Review Round 14, 2023 - Brisbane Lions vs. Sydney

[Grasshopper17]

Our game plan sucks BIG TIME.

It genuinely inhibits players natural football instincts.

It doesn’t allow for taking the game on.

It doesn’t allow for any run and carry, unless we’re completely out in open space.

And we commit way to many players goal side in our forward 50. Which is why teams transition out of our D50 so easily.

This is really interesting, and I agree with it in part.

Very early on it, being at the ground it became evident we were just going to go long inside 50 to Fort or whoever else was there. Yes, it's predictable, yes the opposition know exactly what we're gonna do... But you still have to be able to stop it.

Darcy Fort took 1 mark for the night, which came in the third quarter, but got first (and only hands basically) to about 5 or 6 in the first half. If he marks even half of those, Sydney maybe are forced to take Blakey off him, and suddenly Fort is not nearly as exposed defensively by Blakey's run (not that he was terrible in that regard - better than Gunston anyway).

Anyway I thought we were just starting to get on top and figure out where and how to move to accommodate Fort rather than Gunston in our forward line... Then the last quarter starts, and Rayner goes to the goal square!

Now, don't get me wrong... I've been a big advocate for Rayner playing that tall forward role, but if you're gonna play it, then actually PLAY IT! He spent the whole last quarter getting sucked right up the ground, such that in the last quarter our attacking forays consisted of either: Charlie (and only Charlie) running back with the flight of a ball opposed to a bloke who had beaten him pretty comprehensively all night. OR we got repeat entries but our forward line was so crowded that we were forced to take pot shots from long range under pressure, all of which missed.

So having seen it all in action, I think Fort is absolutely worth persisting with as our tall focal point, at least for the next couple of weeks. And I wouldn't be subbing him out either. I felt like he was becoming more threatening the longer the game went (the big men don't get any shorter). I could be swayed if we're playing a game where we simply can't get out of our back half, and clearly need more run. Then Rayner needs to actually play the role, and not end up in the midfield. Hopefully it's something he is still working on learning.

However I think the way we use our smalls inside 50 needs a fair bit of work, which I guess you are alluding to with your last comment. Fully ready for the stats to prove me fully wrong on this, but I'd be betting that almost all our goals came from repeat 50 entries. Whenever the first one came in we'd often have a pretty open forward line, but usually the end result was a forward 50 stoppage at best. Cue congestion.

Possibly we need to be a little bit courageous, and not blindly follow our opponent inside 50. For a start, I think if we do that against St Kilda it will end in disaster, because they will beat us back the other way. By courage, I mean, be willing to be outnumbered inside forward 50, and trust the pressure from the blokes we DO have in there, to force either turnovers or hacked misdirected kicks to our spare players.

I guess this already happens to an extent, but what if we take the nuclear option, and see what happens if we only commit 5 or 6 blokes to an inside 50 stoppage. Everyone else, on or outside 50, or guarding the corridor. Maybe St Kilda has 12 inside 50 at the same stoppage. Why not see how we go? Can we put enough pressure to stop them chaining out by hand? Surely it won't be any less successful than the congestion we had on Friday night.

In general play I'd also like to see us more clearly define the role our smalls play. I think at times it's all a bit generic. What if we said to Charlie and Linc, "Forty is your man. Wherever he is, your job is to get front and centre to his marking contests." We might say the same thing to Cam and one winger for Joe. Zac and the other winger for Eric. Obviously interchanges and other in-game positional swaps come into this, but really specialise the roles, because I feel like at times some of our guys are a bit unsure of what to do and where to be. It's a bloody hard sport to play at times... Let's make things a bit easier and give these guys one less thing to worry about.

Then, once play has passed your tall player, don't blindly rush forward... Form part of that defensive wall/zone to inhibit any opposition rebound. I do agree with you in that we allowed too much transition from one end of the ground to the other, and it was as much Sydney's poor decision making and skill level going inside 50 as our great defence that prevented them from taking full advantage.



Only other thing I'd say with regards to your post is that I noticed probably as much if not more run from behind and handball receives after marks on Friday night, than in basically all our other games combined this year. To me it was a clear shift and I really liked it. The more we can bring McKenna, Wilmot, Coleman, even Zorko and McCluggage, into this phase of play, the more dangerous we will be. It will give us the opportunity to bypass our tall forwards going forward, opening up other avenues to goal.

