Harry O and Crows structures

[Premier Pies]

We’ve all heard how ineffective Harry O was on Saturday night and how he was tagged out of the game completely by a defensive forward.

Is this something that we should be really concerned about? Is Harry the be all and end all of our prospects in the finals? If you listen to all the doomsayers or read the papers, all you need to do is tag Harry and the Pies will be rendered useless and totally vulnerable to defeat.

Whilst I am a little bit concerned about our whole team’s form on Saturday night, and of course the form of Harry O in isolation, I’m more inclined to put it down to the Crows effective game plan coupled with the Pies being a bit flat.

This should be a good wake up call for the entire team to lift and never drop our intensity and discipline towards team structures. Many players’ positions in the team are far from safe and Malthouse has shown many times this year he is prepared to make changes. We have to assume that Harry O will be tagged against Hawthorn this week, so it will show whether we have any answers and whether Harry O can contribute under those conditions.

On the positive side we restricted the Crows to a miserly 51 points and 8 less scoring shots, so defensively we stood up without having any drive going forward. Another big positive was the fact we were able to grind out a win whilst playing far below our best. This is something we have failed to do in previous years. A sign of improved maturity and confidence perhaps?

Thomas was our best player by a mile and showed his class all night. Shame he missed that easy goal near the end of the match. Sidebottom took another big step in his development and stood up for the boys when most players were flat. Not bad for a second year player. Pendlebury was all class and really led from the front with his clearance work and ability to have time in packs and feed the ball out to team mates.

All in all the Hawks match bears no significance on who we play in week one of the finals. Result aside, it gives us a wonderful chance to test our structures against a really hardened team. Especially players like Harry O and Heater being tagged.

 

[TradeDraft]

Heater use to cope the Same Thing and he worked he way through it. Big H has to do that now

 

[Thommo 42]

Harry has been good this year because Heater has been getting the defensive forwards playing on him. If they start playing on Harry, all that does is release Heater again.

This is a good thing for us as Heater wins more footy, uses it better and is a better decision maker. Problem for us is that Heater appears to be really struggling with his back.

 

[Pie eyed]

We’ve all heard how ineffective Harry O was on Saturday night and how he was tagged out of the game completely by a defensive forward.

Is this something that we should be really concerned about? Is Harry the be all and end all of our prospects in the finals? If you listen to all the doomsayers or read the papers, all you need to do is tag Harry and the Pies will be rendered useless and totally vulnerable to defeat.

Whilst I am a little bit concerned about our whole team’s form on Saturday night, and of course the form of Harry O in isolation, I’m more inclined to put it down to the Crows effective game plan coupled with the Pies being a bit flat.

This should be a good wake up call for the entire team to lift and never drop our intensity and discipline towards team structures. Many players’ positions in the team are far from safe and Malthouse has shown many times this year he is prepared to make changes. We have to assume that Harry O will be tagged against Hawthorn this week, so it will show whether we have any answers and whether Harry O can contribute under those conditions.

On the positive side we restricted the Crows to a miserly 51 points and 8 less scoring shots, so defensively we stood up without having any drive going forward. Another big positive was the fact we were able to grind out a win whilst playing far below our best. This is something we have failed to do in previous years. A sign of improved maturity and confidence perhaps?

Thomas was our best player by a mile and showed his class all night. Shame he missed that easy goal near the end of the match. Sidebottom took another big step in his development and stood up for the boys when most players were flat. Not bad for a second year player. Pendlebury was all class and really led from the front with his clearance work and ability to have time in packs and feed the ball out to team mates.

All in all the Hawks match bears no significance on who we play in week one of the finals. Result aside, it gives us a wonderful chance to test our structures against a really hardened team. Especially players like Harry O and Heater being tagged.

Each side has a limited number of players who could be considered "taggers" and even then their effectiveness varies.

If other sides are willing to tag Harry that's another like Dids, Wellingham or Swan who goes untagged.
I don't see it as a problem.
The Crows set themselves for a huge task and to their credit nearly pulled it off, but I firmly believe Collingwood were flat. Dead flat.

It's up to the boys to turn that around.
I don't see any of our opposition finalists trying anything too far from their existing game plans, game plans which see them in finals, too much on the back of Saturday night.

 

[mattys123]

You have to remember we didn't have Ben Reid or Presti this week, which I think threw all our backline structure "out of whack" (very technical term).

