Analysis Game plan

[Big Slam]

Where’s that poster who said after the Geelong practice match that there was nothing wrong with our defensive game plan?

How many times are we going to have our defenders press too hard and allow 2, 3 or 4 opposition players to leak out and stream into their forward 50 uncontested?

We saw it against Carlton.
We saw it against Geelong.
We saw it against Hawthorn.

It’s not an instance. It’s a trend.

 

[Old Campaigner]

That’s probably the reality of the new rule. If you have players running in waves to take advantage of it your structure across the back half is going to let the opponent waltz through if you turn the ball over.

 

[ghostdog]

Cal alluded to the option of sending Hooker back if Stringer comes in. Rutten implied that Stringer won't have the match fitness yet. Hooker back might leave a defender there because he can't run, but that's probably not the solution we're looking for.

Another issue is our failure to send someone to Mitchell in the second half. Might have been a good way to bring Langford or Parish into the game, but I'm not sure how that would have impacted our structure.

I would have thought that when the midfield players start surging, the defenders are finding their men and trying to stay with them. Better that the middle of the ground opens up than the oppo gets loose players out the back.

 

[Lore]

the defenders are finding their men and trying to stay with them

Seems to be zone defence, they only man up at full back

 

[Big Slam]

That’s probably the reality of the new rule. If you have players running in waves to take advantage of it your structure across the back half is going to let the opponent waltz through if you turn the ball over.

I don’t think it’s a result of the new “stand” rule. If that was the case we’d have seen our guys running in 3’s or 4’s uncontested into our open forward line as well from when Hawthorn had to “stand” - but how many uncontested possessions did we have in our forward 50 Vs them into theirs? It also wasn’t just happening from stoppages, it was happening from the field of play (just like it was against Carlton and Geelong).

Our game plan consists of our back 6 playing a hard press (almost like an aggressive inverted zone). That only works if you have incredible discipline knowing who goes up and contests the ball in the air, who stays down front and square and who protects the back of play - and everyone stays accountable to their direct opponent and wins one on ones. You also really need a loose man in the backline playing a sweeping/safety role as well for the times the ball does spew out.

We don’t have the forward line power to out gun opposing teams and run the score up on them. If we continue with this defensive hard press that invites the opposition to pop the ball over the top of our half back-wing defensive press so they can gallop into open space and shred us with overlapping, uncontested connections as they meander into their forward 50 we’re going to continue to bleed scoring runs of 4-8 goals in very short bursts of time all season.

I pointed out the “points per possession” Vs Geelong when they scored - they were able to score with very few possessions because of how unmanned and open they were when they went over the top of our press. The “points per possession” were slightly better Vs Hawthorn when they scored - but the results weren’t. In both games we gave up far too many wide open entries by waves of 3 or 4 of their unmanned players into their forward 50 - either by foot, by connecting handball or by run and carry.

 

[Big Slam]

I would have thought that when the midfield players start surging, the defenders are finding their men and trying to stay with them. Better that the middle of the ground opens up than the oppo gets loose players out the back.

^ This x 1,000,000

 

[ghostdog]

Seems to be zone defence, they only man up at full back

Not sure what they were doing but if that continues we'll be murdered on the rebound every time. I feel like they need to leave the surge to the mids once they start running. It means we've then got the same theme of the mids needing to be accountable defensively.

 

[ghostdog]

I don’t think it’s a result of the new “stand” rule. If that was the case we’d have seen our guys running in 3’s or 4’s uncontested into our open forward line as well from when Hawthorn had to “stand” - but how many uncontested possessions did we have in our forward 50 Vs them into theirs? It also wasn’t just happening from stoppages, it was happening from the field of play (just like it was against Carlton and Geelong).

Our game plan consists of our back 6 playing a hard press (almost like an aggressive inverted zone). That only works if you have incredible discipline knowing who goes up and contests the ball in the air, who stays down front and square and who protects the back of play - and everyone stays accountable to their direct opponent and wins one on ones. You also really need a loose man in the backline playing a sweeping/safety role as well for the times the ball does spew out.

We don’t have the forward line power to out gun opposing teams and run the score up on them. If we continue with this defensive hard press that invites the opposition to pop the ball over the top of our half back-wing defensive press so they can gallop into open space and shred us with overlapping, uncontested connections as they meander into their forward 50 we’re going to continue to bleed scoring runs of 4-8 goals in very short bursts of time all season.

I pointed out the “points per possession” Vs Geelong when they scored - they were able to score with very few possessions because of how unmanned and open they were when they went over the top of our press. The “points per possession” were slightly better Vs Hawthorn when they scored - but the results weren’t. In both games we gave up far too many wide open entries by waves of 3 or 4 of their unmanned players into their forward 50 - either by foot, by connecting handball or by run and carry.

That discipline was lacking in the back six is probably reflective of the cattle there at the moment as well; Laverde, Cahill and Hind who are still building their understanding with Ridley and Francis. Felt like Ridley should have been sweeping last night.

 

[Big Slam]

That discipline was lacking in the back six is probably reflective of the cattle there at the moment as well.

Fair point - but then it comes down to the game plan.

If they don’t have the discipline/cohesion to effectively execute a defensive hard press, then Rutten should not be playing them that way. He should have them playing a deep zone so they don’t hemorrhage uncontested entries into their forward 50 and allow the score to be run up in very quick bursts.

 

[Lore]

If we continue with this defensive hard press that invites the opposition to pop the ball over the top of our half back-wing defensive press so they can gallop into open space

The hawk at half back wing out in space by himself nearly always spread from the square with Walla chasing him about 10-15 metres behind. Happened several times right in front of me but I doubt the cameras caught it.

