Kick-Out Plan

[LuKe2428]

Now with so many team's playing a zone these day's I dont no why someone hasn't come up with this idea. The defensive team usually set's up a 15 man zone. 5 on the left, 5 in the middle and 5 on the right. Now surely common sense would tell you that if you get more number's to the ball you will win it at least 7-8/10. So why not get Newman to kick it long (55m) to one side where the opposition will have 2-3 player's because of the zone covering all area's and have 6-7 even 8 of our player's (Ruck-man + Ty) get to the contest and out number the opposition. I can tell you now if we out number the opposition by 3-4 player's you will win the contest more times then not and then once you get it over the zone more times then not specially with our kicking eff. this you we will get a score of some type.
Thoughts?

 

[TOOs_Finest]

Hey I have wondered exactly the same on occasions. Simply make it a directive to crowd one side of the ground to out number the opposition and win the ball. The kick-ins have to be quick so as not to give the opposition time to react. Of course, it would only last a quarter before they realise what's happening.

We have really noticed the difference in recent weeks when Lids has spent less time in the back half, meaning he is not around to take the kick-ins. But we have to learn to deal with that.

The problem of recent has more so been a lack of effort of the players to create options. So very stagnant the past couple of weeks.

 

[Wally Matera]

Now with so many team's playing a zone these day's I dont no why someone hasn't come up with this idea. The defensive team usually set's up a 15 man zone. 5 on the left, 5 in the middle and 5 on the right. Now surely common sense would tell you that if you get more number's to the ball you will win it at least 7-8/10. So why not get Newman to kick it long (55m) to one side where the opposition will have 2-3 player's because of the zone covering all area's and have 6-7 even 8 of our player's (Ruck-man + Ty) get to the contest and out number the opposition. I can tell you now if we out number the opposition by 3-4 player's you will win the contest more times then not and then once you get it over the zone more times then not specially with our kicking eff. this you we will get a score of some type.
Thoughts?

We have by far been the filthiest, ugliest, pathetic side in the league in clearing the ball from defence when kicking out from a behind.

We havent had a plan for 15 years, l've given up complaining about this shit. Its like we have to set aside 4 goals a game because we allow complete and utter simpletons to kick out after a behind.

The zone has been in place for decades... its got nothing to do with any new tactic from the opposition.

 

[Hipster Doofus]

Needs a fair bit of practice

 

[foley_falcon]

Would have the problem that if the opposition won the ball, they would then have the 3-4 extra men open within 50

 

[TOOs_Finest]

Would have the problem that if the opposition won the ball, they would then have the 3-4 extra men open within 50

That's already a given with zones, and is what happens to us now time and time again, and is the reason why we need to find a system that works

 

[Crumden]

I think this is sort of what we try when we go the long kick down the middle, although we don't always seem to get enough numbers around it. It also backfires terribly if the kick drops short and doesnt cover enough distance.

 

[HighFlyer]

We have by far been the filthiest, ugliest, pathetic side in the league in clearing the ball from defence when kicking out from a behind.

That's been the common perception I remember up until the Port game we were ranked number 1 in the competition with direct scores from Kick outs. It's only since then our midfield have stopped running and the seasons dragged on that we've started to drop back into old (and preseason) habits.

Opposition sides have also cottoned on to a kick in option we used to use regularly at least 2 or three times a game. One of our talls (jack / Vickers / Rance generally) would position themselves just on the inside the centre circle, Newman or Deledio would kick it long and we'd punch it on to the winger that had dropped onto the other side of the circle. It was clearly a set play because there was never any attempt to mark the ball from the man infront it was always the punch over the back.

 

[Neen]

From what I've seen, Newman, Deledio or Houli have a "checklist" before they kick out :

1 - Short 30m option against the boundary line. Then kick it back to whoever kicked the ball out initially. Allows the opposition to set up a cosy zone.

2 - Look for Browne. Does not matter that he is outnumbered, just kick it to the big bloke.

3 - Avoid the long kick to the three or four Richmond players grouped between the defensive 50m and the center square. If the ball is kicked quickly to them, they can spoil and tap the ball on to a midfielder, thus breaking the zone and the line. Gives Jack a guaranteed one on one. Essendon have been doing this for years.

What irritates me the most is that there are always players in space that don't DEMAND the ball from kick outs. How many times have we seen players on their own and they don't call for the ball or wave their arms. All the players should be making some sort of noise or action to create panic withing the defensive zone. No matter how skillful the designated kicker is, if the player's don't make space and demand the ball, then we are going to continue with the defensive turnovers that always cost us goals.

 

[CoggaRules]

We have by far been the filthiest, ugliest, pathetic side in the league in clearing the ball from defence when kicking out from a behind.

We havent had a plan for 15 years, l've given up complaining about this shit. Its like we have to set aside 4 goals a game because we allow complete and utter simpletons to kick out after a behind.

The zone has been in place for decades... its got nothing to do with any new tactic from the opposition.

What is also laughable is that on the back of that shitfulness, which i totally agree with, we seem to have this plan in place when the opposition is kicking in, whereby the ball gets to the wing without a tiger in sight and somehow, you would think that would mean we are manning up down the ground, but like clockwork there a loose men running rampant in the opposition FL.
I have lost count of the number of times opposition teams waltz into goal after a kick in from our FL, after we have busted and scrounged our way to put it through for a behind.

 

[CoggaRules]

From what I've seen, Newman, Deledio or Houli have a "checklist" before they kick out :

1 - Short 30m option against the boundary line. Then kick it back to whoever kicked the ball out initially. Allows the opposition to set up a cosy zone.

2 - Look for Browne. Does not matter that he is outnumbered, just kick it to the big bloke.

3 - Avoid the long kick to the three or four Richmond players grouped between the defensive 50m and the center square. If the ball is kicked quickly to them, they can spoil and tap the ball on to a midfielder, thus breaking the zone and the line. Gives Jack a guaranteed one on one. Essendon have been doing this for years.

What irritates me the most is that there are always players in space that don't DEMAND the ball from kick outs. How many times have we seen players on their own and they don't call for the ball or wave their arms. All the players should be making some sort of noise or action to create panic withing the defensive zone. No matter how skillful the designated kicker is, if the player's don't make space and demand the ball, then we are going to continue with the defensive turnovers that always cost us goals.

you got it right there dude. I have lost count at the number of times there have been loose tigers lurking within 30 ms on their own who just walk around without any sign of "I AM HERE". Its as if no one wants to take the onus..

 

[BF Tiger]

Against the Dees and Blues the kick-outs were possibly the most frustrating I have seen. No plan and no movement, players just standing still. If we did get the first kick right it was invariably a short one and then the press would just re-set slightly further back, resulting in the same problem.

And why do we always take so long? Please just get the ball moving as quick as possible to any option. That in itself is a press breaker, but we do need to develop two or three other reliable options.

 

[Kapital city TIGER]

We have by far been the filthiest, ugliest, pathetic side in the league in clearing the ball from defence when kicking out from a behind.

We havent had a plan for 15 years, l've given up complaining about this shit. Its like we have to set aside 4 goals a game because we allow complete and utter simpletons to kick out after a behind.

The zone has been in place for decades... its got nothing to do with any new tactic from the opposition.

I think you mean havent had a GOOD plan;

weve had:

1. just give up and concede another behind and hope stagnant backs and mids get the message, a la JB, tragically curtailed by the AFL rules change.
2. Kick to laughably hopeless ruck that moves like an ocean liner, even if he is being stood by every tall in the opp team.
3. kick to pack of opposition players in the hope that they will get confused, or bicker about the opportunity, spreading toxic disharmony through their team.
4. lazy stab pass towards hopeful codefender who is zoned by opp zippy goal sneak that can easily intercept and either run in or lesiurly take a set shot from 35m
5. obof
6. ...

sorry, those are the ones I remember being repeated...repeatedly, over the last decade or so, I dont know HOW you can assert that we dont have a plan Wally, thats clearly BS

about 5 games I can remember being able to clear the ball consitently (as opposed to what seems the norm - another opp score within a min and a half)

Which is only slightly less than the no of games I can remember our lads consistently locking the ball in coming the other way.

to be fair some of the better games were in the last year or so, really thought we mightve done some improving here.

FK Im still dirty about the bloose game!
swore I wouldnt pop on here or even watch Tigs for a while.

 

[LuKe2428]

Would have the problem that if the opposition won the ball, they would then have the 3-4 extra men open within 50

Not really, If we get beat at the contest the player's get need to move to the middle and cover the side the ball is on and if they can kick it to the opposite side of the ground and get a mark then they win.