 

[Grasshopper17]

None the wiser. Eric sprightly. Umps shitely.

Thought we got very much the rub of the green from the men in fluoro on Friday night. Bulldogs-esque at stages.

 

[Grasshopper17]

Would like to keep Lohmann in somehow.

I think we're going to need Sharp's run on a fast Docklands track against a team which plays its best footy when they are allowed to switch the play and outnumber on the fat side.

But I didn't mind Lohmann's game. I guess the only question mark is whether a guy like Bailey is able to play that amount of time in midfield regularly, particularly in a game played at a faster pace. If he's not, it forces a bit of a concertina effect across multiple positions (including the wing) and the end result may be that we have too many forwards.

 

[Mr Ripper]

Thought we got very much the rub of the green from the men in fluoro on Friday night. Bulldogs-esque at stages.

I only ever talk about umpires from the point of view of how they're affecting the sport, not whether they've been mean/nice to my team. Hence why I haven't been complimentary since about 1989.

 

[Grasshopper17]

My main issue is our kick down the line style needs more contested marks. I understand that at times, like tonight, this is a difficult ask as the ball was being bombed out of the backline in every direction, especially in the second qtr.

I thought one of the real pluses of the game was that 5-10 minute period in the second quarter when the ball was camped in our defensive 50. We stood up to the heat and in the end went down the other end for a goal of our own. Reminiscent in that way of our Qualifying Final win over Richmond in 2020.

 

[Grasshopper17]

Eric Hipwood has been a very easy target for commentators and keyboard warriors for some time. His kicking has been wayward, his marking substandard, he has been criticised for not attacking contests or making poor choices or not defending sufficiently. Some of that was warranted at times but he, like so many tall forwards, especially those who are lighter-framed, needed time to develop.

His efforts to get to and impact contests last night was excellent. He leads hard and to the right spots. He runs up the ground to get involved, he is so much more aware of space than he used to be. He is often putting pressure on even if he can’t make the tackle. It has been some time since he looked lethargic while defending.

He was never ready-made like many other talls who are drafted with the expectation that they eventually will be too tall and too strong for defenders. Hipwood came into the team very slight, very young and very raw partly out of desperation for a tall forward presence, lost an important developmental year to an ACL, has struggled to find a role aligned with his strengths. But more and more he is beginning to play the game to those strengths.

He will perhaps never be a big unit who can dominate a game regularly, but if he keeps going he has the ability to develop for a few more years yet. He plays in an unusual forward line that has no one dominant presence like many other teams, but he is playing his role well and opposition coaches will increasingly have to think about the right match up for him. Slowly, frustratingly so at times, his goal kicking is becoming more consistent.

And yet that crazy woman behind me still insists that he should be dropped every week!

Yep. All this. And he was the one guy in the first half that looked like taking a contested mark when Joe and Forty were struggling in that regard.

 

[Grasshopper17]

We seem to be getting sucked into the contest again... so many of our players are over comitting and leaving opposition players unmanned... it lead to so many breakaways by the Swan's last night. Maybe it's a confidence thing after the last few weeks but we need to stamp that out again.

To be honest I thought we did this much better than in the Hawthorn game. We generally had one player going for the ball and others waiting on the outside to receive.

What did concern me however was the fact that so many of our guys going at the ball, went to ground, very often wilfully. And I feel like this definitely did impact our ability to inhibit the Swans whenever they broke away from the contest.

I'd like to see us spend time at training this week doing drills where the focus is on keeping our feet in the contest. This isn't as simple as it sounds... It's part balance, part positioning, part mindset, and part courage - the courage to say "I may get knocked over when I'm not ready for it but I'm ok with this".

Funnily enough, our club more than most is well positioned to get this right, because we have 3 Irishmen on our list. In Gaelic footy you are not allowed to play at the ball while you are on the ground. So I'd love to see a bit of initiative and have McKenna, Madden and Joyce play big parts in running these drills.

While you are on the ground you can't help on the spread.



By the way this is a completely separate issue to the amount of times our players simply slip over in broken play. Happens so often in so many games... Get the darn footwear right!!

 

[Grasshopper17]

My final comments on Friday night.

Generally I'd say our effort was pretty good for the whole game... Probably as close as we've come to a full four quarter effort for the season. I thought in the first quarter we lacked a bit of cohesion, but the longer the game went the more things opened up for us. If we can bring that level of effort every week I think we'll see a lot more consistency in results. But that's a BIG IF on what we've seen the last couple of years.

