Analysis Our Backline

[Nuffers]

The backline has always worked well as unit that in turn as hidden the flaws of the likes of Chaplin who are weak in 1 v1 situations. Problem now is the game has changed slightly and we're seeing more 1 v 1 situations that are now exposing Chaplin and others.

So if our backline is working well as a unit, would that mean that they are, heaven forbid, well coached?

 

[Madtiger2006]

No way Chaps is better than Astbury.
Astbury rarely is beaten in 1 on 1 and he doesn't drop sitters. Doesn't turn it over as much either. Shouldn't have been dropped when he didn't play that bad

 

[CoggaRules]

No way Chaps is better than Astbury.
Astbury rarely is beaten in 1 on 1 and he doesn't drop sitters. Doesn't turn it over as much either. Shouldn't have been dropped when he didn't play that bad

doesnt drop sitters? He goes up for a mark on his own and punches it away so it isnt marked FFS. Like wtf is that all about? very limited indvidual who is slow in the mind and in movement and is basically the reason why Chaplin doesnt retire.

 

[Tomnat Tigers]

Geez clutching here. 1st goal was against Rance for changing, a mark not paid isn't his fault, its Heeney's opponent and the ball was way past the line. He just cant jump the high.

1st goal I admit was harsh but regardless Buddy was his opponent at the time. 2nd goal was absolutely his fault, the ball came in and should have been spoiled instead Sinclair marked only for it not be paid but he was quickly able to give the hands that later ended up in the goal. 3rd goal was again entirely his fault as (1) he didn't jump and (2) his elbow were bent as he went for the mark rather touching it over the line.

I would say our backline is getting thrown under the bus due to the unaccountable midfield.

It is being put under a lot of pressure due to unaccountable midfield but it's show who is capable of standing up and withstanding that pressure and who isn't. Grimes and Rance can handle it perfectly well, the others certainly can't.

If they are that bad why is our defence usually so good? This year it's been poor, but for most of this season, we've had different players through there. We've pretty much gone back to our old defence and it's been much better since

The game has changed a bit this season with the new rule interpretations. In the past there were less 1 v1 situations and there was less pressure going out of the backline. If you can't win 1 v 1 and panic under pressure, your time in the AFL is limited.

I fundamentally disagree with the analysis. You can’t line up the cogs in a watch and say “oh, those cogs are shit, so the whole watch is shit”. Judge the backline on how many goals get kicked against us, not whether Morris and Batchelor are an All-Australians or not.

A great Tiger once shouted “Come on Kevin, I want back-pocket plumber!”. Does anyone remember the Kellaways? Bloody hell…

I'll judge each player on how they perform on the particular day. If they can't beat their opponent they need to be replaced (Chaplin), if they can't rebound and only breakeven with their opponent then they need to be replaced (Morris, Batchelor). Look at Hawthorns backline there no one who can be considered a weakness as they are either very good at beating their man (like Grimes) or are very good at rebounding whilst being accountable.

So if our backline is working well as a unit, would that mean that they are, heaven forbid, well coached?

They were well coached but the game changed slightly and our coach was caught out.

 

[theflea]

1st goal I admit was harsh but regardless Buddy was his opponent at the time. 2nd goal was absolutely his fault, the ball came in and should have been spoiled instead Sinclair marked only for it not be paid but he was quickly able to give the hands that later ended up in the goal. 3rd goal was again entirely his fault as (1) he didn't jump and (2) his elbow were bent as he went for the mark rather touching it over the line.



The first isn't harsh, its plain wrong. You cant blame Chappy because another player gets done for running into the front of his oppo. Guilt by association right there.

If Chappy spoils the contest and then the ball is free, and another player then gets the ball, then that contest has finished. So therefore, even if Chappy spoils the ball the same could happen.

As for the goal interception, I will have to see that again, but from what I remember he did it right.

 

[TigerImposter]

FWD total score 673 average score is 64
Against total score is 882 with average against score 110
First time we kicked over 100 points last Saturday
Backline has issues , but is it due to a lack of defensive midfield and / or forward pressure ????To me we get slaughtered on the rebound as we are slow to react and cover for each other. That manic gut running and fitness was evident for the first time last Sat. It does help though when you have two mobile power forwards to kick too and a tough inside midfield. We still had 100 kicked against us so I will still need more convincing with the backline as there appears to be some passengers.

 

[Juju Porky]

Astbury may only be 26 but moves like someone that is 36. Chaplin is getting a game by default. Houli's form prior to injury was heading south. Vlastuin is being played where he belongs.
There's really only Rance and Grimes that you'd consider high quality defenders.
Interestingly Dea is doing ok for the Bombers, he's no star but would be better value than Batchelor.

Houli is our only real attacking weapon out of the backline, he's our 'quarter-back', and that's why we recruited Yarran. i need not say any more about that. Opposition coaches have worked out that if they make Houli accountable, stop his drive, force him to handball, or at worst, put pressure on him when he's kicking, they limit the number &/or effectiveness of attacks launched from the backline.

Dea is doing ok for a team that doesn't have a side to field, that's the only reason he is there. Would he be getting a game in their best 22? I really doubt it.

 

[Goldust]

Watching the replay for the Sydney game and Chaplin has been responsible for the their first 3 goals.

1st goal, Buddy got a free kick, which to be fair was a horrible call.
2nd goal, Sinclair took a mark on him 20 out that wasn't called a mark but two handballs later Heeney kicks a goal.
3rd goal, Buddy kicks it from 55 and Chaplin touches it behind the line with his elbows bent. If he goes straight up its rushed behind.

What a load of rubbish ... the Chaplin blame is unbelievable.
Go watch the game.
Buddy's first goal was Rance's free kick .... and we'd all want that paid to Jack or Ty or Griff.
The third goal Chaplin did all he could ... bended elbows pffft. Mate, why is Buddy on his own???

 

[Goldust]

No way Chaps is better than Astbury.
Astbury rarely is beaten in 1 on 1 and he doesn't drop sitters. Doesn't turn it over as much either. Shouldn't have been dropped when he didn't play that bad

Which is why once Chappy has got up and running we had an improved performance v Hawthorn and win over Sydney.
Astbury is light years off it, which is how long it takes Astbury to think and move the ball on ... light years!

 

[Charlie Pannam]

Houli is our only real attacking weapon out of the backline, he's our 'quarter-back', and that's why we recruited Yarran. i need not say any more about that. Opposition coaches have worked out that if they make Houli accountable, stop his drive, force him to handball, or at worst, put pressure on him when he's kicking, they limit the number &/or effectiveness of attacks launched from the backline.

Dea is doing ok for a team that doesn't have a side to field, that's the only reason he is there. Would he be getting a game in their best 22? I really doubt it.

Deas numbers have been better than Batchelors this year. He wasn't given the opportunities that Batchelor has, who imo is a very limited player.

 

[26_Miles]

The whole backline works 10x better as a unit without Astbury back there. He just doesn't have the smarts, he's too slow of mind and it destroys our movement out of defence and has a massive flow on effect down field. He even said after the collingwood loss he didn't know what he was meant to do.

It was apparent in 2014 and it was apparent the first 6 rounds this year that he creates a massive weak link in defence.

 

[Goldust]

The whole backline works 10x better as a unit without Astbury back there. He just doesn't have the smarts, he's too slow of mind and it destroys our movement out of defence and has a massive flow on effect down field. He even said after the collingwood loss he didn't know what he was meant to do.

It was apparent in 2014 and it was apparent the first 6 rounds this year that he creates a massive weak link in defence.

Amen!
And The End!

 

[mopsy]

FWD total score 673 average score is 64
Against total score is 882 with average against score 110
First time we kicked over 100 points last Saturday
Backline has issues , but is it due to a lack of defensive midfield and / or forward pressure ????To me we get slaughtered on the rebound as we are slow to react and cover for each other. That manic gut running and fitness was evident for the first time last Sat. It does help though when you have two mobile power forwards to kick too and a tough inside midfield. We still had 100 kicked against us so I will still need more convincing with the backline as there appears to be some passengers.

If your backline is heavily reliant on your midfield then it will always be vulnerable when the mids struggle.

Imo the primary role of all defenders is to defend a player!!!! then comes run carry intercepts etc.
How many of our defenders do all things well. The honest answer is very few.
When our systems break down all bar one is found wanting in one way or another.

We should be looking for players who do most things well not just one or two things well. This is a problem right across the field.

 

[theflea]

If your backline is heavily reliant on your midfield then it will always be vulnerable when the mids struggle.

Imo the primary role of all defenders is to defend a player!!!! then comes run carry intercepts etc.
How many of our defenders do all things well. The honest answer is very few.
When our systems break down all bar one is found wanting in one way or another.

We should be looking for players who do most things well not just one or two things well. This is a problem right across the field.

In this modern era of zones and fwd presses, backlines are more and more reliant on midfield pressure. It isn't like yesteryear. having said that, it is also needed that the defenders can go 1 on 1. The better teams can sustain more challenges than others if their defenders are better, but they also don't need to knock back as much if the midfield is doing their jobs.

 

[RunningBounce]

I'll judge each player on how they perform on the particular day. If they can't beat their opponent they need to be replaced (Chaplin), if they can't rebound and only breakeven with their opponent then they need to be replaced (Morris, Batchelor). Look at Hawthorns backline there no one who can be considered a weakness as they are either very good at beating their man (like Grimes) or are very good at rebounding whilst being accountable.

