Review Dees v the Handbaggers and the Dangerwank Media Circus: the Good, Bad & Fugly

[saj_21]

This isn't a bad post and I haven't got the energy to dissect it entirely.

But you're defending players on one game as if it's isolated versions of themselves, or isolated performances. We all love max but he has many games under his sleeve of basically giving up or not being dominant enough (that isn't saying hitouts, it's saying not asserting his dominance on a game, or responding when an inferior player has a dip).

We all watched Melbourne defend 5m off a player and you knew where the kick was going.

Not saying anyone here is bagging our players personally as I hate that and call it myself, but most of us are sick of this picking and choosing when to have ago. Gawn in 2020 has shown he just writes it off as a bad day instead of answering a challenge. 2 average rucks like pittonet and fort have made him look average. Making excuses for our inadequate efforts like camera work or isolated incidents are an absolute pisstske of our supporters here on this forum.

agree Gawn, I was critical of him last year dropping easy marks, he is 208cm and gets rag dolled at critical times. 3 marks on the weekend and two of those were in the last 5 minutes. He looked his best first quarter round 2 and since then has had little influence on our games. Nic Nat had the better of him round 1 as well.

He was playing against a park footballer on the weekend and had little influence . What do you think Grundy would of produce against fort. Fort even went forward and kicked a goal while Gawn was in no mans land.

 

[A11dAtP0w3R]

Sloane and Boak are both pretty inside types though. They're not gonna fix our lack of good outside users.

If we could trade Viney for Boak mind you I'd do it in a heartbeat. But as far as adding them to our list, no thanks.

 

[A11dAtP0w3R]

Was just looking up Jack Viney for his age and came across this

Jack Viney - Book for guest speaking, marketing and more

Book Jack Viney for guest speaking, marketing campaigns, brand ambassadorships and more. Thousands of stars, free to request.

pickstar.com.au

Imagine paying Jack to be a guest speaker.

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

Just what we need, more inside plodders.

Have you ever seen Sloane play?

 

[A11dAtP0w3R]

Have you ever seen Sloane play?

Wait, you really think he's quick? Seriously?

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

Wait, you really think he's quick? Seriously?

He’s not quick but he’s one of the best two way running midfielders in the league, his marking would be better than any of our mids and he a) kicks goals and b) is a more damaging user of the ball than anyone we’ve got. One of the most underrated players going around.

Anyway I just realised that’s he’s now Adelaide’s only captain so that’s not going to happen even in my wildest dreams. Should have targeted him hard in 2014 instead of Dangerfield.

 

[A11dAtP0w3R]

He’s not quick but he’s one of the best two way running midfielders in the league, his marking would be better than any of our mids and he a) kicks goals and b) is a more damaging user of the ball than anyone we’ve got. One of the most underrated players going around.

Anyway I just realised that’s he’s now Adelaide’s only captain so that’s not going to happen even in my wildest dreams. Should have targeted him hard in 2014 instead of Dangerfield.

I didn't say anything about his two way running, I agree him and Boak are far better runners defensively than what we have. That doesn't mean he isn't a plodder though.

 

[Xhoquelin]

No one plays man on man anymore, no one. If you leave your spot in the zone to man up someone the zone is f@?ked
It’s exactly what Geelong would of wanted

aside from the brain explosions Melkshams 50, Langdon throw to gablett and the debacle of three blokes missing a ball on the goaline we defended pretty well yesterday

The problem is you've got people bagging May and Lever out when they're the only two who communicate.

Anyway, a zone is flawed if you have 3 forwards guarding no-one as the team transitions the ball into the midfield. You have to be able to transition from zone to man on man; there's got to be some level of flexibility. The best zone defenses in basketball can do man on man; footy with those wide expanses at the G values that kind of malleability even more.

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

I didn't say anything about his two way running, I agree him and Boak are far better runners defensively than what we have. That doesn't mean he isn't a plodder though.

if we’re just trying to pick off quick runners who’ll fit into our midfield we’re going to have trouble. I don’t think we’re missing the attributes anyway so much as someone who’s going to lead the midfield group and show them how to make the most of their ability and Sloane is 100% that player. Would have to be one of the best inside plodders I’ve seen and certainly we are stacked with those, might as well give them a role model. Will be wasted captaining the Crows for the next few years. Even getting in another Cross would be decent for us.

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

Anyway I don’t think we’d be better if any of our mids were somehow quicker.

 

[Xhoquelin]

I didn't say anything about his two way running, I agree him and Boak are far better runners defensively than what we have. That doesn't mean he isn't a plodder though.

If people think Brayshaw and Oliver are plodders they'll be in for a rude shock with Sloane.

 

[saj_21]

The problem is you've got people bagging May and Lever out when they're the only two who communicate.

Anyway, a zone is flawed if you have 3 forwards guarding no-one as the team transitions the ball into the midfield. You have to be able to transition from zone to man on man; there's got to be some level of flexibility. The best zone defenses in basketball can do man on man; footy with those wide expanses at the G values that kind of malleability even more.

You keep going on about 3 forwards guarding no one, I disagree if you could access down the ground footage and a geelong player had the ball 80m out you’d see all melbourne players inside 65m. And they will allow the sideways 20m kick because that is easier to give up/defend than pressing up and putting a “hole” in the zone that would lead to a more dangerous kick.

If a team kicks side ways and side ways it’s an attempt to wear down the defending side and then the zone falls down and you can pick a hole in the zone.

When a kick goes sideways a player has to roll up to the mark and then a player has to fill his spot in the zone, so on and so forth

I was a bit to general when I said no one plays man on man, defenders play man on man, mids play man on man at stoppages. But teams defend with a zone.

You can’t compare 10 players and a basketball court to 36 players and a football field. You want to chop and change from zone to man on man that’s a recipe for disaster.

 

[ThePuppetMaster]

Lots of talk about zone vs man on man, etc.

I think Goody hit the mark in his press conference, more intensity is needed when defending in the zone so we can actually create pressure on a kick and turnovers instead of slowing down a teams ball movement.

We slowed down their ability to move the ball pretty well, but never looked like disrupting the majority of their chains until it got inside our defensive 50.

 

[Xhoquelin]

You keep going on about 3 forwards guarding no one, I disagree if you could access down the ground footage and a geelong player had the ball 80m out you’d see all melbourne players inside 65m. And they will allow the sideways 20m kick because that is easier to give up/defend than pressing up and putting a “hole” in the zone that would lead to a more dangerous kick.

If a team kicks side ways and side ways it’s an attempt to wear down the defending side and then the zone falls down and you can pick a hole in the zone.

When a kick goes sideways a player has to roll up to the mark and then a player has to fill his spot in the zone, so on and so forth

I was a bit to general when I said no one plays man on man, defenders play man on man, mids play man on man at stoppages. But teams defend with a zone.

You can’t compare 10 players and a basketball court to 36 players and a football field. You want to chop and change from zone to man on man that’s a recipe for disaster.

Now we're getting somewhere. Now, firstly I am talking about a forward press, not a defensive zone.

If I had the Kayo replay I'd definitely try find some footage; but not many teams defend kick-ins with 6 in the defensive fifty first of all, like we do. So from there we're already playing a much more aggressive forward press than 17 other teams.

How could there be a consistent outnumber in the defensive fifty as there were for the Cats' first 2 goals, if we had 18 inside 65M.

When we had our defense set up like a normal team with 18 guys inside 65M, we were good. But that was extremely, extremely rare.

Cats would shift the ball to the side with the holes/vacant players. You can't seriously think we wanted them to dissect us like they did? They never had to make a hard decision. The whole point of the forward press is to cut off easy kicks and force the ball into a disputed era around the wings/80-100M from each goal.

The Cats would advance to 80M out with half backs(Tuohy O'Connor Henry) having the ball. Those guys had to be picked up by mids because the forwards, due to scheme, didn't track back. Then when Cats found guys like Duncan Parfitt Ablett at half forward, our defenders had to leave their zones to pick them up, because the mids supposed to be defending them had left their zones to pick up Geelong's defenders.

Again: how could there be an outnumber in the defensive fifty if we had 18 behind the footy?

There were likely times where we did properly setup, but also a lot of times where we didn't.


if you want to jog your memory on how our defenders were outnumbered in defensive fifty for multiple Cats goals which is pretty unforgivable.

It's not on Oliver/Trac's lack of "two way running" its a very poor scheme' as I said earlier in this thread Melksham TMac Langdon were also caught at half forward when the Cats had the footy 80-100M out from goal; that's proof of an extremely confusing scheme because those 3 guys can all run very well.

I will say, given you seem to think we did defend with 18 behind the ball(which I don't remember but I am also an eternal pessimist); that would represent genuine improvement. And that's a good thing. Honestly, now I'm starting to think as garbage as the result was, that the loss to the Cats represented a step forward with Vines starting to play off Clarry, with the forwards applying solid pressure, with the mids and half forwards continuing to lower their eyes slightly better and as you said the defense, for once, looked capable of defending 6 v 6. Problem was every time Cats scored it was an outnumber in the Cats favour inside 50.

 

[Xhoquelin]

Lots of talk about zone vs man on man, etc.

I think Goody hit the mark in his press conference, more intensity is needed when defending in the zone so we can actually create pressure on a kick and turnovers instead of slowing down a teams ball movement.

We slowed down their ability to move the ball pretty well, but never looked like disrupting the majority of their chains until it got inside our defensive 50.

Its not intensity. And footy fans in general would do well to avoid using terms like "intimidation" "mentality" "aggressiveness" "energy" "intensity" "lethargy." They are applicable in rare cases; like off a 4 day break and the team has only managed to have 1 session together to plan for the opposition. Much more applicable to a sport like basketball where teams(in the past) used to play on consecutive nights, having to play hundreds of kms and only checking into the city 16 hours before the match. Its ridiculous to use it in footy where most teams, perhaps not this year but previously, have a good 6-7 days to recover/train/prepare for a game. These guys are professionals.

Vanders, Hunt, Kozzy, Trac were absolutely busting their guts all game inside F50.

But the forward press is always going to have holes, and teams like Geelong exploit those. Its a flaw in the system; honestly I doubt even Richmond with Rance could win a flag with that kind of tactic, but if they did it would be in a normal season where the defenders/mids/forwards can train 18 v 18 together and build onfield chemistry.

So I'm sure Coronavirus has ****ed up Goody's plans to a degree. In Marsh series the forward press had its issues but it looked like it was improving; and tbf the press we used vs the Cats was more effective than it was vs Eagles(and Eagles away a tough one first up, the best kicking team in the comp vs a forward press was never going to end well in round one at least). But its still a flawed scheme. And also: adaptability is a strength, yet its something Goodwin has never excelled at. A good coach wouldn't have tried to implement such a complicated scheme so reliant on communication, in a situation like today's where you can't even have contact training you would've thought?

 

[CTHORANGE]

...And Lockhart, I like your endeavour mate but you don't have 25 minutes to decide what to do with the ball! Too slow, maybe needs a few games to get the speed of the game again.

yeh I like Lockhart, and he showed a quite a bit around the forward 50 last year, but now he is in defence, not sure i like that myself, feel he is a natural forward who makes a beeline for the sticks when he gets the ball and has a go

 

[Dory_77]

yeh I like Lockhart, and he showed a quite a bit around the forward 50 last year, but now he is in defence, not sure i like that myself, feel he is a natural forward who makes a beeline for the sticks when he gets the ball and has a go

Yeah seemed pretty natural at having a ping or taking a first option up forward. Seems a bit more worried about finding the best kick and is slowed down too much.

 

[Crusty Demon]

Kicking straight is another big issue still plaguing this team. Fritsch arguably our best kick for goal has like 2.6 for the season. Melk missed some decent opportunities, Tomlinson etc etc. It must deflate the whole side. I thought we got a goalkicking coach over preseason?