So the fact that we looked so porous defensively despite our effort level I think comes back to briztoon's concerns with our game plan. We won clearances 48-39 and we also won the intercept battle 76-69. Get both of those right and you usually set yourself up for a pretty good day. But we've still conceded 56 inside 50s, which is a lot, and we did well to limit them to only 22 shots.

Even in the last quarter, the Swans were able to generate so much space in their forward line, while ours was so congested. It really should have been the other way round; it actually looked like we were the ones chasing the game rather than Sydney. So that was strange and concerning.

Our skills also look to have deteriorated dramatically, often under little or no pressure. Ashcroft's kicking in particular was awful on Friday night... briztoon was it this bad in his draft year? Hopefully as he becomes more accustomed to the pace of AFL games he forms a better understanding of when he has time and space to use the ball.

Encouraging tho to see guys like Bailey and Berry play probably their best games for the season.

 

[Dalions]

This is really interesting, and I agree with it in part.

Very early on it, being at the ground it became evident we were just going to go long inside 50 to Fort or whoever else was there. Yes, it's predictable, yes the opposition know exactly what we're gonna do... But you still have to be able to stop it.

Darcy Fort took 1 mark for the night, which came in the third quarter, but got first (and only hands basically) to about 5 or 6 in the first half. If he marks even half of those, Sydney maybe are forced to take Blakey off him, and suddenly Fort is not nearly as exposed defensively by Blakey's run (not that he was terrible in that regard - better than Gunston anyway).

Anyway I thought we were just starting to get on top and figure out where and how to move to accommodate Fort rather than Gunston in our forward line... Then the last quarter starts, and Rayner goes to the goal square!

Now, don't get me wrong... I've been a big advocate for Rayner playing that tall forward role, but if you're gonna play it, then actually PLAY IT! He spent the whole last quarter getting sucked right up the ground, such that in the last quarter our attacking forays consisted of either: Charlie (and only Charlie) running back with the flight of a ball opposed to a bloke who had beaten him pretty comprehensively all night. OR we got repeat entries but our forward line was so crowded that we were forced to take pot shots from long range under pressure, all of which missed.

So having seen it all in action, I think Fort is absolutely worth persisting with as our tall focal point, at least for the next couple of weeks. And I wouldn't be subbing him out either. I felt like he was becoming more threatening the longer the game went (the big men don't get any shorter). I could be swayed if we're playing a game where we simply can't get out of our back half, and clearly need more run. Then Rayner needs to actually play the role, and not end up in the midfield. Hopefully it's something he is still working on learning.

However I think the way we use our smalls inside 50 needs a fair bit of work, which I guess you are alluding to with your last comment. Fully ready for the stats to prove me fully wrong on this, but I'd be betting that almost all our goals came from repeat 50 entries. Whenever the first one came in we'd often have a pretty open forward line, but usually the end result was a forward 50 stoppage at best. Cue congestion.

Possibly we need to be a little bit courageous, and not blindly follow our opponent inside 50. For a start, I think if we do that against St Kilda it will end in disaster, because they will beat us back the other way. By courage, I mean, be willing to be outnumbered inside forward 50, and trust the pressure from the blokes we DO have in there, to force either turnovers or hacked misdirected kicks to our spare players.

I guess this already happens to an extent, but what if we take the nuclear option, and see what happens if we only commit 5 or 6 blokes to an inside 50 stoppage. Everyone else, on or outside 50, or guarding the corridor. Maybe St Kilda has 12 inside 50 at the same stoppage. Why not see how we go? Can we put enough pressure to stop them chaining out by hand? Surely it won't be any less successful than the congestion we had on Friday night.

In general play I'd also like to see us more clearly define the role our smalls play. I think at times it's all a bit generic. What if we said to Charlie and Linc, "Forty is your man. Wherever he is, your job is to get front and centre to his marking contests." We might say the same thing to Cam and one winger for Joe. Zac and the other winger for Eric. Obviously interchanges and other in-game positional swaps come into this, but really specialise the roles, because I feel like at times some of our guys are a bit unsure of what to do and where to be. It's a bloody hard sport to play at times... Let's make things a bit easier and give these guys one less thing to worry about.

