Roast Risk-averse boundary-hugging ball movement

Remove this Banner Ad

iameviljez

iameviljez

Brownlow Medallist
Veteran 10k Posts
Oct 20, 2004
17,670
21,918
Brisbane
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Pompey
There is one thing that had me just about ready to put my foot through the TV last night - and it wasn't BT or Wayne Carey, it was our appallingly conservative ball movement.

This has been a really common theme when we've struggled this year - against Collingwood at the G, against Freo at home and again now with Adelaide - consistently we've tried to pick our way jammed up against one boundary line channel (usually the same one for multiple attempts in a row), and while I know it's a common enough risk-management strategy in the AFL, but we seem to adopt it more than any other team. Last night was a key example, where Adelaide consistently went for higher-risk passing into the middle or to the other pocket, and cut us open on multiple occasions.

A few times it half-bloody killed me to see us take possession under limited pressure just inside the opposition fifty, and immediately look to the boundary line with a 40m diagonal pass, only for the opposition to then close off all following options. Of course, it didn't help that the one time we went inboard Motlop dropped a pud and coughed up a goal.

This results in a few things:

  • It relies on winning five or so pack contests in a row to get an inside-fifty
  • It's too easy to have the footy spoiled over the line - and when we're getting smashed in clearances, a throw-in is NOT what we want
  • Hawkins and Menzel barely get a look-in up forward as the ball's only going in from one side
  • As soon as we've picked a side of the ground, sides pick us off in the knowledge that we won't switch
  • Motlop, Tuohy and Murdoch get absolutely no space in which to operate
  • It's incredibly slow so we barely catch sides out, and
  • It's shithouse to watch, it's not the Geelong way to play.
If we're winning the contest in close, it makes some sense - but if we're six goals down, for God's sakes, don't bomb your way along the bloody wing like we've got Wayne Carey on every line. Trust your foot skills and take a bloody risk - not every time, but at least enough to keep the opposition guessing. Rant over.
 
I share the frustration generally but take a look at the goals we kicked in the 2nd half - we were noticeably more dynamic moving the ball and it was very effective. Just shits me that it takes for us to be so far down before we commit to that style.
 
catempire said:
I share the frustration generally but take a look at the goals we kicked in the 2nd half - we were noticeably more dynamic moving the ball and it was very effective. Just shits me that it takes for us to be so far down before we commit to that style.
Click to expand...
I think that's a lot to do with why we've been so good when we've been down in the last, too - we've gone to Plan B and hey, who knew that might work.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

It isn't by choice, it is a result of being choked and stagnant of movement and options. The kick down the wing is a resort when there are no options or movement.

It's a bit large an arm wrestle. You will generally find the side that is on top is also controlling the centre and defending the opposition out wide.

It isn't a deliberate tactical choice, more the players choosing it due to poor execution of their game plan forcing them that way.
 
geelong_crazy26 said:
It isn't by choice, it is a result of being choked and stagnant of movement and options. The kick down the wing is a resort when there are no options or movement.

It's a bit large an arm wrestle. You will generally find the side that is on top is also controlling the centre and defending the opposition out wide.

It isn't a deliberate tactical choice, more the players choosing it due to poor execution of their game plan forcing them that way.
Click to expand...
I disagree - it's absolutely a choice. Even when under limited pressure against poorer sides, we still opt for the boundary line and, furthermore, kick it to the boundary side of our target. If a side like Essendon can switch into the corridor and play fast, we certainly can. Certainly, when watching live it seems highly evident that it's a deliberate tactical choice.
 
iameviljez said:
I disagree - it's absolutely a choice. Even when under limited pressure against poorer sides, we still opt for the boundary line and, furthermore, kick it to the boundary side of our target. If a side like Essendon can switch into the corridor and play fast, we certainly can. Certainly, when watching live it seems highly evident that it's a deliberate tactical choice.
Click to expand...

Can't say I agree. It is a tactic in the sense it's planned, but it isn't our go to.. it's the alternative if say plan A,B,C aren't working or available. Some aspects of tactics need a lot working for them and a collaborative effort to get going. This just doesn't happen in all instances or even entire matches sometimes.

We seem to be a very good team at controlling the ball and moving it through the centre as well as the wings ( we have become more unpredictable this year).

If we are not generating run and have poor momentum and no options being created, then trying to go up the middle and fast is probably the quickest and surest way to find yourself 10+ goals down in a hurry.

its a complicated topic, worthy of a thread. But it's a bit more than your original post and it does have great benefits for going long down the line in circumstances.
 
iameviljez said:
There is one thing that had me just about ready to put my foot through the TV last night - and it wasn't BT or Wayne Carey, it was our appallingly conservative ball movement.

This has been a really common theme when we've struggled this year - against Collingwood at the G, against Freo at home and again now with Adelaide - consistently we've tried to pick our way jammed up against one boundary line channel (usually the same one for multiple attempts in a row), and while I know it's a common enough risk-management strategy in the AFL, but we seem to adopt it more than any other team. Last night was a key example, where Adelaide consistently went for higher-risk passing into the middle or to the other pocket, and cut us open on multiple occasions.

A few times it half-bloody killed me to see us take possession under limited pressure just inside the opposition fifty, and immediately look to the boundary line with a 40m diagonal pass, only for the opposition to then close off all following options. Of course, it didn't help that the one time we went inboard Motlop dropped a pud and coughed up a goal.

