Opinion Game Plan

[bergholt]

It's called tough love and if you are/plan to be a parent you will know it is a very necessary thing at times.

Maybe with 5 year olds but these guys are a bit older and more mature than primary schoolers. Tough love is a pretty one-dimensional and ineffective way to manage adults, in my experience. Unfortunately it needs to be more nuanced than that.

 

[Impatient Saint]

My observation on the kicking skills is for me.

David Armitage is extremely lazy kick of the ball , wins hard in close football , lacks total concentration
when kicking , most times never looks at the ball drop to his foot.
Jack Steven could be a really good kick , but generally kicks the ball either when unbalanced or kicks
at the target rather than 5 metres diagonally to the player this allows to run into space , opposed to on top of their head.

Newnes is an excellent kick for mine
Billings is an excellent kick as we all know.

Ross has improved because he kicks the ball the distance he is comfortable with , not trying anything excessive.
The guys that are mixed bag Weller & Gilbert some times good , sometimes terrible for experienced players.

Completely agree with you re Armitage. I would suggest of all our midfielders he our worst with taking the correct option and disposing to leading forwards...

 

[Diehard Saint]

Maybe with 5 year olds but these guys are a bit older and more mature than primary schoolers. Tough love is a pretty one-dimensional and ineffective way to manage adults, in my experience. Unfortunately it needs to be more nuanced than that.

You know it's just a general term I used.
I have no doubt that Richo, who is known for being an exceptional teacher and man manager, will know exactly the nuances to use in going about it.

 

[Tom_Wilson_55]

I've noticed over the last couple of weeks that at CC we tend to go backwards rather then propelling forwards.
It's something that gives you around -20m and IMO is an absolute killer for us.
It seems as if the boys are frightened of being bold at times in this part of the game.

But it's just an observation, curious to hear what others think.

 

[plugger66]

Surely kicking accuracy is the key to the game plan here, as far as when we have the ball is concerned.

Here is my assessment of the list (the blokes who've played for St Kilda)

Hickey - good kick for 200cm+, can hit targets
Steven - extremely poor at times, other times adequate, leads team in inside 50s 2015 & 2016, join the dots.
Templeton - fine from what I have seen
Savage - a rich man's Gram by foot, can be excellent over short distances as well
Ross - can't remember a misplaced kick or mis-kick this season, isn't really ambitious with his kicking
Dunstan - much better than most give him credit for, but not an elite kick
Acres - a poor kick
Lee - an elite kick for 194cm
Montagna - only bloke who hit an inside 50 target in 1st quarter on Sunday, can butcher on occasion
Riewoldt - good when not kicking off his back foot
Lonie - usually an elite kick inside 50
Geary - not a good kick, sometimes overly ambitious
Billings - an elite kick, but not a driller
Newnes - probably the best all round kick on the team, can go those longer ambitious kicks
Roberton - a very good kick, more ambitious with decision making than backing his skills
Longer - just throws it onto the boot, stock standard 200cm+
Gilbert - can really fluff them, and is happy to be ambitious regardless of situation, which can spell disaster
Armitage - not as bad as Steven, but can butcher
Delaney - doesn't want to kick the ball
Gresham - ok from what I've seen
Goddard - a good kick
Dempster - a good long kick, not ambitious
Fisher - his decision making is his biggest kicking asset, rarely mis-kicks
Curren - quantity over quality
Bruce - a good field kick for a KPF
Membrey - another good, not great, kick
Webster - probably the most ambitious kick on the team, can be excellent
Murdoch - cannon leg
McCartin - probably better than Bruce
Wright - probably the worst kick on the list
Saunders - reasonable over shorter distances
McKenzie - handballs better than kicks (is an elite handballer)
Shenton - poor man's Gram
Minchington - very good kick
Weller - great long kick, poor short kick
Holmes - still learning

