AFL Autopsy RND 18: Essington crapped on by the Cats

[Nicholas61]

I think good list management begins with an honest look at where you are at.

The positive is Geelong are the reigning premiers and we got there best effort both games this year so it’s an accurate away to see how we stack up against the best teams in the comp.

They did this to the Swans in the grand final. This is the level you need to be at to compete and win games in September.

Whining about wanting success because We’ve been so unsuccessful for so long isn’t a path to success. Success has to be earned. It’s not like being wealthy where that’s just given to you based on the past success of others.

They aren’t as bad as they showed last night and they aren’t where they need to be are both true statements.

There’s lessons to be learned from this and if they are it will make this team much better moving forward.

Geelong definitely hitting their straps. They did it to Brisbane as well in the finals - they seemed to have loose players everywhere and Brisbane couldn't move the ball without being strangled, same as last night. Is that aerobic capacity as much as gameplan?

 

[MiguelM]

OK, trying to stop potting the list, it is bloody hard., breathe!

One thing that stood out was we had no space through the middle and no one breaking lines from defence. To make it worse, we kicked wide (well as wide as you can on that poor excuse for an oval) and had nobody even remotely looking like clunking a contested mark. We need a genuine tough line breaker as well as marking options. I like Kelly but he is so slow.

Daicos, Quaynor type would be nice.

 

[jdstorm]

Geelong definitely hitting their straps. They did it to Brisbane as well in the finals - they seemed to have loose players everywhere and Brisbane couldn't move the ball without being strangled, same as last night. Is that aerobic capacity as much as gameplan?

I’d say it’s footy inteligence more than anything else. It’s the angles that they run. Using the ball in a way that puts the receiver into space, attacking the ball on an intercept path vs waiting for it to get to you ect, being able to switch defensive roles when caught out of position ect

Then it’s the physicality and ability for 6-8 of their players to win virtually any 1 on 1 contest.

They are a smart team and a strong team with great skills and that Collective IQ raises the standard of anyone new who joins.

 

[Vindicater]

OK, trying to stop potting the list, it is bloody hard., breathe!

One thing that stood out was we had no space through the middle and no one breaking lines from defence. To make it worse, we kicked wide (well as wide as you can on that poor excuse for an oval) and had nobody even remotely looking like clunking a contested mark. We need a genuine tough line breaker as well as marking options. I like Kelly but he is so slow.

Daicos, Quaynor type would be nice.

We should get into Holmes from Geelong. Would be perfect for this role. Redman, Holmes and McGrath coming out of back 50 with Ridley as another kicking weapon.

Zerk and Laverde playing keeper.

 

[ant555]

OK, trying to stop potting the list, it is bloody hard., breathe!

One thing that stood out was we had no space through the middle and no one breaking lines from defence. To make it worse, we kicked wide (well as wide as you can on that poor excuse for an oval) and had nobody even remotely looking like clunking a contested mark. We need a genuine tough line breaker as well as marking options. I like Kelly but he is so slow.

Daicos, Quaynor type would be nice.

Kelly is not the issue. Heppell is the one playing in the spot you need a line breaking defender.

 

[MiguelM]

Key stats. Cats above their average in all, us below. Nutshell!

 

[Runk]

 

[MiguelM]

Kelly is not the issue. Heppell is the one playing in the spot you need a line breaking defender.

I agree, he defends well just needs someone running through to dish off to.

 

[Alberto_Magnifico]

Cats kicked 105 of their points from turnovers and Bombers scored more in the first quarter last week than this whole match, jeez I'm glad I missed this one, sounds absolutely horrific.

 

[outersanctum]

What I am enjoying the most is how disappointed I feel.. and knowing that I haven't felt that most of the season. This team has been very consistent this year and even in the losses we have shown effort. Last night was the first time all season that we were absolutely non-competitive from start to finish. And there are probably a lot reasons for that.

Hopefully Scott uses this to show the group how far they have left to climb but without losing the confidence they have built to be better. I also think that Scott has a LOT he can learn from our two games against the Cats this year.

Selecting Weid week after week is hurting this squad. He needs a rest. Young bryan showed that he could play as a tall foward/rotating ruck or possible we use langford as the 2nd tall. We are playing a man down by continuing to select a player that is clearly out of his depth and out of form. 2nd thing I really didn't like was putting Zerk on Hawkins again. We learnt the first time that it doesn't work.. Why Ridley didn't get first crack is beyond me.. I am hopeful it was injury related and not hubris. Do not like Perkins in the middle to start the game.. I understand he wants him to run with players like Danger to learn the game but it was ugly. Those dump blind kicks out of contest are just useless against a team like Geelong. Literally gifted them the first four goals.

