Game plan - The way we play

Remove this Banner Ad

greatwhiteshark

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 3, 2007
11,252
10,892
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
West Perth
We are a reasonably strong list, we have a strong central defence, two big targets up forward and a midfield according to the media which is as good as any teams.
So why do we play such a slow reactive brand of footy?
We rarely take the game on, we chip it sideways and backwards and allow the opposition an easy time in clogging up holes.
We have the players to move the ball very quickly and break lines yet we don't play this way.
I know we won a flag doing this just 18 months ago but it's pretty visible we are off the mark in how we play now.
If I played anywhere forward in this team it would frustrate the hell out of you watching, Hurn, Shep, Gov, Jetta etc just chipping it around themselves instead of taking the game on.
Thoughts guys? Can our game plan stand up in 2020, why are we even playing this type of game plan with the list we have?
 

HoneyBadger35

Moderator
Aug 11, 2011
19,841
49,531
AFL Club
West Coast
Chipping the ball around does not equal failing to take the game on. We maintain possession until there is an opening then we go very directly through that opening.

I know Adelaide are properly sh*t but there were plenty of examples on the weekend of us keeping possession until a diagonal kick into the middle opened up and then playing on/handballing from there, launching inside 50.

The biggest question mark to me with our game plan at the minute is not what we do around the ground, it’s our entry inside 50.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

greatwhiteshark

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 3, 2007
11,252
10,892
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
West Perth
Chipping the ball around does not equal failing to take the game on. We maintain possession until there is an opening then we go very directly through that opening.

I know Adelaide are properly sh*t but there were plenty of examples on the weekend of us keeping possession until a diagonal kick into the middle opened up and then playing on/handballing from there, launching inside 50.

The biggest question mark to me with our game plan at the minute is not what we do around the ground, it’s our entry inside 50.
Doesn’t that come back to stuffing around with the ball and allowing the opposition to get players back, you will never have good efficiency going forward if you allow your opponents to get back in there in numbers.
 

HoneyBadger35

Moderator
Aug 11, 2011
19,841
49,531
AFL Club
West Coast
Doesn’t that come back to stuffing around with the ball and allowing the opposition to get players back, you will never have good efficiency going forward if you allow your opponents to get back in there in numbers.
Not inherently. If you maintain possession or “stuff around with it” inside defensive 50, the opposition are going to set up on the wing or closer. They’re not setting up inside your attacking 50.

What matters is the speed you attack with once you choose to go, which is something we do reasonably well. For all the maintaining possession/stuffing around with it between Shep, Hurn, Jetta, TB, Duggan et al - once we actually switch and go, or come in board and go, we do the rest quickly. Again, Adelaide are sh*t but there’s plenty of examples last week.

The forwardline issues to me seem to be hindered the most by both key targets continually occupying the same space and some very average decisions when picking out a target.

Holding the ball for a minute around your back flank doesn’t slow down your ball movement if you go with speed when you actually forge forward. What we do is all about moving the opposition around to set up the best option when we do choose to attack.
 

greatwhiteshark

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 3, 2007
11,252
10,892
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
West Perth
Not inherently. If you maintain possession or “stuff around with it” inside defensive 50, the opposition are going to set up on the wing or closer. They’re not setting up inside your attacking 50.

What matters is the speed you attack with once you choose to go, which is something we do reasonably well. For all the maintaining possession/stuffing around with it between Shep, Hurn, Jetta, TB, Duggan et al - once we actually switch and go, or come in board and go, we do the rest quickly. Again, Adelaide are sh*t but there’s plenty of examples last week.

The forwardline issues to me seem to be hindered the most by both key targets continually occupying the same space and some very average decisions when picking out a target.

Holding the ball for a minute around your back flank doesn’t slow down your ball movement if you go with speed when you actually forge forward. What we do is all about moving the opposition around to set up the best option when we do choose to attack.
There is a valid reason they lead to the same areas in the modern game, coaches don’t want JK leading one way and JD leading the other way as it potentially opens up an area of the ground you don’t have covered if there is a turnover. It is why we see in all AFL games kicked from 70m out lobbed to the forward pocket near the boundary instead of the top of the square.
 

