TACKLING - Gerard Wheatley on ABC

[catempire]

Some interesting stats regarding tackling, particularly as regarded Friday night:

* Collingwood had 58 tackles in the first half compared with a season average of 51 tackles PER MATCH

* The tackle count for the match was 85-49 in Collingwood's favour

* Geelong has had 104 tackles fewer than its opponents for the season (11.6 per game) ranking 16th in the league



Hope they've got the tackle bags out at training this week.

Obviously, the cliche, "being the hunted" applies very well here. But it is something that's going to have to improve to see an overall performance improvement.

An ancillary issue is that we are going to have to get smarter about protecting the ball carrier and alerting players to the danger of the imminent tackle.

 

[didak04]

geelong generally have possession of the ball more and dominate their opposition, that's the reason they don't have as many tackles as other teams. Tackling performances such as Colligwood's from Friday aren't going to occur very often so i dont think it is a massive thing to worry about. Our players lifted as the memory of the prelim was still burning in their minds

 

[nananana catman]

geelong generally have possession of the ball more and dominate their opposition, that's the reason they don't have as many tackles as other team

Kind of true, but the statistic against Collingwood is alarming.

 

[SJ]

According to footywire.com we are only down 3.6 tackles on our opponents per match in 2008.

However, they also have us +1.1 during the home and away matches in 2007 (and +4.7 during the finals).

 

[hamG]

I don't think its very complicated.

Over use of the handball under pressure = plenty of tackles for the opposition.

Thats the way we play and every coach knows it.

 

[SJ]

I don't think its very complicated.

Over use of the handball under pressure = plenty of tackles for the opposition.

Thats the way we play and every coach knows it.

Spot on.

 

[AM]

The telling point is number 3 - our tackling is way down on last year. In the G.F we were as ferocious as Collingwood with our tackling.

The other concern in relation to Friday's game was that we didn't seem to have a plan 'B' when things went pear shaped. We just kept doing the same things the same way throughout the game. Compare that with the Hawks against Port Adelaide when their zone set-up was exposed and they were getting done. They went to a man-on-man plan and triumphed.

All that's history.The real test of a club is how they bounce back after a belting. Look out Carlton!

 

[nananana catman]

The other concern in relation to Friday's game was that we didn't seem to have a plan 'B' when things went pear shaped. We just kept doing the same things the same way throughout the game. Compare that with the Hawks against Port Adelaide when their zone set-up was exposed and they were getting done. They went to a man-on-man plan and triumphed.

Thompsons reaction in the past has been more of an 'oh well, our boys didn't come to play' rather than change things around during the game, or analyse what went wrong during it.

 

[Oscarlett]

Some interesting stats regarding tackling, particularly as regarded Friday night:

* Collingwood had 58 tackles in the first half compared with a season average of 51 tackles PER MATCH

* The tackle count for the match was 85-49 in Collingwood's favour

* Geelong has had 104 tackles fewer than its opponents for the season (11.6 per game) ranking 16th in the league



Hope they've got the tackle bags out at training this week.

Obviously, the cliche, "being the hunted" applies very well here. But it is something that's going to have to improve to see an overall performance improvement.

An ancillary issue is that we are going to have to get smarter about protecting the ball carrier and alerting players to the danger of the imminent tackle.

Last two points - SPOT on.

 

[Cattery]

Didn't he also say that we're the "most tackled" team in the competition?

Guess part of the explanation for this is other teams applying more pressure this year, but I also think part of the problem is we've stopped running hard to provide options for the ball carrier, which means he has to hang onto the ball longer and therefore is more likely to be tackled.

Players last year more often then not didn't have the ball long enough to be tackled, soon as they took possession there were multiple options to give it off to, this year I've lost count of the times the player with the ball has had to stop and look for someone on the move to give it to, which means there's a far greater chance of him being tackled.

 

[Topper]

losing 1 game form the last 13 games isnt anything to be alarmed about. the way teams have been hunting us with pressure and tackles was bound to bring about a meltdown from the players, they cant possibly stay up for ever, hard hits and tackling takes the toll on the body. how ever now that we've had that down game i would be very surprised if the boys dont come out determined to show everyone is was a one off and come out this week with a tackle count of 70+.

