What's our new plan A?

[Maydok]

So, since about the 15 minute mark of the first quarter of the 2010 preliminary final, I've been pondering exactly what the Cat's new game plan will be for 2011 - you know - the one that will allow us to get the ball from the back pocket to somewhere past the wing against teams like Collingwood and the Saints - and all the other inevitable copy cats we'll see this year.

Over the summer, as usually happens, you figure around half the teams have spent it trying to copy and evolve on last year's Premiership winning tactic - the box/forward press whatever you want to call it.

The other half have been working out how to get thru it.

With Scott at the helm we're all expecting change, but what will it be exactly?

We've heard a few things to give a taste of things to come (and I'm paraphrasing here from memory):

Scarlett, Moons and others have dropped 3 or 4 kilos in preparation for more running.

The entire team has stepped up it's fitness levels, again, presumably for a quicker and faster running game.

T Hunt hinted there'd be a version of the Collingwood defensive press - but said our attacking game was fine.

Other than that, Selwood, Ling and Scott have all talked about a tweak to the game plan - varying between a 10% change, to a much more defensive Geelong than what we're used to.

And I think we can all agree less handball is also on the agenda.

We may get a few hints on Sunday, but round 1 will probably be the best indicator as to what the new Plan A will be - who knows, we may have a plan B as well this year too.

So, after all of that, I'm keen to know what we think we'll see from the coaches box this year - what will the focus be on, and, what's necessary from a tactical point of view to get thru the defensive press, that, let's face, won Collingwood the flag last year.

 

[Scottland2007]

I think the plan is maybe to take it 1 week at a time......
Seriously, I think teams will look at how Melbourne drew and then lost by less than a goal in their 2 meetings with Collingwood last year.

 

[SJ]

In the mid-2000s, teams would flood the opposition forward line, making it difficult to score due to high congestion.

Geelong blew this open by moving the ball quickly out of defence by hand with numbers and going straight up the middle, beating the flood before it was allowed to set up.

The way to shut this down was to swamp Geelong in their own back half - that is, flood your own forward line with players.

Therefore the aim now to beat this is to get the ball out of the backline whilst limiting time with the footy. I think you will find teams having talls presenting at half back so they can go long over the forward press, and then have a lot of space out the back.

 

[JMc#5]

In the mid-2000s, teams would flood the opposition forward line, making it difficult to score due to high congestion.

Geelong blew this open by moving the ball quickly out of defence by hand with numbers and going straight up the middle, beating the flood before it was allowed to set up.

The way to shut this down was to swamp Geelong in their own back half - that is, flood your own forward line with players.

Therefore the aim now to beat this is to get the ball out of the backline whilst limiting time with the footy. I think you will find teams having talls presenting at half back so they can go long over the forward press, and then have a lot of space out the back.

I agree! I reckon we will be aiming to kick over the forward press.

You might see Pods/Hawkins pushing a lot more up the ground and the forward line will be very open...

Obviously the first option is to hit a target, but failing that it will be a long kick (not sure whether straight or wide) but i would hate to see us get caught with the ball or without options on the defensive 50 as was the case late last year...

The Pies aren't unbeatable... they had an amzing run last year ala Hawks 2008 and were playing with a ridiculous amount of confidence and arrogance and at times we looked like we were scared by or knew we were unable to beat them...

I reckon we have to come out like the end of 2007 and play with that confidence again... do that and get some good ball carriers with the ball and we'll get through the flood no worries...

 

[Pure_Ownage]

In the mid-2000s, teams would flood the opposition forward line, making it difficult to score due to high congestion.

Geelong blew this open by moving the ball quickly out of defence by hand with numbers and going straight up the middle, beating the flood before it was allowed to set up.

The way to shut this down was to swamp Geelong in their own back half - that is, flood your own forward line with players.

Therefore the aim now to beat this is to get the ball out of the backline whilst limiting time with the footy. I think you will find teams having talls presenting at half back so they can go long over the forward press, and then have a lot of space out the back.

Agree.

The issue with this is that you need talls who are mobile and have the endurance to keep presenting there, and you also need the guys with the best footskills in your side in your back half.

The other thing I noticed re going over the back of the press is that a lot of times on the w/e (particularly the second half of the North game) we pushed most of our forwards up into the midfield and left only one or two forwards, with the others running up and then turning around and running back into the space once we won the ball. We didn't do this anywhere near as much in 2010.

