Analysis Game plan

[ant555]

This thread could end up going in any direction but there is one observation I have been looking at recently and have tortured myself by going back and having a look at a few games where we have looked very poor as far as forward pressure goes given there has been a lot of comment in recent years about us being a back half side.
One thing keeps sticking in my mind and that is for 10 or so years we have been an extra at the contest team through various coaches and I do not think it works for us as the extra tends to be just another see ball get ball flanker who really does not help us all that much.
What it does do is two fold. Leaves us defending one on more more often than not but worse than that is the extra tends to get caught in no mans land and our forwards end up being in a 5 on 6 or 5 on 7 situation depending on the Oppositions extra. It is certainly not helping our forward half defense as sides often have a two man overlap to run the ball out.

 

[Vander18]

This thread could end up going in any direction but there is one observation I have been looking at recently and have tortured myself by going back and having a look at a few games where we have looked very poor as far as forward pressure goes given there has been a lot of comment in recent years about us being a back half side.
One thing keeps sticking in my mind and that is for 10 or so years we have been an extra at the contest team through various coaches and I do not think it works for us as the extra tends to be just another see ball get ball flanker who really does not help us all that much.
What it does do is two fold. Leaves us defending one on more more often than not but worse than that is the extra tends to get caught in no mans land and our forwards end up being in a 5 on 6 or 5 on 7 situation depending on the Oppositions extra. It is certainly not helping our forward half defense as sides often have a two man overlap to run the ball out.

Do many other teams throw an extra at the contest?

 

[TheGrizz]

I want to discuss how we are unable to shut games down late when we have a lead. 3 games now we have had a lead late before coughing it up late:

CARL: up 12 points with 6 mins left
GWS: up 16 points at 3/4 time and up a goal with 5 mins left
GCS: up a goal with 2.5 minutes left.

I recall Worsfold said last year that we dont practice late game scenarios all that much, and i think it shows. particularly last night where we went up late by a point and GC waltzed up the ground from kick in, which should be the easiest place to defend from.

It seems if teams can get over our zone 55-60m out we are exposed badly. Particularly with forward handball.

 

[Learntopray]

Do many other teams throw an extra at the contest?

Well by definition if we have an extra at the contest, the team we are versing doesn't

 

[eth-dog]

Against GWS it was interesting. In the first half, when we were on top of the contest it seemed as if they had the extra at the contest and our pressure was really good around there, and Ridley was essentially able to play as the loose and cut off their attacks. In the second half they chose not to have the extra at the contest which meant Ridley couldn't do as he pleased essentially and we coughed up the lead.

The extra at the contest seems like a "we're too small inside" sort of play. I think we'd be better off having it matched across the field or if they want to push their half forward up, let them and let Ridley dictate terms.

 

[Vander18]

Well by definition if we have an extra at the contest, the team we are versing doesn't

Well yeah....

Was more thinking about how common the strategy is broadly, not just when playing us.

 

[ant555]

Do many other teams throw an extra at the contest?

Not many. Most push one into the back half.

 

[Don35]

If an extra at the contest is the plan they sure as hell don’t execute it well. We have been constantly outnumbered all year

 

[Vander18]

Not many. Most push one into the back half.

Right.

Am I right to say we did this under Hird even when our midfield was full of big, slow, contested beasts?

 

[ant555]

Right.

Am I right to say we did this under Hird even when our midfield was full of big, slow, contested beasts?

Yep. I think it was a Bomber tactic.

 

[CBombers17]

I thought our plan was to do the opposite? Be outnumbered at the contest but gain the ball back from turnovers from the next possession (and then counter attack)?

So effectively being prepared to lose the clearance whilst still applying enough pressure at the contest and have enough numbers elsewhere ro create turnovers.

This being rhe reason we are happy to have 'pressure' players harrassing at the contest rather than contested beasts winning the ball - Smith and Tippa over Hibberd and Clarke etc

 

[ant555]

I thought our plan was to do the opposite? Be outnumbered at the contest but gain the ball back from turnovers from the next possession (and then counter attack)?

So effectively being prepared to lose the clearance whilst still applying enough pressure at the contest and have enough numbers elsewhere ro create turnovers.

They would like it to be that way

 

[CBombers17]

They would like it to be that way

Where do you see it breaking down for us? We lack the ball users on the counter is one area (there's no Dusty's but that's not this problem). Do you think we are getting sucked into the contest or we just don't have the cattle to apply enough pressure with fewer numbers (Smith and co not able).