All that said, it is not like we lost to norf by 80.. Geelong are a good side and they play their home deck very well. Plenty of good teams would have been beaten last night. Hopefully the boys put the review to bed quickly and bounce back for a good contest against the dogs.

 

[Kong]

We need a big bodied defender !
Lack of midfield pressure does not change that one bit.
We need a goof FB and we need a CHF. The order they come in does not really matter as long as we get them in the next two years.
We need better marking midfielders and we need a small forward with X factor.
The issues are the same as most have been commenting on for the last 5 years. One year of Scott is not going to be some sort of magic wand.

I didn't watch last night's game, thankfully, but it's crazy to read analysis like this, given you've been saying very similarly for 5 or so years.

How the club are content to maintain their list/recruitment strategy when they've not had a balanced list in 20 years is perplexing.

 

[Vindicater]

Kelly is not the issue. Heppell is the one playing in the spot you need a line breaking defender.

Kelly is part of the overall problem

If we think of most teams running 7 defenders then the good teams have 4/5 defenders who are offensive weapons. We currently run 3 with Redman, Ridley and McGrath.

Realistically we can only run 3 of Zerk, Heppell, Lav and Kelly but preferably two.

There is a reason we look better with Hind running around instead of Kelly although I do agree we could replace Heppell before Kelly.

 

[Nicholas61]

Key stats. Cats above their average in all, us below. Nutshell!
View attachment 1739845

View attachment 1739846

View attachment 1739848

View attachment 1739849

At one stage the marks inside 50 was 10-0. They seemed to have players everywhere when going forward whereas our forwards were being worn like a glove. Then the blind dump kicks going straight to Tom Stewart seemed preternatural.

 

[Don_Gia]

Smelling the roses that do come along now and then is better than perpetual misery.

I take your point though. I wonder if the less patient amongst us are more or less likely to have seen any Essendon success in their lifetimes?

I am probably one of the slightly impatient ones…I grew up expecting a flag every 7 years or so after 2000 lol…I thought 2006 was a hiccup only and wouldn’t set in a 18 year run of rubbish :/

But I’m also happy with this build we are embarking on.

 

[jdstorm]

Kelly is part of the overall problem

If we think of most teams running 7 defenders then the good teams have 4/5 defenders who are offensive weapons. We currently run 3 with Redman, Ridley and McGrath.

Realistically we can only run 3 of Zerk, Heppell, Lav and Kelly but preferably two.

There is a reason we look better with Hind running around instead of Kelly although I do agree we could replace Heppell before Kelly.

McGrath belongs on that second list. His usage is awful.

 

[Nicholas61]

being able to switch defensive roles when caught out of position ect

Appreciated your entire post. This part was very noticeable. You could see who their outlet player was going to be when they got possession and a large percentage of our guys (and I have noticed this with Perk) just stand there and I think Ant555 calls this ball watching. Merrett was onto them and would try closing down the escape avenue.

 

[Vindicater]

McGrath belongs on that second list. His usage is awful.

I think his speed makes him a weapon not his kicking.

If we had better users around him he would be able to use his pace even more. It is noticeable that the pressure forwards from other teams peel off Kelly/Heppell and clamp to Redman/McGrath/Hind as they know those guys will break the line.

 

[ant555]

Kelly is part of the overall problem

If we think of most teams running 7 defenders then the good teams have 4/5 defenders who are offensive weapons. We currently run 3 with Redman, Ridley and McGrath.

Realistically we can only run 3 of Zerk, Heppell, Lav and Kelly but preferably two.

There is a reason we look better with Hind running around instead of Kelly although I do agree we could replace Heppell before Kelly.

I think if you look through the good teams they do not all run 4 or 5 attacking defenders. It also depends on what game plan they run.
On top of this how the defenders attack is dictated by what they see in front of them. I was keeping stats on Kelly's possessions last week and when he had an option he went without slowing play. When he did not he held the ball. I saw him only miss two opportunities that had risk but may have paid off with quicker play.
Then there is the fact that the game plan is not to actually go racing out of defense with no options in front of you. Rightly or wrongly our current game plan is defend / intercept in the back 50. Take the short kicks out of defense and set up the forward handball through the middle. That is the meat and veg of our plan. It is not without its issues as in games like last night it comes undone but it is what we are running. One reason we do run this style of game is to control the footy when we can as if we go to plan B and go down the line we are not a great marking side. Last night the wheels came right off because we turned to footy over too much and they scored going back the other way easily.

