Is Tagging worth it?

[greatwhiteshark]

I was thinking after Sundays game how Selwood tagged Ablett, I left the ground thinking he did a pretty good job although Ablett was ok too.
Next day you see the stats and Ablett had 40 odd posessions??

So for arguements sake you did not tag Ablett on Sunday, its not as if he will get 60 possessions, he would still get his 40 odd.

Is this becoming a trend with the outright stars of the game that you may be better off just playing against him and not bother tagging them.
It seems Judd, Murphy, Ablett, Bartel, Black, Cousins etc etc the elite mids of the game still get their 30 odd possessions anyway.

By playing just against them you can create for your own team as well knowing that your opponent will get his high possession count. But at least you will make him have to be accountable as well?

Whats your thoughts guys? Based on what I watched on the weekend with Selwood and Ablett we would have been much better off just letting Selwood play against Ablett instead of trying to shut him down. If the stars that are being tagged are still getting high numbers of the ball when they are tagged you are basically playing a man short by tagging them. You might as well shoot out with them, you may come off second best in that contest but you have still given your own side some assistance.

To me Tagging is not having any impact at all on the real elite players.

 

[Chuck_Spidena]

good point, its probably a matter of determining who those players are - and they might not just be elite players.

in kerrs case if you dont put a tag on him he would most likely tear the game apart

 

[greatwhiteshark]

good point, its probably a matter of determining who those players are - and they might not just be elite players.

in kerrs case if you dont put a tag on him he would most likely tear the game apart

That is why I said the real elite, Kerr has shown he can't break a tag so he is someone you would tag. But its getting to the point its not worth Tagging Judd, Ablett, Black and co. They still get their 30 odd anyway. Maybe just play against them is the way to go and make them have to be accountable also.

 

[Jafa]

There have certainly been instances in the past where coaches havn't bothered tagging guys because they where too good and have opted to negate them down field or tag their second stringers.

 

[fryzie]

There was discussion about Selwood tagging in a thread I started a few weeks back.

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=580433


Ablett was running free at the beginning of the match and was super damaging, I think the tag, while still letting him clock up 40 touches, limited the effectiveness of those possessions. He got about 5 or 6 cheap ones across half back in the last half of the last quarter.

Same thing happened with Dane Swan against Melbourne on the weekend, got 14 touches in the first quarter or something at about 85% effeciency, once he got a tag his numbers not only dropped off but his efficiency ended on 50% or so. The pressure of a tag might not effect how much these ball magnets get the ball, but will reduce the damage those possessions do.

In saying that I still believe Adam Selwood should be soley an attacking mid

 

[greatwhiteshark]

There was discussion about Selwood tagging in a thread I started a few weeks back.

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=580433


Ablett was running free at the beginning of the match and was super damaging, I think the tag, while still letting him clock up 40 touches, limited the effectiveness of those possessions. He got about 5 or 6 cheap ones across half back in the last half of the last quarter.

Same thing happened with Dane Swan against Melbourne on the weekend, got 14 touches in the first quarter or something at about 85% effeciency, once he got a tag his numbers not only dropped off but his efficiency ended on 50% or so. The pressure of a tag might not effect how much these ball magnets get the ball, but will reduce the damage those possessions do.

In saying that I still believe Adam Selwood should be soley an attacking mid

I am not advocating letting them run free, when Geelong have the ball you wear him like a glove as you would when you tag, but when we get the ball you can create and run off him. That is when a team mate must be able to pick up the slack if there is a turnover and get on to Ablett. Just using us and Geelong as an example.

 

[bodazoka]

I think its mostly making sure that when those players start to float to dangerous areas in the forward line theres at least some pressure on them. Sure Ablett might still get 40+ posessions if left alone but with the amount of times he sneaks into the forward line you would hate for there to be no pressure on him what so ever there.

And i dont believe that its something you could train the defenders to do at all times, allot of the times the defenders are all ready covering there men and people get into the forward line so quickly it would be hard to pick up loose players.

Youve also got the fact that during contested situations like ball ups if you dont have a man to tackle Ablett/Judd as soon as they get the ball there going to end the game with 10 clearances to go along there 40+ posessions.

 

[fryzie]

I am not advocating letting them run free, when Geelong have the ball you wear him like a glove as you would when you tag, but when we get the ball you can create and run off him. That is when a team mate must be able to pick up the slack if there is a turnover and get on to Ablett. Just using us and Geelong as an example.

I think this comes down to the individual taggers' style. Some guys stick close to their man, let them get 30 odd touches but pressure them when they do have the ball and then run off them and hurt them the other way. Examples would be Kane Cornes and Brett Kirk. Other taggers play a completely negating role, sacrificing their own game and usually keep their man to under 20 touches but generally have no impact on the game other than that. Examples here would be Steven Baker and Ryan Crowley.

I rate Cameron Ling as the best tagger in the league because he usually fits into the second category against the higher quality players he tags, but against weaker opponents he will get 30 touches himself, constantly hurting them the other way. He knows who to stick to like glue and who to run off, thats what makes him so good.

Also he never has to tag Geelong midfielders which makes his job a little easier.

 

[sTeeL]

Despite Ablett getting 40 possies I dont really think he was that damaging in our game. As someone pointed out, limited effectiveness can also help

 

[faisan]

Tagging isnt done to just limit the number of possessions someone gets. Its about limiting the effectiveness of that player. If you dont tag Ablett or Judd, they will hurt you. Yes they may still get their possessions (great players always find the ball) but you prevent them doing some serious run and carry.

 

[galen]

So i think to answer the question.