I think the pressure we are trying to apply has to have enough impact at the contest. The plan isn't for the opposition to absolutely walk away with the football. Its hard to tell where it breaks down (same when it stands up).

 

[Bombermania]

I have noticed that and the smart teams notably Geelong used to play a loose player a kick off the contest usually on the defensive side.

 

[ant555]

Where do you see it breaking down for us? We lack the ball users on the counter is one area (there's no Dusty's but that's not this problem). Do you think we are getting sucked into the contest or we just don't have the cattle to apply enough pressure with fewer numbers (Smith and co not able).

I think the pressure we are trying to apply has to do enough at the contest. The plan isn't for the opposition to absolutely walk away with the football. Its hard to tell where it breaks down (same when it stands up).

I think we just waste a number at the contest by having too many pushing in close. Despite the out number there is no coverage of the opposition . We will have a 3 on 1 scrapping for the ball and it spills out where our opponents end up with the outnumber . I really think it has a lot to do with the flanker factor and the fact that players who do not play a lot of midfield in their development tend to hunt the ball non stop. It may work for us if the extra was a smart midfielder but we do not have a lot of those to spare.
Richmond seem to set up better around the contest so they are not out numbered inside 3 meters but also at 5 meters. If the ball escapes they either win it or pressure the second receiver. For it to be effective for us we would need to be creating stoppage after stoppage and not letting the ball out but that does not happen.
The Bulldogs slayed us by playing an extra back and that extra was generally a link player so they had a 7 on 5 in defense and where able to pick the zone by having the overlap.
I just wonder if we play 6 on 6 forward and play one winger as a sweeper into the back half to try and exploit our intercept marking power and runners then we may be able to put more forward pressure on with 2 tall , 2 medium and 2 small (or a slight variation) in the forward half. The winger can push up to the contest from the back end if needed.

 

[CBombers17]

I think we just waste a number at the contest by having too many pushing in close. Despite the out number there is no coverage of the opposition . We will have a 3 on 1 scrapping for the ball and it spills out where our opponents end up with the outnumber . I really think it has a lot to do with the flanker factor and the fact that players who do not play a lot of midfield in their development tend to hunt the ball non stop. It may work for us if the extra was a smart midfielder but we do not have a lot of those to spare.
Richmond seem to set up better around the contest so they are not out numbered inside 3 meters but also at 5 meters. If the ball escapes they either win it or pressure the second receiver. For it to be effective for us we would need to be creating stoppage after stoppage and not letting the ball out but that does not happen.
The Bulldogs slayed us by playing an extra back and that extra was generally a link player so they had a 7 on 5 in defense and where able to pick the zone by having the overlap.
I just wonder if we play 6 on 6 forward and play one winger as a sweeper into the back half to try and exploit our intercept marking power and runners then we may be able to put more forward pressure on with 2 tall , 2 medium and 2 small (or a slight variation) in the forward half. The winger can push up to the contest from the back end if needed.

The flanker factor was in part why i was hoping they would give Clarke a proper run in there. I reckon he's the type of player who is mobile enough and fit enough to play that role whereas the others either don't have the physical capacity or play reading ability to apply regular enough pressure at the contest. This is where Snelling is the forward prototype. He can get to a lot of contests and also impacts them when he does scappy ****er that he is. .

If we were going to play someone behind the ball I'd go for a Ridley or Redman. I wouldn't want any of the current winger crop near it TBH. I'd like to see us try it with Redman if could find his kicking ability again.

 

[ant555]

The flanker factor was in part why i was hoping they would give Clarke a proper run in there. I reckon he's the type of player who is mobile enough and fit enough to play that role whereas the others either don't have the physical capacity or play reading ability to apply regular enough pressure at the contest. This is where Snelling is the forward prototype. He can get to a lot of contests and also impacts them when he does scappy f***er that he is. .

If we were going to play someone behind the ball I'd go for a Ridley or Redman. I wouldn't want any of the current winger crop near it TBH. I'd like to see us try it with Redman if could find his kicking ability again.

I agree. Could not be a current winger. Cutler in his 2018 form yes but he is not close to that now. Ridley is better in defense so it would have to be someone like Redman or McKenna right now. Maybe a role for the skipper in the future.