Get angry catters!!!

 

[Ricketts]

Hope they've got the Max Rooke out at training this week.

Edited for accuracy.

 

[Tay29]

According to footywire.com we are only down 3.6 tackles on our opponents per match in 2008.

However, they also have us +1.1 during the home and away matches in 2007 (and +4.7 during the finals).

I am pretty sure I saw his statistics were courtesy of pro-stats.com.au.

The telling point is number 3 - our tackling is way down on last year. In the G.F we were as ferocious as Collingwood with our tackling.

The other concern in relation to Friday's game was that we didn't seem to have a plan 'B' when things went pear shaped. We just kept doing the same things the same way throughout the game. Compare that with the Hawks against Port Adelaide when their zone set-up was exposed and they were getting done. They went to a man-on-man plan and triumphed.

All that's history.The real test of a club is how they bounce back after a belting. Look out Carlton!

I work in Psychology and am a part of a research group that looks at dynamic decision making. While not a psychologist myself, I closely work alongside them. I believe that Bomber Thompson shows classic signs of "failure to change plans". It's generally considered a poor sign of decision making in unpredictable and time-pressured environments. People who refuse to change strategies usually think that their plan will eventually work despite all the evidence contrary. By the time they realise it won't usually it's too late to change plans and still be effective. This is one big criticism I have of Bomber and why I loved Sheedy who wasn't afraid of really mixing it up if things weren't working.

 

[sarah.13]

I agree,we are to predictable.He has great belief in his game plan and structures and relunctent to make left field type changes.
Other teams have dissected our game,we need to,on occasions dare to be different.

 

[TheTimeCometh]

yes, dare. the dons won a flag in '83 (?) thru sheedy forcing something to happen in the last quarter of the gf, y'know, like throwing defenders forward.

although over the last year of cats footy they generally have come good by the end by stickin' to a plan.

 

[Pollywaffle]

I agree,we are to predictable.He has great belief in his game plan and structures and relunctent to make left field type changes.
Other teams have dissected our game,we need to,on occasions dare to be different.

Yes I agree. Other teams have sussed out our game strategies and its not coming so easy now. Bomber was lucky last year, he didnt have to make many changes during a game, or try a plan B. I guess now we will see if the coaching staff and the players can adapt to this added pressure

 

[catempire]

Just on the topic of gameplan, I remember hearing Bomber say during the pre-season that teams would work out how to take on our gameplan, "but we just have to get better at playing that gameplan" (or words to that effect).

Didn't really pay much attention to it at the time, but if teams are consistently able to clog the midfield like Collingwood did and apply a lot of pressure to our ball carriers, we're going to need a plan B.

I'm not convinced that Bomber has one.

[Before the negativity police pounce, I'm not just basing this on one game, but on many, many years of observing Geelong play under Thompson]

 

[DanA]

I am not to worried about the current position but I have always thought Bomber was tactically poor. He has made up for it in spades strategically though.

 

[year of the cat]

Just on the topic of gameplan, I remember hearing Bomber say during the pre-season that teams would work out how to take on our gameplan, "but we just have to get better at playing that gameplan" (or words to that effect).

Didn't really pay much attention to it at the time, but if teams are consistently able to clog the midfield like Collingwood did and apply a lot of pressure to our ball carriers, we're going to need a plan B.

I'm not convinced that Bomber has one.

[Before the negativity police pounce, I'm not just basing this on one game, but on many, many years of observing Geelong play under Thompson]

Careful, we will have Renegade on here before long calling for Bombers head ala 2006!!!!

I reckon Friday night was one of his very ordinary coaching performances having said that. The Cloke-Taylor matchup set the tone for the night very early and should have been changed within the first 10 minutes of the start of the match. We would have been beaten in all likelihood anyway but Collingwood generally play well and win when Cloke is on fire. You just cannot let that happen without attempting to alter his influence. Bomber better have a better plan next time round.

 

[catempire]

I am not to worried about the current position but I have always thought Bomber was tactically poor. He has made up for it in spades strategically though.

What do you mean strategically, Dan?

I agree that he has made up for it in other ways (recruiting, player development, etc.).

