Analysis Let's talk Game Plan

[feenix67]

pjcrows and others have raised the valid point that, whilst our mids have generally stunk it up in recent weeks, our gameplan is one that requires first use of the ball.

Ricciutto this morning emphasised the need for us to win the CP stat, and our coach has stated often that our most important stat is groundball (aka CP).

Is it valid to have such a gameplan when we have such a young midfield loaded with outside players? Are we too vulnerable to a tag on Sloane as a result?

Further, we start a lot of forward movement from half back, yet at the moment have only one genuine ball carrier in defence, Brodie Smith. We've all seen what happens when Brodie is not given space.

We've had some key injuries to players critical to our game style. CEY early and then Hampton, which directly impacts our toughness inside, and Seedsman impacting our defensive rebound.

Our forward line is our strength, but is ineffective if the CP is down and the rebound is snuffed out.

Are we set up for failure due to a plan that is easily countered? Should we be considering adjustments to offset our current key injuries? Has Don erred by instilling a plan that doesn't suit our list?

Have at it

 

[GreyCrow]

If the gameplan is for our midfielders to get the ball then it starts with the ruck. It also needs variety in the midfield

Are the ruck taps predictable? Are the players in the middle predictable?

 

[Coopers]

The problem is doggedly sticking to what is not working throughout a game.

There seems to be a game plan that will kills us off, and other teams know it. It goes something like this:

• Play a heavy zone within 60 or so meters forward of a stoppage. This to hold up outside run.
  
• Coupled with that the zone has free defenders both 30 and 50m off the ball. To catch the hacks/bombs forward.
  
• Have extra mids around contests to apply more pressure to force the bad kicks (and try to win it yourself).
• Repeat for 120 minutes.

So what do you change to beat that play? 2 ideas:

• The obvious one is possession football. Now that's pretty much the opposite of our run and gun, but we can stop trying to leave 1-2 players (Atkins, Cameron, Mackay do this all the time) free at stoppages, to maintain our defensive zone in case we lose the contest. Then when we have it we short kick down into our forward line so we're not playing to the opposition free players.
  
• Man on Man/offensive zone. Ensure there are not free opposition players all over the shop. This means we're not going to get huge amounts of run but I think we're quite talented, and I'd generally back our guys to win more than our fair share of 1 on 1 contests. It will make it lower scoring but we won't constantly turn the ball over.

Can we keep the run and gun? Is there a style where we can continue to have free outside runners near stoppages, but somehow negate the free defenders that the "anti crows" defensive plan creates? I can't see it.

 

[Coopers]

Possibly if we switched game plans suddenly during a game to beat that defense, then the opposition would try something else, then we COULD switch to run and gun.

 

[feenix67]

Possibly if we switched game plans suddenly during a game to beat that defense, then the opposition would try something else, then we COULD switch to run and gun.

I totally agree with this. We should have shut the game down half way through the second against the cats, played ugly and then try to open it up in the last to get the win. Far too much inertia in the coaches box.

 

[hey shorty]

1 question - Do we have the skill level to play possession based footy ?? It requires nerves of steel and patience which I'm not sure we have

 

[1990crow]

When game plan A isn't working.. don't stubbornly keep trying assuming it will turn around.
DO SOMETHING DON.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Prior to the Geelong game we were conceding the least scores per I50 entry

And without checking I'd assume we'd have one of the more potent forward lines

So not sure I agree with the summary.

I do think our game plan breaks down when we don't apply midfield pressure when the opposition win the ball. That is terminal to any game plan and has been a glaring factor in our 3 losses.

 

[Alwaysacrow]

I totally agree with this. We should have shut the game down half way through the second against the cats, played ugly and then try to open it up in the last to get the win. Far too much inertia in the coaches box.

I posted something similar to this in the Geelong preview thread. Our gameplan should be to just contain teams in the 1st quarter while still being in touch. The game usually opens up later on so we can play our way but it's usually too late.
The other problem I think is team balance. We've got too many running types and not enough ball winners. I'm not sure Don has the balls to make the decision but I'd like to see Beech get a game at least he's got a mature body. I also wouldn't be opposed to give Thommo a game for those tough inside MF teams. Yes Thommo I said it.