 

[MiguelM]

We are struggling to break lines out of defence this year. Partly due to the fact that McKenna was far from his best when back and Gleeson has lost his pace. Saad can break the lines but we often need him to stick close to dangerous forwards.

Fantasia was good for the Pies game, just got to get him on the park.

If McKenna leaves, this area is a problem. Would love another Andy Lovett type off half back.

 

[Bjchan13]

To me it looks like we still rely on the slingshot brand too much. At times when we've held onto the ball for a bit and used space we've looked ok. And other times when we set up we can lock it in and get some repeat entries. But we cant do anything consistently and we need to learn when to play which style. Too much playing on inside fwd 50 as well. If you mark it why not take your 30 seconds, give everyone a breather and a chance to set up the zone and then even if you miss you're a good chance to get a repeat entry or lock it in your forward line. Its one of the reasons teams run it out so easily. We go 100 miles an hour, botch it and then teams on the rebound have open players everywhere.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Didn’t you guys listen to Woosh’s presser?

“I don't get too caught up with the brand of footy, but it has defence and attack elements and they work together.”

 

[CBombers17]

I agree. Could not be a current winger. Cutler in his 2018 form yes but he is not close to that now. Ridley is better in defense so it would have to be someone like Redman or McKenna right now. Maybe a role for the skipper in the future.

I wondered what they will do with Heppell when he gets back...

It will be a good measure to see how we go against the Tigers soon. To look at any contrast in the two sides ability to play this way.

It would also be very interesting if someone who has a good understanding of each clubs tactics could do a rundown. Just to know where the trends are heading and also to then compare how our system works against particular clubs (or if someone has an article etc).

 

[DERO]

Didn’t you guys listen to Woosh’s presser?

“I don't get too caught up with the brand of footy, but it has defence and attack elements and they work together.”

He's just clipping his ticket now. It would have been much worse if we sacked him. Thanks goodness he is going out with some grace.

 

[JayJ20]

I want to discuss how we are unable to shut games down late when we have a lead. 3 games now we have had a lead late before coughing it up late:

CARL: up 12 points with 6 mins left
GWS: up 16 points at 3/4 time and up a goal with 5 mins left
GCS: up a goal with 2.5 minutes left.

I recall Worsfold said last year that we dont practice late game scenarios all that much, and i think it shows. particularly last night where we went up late by a point and GC waltzed up the ground from kick in, which should be the easiest place to defend from.

It seems if teams can get over our zone 55-60m out we are exposed badly. Particularly with forward handball.

Not to mention:

- We won by 3 vs Adelaide after leading by 19 in the 3rd. We also didn't defend the 3 point lead late in the game. We were lucky Adelaide messed it up because they were all over us.
- We led Fremantle by 27 points at 3QT. We nearly lost the game
- We led Sydney by 20 points in the last quarter. It took a brilliant set shot by Parish to win by 6 points.
- We led by 28 points vs Collingwood early in the last. They wiped the score in 10 minutes for us to lead by only 3 points.

It's a real concern that we cannot win comfortably. It's the reason why we lost vs Carlton, Gold Coast and GWS. In all 3 games we could have ran away with it if we had it in us to smash teams.

 

[ant555]

To me it looks like we still rely on the slingshot brand too much. At times when we've held onto the ball for a bit and used space we've looked ok. And other times when we set up we can lock it in and get some repeat entries. But we cant do anything consistently and we need to learn when to play which style. Too much playing on inside fwd 50 as well. If you mark it why not take your 30 seconds, give everyone a breather and a chance to set up the zone and then even if you miss you're a good chance to get a repeat entry or lock it in your forward line. Its one of the reasons teams run it out so easily. We go 100 miles an hour, botch it and then teams on the rebound have open players everywhere.

And all of this relates to the OP.
Ball gets out of F50 easily as their is an out number all the time.
Defense actually defends well and wins the ball so we sling shot of half back.
Ball goes back inside 50 and we stuff it up.
Ball comes back out because the out number allows teams to over lap run or kick and pick the zone apart.
The time we lock it in generally are the deep entries that we do not turn over and get a repeat contest from. It allows the extra number to get back and the midfield to push up.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

The most baffling part about outnumbering at the contest is we don’t even attempt to use handball. We know where the numbers are but continually hack kick out of congestion.