Strategy Gameday Tactics and Mechanisms - EXPLANATIONS

[Juddernaut08]

Hello, over the years football has evolved. Not only with the players getting bigger, stronger and more mobile; but also with onfield strategies.

• We've had defensive mechanisms like the flood (packing 18-ish players into the opposition's forwardline).

• We've had offensive tactics like Pagan's Paddock.

• We've seen different philosphies in ball movement: corridor vs boundary-line (Malthouse)...or the keepings-off precision passes of the Hawks.

I'd like to have a thread where we can discuss stuff that we see and perhaps don't understand or agree with...then have others explain or provide comment on this.

The reason I bring this up:

Our defensive strategy at the moment and even last year seems really unorthodox. It seems our KPD's and potentially even the other defenders are playing a switch defense to combat leading patterns. This means if: Jones' man makes a lead and gets space on him, Plowman is expected to peel off his own man and man this guy up while Jones "switches" onto Plowman's man. The benefit (in theory) of this is you negate the separation these guys get on the lead by helping each other out...instead of, for example, Jones chasing his guy down with no hope of catching him

Questions:
Have I got this right?
It seems to me this is what is happening but instead of helping each other out, they're just helping each other get confused.
Can it work? Is it because it's new-ish and Docherty isn't there to general them?

 

[Juddernaut08]

Another is centre bounce strategy. Bugs me when other teams win it and find an easy back pass to a guy in space who then has time to hit a teammate lace out.

 

[Jimmae]

Your first example is called a zone defence, and I'm sure you're familiar with it given your avatar.

The second tactic is called an overlap, and tries to unsettle the oppositions defensive systems and open up space by committing numbers from behind the ball into your chain of possession. It's a common soccer tactic in more defensive formations and also sides that have a clear skill/fitness advantage over their opposition.

 

[Jabba73]

Hello, over the years football has evolved. Not only with the players getting bigger, stronger and more mobile; but also with onfield strategies.

• We've had defensive mechanisms like the flood (packing 18-ish players into the opposition's forwardline).

• We've had offensive tactics like Pagan's Paddock.

• We've seen different philosphies in ball movement: corridor vs boundary-line (Malthouse)...or the keepings-off precision passes of the Hawks.

I'd like to have a thread where we can discuss stuff that we see and perhaps don't understand or agree with...then have others explain or provide comment on this.

The reason I bring this up:

Our defensive strategy at the moment and even last year seems really unorthodox. It seems our KPD's and potentially even the other defenders are playing a switch defense to combat leading patterns. This means if: Jones' man makes a lead and gets space on him, Plowman is expected to peel off his own man and man this guy up while Jones "switches" onto Plowman's man. The benefit (in theory) of this is you negate the separation these guys get on the lead by helping each other out...instead of, for example, Jones chasing his guy down with no hope of catching him

Questions:
Have I got this right?
It seems to me this is what is happening but instead of helping each other out, they're just helping each other get confused.
Can it work? Is it because it's new-ish and Docherty isn't there to general them?

This tactic of guarding an area rather than a player is the reason we carry extra talls in defence. More a zone type defence where defenders will roll off a chase so they stay in the area.

Can also see it happen when the opposition gets the ball streaming through the middle, starting from the backline. Everyone rolls up to guard the mark so there is less chance of the player running through the zone while defenders stick with their opponent who runs away from the ball to create space. The players behind are then expected to leave their direct opponent to pick up the loose man to slow the easy kicks over the top. If it works, it creates enough delay for midfielders to get back into the space and prevent the easy handball over the top into the unguarded goal square when the last defender gets drawn into the play.

Playing so many mobile talls also makes it harder for teams to swap players to create a height mismatch to exploit. Also allows anyone to be the third man up to kill the contest, or the loose player taking the intercept mark.

Once we sort it all out, it will probably become the new blueprint for other teams to copy.

 

[thylacine60]

the only thing other clubs might copy off us is the quality of adhesive on our stickers.......really sticky glue on our stickers this year........

 

[Jabba73]

the only thing other clubs might copy off us is the quality of adhesive on our stickers.......really sticky glue on our stickers this year........

Sticky thread

 

[JustaBattler]

Sticky fingers

 

[thylacine60]

exile on main street

 

[Juddernaut08]

This tactic of guarding an area rather than a player is the reason we carry extra talls in defence. More a zone type defence where defenders will roll off a chase so they stay in the area.

