I see what you mean, but i don't think the second half was tha different. It was just that when the handball came, players were then more inclined to run with the footy. Let alone there was no handballing to stagnant players, which i think was all about confidence.

Centre clearances have been shocking all year. The last quarter, suddenly we have the run, players are all moving, we suddenly start winning some. Quick handballs to moving targets who were then able to kick long to space, or where forwards had been able to move to

Confidence is a huge factor, no doubt. For me, it was as if the players stopped thinking about the process and were trying to focus on the result. By that I mean, in the first half when running the ball out of defence, quite often their first option was to look sideways or backwards as if there was a certain formula that needed to be followed.

However, by the second half the focus seemed to shift to the fact that their aim was to simply get the ball in to the forward line as quickly as possible to kick as many goals as possible becuase they were so far behind. This resulted in more direct play, long kicking and like you mentioned, harder running.

After watching the highlights, it was amazing to see just how many Melbourne (and Freo) goals were the result of long kicks in to the forward line. Moreover, just how beneficial it is to have a crumbing forward who can pounce on the loose ball and not just rely on players being hit on the chest on the lead (which still should always be a first option).

Jamar jumping straight into Sandilands at the centre bouces was golden. Very instrumental in gaining the ascendency out of them middle in the second half. God I hope some one has finally managed to convince the Big Russian he is big enough to command his own post code and its about time he showed it.

It's exactly the same game plan, we simply did it better.

What we did in the second half is move the ball faster. It wasn't that we tried to move it in a different way, we simply did it faster. When we stopped with the ball we'd turn it over because the opposition had time to move their numbers back, which resulted in a turnover due to their pressure of numbers.

We simply ran, and ran and ran. The ball never stopped moving. That's what we've been trying to do.

In the first half we still kicked long into the forward line. The difference was that we moved the ball so quickly from defence that the final kick was to a one on one, or two on two, rather than giving Freo time to get numbers back.

A prime example was when White took a mark on the boundary in front of the Southern stand. Normally he would have gone back and then kicked (either short inside or long to the square). Instead he immediately played on and hit the hot spot where we marked. The difference between the first half and the second half was 15 seconds. But 15 seconds all over the ground.

The Sandilands kick was his worst, but again how many times did Melbourne cough the ball up in the middle of the ground by over using it?

The problem was, that there weren't any forward options.

Either becuase they weren't there in the first place, or that Melbourne's slow, indirect ball movement through short kicking and over using the handball allowed Freo players enough time to get back and fill in space.

It's exactly the same game plan, we simply did it better.

What we did in the second half is move the ball faster. It wasn't that we tried to move it in a different way, we simply did it faster. When we stopped with the ball we'd turn it over because the opposition had time to move their numbers back, which resulted in a turnover due to their pressure of numbers.

We simply ran, and ran and ran. The ball never stopped moving. That's what we've been trying to do.

In the first half we still kicked long into the forward line. The difference was that we moved the ball so quickly from defence that the final kick was to a one on one, or two on two, rather than giving Freo time to get numbers back.

A prime example was when White took a mark on the boundary in front of the Southern stand. Normally he would have gone back and then kicked (either short inside or long to the square). Instead he immediately played on and hit the hot spot where we marked. The difference between the first half and the second half was 15 seconds. But 15 seconds all over the ground.

following on from both these quotes, what i noticed was that as the ball was moved up the ground towards our forward 50, our forwards lead early. this is so that they are in position for the fast moving ball that is kicked long to them. if the ball is held up on the wing the players have all led forward, throwing our forward structure out. 2 chip kicks to the flank mean that suddenly all our forwards are either outside the 50 or are running back towards goal with 10 freo players. in the second half, the run of the players supporting each other meant that the long kicks were able to be effected by the last player onto the chain, and this kick linked up perfect with our forwards timed leads.

CB its no good for us to lob the ball up high...it gives too much time for the opposition to organise themselves and form a pack in the air and at ground level.

You've got to keep the kicks as low as possible.

When kicking long and low the opposition defenders are being dragged away from goal at pace. Thus if the ball does spill from such a contest there is now space for the likes of a Wonaemirri / Davey to run onto the ball and weave their magic. Plenty of evidence off this in the 2nd half.

I suspect this is why Bailey gave Moloney such a bollocking...the way he was delivering the ball [especially in the first half] suited the defenders to a tee.

I don't think you're correct! Someone may have access to better stats than I have, but at half time I saw [on the scoreboard] that we'd had almost as many handballs as kicks. Yet at the end, according to The Age it was 189/136. That is constent with my impression that Melbourne kicked a lot more and handballed less, in the 2nd half. And someting I LOVED was a 60 metre kick out of defence by Warnock aimed at the boundary line on the wing, it landed inside the line, but went out. In the first half the ball would still have been in the backline 5 minutes later!

It's exactly the same game plan, we simply did it better.

What we did in the second half is move the ball faster. It wasn't that we tried to move it in a different way, we simply did it faster. When we stopped with the ball we'd turn it over because the opposition had time to move their numbers back, which resulted in a turnover due to their pressure of numbers.

We simply ran, and ran and ran. The ball never stopped moving. That's what we've been trying to do.
In the first half we still kicked long into the forward line. The difference was that we moved the ball so quickly from defence that the final kick was to a one on one, or two on two, rather than giving Freo time to get numbers back.

A prime example was when White took a mark on the boundary in front of the Southern stand. Normally he would have gone back and then kicked (either short inside or long to the square). Instead he immediately played on and hit the hot spot where we marked. The difference between the first half and the second half was 15 seconds. But 15 seconds all over the ground.

A prime example was when White took a mark on the boundary in front of the Southern stand. Normally he would have gone back and then kicked (either short inside or long to the square). Instead he immediately played on and hit the hot spot where we marked. The difference between the first half and the second half was 15 seconds. But 15 seconds all over the ground.

But he can only do this if we have a structured forward line of marking, leading and crumbing forwards.

Moloney gets berated by the coach for constantly doing the same thing as what White did.

Geez, it makes a world of difference to the forwards if the 1st option is a kick, rather than watching the players up the ground handball it around to a player that's under just as much pressure. And you can tell that it's a coaching directive to handball when under pressure.

Miller's best game ever by far.

Nope he had a far better one against the Saints at the 'G about 3 years ago. He needs space to use his strength in the air, win the one-on-ones and then to move the ball quickly to the hot spot where hopefully we've got crumbers as well as big flyers.

He needs to be allowed to play to his strengths.

in the second half, the run of the players supporting each other meant that the long kicks were able to be effected by the last player onto the chain, and this kick linked up perfect with our forwards timed leads.

The lack of pressure by Freo after half time had a lot to do with us getting cleaner ball at the stoppages. When under pressure, our attempts of linking up via handball have failed dismally.

CB its no good for us to lob the ball up high...it gives too much time for the opposition to organise themselves and form a pack in the air and at ground level.

You've got to keep the kicks as low as possible.

First of all, I never said just "lob the ball up high".

But seeing as you mentioned it.

Highlights

- 4:59

- 5:33

- 6:30

- 6:46 (Was kicked in by Moloney, not in footage)

I'm not saying just bomb the ball in long and hope, if the lead is on then that should be the first option.

However, IMO it is better to have the ball in the "hot spot" (20-30 metres out) in a contested situation with marking forwards and crumbers at their feet than it is to chip the ball around while you wait for a player to get free. Incidentally it is harder to find a free player the longer you wait as the opposition has more time to get back and fill in space.

The lack of pressure by Freo after half time had a lot to do with us getting cleaner ball at the stoppages. When under pressure, our attempts of linking up via handball have failed dismally.

yep. thats what worries me as well. we had a good win, but i will be interested to see how that translates to next week against adelaide.

we have struggled under pressure, but perhaps that is because we havnt learnt how to do it properly. the players need to know it will work. it will be interesting to see if they can stand up under pressure.

The lack of pressure by Freo after half time had a lot to do with us getting cleaner ball at the stoppages. When under pressure, our attempts of linking up via handball have failed dismally.

/agreed, it's still nice for the team to get some confidence though.

They've had a taste of what it feels like when it all clicks which will hopefully give them the urge to work harder and improve themselves. It's still going to be a very long year and I'm still expecting a bottom two finish because not every side will completely fall apart like Freo and apply no pressure at all, but it's nice to have something to smile about.

Jamar jumping straight into Sandilands at the centre bouces was golden. Very instrumental in gaining the ascendency out of them middle in the second half. God I hope some one has finally managed to convince the Big Russian he is big enough to command his own post code and its about time he showed it.

I agree, he didn't win many hitouts but he finally used his body around the ground. He was blocking well and he and White did well enough in the ruck to allow us to get some clearances in the second half

following on from both these quotes, what i noticed was that as the ball was moved up the ground towards our forward 50, our forwards lead early. this is so that they are in position for the fast moving ball that is kicked long to them. if the ball is held up on the wing the players have all led forward, throwing our forward structure out. 2 chip kicks to the flank mean that suddenly all our forwards are either outside the 50 or are running back towards goal with 10 freo players. in the second half, the run of the players supporting each other meant that the long kicks were able to be effected by the last player onto the chain, and this kick linked up perfect with our forwards timed leads.

Deanox is absolutely right and this has been the problem moving forward in the previous games. Watching the game replay, Bailey at half time said the side has been too hesitant to run and kick quickly. The timing was excellent in the second half as the ball was coming in quicker to man on man situations or forwards on deep leads.

First of all, I never said just "lob the ball up high".

But seeing as you mentioned it.

Highlights

- 4:59

- 5:33

- 6:30

- 6:46 (Was kicked in by Moloney, not in footage)

I'm not saying just bomb the ball in long and hope, if the lead is on then that should be the first option.

However, IMO it is better to have the ball in the "hot spot" (20-30 metres out) in a contested situation with marking forwards and crumbers at their feet than it is to chip the ball around while you wait for a player to get free. Incidentally it is harder to find a free player the longer you wait as the opposition has more time to get back and fill in space.

I agree about the hot spot if under pressure and no other option available...and the crumbers should be 5 to 10 metres away = in space. Your right in that the speed in which the ball comes through the middle is crucial.

In the first half Moloney was under no pressure and kicked long and high to Sandilands who was 20 metres clear of anyone else...Bailey must have been apoplectic.

And thanks for the highlights CB...any excuse to watch that 2nd half again most welcome.

4:59...if your in range by all means kick it through

5:33 ...all the Freo players bumped into each other and fell over...that helps but probably not plan A against quality opposition

6:30...that was a long deep penetrating kick the went over the heads into space...big tick

6:46...When you kick it long and high and Aaron Davey marks it overhead on the goal line...you know its your day!

In the first half Moloney was under no pressure and kicked long and high to Sandilands who was 20 metres clear of anyone else...

It was a shocking kick, no denying that one.

It's exactly the same game plan, we simply did it better.

What we did in the second half is move the ball faster. It wasn't that we tried to move it in a different way, we simply did it faster. When we stopped with the ball we'd turn it over because the opposition had time to move their numbers back, which resulted in a turnover due to their pressure of numbers.

We were able to move the ball by foot in the second half, largely because we finally had options to kick to at half forward. With Bate and Miller providing a target it opened us out to allow us to run. We moved it faster because we moved it by foot a lot more. Not all the time, but much more so than we have at any point this year.

We also changed our forward setup at centre bounces, pushing everyone right up onto the centre square and isolating Robbo or Wona - doing the same thing that having Miller and Bate at half forward does, drag defenders up and create space behind. And funny enough the confidence returned pretty quickly when we started doing this, playing to our strength, counter-attacking with quick movement and numbers in waves.

When we stopped stuffing around with the ball and allowing their numbers to get back we went from a 3 goals a half side to a 14 goals a half side. I hope we continue with the same practice in two weeks time.

hards, i dont think the purpose has ever been to stuff around with the handballs, and i do believe that kicking long (and intelligently) is part of the plan. the 'run and carry' and 'handball use' is intended to allow players to run past and link up together (running in waves) so that the pressure is moved off the player with the ball. it is intended that the last player to get the ball (whether it is the 2nd or 5th in the andball chain) will kick the ball when he is clear and has a viable option. unfortunately the players have been thinking "oops i am under pressure need to handball off" and this results in two things. a) other players havnt been running and linking for them and b ) players with the ball are handballing to players who are standing still and under more pressure than the first player was.

its not a kick or handball question, bomb it long, or handball to a player with no pressure who can kick it intelligently.

hards, i dont think the purpose has ever been to stuff around with the handballs, and i do believe that kicking long (and intelligently) is part of the plan. the 'run and carry' and 'handball use' is intended to allow players to run past and link up together (running in waves) so that the pressure is moved off the player with the ball. it is intended that the last player to get the ball (whether it is the 2nd or 5th in the andball chain) will kick the ball when he is clear and has a viable option. unfortunately the players have been thinking "oops i am under pressure need to handball off" and this results in two things. a) other players havnt been running and linking for them and b ) players with the ball are handballing to players who are standing still and under more pressure than the first player was.

its not a kick or handball question, bomb it long, or handball to a player with no pressure who can kick it intelligently.

correct... by handballing you can release a player to have time and space to run and spot up a target down the field...

we've had two problems with this... we handball to a player who doesn't have time and space, and they get tackled, because there isn't another player close by to give the ball to... secondly when they do find space they don't have a target to kick too, so they stop, handball again, and we become stagnant... good to see the plan finally click...

Yeah absolutely, I'm not saying the intention was to over handball, but the emphasis has come from the coach with the new gameplan to handball to release guys - the difference between us and Port where he's taken it from is that they have guys who can sprint to release themselves, like the Burgoyne's, Rodan etc. We don't have that express pace, but we have some pretty decent lead up guys, and in the 2nd half this week we used the ball by foot substantially more. Where Port would hit five or six handballs, we started hitting two or three then kicking.

The turnovers come from the fourth, fifth, sixth handball, not from the first couple. If the ball is in a pack and the in and under gets the handball to a teammate, and he hits gets the handball into some space for the third teammate, then the next possession should be a kick. That's what it was in the 2nd half, and once we started doing it a few times it spread the Dockers mid-defenders out and created more space infront and behind half forward. It was perfect, exactly how we should do it, and the result (the increased scoring rate let alone the victory) showed it.

We got better quality inside 50s because we started using the space on the ground instead of getting congested in the middle. And it all feeds into the next step - the more you're able to have multiple identifable targets at half forward the more space there is off the stopages going forward for our mids to run into. If we get some space to run into and we bypass the hit up half forwards then they've dragged defenders up enough that there's space behind for our deeper forwards - that's why we had Robbo getting some one on ones, or two on twos with him and Green or him and Wona, and they resulted in goals, rather than being bottled up in a pack of 10 from a slow delivery forward.

If the 2nd half was an example of Bailey's game plan well ime on it full time. Man that was great footy-we would have beaten most teams on sunday playing that. Miller and Jamar were AWESOME...Finally!!!!

I've been to many games (incl. pre-season) this year. IMHO the majority of the turnovers from a string of handballs have been as a result of a lack of targets further afield.

And someting I LOVED was a 60 metre kick out of defence by Warnock aimed at the boundary line on the wing, it landed inside the line, but went out. In the first half the ball would still have been in the backline 5 minutes later!

Yes, that was a smart kick.

Will be interesting to see whether this game plan holds up against a decent side

Worked well for Geelong today.