 

[LuKe2428]

Needs a fair bit of practice

Serious? If the players had half a brain, maybe even a quarter, Just tell everyone to run to the right hand side and out number the contest by 3-4 player's and when you get it a couple of handballs then a long kick into the forward 50 would land about 20m out. Even Blind Fredy can tell we would get the ball if we have 75% of the players around the ball.

 

[Colonel Matrix]

I can't keep up with the pace at which the game is evolving, for the first time on the weekend it struck me just how difficult it is for Jack to find space in the forward line, he would have been lucky to have 2 metres to lead into.

Bloody zones!!!

 

[foley_falcon]

Not really, If we get beat at the contest the player's get need to move to the middle and cover the side the ball is on and if they can kick it to the opposite side of the ground and get a mark then they win.

So you are agreeing that there would be the 3-4 spare opposition players within 50 but our players would be quicker enough to run over and cover them before they could get the ball to them?

Reminds me of that scene in the movie goal where the coach is teaching the main character that the ball travels faster than any person..

 

[LuKe2428]

So you are agreeing that there would be the 3-4 spare opposition players within 50 but our players would be quicker enough to run over and cover them before they could get the ball to them?

Reminds me of that scene in the movie goal where the coach is teaching the main character that the ball travels faster than any person..

If we have 4-5 more players around the ball at least 8/10 times your going to win the ball. otherwise we can have 5-6 players in our defensive 50 just in case.

 

[Woefully Inept]

i know our kick outs are bad, but our defending of other kick outs isn't great either. Both Melbourne and the Blues were able to a lot of the time, just run the ball straight out of the 50

I remember watching North a few weeks ago against Essendon, just predictably bombed it to the same spot every time...it just worked though because everyone knew where to go. Can't see why that's not possible for us

 

[El Tigre]

If we have 4-5 more players around the ball at least 8/10 times your going to win the ball. otherwise we can have 5-6 players in our defensive 50 just in case.

The Pies are happy to kick back in it to a contest, knowing that their mids will get there quickly, and by sheer weight of numbers, will win the ball, and then move it on. The kicks are long, but not too up and under so not to give too much time to the opposition to get their numbers there as well. The timing has to be right.
And while we are on the up and under kicks, most of our players gives me the irrits with too much ball hang time. It just robs the advantage of our player going for the mark. Two players (amongst others) are Grigg and Cotch. I wish they would just keep it down a bit.

 

[Ralll]

I hate it when Newy or Lids runs from 50m away to take the kick, then kicks to McGuane or Rance 15 m away tucked in the pocket in a worse position.

 

[Livonski]

Love it. Go the long bomb! If it's close to the boundary we've got cover on one side. Then weight of numbers wins the day. But they've gotta be switched on and the kick must be right. Newmans kick ins against the Dees from the city end were disgraceful. His long bomb down the guts went 40m.
I hate the short kick sideways, especially if it's taken after a time gap. Remember the granny last year. StK got trapped so many times next to their point posts. Idiots kept doing it too. I'd rather a turnover 60m out than 15m.

 

[TOOs_Finest]

I hate it when Newy or Lids runs from 50m away to take the kick, then kicks to McGuane or Rance 15 m away tucked in the pocket in a worse position.

Rance took a great pack mark on Saturday out beyond the 50m arc, when presenting for a kick out. This should be his role. Last thing we want is for him to be sitting in the pocket, taking responsibility for running the ball through the zone. We know he will compete out beyond the 50m, if not take the mark.

 

[carn tigez]

What is also laughable is that on the back of that shitfulness, which i totally agree with, we seem to have this plan in place when the opposition is kicking in, whereby the ball gets to the wing without a tiger in sight and somehow, you would think that would mean we are manning up down the ground, but like clockwork there a loose men running rampant in the opposition FL.
I have lost count of the number of times opposition teams waltz into goal after a kick in from our FL, after we have busted and scrounged our way to put it through for a behind.

Under Dimma this is the one thing that's been most noticeable IMO. We are now very good at locking the ball inside our 50 from kickouts when we have time to set up.

 

[LuKe2428]

The coaches should have tapes from the opposition's defensive set-up and have plan's to beat it. Newman hold's the ball in the hand he will kick it long to and once we have 5-6 player's over there he kick's it and we have more number's then the opposition.