Review Round 12 vs Richmond

[Janus]

I love how people seem to think that we went slow because it was a direction from the coaches, when it was actually determined by the following factors:

1. The umpires stopped calling Richmond for holding the ball when moving the ball in transition, which meant that our elite pressure went unrewarded and the Tigers were able to get the ball down into their forward 50 and lock it up.

2. This enabled them to setup their defensive zone and roll back into our defensive 50 easily, clogging up scoring opportunities and making it a slog.

3. Our players still can’t execute quick enough to beat a team rolling back, especially when they are fatigued.

 

[Pappagallo]

I love how people seem to think that we went slow because it was a direction from the coaches, when it was actually determined by the following factors:

1. The umpires stopped calling Richmond for holding the ball when moving the ball in transition, which meant that our elite pressure went unrewarded and the Tigers were able to get the ball down into their forward 50 and lock it up.

2. This enabled them to setup their defensive zone and roll back into our defensive 50 easily, clogging up scoring opportunities and making it a slog.

3. Our players still can’t execute quick enough to beat a team rolling back, especially when they are fatigued.

This doesn’t account for all the times we intercepted their forward thrusts and instead of taking advantage of them being out of position defensively we held it up. It was a major talking point between the commentators during the second half.

 

[Janus]

This doesn’t account for all the times we intercepted their forward thrusts and instead of taking advantage of them being out of position defensively we held it up. It was a major talking point between the commentators during the second half.

See point 3.

 

[Pappagallo]

See point 3.

It’s an intercept. They’re not rolling back. Yet.

 

[*PAF]

Saw the last qtrvreplay this morning. Commentators made mention of howmany holdingbthe ball decisions the umps got wrong last night.
I was sure that I didn't dream all of them up, and there it was confirmed.

I thought the umpiring was consistent and that to me means it was well umpired.
Umpiring pisses people off when it's inconsistent and no one knows what to expect.

 

[Young Gun #6]

I love how people seem to think that we went slow because it was a direction from the coaches, when it was actually determined by the following factors:

1. The umpires stopped calling Richmond for holding the ball when moving the ball in transition, which meant that our elite pressure went unrewarded and the Tigers were able to get the ball down into their forward 50 and lock it up.

2. This enabled them to setup their defensive zone and roll back into our defensive 50 easily, clogging up scoring opportunities and making it a slog.

3. Our players still can’t execute quick enough to beat a team rolling back, especially when they are fatigued.

I think I agree and would like to touch on further that without the holding the balls, there were more ball-ups and congestion so even when we did get it forward it wasn’t fast play from a holding the ball, it was by a clearance from a stoppage where the Richmond defense had already flooded back.

We had it locked in our forward line for so long on many occasions in the second half but couldn’t get a goal because ther was at least 25-30 players in the forward 50.

What was excellent to see was, a heap of times they would get it out but what would usually end up in a decent chance for opposition players in the past, was stopped by a mark by DBJ or Houston about 70 out from our goal, on so many occasions.

 

[missionpossible]

To beat richmond you need to chip the ball through the midfield before hitting a leading player or kicking long to a one one over the back or win the ball out of the centre and hope they don't mark it. The first half we could do this.
It was interesting to see richmond go to a 6 man backline when it got to 5 goals each. Once it got to 8 goals to 5 they went to an 8 man backline.
In the second quarter we were helped by richmond dropping all their defensive marks.

 

[Janus]

It’s an intercept. They’re not rolling back. Yet.

Which was my point. We don’t execute quick enough to beat them rolling back. That means transitioning from defence to attack.

 

[Pappagallo]

Which was my point. We don’t execute quick enough to beat them rolling back. That means transitioning from defence to attack.

Again, it’s an intercept. Everyone is out of position, they have no defensive set up at that point. I don’t believe for one second that every single one of our players is incapable of reacting to that obvious opportunity unless they are being instructed not to do so.

 

[Tibbs]

I love how people seem to think that we went slow because it was a direction from the coaches, when it was actually determined by the following factors:
....
3. Our players still can’t execute quick enough to beat a team rolling back, especially when they are fatigued.

This is absolutely true. As mentioned by a poster previously, it is a mental (confidence) thing IMO. When we are up and about, we move the ball on very quickly, and are very hard to beat. For some reason we are going into our shells, and players are stopping and allowing the oppo time to reset. It happened so many times on Friday night, I was yelling at players to take opportunities to move it on. They would constantly stop, faff around, miss opportunities to move the ball on to running players, and this more than often then resulted in this chippy chippy crap stuff, and eventual turnovers!

So maddening! When we play instinctively, we are an unbeatable team!

