Bring back the Mosquito Fleet
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Anywhere, up on the wing, or at the centre bounce have them on the bench ready to come on soon after. If we have someone become Alex Rance 2.0, drop the defender and go back to 2017-18 style for sure.Good post, it makes sense.
But even with more defenders only 6 can be on the field at any given time. We had just 6 in the side in the 2017 GF, including the colossal Rance.
Now we play 8, eg. Broad and Baker start on the bench. Why do we need 8? Despite the 6-6-6 rule, do we play 7 defenders in general play?
I reckon once we have the full side back we should be playing 6 or at most 7, and have that extra spot for another midfield rotation. I get that McIntosh/Pickett can go back to help, but so should parts of the midfield once the ball hits the deck, if they are able to get up and down the ground.
Not necessarily sure I agree that our ball movement is heaps better. These days we bomb it in way too often. In 2018 we had some pretty big scores. We don't seem to score quite as heavily now.
Playing one-one-one for the full ground is suicide. Each player has to react to their direct opponent every time. Just need one player at each possession to be able to get a metre of leg rope and its over. As soon as one of our players overcommits, they have a spare which we have nothing to defend.Defensively the zone is dead so need to go back to playing man on man pronto.
Offensively we should be thriving though. Leg speed and speed of ball movement is king now which is our 1 wood. If anything we need to just enhance what we’ve been doing for the last 5 years.
Agree with man on man.Defensively the zone is dead so need to go back to playing man on man pronto.
Offensively we should be thriving though. Leg speed and speed of ball movement is king now which is our 1 wood. If anything we need to just enhance what we’ve been doing for the last 5 years.
Just copy whatever Geelong Draft player type wise.But how can we draft for the future when the AFL are radically changing the rules to nullify our gameplan?
You make it sound like we'll get beaten one on one everytime.It can work in our favor as well.We of any side in the comp can afford too do it.Hope we try it Friday night just to see where it stacks up against one of our threats.Playing one-one-one for the full ground is suicide. Each player has to react to their direct opponent every time. Just need one player at each possession to be able to get a metre of leg rope and its over. As soon as one of our players overcommits, they have a spare which we have nothing to defend.
Our press probably needs tweaking. The short kicks moving pretty much directly forward can be hit much quicker now because they don't need to get over the mark - so perhaps we go a tighter zone there, or one on one within 30m of the ball carrier - has the same flaw but they will need a lot more possessions to move it up the ground hitting 20m kicks on the 45.
In a one on one contest, a good kick to player with separation on their opponent is impossible to defend. You’re relying on a mistake from either the kicker or marker to force a turnover. Players won’t always get that separation, but out of 10 players within range, someone will almost certainly get it. With no pressure on the kicker, and no one to peel off and cut off the kick, the chances of a mistake happening are slim at AFL level.You make it sound like we'll get beaten one on one everytime.It can work in our favor as well.We of any side in the comp can afford too do it.Hope we try it Friday night just to see where it stacks up against one of our threats.
As opposed to what happened on saturday?In a one on one contest, a good kick to player with separation on their opponent is impossible to defend. You’re relying on a mistake from either the kicker or marker to force a turnover. Players won’t always get that separation, but out of 10 players within range, someone will almost certainly get it. With no pressure on the kicker, and no one to peel off and cut off the kick, the chances of a mistake happening are slim at AFL level.
Any player that peels off MUST impact the contest because if they don’t, they leave their direct opponent in space. Compare that to a zone/press where numerous defenders can close the space which the player is leading, and even in a worst case scenario if they take the mark, and can play on, the rest of the team can move to cover gaps.
We've always been somewhat susceptible to teams doing that to us, especially when we lose a key structural player - like in 2019 when Collingwood took 159 uncontested marks and smashed us a week after we lost Rance. This week we were missing Vlastuin and Houli - arguably our best two intercepters. The biggest problem we had on the weekend imo was turning it over when we were rebounding. We made so many unforced errors in transition, and we were burnt because there was space for the swans to work in. We had to get back and set up, thats where they picked the holes.As opposed to what happened on saturday?
Let the opposition practically waltz into their fwd line unopposed?
Least going one on one your asking the kicker to be precise rather than the easy option that happened on sat.
The stand rule has compromised our Zone defence.
In a one on one contest, a good kick to player with separation on their opponent is impossible to defend. You’re relying on a mistake from either the kicker or marker to force a turnover. Players won’t always get that separation, but out of 10 players within range, someone will almost certainly get it. With no pressure on the kicker, and no one to peel off and cut off the kick, the chances of a mistake happening are slim at AFL level.
Any player that peels off MUST impact the contest because if they don’t, they leave their direct opponent in space. Compare that to a zone/press where numerous defenders can close the space which the player is leading, and even in a worst case scenario if they take the mark, and can play on, the rest of the team can move to cover gaps.
Couldn't agree more that our pressure game has dropped off considerably. At times now we look slow.Hey all,
I'm not too phased about the loss to Sydney be honest (I didn't get to watch it though), it ended up being a weird weekend for footy with lots of blowouts too. We also always start the season much more "leaky" defensively than later in the year when we are much harder to score against. In other words, we'll be fine, though these early season injuries we've been getting since 2019 are ******* annoying.
But my questions are:
- Have we gone away too much from what made us a really good and exciting side? (eg. the forward and midfield being full-on pressure)
- Are we too structurally different now to when we were electric?
- Are we playing too many defenders?
- Is Dimma messing with positioning too much or is it currently just forced given we haven't had Vlastuin and Houli?
Again, not overreacting from the loss, but even though we won the last two flags we're certainly not as "awesome/exciting" to watch as we were in 2017 and most of 2018. Surely Dimma is not up to his old tricks again by going back to pre-2017 and trying to make us too skill-perfect? I would hate for us to try and become a possession side.
I think we are wrong not playing the three pressure smalls (Rioli out of form but will find it), Aarts is too slow and doesn't make up for it by at least being a good marking target.
I think we are wrong favouring 8 defenders when we should have 6 or at most 7 and play another midfielder.
I think we are erring by Dusty not spending more time through the midfield, and I think that on the flipside we err in having Caddy play wing when he should be in the forward 50 most of the time.
If you look at the grand final side in 2017, we had dropped Short (much improved since) and played 6 defenders, Rance, Astbury, Grimes, Broad, Vlastuin, Houli. Since then we have the same 6 (Balta replacing Rance) but added Short and Baker. Again, it has worked for us yes, but I think it has robbed us of a deeper midfield.
What do people think of this as a best 22, with the view to going back to our 2017-esque style?
Grimes, Astbury, Broad
Houli, Balta, Vlastuin
McIntosh, Cotchin, Lambert
Caddy, Riewoldt, Bolton
Rioli, Lynch, Castagna
Nankervis, Martin, Prestia
Edwards, Graham, Ross, Short
- It obviously pains me to leave Baker out as I love him generally, but I just don't think we can keep playing 8 defenders. Baker will just come straight back in for Houli when he gets injured or retires. Baker could even run a wing in favour of Kmac, but I do love the attributes Kmac brings.
- Caddy back into the forward line as that third mobile medium/tall who can take a strong mark too. This means Dusty will spend more time in the midfield and when he pushes forward, Caddy or Bolton give him the midfield chop out.
- Three speedy smalls with Rioli, Castagna and Bolton, with the upside being that now we know Bolton is also a genuine midfielder and can push through there whenever.
I just look at that side on paper and am honestly glad to not see Aarts and Pickett, as well as Egg-Smith. I personally think it would be our best side and best structure, with the only question mark for me being do we go back to playing two rucks? If so, at whose expense? Again it pains me, but Short's? He is obviously the reigning best and fairest but if I had to choose between he and a fit Houli, I'd still choose Houli. I'd prefer not to rob the forward line or midfield of players, so it would need to be a defender.
Would be interested to hear people's thoughts, cheers
Lost it in the guts, until late last year we placed low importance on clearances backing our defenders to intercept and launch. That stopped working last year so we (rather successfully) focussed on winning it from the middle.Early on last week and in seasons past (Collingwood Rd 2 2019, first half of 2019 prelim vs Geelong), short kicks into space have really hurt us. We tend to push numbers back expecting the long down the line kick, and that opens up a hole between the kicker and the pack. What the Swans did last week was chip it forward a few times until they reached the wing, then using the new sh*te stand rule, they could take off and get a deep entry into their forward 50. The new rule also makes it easier to hit the short chip kicks.