HoneyBadger35

Moderator
Aug 11, 2011
19,841
49,531
AFL Club
West Coast
There is a valid reason they lead to the same areas in the modern game, coaches don’t want JK leading one way and JD leading the other way as it potentially opens up an area of the ground you don’t have covered if there is a turnover. It is why we see in all AFL games kicked from 70m out lobbed to the forward pocket near the boundary instead of the top of the square.
Either way, I don’t think our game plan hinders our efficiency going forward, given we are always right up top with the forward efficiency statistics (to the point where some models like the Squiggle mark us down for it, because they think it’s impossible to be as efficient as we are consistently. And yet...)
 

greatwhiteshark

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 3, 2007
11,252
10,892
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
West Perth
Either way, I don’t think our game plan hinders our efficiency going forward, given we are always right up top with the forward efficiency statistics (to the point where some models like the Squiggle mark us down for it, because they think it’s impossible to be as efficient as we are consistently. And yet...)
We disagree a bit as I think our slow movement does hinder our forward entries a great deal. But this is an opinion board and I respect that you think otherwise. Cheers
 

ukurrie

Debutant
Jul 12, 2015
134
323
Melbourne
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Liverpool FC, Las Vegas Raiders
With Hurn, Jetta and a few others, we also are blessed (usually...) with some once in an era precision kicking from defence, which means we can have a higher level of confidence that we’ll get to the wing or so with the ball safely in our possession.

If you’re blessed with this skillset, it would be a mistake not to build a game plan around it. Just like we built a game plan around the midfields of the past, or any other clear advantage.
 

greatwhiteshark

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 3, 2007
11,252
10,892
Perth
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
West Perth
With Hurn, Jetta and a few others, we also are blessed (usually...) with some once in an era precision kicking from defence, which means we can have a higher level of confidence that we’ll get to the wing or so with the ball safely in our possession.

If you’re blessed with this skillset, it would be a mistake not to build a game plan around it. Just like we built a game plan around the midfields of the past, or any other clear advantage.
The skill set is awesome, if they used it to break lines. I don’t reckon a Hurn has hit many targets passed 25m in the last 12 months, Jetta does once in a while but he also misses a fair bit. Hurn and Jetta should be weapons, we don’t use them to be weapons though.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Dylan82

Premium Platinum
Aug 14, 2004
2,283
7,219
Brisbane
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Cardiff City
We are a reasonably strong list, we have a strong central defence, two big targets up forward and a midfield according to the media which is as good as any teams.
So why do we play such a slow reactive brand of footy?
We rarely take the game on, we chip it sideways and backwards and allow the opposition an easy time in clogging up holes.
We have the players to move the ball very quickly and break lines yet we don't play this way.
I know we won a flag doing this just 18 months ago but it's pretty visible we are off the mark in how we play now.
If I played anywhere forward in this team it would frustrate the hell out of you watching, Hurn, Shep, Gov, Jetta etc just chipping it around themselves instead of taking the game on.
Thoughts guys? Can our game plan stand up in 2020, why are we even playing this type of game plan with the list we have?
Interesting timing for this thread, the match against Sydney saw the most radical tactical changes by the club since 2018 and they were repeated again against Adelaide.

Granted both Sydney and Adelaide are poor, but +17 and +25 inside 50s in those matches are indicative that things are proactively occurring.

The team is now pressing higher up the ground than at any other time in the Simpson era and the halfbacks are overlapping into the midfield in a way that has not been seen since 2015. With Nelson pushing up as a stoppage backstop, the stoppage execution has become far more aggressive and focused towards creating channels and getting possession to players on the move.

It's made me sit up and take notice, because it may finally mean this team has developed some tactical gears that it can switch between depending upon need. Play a pressing, territory team like Richmond and roll out the retention-based marking style that nullifies them; conversely if the opponent tries to get numbers behind the ball to launch counterattacks, they can be crushed by the newly adapted high press.

The last six quarters of football by the club has seen just 35 attacking 50 entries by the opposition - whilst in the same period the club has managed 76 inside attacking 50 entries of its own.

Address the current dysfunction within the forward line and this team gets very impressive again very quickly.
 

Chris_6678

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 29, 2007
17,381
20,225
Perth Western Australia
AFL Club
West Coast
Interesting timing for this thread, the match against Sydney saw the most radical tactical changes by the club since 2018 and they were repeated again against Adelaide.

Granted both Sydney and Adelaide are poor, but +17 and +25 inside 50s in those matches are indicative that things are proactively occurring.