Can also see it happen when the opposition gets the ball streaming through the middle, starting from the backline. Everyone rolls up to guard the mark so there is less chance of the player running through the zone while defenders stick with their opponent who runs away from the ball to create space. The players behind are then expected to leave their direct opponent to pick up the loose man to slow the easy kicks over the top. If it works, it creates enough delay for midfielders to get back into the space and prevent the easy handball over the top into the unguarded goal square when the last defender gets drawn into the play.

Playing so many mobile talls also makes it harder for teams to swap players to create a height mismatch to exploit. Also allows anyone to be the third man up to kill the contest, or the loose player taking the intercept mark.

Once we sort it all out, it will probably become the new blueprint for other teams to copy.

I'd love that to be the case, especially since its not so easy to copy as we have a number of mobile quality talls that others dont. I am not sure itll work out though

 

[Jabba73]

I'd love that to be the case, especially since its not so easy to copy as we have a number of mobile quality talls that others dont. I am not sure itll work out though

Short forward line with only one marking target was never going to work, until it did. Never say never anymore

 

[Gethelred]

Hello, over the years football has evolved. Not only with the players getting bigger, stronger and more mobile; but also with onfield strategies.

• We've had defensive mechanisms like the flood (packing 18-ish players into the opposition's forwardline).

• We've had offensive tactics like Pagan's Paddock.

• We've seen different philosphies in ball movement: corridor vs boundary-line (Malthouse)...or the keepings-off precision passes of the Hawks.

I'd like to have a thread where we can discuss stuff that we see and perhaps don't understand or agree with...then have others explain or provide comment on this.

The reason I bring this up:

Our defensive strategy at the moment and even last year seems really unorthodox. It seems our KPD's and potentially even the other defenders are playing a switch defense to combat leading patterns. This means if: Jones' man makes a lead and gets space on him, Plowman is expected to peel off his own man and man this guy up while Jones "switches" onto Plowman's man. The benefit (in theory) of this is you negate the separation these guys get on the lead by helping each other out...instead of, for example, Jones chasing his guy down with no hope of catching him

Questions:
Have I got this right?
It seems to me this is what is happening but instead of helping each other out, they're just helping each other get confused.
Can it work? Is it because it's new-ish and Docherty isn't there to general them?

That one.

Doc ran our backline last year. It goes beyond simple organisation, and into split second small tier drill sergeant-esque yelling orders at people to get them to move early. It's why, despite the midfield being pretty bloody poor for most of the past two years, we've managed to keep from getting blown out too often; if there's been a stab pass, someone's peeled off and taken the space (usually Marshbank or Doc, occasionally Weitering) to take the intercept mark before the forward got there. Seeing as you can't go all Plugger into the back of a defender these days when they sit in your space, it at least halves the contest if the kick is good, and outright wins the turnover if it isn't.

This season, Plow is the one doing the organisation, and we saw, when Doc went into the midfield last season in Cripps and Ed's absence, he is simply not as good at it. When the midfield is winning, he's serviceable as the backline general; when they're struggling, well, you saw what happened against Geelong last year and against GC this week.

It's also why we're fairly tall across the entire backline, and why there's a higher interceptor to true defender ratio across the back half than any other team running around at the moment - with the possible exception of Sydney. All of the talls - including Plow and Doc - are expected to cut off the bullet pass before it gets to the forward, instead of just trying to mind your man, and it allows play like Jones flying nearly constantly for marks and leaving his man without risk. Someone else should've taken Lynch when Liam left his man - some of the time, at least - to zone off, and it just didn't happen.

I don't actually want Doc to go into the midfield, when he returns to matches. He's an indifferent midfielder, and we look so much sharper with him back there, and the backline from the last few seasons is designed as much as anything else to begin midfield scoring chains. That's what we're looking to see this season, the increased offensive running play that will, when he comes back/we get the right cattle to implement the gameplan 100% of the time, slot into the team defense gameplan.

 

[Gethelred]

Short forward line with only one marking target was never going to work, until it did. Never say never anymore

Relies just so, so much on Riewoldt it's not funny though. He goes down, just watch them struggle to score.

I mean, who's going to ensure the ball hits the deck in the right spot? Townsend? Elton?

 

[AndyWalkersGirl]

I want to see old fashioned one on one again, waaaaaaayyy too many loose opposition players last week.

 

[Iamcarlton]

Tactics are probably irrelevant when talking about the CFC and its fortunes or misfortunes over the past 15 years or so .