What we also saw last week was even when we turned the ball over, because Sydney played so slowly from their back half, we had to go through every one of their defenders to get to our goal.
As others in this thread have said, when the weather turns sour the short chip gamestyle doesn't work, or if our players start coming up more at the ball to deny those opportunities.
***also let's be honest, Sydney played out of their arse last week and had a ton of luck with the bouncing of the ball, some dodgy frees inside 50, and some very uncharacteristic turnovers from us. Look at how much worse they were against Essendon.
I agree we started losing the center clearances and clearances in general pretty handily midway through the second quarter. It was just what was happening previously regarding the short kicks was really working well for them and it's a tactic that has troubled us in the past.Lost it in the guts, until late last year we placed low importance on clearances backing our defenders to intercept and launch. That stopped working last year so we (rather successfully) focussed on winning it from the middle.
With that already dead, and missing Vlastuin and Houli, we really struggled to move it from defence. It reminded me of the first half last year's GF when, funnily enough, Vlastuin was out and Houli was playing through injury. I'd love to see how clearances looked in the first half vs second half of that game.
Your 22 is my ideal 22 as well with one slightly controversial exception. I'd drop Rioli and put Baker in his place. Baker is a nutcase terrier who brings a tonne of energy and pressure to his role, has great hands, great disposal and has proven he can kick goals as a small forward.Hey all,
I'm not too phased about the loss to Sydney be honest (I didn't get to watch it though), it ended up being a weird weekend for footy with lots of blowouts too. We also always start the season much more "leaky" defensively than later in the year when we are much harder to score against. In other words, we'll be fine, though these early season injuries we've been getting since 2019 are ******* annoying.
But my questions are:
- Have we gone away too much from what made us a really good and exciting side? (eg. the forward and midfield being full-on pressure)
- Are we too structurally different now to when we were electric?
- Are we playing too many defenders?
- Is Dimma messing with positioning too much or is it currently just forced given we haven't had Vlastuin and Houli?
Again, not overreacting from the loss, but even though we won the last two flags we're certainly not as "awesome/exciting" to watch as we were in 2017 and most of 2018. Surely Dimma is not up to his old tricks again by going back to pre-2017 and trying to make us too skill-perfect? I would hate for us to try and become a possession side.
I think we are wrong not playing the three pressure smalls (Rioli out of form but will find it), Aarts is too slow and doesn't make up for it by at least being a good marking target.
I think we are wrong favouring 8 defenders when we should have 6 or at most 7 and play another midfielder.
I think we are erring by Dusty not spending more time through the midfield, and I think that on the flipside we err in having Caddy play wing when he should be in the forward 50 most of the time.
If you look at the grand final side in 2017, we had dropped Short (much improved since) and played 6 defenders, Rance, Astbury, Grimes, Broad, Vlastuin, Houli. Since then we have the same 6 (Balta replacing Rance) but added Short and Baker. Again, it has worked for us yes, but I think it has robbed us of a deeper midfield.
What do people think of this as a best 22, with the view to going back to our 2017-esque style?
Grimes, Astbury, Broad
Houli, Balta, Vlastuin
McIntosh, Cotchin, Lambert
Caddy, Riewoldt, Bolton
Rioli, Lynch, Castagna
Nankervis, Martin, Prestia
Edwards, Graham, Ross, Short
- It obviously pains me to leave Baker out as I love him generally, but I just don't think we can keep playing 8 defenders. Baker will just come straight back in for Houli when he gets injured or retires. Baker could even run a wing in favour of Kmac, but I do love the attributes Kmac brings.
- Caddy back into the forward line as that third mobile medium/tall who can take a strong mark too. This means Dusty will spend more time in the midfield and when he pushes forward, Caddy or Bolton give him the midfield chop out.
- Three speedy smalls with Rioli, Castagna and Bolton, with the upside being that now we know Bolton is also a genuine midfielder and can push through there whenever.
I just look at that side on paper and am honestly glad to not see Aarts and Pickett, as well as Egg-Smith. I personally think it would be our best side and best structure, with the only question mark for me being do we go back to playing two rucks? If so, at whose expense? Again it pains me, but Short's? He is obviously the reigning best and fairest but if I had to choose between he and a fit Houli, I'd still choose Houli. I'd prefer not to rob the forward line or midfield of players, so it would need to be a defender.
Would be interested to hear people's thoughts, cheers