Analysis Forward Line Staff

[FreoRicci]

Have to bring this up. Feel like over the past few weeks, even with supposedly tall forwards, cannot kick more then 80 points.
Who’s forward line coach? It’s an indictment the past few weeks. The chemistry suck. Sure I get it, early season. But now it’s getting frustrating. Who’s in charge of leading, the 1%ers. Too many time we have players going for the same mark.

We’ve had 55 I50s against Richmond and 50 against Adelaide. 56 against Bulldogs. Cannot kick a winning score.
What’s going wrong? Hogan is being played like a defensive forward and feel like we’ve turned him into a B grade forward with the patterns we make him play.

 

[blue shark]

Have to bring this up. Feel like over the past few weeks, even with supposedly tall forwards, cannot kick more then 80 points.
Who’s forward line coach? It’s an indictment the past few weeks. The chemistry suck. Sure I get it, early season. But now it’s getting frustrating. Who’s in charge of leading, the 1%ers. Too many time we have players going for the same mark.

We’ve had 55 I50s against Richmond and 50 against Adelaide. 56 against Bulldogs. Cannot kick a winning score.
What’s going wrong? Hogan is being played like a defensive forward and feel like we’ve turned him into a B grade forward with the patterns we make him play.

WC, Dogs changed coach game plan, new direction. Tigers, Pies coaches read the riot act and their clubs took back
control, better assistants.
We need to follow the leaders, or a little of both, inside 50's suggest we get the pill enough it's the finishing touch,
not enough clean ball.
Uncontested ball use by spreading, creating space is non existent, not enough class, smart players midfield to
deliver the ball to our forwards advantage.
Bombing the ball equals more inside 50's, winning contested ball is another key indicator. These stats are
pointless when we get killed on the rebound, turnover.
We have outside class, players but play an inside game? Traded in BHill, Hogan, Wilson, McCarthy?
Cerra? Next it will be Valente to HB, and he too will look slow.

 

[blue shark]

Have to bring this up. Feel like over the past few weeks, even with supposedly tall forwards, cannot kick more then 80 points.
Who’s forward line coach? It’s an indictment the past few weeks. The chemistry suck. Sure I get it, early season. But now it’s getting frustrating. Who’s in charge of leading, the 1%ers. Too many time we have players going for the same mark.

We’ve had 55 I50s against Richmond and 50 against Adelaide. 56 against Bulldogs. Cannot kick a winning score.
What’s going wrong? Hogan is being played like a defensive forward and feel like we’ve turned him into a B grade forward with the patterns we make him play.

WC, Dogs changed coach game plan, new direction. Tigers, Pies coaches read the riot act and their clubs took back
control, better assistants.
We need to follow the leaders, or a little of both, inside 50's suggest we get the pill enough it's the finishing touch,
not enough clean ball.
Uncontested ball use by spreading, creating space is non existent, not enough class, smart players midfield to
deliver the ball to our forwards advantage.
Bombing the ball equals more inside 50's, winning contested ball is another key indicator. These stats are
pointless when we get killed on the rebound, turnover.
We have outside class, players but play an inside game? Traded in BHill, Hogan, Wilson, McCarthy?
Cerra? Next it will be Valente to HB, and he too will look slow.

 

[Yeti]

Have to bring this up. Feel like over the past few weeks, even with supposedly tall forwards, cannot kick more then 80 points.

Whut?

 

[Scham]

Under Ross we’ve tried Sumich, Hale, Eastaugh and Stone as our forward line coach. None have been ultra successful except for Sumich for a half of 2015. So either we haven’t had the right people in the job, in which case why haven’t we been able to and why have we stuck with Hale for 3 years if he’s not the answer, or there’s another overriding influence that’s contributing to our poor forward line structure and results.

I personally don’t think it’s got anything to do with the person charged with looking after that area for us and has everything to do the main man that dictates the overall gameplan, game style and structures. The forward line coach has to work within that.

 

[malpaso]

Under Ross we’ve tried Sumich, Hale, Eastaugh and Stone as our forward line coach. None have been ultra successful except for Sumich for a half of 2015. So either we haven’t had the right people in the job, in which case why haven’t we been able to and why have we stuck with Hale for 3 years if he’s not the answer, or there’s another overriding influence that’s contributing to our poor forward line structure and results.

