Strategy EXPOSED!

[doodles98]

It's funny how people think the that a game plan from 2010 can be replicated and still be 100% relevant today.

It's funny how people feel the need to make a post that just says it's funny how other people think..

 

[DaVe86]

I don't think it is the best setup for us this year, but that said I think it is the best until Reid is available.

Ultimately I have no problem playing the 2 rucks at the moment for 2 reasons.

1. They get really good exposure
2. They are both young so can share the burden without totally playing one into the ground too early in their career.

We need to continue to experiment with our lineup this year and keep giving exposure to key players. I think we'll start seeing guys like Broomhead, Kennedy, JT and Adams more in the 2nd half of the season as well.

 

[DaVe86]

Also, I thought Witts actually set up 2 goals with his work up forward. He needs to do more I agree, but I don't think we played any better without him on the field. I think in general, the 2 pronged ruck setup works.

 

[4#Didak#4]

Clearly this evening demonstrates that having 2 dedicated big men rucks is too risky, doesn't work with the game plan and is ultimately pointless when we have players like Jesse White and Keeffe who are more than capable of helping the fittest no. 1 between Grundy and Witts, atm Grundy is 1 imo.

The freed up player is what will turn the current game plan, very similar to 2010, into generating the same scorelines that we saw in 2010, 2011.
An extra midfielder.

Jolly did it on his own.
Grundy is holding his own, not as good as Jolly yet, but you would back him to break even.
White can and should ruck, he is such a rare athlete, you would want him burning up the opposition ruck surely, smashing his way through packs Leroy style.

Anyway, I just don't think with the incredibly amazing level of fitness of all the teams in the league these last few seasons, that 2 dedicated rucks is ever going to be the most efficient option for teams.

We started the revolution with Jolly solo with Leroy pinch hitting, why change?
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

The rucks were a small issue coming out of this game.

Remember Witts is playing as the thrid tall and rucking. If you remove him we basically just have Trav and White as talls with White also rucking - so often you have just one tall forward which is stupid. Witts will go out when Ried comes in. White takes Witts spot & Reid takes Whites spot. Zero change to the current structure just different personell.

I think the major problem is still disposal effeciency. It was talked about by Bucks over the break and I think statistically we are one of the worst in this area. I was expecting some improvement but it got worse.... a lot worse. If we are to compete against the best we can't turn it over & waste oppurtunities as much as we have been. Against crap sides like Carlton you get away with it.

I think Bucks will be keen to start getting some better ball users back into the team. Fasolo & Seedsman are two that will instantly improve us in that area, these guys you want the ball in their hands.

The other glaring weakness that stood out on the bigger ground was our pace. We were slow and when they got ball got in to space - which it did a lot cos they killed us in the clearances - they really zipped away, whilst we struggled to break lines. I am not sure we have too many answers to this immediately - less of a worry on the MCG but we really need some explosive pace in this team. I am hoping Freeman can be Dangerfield Mark II - failing that any chance we could throw a million bucks at Danger as a free agent? Apart from Gary he would be the one guy I would pick above all others in the comp for our team. Would happily pay him lots, seems a top bloke too.

 

[Betterthenbencoon]

Witts played like he had no hands on the end of his arms last night, but overall his season hasn't been too bad.

 

[Apex36]

If almost be inclined to drop Witts for Karnezis (depending on his performance tomorrow of course). Not as tall, but a hell of a lot more dangerous up forward and has the capability of running through the middle too.
Would be interesting to trial before Reid returns.

 

[MarkT2]

I don't mind 2 rucks but it doesn't work with 1 KP forward and 1 tall flanker unless one of the two rucks is also a good key forward.
With Reid back in the side and playing foward I'd be starting with White as the 3rd tall on the flank and reliefe ruckman but I'm not sold on him in either role yet. Without Reid we are a bit snookered.