 

[you pick one]

I'm waiting to see if Chris uses the the old Leigh Mathews tactic from his successful Brisbane days,Where the goal was to try and play the game between CHB and CHF a simple and effective plan if you have the personal.
Set up strong across HB, always forcing the ball forward, and backing your mid fielders and on ballers to win the contest,a quick transition through the middle of the ground(not nessecerily the centre) then long to a couple of tall forwards working in tandem and couple of crumber streaming forward.

 

[maxy87]

Seriously, I think teams will look at how Melbourne drew and then lost by less than a goal in their 2 meetings with Collingwood last year.

Interesting post. I've been thinking the same thing as I watched both matches. Melbourne play a fairly similar brand of football to Geelong and perhaps younger, fitter players were able to pull it off a little more effectively than we were able to last year. To be fair though Collingwood hadn't truly hit their straps at that stage yet.

I can't see the Cats copying Collingwood, but rather basing our gamestyle on the knowledge that they'll be faced with the forward press and zones. Whatever Scott has in store for this will be plan A and thing plan B may be to experiment with a few players in different positions to become a bit more versatile in the face if adversity. That seems to be where the game is going anyway.

Under Bombers regime, sheer skill and hardness at the ball enabled us the break the shackles of 'clarkos cluster' but we have never really beaten them soundly in a long time.

Adding new (and hopefully dynamic) tactics and some youthful exuberance to our proven elite skillset and
strong bodied players is something I'm very interested to see

 

[Scottland2007]

Interesting post. I've been thinking the same thing as I watched both matches. Melbourne play a fairly similar brand of football to Geelong and perhaps younger, fitter players were able to pull it off a little more effectively than we were able to last year. To be fair though Collingwood hadn't truly hit their straps at that stage yet.

I can't see the Cats copying Collingwood, but rather basing our gamestyle on the knowledge that they'll be faced with the forward press and zones. Whatever Scott has in store for this will be plan A and thing plan B may be to experiment with a few players in different positions to become a bit more versatile in the face if adversity. That seems to be where the game is going anyway.

Under Bombers regime, sheer skill and hardness at the ball enabled us the break the shackles of 'clarkos cluster' but we have never really beaten them soundly in a long time.

Adding new (and hopefully dynamic) tactics and some youthful exuberance to our proven elite skillset and
strong bodied players is something I'm very interested to see

Hey maxy 87, have never replied before, I hope this works. I think you are right about Collingwood not hitting their straps when they played Melbourne. The Pies seemed to get better as the year went on. Can only hope their retiring of senior players and therefore less depth, brings them back a little.

 

[witsend]

Podsy's Paddock!!

 

[Berserker26]

I don't understand why we're not getting Josh Hunt to kick it the length of the ground directly to Pods on the lead from from the kickout...

In all seriousness, out best long kicks are Hunt and Mackie (don't flame me, I still remember reading how Geelong try to funnel as much of the play through Mackie as they could) these guys should be given a licence to load up every now and then.

 

[Beth]

I'm not sure too much can be taken from Melbourne's efforts last year. I was a that first Melbourne Collingwood game imparting my vast (not) tactical knowledge on an unitiated friend and commented that Melbourne were playing exactly like Geelong but with more ordinary finishing/less skill. I would have been interested to see that match in round 19-20 rather than round 2 because I think the Pies would have blown them away by then.

In other words the Pies have got that particular game plan well beaten.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Podsy's Paddock!!

Brinngggg itttt!

 

[DanA]

I don't think there was anything wrong with the game plan last year I just think Collingwood were extrodinarily accurate and Bomber did a poor job in setting up the team. IMO Bomber has always been extrodinary at assembling a team and second to none at developing players but a tactical imbecile on matchday. Hats off to Bomber he won us two premierships and I will be forever thankfull but I'm pretty sure Scott will be an improvement on match day.

So how do we improve?

More clearances
Corey back in the middle, Bartel used as a midfielder and Chapman less so will almost certainly improve our clearance numbers. Ling will need to reinvent himself as a tagger, he has done it every other time, perhaps with 6 months to work on it he can do it again.

Smaller more mobile across the field
Scarlett, Taylor, Lonergan, Ottens, Hawkins, Mooney & Pods is simply too tall IMO. Drop Mooney & Lonergan and we'll look a much more mobile team. Rarely can I remember a team dominating us in the air so don't see the need for a 3 tall forwardline or 3 tall backline.

