Interesting stats

[Lach72]

http://finalsiren.com/MatchDetails.asp?GameID=4880&Code=1e020b62a7f3570f4a824cce8693f4c0

Actually quite efficient in some respects. 25% less ball but more efficient in scoring shots.

Just killed ourselves by giving it back and not kicking straight

 

[Clay Davis]

One of the interesting stats from the game:

Rhys Palmer

He spent a third of the game on the bench. But still ranked one of our highest performers for the game.

Paul Hasleby

Spent almost half the game on the pine but still got 18 possies.

When these two are playing with more game time I really like the way our midfield will look.

 

[Angus McFuttock]

http://finalsiren.com/MatchDetails.asp?GameID=4880&Code=1e020b62a7f3570f4a824cce8693f4c0

Actually quite efficient in some respects. 25% less ball but more efficient in scoring shots.

Just killed ourselves by giving it back and not kicking straight

We seem to be a low possession team - against Richmond in the NAB we had similar numbers/share of the ball. The turnovers never stopped all game, I think Harvey mentioned the Dogs kicked 18 goals from our turnovers and many of them in easy scoring positions.
If we're going to be conceding that much possession we need defenders with better disposal/decision making skills than Head and Dodd.

 

[Lach72]

We seem to be a low possession team - against Richmond in the NAB we had similar numbers/share of the ball. The turnovers never stopped all game, I think Harvey mentioned the Dogs kicked 18 goals from our turnovers and many of them in easy scoring positions.
If we're going to be conceding that much possession we need defenders with better disposal/decision making skills than Head and Dodd.

I think the lack of possessions is directly related to bad disposal.
If you keep giving it back, they will have more possession.

I think as our disposal improves so will the disposal difference

 

[VolgaBoatman]

We seem to be a low possession team - against Richmond in the NAB we had similar numbers/share of the ball. The turnovers never stopped all game, I think Harvey mentioned the Dogs kicked 18 goals from our turnovers and many of them in easy scoring positions.
If we're going to be conceding that much possession we need defenders with better disposal/decision making skills than Head and Dodd.

We are a low possession team, because we couldn't get hold of the ball enough. Especially a problem in the back-line. I was used to seeing the defense take a mark or a spoil and clear it out - that didn't happen much at all.

 

[Clay Davis]

Looking at the stats and watching replays - it seems to me the problem isn't that bad and could be easily resolved if we returned to a sensible structure. Put old heads like McPharlin, Hayden and Grover down back, stop trying to throw everyone in the midfield, play Pav up forward and you could quite likely get away with playing Josh Head and win a few games. Certainly not get flogged. Head might even learn a thing or two under the more experienced players tutelage.

Having a backline made up of Dodd, Duffield, Head, Suban and Tarrant is hardly going to gel into something amazing. We need some semblance of structure if we're going to improve at all. I really think this game was lost in the coaches box.

 

[Memories]

As I've been saying for years, Hayden is/was our second best player and without him our backline is a shambles. You need at least one composed backman who doesn't shit themselves when the ball is coming in and he is our guy. He knows when to leave his man and help out and very rarely loses a game against his opponent even whilst being on the best small forward.

Our whole team had shocking disposal so pinpointing one or two of them is kinda pointless. A lot of the time the ball was kicked wildly even in the backline with no pressure.

One thing the bulldogs have a lot of is speed, which means you have to be able to pinpoint your kicks and handballs very well or they will intercept/pressure them. We were doing lollypop kicks and handballs. We have a long way to go to improve our skills, but with teams that don't apply as much pressure we should do better.... as has pretty much been the case with our team since inception.

Even with these issues though I think we are doing alright thought. Look at the duds we had in our team (Browne and Head cost us about 5 goals directly), underdone Palmer and Hase, a crappy chaseless Pav, and I am surprised we almost came over the top of them at one stage. What held us in this game? I can't put my finger on it. Dogs were a bit underdone too granted, and they were playing at Subi, but who cares.

 

[Memories]

Looking at the stats and watching replays - it seems to me the problem isn't that bad and could be easily resolved if we returned to a sensible structure. Put old heads like McPharlin, Hayden and Grover down back, stop trying to throw everyone in the midfield, play Pav up forward and you could quite likely get away with playing Josh Head and win a few games. Certainly not get flogged. Head might even learn a thing or two under the more experienced players tutelage.

Agreed for the most part. I think Tarrant was one of our best players, if not best player. Without him the defeat would have been over 100 easily. There is no harm in keeping tarrant down back when he is doing so well, he seems to like it.

Pavlich was kinda good at the center bounce, some of his crash and bang gave us the ball, but outside that he was murdered. Did you see how many times he was chasing his opponent and getting completely blown away? It looked embarrassing. With Tarrant down back we need a Pavlich with strong hands at CHF consistently, but throwing him in at center bounces isn't so bad. Just don't have him wasting energy chasing 20kg lighter players into their goal lines pointlessly.