The team is now pressing higher up the ground than at any other time in the Simpson era and the halfbacks are overlapping into the midfield in a way that has not been seen since 2015. With Nelson pushing up as a stoppage backstop, the stoppage execution has become far more aggressive and focused towards creating channels and getting possession to players on the move.

It's made me sit up and take notice, because it may finally mean this team has developed some tactical gears that it can switch between depending upon need. Play a pressing, territory team like Richmond and roll out the retention-based marking style that nullifies them; conversely if the opponent tries to get numbers behind the ball to launch counterattacks, they can be crushed by the newly adapted high press.

The last six quarters of football by the club has seen just 35 attacking 50 entries by the opposition - whilst in the same period the club has managed 76 inside attacking 50 entries of its own.

Address the current dysfunction within the forward line and this team gets very impressive again very quickly.
But but Mitchell Pyke
 

flamingEMBERS

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 8, 2011
9,734
8,501
AFL Club
West Coast
You can still take the game on with a kick mark game style. There are a few issues I’ve noticed. A bit of chicken and the egg though.

I think the main issue is our half forwards aren’t presenting enough up the ground when we switch. Thus we are taking to long and then we switch again, same problem again. Waterman has been doing pretty good since he’s been in. Darling and Cripps really have to lift to provide options up the ground.

Secondly, Players are taking to slow to dispose the ball when there’s an attacking option. It is the risky kick and I guess players are more scared due to lack of training etc to take that in 2020. Hurn for one has been extra cautious since last season. Drive me crazy last year.

Are we too slow because we are breaking down on the half forward line or are the half forwards not presenting because we are taking too long.
 

The Passenger

Mr. Mojo Risin'
Mar 25, 2003
31,254
18,962
Hasa Diga Eebowai
AFL Club
West Coast
Interesting timing for this thread, the match against Sydney saw the most radical tactical changes by the club since 2018 and they were repeated again against Adelaide.
Due to timezone difference I haven't watched a full game yet this year so my comments can be taken with a grain of salt, but I do find the above sentence encouraging.

If there was one nagging thought I had at the end of 2019 it was that we haven't really evolved our game plan at all through 2017 to 2019. Obviously we won the flag in 2018 so Simpson and co were clearly onto the right stuff, which is fine. But at AFL level - and indeed pretty much all professional team sports - you will almost certainly get over run by other teams if your game plan stays static even if you have fantastic players and aforementioned game plan is seemingly impregnable. That is just the nature of the beast.
 

the harry

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 25, 2007
12,378
11,002
AFL Club
West Coast
The skill set is awesome, if they used it to break lines. I don’t reckon a Hurn has hit many targets passed 25m in the last 12 months, Jetta does once in a while but he also misses a fair bit. Hurn and Jetta should be weapons, we don’t use them to be weapons though.

Strongly agree on Hurn.
 

DanWCE

Norm Smith Medallist
Apr 2, 2015
9,546
17,983
AFL Club
West Coast
They have treated him like sh*t for several years now. He should just take the money and move back to WA now.
Robbo has gone after him plenty. He was brought in to right the ship more than achieve on field success, so he should be judged upon that primarily. But there's that overlap period where results are now important on the field and he started copping it.

For what it's worth, the Bombers have a good record this year but noone is paying much attention to who they've beaten. Pies (5th) aside, which is a great scalp, they've lost to Carlton (8th) and beaten Freo (14th), North Melb (16th) and Swans (17th).
 

DanWCE

Norm Smith Medallist
Apr 2, 2015
9,546
17,983
AFL Club
West Coast
And.....still got a game V Dees in hand.


Sent from my iPad using BigFooty.com
Even so, are they tracking any better than they would have been based on the fixture?

I would have given them wins against Blues, Freo, North, Swans, plus losing to the Pies. That's still 4-1. I think they're tracking as they should be. We won't know if they're the real deal until they line up against a series of contenders.
 

kranky al

Brownlow Medallist
Jun 30, 2009
20,467
26,208
Greenough
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
east perth www.pixelpac.com.au
Doesn’t that come back to stuffing around with the ball and allowing the opposition to get players back, you will never have good efficiency going forward if you allow your opponents to get back in there in numbers.
If you are completely predictably just bombing it forward to kennedarlings general direction then yes.

if you recognise that we have other targets up forward and mix it up a bit then no.

ah chee is another marking target thats pretty hard to beat one on one - liam ryanSpeaks for himself.

Our problem is bombing it and its been our default setting for years and years.
 

Top Bottom