Our 2016 game style

[GarnerSmash]

Also, my AFL App says we were up two at 53 entries to their 51. Splitting hairs, I know.

Well there you go. And thats about average for the year too.

Our efficiency was the lowest its been all season though. We average a score 52.4% of the time we get it in there. Against the Swans it was 38%. Interestingly since the Dogs game our efficiency is down to 45%, so maybe that is reflective of teams getting better at putting us under pressure once in there or forcimg us wider to take the marks.

We average 11.4 marks inside 50 per game. Against the Swans we took 6. I think these stats reflect a method used by the swans that still allowed us to get forward but less dynamic than usual and blocked up the space for our forwards. Other teams are going to try follow suit i think but it isn't an easy thing to do.

 

[Frank Thring]

Scott summed it up on On The Couch when he said that when you are winning you tend to look for the next match instead of looking backwards meaning we may have papered over the cracks somewhat. Anyway they had a thorough review on Monday including MC review.

It will be interested in how we respond this week.

 

[Kimbo]

Other teams are going to try follow suit i think but it isn't an easy thing to do.

Because it relies on bullying us in the middle, and when our mob are switched on not many can do that to us. The Swans, however, had the size and speed to do it.

 

[Grogg]

Because it relies on bullying us in the middle, and when our mob are switched on not many can do that to us. The Swans, however, had the size and speed to do it.

Sure does. I think the smaller ground highlighted the fact we were unable to get any clear air with our I50 entries and the slower ball movement allowed the Swans plenty of time to set up the D50 as well. I can barely remember our mids getting much use of the corridor on Friday either and the ball coming in was almost always from deep flank or deep pocket.

 

[Moti]

The past month or so the cracks have started to appear. If you can get to our outside you know you are going to get an Inside 50. And if you put Ziebell under a tiny amount of pressure at the stoppages, you know the kick will go 40m long, 35m high. As good as our forwards have been, it has been their system that has largely paid off in terms of results. If teams start to really block the leading patterns then our talls just don't kick goals.

That is why someone like Wood is important as he forces teams to watch or he can provide a real headache. Also that is why our lack of running player options will always stop us from matching the best teams consistently. The Hawks haven't go great forwards or defenders in KP slots but they also don't lack for anything around the ground. We have one very large hole in the middle.

 

[RobZombie]

I wonder whether Sydney studied up on this and took appropriate action. Hardly a coincidence that straight after the Carlton game, our talls get towelled. Maybe, the ball is back in our court now.

Our forwards have been running these sort of patterns for years. If you sit behind the goals sometimes it's marvellous to watch. It would be an indictment on opposition analysts across the league if it took one bit of video from Jon Brown for them to twig.

I think it was more the combination of midfield pressure and numbers back for the Swans. And unless you're as good as the Swans, committing that many extras to the contest and behind the ball is going to kill your ability to score.

 

[Grogg]

Our forwards have been running these sort of patterns for years. If you sit behind the goals sometimes it's marvellous to watch. It would be an indictment on opposition analysts across the league if it took one bit of video from Jon Brown for them to twig.

I think it was more the combination of midfield pressure and numbers back for the Swans. And unless you're as good as the Swans, committing that many extras to the contest and behind the ball is going to kill your ability to score.

Agreed on all points Rob. Having said that, what the last few games have shown me is a need to vary how we structure up against the very best sides if we are not getting optimum output from the 3 tall set up during a game. I understand that the preference is for us to stretch sides with our height advantage, but I would like to see a variance in approach when our mids aren't getting clean ball at speed that allows us to fully capitalise on that height advantavge. In simple terms, it's a lot harder to stop a big bloke on a lead in space than a shorter flanker type. When that isn't possible, we need the flexibility in the coaching box to change that structure up.

 

[Moti]

Agreed on all points Rob. Having said that, what the last few games have shown me is a need to vary how we structure up against the very best sides if we are not getting optimum output from the 3 tall set up during a game. I understand that the preference is for us to stretch sides with our height advantage, but I would like to see a variance in approach when our mids aren't getting clean ball at speed that allows us to fully capitalise on that height advantavge. In simple terms, it's a lot harder to stop a big bloke on a lead in space than a shorter flanker type. When that isn't possible, we need the flexibility in the coaching box to change that structure up.

Shows the potential importance of Wood. If he can rotate through the midfield at times his alternative style may help shake off any staleness we get from the big 3.

 

[Event Horizon]

Agreed on all points Rob. Having said that, what the last few games have shown me is a need to vary how we structure up against the very best sides if we are not getting optimum output from the 3 tall set up during a game. I understand that the preference is for us to stretch sides with our height advantage, but I would like to see a variance in approach when our mids aren't getting clean ball at speed that allows us to fully capitalise on that height advantavge. In simple terms, it's a lot harder to stop a big bloke on a lead in space than a shorter flanker type. When that isn't possible, we need the flexibility in the coaching box to change that structure up.

Bottom line is, in today's footy it's as important to lock the ball in and achieve repeat entries, as it is to score from a quick centre break. If our tall forwards aren't catching it in some games, that's ok, provided they can lock the ball in. But when they can't, which certainly was the case last week, that's when it all falls apart.

Which is why blokes like Garner, Turner, Higgins and Waite when he is on, are extremely important. Our forward press has been ok earlier in the year, but hasn't been as good for the last month or so.

 

[giantroo]

Round 11

 

[Reginald0]

we have been an exciting high scoring team for a few yrs now
most fans wld say we had talent but our bottom 6 were woeful and our gun players choked in big games
who can forget the 100pt thrashings, and also the opposition run-ons just totally unstoppable
A lot of tipsters got caught out so we have a flakey reputation

OK, wot we have been able to do, (and compare the Tiggers)
we changed the run'n'gun gamestyle, reduced the thrashings but still lost , was it 10 by less than 2 goals
next step was we took some scalps, beat all the Top 8, but still lost to supposed easybeats regularly
Oddly enuf last yr we were pretty crap v the Top teams but to the NMFC fan it was obvious that the Team was playing Presssure footy for 4 Qtrs
and had retained the ability to kick 5 goals in 5 minutes

The whole NDS Higgo W80 has been incredibly successful, all just exactly wot the team has needed
Drafting has been superb and the Coach has been able to blend a tough skilled team with 8 or so 30yr olds

This yr there is a week off befor the Finals so quite likely a winning Top 2 team will have a rest, play Home Final, have a rest play Home Final,
Play in GF
This cld be NMFC

Remember Hawks have beat 3 Interstate teams in a row!!!

)