 

[Maggie5]

As 4#Didak#4 states "I think the major problem is still disposal effeciency. It was talked about by Bucks over the break and I think statistically we are one of the worst in this area. I was expecting some improvement but it got worse.... a lot worse. If we are to compete against the best we can't turn it over & waste oppurtunities as much as we have been. Against crap sides like Carlton you get away with it.

We lost today because of a lot of other reasons, putting up season worst numbers in a host of categories:
Disposals (-45)
Clearances (-17)
Tackles (-22)
Marks (-21)
Clangers (14 more)
Uncontested possessions (-38)

These two posts have much merit. From how I saw the game, using cliches, Adelaide came to play, it seemed that the message was move the ball forward at all cost. Some of those dinky kicks fell straight into the arms of their players, they spread better than we did (shades of our earlier games).

I also thought that we held on to the ball for too long, and not raising our eyes to see what options there were and on more than one occasions there were options..

I am not gong to finger point to anyone as I believe that we were just beaten by a better side on the night and as disappointed as I am, am hoping that it was just a one off coming off the bye.

Although we have been winning our disposal efficiency has been poor, I think that there has only been one game where the majority had over 70% but then again, I suppose this depends on the pressure from the other side.

Lets hope that this is just an aberration and not a sign of things to come.

 

[dansa]

Clearly this evening demonstrates that having 2 dedicated big men rucks is too risky, doesn't work with the game plan and is ultimately pointless when we have players like Jesse White and Keeffe who are more than capable of helping the fittest no. 1 between Grundy and Witts, atm Grundy is 1 imo.

The freed up player is what will turn the current game plan, very similar to 2010, into generating the same scorelines that we saw in 2010, 2011.
An extra midfielder.

Jolly did it on his own.
Grundy is holding his own, not as good as Jolly yet, but you would back him to break even.
White can and should ruck, he is such a rare athlete, you would want him burning up the opposition ruck surely, smashing his way through packs Leroy style.

Anyway, I just don't think with the incredibly amazing level of fitness of all the teams in the league these last few seasons, that 2 dedicated rucks is ever going to be the most efficient option for teams.

We started the revolution with Jolly solo with Leroy pinch hitting, why change?
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Where was this thread when we had just won 5 of our last 6?

 

[didaksrightfoot]

I don't think it's ideal playing Witts and Grundy together, but it may be the best option we have until one of them can play well in the ruck for 80-90% of a game. And it hasn't been that bad so far this year.

Grundy is the better of the two, but doesnt have the tank to play more than 60-70% of gametime in the ruck. In the games he was our solo ruckman, he was spent by 3QT.
But none of our other bigs are good enough to cover that 30-40% of time in the ruck. White was brought in with that in mind but his rucking probably isn't good enough against teams with a legitimate 2nd ruck option. Keefe has shown very little in the ruck. Lynch IMO actually does pretty well as the 2nd ruck, but doesnt really have the agility/pace to do much in the forward line - but he could be tried. And Hudson could get the odd game, but wouldn't change any of the problems of having a ruckman in the forward line.

We will see plenty of rotation over the season, and hopefuly by season's end it becomes clearer what is the best combination to have out on the field.

 

[MagpieJoel]

It's funny how people feel the need to make a post that just says it's funny how other people think..

Not really.

 

[TheWing121]

Hasn't playing Grundy (1st Ruck) & Cloke, White & Witts (fwd / ruck), got us to this position?
I think that structure is the best we have for now until Reid is fit enough and Witts will come out

 

[Yonchi]

I actually thought the Crows showed a lot of qualities that we brought to 2002/3 - pressure is the way to beat a team which otherwise is more skillful than you. That said, it was our first game after a bye. Yes I know it was for them as well, but we tend to come off byes fairly flat and I'm confident we will improve considerably

 

[Knightmare]

I didn't like the positional moves in the final quarter.

Keeffe forward didn't and doesn't work, he would have been a better sub option if we felt that strongly that he couldn't contain Jenkins - who is having a terrific season for those who don't watch Adelaide regularly.
Macaffer needed to stay with Dangerfield even though he was clearly beaten in third quarter.