I personally don’t think it’s got anything to do with the person charged with looking after that area for us and has everything to do the main man that dictates the overall gameplan, game style and structures. The forward line coach has to work within that.

I'm not so sure, I think it has to do with our forward strategy, we simply have too many players in one area of the forward 50 arc allowing defenders to help each other. Just need more spread and one on one's created, kick to the fat side etc..

 

[raffrox]

I'm not so sure, I think it has to do with our forward strategy, we simply have too many players in one area of the forward 50 arc allowing defenders to help each other. Just need more spread and one on one's created, kick to the fat side etc..

Guess the guy that oversees the forward coach should do something about it.

 

[malpaso]

Guess the guy that oversees the forward coach should do something about it.

Totally agree. Somehow though I think it's because we seem to not have a 'primary' target. It was almost easier just having Pavlich there, players just knew to go to him and he was a lot of times one on one. Nowadays it's as if our forwards all want to be the 'primary'.

 

[raffrox]

Totally agree. Somehow though I think it's because we seem to not have a 'primary' target. It was almost easier just having Pavlich there, players just knew to go to him and he was a lot of times one on one. Nowadays it's as if our forwards all want to be the 'primary'.

But the game has moved on. Do many teams if any have one primary target these days?

 

[malpaso]

But the game has moved on. Do many teams if any have one primary target these days?

Yes, Richmond do. Bulldogs do. Geelong do. GWS do.

 

[raffrox]

Yes, Richmond do. Bulldogs do. Geelong do. GWS do.

Geelong I'll give you. Toby Greene and Himmelberg are integral keys to the GWS forwardline. Richmond and Bulldogs have multiple routes to goal.

Are we really saying the issue now is that we have too many options?

 

[malpaso]

Geelong I'll give you. Toby Greene and Himmelberg are integral keys to the GWS forwardline. Richmond and Bulldogs have multiple routes to goal.

Are we really saying the issue now is that we have too many options?

No I'm not saying that. What I am saying is that our forward line don't know how to make it advantageous to at least one forward getting open whoever that may be.
Multiple routes to goal does not mean 'primary'. Don't skew my point. It's obvious teams have multiple routes but there is a 'primary'.

 

[raffrox]

No I'm not saying that. What I am saying is that our forward line don't know how to make it advantageous to at least one forward getting open whoever that may be.
Multiple routes to goal does not mean 'primary'. Don't skew my point. It's obvious teams have multiple routes but there is a 'primary'.

Fair enough. I agree with what you're saying about how things are working but i still think its a failure of system rather than personel.

 

[Miltz]

26 scoring shots each.

Lobb needs a serious lesson in set shot routine.
1. He stand sideways FFS when he’s directly in front.
2. He has a terrible run up with those JK steps.
3. He doesn’t swing his leg back and then kick through the ball with power.

He did some great marking and rucking, but he needs some serious work if he wants to be a full time FF.

I know we now have 3/4/5 KPP forwards, but that doesn’t mean we need to kick it high and long every time. Look for them on the lead so they can can use their long arms or big body to protect space. Our best game from a KPP forward this year was McCarthy kicking 5 - and I don’t remember one of his goals coming from a high kick in.

 

[Cobbler]

26 scoring shots each.

Lobb needs a serious lesson in set shot routine.
1. He stand sideways FFS when he’s directly in front.
2. He has a terrible run up with those JK steps.
3. He doesn’t swing his leg back and then kick through the ball with power.

He did some great marking and rucking, but he needs some serious work if he wants to be a full time FF.

I know we now have 3/4/5 KPP forwards, but that doesn’t mean we need to kick it high and long every time. Look for them on the lead so they can can use their long arms or big body to protect space. Our best game from a KPP forward this year was McCarthy kicking 5 - and I don’t remember one of his goals coming from a high kick in.

I feel ya.

That said North were truly diabolical in that game.

I get annoyed by the constant long bomb down the line.

Very rarely do we look for the 20m inside pass and then go from that. High risk high reward type stuff.

I also feel Wilson has become nothing because we don’t allow to use his strengths. That’s a bit of dash off half back and a long kick to space.

It’s impossible to hit up a leading player on the tit when we play the game style we do.

 

[FreoRicci]

I feel ya.

That said North were truly diabolical in that game.

I get annoyed by the constant long bomb down the line.

Very rarely do we look for the 20m inside pass and then go from that. High risk high reward type stuff.

I also feel Wilson has become nothing because we don’t allow to use his strengths. That’s a bit of dash off half back and a long kick to space.

It’s impossible to hit up a leading player on the tit when we play the game style we do.

Richmond played exactly this way. High risk stuff, found Lynch on short 20 m passes. Pearce couldn't get there because that 2-3 metre separation is all Richmond needed. West Coast do this too. No matter how much under pressure they seem to be under, Richmond were calm with the footy, handballed sideways, kicked short and knew where to get involved. Freo haven't got that chemistry or gameplan. Thus the forwards aren't running into their patterns or have no understanding. Frustrating, it's the basic foward set ups that Richmond and West Coast do so well. Kennedy and Lynch rarely have another player in their way or have others leading in their area.

 

[Cobbler]

Richmond played exactly this way. High risk stuff, found Lynch on short 20 m passes. Pearce couldn't get there because that 2-3 metre separation is all Richmond needed. West Coast do this too. No matter how much under pressure they seem to be under, Richmond were calm with the footy, handballed sideways, kicked short and knew where to get involved. Freo haven't got that chemistry or gameplan. Thus the forwards aren't running into their patterns or have no understanding. Frustrating, it's the basic foward set ups that Richmond and West Coast do so well. Kennedy and Lynch rarely have another player in their way or have others leading in their area.

Put another way, they 'cheat' with players ahead of the ball. Once they're out they can do as they please. I actually thought they messed up some pretty basic opportunities on many occasions.

Eagles do also do it. You just watch Cripps, Ryan and a few others float off the back of a pack. If it gets out the back away they go too.

It's kind of a shoot out. Richmond rolled the dice and it paid off for them massively. When we were able to structure up and slow movement we had them for toast. Shame the game doesn't run in slow motion all the time.

Bombers will be very interesting test. They like to run and gun, but aren't great at a structured game.

 

[FD2646]

This topic is a continuous issue with me......I don't believe any of our assistant coaches would get a gig in any other team. If we keep Ross, we must invest in new senior assistants and empower them to challenge both Ross and the playing group.

 

[FreoRicci]

Put another way, they 'cheat' with players ahead of the ball. Once they're out they can do as they please. I actually thought they messed up some pretty basic opportunities on many occasions.

Eagles do also do it. You just watch Cripps, Ryan and a few others float off the back of a pack. If it gets out the back away they go too.

It's kind of a shoot out. Richmond rolled the dice and it paid off for them massively. When we were able to structure up and slow movement we had them for toast. Shame the game doesn't run in slow motion all the time.

Bombers will be very interesting test. They like to run and gun, but aren't great at a structured game.

It’s how they set up their gameplan. Don’t overcommit numbers to the ball, trust in the hard contested players to get it out. Plus if we do get it out, there’s spare defenders on their end ready to mop up. It’s similar how Richmond set up to west coast. Houlli cleaned up, Grimes was solid.
West coast it’s McGovern and Hurn.
Whereas we often overcommit and no one on the outside to defend the spread. That’s when we look slow.
It’s funny that no matter how much we study them, west coast and Richmond still dominate us. Bulldogs just a tad off. But they’re regaining it again. It’s concerning that the same teams still get the jump on us. You’d think we would have counter or reset since then.

 

[Farrand]

No offence to Hale and Guerra's playing careers but they weren't exactly convincing forwards and that's why I agree with FreoRicci and believe that they need to be moved on or to different coaching positions.

Hale was a utility with a decent run as second ruckman and second tall at North and third at Hawthorn. His average goals per game were 0.92 which doesn't scream super forward. Again, he was a handy player but I don't think he was a forward expert and this is what we need with our talls. Someone who knows how to run the lines, get to the right space and provide the leads. We need Pav or someone like Riewoldt if we could throw some money at him.