This results in a few things:

  • It relies on winning five or so pack contests in a row to get an inside-fifty
  • It's too easy to have the footy spoiled over the line - and when we're getting smashed in clearances, a throw-in is NOT what we want
  • Hawkins and Menzel barely get a look-in up forward as the ball's only going in from one side
  • As soon as we've picked a side of the ground, sides pick us off in the knowledge that we won't switch
  • Motlop, Tuohy and Murdoch get absolutely no space in which to operate
  • It's incredibly slow so we barely catch sides out, and
  • It's shithouse to watch, it's not the Geelong way to play.
If we're winning the contest in close, it makes some sense - but if we're six goals down, for God's sakes, don't bomb your way along the bloody wing like we've got Wayne Carey on every line. Trust your foot skills and take a bloody risk - not every time, but at least enough to keep the opposition guessing. Rant over.
Click to expand...
Lucky you don't go for Collingwood it's literally all they do.
 
geelong_crazy26 said:
Can't say I agree. It is a tactic in the sense it's planned, but it isn't our go to.. it's the alternative if say plan A,B,C aren't working or available. Some aspects of tactics need a lot working for them and a collaborative effort to get going. This just doesn't happen in all instances or even entire matches sometimes.

We seem to be a very good team at controlling the ball and moving it through the centre as well as the wings ( we have become more unpredictable this year).

If we are not generating run and have poor momentum and no options being created, then trying to go up the middle and fast is probably the quickest and surest way to find yourself 10+ goals down in a hurry.

its a complicated topic, worthy of a thread. But it's a bit more than your original post and it does have great benefits for going long down the line in circumstances.
Click to expand...
I agree with evil that it looks like sometimes we do it on purpose but also totally agree with this.
Also with Mackie out, Stewart out of touch a bit and no Thurlow it's harder to play through the middle with your best kicks off half back out.
Ruggles is another one that always tries to setup the play through the middle but overestimates his kicking a bit.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

iameviljez said:
There is one thing that had me just about ready to put my foot through the TV last night - and it wasn't BT or Wayne Carey, it was our appallingly conservative ball movement.

This has been a really common theme when we've struggled this year - against Collingwood at the G, against Freo at home and again now with Adelaide - consistently we've tried to pick our way jammed up against one boundary line channel (usually the same one for multiple attempts in a row), and while I know it's a common enough risk-management strategy in the AFL, but we seem to adopt it more than any other team. Last night was a key example, where Adelaide consistently went for higher-risk passing into the middle or to the other pocket, and cut us open on multiple occasions.

A few times it half-bloody killed me to see us take possession under limited pressure just inside the opposition fifty, and immediately look to the boundary line with a 40m diagonal pass, only for the opposition to then close off all following options. Of course, it didn't help that the one time we went inboard Motlop dropped a pud and coughed up a goal.

This results in a few things:

  • It relies on winning five or so pack contests in a row to get an inside-fifty
  • It's too easy to have the footy spoiled over the line - and when we're getting smashed in clearances, a throw-in is NOT what we want
  • Hawkins and Menzel barely get a look-in up forward as the ball's only going in from one side
  • As soon as we've picked a side of the ground, sides pick us off in the knowledge that we won't switch
  • Motlop, Tuohy and Murdoch get absolutely no space in which to operate
  • It's incredibly slow so we barely catch sides out, and
  • It's shithouse to watch, it's not the Geelong way to play.
If we're winning the contest in close, it makes some sense - but if we're six goals down, for God's sakes, don't bomb your way along the bloody wing like we've got Wayne Carey on every line. Trust your foot skills and take a bloody risk - not every time, but at least enough to keep the opposition guessing. Rant over.
Click to expand...
Its un geelong like football and its cos scott has a defensive mindset
 
catempire said:
I share the frustration generally but take a look at the goals we kicked in the 2nd half - we were noticeably more dynamic moving the ball and it was very effective. Just shits me that it takes for us to be so far down before we commit to that style.
Click to expand...

Who says we are committing to that style and aren't instead wanting to go that way the entire time?
Some people forget there are TWO teams out there....
They put as much work into stopping us as we do them, sometimes it works.
Seeing the game live you would understand it a bit more because you can see when we do "go slow" it's purely down to a well setup defensive system and a lack of options.
That seems to reduce the longer the game goes, hence we get on top.
 
Mad_Hatter said:
Who says we are committing to that style and aren't instead wanting to go that way the entire time?
Some people forget there are TWO teams out there....
They put as much work into stopping us as we do them, sometimes it works.
Seeing the game live you would understand it a bit more because you can see when we do "go slow" it's purely down to a well setup defensive system and a lack of options.
That seems to reduce the longer the game goes, hence we get on top.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying the opposition doesn't play a part but I would say our preferred style in plan A is as the OP describes.
 
Mad_Hatter said:
Who says we are committing to that style and aren't instead wanting to go that way the entire time?
Some people forget there are TWO teams out there....
They put as much work into stopping us as we do them, sometimes it works.
Seeing the game live you would understand it a bit more because you can see when we do "go slow" it's purely down to a well setup defensive system and a lack of options.
That seems to reduce the longer the game goes, hence we get on top.
Click to expand...
OP has been to games live and has observed quite differently to you. The reluctance to take inboard options until the chips are really down is quite prominent - and besides, if it were the case that it's just the opposition forcing us to play that way, then every side in the AFL would have the same style - but they certainly don't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top