Opinion Do we need a better backline coach?

[Matz]

I know the whole team played very poor on Friday night but I felt our defensive mechanisms really let us down. Instead of just finding the easy way and blaming bucks should we be reviewing Ben Harts competency as this is his backline hes in charge of? I personally feel Adelaides backline only got better after he left. Would like peoples thoughts on this.

 

[Da Main Man]

first we need to get a settled defensive unit.

Bucks needs to decide if Reid is going to be a defender who can move forward or a forward that can float back if required.

Marley needs to get back into the team after all this trial nonsense.

The hard call needs to be made of Maxwell.

Toovey will only get better.

then when the is all settled then we can see how they 'click'.......IF they click

 

[Matz]

Very true but im more interested in the way Hart has set it up

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

 

[Duggy31]

You know I was only thinking this to myself last night.

Since Ben Hart has been at the club, our defensive structure has been terrible.

 

[Scodog10]

My observation is a no.

Many of the goals from Friday night were a result of a lack of pressure from the midfield and forward half. For instance the defenders shouldn't be expected to stop goals from kick outs that's the mids and forwards responsibility to stop it getting over the back.

Also as da main man noted we haven't been settled in that part of the ground all pre-season it will take time for the back 6 to gel especially with Williams unavailable and Reid in the forward half.

It's also worth noting that our achilles heel of the past few seasons was improved on Friday night. We managed to win quite a few one on ones in our D50 and also keep there goal efficiency from I50's down. In 2013 I believe it ran at a goal every 3 I50's on Friday that was closer to four. It's only a 7-8% increase, but it's the difference between a 70 point defeat and a 100 point defeat...

It's early in the season so let's give it time before having this sort of discussion.

 

[mike123]

We need better midfield and forward defensive structures to help our backline

 

[HFF]

This whole "we need more midfield defensive pressure" is a massive overreaction and wank IMO.

Our midfield rolled back extremely hard on Friday night to assist the defence. How much more can you expect 6-7 players to do if they are required to have to do it all over the field because a back six cannot control any flow of the game and hold out opposition attacks?

At various stages all of swan, Pendlebury, Ball, Beams etc were all in our defensive 50 trying to make it difficult for Freo.

I think it's about time that our back six began to hold up its own end of the bargain and stopped relying on our mids to have to do everything. There comes a time where you need to start winning with regularity your fair share of 50/50 one-on-one battles. I'm not talking about the delivery that's just too good and indefensible, I'm talking about the ball that sits in the air for an eternity and all of our defenders think they have to all go up and nobody stays down or when our backs decide to push up so far and let their direct opponents stand behind them all by themselves and waltz into open goals.

Sure, I do think our forward line is also incapable of holding the ball in from a kick in or at least neutralising it but this whole "our midfield doesn't run two ways" perception is a wank.

 

[mike123]

This whole "we need more midfield defensive pressure" is a massive overreaction and wank IMO.

Our midfield rolled back extremely hard on Friday night to assist the defence. How much more can you expect 6-7 players to do if they are required to have to do it all over the field because a back six cannot control any flow of the game and hold out opposition attacks?

At various stages all of swan, Pendlebury, Ball, Beams etc were all in our defensive 50 trying to make it difficult for Freo.

I think it's about time that our back six began to hold up its own end of the bargain and stopped relying on our mids to have to do everything. There comes a time where you need to start winning with regularity your fair share of 50/50 one-on-one battles. I'm not talking about the delivery that's just too good and indefensible, I'm talking about the ball that sits in the air for an eternity and all of our defenders think they have to all go up and nobody stays down or when our backs decide to push up so far and let their direct opponents stand behind them all by themselves and waltz into open goals.

Sure, I do think our forward line is also incapable of holding the ball in from a kick in or at least neutralising it but this whole "our midfield doesn't run two ways" perception is a wank.

Because there pressure on the opposition's midfield was horrendous. I also saw plenty of times when three our more Freo mids would just stream into our backline undefended.

