This thread is about ideas to solve our forward line ineptitude. I have played in functioning and non-functioning forward lines. I would break these down into 6 choices and pros cons of each:
Zero as in 0 tall forwards.
This formation relies on fast ball movement, low trajectory kicks and speed. This tactic has never won a premiership but we did use it under Rocket Eade and made prelim finals.
Pros:
Ball gets locked in easily by elite forward pressure.
Team can score heavily without needing a KPF
Cons:
Lack of marking targets makes slow ball movement impossible.
1 Naughton.
This formation relies on 1 Naughton and means that IF the KPF leads up and takes the ball at HHF, then he has to pass off before running forward to provide the ONLY option.
Pros:
Forward pressure is still great (Naughton is elite for a big bloke)
Cons:
Only 1 option on slow plays.
Too easy to defend.
Naughton + 1.
In this scenario we have Naughton with a partner. IF Bruce was fit, we would play this formation. The defenders are split and the KPF can lead up and still have a deep option to kick too.
Pros:
2 options splits the defence.
More potent in the air and promotes faster ball movement.
Cons:
Forward pressure only OK.
Ruck chop out can be provided but reduces scoring potential.
Naughton + 1 + R
Highest scoring offence we ran, when English, Bruce and Naughton played this formation together. Provides multiple aerial threats and splits the defence.
Pros:
Score heavily from big boy ball.
Ball is kicked quickly forward to aerial targets and midfielders have confidence in pulling the trigger.
Cons:
Low forward pressure.
Requires a fast crumber which we don’t have on our list (Weightman is an elite small but not a crumber).
Naughton + 2
Formation plays 2 KPF and Naughton. You say when is this ever going to happen? (No sh!t
). Schache and JUH play high HFF and provide aerial targets up the ground, with JUH and Naughton occasionally swapping.
This formation relies on good leading and marking at HFF and then long kicks. The disadvantage is lack of forward half pressure. But I would counter that it is unlikely we will give up intercept marks and that will provide an equal amount of pressured ball from defenders.
Pros:
Structure and height promoting long kicks.
Aerial threats that need to be covered. Splits the defence OR allows the HFF to dominate and provide frequent i50s.
Cons:
Low forward pressure on loose balls.
Naughton + 2 + R
Really tall formation and would rely on our midfield to kick long and maintain position behind the ball. This would provide good cover for our defence and stretch opponents as few have a 4th tall and IF we provide good separation the kicks should target that 4th tall defender.
Pros:
Aerial power to the max.
Midfield kept in midfield, reducing running.
Forwards can lead into space and have leads honoured more often.
Cons:
Lowest forward pressure.
Forwards have fewer leading options.
At the moment we are playing Naughton + 1. This isn’t working, as the plus 1 isn’t damaging enough or maybe not targeted enough. I suspect it’s a bit of both and that is due to that forward not winning his match up often enough.
At the moment, Melbourne run a modified Naughton +2 +R. This is allowing their midfield to setup a wall behind the ball and kick long to the advantage of their targets. They learn to kick to advantage or the ball gets turned over on their kick. Their disposal is often not up to this but it is their plan.
My preference:
Naughton +2 (Schache, JUH) +R (Sweet). Make our midfielders kick to advantage and form a Melbourne like wall behind the ball. When Bruce comes back he can replace…. Sweet (Schache to provide ruck support). We have the cattle to run this formation and I don’t know why we don’t.
Zero as in 0 tall forwards.
This formation relies on fast ball movement, low trajectory kicks and speed. This tactic has never won a premiership but we did use it under Rocket Eade and made prelim finals.
Pros:
Ball gets locked in easily by elite forward pressure.
Team can score heavily without needing a KPF
Cons:
Lack of marking targets makes slow ball movement impossible.
1 Naughton.
This formation relies on 1 Naughton and means that IF the KPF leads up and takes the ball at HHF, then he has to pass off before running forward to provide the ONLY option.
Pros:
Forward pressure is still great (Naughton is elite for a big bloke)
Cons:
Only 1 option on slow plays.
Too easy to defend.
Naughton + 1.
In this scenario we have Naughton with a partner. IF Bruce was fit, we would play this formation. The defenders are split and the KPF can lead up and still have a deep option to kick too.
Pros:
2 options splits the defence.
More potent in the air and promotes faster ball movement.
Cons:
Forward pressure only OK.
Ruck chop out can be provided but reduces scoring potential.
Naughton + 1 + R
Highest scoring offence we ran, when English, Bruce and Naughton played this formation together. Provides multiple aerial threats and splits the defence.
Pros:
Score heavily from big boy ball.
Ball is kicked quickly forward to aerial targets and midfielders have confidence in pulling the trigger.
Cons:
Low forward pressure.
Requires a fast crumber which we don’t have on our list (Weightman is an elite small but not a crumber).
Naughton + 2
Formation plays 2 KPF and Naughton. You say when is this ever going to happen? (No sh!t
). Schache and JUH play high HFF and provide aerial targets up the ground, with JUH and Naughton occasionally swapping. This formation relies on good leading and marking at HFF and then long kicks. The disadvantage is lack of forward half pressure. But I would counter that it is unlikely we will give up intercept marks and that will provide an equal amount of pressured ball from defenders.
Pros:
Structure and height promoting long kicks.
Aerial threats that need to be covered. Splits the defence OR allows the HFF to dominate and provide frequent i50s.
Cons:
Low forward pressure on loose balls.
Naughton + 2 + R
Really tall formation and would rely on our midfield to kick long and maintain position behind the ball. This would provide good cover for our defence and stretch opponents as few have a 4th tall and IF we provide good separation the kicks should target that 4th tall defender.
Pros:
Aerial power to the max.
Midfield kept in midfield, reducing running.
Forwards can lead into space and have leads honoured more often.
Cons:
Lowest forward pressure.
Forwards have fewer leading options.
At the moment we are playing Naughton + 1. This isn’t working, as the plus 1 isn’t damaging enough or maybe not targeted enough. I suspect it’s a bit of both and that is due to that forward not winning his match up often enough.
At the moment, Melbourne run a modified Naughton +2 +R. This is allowing their midfield to setup a wall behind the ball and kick long to the advantage of their targets. They learn to kick to advantage or the ball gets turned over on their kick. Their disposal is often not up to this but it is their plan.
My preference:
Naughton +2 (Schache, JUH) +R (Sweet). Make our midfielders kick to advantage and form a Melbourne like wall behind the ball. When Bruce comes back he can replace…. Sweet (Schache to provide ruck support). We have the cattle to run this formation and I don’t know why we don’t.
