Why do we use the wings ?

[boubba_25]

I just watched another replay of the Collingwood game. What i still can't understand is why Collingwood continually play down the wing. Yes we might not have the skills to control the centre but what I don't understand is why sometimes instead of chipping it around, we should go direct through the middle of the ground. What I found is that since we use the wings, most of the time the ball is delivered to the forwards near the boundary and half of there shots are pretty difficult to kick rather than been shots in front of goal example Thursday night game. The only time we seem to generate run and consistent play of football is down the centre, I am in all support of Mick but I can’t understand why we can’t play direct football and use the middle and delivered the ball to our forwards in centre as the results of using the corridor.


But I just question why do we do this

Your thoughts

 

[abs_of_STEELE]

I have NFI why we do it. IF we get Bucks next year I'm certain that we'd have a different and better gameplan.

 

[thatday]

Because, MM is our coach.

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?t=562464&page=5

 

[Pie eyed]

I have NFI why we do it. IF we get Bucks next year I'm certain that we'd have a different and better gameplan.

Bucks, or any coach for that matter will have the same "clay" to mould as MM.

Too many reason that a change of coach will somehow miraculously change our list.
Sure there may be a short term jump in enthusiasm but at the end of the day, in the near future, we will have more or less the same list.
The players, shortcomings will still be there.

 

[hellfire]

It's a shame because Mick used to be right when he said we didn't have the skills to pull it off (Licuria, Holland, O'Bree, Johnson, Burns - they were all average users of the ball, and weren't quick or suited to a running the corridor style). But now we have guys like Pendlebury, Davis, Thomas, Didak, Lockyer, Beams, Wellingham, McCarthy and eventually Sidebottom, all going through the midfield. They're all above average users of the ball, most of them have pace and flair and would thrive charging through the midfield. With a midfield with greater skill, the risk of a turnover and subsequent damage on the rebound is lower than it was with our old workman-like midfield.

We shouldn't change to an over-possessing game plan, we just need to use the corridor more. When we do use it, we can look a million bucks. We have the cattle to use it, we just need to be instructed to do so! I'm sure they don't like hearing from the coach that they don't have the skills to pull it off... it's no wonder we never seem to be "up" anymore! Change the gameplan, let them use their skills to their full potential, give them some hunger! This doesn't mean we have to change coaches, it just means our coach needs to realise it's time to change the plan a bit! Because until that happens, we'll never beat a team like Carlton or Hawthorn, who require the opposition to attack hard through the corridor.

 

[Frankie23]

What is the meaning of life...?
Why do we use the wings...?

Life throws up some tough questions lol

 

[RRRooocccaaa]

Bucks, or any coach for that matter will have the same "clay" to mould as MM.

Too many reason that a change of coach will somehow miraculously change our list.
Sure there may be a short term jump in enthusiasm but at the end of the day, in the near future, we will have more or less the same list.
The players, shortcomings will still be there.

Maybe Pie-eyed. But a creative coach may take a completely different look at that list and work out how those parts can be used more effectively.

It was telling that last year in our 86 point demolition of Geelong Bucks was heard to say "It's why Geelong are such a good team - it doesn't matter who they're playing, they play the same way all the time". Not a negative - it's almost like they play well in their sleep! If their form is down or they're carrying injuries it's not as much of a dip for them - they still play the same way and everyone knows their role.

It's why the Pies need to settle a bit and work out how we can travel more consistently. Not just kicking, but frame of mind. I reckon the confidence - and hence the kicking - will snap back once we find our groove again.

Maybe the 'playing the wings' strategy is just a steadier while MM tries to get the team back in the right frame of mind? I dunno...

 

[Chase the Ace]

MM has always been a 'defensive' coach
It all his years at the Dogs, WCE (and us) he has had a game plan that in the main has bought him success.

If you listen to him he reasons that, by going wide from the backline any turn overs or poor skill errors will give his teams a second chance because the ball may well go out of bounds, hence his teams get a second chance to regain possession during the throw in.
He says a turn over in the midfield will ultimately lead to the opposing team having a shot for goal, he eliminates that by going wide and not coming inboard until there is an easy position in the middle or when our forwards have got clear in the F50.

That's the theory of it, we can discuss it at length but in the end it is the coach who decides, not wannabe coaches on BF.

 

[Brent24]

It's a shame because Mick used to be right when he said we didn't have the skills to pull it off (Licuria, Holland, O'Bree, Johnson, Burns - they were all average users of the ball, and weren't quick or suited to a running the corridor style). But now we have guys like Pendlebury, Davis, Thomas, Didak, Lockyer, Beams, Wellingham, McCarthy and eventually Sidebottom, all going through the midfield. They're all above average users of the ball, most of them have pace and flair and would thrive charging through the midfield. With a midfield with greater skill, the risk of a turnover and subsequent damage on the rebound is lower than it was with our old workman-like midfield.

We shouldn't change to an over-possessing game plan, we just need to use the corridor more. When we do use it, we can look a million bucks. We have the cattle to use it, we just need to be instructed to do so! I'm sure they don't like hearing from the coach that they don't have the skills to pull it off... it's no wonder we never seem to be "up" anymore! Change the gameplan, let them use their skills to their full potential, give them some hunger! This doesn't mean we have to change coaches, it just means our coach needs to realise it's time to change the plan a bit! Because until that happens, we'll never beat a team like Carlton or Hawthorn, who require the opposition to attack hard through the corridor.

 

[Dave The Man]

MM has always been a 'defensive' coach
It all his years at the Dogs, WCE (and us) he has had a game plan that in the main has bought him success.

If you listen to him he reasons that, by going wide from the backline any turn overs or poor skill errors will give his teams a second chance because the ball may well go out of bounds, hence his teams get a second chance to regain possession during the throw in.
He says a turn over in the midfield will ultimately lead to the opposing team having a shot for goal, he eliminates that by going wide and not coming inboard until there is an easy position in the middle or when our forwards have got clear in the F50.

That's the theory of it, we can discuss it at length but in the end it is the coach who decides, not wannabe coaches on BF.

It's a Good Theroy but I think teams might be catching on how to stop it by Slowing us Down and Force us to go back and switch play

 

[Chase the Ace]

It's a Good Theroy but I think teams might be catching on how to stop it by Slowing us Down and Force us to go back and switch play

Yep, I think there is something in what you say DTM

 

[FuManchu]

What is the meaning of life...?
Why do we use the wings...?

Life throws up some tough questions lol

MM might be taking the meaning of life question too far if he thinks its all about the journey, not the destination. Because his journey seems to be the long bloody way, around the flanks!

 

[Jabso]

I think the wide gameplan certainly has a place. I also get frustrated at people who criticise it just because it's different, or it's not Geelong or Hawthorn's gameplan. No team has won a premiership by copying the previous premiers gameplan.

I think we should try to release a few players through the corridor more often though, or players should run up there more often. Because we play wide, the opposition is often weak through the middle because they are covering our wide positions. That's why we look pretty good when we do go through the middle. My main criticism of the gameplan is that and we aren't good at switching the footy. Whether that's fault of the gameplan, matchday coaching, weekly training or the players.

 

[FuManchu]

I think the wide gameplan certainly has a place. I also get frustrated at people who criticise it just because it's different, or it's not Geelong or Hawthorn's gameplan. No team has won a premiership by copying the previous premiers gameplan.

I think we should try to release a few players through the corridor more often though, or players should run up there more often. Because we play wide, the opposition is often weak through the middle because they are covering our wide positions. That's why we look pretty good when we do go through the middle. My main criticism of the gameplan is that and we aren't good at switching the footy. Whether that's fault of the gameplan, matchday coaching, weekly training or the players.

The switching of play relies on good footskills. We just dont have them, even when not under pressure, we are poor at times by foot.

The other night, however, MM did have the right mix of contesting in the corridor, he had no choice, the ball was always going to be in dispute there becausethats where geelong play the game and they are such a high possession team.

But MM had it right in that once we got the ball, we had to get it away from their superior strength in that corridor. To take it out wide made sense.

But its against other teams that dont have the physicality of geelong that it doesnt stand up. Especially as soon as we turn it over and they run it straight out thru the middle in half the time it took us to take it around the flanks.

 

[Optimax]

Why is the sky blue?

what is so special about 7?

What is the meaning of life?

Will the simpsons ever end?

What ever happened to the old art of conversation?


So many questions still to be answered and you thread is another example, i will also add no one sooks about the wide gameplan when we win........

 

[Chase the Ace]

So many questions still to be answered and you thread is another example, i will also add no one sooks about the wide gameplan when we win........

Exactly right, when we win everyone talks about how effective certain players are, but of course in being so effective, they are just carrying out the Malthouse game plan.

Strange world isn't it?

 

[Visions]

So many questions still to be answered and you thread is another example, i will also add no one sooks about the wide gameplan when we win........

Which is at 50%. So half the time we are bitching and the other half of the time we are celebrating. Quite the Jekyll and Hyde.

 

[Chase the Ace]

Which is at 50%. So half the time we are bitching and the other half of the time we are celebrating. Quite the Jekyll and Hyde.

But as we have recruited better so has the % got better, still using the same game plan.
For instance we have played in the finals for the last 3 years.
in 02/03 we played in the GF
In 2000 we were coming off a spoon.

Perspective is an asset

 

[Rohan Coventry]

But as we have recruited better so has the % got better, still using the same game plan.

Not really.

You could say that the recruiting improved onwards the 05 Draft. Since this period we've won 54% of games, which is marginally better than 50%.

 

[Snoop Dog]

its odd isnt it. mick says that the midfield is the one area you have to be v good in to win a premiership and yet we have one that demands we need to go around the flanks bc we dont have enough confidence they wont turn it over....

 

[FuManchu]

Why is the sky blue?

what is so special about 7?

What is the meaning of life?

Will the simpsons ever end?

What ever happened to the old art of conversation?


So many questions still to be answered and you thread is another example, i will also add no one sooks about the wide gameplan when we win........

Garbage, I have commenting about this since 2003, when for the life of me, with Rocca and tarrant have pretty good seasons, I could never figure out why we persisted in delaying movement of the ball to them. Nothing has changed since.

 

[thatday]

This flawed game plan that seems to win finals interstate and have players playing above themselves and came within a few points of beating Geelong in a prelim has got to go!!!

But it hasn't won us a premiership, has it. So yes, after 9 years it does have to go. Near enough isn't good enough.

 

[FuManchu]

starka is DL

 

[Ant85]

its odd isnt it. mick says that the midfield is the one area you have to be v good in to win a premiership and yet we have one that demands we need to go around the flanks bc we dont have enough confidence they wont turn it over....

I just wonder if that lack of confidence is coming from MM, or the players themselves?

Could it be that MM doesn't trust the ability of his players to go quick and direct to what is apparently among the best forward setups in the competition?

Even when we rebound, we take forever to get the ball inside 50, and by then the opposition has flooded back.

I have mentioned in other threads that our poor kicks has more to do with our psychological/lack of confidence/drive/hunger than with our actual "skill". Even BJ when he gets the run in him somehow has pinpoint accuracy.

Does MM have faith in his own players to play at their ability? Chipping around the edges for several years kinda stifles one's confidence in his own skill.

I compare that to Carlton, where the directive has been "go to your best ability" and we have youngsters playing BOG because they're being let loose. Why don't we let our players off the leash?

It appears MM is very strict on discipline and adherence to the game plan. Sometimes this discipline gets us over the line, other times it lets us down because there are occasions when you just have to trust in the player's personal ability. MM doesn't do that.

The last player under MM in the black and white I can remember that was confident and audacious enough to defy MM and play to his own style was Bucks.

 

[Snoop Dog]

I just wonder if that lack of confidence is coming from MM, or the players themselves?

Could it be that MM doesn't trust the ability of his players to go quick and direct to what is apparently among the best forward setups in the competition?

Even when we rebound, we take forever to get the ball inside 50, and by then the opposition has flooded back.

I have mentioned in other threads that our poor kicks has more to do with our psychological/lack of confidence/drive/hunger than with our actual "skill". Even BJ when he gets the run in him somehow has pinpoint accuracy.

Does MM have faith in his own players to play at their ability? Chipping around the edges for several years kinda stifles one's confidence in his own skill.

I compare that to Carlton, where the directive has been "go to your best ability" and we have youngsters playing BOG because they're being let loose. Why don't we let our players off the leash?

It appears MM is very strict on discipline and adherence to the game plan. Sometimes this discipline gets us over the line, other times it lets us down because there are occasions when you just have to trust in the player's personal ability. MM doesn't do that.

The last player under MM in the black and white I can remember that was confident and audacious enough to defy MM and play to his own style was Bucks.

lot of truth in this. Johno is a classic as well. often say to the blokes i watch the footy with if he is trapped in a pocket and needs to kick a goal from the boundary line he will more often kick it - i think thats got a lot to do with theres no pressure bc nobody is expecting him to do it whereas you ask him to hit a target from 40m with someone tailing him and he's a bunny in a spotlight.

I think we have some incredibly talented players and a direct approach would suit us well. Hawks leave Roughie and Franklin one out. Imagine if we had Medhurst, Didak and a Trav Cloke left on their own. You have to play to your strengths and quick direct ball to our fwds is the go. Hawks are helped bc they have v penetrating kickers like Young, Dew, Hodge etc whereas we dont.