 

[Tibbs]

This is absolutely true. As mentioned by a poster previously, it is a mental (confidence) thing IMO. When we are up and about, we move the ball on very quickly, and are very hard to beat. For some reason we are going into our shells, and players are stopping and allowing the oppo time to reset. It happened so many times on Friday night, I was yelling at players to take opportunities to move it on. They would constantly stop, faff around, miss opportunities to move the ball on to running players, and this more than often then resulted in this chippy chippy crap stuff, and eventual turnovers!

So maddening! When we play instinctively, we are an unbeatable team!

This negativity aside, I find it humorous that most posters had us being beaten by the Tigers. Some talking about a 90 point drubbing! Lo and behold, Port win, beating the reigning premiers, albeit with an ugly second half, and the same said posters then come back and complain like stuffed pigs! Go figure!

I do get that we are no where near our best. Our skills are off, our kicking is off, we seem to lack confidence and are hesitating, a number of important players are still not in form, and we are missing Marshall, an important link in our forward chain. But rather than brood in negativity, I see this as A HUGE positive. There is so much more to come from this team. We as supporters, coaches, and players, need to hang in there, I sense it all coming together, and when it does, it is going to be blindingly good!

 

[Janus]

Again, it’s an intercept. Everyone is out of position, they have no defensive set up at that point. I don’t believe for one second that every single one of our players is incapable of reacting to that obvious opportunity unless they are being instructed not to do so.

And I don't believe for one second that our coaches are instructing our players to hold the ball up and wait for the opposition to set up their defence before moving the ball forward. It's a fundamental, basic aspect of any game plan to do so. I think it's more that in those situations our players are still trying to move the ball into the corridor first instead of simply getting the ball forward as quickly as possible and exploiting the holes in the opposition defence.

Let me give you a classic example.

Dougal Howard takes an intercept mark on the outer half back flank. Jared Polec is free down the line with no one around him, because Richmond have pushed forward. He sees Polec, but instead of hitting the open player, he waits and looks inboard to where Richmond have a whole bunch of players. By the time he actually decides that Polec is the best option, 5 seconds later, there are three Tigers surrounding him and the ball gets spoiled out of bounds.

All it required was for him to hit up the line. Then, Polec could either go for a run, hit another target in the corridor, whatever. The primary goal of an intercept should be to get the ball forward straight away while retaining possession.

 

[1954]

Someone in an earlier post suggested that maybe Kern/Bassett want to perfect the defensive stuff first and extra goal scoring will come later.
Hopefully that will be the case, but I am far from convinced that is the plan, and as others have suggested that over defensive stuff allows the oppo to stay close enough to never be out of the game, plus even the close wins do sfa for our ordinary percentage.

 

[Pappagallo]

And I don't believe for one second that our coaches are instructing our players to hold the ball up and wait for the opposition to set up their defence before moving the ball forward. It's a fundamental, basic aspect of any game plan to do so. I think it's more that in those situations our players are still trying to move the ball into the corridor first instead of simply getting the ball forward as quickly as possible and exploiting the holes in the opposition defence.

Let me give you a classic example.

Dougal Howard takes an intercept mark on the outer half back flank. Jared Polec is free down the line with no one around him, because Richmond have pushed forward. He sees Polec, but instead of hitting the open player, he waits and looks inboard to where Richmond have a whole bunch of players. By the time he actually decides that Polec is the best option, 5 seconds later, there are three Tigers surrounding him and the ball gets spoiled out of bounds.

All it required was for him to hit up the line. Then, Polec could either go for a run, hit another target in the corridor, whatever. The primary goal of an intercept should be to get the ball forward straight away while retaining possession.

When one player does it, yeah, it’s probably the player. When the entire team does it in unison, well, you know the answer. Even if it goes against your predetermined position and don’t want to see it for what it is.

 

[SureBuddy]

Watching the game on TV, to me it felt like Richmond started flooding to stop our offense and tried to play pure counter attack. Hence our goals drying up.

 

[Janus]

When one player does it, yeah, it’s probably the player. When the entire team does it in unison, well, you know the answer. Even if it goes against your predetermined position and don’t want to see it for what it is.

Again, I'm going to say that no coach, in ANY sport, would instruct their players to hold up the play when there is an opportunity to attack quickly.

Let's put it this way: a team that is instructed to hold the ball up wouldn't be looking around for options as soon as they intercept, nor would they get back to take their kick quickly, because they would want to extract the maximum amount of time to enable the offence to get into position.

I see what we are doing quite clearly, because I'm not basing my opinion on the supposition that our coaches are inherently flawed due to wanting to concentrate on defence first.