 

[Clay Davis]

Agreed for the most part. I think Tarrant was one of our best players, if not best player. Without him the defeat would have been over 100 easily. There is no harm in keeping tarrant down back when he is doing so well, he seems to like it.

No problem with Tarrant down back, the problem is he doesn't have much experience at it and can't really lead. We generally had no leaders down there and seemed a bit lost. It's easy to criticise Josh Head, and while I believe it's somewhat warranted, it's a lot of pressure on a guy whose played only a handful of games to assume he'll know what to do without guidance.

The simple problem is that we can't just throw a bunch of inexperienced guys in the backline and expect it to work. Guys like Suban and Head, if they are to continue playing and developing, need to have confidence that the senior players around them will know what to do when it gets a bit panicky.

Pavlich was kinda good at the center bounce, some of his crash and bang gave us the ball, but outside that he was murdered. Did you see how many times he was chasing his opponent and getting completely blown away? It looked embarrassing. With Tarrant down back we need a Pavlich with strong hands at CHF consistently, but throwing him in at center bounces isn't so bad. Just don't have him wasting energy chasing 20kg lighter players into their goal lines pointlessly.

Agree, Pavlich is not a midfielder. Explosive and strong at clearances, but not an endurance player, like Palmer.

 

[Belnakor]

The problem with Pav is he has an elite tank, elite agility and elite pace... for a CHF. For a midfielder he has nothing but middle ground skills... i agree the chasing he put on, on the weekend was terrible.

 

[Belnakor]

As I've been saying for years, Hayden is/was our second best player and without him our backline is a shambles. You need at least one composed backman who doesn't shit themselves when the ball is coming in and he is our guy. He knows when to leave his man and help out and very rarely loses a game against his opponent even whilst being on the best small forward.

Hayden is also our general in the backline, tells people where to go, keeps an eye on everything including his own man. Guys like Tarrant can't be expected to do that, he is there to blanket the FF and a bit of a rebound, no more.

One thing the bulldogs have a lot of is speed, which means you have to be able to pinpoint your kicks and handballs very well or they will intercept/pressure them. We were doing lollypop kicks and handballs. We have a long way to go to improve our skills, but with teams that don't apply as much pressure we should do better.... as has pretty much been the case with our team since inception.

we seemed to be under pressure the whole game, i think it was an issue of people not picking the right option. Harvey seems to have implemented a plan, where if a man comes at you, you wait for him to grab you, free the arms and hand ball off.. strange tactic, and it wasn't working on the weekend.

the lollypop kicks were a problem with Head's kicking out. He was kicking WAY WAY WAY too high for someone kicking out.. you need to kick bullets, not rainmakers that go as high up as forward. Head's kicking didn't impress me at all.

Even with these issues though I think we are doing alright thought. Look at the duds we had in our team (Browne and Head cost us about 5 goals directly), underdone Palmer and Hase, a crappy chaseless Pav, and I am surprised we almost came over the top of them at one stage. What held us in this game? I can't put my finger on it. Dogs were a bit underdone too granted, and they were playing at Subi, but who cares.

We actually did pretty well in the middle. Inspite of people saying Sandilands went shithouse, we still were competitve in the midfield, breaking even over all, which is pretty good for a team that got done by 10 goals.

 

[greenred]

Looking at the stats and watching replays - it seems to me the problem isn't that bad and could be easily resolved if we returned to a sensible structure. Put old heads like McPharlin, Hayden and Grover down back, stop trying to throw everyone in the midfield, play Pav up forward and you could quite likely get away with playing Josh Head and win a few games. Certainly not get flogged. Head might even learn a thing or two under the more experienced players tutelage.

If Geelong had kicked straight on that last Saturday in September would Harvey have even considered the rolling zone? The structure in place for the second half of 2008 seemed to work reasonably well and made the team competitive if nothing else. The Tarrant move back and Johnson forward have been quite successful to this point, but none of the other moves worked even in the pre-season.

 

[prattsta]

If Geelong had kicked straight on that last Saturday in September would Harvey have even considered the rolling zone?

Fremantle started using a rolling zone last year. Our game against Sydney - which was well before the Hawks held up the premiership cup - probably the most notable.

As someone who has played a lot of basketball, being able mix up defensive structures to exploit opposition weaknesses and cover your own is in-valuable. If the players are able to implement a zone or a man-on-man depending on the opposition/situation it will make us a better team in the long run.

It's not something that will happen overnight though. Scrapping everything they have worked on over the last 3 months after 1 loss isn't the way to go. The players/coaches will need time to get it right.

The structure in place for the second half of 2008 seemed to work reasonably well and made the team competitive if nothing else. The Tarrant move back and Johnson forward have been quite successful to this point, but none of the other moves worked even in the pre-season.

At least with the zone I can see what they are trying to do though. The forward line structures leave me baffled.

