allowing the opposition to fall into that trap and we are prepared to concede some ground to rebound from our defensive 50 with quality moves forward.

It provides for some interesting analysis that's for sure!

Looking at our current set up, IMO, any match that we hold that structure AND win the clearances we will really put a team to the sword!

 

[piedpiper32]

It provides for some interesting analysis that's for sure!

Looking at our current set up, IMO, any match that we hold that structure AND win the clearances we will really put a team to the sword!

Yes our defence is holding up superbly with the mids helping out that much.

Taking out the Round 1 Freo debacle where they scored 116 against us we have been equal 2nd in points against from Rounds 2-6, conceding only 69 points on average. Port are first, but only just at just under 68 points, so our team defence has been excellent.

If we also begin to win clearances as well... watch out!

 

[dubber]

Our new game plan definitely relies on - Rebound 50's coming from the midfield, much improved two-way running

Super post, top stuff

Definitely noticed that our mids are running harder this year. I noticed how Swan, Pendles and to some extent Beams is running backwards as soon as the ball is turned over.

I think the game plan is simple ; numbers at the contest, loose man behind play, physical pressure on the ball carrier - THE SWARM is back

 

[jonbe54]

Super post, top stuff

Definitely noticed that our mids are running harder this year. I noticed how Swan, Pendles and to some extent Beams is running backwards as soon as the ball is turned over.

I think the game plan is simple ; numbers at the contest, loose man behind play, physical pressure on the ball carrier - THE SWARM is back

Agree with all that dub, special mention to young Elliott who is getting from the forward line to the back line to help out, that is super stuff !!

 

[3kicks3goals]

Dominate.

 

[Big Bryza]

As I see it, Cloke staying in our 50 essentially means the opposition will ensure they have a player back there to help out as we all know good Cloke is in a 1v1 situation. When the opposition sacrifice a player to help out against Cloke, it allows us to play a spare man at the back, which is vital when rebounding off the half back line which has been done well so far this season.

This is correct. The big change from last year is that we're using our spare man in defence rather than at the contest. Our run from half back has been a thousand times better this season compared to 2013.