Based on your assessment you have Steven as about our second worst kick. I completely disagree. His kicking style to pretty good but he is told to take the game on and because he clearly is really our only real run and receive player he is sometimes completely stuffed by the time he kicks it. I have said for a couple of years now he will be fine once he gets help. And I would rather him take the game in than take the safe option like Ross. Kicking is important but some of the greats at the moment aren't great kicks. Murdoch is a perfect example that kicking accuracy isn't the be all and end all. You can carry ordinary kicks with any game plan as long as we have enough good ones that actually get the ball

 

[Diehard Saint]

I've noticed over the last couple of weeks that at CC we tend to go backwards rather then propelling forwards.
It's something that gives you around -20m and IMO is an absolute killer for us.
It seems as if the boys are frightened of being bold at times in this part of the game.

But it's just an observation, curious to hear what others think.

Which is why it was so amazing seeing Acres burst out the middle, ball in hand and hitting Roo on the chest in the goal square with that long, raking kick ( for those who are a bit iffy on his kicking) in the Hawks game.

Much more of that please.

 

[The Punter]

Based on your assessment you have Steven as about our second worst kick. I completely disagree. His kicking style to pretty good but he is told to take the game on and because he clearly is really our only real run and receive player he is sometimes completely stuffed by the time he kicks it. I have said for a couple of years now he will be fine once he gets help. And I would rather him take the game in than take the safe option like Ross. Kicking is important but some of the greats at the moment aren't great kicks. Murdoch is a perfect example that kicking accuracy isn't the be all and end all. You can carry ordinary kicks with any game plan as long as we have enough good ones that actually get the ball

You can see the effect one of Steven's missed targets has on the team - everyone works hard, particularly Steven, get the ball in a position to score, turnover. On the other hand there is no dropping of the heads when Ross finds a teammates and we still have the ball, except in the stands were a bunch of people wish they were watching a sport that disappeared 20 years ago.

I agree Steven needs help, but the help is very specific - someone who can kick standing next to him as he's about to kick it.

 

[plugger66]

You can see the effect one of Steven's missed targets has on the team - everyone works hard, particularly Steven, get the ball in a position to score, turnover. On the other hand there is no dropping of the heads when Ross finds a teammates and we still have the ball, except in the stands were a bunch of people wish they were watching a sport that disappeared 20 years ago.

I agree Steven needs help, but the help is very specific - someone who can kick standing next to him as he's about to kick it.

I just think you are being way to unfair. Wait until he gets more time with the ball when we improve. The kicking action is fine and that's half the battle. Decision making and tiredness are his real issues and being told to take the game on. We may keep possession with Ross but id rather someone trying to make the play. He is doing exactly what the club want him to do in making the play. Obviously he and the club would rather less turnovers and they could do that by making him take the easy option. The club have no interest in that though.

 

[Choomah]

Kick more goals then behinds

 

[dct66]

I've noticed over the last couple of weeks that at CC we tend to go backwards rather then propelling forwards.
It's something that gives you around -20m and IMO is an absolute killer for us.
It seems as if the boys are frightened of being bold at times in this part of the game.

But it's just an observation, curious to hear what others think.

One thing I noticed on the weekend at times on our defensive 50 we would handball backwards past a GWS player to a StK player meaning that there was now another GWS player between us and the goal and the StK player who received the ball now had to deal with that fairly close GWS player. From the stands it seemed that the first player was in a better position to turnaround and play on towards goal. I hope this would get better with time. A player taking the ball with his back to the goal we are attacking needs to be told whether he is free or not. If it's a mark he then knows if he can swing around to play on, handball it off or go back and take his kick. If it wasn't a mark then it is even more imperative that the players around him let him know how hot he is and handballing backwards past an opposition players should be a last resort to avoid being caught with the ball.

 

[Grav]

IMO our style is based on a similar role to Hawthorns & GWS. Unfortunately Hawthorn have been doing it so long, they still have the experience to win close games. GWS has had a few years more at training for this style and as has been shown this year, are reaping the benefits. What we need is a couple of players with pace that can hit a target & probably a couple with big tanks that can hit a target. Only two years to find them as I still believe it will be around 2018 before we will be challenging again.