 

[stEdy]

Watched a bit on replay and our forwards spilled so many marks that they had two hands to

We can talk about the kicks inside 50, but the forwards themselves fluffed so many decent kicks that were to advantage.

Geelong's defending was good, but we were even better at shooting ourselves in the foot. Melksham & Fritsch the main culprits.

 

[CTHORANGE]

Watched a bit on replay and our forwards spilled so many marks that they had two hands to

We can talk about the kicks inside 50, but the forwards themselves fluffed so many decent kicks that were to advantage.

Geelong's defending was good, but we were even better at shooting ourselves in the foot. Melksham & Fritsch the main culprits.

yeh it's one where goodwin annoys me, put players who are clearly out of touch into the middle for couple of short bursts, like Melksham, so they can get a feel for the speed of the game again. Melksham is way out of form and he is getting cold waiting for the handful of opportunities a game that he totally nuffs it when he finally gets a chance

 

[saj_21]

Now we're getting somewhere. Now, firstly I am talking about a forward press, not a defensive zone.

If I had the Kayo replay I'd definitely try find some footage; but not many teams defend kick-ins with 6 in the defensive fifty first of all, like we do. So from there we're already playing a much more aggressive forward press than 17 other teams.

How could there be a consistent outnumber in the defensive fifty as there were for the Cats' first 2 goals, if we had 18 inside 65M.

When we had our defense set up like a normal team with 18 guys inside 65M, we were good. But that was extremely, extremely rare.

Cats would shift the ball to the side with the holes/vacant players. You can't seriously think we wanted them to dissect us like they did? They never had to make a hard decision. The whole point of the forward press is to cut off easy kicks and force the ball into a disputed era around the wings/80-100M from each goal.

The Cats would advance to 80M out with half backs(Tuohy O'Connor Henry) having the ball. Those guys had to be picked up by mids because the forwards, due to scheme, didn't track back. Then when Cats found guys like Duncan Parfitt Ablett at half forward, our defenders had to leave their zones to pick them up, because the mids supposed to be defending them had left their zones to pick up Geelong's defenders.

Again: how could there be an outnumber in the defensive fifty if we had 18 behind the footy?

There were likely times where we did properly setup, but also a lot of times where we didn't.


if you want to jog your memory on how our defenders were outnumbered in defensive fifty for multiple Cats goals which is pretty unforgivable.

It's not on Oliver/Trac's lack of "two way running" its a very poor scheme' as I said earlier in this thread Melksham TMac Langdon were also caught at half forward when the Cats had the footy 80-100M out from goal; that's proof of an extremely confusing scheme because those 3 guys can all run very well.

I will say, given you seem to think we did defend with 18 behind the ball(which I don't remember but I am also an eternal pessimist); that would represent genuine improvement. And that's a good thing. Honestly, now I'm starting to think as garbage as the result was, that the loss to the Cats represented a step forward with Vines starting to play off Clarry, with the forwards applying solid pressure, with the mids and half forwards continuing to lower their eyes slightly better and as you said the defense, for once, looked capable of defending 6 v 6. Problem was every time Cats scored it was an outnumber in the Cats favour inside 50.

good response, looking at the highlights I will agree their are times we don’t team defend well, admittedly the highlights shows the goals only (which is generally when we make mistakes) and not the times we do defend well.

In general all sides zone/team defend, with varying degrees of success. And it’s partly why a lot of people debate the state of the game is so poor.

I will say we dontdefend consistently well enough, but you can see where we fall down is allowing Geelong the dangerous chip forward as opposed to sideways (it also drives me insane when we seem to get 2-3 players rolling up to to the mark)

I think the mid/forward connection is more of an issue than the defending. We also made some really basic errors on the weekend that cost us goals. The rata goal and Ablett snap still infuriate me

 

[Tulip]

The problem is you've got people bagging May and Lever out when they're the only two who communicate.

According to what? Seen too many instances of the two of them spoiling each other, usually with a third in for good measure.

 

[Tulip]

We can talk about the kicks inside 50, but the forwards themselves fluffed so many decent kicks that were to advantage.

Kicking inside 50 was actually much better this week