 

[HFF]

Because there pressure on the opposition's midfield was horrendous. I also saw plenty of times when three our more Freo mids would just stream into our backline undefended.

We were winning the ball more often than not. Clearances were 21-10 at one stage, how can you apply pressure when you actually are owning the ball?

Our entries inside 50 were poor and once turned over I saw them all roll back and try to cover up for a defence that was weaker than a string of piss.

It's funny how we expect mids to do it everywhere, defence, middle, attack, interchange etc yet it's honestly about time some of our other units began hold up their end of the bargain rather than complaining about "midfield pressure" because Freo's delivery inside 50 wasn't always lace out and indefensible.

 

[mike123]

We were winning the ball more often than not. Clearances were 21-10 at one stage, how can you apply pressure when you actually are owning the ball?

Our entries inside 50 were poor and once turned over I saw them all roll back and try to cover up for a defence that was weaker than a string of piss.

It's funny how we expect mids to do it everywhere, defence, middle, attack, interchange etc yet it's honestly about time some of our other units began hold up their end of the bargain rather than complaining about "midfield pressure" because Freo's delivery inside 50 wasn't always lace out and indefensible.

Maybe if we don't "cheat"

 

[joesph]

We need better midfield and forward defensive structures to help our backline

Freemantle's midfield: Fyfe was there smallest midfielder at 6feet 2
Why are the pies persisting with so many 170cms players Shocking recruiting IMO
The modern midfielder is Pendle's height and body strength
It is so disappointing with so many specialist coaches to provide feedback and options

 

[joesph]

''Marley needs to get back into the team after all this trial nonsense.''
How can you say trial nonsense. He is being sentenced for grievous bodily harm on a defenceless victim and you are only concerned with the football team

 

[Knightmare]

The argument is the poor form of Brown and Keeffe and both despite being proven AFL level performers look like VFL players out there right now and that can't be accepted. You may as well keep Frost in and throw in Lynch as a defender and make Brown and Keeffe force their way back into the side to prove a point that their form is unacceptable and that their position in the team needs to be earned.

My argument rather than blaming our backline coach one round into the season is that we need a better backline first.

Toovey and Maxwell are the only 100+ gamers down back, and history suggests experienced backlines who have played together for years typically are winning backlines.

With Williams, Scharenberg and Seedsman all not yet available for selection you can't expect a particularly functional back half, particularly with the departure of Shaw who will be missed as one of the better backmen in the competition.

It going to take a number of years to develop and we need a talent injection down back. Perhaps a Fasolo could swing back for the time being but ultimately you'd probably want to bring in another elite key defender (that James Frawley guy can play - hint) but similarly you could get one through the draft along with another quality general defender who can replace the talent lost from the departure of Shaw.

 

[mike123]

Freemantle's midfield: Fyfe was there smallest midfielder at 6feet 2
Why are the pies persisting with so many 170cms players Shocking recruiting IMO
The modern midfielder is Pendle's height and body strength
It is so disappointing with so many specialist coaches to provide feedback and options

Mundy: 192cm
Fyfe: 190cm
Barlow: 189cm
Crowley: 188cm
de Boer: 186cm
Hill: 182cm
Mzungu: 182cm
Pearce: 178cm

Pendlebury: 191cm
Lumumba: 188cm
Maccaffer: 187cm
Beams: 186cm
Swan: 185cm
Ball: 184cm
Adams: 181cm
Sidebottom: 180cm

 

[Shaneprice97]

Tom Langdon should be our backline coach

 

[HFF]

Maybe if we don't "cheat"

Buddy, when you have the ball you can't be cheating- we dominated most stats around the ball for large periods of the game.

 

[mike123]

Buddy, when you have the ball you can't be cheating- we dominated most stats around the ball for large periods of the game.

Only one of our mids had the ball at one given time.

 

[HFF]

Only one of our mids had the ball at one given time.

And if you are a teammate and you know your teammate has the ball at any given one time what do you do?

You create an option or find space.

Now if you do that, yet your teammate still finds a way to turn the ball over after we have committed numbers forward and options to be hit up, you can't possibly be "cheating".

We turned it over and the opposition hit us on the break. It's not a slow play where it can actually be defended.

 

[Scodog10]

This whole "we need more midfield defensive pressure" is a massive overreaction and wank IMO.

Our midfield rolled back extremely hard on Friday night to assist the defence. How much more can you expect 6-7 players to do if they are required to have to do it all over the field because a back six cannot control any flow of the game and hold out opposition attacks?

At various stages all of swan, Pendlebury, Ball, Beams etc were all in our defensive 50 trying to make it difficult for Freo.

I think it's about time that our back six began to hold up its own end of the bargain and stopped relying on our mids to have to do everything. There comes a time where you need to start winning with regularity your fair share of 50/50 one-on-one battles. I'm not talking about the delivery that's just too good and indefensible, I'm talking about the ball that sits in the air for an eternity and all of our defenders think they have to all go up and nobody stays down or when our backs decide to push up so far and let their direct opponents stand behind them all by themselves and waltz into open goals.

Sure, I do think our forward line is also incapable of holding the ball in from a kick in or at least neutralising it but this whole "our midfield doesn't run two ways" perception is a wank.

It really isn't. You can't allow 65 entries into your forward 50 and then say that the midfield worked hard enough defensively.

We allowed Fremantle the loose at the back end and instead of using it in our D50 we used ours through the midfield so with an extra number in there we had 1 extra contested possession, 5 less uncontested possessions and -18 I50's which are all indicative of a midfield unit smashed on the spread and not working hard enough. If you are going to allow them free space in their forward half you need to dominate in the midfield with the extra number.

That extra should have meant that we always had an outlet to feed to under pressure, but everything appeared rushed. Personally I'd have gone with our loose in the D50. To play it through the midfield is indicative of the direction we're taking and was probably in an attempt to counteract Sandilands influence. As soon as we ran it through the midfield though it meant that we needed to put in the extra running effort in that area to make the most of it and post 1/4 time we didn't.

On a separate note how do you explain their midfield and defenders kicking 11 of 17 goals if our midfield worked hard enough? Seriously Crowley, Mzungu and Sheridan all had defensive roles on the night, but kicked 4 goals between them.

Make no mistake to allow 65 I50's and concede just 6 goals to forwards is a tremendous effort from an inexperienced and outgunned defensive unit!

 

[mike123]

And if you are a teammate and you know your teammate has the ball at any given one time what do you do?

You create an option or find space.

Now if you do that, yet your teammate still finds a way to turn the ball over after we have committed numbers forward and options to be hit up, you can't possibly be "cheating".

We turned it over and the opposition hit us on the break. It's not a slow play where it can actually be defended.

And that's where our midfield has to do better

 

[HFF]

It really isn't. You can't allow 65 entries into your forward 50 and then say that the midfield worked hard enough defensively.

We allowed Fremantle the loose at the back end and instead of using it in our D50 we used ours through the midfield so with an extra number in there we had 1 extra contested possession, 5 less uncontested possessions and -18 I50's which are all indicative of a midfield unit smashed on the spread and not working hard enough. If you are going to allow them free space in their forward half you need to dominate in the midfield with the extra number.

That extra should have meant that we always had an outlet to feed to under pressure, but everything appeared rushed. Personally I'd have gone with our loose in the D50 to play it through the midfield is indicative of the direction we're taking and was probably in an attempt to counteract Sandilands influence. As soon as we ran it through the midfield though it meant that we needed to put in the extra running effort in that area to make the most of it and post 1/4 time we didn't.

On a separate note how do you explain their midfield and defenders kicking 11 of 17 goals if our midfield worked hard enough? Seriously Crowley, Mzungu and Sheridan all had defensive roles on the night, but kicked 4 goals between them.

Make no mistake to allow 65 I50's and concede just 6 goals to forwards is a tremendous effort from an inexperienced and outgunned defensive unit!

I hear exactly what you are saying about the allowing Freo the loose back while ours was at the contest. This was something I did not want to happen from the beginning. The problem was, our extra at the ball can't be effective in a congestion situation unless he positions himself away from the contest and teammates that win it look to kick it to him at all costs because he is out on his own. Our extra was just taking up more space and it was still a 50/50 clearance situation. We'd win it but kick it straight to their spare in defence.

I'd explain it by saying if our players commit forward when we are in possession of the ball but the ball gets turned over, you are out of position because you have committed numbers forward to create options and space, therefore any turnover will be punished as the opposition will have acres of space and time.

In slow plays, I can understand (like the ones where a couple of Freo players received hand balls running past and waltzed inside 50) however when we turn it over and gets sling shot back over heads that is not a midfield fault.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

Who is available or is this one of those "I don't have any answers" thingy's?

 

[Scodog10]

I hear exactly what you are saying about the allowing Freo the loose back while ours was at the contest. This was something I did not want to happen from the beginning. The problem was, our extra at the ball can't be effective in a congestion situation unless he positions himself away from the contest and teammates that win it look to kick it to him at all costs because he is out on his own. Our extra was just taking up more space and it was still a 50/50 clearance situation. We'd win it but kick it straight to their spare in defence.

I'd explain it by saying if our players commit forward when we are in possession of the ball but the ball gets turned over, you are out of position because you have committed numbers forward to create options and space, therefore any turnover will be punished as the opposition will have acres of space and time.

In slow plays, I can understand (like the ones where a couple of Freo players received hand balls running past and waltzed inside 50) however when we turn it over and gets sling shot back over heads that is not a midfield fault.

That goes against everything we worked on in the pre-season.

We worked overtime on the handball in order to orchestrate the loose and though it didn't work consistently we completely moved away from it on Friday. In comparison every possession when Freo were in control if it were a 50/50 moved backwards by hand and then laterally ours just pushed forward to the Freo extra in the back half. We were then exposed going the other way because our spread was already moving offensively.

If you work harder on the defensive side the offensive things will take care of themselves with the talent we have around the ball. For instance instead of committing to run forward when the ball has just been won wait that extra beat in case the turnover comes. If it means a slow play so be it at least if the ball is turned over we have our defensive pieces in play.

With all the available information would you be able to say we worked as hard as Freo defensively?

 

[Markfs]

Very true but im more interested in the way Hart has set it
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Are you kidding? This isnt American football. If Hart was really in charge of defence then he would be in charge of the midfield and the forward line who are all responsible for defensive pressure when we havent got the ball.

Hart's job is to implement the plan in the backline, not to design the plan. Buckley is the man in charge and I'm sure Ben gets an input into the overall defensive plan but I wouldnt be holding him responsible for "setting it"..

 

[HFF]

That goes against everything we worked on in the pre-season.

We worked overtime on the handball in order to orchestrate the loose and though it didn't work consistently we completely moved away from it on Friday. In comparison every possession when Freo were in control if it were a 50/50 moved backwards by hand and then laterally ours just pushed forward to the Freo extra in the back half. We were then exposed going the other way because our spread was already moving offensively.

If you work harder on the defensive side the offensive things will take care of themselves with the talent we have around the ball. For instance instead of committing to run forward when the ball has just been won wait that extra beat in case the turnover comes. If it means a slow play so be it at least if the ball is turned over we have our defensive pieces in play.

With all the available information would you be able to say we worked as hard as Freo defensively?

We have to move away from it. We don't have the leg speed to be able to run and link via handball and that kind of game style invites too much pressure on the ball carrier and receiver that creates turnover. This is the same game plan we picked apart in 2010 and now we are trying to do it? It makes no sense to me.

The slow play (can be used effectively at times), yet when we have a heavy reliance on the best power forward in the biz, how do you expect to score or give him a decent chance to contribute if you are slow playing it and allowing the opposition to get numbers back quickly. You need to be able to execute swiftly and effectively but our kicking and decision making skills are horrendous.