 

[plugger66]

IMO our style is based on a similar role to Hawthorns & GWS. Unfortunately Hawthorn have been doing it so long, they still have the experience to win close games. GWS has had a few years more at training for this style and as has been shown this year, are reaping the benefits. What we need is a couple of players with pace that can hit a target & probably a couple with big tanks that can hit a target. Only two years to find them as I still believe it will be around 2018 before we will be challenging again.

I think Hawthorn play a slow and sure kicking game style. We are moving it quicker like GWS and the WB and even the Demons. The demons huge advantage over everyone at the moment is Gawn and hopefully it is really gone on Saturday.

 

[TheLonieRanger]

i think our game plan from half back is quite similar to the dogs and GWS. When we do it well we play the switch n spread as good as any, and it works (more so than what i've seen from any other team, though i mainly watch saints games). The hawks however have brilliant forward patterns. The way they lead and make space is still the best in the biz. Hard to rate it against ours because our kicking into the 50 is just not on the level of theirs so a lot of the good work we do becomes undone

 

[St Pauls]

Interesting to think about our game plan after getting snashed against the Eagles.

Players like Billings, Sincs, Monty, Savage have all been really good when we have been able to play the game on our terms. The run and gun off half back.

Against the Eagles, they clearly are good from stoppages and clamped the game up to create more stoppages. They would then smash us in the clearance and serve it on a platter to the forwards.

Clearly we need to work on our inside mids. I thought Ross was pretty good and missed some of the initial Blitz. His form for the year suggests that he could be a good cog in the midfield machine.

Armo, who is normally our turn to guy in the stoppage was a bit off his game this week and has had a slower year so far.

I think the comparison between Billings and Bont is often unfair. Billings had had some really good games so far, but is still young and inconsistent. I also think noting that when the game is being played fast and skilfully, Billings is the player you would love to have in your team. Where as Bont as that grunt you need for stoppage clashes.

Basically, what I'm saying is apples and oranges here.

We still have a lot of work to do and I think the weekend showed we will need to bolster our inside mids. Whether that is development, recruitment or trades, I'm not sure yet.

 

[freebloke]

I think the game against the eagles was lost at the planning table.

Too much handballing to a running player against the eagles. Just didn't have the gameplan set for subiaco.

NN just tapped the ball to their players, who passed to the player outside the pack. That player either ran and kicked or kicked to another player in space for a mark. This usually ended up as inside 50.

Saints gameplan was force a mid turnover, then do a running handball chain leading to an inside 50.

Obviously (with hindsight), that wouldn't work on a long ground like Subiaco. Basically, once the turnover was had, players should have spread out to give an uncontested marking target in the midfield. Just didn't handle the switch from defense to attack very well (and vice verca).

Again, it poses concern when saints go to Adelaide and don't change from handball to kicking mode.

 

[plugger66]

I think the game against the eagles was lost at the planning table.

Too much handballing to a running player against the eagles. Just didn't have the gameplan set for subiaco.

NN just tapped the ball to their players, who passed to the player outside the pack. That player either ran and kicked or kicked to another player in space for a mark. This usually ended up as inside 50.

Saints gameplan was force a mid turnover, then do a running handball chain leading to an inside 50.

Obviously (with hindsight), that wouldn't work on a long ground like Subiaco. Basically, once the turnover was had, players should have spread out to give an uncontested marking target in the midfield. Just didn't handle the switch from defense to attack very well (and vice verca).

Again, it poses concern when saints go to Adelaide and don't change from handball to kicking mode.

Well I think the game plan was thrown out the door after we hardly touched it in the first 10 minutes of the game and they had 6 goals on the scoreboard. There is no way the plan was to handball that much but we were under so much pressure we had no choice. They certainly don't want Jack having 8 kicks and 21 handballs. They want him running with the ball and kicking it into the forward line.