Also worth considering. The results of teams that week after the bye these past two seasons have proven very random. Some of the weaker teams come out with real energy as Adelaide did while the better teams have often come out without that energy.

While it's a game you can learn bits and pieces from it's also not a game I'd be overly concerned knowing the randomness of the performances in that game after the bye by some teams in recent times.

 

[jmac70]

I didn't like the positional moves in the final quarter.

Keeffe forward didn't and doesn't work, he would have been a better sub option if we felt that strongly that he couldn't contain Jenkins - who is having a terrific season for those who don't watch Adelaide regularly.
Macaffer needed to stay with Dangerfield even though he was clearly beaten in third quarter.

Also worth considering. The results of teams that week after the bye these past two seasons have proven very random. Some of the weaker teams come out with real energy as Adelaide did while the better teams have often come out without that energy.

While it's a game you can learn bits and pieces from it's also not a game I'd be overly concerned knowing the randomness of the performances in that game after the bye by some teams in recent times.

I agree. Keeffe in the forward line should never happen.

 

[BEEG]

Adelaide came to play

Had 94 tackles season average for the Crows is about 64

We dropped one now lets win the next 4

 

[MarkT2]

Not so sure about Keeffe forward.
He is still a developing player. You can't judge him on a first go in a final and a second go in a game we were getting smashed in when he went forward after he'd copped a smacking down back. It took Reid a while to learn to play as a backman inthe VFL. I wouldn't mind given Keeffe a run up forward in the VFL. Whatever happens he needs to put on some bulk though.

 

[sr36]

I didn't see the rucks as an issue. To me Adelaide brought an incredible intensity and we were exposed for having too many role players particularly as most of them have sloppy skills.

As individual players, I'm a fan of Toovey, Blair, Frost, Macaffer, Maxwell, OBrien, Young, and Goldsack. And think that they are all able to play a very effective AFL standard role. But put them all together and you have a team who are going to miss a lot of targets under pressure.

 

[MarkT2]

Adelaide came to play

Had 94 tackles season average for the Crows is about 64

We dropped one now lets win the next 4

Sure they came to play which was always going to happen after their previous loss to Melbourne. If we can't beat mid range teams that come to play we can't finish top 4 let alone win a flag. As I said earlier, that is where we are at. we are, like Adeladie a side trying to compete in the middle of the ladder.

 

[BEEG]

Sure they came to play which was always going to happen after their previous loss to Melbourne. If we can't beat mid range teams that come to play we can't finish top 4 let alone win a flag. As I said earlier, that is where we are at. we are, like Adeladie a side trying to compete in the middle of the ladder.

No one expected us to be top 4

 

[DaVe86]

There is no invincible team in the AFL at the moment. Even Hawthorn all of a sudden looks vulnerable.

If Port Adelaide are the real deal, should they have lost to North Melbourne?

Or should Hawthorn lose to Sydney? Even we beat Sydney...as did GWS!!

The truth is that on any given day, an upset can happen.

Just because we lost last night does not mean that we are not top 4 or not ever going to win another premiership. Adelaide is a decent team, but we are still better.

Last night just showed that Adelaide were a bit more switched on than us and brought their A game. We were playing at around a B to C level. At our best, we are a lot better.

It was also a mini grand final for Adelaide with the opening of their new ground at night, and playing the biggest drawing team in the comp, the week after they lost to Melbourne.

It was dissapointing, but I don't think we need to draw conclusions on our season.

 

[RuFiO]

No one expected us to be top 4

Robbo did.

 

[Collingwood pro]

Did people watch the same game, thought Witts was good, might not be the fastest but was able to create contests he created a few goals or at least one. Why do people want him out.

 

[Chief Ten Beers]

No one expected us to be top 4

Caro had us for the flag.

(Rolling eyes at Caro, not you my fellow Pie)

 

[MarkT2]

No one expected us to be top 4

Plenty on here did and probably still do.