Autopsy "Sometimes you win, sometimes you learn".

[Scodog10]

My thread comes on the back of the thread Snoop Dog created with the dust having settled on Friday's result.

Today the boys would have been in at the Westpac centre conducting their reviews so why don't we do one of our own. Some involved in the media believe that the game and teams for that matter evolve at a rapid rate, one in particular rabbits on about it being bi monthly (David King for the uninformed). Therefore I intend to put that to the test and bump the thread after each loss as a means of identifying whether we're learning and evolving from our losses or stagnating...

For mine I'm going to attempt to stick to long term issues and not individualize (though that will be a struggle). I'd hope that others will follow suit, but I guess it's hard not to target individuals after such a demoralizing performance.

The three things I learnt about Collingwood were:

1) We genuinely suck at the fundamentals. I'm talking about players getting sucked into the contest, flying third man up when a teammate has a contest covered, fumbling under no pressure, taking a tackler on when you can draw them in and release a player OTT etc. Early season rust, maybe. A sign of something more ingrained, I hope not. If it's the former we can deal with that, but the latter would be alarming.

2) Kick ins both offensive and defensive. I had a look at the smart replay of Friday nights match and in particular the 30 kick ins from both teams. WOW just wow.

Within the space of just 10 kick ins a trend emerged. Johnson (2) and Duffield (3) took their 5 while our first 5 were spread between Maxwell (2), Brown (1), Ball (1) and Pendles (1). So three of our 5 worst kicks in the line up took 4 of the first 5 kick ins.

The next 20 improved slightly, but to nowhere near what I would class a minimum standard. All in all they had just 5 players take their 16 With Johnson and Duffield taking the lions share with 11 between them and good kicks in Pearce and Sutcliffe taking another 3. Conversely we had 6 players share our 14 with 7 coming from players with average to poor foot skills (Frost, Ball, Brown and Maxwell). Just 5 of ours were taken by players that could do any damage (Young 4 & Pendles 1). FWIW Langdon took the other 2.

The main difference though was the ineffectiveness of our zone. They were able to get 12 of 16 beyond 40 metres from goal (2 of which were uncontested ) v 8 out of 14 for us. Set shots are an opportunity to choose who you want the ball in the hands of if it's a miss. Maxwell and Young shared ours 50/50 with 3 apiece. Johnson (1) and Duffield (3) shared their 4...

In a nutshell we were shithouse at this aspect of the game and have been for a while. Our zone was 5-10 metres to close to goal and I know I said I wasn't going to individualise, but Maxwell can you please **** off from kick ins!

3) The extra at the contest doesn't work against certain teams. I'll keep this brief, but an extra at the contest just isn't going to work against a team as disciplined as Fremantle. They won't get sucked into matching your numbers around the ball and will fall back, wait for your turnover and get you on the spread because you commit so many to the contest.

In future unless we're dominating in the middle that extra needs to go back to lend support to an inexperienced and outgunned defensive unit.

There is a lot to take in (especially on the kick ins which I could have further analyzed), but I think it's all relevant to how we can learn as a team moving forward.

I'd also like feedback from neutrals if they care to get involved because sometimes supporters can get too singleminded and miss things that might be obvious to an outsider

 

[dubber]

1) We genuinely suck at the fundamentals. I'm talking about players getting sucked into the contest, flying third man up when a teammate has a contest covered, fumbling under no pressure, taking a tackler on when you can draw them in and release a player OTT etc. Early season rust, maybe. A sign of something more ingrained, I hope not. If it's the former we can deal with that, but the latter would be alarming

Could not agree more with this one. Our players do not seem to have the discipline not to get sucked into the contest and stick to their man/structure. So many times we seem to just chase the ball with their player feeding it to the loose player to clear. Is it that hard to not do that?

I will also add running fitness to the learning as we seem to be no way near as fit as we used to be in 2010/11. How can Port Adelaide over take us in that department with our facilities & abundance of funds available to find the best fitness staff out there?

 

[Yidaki]

Off topic question: Are you related to snoop dog?

 

[Scodog10]

Off topic question: Are you related to snoop dog?

Nope, but I'll take the asking as a compliment

 

[popin]

It's only round one but we have another 9 hard games first up but our backline are not as skillful by foot like the hawks etc are. Just need to chuck Reid back and blood Oxley all season as he is a super kick and reads the play better than Maxwell can and gives us 3 options to get out of the backline in Reid, Langdon and Oxley witch is a good start to improve over the back line we had on friday night witch was, Brown, Tooves, Frost, Maxwell, and Clarke so you see my view sco??

 

[Yidaki]

Nope, but I'll take the asking as a compliment

I should have put an emoticon in my post above.

