Our ongoing problems against Hawthorn

[Hva sher a]

Fairly good summary of our current woes. (Actually a bit of a change from the normal media rubbish)

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/featherweights-20120908-25lgy.html

There is more than a hint of hubris about the way the Collingwood midfield has approached 2012.
There's an attitude that ''our best will beat anyone'' and thus they can back themselves, without the need for an Andrew Carrazzo-style or even Brad Sewell-like shutdown job.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/featherweights-20120908-25lgy.html

The article also talks about Bucks's game style, the beaten press from 2010 and our kicking issues.
I don't agree with the hubris bit, but the real point is that our mids are getting literally ahead of themselves, in anticipation that their team mate will win the contested possession.
Hence why our much vaunted reputation of being kings at stoppages is getting eroded...and we got killed of Friday night in this area

Thoughts?

 

[jmac70]

It doesn't help the article when he gets his stats wrong at the start. We beat them by 64 points in 2010.

 

[Hva sher a]

aaah good point...nonetheless the rest of it was balanced, if a little "captain obvious"

 

[Yidaki]

Don't see how we can beat them. I have faith IF we meet them in the GF that we might just cause an upset, but a lot of things need to go our way and hopefully they choke.

 

[Hva sher a]

don't know if its been mentioned in other threads but it might be time for Wellers to return to a run-with role to minimise prime movers like Kerr, Bolton and Mitchell. He seems to lack concentration and giving him an assignment might be just what we all need. Even if it was just for the finals

 

[Lockyer24]

The story makes out like Hawks have been the benchmark

Fact is this is the first year since 2008 Hawthorn has been better than us

Their game plan in combination with their skill set has superseded ours, they've found the flag formula- we need to evolve and go past them again

 

[Hardas]

Yeah, Jake Niall can produce good articles when he takes the time. Just quickly addressing the four headings of his article [sometimes stating the obvious, I know]:

1. KICKING THEMSELVES
No doubt we've missed Leon's elite kicking skills from the back -it would've been great if he'd stayed on one more year, or if Johnno had had a full season in the role he's now being asked to play with Heater being used elsewhere. And we have our share of ordinary kicks. We have seldom been able to gain much advantage from kickouts this year. This shortcoming, whether tactical or skills-based, has no doubt contributed to our much lower 'Inside-50' numbers this year.
Also, with Dids missing so much football, it's fallen to others to do more of the passing of the ball to the forwards, and some of them have been very disappointing. For example, Steele's never been a strong 'spear-like' kick, but in the past 8 weeks or so his kicks have consistently fallen short of targets. Is it OP, wear and tear from the bigger load he's carried this year, instructions to keep the ball low to avoid the worst of turnovers? You could say something similar for Daisy too and perhaps others.


2. THE BEATEN PRESS
One point not raised in the article is the AFL move to a '3 + 1' bench just when we were most dominant. It may have cost us last year, although there's not much to be done about it and it isn't going to matter moving forward. A question for next year maybe, but are they really going to go 2 +2 on the bench? It will have a huge impact on tactics and all if they do. It maybe that you need to run many more players through the midfield to keep them a little fresher, and so maximize whatever kicking skills players have. So our top 5 or 6 mids would spend even more time forward and the younger players and smaller forwards like Fasolo, Sinclair, Krak and Dids would all have to be able to go through the middle [Obviously this year, we have been hamstrung by injuries to the last two and the need for another pre-season for the young guys.


3. NO MANDATE
This is a good point. Bucks was in a very tough position regarding making major changes, and one would think will be better able to make adjustments from now on, whether tactical or coaching personnel. I have some doubts about Lappin [big doubts] and Hart [this maybe more that Watters was a big loss rather than anything negative about Hart], but trust the club to evaluate that better than we could from the outside. And again, all the coaches may be limited by the current gameplan.


4. NO TAGS
This has been talked about a lot already, but my current suggestion is Toovey. We would still have Maxy, Harry and Heater for the back half. I know Heath has been the one moved around this year because of his capacity to offer different stuff on a wing etc, but Tooves could be worth an extended try - he's athletic and quick off the mark, has lock down skills that are now well-developed and with all the congestion around the stoppages these days you don't need all your players to have elite skills [although it would be nice].

Brodie Holland is probably the last out-and-out tagger that I can remember, isn't he? I think you either have to have someone who can shutdown heavily, or someone who can runoff an opponent and really do damage the other way, or a bit of both depending on the tagging target. Do you think Tooves could be the guy? Any other suggestions? Do we overpay to get one that's already on another team's list?

 

[Hardas]

don't know if its been mentioned in other threads but it might be time for Wellers to return to a run-with role to minimise prime movers like Kerr, Bolton and Mitchell. He seems to lack concentration and giving him an assignment might be just what we all need. Even if it was just for the finals

Yep, good suggestion. Sharrod's inconsistency and mental application worry me as a permanent role though. Maybe Wellers or Tooves depending on the assignment?

 

[speedytiger]

So in one paragraph we are arrogant for not tagging and Mitchell always kills us, yet we tagged Mitchell fri night. Isn't that a tick for Buckley?

The stats prior to 2010 are irrelevant as we changed our gameplan hugely. Before that we struggled against the 'cluster' and continued to kick to outnumbered contests.

 

[Hva sher a]

So in one paragraph we are arrogant for not tagging and Mitchell always kills us, yet we tagged Mitchell fri night. Isn't that a tick for Buckley?

The stats prior to 2010 are irrelevant as we changed our gameplan hugely. Before that we struggled against the 'cluster' and continued to kick to outnumbered contests.

yeah he tried to tag but with Blair. Its like Clarko asking Mitchell to tag.
Blair one on one would get killed - his best work is in packs or tackling in the fwd 50

 

[loki04]

Toovey and Wellingham have both been successful as taggers on the odd occasion, Sharrod has also played a poor role as a tagger too so he is hit and miss (mental with Wellingham).

I'd give the nod to Toovey for the role he has all the right attributes to make a great tagger, just tell him to handball more then kick and we will be laughing.

People will put Clarkes name up but he is only suited to the slower type mids and won't keep up with the Judds/Abletts.

 

[4#Didak#4]

The problem against Hawthorn IMO is our midfield. Their forward line & ball use are lethal. If we allow them first use of the ball, they control the game and always make the most of their chances. For us to beat them we need our biggest asset working: our midfield.

If we lose the clearances we lose the game. If we break even in clearances we probably still lose the game. If we win & win well in the clearances we are a big chance. Make no mistake Mitchell is their most valuable player against us. He wins most of their clearances & does it brilliantly. We need to chop him out and have Swan & Pendles dominating in there. Until this happens we don't beat the Hawks. Our midfield is our greatest strength, yet against the Hawks they can't get the job done for some reason.