Heres a thought for Carlton dont drop basic chest marks dont fumble and bumble at every opportunity . And when you get a shot on goal kick it through those big sticks not the big one and little one . Or worse case scenario miss the lot . Football these days has been made so much more technical and inefficient than at any period in the history of the game due to the coaches . And the rulemakers trying to outwit the coaches just for the fun of it .

At the end of the day its not rocket science and thèse 2 rules still apply no matter how much the game has changed .
* make less mistakes both ball handling and decision making than your opposition .
* make the most of your opportunities in front of goal when they are presented .
Do that and you give yourself a good chance of winning the game or atleast a chance of winning .

Sadly for us all the CFC has failed miserably on those two basic commandments . Until that changes no matter the personnel put on the field or the tactics implemented little will change .

 

[Metalcrusher]

Another is centre bounce strategy. Bugs me when other teams win it and find an easy back pass to a guy in space who then has time to hit a teammate lace out.

This is called the smiley face centre bounce.

Short forward line with only one marking target was never going to work, until it did. Never say never anymore

Short mobile forward lines only work if you midfield is COMPETANT enough to deliver lace out leading passes.

 

[gbatman]

Hello, over the years football has evolved. Not only with the players getting bigger, stronger and more mobile; but also with onfield strategies.

• We've had defensive mechanisms like the flood (packing 18-ish players into the opposition's forwardline).

• We've had offensive tactics like Pagan's Paddock.

• We've seen different philosphies in ball movement: corridor vs boundary-line (Malthouse)...or the keepings-off precision passes of the Hawks.

I'd like to have a thread where we can discuss stuff that we see and perhaps don't understand or agree with...then have others explain or provide comment on this.

The reason I bring this up:

Our defensive strategy at the moment and even last year seems really unorthodox. It seems our KPD's and potentially even the other defenders are playing a switch defense to combat leading patterns. This means if: Jones' man makes a lead and gets space on him, Plowman is expected to peel off his own man and man this guy up while Jones "switches" onto Plowman's man. The benefit (in theory) of this is you negate the separation these guys get on the lead by helping each other out...instead of, for example, Jones chasing his guy down with no hope of catching him

Questions:
Have I got this right?
It seems to me this is what is happening but instead of helping each other out, they're just helping each other get confused.
Can it work? Is it because it's new-ish and Docherty isn't there to general them?

That type of defence has been used for years, can remember seeing it done in Ratten's time. Just how the whole ground defends. If teams are going to be more direct it's going to be harder.

Our zoning and intercepting defending will take a hit as we turn it over a lot and are going more direct. It's a good way to defend when the opposition are slowed down and it's coming in from out wide. Not so much when you have less numbers back and the opposition get to move it quick and direct.

It's a good game plan we are attempting but we do not have the players for it. It's why Mick Malthouse made us play the way we did. Would have seen one training session and decided we weren't skilled enough to move it up the middle and he was right. What let Malthouse down the most was forwards who refused to apply forward pressure and allow us to lock the ball in the forward line and to force turnovers. That's why those forwards were pushed out by him.

The problem is that there are cracks showing a little with forward pressure for Brendan Bolton. Casboult, Wright, Lamb are too slow to apply high end forward pressure. Garlett has shown very inconsistent efforts to apply pressure. Polson didn't apply much. Something is wrong there.

Our center clearance has changed, we're going direct from there instead of out wide to the flanks then in. This is ok but again no forward pressure and we can't defend from there.

We've had a game plan that meant we had the ball in areas of the ground a lot where it was safe to turn it over and we played slow and safe football. It meant players with poor skills and low ability were protected. Now we are taking loads of risk and going more direct, those who cause turnovers are hurting us a lot more. It's bad because we will get flogged more and may even lose more (maybe not too) but it's good because it accommodates our better and more skilled players and helps weed out our list of poor footballers. I think in time, if we draft and recruit really well we will be rewarded but in the short term this may hurt a little.

Guys like Jones may suffer from this too. Spent all of last year zoning off, playing way in front and relying on defensive numbers to stop his opponent from leading. A few games last year where we were cut up up the guts by opposition (WCE and Sydney) he had bags kicked on him and that may be a more common occurrence. He's shown little ability to play one on one and demonstrate good game sense. As a defender you need to know when to zone off and when to drop back and defend one on one and that change has to happen very quickly. Again, this is an example of a game plan that protects inadequate footballers VS a game plan which exposes them.