Tiger, I can see you've been argued with plenty, and I don't want to make you feel more ostracized, but I still fundamentally disagree with the analysis.

Backlines need to be judged as a unit, not broken into individual bits. Our defence conceded the third least points in 2015, eighth least in 2014 and third least in 2013. However rusty the individual cogs might be, the clock seems to keep time reasonably well.

It’s not even entirely down to the back 6 working as a unit. It also has something to do with winning contested footy in the midfield.

I just fundamentally disagree with the analysis, and you’ve given me no reason to rethink. One of the things that makes Aussie Rules my favourite sport is that it really involves some intangibles. Playing well relies on a team performance and the interactions between individuals, not simply individual performances. It’s not basketball. It’s not soccer. It’s more complex than just saying one player is shit coz they can’t kick, so they don’t give us anything at all.

Let’s just acknowledge that Leigh Brown, Mitch Morton and Ryan Schoenmakers were very important in premiership teams and leave it at that.

 

[Tomnat Tigers]

Tiger, I can see you've been argued with plenty, and I don't want to make you feel more ostracized, but I still fundamentally disagree with the analysis.

Backlines need to be judged as a unit, not broken into individual bits. Our defence conceded the third least points in 2015, eighth least in 2014 and third least in 2013. However rusty the individual cogs might be, the clock seems to keep time reasonably well.

It’s not even entirely down to the back 6 working as a unit. It also has something to do with winning contested footy in the midfield.

I just fundamentally disagree with the analysis, and you’ve given me no reason to rethink. One of the things that makes Aussie Rules my favourite sport is that it really involves some intangibles. Playing well relies on a team performance and the interactions between individuals, not simply individual performances. It’s not basketball. It’s not soccer. It’s more complex than just saying one player is shit coz they can’t kick, so they don’t give us anything at all.

Let’s just acknowledge that Leigh Brown, Mitch Morton and Ryan Schoenmakers were very important in premiership teams and leave it at that.

Which all means nothing come finals time. Ross Lyon regularly has the best defensive team due to the way his side defends but when it's time for his defence stand up they have been found wanting as they haven't had the individuals who could stand up for the occasion. Which we have been no different, the exception being we've got knocked out in earlier stages of finals.

In 2012 Hawthorn lost in the grand final to Sydney. On that day Sydney back line consisted of:

B: Shaw - Richards - Mattner
HB: Johnson - Grundy - Smith

Compared to Hawthorns back line of:

B: Birchall - Gibson - Stratton
HB: Suckling - Shoenmakers - Smith

Comparing the two it becomes obvious that Suckling and Shoenmakers where the passengers of the two back lines and they both happened to play for Hawthorn who lost. Hawthorn acknowledge this and went out got Brian Lake who then went on to win the next three premierships with Hawthorn. Whilst Brent Guerra replaced Suckling.



Notice for all the sides who won premierships their back lines had very few individuals who were not capable of withstanding the heat finals footy let alone in grand finals. They also had very good inside mids capable of getting first use of the ball but I think we already have the players capable of doing that, we just need to play them in the guts, which is what we've seen to a small degree the past three weeks.

 

[Growapair]

Which is why once Chappy has got up and running we had an improved performance v Hawthorn and win over Sydney.
Astbury is light years off it, which is how long it takes Astbury to think and move the ball on ... light years!

The difference is Grimes, not Chaplin.

 

[RunningBounce]

Which all means nothing come finals time. Ross Lyon regularly has the best defensive team due to the way his side defends but when it's time for his defence stand up they have been found wanting as they haven't had the individuals who could stand up for the occasion. Which we have been no different, the exception being we've got knocked out in earlier stages of finals.

In 2012 Hawthorn lost in the grand final to Sydney. On that day Sydney back line consisted of:

B: Shaw - Richards - Mattner
HB: Johnson - Grundy - Smith

Compared to Hawthorns back line of:

B: Birchall - Gibson - Stratton
HB: Suckling - Shoenmakers - Smith

Comparing the two it becomes obvious that Suckling and Shoenmakers where the passengers of the two back lines and they both happened to play for Hawthorn who lost. Hawthorn acknowledge this and went out got Brian Lake who then went on to win the next three premierships with Hawthorn. Whilst Brent Guerra replaced Suckling.

View attachment 249841 View attachment 249842 View attachment 249843 View attachment 249844

Notice for all the sides who won premierships their back lines had very few individuals who were not capable of withstanding the heat finals footy let alone in grand finals. They also had very good inside mids capable of getting first use of the ball but I think we already have the players capable of doing that, we just need to play them in the guts, which is what we've seen to a small degree the past three weeks.

