The constructive criticism thread

[Kramer1]

As if getting up early to feed the little man wasn't cruel enough on a Sunday morning, when I flicked the telly on they were replaying yesterdays match. Rather than sit there and fume and potentially throw things at the telly (not a great idea when holding a newborn) I thought I would try and look at the match sans emotion.

Obviously there were the the numerous things evident from yesterday...lack of run, lack of support for team mates, no spread from contests, Collingwood going in lower, harder and wanting it a hell of a lot more, appaling skills and so on.

One thing that did spring to mind though was that Collingwood basically had the use of an extra 4-5 players when in posession of the ball. They had the faith in basically the enire team and would invariably honour the efforts that team mates put in...this is a pretty healthy way to be as team mates know the more they run and support, the more they will be in the play.

We on the other hand had three pure negaters running around in Joseph, Carrazo and Ellard that had no interest in getting the ball. In any given week it is likely that two out of the three amigos will be providing very little in the way of ball winning ability or link up options within the play, yesterday it was three. In an obvious attempt to improve our ball usage we seem to have been avoiding working through our ruckmen in general play (though Warncok yesterday was good). Often we will have a forward playing a defensive role as well.

Most weeks we could have up to 5-6 players who really don't contribute a lot when we have posession of the ball. This makes it so much easier for oppostion teams, knowing that we will invariably direct our play through a handful of users. Focus pressure on thsose ball carriers and the skill errors and turnovers are bound to follow. In short we have toom any guys playing roles and not enough guys playing football.

The top teams in Collingwood, Geelong, the WB's and to a lesser extent the Saints don't seem to have this problem. They always seem to have greater numbers at contests than us and have much better skills across the park. The prime 'taggers' (Ling, Jones, Picken) seem to offer so much more than ours. Flanks and wings seem to work so much harder.

Now I don't know if this is game plan because we are a poorly skilled side, or if we are a poorly skilled side because of this gameplan. The answer is probably somewhere in the middle.

Just a bleary eyed thought from early this morning. Feel free to add something constructive if you can muster it.

 

[Blue Dimension]

Thought that Ellard was fantastic in the last quarter when he was allowed to run free in the midfield. We were struggling to get the ball free from the centre all day, and Ellard was able to make some swift, clean getaways.

Walker, as I've been saying for a long, long time would be a natural forward and would be very dangerous because he is good in the air as well as when the ball hits the deck. Imo, swing Walker forward, and play 2 of the 3 amigo's with him. Rotate one of Betts, Yarran, Garlett into the midfield with short sharp bursts and we will benefit from it.

It's been brushed aside for weeks but our clearance work from the stoppages has been deplorable. The stats don't show it - we have rarely been clean and have often tumbled the ball forward in a scrappy way, while the opposition have been able to make clean getaways. Something needs to change in the midfield and perhaps what I've mentioned above could help the situation.

 

[ratten7]

I would like to see the 3 amigos rotated through the centre alot more than they are. Would also like to see Yarran get a gig at half back flank. As much as i likw waite in th eforward line, he may be needed in the back line, reads the play well and always willin to take the game on. We need hard running rebound players. Ala collingwood, they all leave their man and become targets going forward.
Like mentioned earlier, we have 3 taggers that only work one way. This could also possibly come from the coaches box. Leaving too few to do the work when going forward.

 

[Silvagnis]

I'd rather bring Walker into the midfield for Carrazzo because he wins the ball and takes them on with run.

Everyone mentions Walker's best game as his best first game, yet AW was BOG as a defensive mid against Burgoyne.

Would give him a breather from his role as a defender where they're trying to stop his run from the backline.

Switch Yarran to the backline as a sweeper.

 

[BlueVision]

Numbers to the ball comes down to 2 attributes, fitness & mentality and our guys don't seem to want to get to the contest and either provide a 1%er or any other type of support.

From what has been posted over the years it sounds as though Justin Cordy is top notch so its not a fitness issue.

To me it seems too many are playing for themselves and I hope it is a confidence/form thing as opposed to players just being selfish.

Maybe the above is just mindless dribble as it doesn't provide any answers, but as an interstate member looking in its just some thoughts, I don't believe in hammering individual players or the coaches as I for one am too far removed from the inner sanctum of our club to pass those judgements.

Nice OP Kramer

 

[Lukesta63]

I've been bagged before for criticizing Henderson ...but what the F is he doing coming out of the 50.Stay in the goalsquare when we have the ball,the 3 amigos are there to crumb.
Give our blokes a target ffs
Another thing ,how many times were we dumbfounded at the kick out yesterday,surely there is a way to beat this?

Finally how can you let Collingwood's half-back line push all the way to the centre circle???

 

[Jezza U Beauty]

Good OP.

We seem to have more 'pure negaters' than other sides. Carrots and AJ are picked every week to 'do a role'. I think the reason is they're not much good for anything else.

A few rounds back Jordan Lewis played a defensive role. Not only did he shut down his opponent but he also kicked 3 snags. If Carrots/AJ don't beat their man then they may as well not even be out there, because they don't do any damage themsleves.

It's as though the MC believe these guys are in the best 22 (based on fitness/GPS stats etc) but realise they don't contribute offensively so they just 'give them a role'.

I reckon we're still paying for the 2 drafts we missed out of (the 1st 2 rounds of).

Can't see any solution aside from continuing to pick well in the upcoming drafts.

A coupla maniacs a la Dean/Brown/Hammillwould be nice.

 

[blues4flag]

I've been bagged before for criticizing Henderson ...but what the F is he doing coming out of the 50.Stay in the goalsquare when we have the ball,the 3 amigos are there to crumb.
Give our blokes a target ffs
Another thing ,how many times were we dumbfounded at the kick out yesterday,surely there is a way to beat this?

Finally how can you let Collingwood's half-back line push all the way to the centre circle???

And how exactly do we get the ball to him inside 50 when we can't get it past half forward?

 

[The Coach]

I'd rather bring Walker into the midfield for Carrazzo because he wins the ball and takes them on with run.

Everyone mentions Walker's best game as his best first game, yet AW was BOG as a defensive mid against Burgoyne.

Would give him a breather from his role as a defender where they're trying to stop his run from the backline.

Switch Yarran to the backline as a sweeper.

He could go down there as a winger to run past for handball then run the ball through the middle - maybe we could tell him 2 bounces then kick as I do not think the forwards know when to lead to him. I don't think he is ready for what I call a sweeper (the Waite/Thornton type role) as he is only 19 and still a little bit wary - lets face it a Cloke or Hall bearing down would frighten the shit out of most teenagers.

 

[Blue since 72]

Agree with the op and JUB's post. We do go too defensive against some sides, the pies being one team and the bombers being another (as if we're worried about them instead of them being worried about us). We have too many negators and the attacking players are the same old too few. Maybe its an indictment on the cattle we have although as an example of a negator doing some attacking I noticed Joseph providing alot of run down the wing in the third quarter last week, and hitting targets everytime, so I reckon the players can play and I don't believe its anything to do with fitness.

I haven't watched the game and probably won't now but from all I've heard and read we were basically soft. If pressure is week we excel. If pressure is strong we wilt.

As far as I'm concerned that is between the ears.

Do we have too many front runners who are waiting for the give instead of sheparding?, too many guys willing to watch Judd and a couple of others get the ball for them?

I don't know but behaviour has to change before performance can.

 

[BlueYoss]

Do we have too many front runners who are waiting for the give instead of sheparding?

Exactly what was happening yesterday.

 

[disconorman]

Exactly what was happening yesterday.

Walker gave a very good example in the last quarter of this. Ran around the Collingwood player for the give instead of sheparding. I think it might have been Joseph or Yarran can't remember, who had taken a few bounces and was approching 50, but Walker didn't get himself into a good position so the give wasn't on. Turnover.

And I thought Walker didn't read the play well at all as a forward. But then again, he kicked 2 goals in the last, so maybe it is worth persisting with.

The most glaring problem I saw though was the lack of work rate off the ball. And this applied to ALL players. At one stage, we had the ball at half back after a mark, and not a single Carlton player was running to create an option or space. There were maybe 3 or 4 players working up to a light jog, and that was it. And this was the 2nd quarter, so they couldn't have been tired.

I really think we need to ditch the ultra-defensive plan we've adopted, and attack. It didn't work in the pre-season, and it's not working now.

 

[The Big Sticks]

Agree with the op and JUB's post. We do go too defensive against some sides, the pies being one team and the bombers being another (as if we're worried about them instead of them being worried about us). We have too many negators and the attacking players are the same old too few. Maybe its an indictment on the cattle we have although as an example of a negator doing some attacking I noticed Joseph providing alot of run down the wing in the third quarter last week, and hitting targets everytime, so I reckon the players can play and I don't believe its anything to do with fitness.

I haven't watched the game and probably won't now but from all I've heard and read we were basically soft. If pressure is week we excel. If pressure is strong we wilt.

As far as I'm concerned that is between the ears.

Do we have too many front runners who are waiting for the give instead of sheparding?, too many guys willing to watch Judd and a couple of others get the ball for them?

I don't know but behaviour has to change before performance can.

I agree with this. I can't remember how many times I keep yelling out shepherd when they just run past the opposition player to get the handball recieve. To me that's very selfish footy. Even I do that and I'm usually the lightest player on the field.

On TV, during the kick-ins, they show the view from behind the goals and you can see that nobody is working to get the ball and they're just leaving it for someone else to do.

They just need to get the basics right and work as team and the results will come

 

[KnaveyBlue]

We REALLY need to improve in the 2-on-2 situations. I don't know if it's a lack of basic footy instinct but we get out-smarted in these scenarios every time:

2-on-2 with us in possession: Our spare man doesn't work hard enough for the ball carrier. Ideally he needs to break hard and create an option or lay a shepherd to protect the ball carrier. We often do neither, with the free man instead running past the ball carrier (bringing his opponent with him) for an easy give which invariably draws both opponents to the contest and we cough it up.

2-on-2 with them in possession: This is where I've been pulling my hair out all year. I've lost count of the amount of times two Carlton players rush the opposition ball carrier, who then pops an easy handball over the top to the spare man. You see it happen three or four times every game, and for me it's the most frustrating part of our game. It's also a clear indication that there's no communication and understanding between the players. No concept of team play.

 

[Just Kreuzing]

2 on 2 breakdowns at training perhaps, maybe try some 1 on 1 situations at training also, drill it and drill it.

 

[Blue since 72]

Exactly what was happening yesterday.

I agree with this. I can't remember how many times I keep yelling out shepherd when they just run past the opposition player to get the handball recieve. To me that's very selfish footy. Even I do that and I'm usually the lightest player on the field.

On TV, during the kick-ins, they show the view from behind the goals and you can see that nobody is working to get the ball and they're just leaving it for someone else to do.

They just need to get the basics right and work as team and the results will come

And the other issue you get with this selfish style of footy is the players run too hard one way (a common issue with this team noted by many posters before now). Too many guys running forward looking to get involved directly and if its turned over they're caught out of position going back the other way.

The players are their own worst enemy. Unselfish, team footy, protecting your mates and having faith in every other player on the ground over and over again will see the team improve.

 

[Jezza U Beauty]

We REALLY need to improve in the 2-on-2 situations. I don't know if it's a lack of basic footy instinct but we get out-smarted in these scenarios every time:

2-on-2 with us in possession: Our spare man doesn't work hard enough for the ball carrier. Ideally he needs to break hard and create an option or lay a shepherd to protect the ball carrier. We often do neither, with the free man instead running past the ball carrier (bringing his opponent with him) for an easy give which invariably draws both opponents to the contest and we cough it up.

2-on-2 with them in possession: This is where I've been pulling my hair out all year. I've lost count of the amount of times two Carlton players rush the opposition ball carrier, who then pops an easy handball over the top to the spare man. You see it happen three or four times every game, and for me it's the most frustrating part of our game. It's also a clear indication that there's no communication and understanding between the players. No concept of team play.

There's no doubt a lot of work to be done on fundamental 'footy smarts'.

A mate of mine texted me the other day during the game asking why we continually lose 2-on-1s in OUR favour.

I lost count of the number of hangers taken by Pies going up Warnock's and Hammer's backs on saturday - these were set up perfectly for them because our blokes kick it directly at where our ruckmen are standing, not out in front of or to either side of them so our ruckmen are actually ON THE MOVE when they're attempting to mark instead of being a stationary step ladder.

We are amongst the poorest in the league at kicking the pill to a teammate's advantage (apologies to Yarran and Judd) in general terms. Often we have the advantage in play and turn the ball over rather than create scoring opportunities.