I really do believe that our players who have ability and skill will be better off with a more open and direct game style. SPS, Fisher, Marchbank, Dow, Curnow will all benefit I believe.

From a list management point of view, this style of football could be a useful tool when it comes to making decisions.

What needs to improve is our decision making. When do we go with the new and go direct and quick and when do we go with the old, chip it around and go a bit wider and safer. We have to identify when it's on and when it's not. Also with our defence when we need to go one on one or when to zone off.

For defence, when the ball is coming in wide, under pressure and you have numbers back then zone up. When the opposition are running and carrying the ball or it's open then man up.

The other thing is skill. No game plan, especially this one, will work if your are missing kicks/handballs, fumbling or dropping marks.

Pressure is the other, pressure at stoppages and in our forward end are not negotiable. If this is not 100% then the defence stands 0 chance.

 

[Iamcarlton]

This is called the smiley face centre bounce.



Short mobile forward lines only work if you midfield is COMPETANT enough to deliver lace out leading passes.

I think thats a debatable point these days a short mobile forwardline will most likely create more turnovers in the forward half of which theres a hell of a lot of scores from turnovers . Than say our forwardline at present .
There really isnt many contested marks taken in forwardlines .

 

[Metalcrusher]

I think thats a debatable point these days a short mobile forwardline will most likely create more turnovers in the forward half of which theres a hell of a lot of scores from turnovers . Than say our forwardline at present .
There really isnt many contested marks taken in forwardlines .

That's what makes Charlie so damn special. You are right about the discrepancy between Marks v Contested marks in general though. Huge disparity between the two figures.

 

[Juddernaut08]

I think thats a debatable point these days a short mobile forwardline will most likely create more turnovers in the forward half of which theres a hell of a lot of scores from turnovers . Than say our forwardline at present .
There really isnt many contested marks taken in forwardlines .

The Tuohy-types are going to be pretty useful in the modern game too methinks. His ability to receive a handball hand-off from someone who has marked just outside 50 and then go the long bomb for goal is invaluable when the 50 is congested.

Zac Fisher to a certain extent has this potential as well. Kid has a surprisingly huge and accurate boot. Love the kid.

 

[Iamcarlton]

The Tuohy-types are going to be pretty useful in the modern game too methinks. His ability to receive a handball hand-off from someone who has marked just outside 50 and then go the long bomb for goal is invaluable when the 50 is congested.

Zac Fisher to a certain extent has this potential as well. Kid has a surprisingly huge and accurate boot. Love the kid.

What we really do lack is quality medium sized forwards that can take a mark and quick enough to apply the pressure needed to cause turnovers . Lamb is about all weve got tries hard but is certainly no Luke Bruest .

 

[Juddernaut08]

What we really do lack is quality medium sized forwards that can take a mark and quick enough to apply the pressure needed to cause turnovers . Lamb is about all weve got tries hard but is certainly no Luke Bruest .

Do you think Jack could fit this?

 

[Metalcrusher]

Is he quick enough? Closing speed wise to harass etc .... force the turn over?

 

[Juddernaut08]

Is he quick enough? Closing speed wise to harass etc .... force the turn over?

Not quick. But has the brains to make up for it. One of our better tacklers also.

 

[Metalcrusher]

Not quick. But has the brains to make up for it. One of our better tacklers also.

As long as his shoulders are right .... he has not been the same JSOS since the off season surgery.

 

[Jimmae]

Relies just so, so much on Riewoldt it's not funny though. He goes down, just watch them struggle to score.

I mean, who's going to ensure the ball hits the deck in the right spot? Townsend? Elton?

You're assuming that they're going to be forced into kicking the ball long and high to the hotspot.

The point of their make up is to open up space in the forward line by overloading the midfield, creating overlap options easily once a turnover is forced and then quickly hitting the lead back into the 50.

It's a very tactical and controlled form of the flood that doesn't excessively fatigue your runners when executed properly, but it obviously requires those extra runners from the forward line.

We're trying to do something relatively similar, but with strong marking players at either end to secure the football. Our biggest problem right now is guys like Levi, Lamb and O'Shea gumming up the works.

We've also placed less emphasis on running power and relative strength in the contest than Richmond's recruiting, and are more obsessed with skills (and thus increasing time in/control of possession). In theory our setup is more flexible than Richmond's, but it's important to not drift too far away from the fundamentals of football other than kicking.