We're gunna have to agree to disagree.

I can see you have thought this through, but the evidence you've provided makes me believe even more that the individuals in a backline are less important than how they gel as a unit.

I see your Lake and raise you Toovey, Spur and Eddy. Let's throw in Thurstans for giggles, because he was pretty funny. And have you ever talked to a Geelong supporter about Josh Hunt? They are not complimentary. After he was delisted, he played a lot of NEAFL because he couldn't find a spot in the GWS team that was regularly being flogged.

All those players fit the profile of a Chaplin or Morris type. They serve a very specific purpose that is unglamorous, but important to the functioning of the unit. They only become respected by neutral supporters after they win a premiership. There's no way of knowing whether they have that in them, or not, by going on their Supercoach points. Marty Mattner is the shining example of that.

But I have no interest in changing your mind, Tiger. We are in furious agreement that our starting 22 need to improve.

 

[Greg Tivendale]

Think you need to look at the backline from a holistic approach, not individually.

Some players are better than others, but in a certain team dynamic the lower ranked player performs better.

Grimes is one of my favorites, very underrated but always gets the closing spoil, competes hard and plays for the jumper.

 

[mopsy]

I'll judge each player on how they perform on the particular day. If they can't beat their opponent they need to be replaced (Chaplin), if they can't rebound and only breakeven with their opponent then they need to be replaced (Morris, Batchelor). Look at Hawthorns backline there no one who can be considered a weakness as they are either very good at beating their man (like Grimes) or are very good at rebounding whilst being accountable.

Great post 100% agree.

I think people do miss the obvious sometimes. Of course a backline tries to function as a unit. but as is so often the case in footy when things go to shit your players have to be able to defend.
Geelong Hawthorn most of the better sides have had their mids beaten badly at times but they find a way to win usually on the back of their defenses ability to go one v one and win their battles.

People look at stats and say geez our defense is good when it is in reality poor.
When our mids get beaten we get thrashed. There is too much reliance on others.

We have all seen what happens to blokes like Houli, Batchelor, Morris, Chaplin when we have to go one v one.
It is widely acknowledged we need kpds, as you say there are too many who dont do everything well. Some are caught out one v one some are too slow some provide absolutely no run and make poor decisions.Even Grimes is guilty For gods sake even Hardwick could see one of the weaknesses so he went and got Yarran just to provide run. Trouble is Yarran wont fix the lack of accountability.

Most clubs defenses work quite well when their structures and systems work well. It is when things go badly when your defenders earn their keep.
Instead of saying geez our defense is good people should be asking why it fails in big games and really should ask how much better can it be. Imo the backline can be significantly improved upon with out trying too hard.

 

[Komrade_Tiger]

We're gunna have to agree to disagree.

I can see you have thought this through, but the evidence you've provided makes me believe even more that the individuals in a backline are less important than how they gel as a unit.

I see your Lake and raise you Toovey, Spur and Eddy. Let's throw in Thurstans for giggles, because he was pretty funny. And have you ever talked to a Geelong supporter about Josh Hunt? They are not complimentary. After he was delisted, he played a lot of NEAFL because he couldn't find a spot in the GWS team that was regularly being flogged.

All those players fit the profile of a Chaplin or Morris type. They serve a very specific purpose that is unglamorous, but important to the functioning of the unit. They only become respected by neutral supporters after they win a premiership. There's no way of knowing whether they have that in them, or not, by going on their Supercoach points. Marty Mattner is the shining example of that.

But I have no interest in changing your mind, Tiger. We are in furious agreement that our starting 22 need to improve.

you forgot Maxwell - a premiership captain

 

[CoggaRules]

Think you need to look at the backline from a holistic approach, not individually.

Some players are better than others, but in a certain team dynamic the lower ranked player performs better.

Grimes is one of my favorites, very underrated but always gets the closing spoil, competes hard and plays for the jumper.

there are rumours that this is Taylor Hunt.

 

[RunningBounce]

Some players are better than others, but in a certain team dynamic the lower ranked player performs better.

You could say the same about particularly speedy blonde wingers from the Wallace era. Unstoppable if there’s someone laying a shepherd letting them turn onto their left. Not so much if there is not.

Team dynamics count for a lot.

 

[CoggaRules]

So if our backline is working well as a unit, would that mean that they are, heaven forbid, well coached?

 

[TigerImposter]

The difference is Grimes, not Chaplin.

And no Houli spudding it up with soft turn overs , poor / missed / or no tackles and poor disposal
Hope he comes back through the seconds and learns to toughen up and tackle. Massive liability in big games where the pressure is on. His three EF were classic non accountable Houli with poor decision making and soft turnovers.