Guerra was a bloody liability as a forward when he played for the saints. Massive disciplinary issues. He may have kicked goals here and there but he was in a forward line that included Milne, Riewoldt and Gehrig. So he benefited slightly there but never kicked more than 29 as his top score. At Port he was never a world beater but it was a difficult side to break into and he did have two good seasons.

Guerra's best work was playing in the back pocket at Hawthorn. He definitely came into his own in that position and I honestly think that he could teach a lot going and coaching our small backs.

Eastaugh has been around for years and years and years. He's always done decent enough with the rucks but perhaps a change is due.

 

[freodog]

The way we enter into the forward line does our forwards no favours. Almost always it is a kick to 20m out directly in front. It’s so predictable for the defence to spoil turnover.

 

[Scham]

No offence to Hale and Guerra's playing careers but they weren't exactly convincing forwards and that's why I agree with FreoRicci and believe that they need to be moved on or to different coaching positions.

Hale was a utility with a decent run as second ruckman and second tall at North and third at Hawthorn. His average goals per game were 0.92 which doesn't scream super forward. Again, he was a handy player but I don't think he was a forward expert and this is what we need with our talls. Someone who knows how to run the lines, get to the right space and provide the leads. We need Pav or someone like Riewoldt if we could throw some money at him.

Guerra was a bloody liability as a forward when he played for the saints. Massive disciplinary issues. He may have kicked goals here and there but he was in a forward line that included Milne, Riewoldt and Gehrig. So he benefited slightly there but never kicked more than 29 as his top score. At Port he was never a world beater but it was a difficult side to break into and he did have two good seasons.

Guerra's best work was playing in the back pocket at Hawthorn. He definitely came into his own in that position and I honestly think that he could teach a lot going and coaching our small backs.

Eastaugh has been around for years and years and years. He's always done decent enough with the rucks but perhaps a change is due.

I take your point, but history shows that you don’t actually need to be a good player in the actual position that you coach. One current example is JLo doing a great job with the Pies defence whereas he didn’t play in defence at all. Football intelligence is what you need and Hale had/has that.

 

[Cesoir]

I take your point, but history shows that you don’t actually need to be a good player in the actual position that you coach. One current example is JLo doing a great job with the Pies defence whereas he didn’t play in defence at all. Football intelligence is what you need and Hale had/has that.

Yep, Alistair Clarkson was a mediocre player and has turned out to be a fair coach.

 

[Frigate]

I said it before the match, that Richmond are a small and fast team and we are bigger and slower. We need to be efficient and not be bombing it.
Quite simply, Richmond's pressure was too intense for us to get clean possession. We are not a highly skilled team, so under pressure our kicks did not provide our forwards with any great consistent opportunity.

Some terrible selfish decisions from players from a lot of leaders in the forward 50 also - taking hard shots at goals - Walters was one example for a certain goal. Some stupid decisions - Mundy kicking to Hogan instead of a shot from 50.

I do see a floor in the coaching style for the midfield perhaps - it looks like a forward coaching problem - however it is the possession before.

malpaso said "Just need more spread and one on one's created, kick to the fat side etc.. "

This is footy entry 101 - we insisted on kicking to the pockets - low percentage shots even if it does come off.

We never took the game on, we always played an extra in defence and when the game was up for grabs this really hurt us. We had tall timber, however we were always out numbered up the ground. Where I was seated we had a bunch of muppets shouting the old "kick the bloody thing" then we would and it could back with interest.

If we are going to play tall, we have to have equal numbers up the ground to have a fighting chance, otherwise we are just defending.

Everyone that could for Blakely in was right. He could have been a big difference, and I suspect the coaching staff will be scratching their head for the Cox inclusion over him - Cox had a decent game - but it was the wrong call. We were not mobile enough.

End of the day we were beaten by a team that played better footy, plain and simple.

 

[BlueE]

I take your point, but history shows that you don’t actually need to be a good player in the actual position that you coach. One current example is JLo doing a great job with the Pies defence whereas he didn’t play in defence at all. Football intelligence is what you need and Hale had/has that.

I agree that you don't need to be a good player to coach but if assistants, after years coaching are ineffective then there is a big problem. Either they can't coach or they are only doing exactly what the head coach has told them and it's a problem with the head coach.