Then, once play has passed your tall player, don't blindly rush forward... Form part of that defensive wall/zone to inhibit any opposition rebound. I do agree with you in that we allowed too much transition from one end of the ground to the other, and it was as much Sydney's poor decision making and skill level going inside 50 as our great defence that prevented them from taking full advantage.



Only other thing I'd say with regards to your post is that I noticed probably as much if not more run from behind and handball receives after marks on Friday night, than in basically all our other games combined this year. To me it was a clear shift and I really liked it. The more we can bring McKenna, Wilmot, Coleman, even Zorko and McCluggage, into this phase of play, the more dangerous we will be. It will give us the opportunity to bypass our tall forwards going forward, opening up other avenues to goal.

To be honest, I wouldn’t be surprised if we drop Fort for one of Zorko or Clugga.
In the second half Fort spent barely any time in The forward line and I thought we functioned better as a forward line when he wasn’t in there and running with Joe and Hippy and 4 smaller types.

 

[Nathan Barley]

To be honest, I wouldn’t be surprised if we drop Fort for one of Zorko or Clugga.
In the second half Fort spent barely any time in The forward line and I thought we functioned better as a forward line when he wasn’t in there and running with Joe and Hippy and 4 smaller types.

Especially against the saints who don't have a second ruck

But if they do flood back we can't let them get intercept marks. Need to get the ball to ground and keep it in our forward line

 

[Dalions]

But if they do flood back we can't let them get intercept marks. Need to get the ball to ground and keep it in our forward line

No doubt they will, we will just need to be smarter with the way we deliver the ball into the forward line and do it quicker, Rather than waiting for them to flood before kicking high and long.
But with both Rayner and Lohmann in the forward line, they can both compete in the air.
I think we need to give it a go for a bit longer and for me, it is Fort who has to miss out to keep Lohmann in.

 

[Viceregal]

What is up with Fagan, does he personally not like Ryan Lester? Watched the presser and Fagan is running through the players who came into the side and talking about their performances. He mentions all of them apart from Lester. At one point he asks out loud, who else came into the team and instead of answering his own question and mentioning Lester, he blanks him. That was very very poor and very very disrespectful. What is Fagan’s problem with Lester?

It was mentioned that Fagan might read BigFooty.

If he does it may be that he is not talking about him as he has Lester-fatigue from reading soooooo many posts about him and his awesomeness and his every statistically tweakable comparison that the only thing he wants to do it to trade Lester out so he can stop reading about him...

And considering the question he was asked was about 'the new faces' and 'the younger guys' brought in I know Lester is a lot younger than we are but in terms of the playing list he ain't getting in any rising star line ups or best under 23 conversations etc and he has certainly played a chunk of games for us in the past so the only problem with his answer was how you interpreted it based not on the question he was actually asked but on the answer you wanted given.

 

[MSB ROYS]

It was mentioned that Fagan might read BigFooty.

If he does it may be that he is not talking about him as he has Lester-fatigue from reading soooooo many posts about him and his awesomeness and his every statistically tweakable comparison that the only thing he wants to do it to trade Lester out so he can stop reading about him...

And considering the question he was asked was about 'the new faces' and 'the younger guys' brought in I know Lester is a lot younger than we are but in terms of the playing list he ain't getting in any rising star line ups or best under 23 conversations etc and he has certainly played a chunk of games for us in the past so the only problem with his answer was how you interpreted it based not on the question he was actually asked but on the answer you wanted given.

For some perspective, Lester played in the Miracle on Grass!

 

[Bucking Beads]

2 points in the bank but we played so poorly. I'm way too negative on my team for where they're on the ladder. Feels like we're just waiting to get bundled out in an embarrassing fashion in the finals again.

 

[3KZ is Football]

For some perspective, Lester played in the Miracle on Grass!

Played? Played? I think you mean starred!

Considering his career, there are a lot of Champion footballers who can say with pride, “I played with Ryan Lester!”

 

[Grasshopper17]

To be honest, I wouldn’t be surprised if we drop Fort for one of Zorko or Clugga.
In the second half Fort spent barely any time in The forward line and I thought we functioned better as a forward line when he wasn’t in there and running with Joe and Hippy and 4 smaller types.

Ok this is interesting. I was at the school end so it was tricky to observe that in the third quarter. I did see Fort take a mark inside 50 and have a set shot in the third quarter so assumed he had keep playing down there.