Too often breaking down across H/F line
Josh Hunt on the forward flank? Chapman more as a forward? Pods further up the field? I don't know what Scott's plans are but IMO it needs to be addressed. It'd also be a headache with Hawkins moving between forward & ruck relief

Forward Pressure.
We always had it with Varcoe IMO but it was largely lost as he's become more offensively damaging. Motlop could play that role well IMO, he seems to have that explosiveness about him. Also dropping a tall forward for Hunt might be worth a try. He's quite good in the air and his body strength could cause problems. Maybe also replace Stokes with a quicker player like Menzel/Duncan/Wojak and last an emphasis on fitness will hopefully solve this problem.

Tactical unpredictability
I don't remember ever seeing a surprising change made by Bomber, teams each week would know exactly what they were up against. Hopefully Scott can be a bit more cunning.

Wouldn't necessarily require too big a shift in game plan but rather some tactical role changes for key players and I think we could be back in it.

My ideal team:

FB: Milburn Scarlett Kelly
HB: Enright Taylor T.Hunt
C: Varcoe Selwood Byrnes
HF: Chapman Pods J.Hunt
FF: Johnson Hawkins Motlop
C: Ottens Bartel Corey
Int: Ling Wojak Menzel
Sub: Mooney
Emg: Duncan, Guthrie, Stokes, Lonergan, Cowan

 

[you pick one]

I don't think there was anything wrong with the game plan last year I just think Collingwood were extrodinarily accurate and Bomber did a poor job in setting up the team. IMO Bomber has always been extrodinary at assembling a team and second to none at developing players but a tactical imbecile on matchday. Hats off to Bomber he won us two premierships and I will be forever thankfull but I'm pretty sure Scott will be an improvement on match day.

So how do we improve?

More clearances
Corey back in the middle, Bartel used as a midfielder and Chapman less so will almost certainly improve our clearance numbers. Ling will need to reinvent himself as a tagger, he has done it every other time, perhaps with 6 months to work on it he can do it again.

Smaller more mobile across the field
Scarlett, Taylor, Lonergan, Ottens, Hawkins, Mooney & Pods is simply too tall IMO. Drop Mooney & Lonergan and we'll look a much more mobile team. Rarely can I remember a team dominating us in the air so don't see the need for a 3 tall forwardline or 3 tall backline.

Too often breaking down across H/F line
Josh Hunt on the forward flank? Chapman more as a forward? Pods further up the field? I don't know what Scott's plans are but IMO it needs to be addressed. It'd also be a headache with Hawkins moving between forward & ruck relief

Forward Pressure.
We always had it with Varcoe IMO but it was largely lost as he's become more offensively damaging. Motlop could play that role well IMO, he seems to have that explosiveness about him. Also dropping a tall forward for Hunt might be worth a try. He's quite good in the air and his body strength could cause problems. Maybe also replace Stokes with a quicker player like Menzel/Duncan/Wojak and last an emphasis on fitness will hopefully solve this problem.

Tactical unpredictability
I don't remember ever seeing a surprising change made by Bomber, teams each week would know exactly what they were up against. Hopefully Scott can be a bit more cunning.

Wouldn't necessarily require too big a shift in game plan but rather some tactical role changes for key players and I think we could be back in it.

My ideal team:

FB: Milburn Scarlett Kelly
HB: Enright Taylor T.Hunt
C: Varcoe Selwood Byrnes
HF: Chapman Pods J.Hunt
FF: Johnson Hawkins Motlop
C: Ottens Bartel Corey
Int: Ling Wojak Menzel
Sub: Mooney
Emg: Duncan, Guthrie, Stokes, Lonergan, Cowan

Interesting going with only one ageing ruckman.

 

[vinum coupe]

Wow how good was lappin on SEN?
Incredible amount of detail on our game plan that he gave out.

Didn't catch the whole thing though.
Only the last 5 min or so.

SJ middle
Hawk forward
1 ruck (they think)

 

[Claude Balls]

Agree that Bomber was a tactical dunce.

One thing I noticed in GF 1 last year was that St Kilda always threw it straight on the boot at stoppages, rather than trying to finesse the clearance via multiple handballs. This seemed to nullify Collingwood's numbers-at-the-contest advantage which was a big part of their strength last year. I.e. Collingwood may as well have had 10 blokes to St Kilda's 8 at every contest (due to their zoning and pace), but by clearing the ball immediately with a quick kick forward, it generally entailed a 50/50 contest further down the ground, which they won 50% of the time. They ultimately lost the replay of course, but in that first match I was really struck by the contrast between their method at stoppages compared to Geelong's overuse the week before.

This does not constitute an entire game plan obviously, but it is food for thought.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

DanA, while I agree with the vast majority of your post, why does everyone insist on listing their teams with Ottens rucking on his own, and worse, a tall as a sub? If Scott does that he's more of a tactical dunce than Bomber ever was (and Bomber was indeed a tactical dunce) IMO.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Wow how good was lappin on SEN?
Incredible amount of detail on our game plan that he gave out.

