Strategy Where is the game headed tactically?

[suspect footskills]

In the last decade or so football teams have become more and more competitive in their efforts to outdo one another.
The amounts spent by football departments on chasing an extra percentage or so in physical performance is enormous yet there is little hard proof of whether it's money well spent. This has led to a follow the leader mentality with trends emerging each season aping the previous years Premiers both on and off the field.
Nearly every team adopted altitude training after we won in 2010 despite the huge cost and evidence suggesting it's benefits lasted only a few weeks to month.
More easily measurable was the effectiveness of our forward 50 press. It made its way into many teams structures with varying levels of success and is still often seen in use at kick-ins.
Recently though I haven't been able to discern any really visible structural trends emerging. By this I mean visible set ups like our '10-'11 press or the Hawks' cluster of '08.
Where is the game heading and what influences do you see shaping the game in the next few years?

 

[Ketchup]

If we knew, we'd be AFL coaches

 

[rustyg70]

Hopefully not down the same path that Paul Roos and Ross Lyon are strolling down.
That would be an awfully slow and agonising walk.

 

[suspect footskills]

Hopefully not down the same path that Paul Roos and Ross Lyon are strolling down.
That would be an awfully slow and agonising walk.

Couldn't agree more with the above statement. In that respect I guess we're lucky seeing Port dominate playing a fast attacking game that's nice to watch.
That shutdown, sideways kicking crap Melbourne served up on Queen's Bday might have them better placed on the ladder but it was boring sh*t from a viewing perspective.

 

[mike123]

Sling shot footy

 

[Knightmare]

The double green light theory you see from Port Adelaide I expect to see more and particularly from those most elite running and kicking clubs.

Even when the momentum is against you just keep going for it with aggressive kicking and aggressive ball movement.

Those most talented clubs - Gold Coast, GWS, Port Adelaide, Sydney, Hawthorn, Fremantle. They could all use it to really blow out some of the worse teams and it will almost certainly become that next trend/fad in a copycat league.

 

[Pie eyed]

Well I think Cloke should seriously consider using the place kick next season.
Practice over Christmas.

 

[cleomenes]

This will be decided when the AFL makes a clear decision about interchange. If they drastically modify it to go back to the original intention of allowing an injured player to be treated and then return to play if possible, some sort of resumption of positional play may be possible. The massive increase in player fitness and skill improvements over the last 10 years will work against this however.
Restricting interchange might give us better footy to watch, but the coaches in their relentless quest for control over events on the field will work hard to negate any change made.
A return to old rule interpretations would have a big impact too. The directions to umpires are a big influence on the protracted periods of milling around the ball we endure now.
Tactics are always the children of players' skillsets. Teams play the way they do because the coaches believe that they have chosen the best way for their players to maximise their strengths and minimise their weaknesses. Hawthorn have been very successful in this. One could argue that Malthouse failed badly in it in his time at West Coast, when he had a stable of dynamic players that he stifled with a defensive game plan.
Final comment - no idea what is coming next, but I hope it isn't more of the Roos/Lyon stifling style. I prefer what Buckley is trying to do with us, even though the skills to execute seem a bit lacking at present.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Good topic!

I think there has been an increasing trend towards having players that are intelligent and can learn quickly and adapt.

Tactics / Strategies / Gameplans have become an increasingly important aspect of the game, and players abilities to learn quickly and adapt to different opponents will become increasingly important.

Just like the game of paper-rock-scissors, no one game style will become dominant - all the more so with 18 teams in the competition. Teams have to have a way to beat all of their opponents, as we found out the hard way in 2011.

Players will need to become more adaptable. We're already seeing that with players like Reid or Swan or Elliott who can move around. It'll become even more so. Frost is a wonderful shutdown player, but unless he evolves and develops more aspects to his game, he will be superceded by a more versatile player eventually.

We will have more injuries as we push the envelope of what teams expect of players. I don't think there is much the rules committee can do about it. Coaches will always seek competitive advantage by having their players run faster for longer ... And players will overstep the boundaries and get injured. It's only a matter of time before team lists expand beyond the 40 or 45 or whatever. As it is now, Collingwood has already hit the critical stage where they've struggle to field a backline.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

Sling shot footy

Does everyone realise sling shot footy isn't actually a thing?

Unless dropping a spare or two back who run it out is now simply being branded "sling shot". That's been happening long before "gameplans" became an official thing.

I think the cluster was the first time when the wider footy world realised teams had actual gameplans and structures designed to beat teams that were technically better than the team coming up with the strucutre.

Cluster? Designed to beat Geelong
Press w/Swarm? Designed to beat Geelong

Notice the pattern? Geelong were simply better than everyone else, so inferior sides had to design rigid, formal structres to try and counter their sheer ability.

Having said that, now that EVERYONE has some sort of structure gameplan, the round-a-bout will come back around and simply having better players is now the thing to have. In the end, gameplans means jackshit if you don't have the players to execute. A Hawthorn or Sydney side that doesn't play to their structures will still generally win more games than they lose because they have better players.

A team like ours, which DOES have great players (best in comp level of players), still has a LOT of so so/young/inexperienced players, so we have to be far more rigid in adhering to our strucutre and keeping up our effort/intesity or we get shown up.

 

[mike123]

Does everyone realise sling shot footy isn't actually a thing?

Unless dropping a spare or two back who run it out is now simply being branded "sling shot". That's been happening long before "gameplans" became an official thing.

I think the cluster was the first time when the wider footy world realised teams had actual gameplans and structures designed to beat teams that were technically better than the team coming up with the strucutre.

Cluster? Designed to beat Geelong
Press w/Swarm? Designed to beat Geelong

Notice the pattern? Geelong were simply better than everyone else, so inferior sides had to design rigid, formal structres to try and counter their sheer ability.

Having said that, now that EVERYONE has some sort of structure gameplan, the round-a-bout will come back around and simply having better players is now the thing to have. In the end, gameplans means jackshit if you don't have the players to execute. A Hawthorn or Sydney side that doesn't play to their structures will still generally win more games than they lose because they have better players.

A team like ours, which DOES have great players (best in comp level of players), still has a LOT of so so/young/inexperienced players, so we have to be far more rigid in adhering to our strucutre and keeping up our effort/intesity or we get shown up.

Even more sling shot footy then. Port Adelaide is a running side, so to counter their running oppositions will put players behind the ball to intercept their attacks and just hold the ball up slow play down so they don't waste their energy. Slow Sling shot footy.

 

[Robroy22]

Why would restricting interchange give us any better footy to watch Cleo? I quite liked the way we played in 2010 and it's only been since the interchange was limited that coaches have brought in the defensive mauls to limit how much players can run and score against them. Yes I'm aware that Roos did it in 05 with the swans but good teams had been able to beat it by running through the clusters until the interchange caps. Now players have to be "monitored" every second of every game to see if they can keep up their running patterns....
If anything we should be having unlimited interchange and 8 on the bench and let's watch the running game go then.
Interchange caps were only ever brought in to limit the big clubs having "more" quality players on their teams. It was the "anti Pies rule" after the 2010 domination. Now Port Adelaide has shown everyone what they are going to have to do to get around interchange limitation....they have 16 guys on their list that can run 15+ beep tests, most other clubs atm have 7 or 8. So they're players still run away from the teams that want to play slowly and block it up.

The AFL should come clean and dismiss the interchange cap. It's an archaic attempt to slow down an ever evolving game.

 

[jmac70]

To answer the title of the thread........right where we want it.