Certainly agree RE the last quarter on Fort not being there, but I thought our forward line functioned terribly in the last, hence the amount of shots we were required to take from long range.

 

[almagoo]

Lester =

 

[Dalions]

Ok this is interesting. I was at the school end so it was tricky to observe that in the third quarter. I did see Fort take a mark inside 50 and have a set shot in the third quarter so assumed he had keep playing down there.

Certainly agree RE the last quarter on Fort not being there, but I thought our forward line functioned terribly in the last, hence the amount of shots we were required to take from long range.

My thoughts were based off the defensive aspect of the forward half.
Which gave the team better field position and a lot of shots at goal as a result.
Sydney pushed a lot of numbers back which always makes it tough for the talks to take marks.
The Saints will do the same.

 

[briztoon]

By the way this is a completely separate issue to the amount of times our players simply slip over in broken play. Happens so often in so many games... Get the darn footwear right!!

I said that on Friday night.

I wonder how many tats BRAB has?

The bloke next to me left the game early, as he had to drive back to the goldy.

 

[briztoon]

Our skills also look to have deteriorated dramatically, often under little or no pressure. Ashcroft's kicking in particular was awful on Friday night... briztoon was it this bad in his draft year? Hopefully as he becomes more accustomed to the pace of AFL games he forms a better understanding of when he has time and space to use the ball.

Encouraging tho to see guys like Bailey and Berry play probably their best games for the season.

Yes & no.

Ashcroft didn’t kick as much at U18 level.

As I mentioned before, be was very much a run and hand ball player, often receiving the ball back two or three times in a chain of hand balls, running the length of the field.

Often his last hand ball was to a player at forward flank, who would then kick in to the forward 50.


My personal opinion is that Fagan designed our game plan around the fact that we have a lot of non runners, and slow runners in our team, and players who aren’t elite kicks.

It’s hard to play a running game when you have Andrews, Gardiner, Rich, Lester, Coleman, Neale and Rayner, who are either not fast, or blow up real quick.

We have drafted players who can play a running game, but they’re still young. However none are an elite kick, and you really do need two or three of those players to be on the end of handball chains, to pick teams apart by foot, and deliver the ball inside 50.

 

[Nunez]

Yes & no.

Ashcroft didn’t kick as much at U18 level.

As I mentioned before, be was very much a run and hand ball player, often receiving the ball back two or three times in a chain of hand balls, running the length of the field.

Often his last hand ball was to a player at forward flank, who would then kick in to the forward 50.


My personal opinion is that Fagan designed our game plan around the fact that we have a lot of non runners, and slow runners in our team, and players who aren’t elite kicks.

It’s hard to play a running game when you have Andrews, Gardiner, Rich, Lester, Coleman, Neale and Rayner, who are either not fast, or blow up real quick.

We have drafted players who can play a running game, but they’re still young. However none are an elite kick, and you really do need two or three of those players to be on the end of handball chains, to pick teams apart by foot, and deliver the ball inside 50.

Fletcher isn't an elite kick? Seems very good from what I've seen.

 

[DERRINALPHIL]

Yep. All this. And he was the one guy in the first half that looked like taking a contested mark when Joe and Forty were struggling in that regard.

I will say it again. Two good games in a row for Hippy

 

[briztoon]

Fletcher isn't an elite kick? Seems very good from what I've seen.

Yeah, my bad on that one, as I didn’t think of him, as I was thinking of our half backs and on ballers.

On another note, good to see Mighty Lions is still lurking here (everyday), wonder when he’s going to feel comfortable enough to post again.

 

[Nunez]

Yeah, my bad on that one, as I didn’t think of him, as I was thinking of our half backs and on ballers.

On another note, good to see Mighty Lions is still lurking here (everyday), wonder when he’s going to feel comfortable enough to post again.

Yeah for me it's Fletcher and Lohmann who stand out as top shelf kicks. Lohmann is still prone to a few errors but think he can hit some very technical kicks.

I'd love to see a Berry/Fletcher/McCluggage wing rotation this week. Fletcher and McCluggage on the outside kicking forward & Zorko/Lohmann providing support on the flanks sounds like a good mix of talent for inside 50s.

 

[Elixuh]

I said that on Friday night.

I wonder how many tats BRAB has?

The bloke next to me left the game early, as he had to drive back to the goldy.

Did you still have your wallet after the game? If so, wasn’t brab.