 

[geelong_boy]

Yes I agree. Other teams have sussed out our game strategies and its not coming so easy now. Bomber was lucky last year, he didnt have to make many changes during a game, or try a plan B. I guess now we will see if the coaching staff and the players can adapt to this added pressure

I disagree with you there my friend. There were games where we were challenged last year yet we prevailed. Partridge hit the nail on the head in another thread, last year we were simply playing better as a team. This year, to this point in time, we are not.

 

[AM]

Sure we're not playing as well as last year. That is in no small measure due to teams having worked us out. They now realise how important our run from the back half is and take measures to curtail it. Or in Friday's instance, pretty much stop it.

If we remain one dimensional we will have difficulties with teams of equal talent who are well coached.

 

[geelong_boy]

Sure we're not playing as well as last year. That is in no small measure due to teams having worked us out. They now realise how important our run from the back half is and take measures to curtail it. Or in Friday's instance, pretty much stop it.

If we remain one dimensional we will have difficulties with teams of equal talent who are well coached.

Can't disagree with the line of thinking that teams would've worked more on stopping our style of play. But, there is no way we have been as sharp this year as last year, so it's a bit of both I think.

Also, it does work both ways. We can take the pressure off ourselves, ie. worrying about teams working us out/stopping our style of play by showing the opposition enough respect and trying to stifle their style of play. It isn't only Geelong who are susceptible to pressure, tackling and defensive tactics.

 

[WE Are Geelong]

Lets get this out of the way...if you dont tackle well you aren't a really good side. Geelong arent tackling well at the moment, so just finish that sentence...

I dont recall us tackling all that well in 2007 till after the round 5 North loss at Skilled. Is that a fair comment to make?

In simple sums (ie round 5 last season/round 9 this season?) our preseason started 4 weeks later than for the 2007 season. They have shown as a group they tackle very well when fit and firing. This week vs Carlton will be most interesting to see whether our fitness is about to peak. Time will tell.

I still think largely our problems are structural. Egan is a big loss. Ottens has been massive IMO. I dont want to debate this with anyone but I think Nathan was/is the smartest big forward we had/have at the club.

Sides getting a preseason to scrutinise us doesnt help.

I expect the guys if they are truly switched on to get going right about now in the season. I still dont think we should expect anything like last year for the reasons mentioned but I truly believe if they keep their heads down and work hard for the next three months and have a bit of luck with injuries we can still be there come that last week again.

The game plan will hold up...if the players do. A Plan B is nice...but you dont throw Plan A out after 27 wins and a flag against 4 poor quarters of footy to a side who loves playing us anyway. Collingwood is the only side that has shown any real tolerance and effectiveness against Plan A to date. Maybe by finals we might have a few surprises of our own.

Keep the faith.

 

[SJ]

Lets get this out of the way...if you dont tackle well you aren't a really good side. Geelong arent tackling well at the moment, so just finish that sentence...

I dont recall us tackling all that well in 2007 till after the round 5 North loss at Skilled. Is that a fair comment to make?
In simple sums (ie round 5 last season/round 9 this season?) our preseason started 4 weeks later than for the 2007 season. They have shown as a group they tackle very well when fit and firing. This week vs Carlton will be most interesting to see whether our fitness is about to peak. Time will tell.

I still think largely our problems are structural. Egan is a big loss. Ottens has been massive IMO. I dont want to debate this with anyone but I think Nathan was/is the smartest big forward we had/have at the club.

Sides getting a preseason to scrutinise us doesnt help.

I expect the guys if they are truly switched on to get going right about now in the season. I still dont think we should expect anything like last year for the reasons mentioned but I truly believe if they keep their heads down and work hard for the next three months and have a bit of luck with injuries we can still be there come that last week again.

The game plan will hold up...if the players do. A Plan B is nice...but you dont throw Plan A out after 27 wins and a flag against 4 poor quarters of footy to a side who loves playing us anyway. Collingwood is the only side that has shown any real tolerance and effectiveness against Plan A to date. Maybe by finals we might have a few surprises of our own.

Keep the faith.

Agreed once again WE Are Geelong, particularly with the bold.