Yes, without tagging Ablett he still would of got 40 odd posessions.
However, we would of lost by a sh*tload more then we did.

As the better usage by not being closely marked would of turned into a higher score for geelong.

 

[lewigie]

40 possessions did sweet FA.

 

[ROYAL EAGLE]

I would love us too use a McGinnity as a old fashioned hard tagger, scarifice his game just to tag another out.

Let him get his confidence doing that then he can learn to run of like kane Cornes did when he first started out.

That would release Adam Selwood for a more attacking role.

The other option get Adams twin to the club and let him do Adams role and Adam can attack.

 

[15_year_member]

Maybe with our club we should not bother as our best tagger is Selwood and IMO he is absolute rubbish at tagging. Probably the worst in the league amonst those who have been doing it for more than 3 years. No aggression, no scragging, doesn't get in his opponents face etc. That was well evidenced again on the weekend. He is way too soft to be a decent tagger. I expect to to get shouted down by the fanbois for saying it as i always do on here. But Selwood is a crap tagger. We need to develop a Ling or a Cornes. It is a very important role in a decent side. Those guys impact on games is very under rated. I would always have a tagger but i would try and develop a better one than Selwood.

 

[greennick]

Maybe with our club we should not bother as our best tagger is Selwood and IMO he is absolute rubbish at tagging. Probably the worst in the league amonst those who have been doing it for more than 3 years. No aggression, no scragging, doesn't get in his opponents face etc. That was well evidenced again on the weekend. He is way too soft to be a decent tagger. I expect to to get shouted down by the fanbois for saying it as i always do on here. But Selwood is a crap tagger. We need to develop a Ling or a Cornes. It is a very important role in a decent side. Those guys impact on games is very under rated. I would always have a tagger but i would try and develop a better one than Selwood.

I think Headland would have a different take on that.

A Ling or a Cornes would be nice, but they don't exactly just grow on trees.

 

[15_year_member]

I think Headland would have a different take on that.

A Ling or a Cornes would be nice, but they don't exactly just grow on trees.

That incident with Headland is the only time i have seen Selwood get under an opponents skin ever. And even then it was only because Headland is a psycho. Not because Selwood wore him down with physical pressure. He doesn't hang on to opponents at stoppages, doesn't plough them into the turf aggressively with every opportunity to tackle, doesn't take opportunities to put a knee in the back in a marking contest or at the bottom of a pack. Never gets an angry reaction from a tagging subject at all because he is a crap tagger and doesn't wear them tight enough.

It's not just Ling and Cornes. I could name another 6 taggers at a minimum who are way better than Selwood IMO. He had shown an offensive side to his game this year that i was not aware that he had so maybe he does have a future. But he is a rubbish tagger.

 

[Jafa]

Maybe with our club we should not bother as our best tagger is Selwood and IMO he is absolute rubbish at tagging. Probably the worst in the league amonst those who have been doing it for more than 3 years. No aggression, no scragging, doesn't get in his opponents face etc. That was well evidenced again on the weekend. He is way too soft to be a decent tagger. I expect to to get shouted down by the fanbois for saying it as i always do on here. But Selwood is a crap tagger. We need to develop a Ling or a Cornes. It is a very important role in a decent side. Those guys impact on games is very under rated. I would always have a tagger but i would try and develop a better one than Selwood.

Translation - If you don't agree with me you can only obviously be a fanboi because no other opinion could ever be correct in my world.

 

[Level_Headed]

What about when Selwood tagged Judd for the first time? Juddy seemed to get a little fired up then!

I reckon he is a fairly good tagger his MO, IMHO, tends to be pressure once his man has the ball rather than outright scragging to prevent them from receiving the ball in the first place.

 

[KamakazeSalami]

Good thread. Interesting take on it by many people.

I tend to agree that tagging may not necessarily mean restricting actual numbers of possessions but should/would impact on the the effectiveness/damage done by those possies.

I missed the first 10 mins of the game when Ablett was apparently damaging, but have to admit I didn't really notice Ablett until he was moved to the forward line (3rd qtr???). I actually asked the bloke next to me (Cats supporter) if Ablett was playing at one stage. Then I saw he had 42 touches and couldn't for the life of me work out how I missed that much of his game!!! Not sure whether thats saying more about how good Gablett is ... or whether I'm just shite at watching and analysing the game!!. But assuming I'm pretty astute () I guess Selwood must've done ok to have diminished Ablett's normal effectiveness.

Personally, I think you need to tag the playmakers of the games these days.. regardless of whether they're elite or not... and regardless where they play. Generally the playmakers are in the midfield, but as we're seeing more and more, they're in the half back line now. Was it last year or year before (??) when Heath Shaw was killing it from half back and giving the Pies so much drive out of defense in the first half of the year and then teams started to tag him at HB and they crippled Collingwoods offense to a large extent. I wouldn't call him Elite. I don't know that he would've had more than 20 t0 25 touches a game on average through those games, but they were bloody effective at setting the Pies up. Similarly Hodge off HB last year. A couple of teams did try to tag him.

It also comes down to each teams makeup. At the moment it seems we waste a player on a tag because we really only have Selwood and Stenglein who can do it. Selwood has shown he is not bad at being an offensive mid and given we are lacking these its easy to see why we would question whether we're better off just going head to head with other teams and forgetting the tag. If, on the other hand, we had more players who were stronger offensively I don't think we'd even be discussing this. Not only could we create and cause havoc offensively, we could also stop the other teams best offensive weapon. Bit like what we did in 05-06 when Stinger and Selwood were used in those negating roles while Judd/Cousins/Kerr/Braun/Embley etc caned em the other way.