Remove this Banner Ad

Roast Running Bounces

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

blueblood25

blueblood25

Club Legend
Veteran
Joined
Dec 15, 2007
Posts
1,911
Reaction score
9
Location
a nutshell.
AFL Club
Carlton
Other Teams
LAKERS|STORM|BULLANTS
Running bounces
Collingwood had a staggering 73 running bounces for the match, 46 more than Carlton (27). The Magpies featured 14 players contributing at least once in this statistic with Heath Shaw racking up 17 running bounces. Alan Didak was next best with 11 while veteran defender Simon Prestigiacomo, who only had six disposals for the match, finished the game with nine running bounces.

Carlton’s marquee midfielder Chris Judd did not register a statistic in this category while Mark Murphy had five, the most for his side.
Click to expand...

-source collingwoodfc.com.au


This was the single most frustrating thing about Friday night, there was literally no chase and it didn't look like anyone had any interest in putting a contest. This plus tackling imo is our biggest downfall. Compare our game to a bulldogs game (how we won, i'm still trying to work that one out) or a st kilda and their pressure and tackling is out of control. Anyhow. Thought the above was an interesting/depressing stat from Friday night's balls up.
 
That may be the case, but we actually had more tackles than Collingwood
 
Yep, it reflect an inability to cover the Pies defensive zone (and subsequent rebound), and our preference to try and defend space rather than run at the ball carrier. We look utterly deplorable when we play this type of football, and teams that transfer the ball well (like Essendon and Collingwood on Friday) have no trouble cutting us to ribbons.

As poor as we were on Friday Collingwood did play to their gameplan perfectly. They actually looked good bringing it down the boundary, and had plenty of run in the corridor when they did look inwards.

Our best performances for the year have seen us take a more deperate man on man approach, and backing our runners to clear the ball when we spoil or force a turnover. Maybe not the most sophisticated defensive plan, but it's right for us and makes it difficult for opposition defensive zones to get set up in time.

This isn't a knock on Ratten, or an invitation for others to do so. We've had an unsettled back six, and not a lot in the way of defensive minded mids this year...you can't work with what you dont have. That said it looks pretty obvious to even the casual observer what style suits us best.
 
It's not because our tackles don't stick that teams accumulate the running bounces, it's because we don't bloody attempt to tackle. Too often we run away from the player with the ball or just correl. Or as Bryce Gibbs often does, run leisurely alongside the player with the ball, making a token effort at best.

Shits me to tears. :thumbsd:
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Simon Prestigiacomo, who only had six disposals for the match, finished the game with nine running bounces.

--------------------
^ because fev is lazy once he's cracked it. also, is he injured? he was limping after the 1st quarter.


and @ jatz - they spelled simmo Kane Simpson in the Herald Sun last week :thumbsd: douche bags
 
Kramer1 said:
Yep, it reflect an inability to cover the Pies defensive zone (and subsequent rebound), and our preference to try and defend space rather than run at the ball carrier. We look utterly deplorable when we play this type of football, and teams that transfer the ball well (like Essendon and Collingwood on Friday) have no trouble cutting us to ribbons.

As poor as we were on Friday Collingwood did play to their gameplan perfectly. They actually looked good bringing it down the boundary, and had plenty of run in the corridor when they did look inwards.

Our best performances for the year have seen us take a more deperate man on man approach, and backing our runners to clear the ball when we spoil or force a turnover. Maybe not the most sophisticated defensive plan, but it's right for us and makes it difficult for opposition defensive zones to get set up in time.

This isn't a knock on Ratten, or an invitation for others to do so. We've had an unsettled back six, and not a lot in the way of defensive minded mids this year...you can't work with what you dont have. That said it looks pretty obvious to even the casual observer what style suits us best.
Click to expand...

Whilst I agree with this post, I have one qualifier. There seem to be a few distinct playing styles, the zone or the man on man, the lock down low score and the free flowing running high scoring game. Some we are more suited to than others but have come unstuck against both. We came unstuck against the Swans first up and Adelaide against lock down teams, but also against free running teams like Essendon or Collingwood on Friday. But have succeeded at beating runners like the Bulldogs and broke free of the lock down against the Swans 2 weeks ago.

We need to be able to combat whatever is thrown at us. I agree we are more suited to one style over another now, but we need to persist with the styles we are not as proficient with so that we can compete no matter who we play. The other option is to be so good at one style it does not matter what other teams would prefer to play, we force them to play our game.

Whichever game style you lose to you are made to look inept in that game and posters will say if only we played a zone or if only we ran the ball or if only..... its the nature of losing, you dont look too flash.
 
blueblood25 said:
because fev is lazy once he's cracked it. also, is he injured? he was limping after the 1st quarter.
Click to expand...

Most of those bounces came in one passage of play in the 2nd quarter, I believe
 
Most of Heath Shaw's were at kick-ins, when he was being shepherded by a team-mate. Totally Ratten's fault for letting that happen time after fecking time.
 
Kramer1 said:
Yep, it reflect an inability to cover the Pies defensive zone (and subsequent rebound), and our preference to try and defend space rather than run at the ball carrier. We look utterly deplorable when we play this type of football, and teams that transfer the ball well (like Essendon and Collingwood on Friday) have no trouble cutting us to ribbons.

As poor as we were on Friday Collingwood did play to their gameplan perfectly. They actually looked good bringing it down the boundary, and had plenty of run in the corridor when they did look inwards.

Our best performances for the year have seen us take a more deperate man on man approach, and backing our runners to clear the ball when we spoil or force a turnover. Maybe not the most sophisticated defensive plan, but it's right for us and makes it difficult for opposition defensive zones to get set up in time.

This isn't a knock on Ratten, or an invitation for others to do so. We've had an unsettled back six, and not a lot in the way of defensive minded mids this year...you can't work with what you dont have. That said it looks pretty obvious to even the casual observer what style suits us best.
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree with the first paragraph. It is the obvious flaw in the way we play. We effectively concede half the ground and camp everyone behind the ball. There is no effort to attack the ball carrier. Very frustrating to watch. That can't be laziness, it is an instruction to zone off.
 
BIll Brownless on the footy show its the league record now... just shows that we lacked in applying the pressure and gave them to much time to get rid of the ball...
 

Remove this Banner Ad

The reason Collingwood had so many bounces is because we had a zone that was meant to cause turnovers when they kick it to the wing along the boundary line. The zone we had in place mean they had the space to run and carry the ball easily out of defence. All this zone did was force the Pies to cross to the other side where there was space and could again run and carry the ball and move it more efficiently into their forwardline.

We didn't have a plan b and we were outcoached by Malthouse.

FWIW I'm not a Ratten basher but god it was frustrating on Friday night.
 
30yearBLUE said:
Whilst I agree with this post, I have one qualifier. There seem to be a few distinct playing styles, the zone or the man on man, the lock down low score and the free flowing running high scoring game. Some we are more suited to than others but have come unstuck against both. We came unstuck against the Swans first up and Adelaide against lock down teams, but also against free running teams like Essendon or Collingwood on Friday. But have succeeded at beating runners like the Bulldogs and broke free of the lock down against the Swans 2 weeks ago.

We need to be able to combat whatever is thrown at us. I agree we are more suited to one style over another now, but we need to persist with the styles we are not as proficient with so that we can compete no matter who we play. The other option is to be so good at one style it does not matter what other teams would prefer to play, we force them to play our game.

Whichever game style you lose to you are made to look inept in that game and posters will say if only we played a zone or if only we ran the ball or if only..... its the nature of losing, you dont look too flash.
Click to expand...


Agree with bold

Half agree with red

Seems you're not all bad 30year :eek:
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom