Roast Defensive Structure

[CASS1]

Why were these zones in place?
How did they fail so badly?
I don't understand how we can justify guarding space and zoning, when it breaks down just as easily when the ball comes in.. on several occasions, i witnessed rance and mcguane (clearly under instruction) 5-10 metres away from direct opponents. furthermore, they were behind! now id understand the whole zoning thing if collingwood had a dominant forward, say dawes was grabbing everything. however, we were leaving plenty of room for davis and co. AND THEN, once on the rebound, our hf's were too high to even penetrate the 50. is this a lesson hardwicks teaching? it simply didnt work today.. not heaps upset but its just frustrating

 

[thecotch]

Mate we seriously lacked class in defence today. Our key defender in moore being out didn't help. Smashed in the midfield.

I doubt there was much more hardwick could do with the cattle he has at his disposal. It was 1st v 15th today. There's a reason for those ladder placings.

 

[Bazzar]

A coach has the right to experiment and get team plays and structures in place and no one really gives a toss, so today it was like Dimma was having an experiment with his own plays and some new moves. It was a massive fail, and I doubt we will see it again.

So I wouldn’t be too harsh on Dimma as he is also learning. The two year transition period applies not only to the players, but also the coaching staff.

 

[ize_]

I hope Hardwick learnt a lesson today because he was seriously outdone. Very, very disappointing. Even when Davis had kicked his 4th goal from the square out the back, no one was capable of moving to check him.

 

[captain blood 17]

Why were these zones in place?
How did they fail so badly?
I don't understand how we can justify guarding space and zoning, when it breaks down just as easily when the ball comes in.. on several occasions, i witnessed rance and mcguane (clearly under instruction) 5-10 metres away from direct opponents. furthermore, they were behind! now id understand the whole zoning thing if collingwood had a dominant forward, say dawes was grabbing everything. however, we were leaving plenty of room for davis and co. AND THEN, once on the rebound, our hf's were too high to even penetrate the 50. is this a lesson hardwicks teaching? it simply didnt work today.. not heaps upset but its just frustrating

I understand what your saying, but the side took a hit in order to learn yesterday. It's about the bigger picture. I understand this won't make you feel any better, but it's how i see it.

 

[coke_zero]

When Rance has the best game out of all the backs then something is not right. Not putting him down, But none of our backs shined. Newman looked good when he had it but there isnt much you can do when your team is getting rolled.

 

[Mario Speedwagon]

It failed because Collingwood are an in form big- bodied experienced gun side and we are a young developing side with many deficiences still to be ironed out and thus not yet able to withstand the high level of pressure that top sides in top form are able to apply.

 

[Bojangles17]

Why were these zones in place?
How did they fail so badly?

2 simple reasons

1. our midfield was smashed, ball was going forward with ease
2. Our back half was seriously bereft in the absence of Moore and Thursty who has had a few good recent outings

that is why my friend our defence was nothing like what you had seen earlier

 

[Infamy]

Experimentation time, I expect to see it for the rest of the season
We started with it at the start of the year and sucked at it, went back to one on one which got us some wins, but now it's back to learning mode

 

[popcap]

i think the primary issue with the game on saturday was, as some have mentioned already on this thread, the system it appeared we were employing in defence. it's not necessarily a question of 'player quality'; it's rather what the players are told to do when they're actually on the park. the history of the afl is littered with examples of poor players who've become fantastic performers when placed into a well organised and planned framework. i'm not saying that that's what should / is happening at richmond, just pointing out that good systems can overcome the deficiencies of supposedly 'second string' players like the ones we had out there on saturday.

anyway, to get to my point;

playing an agressively zonal defence is all well and good - but that doesn't mean that all the aspects of a more traditional defensive setup should be eschewed. to list three basic examples:

1. ruckmen dropping back to the goal line on set shots. i've noticed multiple times over the last two weeks we've been punished by long bombs which really should have been shepherded over by big gus / browne / vick. this was particularly relevant as i watched leon kick three goals from one metre out on saturday.

2. remembering that, during ball ups / throw ins in the forward fifty, well coached teams will take up positions discussed during the week in 'set plays'. given the fact that there are a large number of these to choose from, opposition teams tend to have a 'quarterback' or playcaller (in collingwood's case it's dane swan) who can simply shout out a set play to counteract where our players have set up in their zone. the way to deal with this this is simply through manning up aggressively, to ensure that every player is being manned (the equivalent of a man blitz in the nfl, for those more tactically minded).

3. staying goalside of your man when defending is something that's taught in every level of the sport - but seems to be dropping away at the elite level. watching kicks over the heads of our defenders to loose men who've dropped backwards as their opposite number has zoned forwards to fill holes has had me tearing my hair out three weeks straight. even when employing a zone, it's vital to realise that the play can unfold any number of ways, and that dogmatically following a coaching formula doesn't always lead to success.

our defenders need to be schooled in the art of the basics IN ADDITION to learning how to play a zone (which, to clarify, i'm not directly criticising). dimma seems to have taken what he learnt under clarkson at hawthorn and applied it to the nth degree - and forgotten what made him such an effective player for both port and essendon along the way. i know i'd be a much happier tiger if i saw sophisticated zoning systems starting to incorporate a few more of the defensive duties of bygone days - it would make us that much more flexible back there, and maybe (just maybe) stop us giving away as many cheapies in the back half as we have over the last three weeks.