Reid gives us as much drive and forward momentum as anyone in that backline, and Presti is the "old leader" down there, and would have had a quit word or two to Harry about how to break the tag.

Plus, from what I saw, Heath Shaw was playing on the wing for most of the night, which made Harry's job even harder.

I think MM was trying a few different tactics and matchups out, but ultimately it didn't work, and I think we will resort back to the normal matchups once Presti and Reid come back in this week.

Plus, let's see a team try and tag Harry in the finals, we can actually live with Harry having a below average night, it means the other side only has 21 players also, as the player on Harry won't be getting a touch either.

If anything, I can see a situation where Harry could be released up the ground if he is getting tagged, maybe move him onto the wing and place Shaw deeper.

It will all work out, Harry works as hard on his game as anyone, and as we speak is probably watching video of the game trying to figure out ways to improve.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

Don't people look any deeper into a game any further than their eyes can see?

Seriously?

The tagging of O'Brien wouldn't have even been NOTICED if Shaw and Goldsack didn't play suck shockers. And Maxwell had done more than JUST stop the ball coming in.

Neil Craig himself said, other teams WON'T use that tactic as a blueprint because there's too many others that can play that role.

 

[Markfs]

We seem to get stuck sometimes and don't play on enough. I was looking at the telecast and we were playing on 30% of the time after marks....which is pitiful.

Harry is one of those that "free up" the team. Johnno is another one. It's ok to say that others can do it when Harry is being tagged...but Harry takes chances. He takes on the opposition. It's one of his strengths..

 

[TradeDraft]

You have to remember we didn't have Ben Reid or Presti this week, which I think threw all our backline structure "out of whack" (very technical term).

Reid gives us as much drive and forward momentum as anyone in that backline, and Presti is the "old leader" down there, and would have had a quit word or two to Harry about how to break the tag.

Plus, from what I saw, Heath Shaw was playing on the wing for most of the night, which made Harry's job even harder.

I think MM was trying a few different tactics and matchups out, but ultimately it didn't work, and I think we will resort back to the normal matchups once Presti and Reid come back in this week.

Plus, let's see a team try and tag Harry in the finals, we can actually live with Harry having a below average night, it means the other side only has 21 players also, as the player on Harry won't be getting a touch either.

If anything, I can see a situation where Harry could be released up the ground if he is getting tagged, maybe move him onto the wing and place Shaw deeper.

It will all work out, Harry works as hard on his game as anyone, and as we speak is probably watching video of the game trying to figure out ways to improve.

Fair Enough and with no CHB did not help

 

[Pie eyed]

We seem to get stuck sometimes and don't play on enough. I was looking at the telecast and we were playing on 30% of the time after marks....which is pitiful.

Harry is one of those that "free up" the team. Johnno is another one. It's ok to say that others can do it when Harry is being tagged...but Harry takes chances. He takes on the opposition. It's one of his strengths..

I think MM had a bit of a play around with a few things v the Crows.
You don't just forget to play on after 20 prior rounds.

 

[Old Spice]

With Reid, Shaw, Maxwell and Harry in the same side, let a finals team waste a tagger on Harry instead of a midfielder. Reid's inclusion will make a massive difference.

 

[Snag Breac]

Interviewed on SEN today, Maxwell, said Harry, "enjoyed the learning experience."

 

[Premier Pies]

Don't people look any deeper into a game any further than their eyes can see?

Seriously?

The tagging of O'Brien wouldn't have even been NOTICED if Shaw and Goldsack didn't play suck shockers. And Maxwell had done more than JUST stop the ball coming in.

Neil Craig himself said, other teams WON'T use that tactic as a blueprint because there's too many others that can play that role.

The fact is it was noticed because Shaw and Goldsack did play shockers. Maxwell was reasonably guilty of a shocker too. What if this occurs in a prelim or even worse, the gf? What plan B or other options do we have/willing to switch to if we have a few players down/being tagged?

There was just no run at all from the backline. Hence why i started this discussion about Harry being tagged and whether it was a major part of why we struggled all night. I believe Crows deserve much of the credit with the tactics they employed against us. Hopefully the boys are going to school on the video and will be much better prepared next time.

Reid and Presti coming back into the fold will be very welcomed and should make a huge difference!

 

[Angelus512]

I think we've got major worries about the scoreline. 18 behind? AGAIN? what is that like the 4-5 time this year thats occured?

