Key fowards vs the bombers

[Cosmo Kramer]

I was speaking with some Essendon supporters today about their backline and the fact they have a perception which im guessing is backed up by fact that they get crucified by key fowards who consistently kick BIG bags against the dons.

I don't see every Essendon game but i see 15-20 and a year and i was just wonders bombers fans thoughts on why this is.

I thought possibly it could be
-Because fletcher doesnt always get the best foward especially when they play up the ground not just in the square.
-Midfield can get exposed on the turnover from skill errors and their isnt enough pressure on the opposition ball carrier kicking the ball in
-Third man up is not playing a big enough role.

On paper its a good backline but it seems to get exposed and exposed alot more than I was aware before talking to some Don's fans. This isnt a troll but I was just wondering if anyone had any thoughts on why this was the case.

I mean you look at fletcher who some suggest is along with clement the best defender in the game. You have michael who is a 3 time premiership player, although i doubt sometimes his passion for the game this season. McPhee who is a good defender although he may be a little like Gilbee/Gram (by that I mean players who are very effective in the backline but as actual backmen vs their men can struggle at times). Then you have Ryder who didnt get a go on Buddy today but has the agility and the leap to play on some fowards and be a very very effective 3rd man up.

 

[kelvin_sheedy]

It is really a simple explanation and has been our achilles heal for a few years.

We concede the most inside 50's out of any team. Your defence can only do so much but if the ball is coming down there that often they you are bound to cop a few.

Turnovers and lack of defensive pressure from the midfield don't do us any favors.

 

[Dr Moose]

It is really a simple explanation and has been our achilles heal for a few years.

We concede the most inside 50's out of any team. Your defence can only do so much but if the ball is coming down there that often they you are bound to cop a few.

Turnovers and lack of defensive pressure from the midfield don't do us any favors.

Absolutely.

 

[Phoenix4]

It is really a simple explanation and has been our achilles heal for a few years.

We concede the most inside 50's out of any team. Your defence can only do so much but if the ball is coming down there that often they you are bound to cop a few.

Turnovers and lack of defensive pressure from the midfield don't do us any favors.

I agree with this reason and also the fact is Kevin Sheedy in too proud to flood as he believes it is part of his responsibilty to the game for his team to play atrractive and entertaining footy.(his comment we box, don't wrestle and basketball crap comments also support this)

Key forwards always kick goals against Essendon. Just have a look at Essendon and Carlton games lately they are bottom teams but have been entertaining because 2 stubborn and old fashion coaches refuse to flood, hence Fevola and Lucas or Lloyd kicking 4 plus. If you play like this the key forward will always win with the amount of space given and the new rules.

Essendon do not flood anywhere near enough to what is needed in this day and age.I think most would agree with him footy is a much better spectacle when teams don't flood, but if he does'nt swallow his pride soon there will be allot more losses and key forwards kicking bags of goals and it wont be at the fault of his defenders.

If the AFL don't see flooding as an issue and are not prepared to change a rule to prevent it then Sheedy needs to stop being stubborn and put coaching to win first.

Oherwise let this be his last year at coaching of an amazing career then go and take that job at the AFL Andrew D has waiting for him.Then the responsibilty of the game is his duty and he the can implement a new rule then.

In the mean time he needs to coach to win at all costs, no matter if it is attractive or not. Most supporters will take an unattractive win over an attractive win.

 

[Broady Poker Tour]

I agree with this reason and also the fact is Kevin Sheedy in too proud to flood as he believes it is part of his responsibilty to the game for his team to play atrractive and entertaining footy.(his comment we box, don't wrestle and basketball crap comments also support this)

Key forwards always kick goals against Essendon. Just have a look at Essendon and Carlton games lately they are bottom teams but have been entertaining because 2 stubborn and old fashion coaches refuse to flood, hence Fevola and Lucas or Lloyd kicking 4 plus. If you play like this the key forward will always win with the amount of space given and the new rules.

Essendon do not flood anywhere near enough to what is needed in this day and age.I think most would agree with him footy is a much better spectacle when teams don't flood, but if he does'nt swallow his pride soon there will be allot more losses and key forwards kicking bags of goals and it wont be at the fault of his defenders.

If the AFL don't see flooding as an issue and are not prepared to change a rule to prevent it then Sheedy needs to stop being stubborn and put coaching to win first.

Oherwise let this be his last year at coaching of an amazing career then go and take that job at the AFL Andrew D has waiting for him.Then the responsibilty of the game is his duty and he the can implement a new rule then.

In the mean time he needs to coach to win at all costs, no matter if it is attractive or not. Most supporters will take an unattractive win over an attractive win.

I have to agree with most of the points that you make. Why not use Ryder to double team Fev (when he kicked 8) and Franklin (9 goals) and allow him to play the loose man? He is great at getting to contests and being the third man up. We also struggle defensively in the midfield, how often do the opposition half back flankers and midfielders get forward and are able to pin-point a pass under no pressure.

Yes the bombers do play attractive football, but from my point of view, there is no point looking good and getting beaten.