I am only replacing Kelly in defense when we are running a different style game plan and that is not going to happen as Scott is in stage one of setting up the current plan.

 

[MiguelM]

Ling interviewing Ridley with that smug smirk was the last straw!

 

[ant555]

Appreciated your entire post. This part was very noticeable. You could see who their outlet player was going to be when they got possession and a large percentage of our guys (and I have noticed this with Perk) just stand there and I think Ant555 calls this ball watching. Merrett was onto them and would try closing down the escape avenue.

Defensive transition but yes ball watching. They are not thinking about the next phase of play quickly enough and by time it registers the horse has bolted.

 

[MiguelM]

I think if you look through the good teams they do not all run 4 or 5 attacking defenders. It also depends on what game plan they run.
On top of this how the defenders attack is dictated by what they see in front of them. I was keeping stats on Kelly's possessions last week and when he had an option he went without slowing play. When he did not he held the ball. I saw him only miss two opportunities that had risk but may have paid off with quicker play.
Then there is the fact that the game plan is not to actually go racing out of defense with no options in front of you. Rightly or wrongly our current game plan is defend / intercept in the back 50. Take the short kicks out of defense and set up the forward handball through the middle. That is the meat and veg of our plan. It is not without its issues as in games like last night it comes undone but it is what we are running. One reason we do run this style of game is to control the footy when we can as if we go to plan B and go down the line we are not a great marking side. Last night the wheels came right off because we turned to footy over too much and they scored going back the other way easily.

I am only replacing Kelly in defense when we are running a different style game plan and that is not going to happen as Scott is in stage one of setting up the current plan.

There were lots of our kicks that fell short and went straight to the Cats too. I suppose pressure does that.

 

[ant555]

I think his speed makes him a weapon not his kicking.

If we had better users around him he would be able to use his pace even more. It is noticeable that the pressure forwards from other teams peel off Kelly/Heppell and clamp to Redman/McGrath/Hind as they know those guys will break the line.

Part of our game plan break down with this last night is the midfield who are supposed to be protecting the corridor are also supposed to push back inside 50 to help defend and provide run from the back half.

 

[Vindicater]

I think if you look through the good teams they do not all run 4 or 5 attacking defenders. It also depends on what game plan they run.
On top of this how the defenders attack is dictated by what they see in front of them. I was keeping stats on Kelly's possessions last week and when he had an option he went without slowing play. When he did not he held the ball. I saw him only miss two opportunities that had risk but may have paid off with quicker play.
Then there is the fact that the game plan is not to actually go racing out of defense with no options in front of you. Rightly or wrongly our current game plan is defend / intercept in the back 50. Take the short kicks out of defense and set up the forward handball through the middle. That is the meat and veg of our plan. It is not without its issues as in games like last night it comes undone but it is what we are running. One reason we do run this style of game is to control the footy when we can as if we go to plan B and go down the line we are not a great marking side. Last night the wheels came right off because we turned to footy over too much and they scored going back the other way easily.

I am only replacing Kelly in defense when we are running a different style game plan and that is not going to happen as Scott is in stage one of setting up the current plan.

I did not say attacking defenders. I said weapons.

May for example is not an attacking defender but his kick is a weapon.

 

[ant555]

I did not say attacking defenders. I said weapons.

May for example is not an attacking defender but his kick is a weapon.

You still need options to kick to. You still need players up the ground to be able to mark it in a one on one contest. May may be a weapon with his kicking but he is not in our side with our rucks or KPF in front of him. On top of that their number priority in the back half is defending / intercept . If this is the argument then yes we do need to upgrade not just Heppell but Kelly and Laverde and BZK and McGarth. Redman and Ridley are the only two weapons who also defend.
That is not happening short term.

 

[jdstorm]

I think his speed makes him a weapon not his kicking.

If we had better users around him he would be able to use his pace even more. It is noticeable that the pressure forwards from other teams peel off Kelly/Heppell and clamp to Redman/McGrath/Hind as they know those guys will break the line.

I like his speed but think it’s useless offensively if the disposal will be ineffective. McGrath is great at getting into the space to do things off HB.

He gets into many of the same positions elite users do. See Daicos and Sheezel ripping the competition apart generating multiple Give and Go opportunities on 100M running chains against whoever they wanted. Mcgrath Generates the same opportunities But that’s where it falls apart.
Mcgrath at present doesn’t use the ball well. Him having the ball in hand doing anything other than hand balling to a better user seems like a negative outcome.