 

[hey shorty]

Is it time to develop a tagger ?? Either on the fly in the Senior side or sacrifice a spot in the SANFL side.

Oh that's right, Campo says good teams don't do that. You know except the ones that have won most of the last 15 flags.

 

[feenix67]

Prior to the Geelong game we were conceding the least scores per I50 entry

And without checking I'd assume we'd have one of the more potent forward lines

So not sure I agree with the summary.

I do think our game plan breaks down when we don't apply midfield pressure when the opposition win the ball. That is terminal to any game plan and has been a glaring factor in our 3 losses.

Those stats are padded out by some wins against inept teams though.

 

[relapse]

I mentioned it on the selection thread, but this seems like a more suitable place for it.

I would love to see Tom Doedee tried as a defensive mid.

He has great lock down skills and supposedly they have been working on his engine in the preseason.

I would love to see what would happen if he was put into the midfield mix playing a defensive role on players like Joel Selwood. I actually think he could become the defensive mid that the Crows are currently lacking.

Even if it doesn't work it is still a better outcome than sitting there on your hands and "backing your midfield to win the contest".

 

[MRB37]

I do think our game plan breaks down when we don't apply midfield pressure when the opposition win the ball. That is terminal to any game plan and has been a glaring factor in our 3 losses.

So Pyke needs to do what guys like Bolton and Beveridge do. Don't care what the name is, or how many games they've played, if they're not willing to bust a gut and apply defensive pressure then they don't play again until they are.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Those stats are padded out by some wins against inept teams though.

So are everyone's

 

[dogs105]

So are everyone's

It's like people don't know what an average is. Someone else was trying to calculate a player's average number of possessions "when you take out his good games"...

 

[slingy55]

Anyone who listens to the people complaining on the radio would think it's that our big guys are too soft. Which is true, but it's not why we lost.
Adelaide have lost the ability to clear the contested ball. If we get the hard ball (through Sloane, Crouch, or Crouch) there's nowhere to go. Any handball out goes to a player who is immediately tackled, and any rushed kick goes to the defensive zone set up 40-60m behind the contest.
If the opposition get the contested ball, the overload of players around the contest manage to find a way out because our players are all on the inside and they don't tackle the opposition inside midfielder (which we apparently couldn't do on Friday night, Dangerfield was untackleable and Selwood ducks).

We need a Hampton type player who can lay a solid tackle, not with the goal of getting a HTB decision by leaving an arm free, but with the aim of locking the ball in for another contest. Need players who are smart enough to run through with attacking intent to receive the ball on the outside and get clean possession to enough time to allow an effective disposal, while also being able to judge if the inside contest is lost and then switch to a defensive role blocking the run of opposition players or tackle the ball holder. Too often we also had multiple players move in to tackle the opposition player inside the contest, leaving other players to run past and collect the ball.

Mackay is being played in a position where he should be receiving the ball while moving at speed past a contest, or tackling/blocking an opponent. He can't do either.
Cameron is obviously a work in progress, he can run, receive and make space for himself, but sometimes gets sucked in to team tackle the stationary inside midfielder when he'd be better suited staying outside to put defensive or tackling pressure on the running outside players.
There are plenty of other culprits too, these are just two who need to either find a role that suits them or make better decisions.

Perhaps (and I can't believe I'm saying this), we need Thommo back on the inside for his strong tackling. He doesn't need pace, just that tackling strength we all know he has. Don't even care about his disposal, we can't do any worse and inside mids can't really be judged on their rushed disposals that have the sole intent of clearing the contested ball and gaining ground to a 50-50 contest (Dangerfield).

TLDR: This isn't primary school footy, not everyone should be running for the centre of the contest the get their hands on the ball, some people need to stay outside with the aim of getting clear possession to affect effective attacking disposals or stop opposition from doing same.

 

[feenix67]

So are everyone's

Yeah that's true enough. There's just such a disparity between our wins and losses, and it all seems to hinge on the CP stat. We never win ugly. It just seems to me that, with a light and young mid group of largely receiver types, we are very vulnerable to one or two simple counter measures which, to me, is a flaw in the game plan.

 

[mattymac]

Two things:

1. We weren't expecting anyone to tag Sloane.

They did.

2. We were expecting Brad Crouch to live up to the hype.

He hasn't.