We keep brushing aside opposition comments that we are inaccurate and most of our scores come from oppo turnovers and we say so what?
I think we should be taking that onboard because ultimate if you cannot score and u rely on the other team being forced into turnovers.....thats NOT a good formula.

 

[sydney_crow]

Hope you don't mind the visitor post.

To be honest I think it is a positive sign for Collingwood that you were able to grind out a win without much on the line and with some key players not at their peak. Says a lot for your structures and depth as the Crows, although not pretty, certainly did come to play and are better than ladder position would suggest.

Good luck in the Finals - I think you'd be deserving Premiers.

 

[shawthing09]

Agree with many above the absence of Reid and the shockers by Shaw and Goldsack are much more responsible for our lack of drive then Harry. Adeliade took away the options foward of the play and having a guy like Reid who is able to hit targets with low passes 40 meters and beyond certainly makes that harder to do.

Shaw certainly needs to be rested again next week seems to be struggling with the lower back still.

 

[mattys123]

I think that's what some people are forgetting too, that Adelaide over the past 6-8 weeks have been one of the best teams outside of the contenders.

They almost beat the Dogs in Adelaide (probably should have), they have beaten Brisbane in Brissy (something we couldn't do) and then they pushed us right to the line.

I'm very interested to watch the Crows/Saints game this week, just to see how the Crows go against the Saints, in a game that will be emotional for all crows supporters, with the sendoff of so many great players.

I'd say Adelaide will show us this week that our performance on Saturday night was actually decent, considering we really didn't "come to play", yet grounded out a win when we had to.

I heard a comment that it "was the loss we had to have but never had", which sort of sums up what happened also, it was our one "down game" since the mid season break, and I'd say we won't have another one from now on.

 

[Good_Old]

I think we've got major worries about the scoreline. 18 behind? AGAIN? what is that like the 4-5 time this year thats occured?

We keep brushing aside opposition comments that we are inaccurate and most of our scores come from oppo turnovers and we say so what?
I think we should be taking that onboard because ultimate if you cannot score and u rely on the other team being forced into turnovers.....thats NOT a good formula.

You can't just look at 18 behinds and say we kicked terribly. How many of those were rushed behinds, how many of those were half chances.
There was probably 6 genuine set shots that resulted in behinds, which ins't terrible but can be improved upon.

Our problem was the lack of rebound, ability to play on and poor decision making, there was also a few occasions when we went into the forward 50, we should have had an extra kick to get it in deeper. Instead we had people trying to kick 60 metres at goal when they can only kick 40-50.

 

[Thommo 42]

I think that's what some people are forgetting too, that Adelaide over the past 6-8 weeks have been one of the best teams outside of the contenders.

They almost beat the Dogs in Adelaide (probably should have), they have beaten Brisbane in Brissy (something we couldn't do) and then they pushed us right to the line.

They also beat Geelong a month ago

 

[Gambit78]

You can't just look at 18 behinds and say we kicked terribly. How many of those were rushed behinds, how many of those were half chances.
There was probably 6 genuine set shots that resulted in behinds, which ins't terrible but can be improved upon.

Our problem was the lack of rebound, ability to play on and poor decision making, there was also a few occasions when we went into the forward 50, we should have had an extra kick to get it in deeper. Instead we had people trying to kick 60 metres at goal when they can only kick 40-50.

Still, 6.18 isn't great, and whilst highlighting the lack of rebound we had is fair enough, I think we're losing sight of the fact that Adelaide is a defensive unit. The play numbers behind the ball as their default game plan. Teams generally don't score big against them. Our rebound was shite because we rebounded straight into a hoard of crows players. Our frontal press was nullified because the biggest advantage of a turnover is getting players out of position - we have scored plenty of goals this year running into an open goal square with no pressure on - but against Adelaide that does not work. Hence we stopped playing on from a mark, went around the boundary, and generally tried to pierce their defensive zone rather than swamp it.

When we play more attacking teams - Geelong, WB, Carlton, Essendon - we are much more dangerous because they take us on, we create pressure, force turnovers, and find it easier to score against them. It's teams like St.Kilda and Hawthorn, with known zone set ups and game plans, that worry Collingwood the most (and worry me too) for the very reason we saw last weekend.

Having said that - we still had 24 scoring shots and a handful that didn't even register a score. Weight of numbers will eventually tell. But if teams play a defensive zone against us, then don't expect it to be as 'pretty' as what we've been used to this year.