 

[Freodoc]

Looking at the stats and watching replays - it seems to me the problem isn't that bad and could be easily resolved if we returned to a sensible structure. Put old heads like McPharlin, Hayden and Grover down back, stop trying to throw everyone in the midfield, play Pav up forward and you could quite likely get away with playing Josh Head and win a few games. Certainly not get flogged. Head might even learn a thing or two under the more experienced players tutelage.

Having a backline made up of Dodd, Duffield, Head, Suban and Tarrant is hardly going to gel into something amazing. We need some semblance of structure if we're going to improve at all. I really think this game was lost in the coaches box.

Ditto

 

[Chops_a_must]

Ditto

Hey?

How do people come to that conclusion when we couldn't hit a target 10 metres away? When 18 of their goals came from turnovers?

Bugger me.

 

[Freodoc]

Hey?

How do people come to that conclusion when we couldn't hit a target 10 metres away? When 18 of their goals came from turnovers?

Bugger me.

I was merely supporting Gravy's comment on the coaching. Didn't like it one bit.

 

[Clay Davis]

Hey?

How do people come to that conclusion when we couldn't hit a target 10 metres away? When 18 of their goals came from turnovers?

Bugger me.

Because, essentially, we've always had those problems. Since forever. But in recent years we've generally had the cool heads down back to deal with it.

 

[Chops_a_must]

Because, essentially, we've always had those problems. Since forever. But in recent years we've generally had the cool heads down back to deal with it.

Right... so because the same players have been the same level of shitness forever, it's not the player's fault?

And despite all the mistakes, we were in the game until the players gave up... but it aint the player's faults.

And the most skilful player being injured... yep.... must be the coaches fault.

We looked good when our players made the right decision, and executed properly. Enough said.

 

[Clay Davis]

Right... so because the same players have been the same level of shitness forever, it's not the player's fault?

And despite all the mistakes, we were in the game until the players gave up... but it aint the player's faults.

And the most skilful player being injured... yep.... must be the coaches fault.

We looked good when our players made the right decision, and executed properly. Enough said.

Of course. But who put a bunch of kick shankers and inexperienced blokes in the backline for the majority of the game? Dodd was our most senior defensive player, and he's hardly a sharpshooter.

 

[Chops_a_must]

We had Egg shells or Grover there, so no, Dodd was not the most experienced backman there.

The blame lies squarely with the players.

Inexperience - get used to it budy.

 

[Frigate]

One interesting stat is Sandi having 1 kick for the match and 17 handballs.

His kicking looks brilliant compared to some of the shite out there. Think the big fella should be encouraged to kick more.

We fall into the trap of giving the ball to the players which struggle to hit a target. This is why the rolling zone works well against us. It is simple percentages. They can play the simple strategy to let a few players kick it by giving them space (and then cough it up) and pressure those who you do not want to kick it. Our weakest link(s) are always going to kill us against the quality sides if we don't have close to our best 22 on the park. A turnover is basically a shot on goal these days (if not an easy goal).

 

[Clay Davis]

We had Egg shells or Grover there, so no, Dodd was not the most experienced backman there.

The blame lies squarely with the players.

Inexperience - get used to it budy.

Okay. So you're saying we can't get a better settled backline than Taz, Dodd, Head and Duffield?

Dunno who egg shells is. Are you high?

 

[Chops_a_must]

Okay. So you're saying we can't get a better settled backline than Taz, Dodd, Head and Duffield?

Dunno who egg shells is. Are you high?

Mcpharlin.

Our backline wont be much better than that most of the season, and we really really had few choices last week.

Taz, Grover and Mcpharlin are a good back 3, but the other 3 for the rest of the year are going to be very messy at times.

Deal with it.

Myself and others here identified our backline as a problem needing addressing in the draft. We partly did. But this year our depth without one of Grover, Mcpharlin, Tarrant or Hayden is seriously seriously seriously going to struggle. We have virtually no coverage.

We knew that, so you should as well.

 

[Clay Davis]

Mcpharlin.

Our backline wont be much better than that most of the season, and we really really had few choices last week.

Taz, Grover and Mcpharlin are a good back 3, but the other 3 for the rest of the year are going to be very messy at times.

Deal with it.

Myself and others here identified our backline as a problem needing addressing in the draft. We partly did. But this year our depth without one of Grover, Mcpharlin, Tarrant or Hayden is seriously seriously seriously going to struggle. We have virtually no coverage.

We knew that, so you should as well.

McPharlin and Grover hardly spent much time down back.

My point is that we should be keeping a settled structure as much as possible. Grover up forward is an interesting experiment, but I don't think it's going to work. If we're going to put new guys down there then they shouldn't be left to themselves to figure it out. Generally I think McPharlin should be CHB, Grover FB, and the other guys down there learning from them. Then we wouldn't have seemed so horribly exposed so often.

 

[Memories]

I thought Grover had one of his worst games I've seen him play in 3 years.

When I think back about the game it's quite amazing we were up in the game for so long when so many players were off. Reminds me of the hawks vs cats, just a surge or two and they made it competitive despite being down all night.