If those 2 things went to plan our balance would be fine. Now it is too outside.

Plus we have lost the tackling pressure in the middle that was a hallmark of the start of the season. Hampton injured and Cameron shifted forward to cover for Otten's lack of pressure. Makes it ever harder to win the contest in a pressure void.

Cameron needs to go back to the middle as an absolute priority

 

[DD#23]

So Pyke needs to do what guys like Bolton and Beveridge do. Don't care what the name is, or how many games they've played, if they're not willing to bust a gut and apply defensive pressure then they don't play again until they are.

the fact we've fallen out of this practice is absolutely damning.

our selection policy is completely at odds with maintaining any sort of team rules.

 

[Scorpus]

Our game plan is pretty good, it just requires everyone to crack in and apply AFL standard pressure.

Often we don't do that, especially when the heat is on. That's not a game plan issue, that's a mental issue. Dropping underperforming shit players would probably help.

 

[MRB37]

the fact we've fallen out of this practice is absolutely damning.

our selection policy is completely at odds with maintaining any sort of team rules.

We do have team rules, but they seemingly fly out the window once you're established in the 22.

That footage they showed of M Crouch lazily jogging while Jack Viney tore ass to get inside his forward 50 and kick a goal was the sort of thing that shouldn't be tolerated and if he wasn't dropped for it he better of been given a massive rocket for it.

 

[DD#23]

We do have team rules, but they seemingly fly out the window once you're established in the 22.

That footage they showed of M Crouch lazily jogging while Jack Viney tore ass to get inside his forward 50 and kick a goal was the sort of thing that shouldn't be tolerated and if he wasn't dropped for it he better of been given a massive rocket for it.

i.e. they don't exist once you're established.

 

[GreyCrow]

Need players who are smart enough to run through with attacking intent to receive the ball on the outside and get clean possession to enough time to allow an effective disposal, while also being able to judge if the inside contest is lost and then switch to a defensive role blocking the run of opposition players or tackle the ball holder. Too often we also had multiple players move in to tackle the opposition player inside the contest, leaving other players to run past and collect the ball.

Mackay is being played in a position where he should be receiving the ball while moving at speed past a contest, or tackling/blocking an opponent. He can't do either.
Cameron is obviously a work in progress, he can run, receive and make space for himself, but sometimes gets sucked in to team tackle the stationary inside midfielder when he'd be better suited staying outside to put defensive or tackling pressure on the running outside players.
There are plenty of other culprits too, these are just two who need to either find a role that suits them or make better decisions.

I liked most of this.

Handballing to statues invites the tackle. I think that is half the issue. Its like watching training drills where 3 players stand in a triangle and continuously handball to each other. Ok , now what?

I have likened this before to an inner circle and an outer circle. Somehow our players get sucked into the inner circle and face pressure closing in or see bodies and don't execute the handball efficiently. Your idea of having the runners is sound. Instead of Eddie running through the middle he should be skirting the square where the handball/chip comes out. He is followed by another in Smith who mops up any miss.

Does this leave you exposed? Yes. Is it worth the risk at times? Its also up to Jacobs to smash the ball out wide at times.

As I said above we are too predictable at the ruck contest.

 

[Vhaluus]

i.e. they don't exist once you're established.

Just another damning thing about our club.

At the top club they might look the other way on off field transgressions but if you let the team down on the field they're gonna punish you for it.

Our club? Set a foot out of line off the field and we'll smash you, don't do the team things on the field? Well you're best 22 so it's ok.

 

[Vhaluus]

Contested Marks. This is the issue with our game plan.

Our defenders are good at the contested mark.

Our midfield has only Sloane that is good in this situation, occasionally sauce.

Up forward we've got no-one.

How the **** do we have a forward line that won't take contest marks. It's like having a defense where no-one attempts to go the fist, it just doesn't work.

JJ has never been a contested mark, which is exactly why he's worth about 200k less than we are paying him. Tex used to be (and before you argue with me, go watch 2012) but is now softer than butter. with McGovern out Lynch is probably our best contested mark and he's a medium forward.

If we aren't going to learn to take contested marks we need to look to the Hawks of previous years and learn how they get so many uncontested marks. But at the moment we do neither of these things.