Opinion The 'Carlton related stuff that doesn't need it's own thread' thread Part 2

[The Old Dark Navy's]

You said it stems from Teague... absolute rubbish.

He said it stems from Teague refusing to employ a plus one.

Obviously a plus one would have solved that situation and every other instance of our defenders being caught out of position.

I agree we need the extra defender so if a defender is going to join in with an attacking surge, we are covered for the turnover.

 

[Arr0w]

Go reread the post

I will spell it out for you one time

Situational, with a high probability to reoccur =

"That vision is damning for Doc and Jones, all backmen actually"

Prevention, reducing reoccurrence =

" This stems from Teague refusing to play the +1"

 

[Sector 7G]

For those that didn’t see it, the Fox article below contains the footage.

‘This is unforgivable’: ‘Staggering’ vision exposes true extent of Carlton’s defensive issues

‘This is unforgivable’: ‘Staggering’ vision exposes true extent of ‘dumb’ Blues’ big flaw

www.foxsports.com.au

While the footage is not great, they are the last 2 goals the bulldogs kicked. Bruce's was at the 20minute mark in the last and we needed to score to win the game.

Defensive issues weren't the problem, the lack of ability to win a clearance was.

 

[FRUMPY]

I dont even bother to watch footy shows - all the y do is pick a club, highlight a bad passage of play or two and say this is why a certain club is crap.....

you could find bad play in just about every goal kicked from the opposition for every club. Sure Jones stuffs up and when he does its a shocker but you dont question it when he flies in and takes an intercept mark. No-one complains he wasnt on his man then.

 

[FRUMPY]

While the footage is not great, they are the last 2 goals the bulldogs kicked. Bruce's was at the 20minute mark in the last and we needed to score to win the game.

Defensive issues weren't the problem, the lack of ability to win a clearance was.

Spot on

 

[Jeremias]

Bit frightening that we are paying 105% of the salary cap at the moment.

It is exactly as intended having taken advantage of the salary banking mechanism the league put in place a few years ago.

We've effectively just heavily front-loaded the contracts of some of our bigger signings, so most of their salary is already off the books.

Will have next to no bearing on our ability to go after more players at the end of the year.

 

[F_therest]

Our midfield pressure has died, each week you can watch how easily teams score against us and we work hard to hit the scoreboard. Our turnovers are still killing us and this will come with our all out attack policy which tires players and reduces their skill level.

In almost all our losses the reoccurring theme is our midfield getting beaten up...not enough pressure on the oppositions ball carriers and our defence having to contend with a lopsided I50 count.

It's been an issue for years and unfortunately still hasn't been fixed. Bit to do with gameplan and personnel I suspect...I really think we have too many mids who aren't good enough runners for the modern game...eg Cripps, Dow, Williams. Look at the Dogs midfield...all agile and good runners and it was too much for us in the end.

Swap the I50 counts around to 60-44 our way in the Dogs game and we definitely win...our forward line was looking dangerous but wasn't getting down there enough, and basically none at all in the last quarter.

 

[Blue_Fusion]

He said it stems from Teague refusing to employ a plus one.

Obviously a plus one would have solved that situation and every other instance of our defenders being caught out of position.

I agree we need the extra defender so if a defender is going to join in with an attacking surge, we are covered for the turnover.

I will spell it out for you one time

Situational, with a high probability to reoccur =

"That vision is damning for Doc and Jones, all backmen actually"

Prevention, reducing reoccurrence =

" This stems from Teague refusing to play the +1"

I already said, the +1 would help in that situation...

But I'll reiterate, not if that +1 is too busy ball watching or running to the wrong spots... we clearly have players doing that so to say it stems from Teague is rubbish.

 

[Accidental genius]

He said it stems from Teague refusing to employ a plus one.

Obviously a plus one would have solved that situation and every other instance of our defenders being caught out of position.

I agree we need the extra defender so if a defender is going to join in with an attacking surge, we are covered for the turnover.

Do you think we would have scored the way we did and maintained a lead for most of the match if we did play +1 in defence? Whilst I agree, think it will also impact on our ability to score as high as we normally have been. Maybe answer is middle ground. Move up when attacking but run back hard when they are.

 

[Skull Face]

Hard lesson to learn.