 

[ghostdog]

Fair point - but then it comes down to the game plan.

If they don’t have the discipline/cohesion to effectively execute a defensive hard press, then Rutten should not be playing them that way. He should have them playing a deep zone so they don’t hemorrhage uncontested entries into their forward 50 and allow the score to be run up in very quick bursts.

Well he has suggested about 5 weeks before the formlines of the comp are a bit settled. Maybe that speaks for the time expected for them to start getting it right. That coincides with ANZAC Day.

 

[ghostdog]

This is a St Kilda transition after they'd defended from a centre clearance around halfway up the ground. No forwards getting out the back yesterday. Defenders staying with their players. I think Billings got away a couple of times early but not much else. A previous Saints transition was similar; forwards tracked all the way by our defenders. One of the reasons Francis was able to scoot around in front of his man for a couple of intercept marks. Membrey kicked the goal in this instance, but the defenders were actually defending all night.

We learned stuff!
Sorry about the quality of the screen cap.

 

[Big Slam]

View attachment 1093571

This is a St Kilda transition after they'd defended from a centre clearance around halfway up the ground. No forwards getting out the back yesterday. Defenders staying with their players. I think Billings got away a couple of times early but not much else. A previous Saints transition was similar; forwards tracked all the way by our defenders. One of the reasons Francis was able to scoot around in front of his man for a couple of intercept marks. Membrey kicked the goal in this instance, but the defenders were actually defending all night.

We learned stuff!
Sorry about the quality of the screen cap.

Great post.

And agreed, was fantastic to see our defenders staying at home a lot more and getting away from that ridiculous hard press they’d been playing.

Really made it hard for St Kilda to leak into their forward line in droves because we took away all their space.

 

[Zach Package]

Certainly better attention to detail without the ball but I didn’t see *that* big of a difference to last week.

Basically just got deeper entries that didn’t result in direct turnovers and 12 point turnarounds and the opposition weren’t nearly as good and decided to take a nap.

Razor thin margins.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

Certainly better attention to detail without the ball but I didn’t see *that* big of a difference to last week.

Basically just got deeper entries that didn’t result in direct turnovers and 12 point turnarounds and the opposition weren’t nearly as good and decided to take a nap.

Razor thin margins.

Agreed, I don't think the structure changed. The mids competed better, were able to pressure which protected the backline and allowed them to function. The addition of Stringer into the side, and to the lesser extent Waterman and Perkins gave us a little more size and strength around the contest at times so we couldn't get manhandled around the ball.

 

[ant555]

Work rate.
Better skill level.
Allowed us to play the style we wanted.

 

[ghostdog]

Certainly better attention to detail without the ball but I didn’t see *that* big of a difference to last week.

Basically just got deeper entries that didn’t result in direct turnovers and 12 point turnarounds and the opposition weren’t nearly as good and decided to take a nap.

Razor thin margins.

Also forwards that positioned themselves deeper to create space to lead into. When Jones puts some size on he'll be a powerful lead and mark forward.

 

[rumply]

Currently the 2nd highest scoring team in the league & one win out of the 8, not bad for a team with 4 wins, think we all take that before round 1.

 

[Doss]

Currently the 2nd highest scoring team in the league & one win out of the 8, not bad for a team with 4 wins, think we all take that before round 1.

14th (or fifth worst) for points conceded though. And this is the challenge to address moving forward.

For mine we concede too much because our entries into forward 50 are all too often not great. I love Hooker but he is a liability if the ball doesn’t end up in his hands now as he simply can’t move, and this combined with errant delivery means we are still very prone to getting killed on the transition.

Laverde in particular is doing a great job in defence but against the really good sides it tells us against us.

Addressing this is Rutten’s biggest challenge.

 

[rumply]

14th (or fifth worst) for points conceded though. And this is the challenge to address moving forward.

For mine we concede too much because our entries into forward 50 are all too often not great. I love Hooker but he is a liability if the ball doesn’t end up in his hands now as he simply can’t move, and this combined with errant delivery means we are still very prone to getting killed on the transition.

Laverde in particular is doing a great job in defence but against the really good sides it tells us against us.

Addressing this is Rutten’s biggest challenge.

Yep, one step at a time but yeah we'll still get cleaned up by the better sides.

Unfortunately there's no obvious replacement for Hooker & until we get games into these younger guys, he's playing a fairly important role.

 

[Old Campaigner]

14th (or fifth worst) for points conceded though. And this is the challenge to address moving forward.

For mine we concede too much because our entries into forward 50 are all too often not great. I love Hooker but he is a liability if the ball doesn’t end up in his hands now as he simply can’t move, and this combined with errant delivery means we are still very prone to getting killed on the transition.

Laverde in particular is doing a great job in defence but against the really good sides it tells us against us.

Addressing this is Rutten’s biggest challenge.

It's a pretty good position to be in at this point in the rebuild though. He's probably got a couple of years grace to get the team defence to the point it needs to be before the torches and pitchforks come out.

 

[Doss]

It's a pretty good position to be in at this point in the rebuild though. He's probably got a couple of years grace to get the team defence to the point it needs to be before the torches and pitchforks come out.

Absolutely. It's certainly not a torches and pitchforks thing from my perspective; it's just the obvious thing that now needs to be worked on. We're rebuilding and still developing, these things are to be expected.

 

[fishardansin]

I think you're right Doss. It is to do with ball use forward of centre, then getting done on the transition.

 

[rumply]

 

[Zach Package]