Closing out games

[kirky]

I get the lockdown aspect of it, we all do. But obviously the problem is the timing.

I don't like the empty of feeling of "escaping" a game we were in control of.

It looks awful when we kick it long out of the backline to a pack and get outmarked/the ball gets out the back to an opposition sweeper and pumped back in.

More ball control in that situation would be better, too many hack kicks for deliberate OOB or immediate turnover. I'd rather a handball under pressure to a team mate for a tackle, ball up and reset.


Switching won't work as it exposes us to pressure on the open side of the ground.


I like the fact we have some practice at this for when we need it most though.

This sort of play is really coachable in retrospect, coaches can focus on this lock down play and look at where are going wrong in a win mid June, rather than after a 2 point loss in an elimination final etc.

The Geelong game exposed our heavy attack game style and how it can be thwarted by a great side, Geelong just peeled back and fouled us at half forward. Our reaction to that was heavy handed but we are so much better now as a more balanced side and look stronger.


Also Tom Morris and James Hird said Nicks could be coach of the year, they aren't the type of guys to say or do stupid things.

We if we go from 15th to say 4th, of course he is likely to be a leading contending for coach of the year.

 

[NSolis]

Has been discussed at length on here but I think the strategy is fine in principle and you need the skillset and the plan in place to 'ice' close games when you're ahead. The best teams are able to do this - Collingwood easily the best in the AFL at it. 10 points up with 7 mins to go is not an unreasonable time to make that sort of call, not sure I really agree with Sloane's analysis that you just have to keep going for it or whatever. Would prefer a more flexible approach, especially in the Brisbane game I think where it was ok.

We've not done it that well yet though,even if I think some credit has to be given to the fact that we did get a win in both games and defended pretty well. I'd like to see us practice some other options when we are getting smashed at the clearances instead of just long down the line, or at least make sure we have numbers around the ball as Scorpus said. Too many easy turnovers.

 

[Rory Walkerfield]

We are committing numbers inside defensive 50 to repel attacks but that's leaving us outnumbered outside the 50.

It hasn't hurt us too badly because having those numbers inside 50 has been successful defensively (to some degree)

Think all it needs is a small numbers tweak so we aren't as badly outnumbered at the fall of marking contests outside 50

Perhaps they’re doing this, but if we’re going to shut up shop for long periods then we need a roaming hit squad up the line for the bomb out of D50. I would keep TT, Keays and Rash as that three person hit squad as I’d back TT to bring a sky ball to ground and then the three of them will have a decent chance of winning a ground ball or causing a stoppage even if outnumbered. Instruct the defenders to put it on TTs head. If need be keep Fog out there to in case TT gets bodied. Everyone else can flood back.

 

[Multiballz]

Is it all Coaching, or is it partly the players being unfamiliar with the position theyre in and collectively shitting the bed?

I havent been to a game like that in a while. Are there visible indicators that this instruction is run out from the bench? I cant imagine the scenario is drilled at training ala Pies.
Couldnt be part of 3rd quarter address surely?

 

[CrowToon]

I’m not sure what people expect given we lost stoppage clearances 30-48 on Friday night - an absolute spanking in anyones language and yet most times we actually outnumbered them in those situations but they got it out.

What we didn’t do was have someone at the back of the pack in case it went over the back. Also Brisbane always made sure they had someone at the back of a pack to enable outlet and then they made sure they had someone to switch the play to on the opposite side of the ground.

What do you mean expect? I expect a plan.

Most teams will burn the clock with repeat stoppages or possession. Weather didnt allow for possession.

It didnt look like we were trying anything new. It just looked like the plan was to trust the defence to stand up. Which they did, but Lions also had the required scoring shots to win.

We were handing the ball back to them almost constantly

What do you mean what do people expect?

 

[rocket18]

It's very obvious why we have such a poor record in close games, Nicks either doesn't drill our players on how to finish games when a couple of goals up with five minutes to go or a couple of goals down with five minutes to go.

His 'plan' (we'll assume his go slow with 10 minutes to go is his actual plan when we hit the lead) has failed and will continue to fail as it gives the opposition too many chances to steal the win.

Both the Port and Brisbane game saw the opposition have a number of opportunities to pinch it, as Carlton and Essendon did against us last year.

Closing the game down should not provide so many opportunities for the opposition to goal - we may as well keep attacking as that is the part of the game we are actually good at - instead of trying to lock it down where our stoppage work is the weakest part of our game.

 

[davos44]

Hird: "Go put unknown drugs into your arm because I want to win more".

Yeh, nah.

Lol.

 

[adelaidecrows]

We’ve had a very poor record in close games, we’ve had 2 recent wins against Port and Lions.

In both games after hitting the lead we’ve tried to close it down and create contests.

In both games we’ve been badly beaten in clearances and contests. So in what universe is it a sound strategy to play to the opposition strengths and concede repeat inside 50s, desperately trying to hang on? Both games we’ve won due to the opposition blowing their chances.

Our defenders have no one open to kick to, to move the ball up forward, you know away from the oppositions goal and closer to ours.

How did we get these leads?
What’s our strengths?

So why the **** do we do it?

Nicks even said we were lucky, well Mafhew why is this your tactic to close out games? Why not kick more goals and not rely on opposition inaccuracy to win?

Can someone please explain the rationale beyond “we won”. What are you going to say when it doesn’t? You confident of this strategy in a final?

Yeah this is an interesting one. What this screams is a coach who is trying to kill the contest and doesnt trust his players nor actual attacking game plan to hold the lead.

 

[MrBarry]

Is it all Coaching, or is it partly the players being unfamiliar with the position theyre in and collectively shitting the bed?

I havent been to a game like that in a while. Are there visible indicators that this instruction is run out from the bench? I cant imagine the scenario is drilled at training ala Pies.
Couldnt be part of 3rd quarter address surely?

I think it's a bit of both. The players seemed to clam up on the weekend to be honest and were just inviting more pressure on themselves. I thought the best tactic would have been to just run over the top of Brisbane, we invited them back into the game on Friday imo.

 

[Danger in Texas]

Feels like we need to change to working the angles with short kicks, rather than constantly bombing long to contest. We have great contested markers between the arcs, but you’re not going to get a contested markers even 25% of the time you go long down the line, especially in the dying minutes with the losing team coming extra hard at you

Once the ball goes to stoppage, we are disadvantaged, stats say. Fourth worst stoppage clearance differential in the league, and second worst first possession differential

 

[kirky]

In both games against Power and Lions, they not us, were leading all the major stats.

It is our efficiency in attack that is keeping us in the game. And in addition, we ramp up the pressure to create the turnovers to score.

 

[kirky]

Feels like we need to change to working the angles with short kicks, rather than constantly bombing long to contest. We have great contested markers between the arcs, but you’re not going to get a contested markers even 25% of the time you go long down the line, especially in the dying minutes with the losing team coming extra hard at you

Once the ball goes to stoppage, we are disadvantaged, stats say. Fourth worst stoppage clearance differential in the league, and second worst first possession differential

The short kicks will depend on who has the ball. Do you trust Laird with a short kick? I certainly don’t, Smith isn’t good with short kicks either and neither is Butts.

 

[GreyCrow]

I've said before the down the line approach is the better strategy - its the mechanics of it that I think we need work on

A few examples from the Collingwood-Melbourne game highlight how effective a good marking ruck can be - Gawn swallowed 3 balls deep (leave it Pugsley ) in the last 3 minutes to repel any opportunity for Collingwood to score

And give RoB credit he took the goal square mark at the end to help ice the game

What going down the line does is squeeze the play - yes a mid-field outlet might become available - but its mostly played for stoppages - either in the tackle or directly OOBs . Its a time game and this is the most effective way of icing time

Its not about scoring - which we admit is counter-productive to our foot on the pedal - its time

And as I said the mechanics ie the man at the back , the disguised punch to the boundary line and having tacklers sweat off are the little things to work on

 

[Danger in Texas]

The short kicks will depend on who has the ball. Do you trust Laird with a short kick? I certainly don’t, Smith isn’t good with short kicks either and neither is Butts.

Guess it depends if you trust a Laird short kick, or a 4th worst stoppage clearance differential more

Laird’s not an excellent short kick, but I’d trust the latter more