If you are going to spend $5 million on a midfielder... make sure they are a midfielder first

Was a terrible off season for us in hindsight, we blew a large chunk of cap space and gave up a high 1st round pick we could have used to bring in another young mid.

Saad has been good but I feel like between him and Doc we have 2 guys trying to get off their man rather then defend 1st and it has thrown the balance out down there. Williams simply isn't fit enough to play midfield and never has been, his recruitment has only taken midfield time away from guys like dow, sps and crippled our ability to match any big offers for Mckay.

Seems like we have put the icing on before we cook the cake (make finals) and its going to hurt us now.

 

[Coops93]

Do you think we would have scored the way we did and maintained a lead for most of the match if we did play +1 in defence? Whilst I agree, think it will also impact on our ability to score as high as we normally have been. Maybe answer is middle ground. Move up when attacking but run back hard when they are.

He did say in the press conference they tried an extra behind the ball, but it didn't really have any impact.

 

[sparkyblue]

I admire that he wants to keep numbers in the forward arc, but pulling a player from that forward group, to hav a +1 at the stoppages, that player needs to be 10 metres at the back of stoppages to assist the back 6 as well

Having someone on the defensive side of stoppages has been a huge weakness of ours probably since Carrots retired. The closest we get these days is either Ed or Setters setting up there and dump kicking it over the shoulder 50 metres vertically/25 metres horizontally if the ball comes that way.

 

[agro]

While the footage is not great, they are the last 2 goals the bulldogs kicked. Bruce's was at the 20minute mark in the last and we needed to score to win the game.

Defensive issues weren't the problem, the lack of ability to win a clearance was.

Exactly- that photo was taken when we needed 3 goals in 4 minutes to win the game (an unlikely scenario I know) so Jones focus was probably on a potential switch kick at that stage rather than defence, but they probably could have used a similar photo taken earlier in that quarter too.

 

[Pentatonic Flat Fifth]

He said it stems from Teague refusing to employ a plus one.

Obviously a plus one would have solved that situation and every other instance of our defenders being caught out of position.

I agree we need the extra defender so if a defender is going to join in with an attacking surge, we are covered for the turnover.

And - as every footy commentator / coach / casual observer under the sun has been saying, including you - if Liam or Doc just turned and looked there would be no problem. Its 100% on these players - you said so in only a post one or two previously.

This is not a zero-sum move. If you have one behind you are removing one from somewhere else - our game plan relies on an attacking style and this breaks our entire game. You have to at least acknowledge that in your assessment.

The problem against Port, Brisbane and other teams has been our attacking drives into the forward line were not being rewarded - some felt by poor structure, some by poor selection (both is the reality). This is the forward line coach.

We are also breaking down consistently in the backline - with players not running back (Murphy highlighted two weeks ago) - or simply playing man on man instead of zone defence.

AGAIN - this is on the backline coach.

Changing the entire game plan and structure because Jones didn't turn around and have a look around him something that any junior team above about 13 years old would be doing is absolutely on the player and no question about it.

 

[Pentatonic Flat Fifth]

Exactly- that photo was taken when we needed 3 goals in 4 minutes to win the game (an unlikely scenario I know) so Jones focus was probably on a potential switch kick at that stage rather than defence, but they probably could have used a similar photo taken earlier in that quarter too.

There are plenty more where this came from. The exact same "chain of deliveries" as players were running off their man as highlighted by these guys in previous weeks was also happening.

They are just highlighting the worst examples - there were so many it was frustrating.

Sitting on the boundary we were pointing it out to players - it was that obvious.

Edit:

We were also being smashed around the contest - yes. Not mutually exclusive.

 

[SkyhorseTamer]

Bit frightening that we are paying 105% of the salary cap at the moment.

I thought Liddle said we would be having a crack in the trade period again? Looks like we may have a squeeze coming. Imagine if all our high draft picks had come on and were asking for significant pay rises.

Perhaps the Martin, McNuggets deals were heavily front-ended and I'm guessing Murph will be retiring at year end?

We had to pay it now or lose it, can't store that bonus amount forever. Hence the big signings, who are all front ended contracts. Not all doom and gloom on the contract front.