 

[Scodog10]

Could not agree more with this one. Our players do not seem to have the discipline not to get sucked into the contest and stick to their man/structure. So many times we seem to just chase the ball with their player feeding it to the loose player to clear. Is it that hard to not do that?

I will also add running fitness to the learning as we seem to be no way near as fit as we used to be in 2010/11. How can Port Adelaide over take us in that department with our facilities & abundance of funds available to find the best fitness staff out there?

Yeah its' amazing how quickly you can go from cutting edge to trailing the pack. As a club its something we clearly need to work on and is probably inversely related to our injuries.

Looking over the Powers list and they have a reasonably clean bill of health. It's probably one of those chicken or the egg type scenarios, because I haven't noticed any specific trends in their recruiting i.e recruiting endurance freaks that would feed into that running power...

 

[The Magnificent Seven]

I would say our running support is inefficient at the moment. We do transition by hand well but 1 player will tend to pass forward to a runner and then back off. It relies on the whole chain working smoothly and it tends not to. The minute the chain is broken, we have only 1 vs 2 or 1 vs 3 at the contested ball, and it usually ends in tears.

We need runners in packs of 2 or 3 like 2010-11, and not just at stoppages.

 

[dansa]

Foot skills.
We have very few elite kicks in our squad. Whether in play or set shots for goal. It's been this way for a long time but not easy to fix other than over time through the draft.

How many players could you bank on kicking a set shot goal from 40m ? Not too many.

But every club has it's strengths and weaknesses and I'm still generally bullish about our short-medium term future.

 

[Scodog10]

I would say our running support is inefficient at the moment. We do transition by hand well but 1 player will tend to pass forward to a runner and then back off. It relies on the whole chain working smoothly and it tends not to. The minute the chain is broken, we have only 1 vs 2 or 1 vs 3 at the contested ball, and it usually ends in tears.

We need runners in packs of 2 or 3 like 2010-11, and not just at stoppages.

Watching parts of the replay brought this into focus for me as well. The other aspect I'd touch on is that when we had the running support it often wasn't utilised.

One that stood out in the third quarter was a passage of play with Sidebottom on the far side streaming down the wing with runners in support open on the inside. Instead of cutting inwards to Adams and opening up the forward 50 Sidebottom continued wide to Grundy (I mean of all support runners why you'd choose the ruckman is beyond me) who then bombed long to 5 metres from goal and Johnson killed the contest, rushed the behind and they get possession.

It get's back to the fundamentals. They're just errors that shouldn't be made at this level much the same as the Elliott kick in one you touched on in another thread...

 

[SpongePie]

Agree with foot skills. We lack in that department. And as an extension of that, our conversion rate. I can't even begin to imagine how frustrating it must be for mid fielders who work hard to deliver the ball to a scoring position, only for it to be missed time after time.

 

[Scodog10]

Foot skills.
We have very few elite kicks in our squad. Whether in play or set shots for goal. It's been this way for a long time but not easy to fix other than over time through the draft.

How many players could you bank on kicking a set shot goal from 40m ? Not too many.

But every club has it's strengths and weaknesses and I'm still generally bullish about our short-medium term future.

One positive on this front is that of the 15 or so players we have to return many of them are what I would deem reliable kicks.

Outside of Reid I'm not talking great kicks like your Gunstan's or McKenzies, but Fasolo, Reid, White, Dwyer, Karnezis, Scharanberg, Broomhead, Seedsman and Keeffe are all players who I would back in to convert the sort of kick you referred to more often than not.

Not all 9 are best 22, but transitioning them into the side certainly couldn't hurt.

 

[dansa]

One positive on this front is that of the 15 or so players we have to return many of them are what I would deem reliable kicks.

Outside of Reid I'm not talking great kicks like your Gunstan's or McKenzies, but Fasolo, Reid, White, Dwyer, Karnezis, Scharanberg, Broomhead, Seedsman and Keeffe are all players who I would back in to convert the sort of kick you referred to more often than not.

Not all 9 are best 22, but transitioning them into the side certainly couldn't hurt.

I tend to agree with that although I'm not so sure about Seedsman and I haven't watched Karnezis. Still it is clearly is a low percentage compared to Haw and some of the other top sides.
Our team in 2010 weren't much better and particularly bad at set shots, but we pressured our opposition into turning over so many opportunities it could be slightly brushed under the carpet.
Unfortunately the tactics in the current game seem to place more importance on this skill.

 

[Pera]

3) The extra at the contest doesn't work against certain teams. I'll keep this brief, but an extra at the contest just isn't going to work against a team as disciplined as Fremantle. They won't get sucked into matching your numbers around the ball and will fall back, wait for your turnover and get you on the spread because you commit so many to the contest.

