Post BF Upgrade Feedback - Click Here

Remove this Banner Ad

Pies Using the Zone vs Blues

  • Thread starter Thread starter TradeDraft
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

TradeDraft

TradeDraft

Post-Human
Veteran Collingwood - Beau McCreery Player Sponsor 2023 10k Posts 30k Posts Collingwood - Caleb Poulter Player Sponsor 2022 HBF's Milk Crate - 70k Posts Collingwood - Josh Daicos Player Sponsor 2021 Collingwood - Tyler Brown Player Sponsor 2020
Joined
Oct 18, 2009
Posts
160,806
Reaction score
91,948
Location
Mornington Peninsula
AFL Club
Collingwood
I noticed we used the Zone vs the Blues and did not use Man on Man style we been known to use.

Did anyone else notice and how do you think it worked?
 
I thought we used both tactics to great effect.

IMO, we have found a balance between zonal football and man-on-man (which has been the mantra under Malthouse teams).

The team just knows when to switch between the two modes and have trust and confidence in one another to execute either set-up. This is what makes us different to say Hawthorn who are a very good zonal side but their players are exposed in one-on-footy, whereas we have built our defence/team based on one-on-footy from the bottom up.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

I think we are using a zone type defense in particular when the ball is inside our forward 50 zone.

It just seems that we are better then any other team at keeping the ball from escaping our forward area, which is such an advantage in modern day football.

Maybe the first time I have seen MM employ this tactic as a "regular approach".
 
aaronmx said:
Like Opti said we have used it every game this season. We have done it so well to.

I wonder what or who has made him think that we can use the zone to our advantage.
Click to expand...
we were using the zone late last year too, it was a different more defensive zone then this current 2010 version.

The 2010 zone seems to be semi man on man and sets up very highly, starting deep forward and really crushing sides across our half forward line, where as the saints and hawks zone set up around their chf and aim to make a turn over across the middle. Ours is more deadly IMO as we aim for the turnover to occur within scoring range, in saying that because it sets up do high once it's broken cleanly our defenders can be isolated or a free forward can be found with ease
 
Noticed Maxwell and I think Reid up near our fwd 50 on Sunday. The zone is pretty high up. Not sure how many we are leaving behind the press, but seems 2 or 3 are a kick behind the zone ready to send it back in. Have to take my eyes off the action next time to see.
 
Old Spice said:
Noticed Maxwell and I think Reid up near our fwd 50 on Sunday. The zone is pretty high up. Not sure how many we are leaving behind the press, but seems 2 or 3 are a kick behind the zone ready to send it back in. Have to take my eyes off the action next time to see.
Click to expand...

It's usually just one right in the defensive fifty, presti or brown. One of the reasons Melbourne cut us up in round 2 was that Reid got sucked up too high in the zone instead of staying back (sort of) like presti does.

It's seems to be a 2-3-3-3-3-2-1 zone (sorry for the soccer terminology) with one on the mark. But they do move to a man as the opposistion tries to run through it, it's more a man marking zone then space marking.
 
There's definitely a lot of structural zoning going on. With the obvious rolling zone and the Harry O basketball screen style setup when the opposition has a free kick. We're really looking like the whole team understands their role and are sticking to it. Is this a result of a good leadership group or just good coaching? Or both?

On a side note, I really don't feel comfortable when Ben Reid is near the ball. JA was being groomed as a defender before we had to throw him into the forward line - is it possible we could play Anthony in the back line instead of Reid and then throw him forward every now and then (ala Waite, Campbell Brown). He'd need to work on his tackling but i think it'd work.
 
Why would we shift a player who was our leading goal kicker last season and has an incredible goal scoring record to date into the backline?

Honestly, mdc is spot on. Far too many people with short term memories.
 
We have to give Reid time. He has only played 11 games and not many as a defender. I still think we are getting used to playing a zone. We are great man on man and do that well when we have to but having a zone is just another trick to our bag.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

I think what may be the most important thing for the Pies is that we've got some very strong, abled backman that are able to play the man-on-man style that is often employed, especially in finals.

Zone can be very effective, but recently it's been a strong criticism of Hawthorn that they've been unable to adapt so some of the man-on-man style football being played by opposition teams post 2008.

Playing the zone for so long might have negatively impacted on their ability to play hard at the football and defend throughout the ground as well as they have. I can't imagine that happening and the ability to adapt (and adapt quickly) might be on of the best assets a team can have.
 
dalethomas13 said:
Why would we shift a player who was our leading goal kicker last season and has an incredible goal scoring record to date into the backline?

Honestly, mdc is spot on. Far too many people with short term memories.
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about shifting a player - he's currently not in the team. It's apparent that we can't play him up forward with Dawes there, so why not utilize him in the backline. He's a better player than Reid (surer hands and better kick (a LOT better)). Better to have him on the ground than off it.

Besides, he was our leading goal kicker because nobody knew who the hell he was. They've worked him out pretty well now (which is why he's been dropped).

In short, I don't like Reid.
 
DaveyWavey said:
I'm not talking about shifting a player - he's currently not in the team. It's apparent that we can't play him up forward with Dawes there, so why not utilize him in the backline. He's a better player than Reid (surer hands and better kick (a LOT better)). Better to have him on the ground than off it.

Besides, he was our leading goal kicker because nobody knew who the hell he was. They've worked him out pretty well now (which is why he's been dropped).

In short, I don't like Reid.
Click to expand...

Who has "worked him out"?

Do you honestly believe the tripe you are posting?:o

The ONLY reason Jack is out of the team is because of his limited preparation in the pre-season where he required shoulder surgery.

As you can see by his form in the twos, second game in the VFL he kicks a bag of 5. That makes it 8 goals from 2 games for the Jack Attack and you want to waste this kind of output and play him in defence?

Ask any opposition supporter, coach, player etc. who they fear more, Anthony or Dawes and they will all pick Jack.

You will soon see why Jack is just about our best key forward when he returns.
 
I'm disgusted by the lack of "shit-down" in this thread. Clearly, many teams have been shat down from a great height. The interesting thing for me is, the one team we've played whose gameplan should be able to combat the shit-down defence most effectively, actually resulted in the most Benny Hill music... that being Essendon. Hopefully, we can also shit down the team on whose gameplan the Bombers model themselves, ie. Geelong.
 
The Royal Sampler said:
I'm disgusted by the lack of "shit-down" in this thread. Clearly, many teams have been shat down from a great height. The interesting thing for me is, the one team we've played whose gameplan should be able to combat the shit-down defence most effectively, actually resulted in the most Benny Hill music... that being Essendon. Hopefully, we can also shit down the team on whose gameplan the Bombers model themselves, ie. Geelong.
Click to expand...
Ok then, from this day forward our 2-3-3-3-3-2-1 zone formation will be known as the shit-down defensive formation
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Whilst it is pleasing to see how well we are using the zone in combination with man-on-man style football the leaders on field last week were a bit remiss in as much as when Carlscum got that run on we should have immediately gone man-on-man to shut them down. Had we done that to weather the storm then when we clicked up a gear again, we would have been doing it from a better position than a 3 point lead. This would have meant a better % percentage boost than we actually got. Our boys are learning but if they take that long against a good side they may get into strife.
 
DaveyWavey said:
I'm not talking about shifting a player - he's currently not in the team. It's apparent that we can't play him up forward with Dawes there, so why not utilize him in the backline. He's a better player than Reid (surer hands and better kick (a LOT better)). Better to have him on the ground than off it.

Besides, he was our leading goal kicker because nobody knew who the hell he was. They've worked him out pretty well now (which is why he's been dropped).

In short, I don't like Reid.
Click to expand...

Jack was our leading goal kicker because he was our most accurate gol kicker.
I can't see how " being worked out" can effect this?
No reason why JA, Cloke and Dawes can't all play up front, even if Dawes carries on his 2 game streak of reasonable form.:rolleyes:
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

TradeDraft
Roast End of Anonymous on the Internet
2 3
Replies
62
Views
3K
TradeDraft
TradeDraft

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom