Our Gameplan

[jerry springer]

In one word,deadset amauteurish.

So easy to read,lets go slowly along the wings then boom it into 50 and the opposition will just waltz out of their backline.that and our shocking skills and clumsey play.

we will get smashed by Geelong next week.

 

[smiddaz123]

I love how even the midfield of Melbourne can waltz through the corridor against us.

 

[jerry springer]

its just plain amauteurish ,as soon as we get control we become robotic and just go straight for the boundry.be great if we could hit a target,but we are just highlighting our own weaknesses

 

[chop_me]

the gameplan isnt' the main problem... it's the execution of it that is killing us...

doesn't matter what the game plan is.... if we can't hit our targets, we can't win

 

[hellfire]

I love how even the midfield of Melbourne can waltz through the corridor against us.

Yep. It's infuriating. I only just finished work, so I couldn't go to the game today mad, but boy I would've been fuming if I was at the ground. Nothing angers me more than seeing the space we give teams through the corridor.

Sounds like the usual suspects are turning the ball over all the time too.

 

[recon]

Mick Malthouse is the dumbest coach in the AFL we concede the corridor and we are the only team who dont put numbers in defence, he is coaching the club into the ground.

 

[DoubleO7]

Don't respond to the troll and stick to the topic

The gameplan is not the best but it's working.

 

[Pie eyed]

Well whether it was our game plan or not what would you say won us the game after a very slow start?

Beames was reasonable without being even remotely near a down Pendlebury, or O'Bree or Johnson for that matter.

Dick only did enough in the second half to rate a mention despite the huge wraps some gave him during the week.

L. Brown was solid enough at times without any great influence.

Shaw was quiet early but worked hi way into it.

Pendles was obviously off but still played an important role.


O'Bree was very instrumental in taking the game away from Melbourne.

Johnson gave us heaps of run and was an important link player without being great.

Marty was very good in the 2nd half.

Fraser was outstanding.

Jack was accurate! Thank God.

Cox was pretty good considering.

Swan was our most influential player when the game had to be won.

Did's and Davis are starting to get their form back from 08 and did the hard work when it had to be done.

It was a team effort, the good and the bad, and it is obvious we are not even close to our best 22 yet let alone our best form.

So much room for improvement it is ridiculous.

This game will have not very much for the trolls and negative types.

You'll be able to knock the game plan but only in so much as it would not have beaten a better opponents as it was what saved us today.
Our start was pedestrian but it was the stars who appeared to lag behind the most.
It was our most bad mouthed hacks who dragged our arses into the competition and it was our most maligned first ruck who eventually dominated and turned the game.

Our most loved players only came into the game after our most abused won the upper hand.

It was a win but not a confidence builder. As far as the knockers go it may as well have been a loss........


It is going to be an interesting week on the board this week.

Go Pies.

 

[Quicky]

In one word,deadset amauteurish.

So easy to read,lets go slowly along the wings then boom it into 50 and the opposition will just waltz out of their backline.that and our shocking skills and clumsey play.

we will get smashed by Geelong next week.

You've got a good point. If we move the ball that slowly against the Hawks we will get absolutely smashed. Our defensive pressure in the F50 was just not up to scratch in the first half to play that sort of gameplan. Sometimes I think Malthouse thinks that Rocca is still at FF where you can get away with that sort of forward entry. Like you said, its very predictable and easy to defend against. I wish we'd use the corridor a bit more just to mix it up and make our ball movement less predictable.

 

[Jabso]

Mick Malthouse is the dumbest coach in the AFL we concede the corridor and we are the only team who dont put numbers in defence, he is coaching the club into the ground.

So coaching is about copying what other teams are doing?

If we play like that against Hawthorn or Geelong we'll lose. However there wasn't anything fundamentally wrong with the gameplan. Our players did not react to the loose man very well because the loose men we had (H.Shaw or Cox depending on the time) did not play well enough. How you can read that much into the gameplan in a 53 point win is a bit silly anyway.

 

[Rohan Coventry]

It was horrible to watch. We have skilled players & big targets, absolutely zero excuse not to play in board.

 

[mdc]

I'm going to say there is something fundamentally wrong with the gameplan.

Going down the flanks is one thing - it creates closer games and tends to favour the weaker team.

But conceding the corridor between the arcs is moronic, and will burn us. If we do that against Geelong, we'll lose by 60+.

 

[Jabso]

I'm going to say there is something fundamentally wrong with the gameplan.

Going down the flanks is one thing - it creates closer games and tends to favour the weaker team.

But conceding the corridor between the arcs is moronic, and will burn us. If we do that against Geelong, we'll lose by 60+.

Conceding space in the middle is not part of our gameplan. It's players taking too many risks in running forward and not picking anyone up. We are a one on one team (although today we had loose men and were happy to employ a rolling zone) and part of the drawback is if a foray forward doesn't come off sometimes the players who ran forward to get the ball will have their opponents run back off them.

 

[Rohan Coventry]

The Collingwood crowd actually booed our movement at 1 stage.

 

[mdc]

Conceding space in the middle is not part of our gameplan. It's players taking too many risks in running forward and not picking anyone up.

It's hard to tell what is and what isn't technically part of the "gameplan".

But we've left the middle open every single game through pre-season, and the first 2 of the H&A. When something happens 5 times in a row, time to conclude that it's a part of the gameplan, intentional or not.

 

[Chief Ten Beers]

Maybe only 1 more year of it?

 

[Optimax]

We used the corridor about 30% to 40% of the time today, we owned melborune through the centre

Wtf win a game sack the coach?

 

[Chief Ten Beers]

No one said that.

 

[Optimax]

No one said that.

Yes you did

Maybe only 1 more year of it?

or was this some sort of foresight of our gameplan miraculously changing with MM in charge?

As i said in my last post when we started to dominate the middle of the ground we used the corridor more, not as much as some teams but more then usual. Its hard to control or use the corridor if you midfield is chasing tail which is what we did in the first half

 

[pipeline]

It was a win but not a confidence builder. As far as the knockers go it may as well have been a loss........


Go Pies.

You're a very firm marker Pie-eyed but there's not a lot I'd argue against. I actually did take some confidence out of it though. This was a game we could easily have managed to lose. Lousy team, dragging us down to their level, playing out of their skins.....we've lost them before. What pleased me was that we didn't just wait for the world to right itself, we actually worked at it. They didn't romp away to a 40 point lead at half time - we stayed in touch and worked things out, and when the tide changed, it was quick and decisive and we rolled them up. I thought it showed a bit of steel.

 

[Chief Ten Beers]

Yes you did

Read it a again. You can't make a statement with one of these "?" on the end of a sentence mate.

Let me explain if for you. Malthouse hasn't got his contract renewed yet, which is highly unusual this time of year.

Maybe it's his last year?

 

[SteeleBeams]

Melbourne played a rolling zone against us yesterday and it worked brilliantly in the first quarter and a half, but to Mick's credit, he got us out of the position where we couldn't play the game on our terms. It has been known for years that we play down the wings, i don't think it will change any time soon unfortunately.

 

[Pie eyed]

You're a very firm marker Pie-eyed but there's not a lot I'd argue against. I actually did take some confidence out of it though. This was a game we could easily have managed to lose. Lousy team, dragging us down to their level, playing out of their skins.....we've lost them before. What pleased me was that we didn't just wait for the world to right itself, we actually worked at it. They didn't romp away to a 40 point lead at half time - we stayed in touch and worked things out, and when the tide changed, it was quick and decisive and we rolled them up. I thought it showed a bit of steel.

I was very interested to see that Sydney played wide and around the wings against Hawthorn. They took advantage of the larger ground.
It definitely had the desired effect. You can say Hawthorn were decimated in the ruck which was totally true. The tactic was equally as frustrating to watch as when we do it but it negated the Hawks zone because it kept dragging their players out of their preferred game plan.

Buddy and Roughead were not getting the benefit of fast breaks and tagging Mitchell out of the game had a lot to do with it.
All things to put in the memory bank for the future no doubt.

Take out Williams 3 early goals and the score line was a "pumping" in reality.

Yes the Hawks were under-manned and looked down, but we have to live with the same problems at times and have managed pretty well.

The importance of first use from the centre really stood out.

 

[DidakDelight]

bit harsh i say

 

[CENTERMAN]

Melbourne played a rolling zone against us yesterday and it worked brilliantly in the first quarter and a half, but to Mick's credit, he got us out of the position where we couldn't play the game on our terms. It has been known for years that we play down the wings, i don't think it will change any time soon unfortunately.

How true. Now, can someone tell Mick "before" next weeks game that Geel might do the same thing? Or should we wait till 1/4 time, 1/2 way through the second?
The rolling zone, although defensive, positions defenders in an "attacking formation" across half back. Players are fanned out between the area that they "bottle neck" us (usually Clokey) on the boundary at 60mts, and our CHF position. It's like rugby, in that that move the ball quickly by hand/foot across to the corridor and there gone. It's a blatant trap the other clubs are obviously aware of (with us), and the better equipped will always expose this flaw.
And no, i don't want MM sacked, he's a terrific coach, but this area of our game mystifies and frustrates me.