 

[Pablo Escobar]

Perhaps the price paid for the members convention should include a mid-season review. Is their plan not working or is it a planned backing off until they get certain aspects perfected first?

 

[Pappagallo]

Again, I'm going to say that no coach, in ANY sport, would instruct their players to hold up the play when there is an opportunity to attack quickly.

Let's put it this way: a team that is instructed to hold the ball up wouldn't be looking around for options as soon as they intercept, nor would they get back to take their kick quickly, because they would want to extract the maximum amount of time to enable the offence to get into position.

I see what we are doing quite clearly, because I'm not basing my opinion on the supposition that our coaches are inherently flawed due to wanting to concentrate on defence first.

I think we’ve officially descended into “I know you are but what am I?!”

It’s a nice day outside so I might go and enjoy it.

 

[*PAF]

Again, I'm going to say that no coach, in ANY sport, would instruct their players to hold up the play when there is an opportunity to attack quickly.

Let's put it this way: a team that is instructed to hold the ball up wouldn't be looking around for options as soon as they intercept, nor would they get back to take their kick quickly, because they would want to extract the maximum amount of time to enable the offence to get into position.

I see what we are doing quite clearly, because I'm not basing my opinion on the supposition that our coaches are inherently flawed due to wanting to concentrate on defence first.

There is a difference between flawed and having a preferred strategy.

We are not flawed if we play the game we are trained for. People might agree or disagree on strategy but that is different to being flawed.

Flawed is when players either go against or cannot execute coaching instruction and unless mistaken you are the one implying that.

A few years back we weren't amongst the best at stoppages but noways we are and got there in large part by having beefed up our midfield. That plus limiting the number of goals the opposition kicks is our main focus.

 

[missionpossible]

Watching the game on TV, to me it felt like Richmond started flooding to stop our offense and tried to play pure counter attack. Hence our goals drying up.

That has been how Richmond have played for the last 1.5 seasons. Butler. Castagna and co's leg speed and fitness means they run teams off their legs in the first three quarters and then litterally run away from the game.

 

[OneGreatClub]

Watching the game on TV, to me it felt like Richmond started flooding to stop our offense and tried to play pure counter attack. Hence our goals drying up.

I. wish we had done that in the 07 GF

 

[yepits2020]

From my seat in the esern stand i would have said:
Hill 75%
Eastern stand 90%
Southern 90%
Western top tier 90%
Western lower tiers - not in my field of vision
Total 44k to 45k FWIW.

Sounds fair

 

[Peck]

I think we’ve officially descended into “I know you are but what am I?!”

It’s a nice day outside so I might go and enjoy it.

sammy gray said that we didn’t go defensive at all.

He is clearly hiding our tactics from opposition.

#portsconspiracy
#hinkleyball
#yepconfirmed

 

[portly]

Again, I'm going to say that no coach, in ANY sport, would instruct their players to hold up the play when there is an opportunity to attack quickly.

Let's put it this way: a team that is instructed to hold the ball up wouldn't be looking around for options as soon as they intercept, nor would they get back to take their kick quickly, because they would want to extract the maximum amount of time to enable the offence to get into position.

I see what we are doing quite clearly, because I'm not basing my opinion on the supposition that our coaches are inherently flawed due to wanting to concentrate on defence first.

Your last paragraph.

Ken has said this twice, and only just recently Chad Wingard said exactly that. Specifically something close to "take care of defence and the goals will take care of themselves".

Attack-wise KenBassNicks' game plan is, as you say, inherently flawed.

 

[Peck]

Your last paragraph.

Ken has said this twice, and only just recently Chad Wingard said exactly that. Specifically something close to "take care of defence and the goals will take care of themselves".

Attack-wise KenBassNicks' game plan is, as you say, inherently flawed.

He says that because for 95% of the game you don’t have the ball in your hands, and for 50% of it you are playing defence. If you are having a crap day and you defend well it’s a hell of a lot better than otherwise.

It’s equivalent to, “get the fundamentals right and the rest will come”. Defense IS the most important aspect of our game, and in fact most sports, because it’s something that doesn’t rely nearly as much on luck as scoring does.

We actually play very aggressive when we have the ball, and particularly at centre bounces.

I mean honestly do people want us to start playing like Melbourne or Essendon or something? Teams that rely purely on winning the ball more than their opponent and attacking, also teams that have achieved nothing.

Geelong have been one of the most defensive teams in the competition for the last 10 years, same for Hawthorn and Sydney. Geelong are also extremely aggressive when they have the ball unlike Hawthorn and Sydney.

That is clearly the gameplan we are trying to replicate. Defensive without the ball, aggressive with the ball, which is why our opponents flood the crap out of the middle of the ground against us.