Who will play on Hall (and O'Loughlin)?

[Grasshopper17]

These two blokes have really carved Brisbane up this season. In Round 20 Hall beat his opponent(s) all day and the Lions were lucky he didn't start kicking straight til late in the first half. O'Loughlin mightn't play but even then who plays on Bazza? Michael is too slow for him on the lead, ditto Leppitsch and Leppa probably isn't quite strong enough for him either - if he plays off him and tries to leap over the top of him Hall will just lead into space as he did back in Round 7. Bradshaw can probably go with Hall on the lead but I doubt he'd be strong enough in the one on ones. Funnily enough Alastair Lynch would probably be the best matchup for Hall, because he's quick enough to go with him on the lead and he would also be strong enough. Obviously that won't happen (especially after playing in the heat on Friday night) because Hall would run him ragged, but it's an interesting aside.

So what is it going to be? Double team Hall with Michael and Bradshaw? Drop Darryl White into the hole 30 metres out as a loose man? What will they do if O'Loughlin plays? Maybe play Leppitsch on him, with White playing 5-10 metres in front of him. Leppa can probably match him one on one but would have no hope on the lead. In fact it wouldn't so much be a lead as Magic Micky gathering on the bounce at 50, turning on a 6 pence, dodging and weaving around 3 imaginary opponents ok I'm panicking now the bloke's coming back from a hamstring! Still, don't say I didn't tell you so!

Personally I don't like the thought of 4 Brisbane tall defenders playing on 2 Sydney defenders - to me it's overkill - but if the ball comes inside 50 in the air, what are the alternatives? I think we've just got to rely on the midfielders running hard in both directions to clog up the defensive 50 to cut down the places for Hall and O'Loughlin to lead into. Not only that they will have to stop the Swans p*ssfarting around with that infuriatingly successful chipkick-mark-chipkick-mark-chipkick-mark-goal game plan that served them so well a month ago. They were able to stop the Crows doing it and they will have to do it again this week and do it better.

Oh and don't make me start on Goodes

 

[luthor]

From what I saw at the Gabba a few weeks ago, the problem wasn't so much matching up on Hall himself, as it was the latitude we allowed Sydney's midfielders to get into positions that they could drill low and relatively short passes on to Hall's chest.

We persisted all day with that "zoning off" that conceded the Swans numerous chip and mark possessions around the wings and onto the half-forward flanks.

The theory seemed to be that they would more often than not, stuff up their foot-passing and give it up to our "zoned' players.

Well guess what? They didn't stuff up !!

They are an extremely well-drilled, patient and well-coached side and we simply cannot go into the PF with the same game plan as we did a few weeks ago.

We have got to man up one-on-one if and when they go to this slow, short chip and mark game and NOT concede those easy possessions.

If we don't, I fear we could be facing a similar or worse outcome than a few weeks ago.

We have got to force them to kick LONG (not short) to Hall so our best defenders (Michael and leppitsch) have got time to get a good run and jump to spoil the ball away from him.

That's what they're really good at.

 

[lioncub]

One thing I know for sure, our game plan this time will be completely different. Lethal will not make the same mistake again (especially in a final).

My only real concern is Goodes. How can we shut his game down? Has any other team? What method did they use?

 

[Stocka]

The problem with Hall last time, was not so much Michael not being fast enough to keep up with him, but as Luthors pointed out (alebit, with regard to the midfielders), the amount of space that was allowed to Hall in order for him to get free in the first place.

Michael and a number of other defenders, appeared to zone off at the stoppages, as well as at other times in general play. Hall beat him through smart play, rather than necessarily having a marked advantage physically (although he may have an edge on pace, Michael is one of the best key-defenders in the league with regard to athleticism and timing).

In retrospect, I'd say that the biggest concern coming from the last game against Sydney, which was also mirrored in the final against Collingwood, was the fact that we did not take full advantage of set shots on goal - J.Brown in particular. In both of these games, we had a number of opportunities to extend our lead to a decent "buffer zone", but missed set shots on goal which would have achieved this.

The fact that we'll be on a bigger ground (than Sydney are normally used to at home) this week, should be to our advantage, with regard to getting the ball to Lynch and Brown (assuming our midfield performs to the same standard as it did against the Crows). However, they'll need to be on their game with regard to accuracy from set shots.

If we play as we did against the Crows, I'd be fairly confident of winning again this week.

 

[Stocka]

With regards to shutting A.Goodes down, I don't necessarily think that playing him with a direct match-up is the answer, although M.Pike might be an option to run with him around the ground. Pike could cause a few headaches for Sydney, with his ability to pop up as a lose man and set up play into the forward line.

However, Goodes may just be one of those players that you can't completely shut down. With this in mind, you have to plan and play your own game, to your own strengths, without getting hung up about only trying to stop the other team. Matthews has often indicated that he approaches the game in this manner - putting the best foot forward, and going out to WIN the game, rather than to stop the other team from winning. This approach, matched with the capabilities of our players, has been why we've been good enough to win the last two flags.

Personally, I'd be more concerned about the Sydney running players being allowed the same latitude as the last time we met, than I would about Goodes or Hall.

 

[luthor]

Originally posted by Stocka
With regards to shutting A.Goodes down, I don't necessarily think that playing him with a direct match-up is the answer, although M.Pike might be an option to run with him around the ground. Pike could cause a few headaches for Sydney, with his ability to pop up as a lose man and set up play into the forward line.

However, Goodes may just be one of those players that you can't completely shut down. With this in mind, you have to plan and play your own game, to your own strengths, without getting hung up about only trying to stop the other team. Matthews has often indicated that he approaches the game in this manner - putting the best foot forward, and going out to WIN the game, rather than to stop the other team from winning. This approach, matched with the capabilities of our players, has been why we've been good enough to win the last two flags.

Personally, I'd be more concerned about the Sydney running players being allowed the same latitude as the last time we met, than I would about Goodes or Hall.

Bingo Stocka, double bingo on what you say in your last paragraph.

The silly thing about that last game at the Gabba was, that even though we conceded far too many easy possessions, we still would have won comfortably had we converted our set shots on goal.

The missed shots actually were a huge contributary feature to the Swans getting the ball down the other end through the kick-ins and the subsequent chip and marks down to within range of their goals. Most of the time it was slow, dull and boring to watch but all you had to do was look at the scoreboard to know it worked!

Of the 6 goals they got in the third quarter, I counted 4 that were directly or indirectly attributable to OUR set shot misses.

THat's an 8 goal turnaround in one quarter of footy!!!

We MUST convert this time but even if we have another off day with the goal-kicking, I still believe we can win, we provided there is a contingency plan to counter their kick-ins.

They murdered us in this area in Round 20.

We must have a plan this time because I believe last time, it hadn't been given much thought.

 

[LionHeart20]

I hope that Goodes doesn't cause us headaches again like he's done the last few games.

I reckon Sydney are gonna risk O'Loughlin apparently hamstrings are pretty hard to recover from. If Leppitsch gets the all clear i'd maybe put him on O'Loughlin and Michael to go with Hall.

 

[Slax]

I don't think O'Loughlin will make it up for the game so he is not a worry.

Michael has to get Hall first then maybe Lepper if he fails.

The major problem will be finding a way around the Sydney midfield who play tight to their man and give very little room. It has beaten us twice this year and is what worked against Port.

 

[Grasshopper17]

Hmmm yeah and I didn't even think about Leppa a) possibly being suspended and b) the fact that he's played two half decent finals but his shoulder is still troubling and as a result the poor bugger can't catch a cold at the moment!

Originally posted by luthor
Of the 6 goals they got in the third quarter, I counted 4 that were directly or indirectly attributable to OUR set shot misses.

THat's an 8 goal turnaround in one quarter of footy!!!

We must have a plan this time because I believe last time, it hadn't been given much thought.

It's weird because on reflection I seem to remember Brisbane doing pretty well winning the ball from stoppages (having said that I think back to the game against Port last week and that second quarter and I just think WOW - stop that and play fair) - from memory I think the build up to most of Sydney's goals started off half back, or as you say from kickins. So yeah the main thing is to kick straighter, but also pay greater attention to keeping the ball locked inside 50 for greater periods of time. The way Sydney were able to clear the ball out of defence that day was really worrying, as it was last week against Collingwood, and as it was against Essendon in Round 16. The midfield has simply got to work harder in both directions. Your second point is also valid - I think that just like us as supporters, the players just thought they'd turn up and win after what they did to Collingwood the week before. You would have to expect that complacency would not be a factor this time around.

 

[cjwalkley]

There seems to have been a marked turnaround in the attitude of the defenders recently, with players less inclined to zone off and instead play one on one football. This probably occurred after the Swans game at the Gabba. That said if Hall plays close to goal, then I would put Michael on him, however if he plays further up the field then Leppitsch or Bradshaw would get the job. Copeland or White would be good on O'Loughlin or Chris Scott if he is fit.

Goodes needs to be run everywhere by Charman and Keating. If he tries to help out in defence, then Charman and Keating have to present themselves as forward options. They need to jump into Goodes at every contest, and wear him down early.