 

[freebloke]

Well I think the game plan was thrown out the door after we hardly touched it in the first 10 minutes of the game and they had 6 goals on the scoreboard. There is no way the plan was to handball that much but we were under so much pressure we had no choice. They certainly don't want Jack having 8 kicks and 21 handballs. They want him running with the ball and kicking it into the forward line.

I think they did change the setup, but the basic is still a high handball forward to a runner in space. The runner would then run into an eagles player. Instead, if they kicked it to a player in space, that player could mark and reset. Unfortunately, the first instinct was to handball, the gameplan was handball and nobody worked hard to get free space for receiving kick (partly because most players were just trying to get their hands on the ball in the contest).

 

[plugger66]

I think they did change the setup, but the basic is still a high handball forward to a runner in space. The runner would then run into an eagles player. Instead, if they kicked it to a player in space, that player could mark and reset. Unfortunately, the first instinct was to handball, the gameplan was handball and nobody worked hard to get free space for receiving kick (partly because most players were just trying to get their hands on the ball in the contest).

Either way it had no effect in the first 10 minutes because we lost it then and we hardly touched the ball. I could never think the plan is for Jack to have a ratio of 8 and 21.

 

[freebloke]

Either way it had no effect in the first 10 minutes because we lost it then and we hardly touched the ball. I could never think the plan is for Jack to have a ratio of 8 and 21.

I am not disagreeing that the gameplan was dismantled on Subiaco. But the gameplan is a combination of a number of plays and styles. The failure at the centre meant everyone was working extra hard to get into the contest. But in the transition plays where st kilda had the ball either by forcing a turnover or from a kick off, the team kept handballing because of the aforementioned reasons from my earlier post.

 

[bird_man]

I think the game against the eagles was lost at the planning table.

Too much handballing to a running player against the eagles. Just didn't have the gameplan set for subiaco.

NN just tapped the ball to their players, who passed to the player outside the pack. That player either ran and kicked or kicked to another player in space for a mark. This usually ended up as inside 50.

Saints gameplan was force a mid turnover, then do a running handball chain leading to an inside 50.

Obviously (with hindsight), that wouldn't work on a long ground like Subiaco. Basically, once the turnover was had, players should have spread out to give an uncontested marking target in the midfield. Just didn't handle the switch from defense to attack very well (and vice verca).

Again, it poses concern when saints go to Adelaide and don't change from handball to kicking mode.

When you get smashed in contested footy and clearances like we did in the first, it's really hard to tell how the game plan would have went.

 

[Saintbloke]

Any game plan requires you to be in control of the ball or at least inhibit the opposition from using the ball to advantage. The WCE game for me just exposed quite a few weaknesses in our midfield structure, and our defensive work in the forward half. The defence were put under ridiculous pressure early in that game, and as a defender, I would hate to see the opposition coming down the ground with no pressure on the ball carrier, as it enables good use of the ball, and enables forward game plans to get into place.

 

[gringo2011]

Any game plan requires you to be in control of the ball or at least inhibit the opposition from using the ball to advantage. The WCE game for me just exposed quite a few weaknesses in our midfield structure, and our defensive work in the forward half. The defence were put under ridiculous pressure early in that game, and as a defender, I would hate to see the opposition coming down the ground with no pressure on the ball carrier, as it enables good use of the ball, and enables forward game plans to get into place.

I don't think it was necessarily structure as quality of mids. They have a very very good midfield and we have a developing one. We have some good KPs who are developing they have some reasonable ones and the best KPF in the league. I think at the end of the day they are just better than us and we fell apart.

 

[Saintbloke]

I don't think it was necessarily structure as quality of mids. They have a very very good midfield and we have a developing one. We have some good KPs who are developing they have some reasonable ones and the best KPF in the league. I think at the end of the day they are just better than us and we fell apart.

Yeah we need more class in the midfield, but the worrying sign was the lack of one-on-one contesting when the ball was there to get. I can tolerate a better player winning a contest, but when players are nowhere near the drop of the ball or their direct opponents, then I have to turn around to the coach and say "wtf"