 

[SkyhorseTamer]

While the footage is not great, they are the last 2 goals the bulldogs kicked. Bruce's was at the 20minute mark in the last and we needed to score to win the game.

Defensive issues weren't the problem, the lack of ability to win a clearance was.

Yeah exactly right, the defenders made some bad errors at times, but the midfield was smoked. Attention should be there.

 

[agro]

Yeah exactly right, the defenders made some bad errors at times, but the midfield was smoked. Attention should be there.

A centre bounce ruck contest where our guy could tap/knock/push/punch it to our advantage during that 8 goal avalanche would have been handy as well.

 

[__Bobcat__]

Who was meant to be marking Lipinski? A medium tall, so shouldn't that be Plowman's man, not Jones?

Jones was manning a shadow, ffs.

Its a team game put your ******* hand up "MAN THE * UP".
this s**t is U/16 level football knowledge...





*Mod edit: Stop evading the swear filter.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

And - as every footy commentator / coach / casual observer under the sun has been saying, including you - if Liam or Doc just turned and looked there would be no problem. Its 100% on these players - you said so in only a post one or two previously.

This is not a zero-sum move. If you have one behind you are removing one from somewhere else - our game plan relies on an attacking style and this breaks our entire game. You have to at least acknowledge that in your assessment.

The problem against Port, Brisbane and other teams has been our attacking drives into the forward line were not being rewarded - some felt by poor structure, some by poor selection (both is the reality). This is the forward line coach.

We are also breaking down consistently in the backline - with players not running back (Murphy highlighted two weeks ago) - or simply playing man on man instead of zone defence.

AGAIN - this is on the backline coach.

Changing the entire game plan and structure because Jones didn't turn around and have a look around him something that any junior team above about 13 years old would be doing is absolutely on the player and no question about it.

That's a lot of words for something I wasn't claiming.

Yes, Jones should look.

Yes, I also think we need to have a plus one at times, especially when the opposition is getting a run on.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Do you think we would have scored the way we did and maintained a lead for most of the match if we did play +1 in defence? Whilst I agree, think it will also impact on our ability to score as high as we normally have been. Maybe answer is middle ground. Move up when attacking but run back hard when they are.

Plus one to stop opposition runs. Some tempo footy on occasion would be good.

 

[__Bobcat__]

While the footage is not great, they are the last 2 goals the bulldogs kicked. Bruce's was at the 20minute mark in the last and we needed to score to win the game.

Defensive issues weren't the problem, the lack of ability to win a clearance was.

When your team hasn't got the ball, you need to bust your arse and pick up any loose players in the forward line.

 

[JustaBattler]

Our center bounce set ups are just wrong in so many ways compared to better drilled teams - eg either Cottrell or Ed sitting behind the ball as the outlet too close to the contest to have room/time/space to make good kicks- and so often - even if we win a clearance leads to an up and under ball to none and nowhere ...

other teams have HBF streaming through for an overlap and extra number- Carlton gives to Ed or Cottrel sitting way too close to the actual contested area to kick a ball to the moon.

As for extra defender I am against this strategy all it does is take someone from somewhere else - instead do what Port and Doggies do- make the field smaller and move up and back as a team.

 

[sosos]

But where was Liam's opponent? Had Plow taken that player in the interim?

Jones was manning a shadow, ffs.

Its a team game put your ******* hand up "MAN THE * UP".
this sh*t is U/16 level football knowledge...

I can't tell from the footage but if Jones was watching his man, I.e. the kpf he is supposed to be marking, then it kind of looks like he wants space to launch and leap at it. You can argue that he should be on his shoulder but that's the way he often plays.

So potentially Plowman and Jones were looking after the one player leaving Lipinski, nominally Plowman's man free.

So was it a matter of the communication between the defenders failing, or negligence in marking?

 

[RudyBlue]

During the half of year Teague coached in 2019, he showed pretty clearly an ability to tinker when a game was against us. He'd play around with stoppages; he'd manipulate matchups behind the ball; he'd put Ed on a key mover and we'd respond as a team.

This is a great point and something that drew a lot of us to Teague initially in comparison to Bolton.

Remember JSOS on Fyfe anyone?

Teague has shown the capabilities of an astute match-day tactician - strange to see his lack of moves at present.