This is the one that kills me. We have one of the best CHF's in the competition, who is stronger than probably any key back in the league and he has to fight and scrap with three defenders hanging off him every time. He is rotting away down there.

I'd rather us go one on one all over the park, and lets see if we can get some run and space going up forward. There is no point having that extra at the contest, only for us to blaze away with the clearance and kick it down the lose man's throat time after time.

 

[mike123]

I know how we can fix our kick in problem. Bring Armstrong in and give some to Langdon.

 

[Yidaki]

I think the problem is just as much a mental thing as it is a physical thing. It appears that we aren't "motivated" and I'm not so sure where this is coming from.

 

[Frankie23]

Couldn't agree more with the OP.

The opposition kick ins has me most concerned. Last year teams scored heavily from their kick ins and we seemed to lack structure to counter this. If anything, Friday showed we have gone backwards in this area. I'm prepared to overlook it as it is round one, but we were carved up, and it simply isn't good enough. We consistently press forward, yet they always find space and break the zone, leaving quick smalls such as Ballantyne to run into the space behind, such a contrast to 2010 where teams couldn't penetrate us at all.

 

[Pieku]

Watching Buckley's kick
create Pendles' debut goal --
but Young, no-one close.

 

[Scodog10]

I know how we can fix our kick in problem. Bring Armstrong in and give some to Langdon.

I'll pass on the Armstrong move personally.

I did an extreme amount of analysis on this because it's an area we've struggled with for 50 or so games and if you would like to improve our overall skill level as a trade off for ability one on one in defence I would be in support of bringing in Armstrong (from what I have gathered you are a fan for some reason), however not to take the kick ins. As I made mention of, Fremantle most often opened us up with long kicks beyond areas that were dangerous defensively for them. The three players that would make a difference in this area for us are Reid, Seedsman, Young and Fasolo. All three are penetrating kicks capable of spotting up targets beyond 55 metres away. This inturn spreads the defensive zone of the opposition.

Armstrong on the other hand is an elite kick over short distances, but an average kick over long distances and is not creative or confident enough to cash in on his strong short passing by playing on and running 10-15 metres before delivery. Yes using him for kick ins would result in ball retention because he likes to go short, but we didn't struggle with that on Friday with 6 of 7 short kicks resulting in a second Collingwood possession. What happened after that though was that they constricted us after we hit that short target. This get's back to hitting long target's or contests to spread the opposition.

Of the two that Langdon took one was a direct turnover to an opponent in a non contested situation. Why don't we ease the kid into the big time before giving him the responsibility of kick ins

 

[mike123]

I'll pass on the Armstrong move personally.

I did an extreme amount of analysis on this because it's an area we've struggled with for 50 or so games and if you would like to improve our overall skill level as a trade off for ability one on one in defence I would be in support of bringing in Armstrong (from what I have gathered you are a fan for some reason), however not to take the kick ins. As I made mention of, Fremantle most often opened us up with long kicks beyond areas that were dangerous defensively for them. The three players that would make a difference in this area for us are Reid, Seedsman, Young and Fasolo. All three are penetrating kicks capable of spotting up targets beyond 55 metres away. This inturn spreads the defensive zone of the opposition.

Armstrong on the other hand is an elite kick over short distances, but an average kick over long distances and is not creative or confident enough to cash in on his strong short passing by playing on and running 10-15 metres before delivery. Yes using him for kick ins would result in ball retention because he likes to go short, but we didn't struggle with that on Friday with 6 of 7 short kicks resulting in a second Collingwood possession. What happened after that though was that they constricted us after we hit that short target. This get's back to hitting long target's or contests to spread the opposition.

Of the two that Langdon took one was a direct turnover to an opponent in a non contested situation. Why don't we ease the kid into the big time before giving him the responsibility of kick ins

Reid and Fasolo should be used in the forward line and young on the wing because we need midfield speed and Seedsman is injured.

 

[Scodog10]

Reid and Fasolo should be used in the forward line and young on the wing because we need midfield speed and Seedsman is injured.

Why should they though? Reid I can understand because our structure has been geared toward 3 talls in attack, but why Fasolo? He is a work in progress and locking him into one position does him nor the team any favours. Clarkson has pioneered dual position players and its up to us now to respond in kind.

From what I saw on Friday night the kick ins alone on the offensive and defensive end cost us roughly 4-5 goals. Using Fasolo off a half back flank and Young as the designated kicker from set shots, considering he has time to move to the defensive end, improve us by a great deal with very minimal effort.

Young took 3 kick ins from set shots anyway so your opinion of him being needed on a wing for midfield speed is invalid straight away with it clear that there was a concious effort to get him involved and those 3 he took paying off for us with no return scores to Fremantle. I would just be advocating him to take it further and convert that number of 3 into all 6.

 

[mike123]

Why should they though? Reid I can understand because our structure has been geared toward 3 talls in attack, but why Fasolo? He is a work in progress and locking him into one position does him nor the team any favours. Clarkson has pioneered dual position players and its up to us now to respond in kind.

From what I saw on Friday night the kick ins alone on the offensive and defensive end cost us roughly 4-5 goals. Using Fasolo off a half back flank and Young as the designated kicker from set shots, considering he has time to move to the defensive end, improve us by a great deal with very minimal effort.

Young took 3 kick ins from set shots anyway so your opinion of him being needed on a wing for midfield speed is invalid straight away with it clear that there was a concious effort to get him involved and those 3 he took paying off for us with no return scores to Fremantle. I would just be advocating him to take it further and convert that number of 3 into all 6.

Because Young gives our midfield some much needed speed and Fas is a proven forward and his greatest strengths are his goal kicking and marking which wouldn't be as effective if he went to the backline. Fas should be trying to play in the midfield not forward line if you want him to be dual position.

 

[MeisterBot]

We have a surplus of AFL-standard mid/fwds and a deficiency in def/mids. Ramsay, Oxley, Langdon and Scharenberg will all make it I think. But two are injured, one isn't ready and the last one only just made his debut.

The likes of Sidebottom, JT and Dwyer can fill the void of Fasolo in the forward line. Kennedy getting a full game will help as well. Sidebottom especially. If he can get back to his creative best playing as a HFF who pushes up hard and pushes back into the F50 to get on the end of possession chains instead of being wasted at stoppages, he can easily kick 30-40 goal IMO.

Fasolo taking the kick outs would give me real confidence in the back half that I've not had since Davis left.

I get that Fasolo has a better developed forward game (although he is an inside mid first and foremost), but he is just about the best kick on the list, and we need to put him behind the ball since he has shown a willingness to develop his game there and we are bereft of ready-made back flankers with good skills outside of Armstrong.

As for Young, he is already playing off a half back flank, occasionally running onto the wing. He is basically what we have to replace Seedsman. Which is fine. When Seeds gets back, I'd like to see the two of them share the role, spending equal time down back and on the wing at the expense of Lumumba (but that's a post for another topic). Rebound from the back 50 to create meaningful scoring opportunities is one of the biggest weaknesses we have right now.

 

[mike123]

We have a surplus of AFL-standard mid/fwds and a deficiency in def/mids. The likes of Sidebottom, JT and Dwyer can fill the void of Fasolo in the forward line. Kennedy getting a full game will help as well.

Fasolo taking the kick outs would give me real confidence in the back half that I've not had since Davis left.

I get that Fasolo has a better developed forward game (although he is an inside mid first and foremost), but he is just about the best kick on the list, and we need to put him behind the ball since he has shown a willingness to develop his game there and we are bereft of ready-made back flankers with good skills outside of Armstrong.

As for Young, he is already playing off a half back flank, occasionally running onto the wing. He is basically what we have to replace Seedsman. Which is fine. When Seeds gets back, I'd like to see the two of them share the role, spending equal time down back and on the wing at the expense of Lumumba (but that's a post for another topic). Rebound from the back 50 to create meaningful scoring opportunities is one of the biggest weaknesses we have right now.

We have Lumumba, Young, Seedsman, Langdon, Sharenberg and Williams. I think we are fine on Defender/Mids

 

[Scodog10]

Because Young gives our midfield some much needed speed and Fas is a proven forward and his greatest strengths are his goal kicking and marking which wouldn't be as effective if he went to the backline. Fas should be trying to play in the midfield not forward line if you want him to be dual position.

How exactly does using Young for set shot kick outs deprive us of his speed for the other 99% (or thereabouts) of the match?

On average there's likely to be 5-6 of these a game. If Young takes all of them and has the ball in his hand for an average of 5 seconds for each of them (the umpires allow 7 seconds before moving them on) that leaves him unable to "give our midfield some much needed speed" for a total of roughly 1-2 minutes with the rest of the time being taken up by him moving into position further afield.

I really struggle to see how that loss of 1% of game time will offset the gain we make from having him in a position to clear the defensive zone of the oppositon from kick outs.

Jarrad McVeigh, Sam Mitchell, Hamish Hartlett, Bryce Gibbs, Brett Deledio and Pierce Handley are all examples of players that are probably better used in other positions, however find/ found themselves on a halfback flank in order to develop their games or provide support to the back 6. Fasolo will help us become a better team and by association he will become a better and more rounded player long term if he moves to a half back flank and then the middle of the ground.