Didn't catch the whole thing though.
Only the last 5 min or so.

SJ middle
Hawk forward
1 ruck (they think)

Interesting.

When they say 'one ruck' I'm absolutely sure that means either West or Vardy or god forbid Hawkins, playing essentially forward, but helping out Ottens in the ruck. You couldn't possibly go in with literally only one guy who can play ruck, and you surely couldn't be stupid enough to put Mooney in the ruck.

Sounds like a good interview though.

 

[Claude Balls]

Wow how good was lappin on SEN?
Incredible amount of detail on our game plan that he gave out.

Didn't catch the whole thing though.
Only the last 5 min or so.

SJ middle
Hawk forward
1 ruck (they think)

Thoughts on SJ in the middle?

He could be great value, but given he's good for 50+ goals when fit, it may still be an overall loss. Plus, Varcoe and Chappy are apparently going to spend much more time in the middle this year...

Maybe it's just part of the great midfield rotation. Worth a trial at least I suppose.

 

[you pick one]

Interesting.

When they say 'one ruck' I'm absolutely sure that means either West or Vardy or god forbid Hawkins, playing essentially forward, but helping out Ottens in the ruck. You couldn't possibly go in with literally only one guy who can play ruck, and you surely couldn't be stupid enough to put Mooney in the ruck.

Sounds like a good interview though.

I might have got it right Pne ruck and share the second ruck spot between Hawk, Moons and Lonners(West or Vardy if they can push one of the other 3 out)grant you that.

As I said you get to play an extra mid.

 

[vinum coupe]

Dont have much time, (cooking dinner)

Hawkins
No they won't be using hawk in the ruck.
Yes he loves it there as he is a confidence player.
Yes you may see him there from time to time but they need him to develop as a forward.


SJ
He has been unlucky over recent years in that the cats have been loaded with mids.
And he kicks 60 in the forward line so is invaluable.
However they think they lost the most creative player in the league and they think SJ can provide that around the ball.
They still think he will kick 50.

 

[SJ]

Johnson should remain at half-forward, not only does he kick 60 a year but also has league-high assists.

A must.

 

[vinum coupe]

Just expanding a bit.

He was questioned on the ability of SJ to play midfiled with regards to his engine.
"he has an enormous tank. Has always been miles fitter than Ablett. Ablett was a freak"

Said they have to calm Ben Johnson down at training as he keeps trying to smash 'senior' players. Incredibly competitive.

That Geelong have always played a bit of a forward press. They wont really increase this. They'll concentrate on pressuring the ball carrier 'ala collingwood' and fully expect this will see them get opened up occasionally.
( thank F*** as this has driven me insane)

Said that they have a great 8 or so back group that will help protect this.

*note; that now makes varcoe a supercoach lock for me. He drifts past so many ball carriers trying to block space it is not funny. Now he has license he will take them out.

Sub
They are like many teams in that they are not sure how it will all pan out. But if clubs are guessing which way to go they will go small rather than tall as speed back to defense is so important.

Rucks
Said they think otto will ruck on his own all year....if he can.
However they have loads of options.
Hawk can ruck but needs practice and they want him forward.
West is a good ruck but is probably a little small.
Vardy seemed to be the one. "look out for him over the next 12 months. Can take a grab like otto forward but is more mobile"

"all of them will get time this year"
Also mentioned dawson in passing. Didn't menton Blake.

Said that Scott believes that the high 1/2 backs and high1/2 forwards need to play as part of the midfield rotation.

That's about all I heard.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Thanks for expanding VC.

Very happy to hear no mention of Blake. Hopefully he will be left in the 2's all year.

Sounds like one of West or Vardy will support Otto I just hope Otto is fit enough to play a lot of games

On SJ, I have no doubt that when fit he could be a really good midfielder but he's our best forward and I feel we need him there, because we have better depth in the mids than we do in the forwards. But I shall be interested to see how he goes in the mid.

 

[DanA]

DanA, while I agree with the vast majority of your post, why does everyone insist on listing their teams with Ottens rucking on his own, and worse, a tall as a sub? If Scott does that he's more of a tactical dunce than Bomber ever was (and Bomber was indeed a tactical dunce) IMO.

Hawkins iS 2nd ruck and Mooney has played every position on the ground in his career. My reasoning was that I'd rather start an extra small on the ground but have a tall option in case of injury or exposure. Vardy would be better suited but I haven't seen enough of him.