RussellEbertHandball
Flick pass expert
I keep hearing our game plan isn't working, we have to change it, but what exactly is it? There are systems, strategies, tactics, but isn't a game plan the overarching theme - sort of like a vision statement organisations have? What we want to achieve via systems, strategies and tactics??
The last few weeks when I watch us play, below is what I think our game plan is, especially at home and when we get the ball inside 50 at least 60 times.
http://www.nmfc.com.au/news/2016-01-07/long-bombs-to-snake
The whiteboard contained a list of Ron Barassi’s physical, mental and tactical demands; words to influence his men to win the 1977 grand final replay between Collingwood and North Melbourne. The final sentence, straight down the guts when we can, long bombs to Snake, highlighted the faith Barassi had in his full-forward.
Is that our sort of game plan - long bombs to Dixon, long bombs to Robbie (playing on a bigger bloke), long bombs wide to the boundary line??
For those who don't know who Phil Snake Baker was, you can read about him in the link above. He was a big time finals player who delivered in big games for Barassi and North Melbourne. As the article says, he wasn’t a star, but when Baker was on, he played like a star, and he kicked 15 goals for North Melbourne in grand finals, which remains a club record. Look up his you tube videos and watch Snake take big marks from those long bombs. Unfortunately Charlie, especially at night can't take uncontested marks from long bombs, so its probably not going to work too often when its a bomb to a contested situation.
Kenny used to dash off the half back line and put in long bombs to Ablett, Stoneham, Brownless, Mensch, Barnes etc. That's what Jasper has become this year, give me the ball so I can do a long 50m bomb to nobody in particular type player. I picked on Jasper because so many have said Ken likes him because he plays like Ken. But Ken could actually defend just not be a creative player off halfback. Ken won a B&F in a star studded Geelong era and was all Oz twice.
I know we like to do a forward press - is that part of the game plan? But we are hopeless at letting the opposition use counter attacking footy and slingshot footy when we have multiple inside 50's and don't score and they run the ball all the way to their goal square and its easy to kick goals from 5m out. Its hard to miss from 5m and your efficiency numbers improve. Is that part of the game plan? If not what do you call it?
I know we like to play wide because we were spooked by turnovers and sides forcing Port games to have the most stoppages in 2015 and I think 2nd most ( maybe 1st) in 2016. Is that the game plan, to avoid the corridor and turnovers?
I know Ken loves playing small defensive forwards who aren't that good at taking marks and kicking set shot goals or snaps, over tall forwards who should be taking marks, or at least creating spillages for small forwards concentrating on crumbing to take advantage of them, rather than their next defensive pressure act. Is that the game plan, a strategy or a tactic? Stuffed if I know any more.
Now playing Jacko on Rance was a masterstroke IMO - BUT for only half a game. It would have been considered brilliant if we kicked goals from those entries inside 50 that Rance couldn't get to to defend. Jacko bamboozled Rance and Rance didn't know what to do. I know that was a tactic. But Rance was smart enough to wake up at half time and having Justin Leppitsch as your defence coach who was a brilliant attacking KPD, as good as Rance, probably also gave him a slap across the face to wake up. Then after about 5 minutes of the 3rd quarter it stopped working. Ken should have changed things, either put Dixon on him or taken Clurey and use him to negate Rance as Clurey is fitter and more mobile than Jacko so Rance couldn't ignore him like he did with Jacko for most of the second half. Is that what people mean by we dont have game plan B?? If we had taken advantage of it and been 10-5 instead of 5-11 at halftime and kept them to their half time score of 3-8 we probably would have won.
Surely a strategy when we play at Docklands is to play most of our fast players if they are fit and healthy as its the fastest deck in the league and in mid winter they put the roof on so the ground isn't heavy and greasy. Leave the slower bigger bodied blokes at home. Also leave the poorly skilled ones at home.
We have got Ryder back, recruited SPP and put Ebo back in the guts and we win enough of the clearances and contested footy to go forward enough times. Is that the game plan in operation or is that strategies?? We have done well in the mid field this year overall. Big tick from me.
Our defence has become pretty mean and solid. But we still struggle against the gorillia KPF's be it when they get more inside 50's than us or around the same amount. Is that part of our game plan or just a strategy?? Another overall big tick to that part of the team from me, but there has been some poor selections in a couple of games IMO from the coach.
So we have 2/3rds of the ground covered with good tactics, strategies and systems. The forward line is a mess. I don't know what you call what we are trying to do in there, because against better opposition teams we regularly fail with our forward set up, be it structure, tactics, strategies, systems and game plan and execution by the players. Call it what you like, but its an E or an F against the best sides, and probably a B+ against the dud sides and about a C- overall.
So fellow Port Bigfootyites please let me know what you think our game plan actually is because I don't know anymore.
The last few weeks when I watch us play, below is what I think our game plan is, especially at home and when we get the ball inside 50 at least 60 times.
http://www.nmfc.com.au/news/2016-01-07/long-bombs-to-snake
The whiteboard contained a list of Ron Barassi’s physical, mental and tactical demands; words to influence his men to win the 1977 grand final replay between Collingwood and North Melbourne. The final sentence, straight down the guts when we can, long bombs to Snake, highlighted the faith Barassi had in his full-forward.
Is that our sort of game plan - long bombs to Dixon, long bombs to Robbie (playing on a bigger bloke), long bombs wide to the boundary line??
For those who don't know who Phil Snake Baker was, you can read about him in the link above. He was a big time finals player who delivered in big games for Barassi and North Melbourne. As the article says, he wasn’t a star, but when Baker was on, he played like a star, and he kicked 15 goals for North Melbourne in grand finals, which remains a club record. Look up his you tube videos and watch Snake take big marks from those long bombs. Unfortunately Charlie, especially at night can't take uncontested marks from long bombs, so its probably not going to work too often when its a bomb to a contested situation.
Kenny used to dash off the half back line and put in long bombs to Ablett, Stoneham, Brownless, Mensch, Barnes etc. That's what Jasper has become this year, give me the ball so I can do a long 50m bomb to nobody in particular type player. I picked on Jasper because so many have said Ken likes him because he plays like Ken. But Ken could actually defend just not be a creative player off halfback. Ken won a B&F in a star studded Geelong era and was all Oz twice.
I know we like to do a forward press - is that part of the game plan? But we are hopeless at letting the opposition use counter attacking footy and slingshot footy when we have multiple inside 50's and don't score and they run the ball all the way to their goal square and its easy to kick goals from 5m out. Its hard to miss from 5m and your efficiency numbers improve. Is that part of the game plan? If not what do you call it?
I know we like to play wide because we were spooked by turnovers and sides forcing Port games to have the most stoppages in 2015 and I think 2nd most ( maybe 1st) in 2016. Is that the game plan, to avoid the corridor and turnovers?
I know Ken loves playing small defensive forwards who aren't that good at taking marks and kicking set shot goals or snaps, over tall forwards who should be taking marks, or at least creating spillages for small forwards concentrating on crumbing to take advantage of them, rather than their next defensive pressure act. Is that the game plan, a strategy or a tactic? Stuffed if I know any more.
Now playing Jacko on Rance was a masterstroke IMO - BUT for only half a game. It would have been considered brilliant if we kicked goals from those entries inside 50 that Rance couldn't get to to defend. Jacko bamboozled Rance and Rance didn't know what to do. I know that was a tactic. But Rance was smart enough to wake up at half time and having Justin Leppitsch as your defence coach who was a brilliant attacking KPD, as good as Rance, probably also gave him a slap across the face to wake up. Then after about 5 minutes of the 3rd quarter it stopped working. Ken should have changed things, either put Dixon on him or taken Clurey and use him to negate Rance as Clurey is fitter and more mobile than Jacko so Rance couldn't ignore him like he did with Jacko for most of the second half. Is that what people mean by we dont have game plan B?? If we had taken advantage of it and been 10-5 instead of 5-11 at halftime and kept them to their half time score of 3-8 we probably would have won.
Surely a strategy when we play at Docklands is to play most of our fast players if they are fit and healthy as its the fastest deck in the league and in mid winter they put the roof on so the ground isn't heavy and greasy. Leave the slower bigger bodied blokes at home. Also leave the poorly skilled ones at home.
We have got Ryder back, recruited SPP and put Ebo back in the guts and we win enough of the clearances and contested footy to go forward enough times. Is that the game plan in operation or is that strategies?? We have done well in the mid field this year overall. Big tick from me.
Our defence has become pretty mean and solid. But we still struggle against the gorillia KPF's be it when they get more inside 50's than us or around the same amount. Is that part of our game plan or just a strategy?? Another overall big tick to that part of the team from me, but there has been some poor selections in a couple of games IMO from the coach.
So we have 2/3rds of the ground covered with good tactics, strategies and systems. The forward line is a mess. I don't know what you call what we are trying to do in there, because against better opposition teams we regularly fail with our forward set up, be it structure, tactics, strategies, systems and game plan and execution by the players. Call it what you like, but its an E or an F against the best sides, and probably a B+ against the dud sides and about a C- overall.
So fellow Port Bigfootyites please let me know what you think our game plan actually is because I don't know anymore.
Last edited:
