How to beat Collinwood

[Ungarie boy 233]

Thought it might be interesting to create discussion on How to beat Collingwood and see what shape the resulting team would take (I found the exercise also helps shifts your mindset away from the negatives of last week) . Some discussion key points could be:

• Stop Dane Swan

• Expose players who traditionally don’t like pressure (Didak, Shaw)

• Take advantage of their under performing tall forward line (Cloak, Fraser, Brown, Anthony)

• Limit the damage of their backs (particularly Maxwell, O’Brien, Presti)

• Expose a potential lack of speed/endurance in their Midfield (O’bree, Ball, Johnson, Lockyer; perhaps Pendlebury)

• Target their youth (sidebottom, Wellingham, etc)

• more suggestions

Okay in reality, as the current two teams stand we should'nt beat them; but that should NEVER stop us from trying.

[Ungarie boy 233]

First Point - Stop Dane Swan

Dane Swan has great endurance, speed of the mark, footy nous and strength (a man's body) – who racks up possessions, sets up numerous goals and then also kicks goals. In my opinion this limits the options on who should take him on. Our younger players don’t have the strength, he would break their tackles, push them of the ball or out of a marking contest. Most of the rest of our players don’t have the endurance and speed to keep up. My suggestion would be Nathan Jones, with the instructions to not worry about possessions and when he gets the chance “to bury” swan i.e. make him earn his possessions. Jones game could also benefit by running with a dangerous midfielder like Swan.

Swan needs to be tagged out of the game and towards the end of last year; he was shown to struggle with a GOOD tag.

Other options could be:

Bruce – has shown when given the role of locking down a player, that he is very effective. Also whilst gathering a lot of possessions, we may not miss their input/effect on the game as much. Maybe he could also play a “ling” type role, as a tagger who can go forward and be dangerous.

Maloney – if he has the endurance, and can apply a defensive mindset.

Batram, Dunn, McDonald – have all done this role in the past, but how effective are they likely to be against Swan

[Age 381]

Maybe a bit left field, but the only real way that we are going to beat Collingwood based on last week's effort would be for a few members of the forum to take sniper rifles to the game on Saturday!

Not pushing violence at all, but you wanted a way!

[Ungarie boy 233]

Hmmm, The Grassy Knoll option; effective yes, but perhaps the ramifications on the club, would suggest it being utilised as Plan B!!!!!

Second Point - Expose players who traditionally don’t like pressure (Didak, Shaw)

Both Didak and Shaw have shown they don’t like close attention, and consquently can easily be put of their game.

Didak is a great ground level player and can be freakish with the ball, but is he dangerous in the air or on a lead. To curb him we need to prevent him from getting the ball – someone who is prepared to scrag.My suggestion would be Cheney who I believe has the height to match Didak. Oh, and tell Cheney to go in with a “mongrel/pest” attitude.

Shaw likes to play loose, therefore just man him up; it’s really that simple. In my opinion Bruce would be the ideal candidate as he also has the running/marking power to hurt him the other way.

Thomas can also be shut down, but consideration needs to be given to Thomas’s marking ability for a small player. This is probably the role for Joel MacDonald, but I would consider the other “Mac”. Captain courageous has the overhead ability to negate Thomas, and as Thomas is not known for endurance,our aging captain would not be exposed. His experience in the backline would be invaluable.

Davis is also known to go quiet during games – he love his freedom and ground level play. Outside of the “J Macs” not sure who can effectively quell him. Utilising Jones as a tagger requires Grimes and Maloney to play in the midfield. Perhaps Davey, but to me this is to negative of a role (we need him in the forwards to expose their backs); unless of course he plays off Davis which negates the reason for playing him on Davis in the first place.

The key with all of them would be PHYSICAL pressure!!! If nothing else out we, the supporters, would take hope and satisfaction out of seeing passion on the field.

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

This is all negative stuff, which is of course important

What is more important right now IMO is creating a forward structure that has a hope in hell of scoring when we actually get it in there

Nobody seems to want to discuss it, but we need to go with something vastly alternative to the current setup which has seen to be inept over a long period now. Davey inside 50, Maric or another crummer too, to sit at the feet of 4 of the following: Miller, Bate, Newton, Garland, Rivers, Jamar, Martin

[Choko 493]

Ins: Cheney, Martin, Maric,

Out: Spencer, Bennell, Dunn

Cheney to play on Didak, with Junior a back up if Cheney is being beaten badly. Joel MacD on Medhurst, and Grimes to run off Davis. We have the talls to go with Fraser, Cloke and Anthony, so that's fine.

Bruce the job on Swan all day. Bruce to try to float forward and take Swan with him. If Swan doesn't go, Junior to pick up Swan in the Collingwood forward half.

In the middle, NO MORE THAN ONE SLIGHT BODY IN THE CENTRE AT ANY ONE TIME. Collingwood is far too physical for us to play kids without protection. Last week, we played too many new players against men. MUST have Moloney, Jones, Bruce, Green if absolutely necessary, Sylvia, McDonald assisting Grimes, Scully, Trengove etc...

Davey and Maric both forward. One of Miller and Bate deep at all times with Maric at feet. Maric told he will be judged on pressure and tackles. Petterd to present with Bate/Miller at half forward, with davey to maintain pressure round the forward 50m arc.

Green to play forward, preferably by making Shaw accountable for him.

McKenzie defensive midfield role.

With mids in Moloney, Jones, Bruce, Jamar, Martin, Scully, Trengove, Sylvia, we can win enough ball if the forward structure holds and we can keep the ball in there.

[Milesh 26]

I can't believe there are numerous suggestions in this thread, and none of them comical.

Strawberry Fields Forever --- sorry guys.

[Tatu 416]

Thought it might be interesting to create discussion on How to beat Collingwood and see what shape the resulting team would take (I found the exercise also helps shifts your mindset away from the negatives of last week) . Some discussion key points could be:

Stop Dane Swan

Expose players who traditionally dont like pressure (Didak, Shaw)

Take advantage of their under performing tall forward line (Cloak, Fraser, Brown, Anthony)

Limit the damage of their backs (particularly Maxwell, OBrien, Presti)

Expose a potential lack of speed/endurance in their Midfield (Obree, Ball, Johnson, Lockyer; perhaps Pendlebury)

Target their youth (sidebottom, Wellingham, etc)

more suggestions

Okay in reality, as the current two teams stand we should'nt beat them; but that should NEVER stop us from trying.

- stop Dane Swan (in the carpark before the game, with a cricket bat and a sack of door nobs)

- Expose Didak and Shaw (then send the photo to new idea)

- Take advantage of there Tall forwards (then send the photo's to new idea)

- Limit the damage of there backs (with heeps of goals!)

- Expose a lack of speed/endurance (with alot of speed/ice)

- Target there youth (by teasing them, with joke's about there club)

Edited March 30, 2010 by tatu

[Hobbits's 17]

I can't believe there are numerous suggestions in this thread, and none of them comical. Strawberry Fields Forever --- sorry guys.

You were expecting something comical ? have you taken a look at O'logy lately ? that will quench your thirst.

[stranga 328]

A bout of food poisoning causing a forfeit is our only hope people. If 18 pies players tak ethe field we will lose people.

[Demon3 2,541]

To beat them, we must fully understand them, and to fully understand them we must become them...

i'd rather lose!

[dee-luded 2,958]

Cheney Warnock Bruce

Davis Cloke Medhurst

Dunn Frawley Rivers

Didak Anthony Fraser

Trengove Moloney JrMac

Johnson Swan Ball

Sylvia Martin Green

Obrien Maxwell Shaw

Petterd Bate Davey

Toovey Presti Lockyer

Jamar Grimes Jones

Jolly Pendlebury Thomas

Scully Garland McKenzie Bennell

obree brown wellingham sidebottom

Edited March 30, 2010 by dee-luded

[RalphiusMaximus 5,993]

Thought it might be interesting to create discussion on How to beat Collingwood...

With a big stick. With nails in it.

[Ungarie boy 233]

This is all negative stuff, which is of course important

What is more important right now IMO is creating a forward structure that has a hope in hell of scoring when we actually get it in there

Nobody seems to want to discuss it, but we need to go with something vastly alternative to the current setup which has seen to be inept over a long period now. Davey inside 50, Maric or another crummer too, to sit at the feet of 4 of the following: Miller, Bate, Newton, Garland, Rivers, Jamar, Martin

Yes so far it does seem a bit negative, but in reality it's about being competive (not inspidly flogged) so as to have a platform to be positive. I agree our foward line to date is not working and an alternative is needed, one that can perhaps expose collingwood.

Maxwell, O’Brien and Presti are all very good negating backman, particularly in the air and on talls. They also have the strength to compete one on one. But, How will they go against quick leading, ground level small forwards. Green, Davey, Sylvia, Petterd, should all be able to beat them at ground level. With Bruce on Shaw, and another small goal sneak (Jetta, Maric, perhaps Trengove, Gysberts); The pies would have to seriously look at restructuring their back line to match us up – a win for Melbourne. This combination would also be better suited to applying forwardline pressure, therefore helping out the midfield.

Green, Sylvia, Petterd and Trengove are all strong marks for their size.

Green, Davey, Sylvia, Maric and Gysberts are all confident shots at goal.

Instructions to the team would need to be: for gods sake kick the ball low and/or out in front. Putting the ball on the ground in front of these leading forwards is a better option than in the air (above the head)

Lets not fall into the trap of playing tall forwards who, at present if they are not uo to scratch, then in all likelihood will be easily accounted by the Pies tall backs.

[Sir Why You Little 34,662]

Mercendol's in the Gatorade may help.

[praha 10,294]

How to beat Collingwood:

-Outscore them.

/thread.

[Chook 14,602]

How to beat Collingwood:

-Outscore them.

/thread.

God help us. We're screwed.

[Ungarie boy 233]

Ins: Cheney, Martin, Maric,

Out: Spencer, Bennell, Dunn

Cheney to play on Didak, with Junior a back up if Cheney is being beaten badly. Joel MacD on Medhurst, and Grimes to run off Davis. We have the talls to go with Fraser, Cloke and Anthony, so that's fine.

Bruce the job on Swan all day. Bruce to try to float forward and take Swan with him. If Swan doesn't go, Junior to pick up Swan in the Collingwood forward half.

In the middle, NO MORE THAN ONE SLIGHT BODY IN THE CENTRE AT ANY ONE TIME. Collingwood is far too physical for us to play kids without protection. Last week, we played too many new players against men. MUST have Moloney, Jones, Bruce, Green if absolutely necessary, Sylvia, McDonald assisting Grimes, Scully, Trengove etc...

Davey and Maric both forward. One of Miller and Bate deep at all times with Maric at feet. Maric told he will be judged on pressure and tackles. Petterd to present with Bate/Miller at half forward, with davey to maintain pressure round the forward 50m arc.

Green to play forward, preferably by making Shaw accountable for him.

McKenzie defensive midfield role.

With mids in Moloney, Jones, Bruce, Jamar, Martin, Scully, Trengove, Sylvia, we can win enough ball if the forward structure holds and we can keep the ball in there.

Melbourne has more than the 3 tall’s required to cover Collingwoods tall forwards. Even Bruce and Miller have played tall down back and could be considered.

Brown is an old fashion stand and deliver forward relying on strength as much as anything. Warnock is a good match for Brown, or to be slightly more attacking then Frawley (with freedom to play off him and rebound). Martin could also fulfil this role.

Cloak is a lead up forward, but does not apply a lot of defensive pressure and could be exposed. Rivers (or Garland if fit) is a good match for Cloak. Martin is another consideration.

Anthony is also a lead up forward, who is not renowned for defensive pressure. Frawley should be an ideal match for Anthony.

Fraser can play multiple roles but often none. He can be covered by either Frawley or Rivers. Note: Collingwood are unlikely to have more than 3 tall’s in their forward line at once.

Out of our tall backs options there is potentially one left over - perhaps try as a forward or the "mobile ruck" role that a lot of teams are getting away with these days (particularily when Jolly is resting).

Agreed regarding the midfield - boys will get beaten by Men 90% of the time, and it can't be good for their confidence; but perhaps they can be given roles on their outside players and run them of their feet (Scully and Trengove are more than capable of this).

Could Mckenzie play a defensive role on the likes of Davis, Thomas? If not, should he play defensive in the midfield, if we are already tagging Swan out of the game. Though with Swan & Pendlebury/Ball nullified, our tall backs on top; and shattering the confidence of their glory boys - scoring for the pies should be somewhat more difficult.

Our Forwards should be told they will be dragged if they are not constantly moving. You don't ever allow backman to catch their breath or feel comfortable/settled with a position on the field.

Edited March 30, 2010 by Ungarie boy

[flog 20]

How to beat Collingwood:

-Outscore them.

/thread.

Slip the umpires a few pineapples before the game

[Lost Highway 31]

First Point - Stop Dane Swan

Dane Swan has great endurance, speed of the mark, footy nous and strength (a man's body) – who racks up possessions, sets up numerous goals and then also kicks goals. In my opinion this limits the options on who should take him on. Our younger players don’t have the strength, he would break their tackles, push them of the ball or out of a marking contest. Most of the rest of our players don’t have the endurance and speed to keep up. My suggestion would be Nathan Jones, with the instructions to not worry about possessions and when he gets the chance “to bury” swan i.e. make him earn his possessions. Jones game could also benefit by running with a dangerous midfielder like Swan.

Swan needs to be tagged out of the game and towards the end of last year; he was shown to struggle with a GOOD tag.

Other options could be:

Bruce – has shown when given the role of locking down a player, that he is very effective. Also whilst gathering a lot of possessions, we may not miss their input/effect on the game as much. Maybe he could also play a “ling” type role, as a tagger who can go forward and be dangerous.

Maloney – if he has the endurance, and can apply a defensive mindset.

Batram, Dunn, McDonald – have all done this role in the past, but how effective are they likely to be against Swan

I'd drop most of the players you have mentioned. The only one I think did enough to hold his place in a thrashed side is Junior.

This is all a bit ridiculous, all this focus on stopping one or two players.

The emphasis should be on MELBOURNE'S GAME. Our side has to dramatically improve the way it plays football; we don't have to beat Collingwood or stop certain players. We just have to play solid, hard-running, adventurous football - to earn credibility. Let them worry about stopping the Melbourne blokes who are playing really well, if they like.

[Lost Highway 31]

I think the stuff in this thread is well intentioned but useless. Far too detailed - it's the type of stuff the match committee might discuss long into the night on the eve of a grand final. We are so far short of this kind of discussion, it's not funny. Many of the players mentioned as being possible stoppers ought to be out of the side - too slow, too sloppy, too slack. Bruce, Jones, Dunn, Moloney for a start. They've either had it and lost it or never had it. I don't want to read about how muscular they are when they can't play football.

It's really irrelevant whom we play next; every other team just at the moment looks too good for us, THE WAY WE PLAY!

Rather than focus on individual opposition players, the club must focus on drilling the basics into its own men. The only way to even compete with a top 6 team is to run hard all day, make good position ahead of the ball and ahead of your opponent, and apply maximum pressure whenever the opposition have it. The tackling was not bad during long stretches of the match against Hawthorn, but the running to position was hopeless - maybe a couple of forwards got away from their men during the last quarter when someone of Green's calibre managed to kick it penetratingly beyond the 50 line. But how often did this happen compared to the opposition.

I'm not concerned about BEATING Collingwood, I just want to see the team play with directness, a bit of panache and a lot of gut-running. Make Collingwood pay for their errors, which will come, surely, if they're put under pressure. Don't forget - this Collingwood team should have been whipped out of the finals by Adelaide last year.

[Goodvibes 3,596]

I think the stuff in this thread is well intentioned but useless. Far too detailed

That's a fair call. After a loss like Saturday's we need to keep it simple. Talk about the ideals that the team values and attempt to show the footballing world and the faithful supporters that we stand for something. One on one footy makes alot of sense at this point. Obviously we'll still have our defensive structures and zones at appropriate points.

I'd place the emphasis on two things - run and risk taking. I'd give Davey, Bennell, Scully, Strauss, Trengove, Sylvia, Jones, Green, Bruce, Junior and Frawley the license to take the game on, play on at every opportunity and take risk after risk. I'd tell them not to worry about the mistakes, keep having a crack. I'd forget about a 4 term approach and tell the boys that we're going to break the game up. Let's play the first quarter like it's the only quarter of the game and run to the point of exhaustion - run in numbers, hunt in packs. And as corny as it sounds, I'd tell them to have fun. I'd talk about the amazing honour they have every time they run out onto the MCG. To play this game like it might be their last. And if we were anywhere near Collingwood at quarter time we'd immediately forgot the scoreline and start again. Sounds a bit u/14's but most of this team were at that level not long ago! Keep running, keep taking risks. Keep running, keep taking risks, Keep running, keep taking risks. If Woey were playing this weekend it would be pretty clear which two words I'd have him writing on the back of his hands.

[Milesh 26]

Mercendol's in the Gatorade may help.

Much better.

All I hope for this week is no ice-riddled Collingwood crazies pummelling opposition supporters.

I know ... it's a Melbourne-beating-Collingwood longshot.

[Sir Why You Little 34,662]

That's a fair call. After a loss like Saturday's we need to keep it simple. Talk about the ideals that the team values and attempt to show the footballing world and the faithful supporters that we stand for something. One on one footy makes alot of sense at this point. Obviously we'll still have our defensive structures and zones at appropriate points.

I'd place the emphasis on two things - run and risk taking. I'd give Davey, Bennell, Scully, Strauss, Trengove, Sylvia, Jones, Green, Bruce, Junior and Frawley the license to take the game on, play on at every opportunity and take risk after risk. I'd tell them not to worry about the mistakes, keep having a crack. I'd forget about a 4 term approach and tell the boys that we're going to break the game up. Let's play the first quarter like it's the only quarter of the game and run to the point of exhaustion - run in numbers, hunt in packs. And as corny as it sounds, I'd tell them to have fun. I'd talk about the amazing honour they have every time they run out onto the MCG. To play this game like it might be their last. And if we were anywhere near Collingwood at quarter time we'd immediately forgot the scoreline and start again. Sounds a bit u/14's but most of this team were at that level not long ago! Keep running, keep taking risks. Keep running, keep taking risks, Keep running, keep taking risks. If Woey were playing this weekend it would be pretty clear which two words I'd have him writing on the back of his hands.

Absolutely right GV..If i were dean Bailey that is exactly what i would say..Throw most tactics out the window and tell the team to run, talk Tackle shepherd for your mates, move the ball forward as simply as possible, and don't look at the scoreboard-Look for the ball.

We will know the answer within 5 minutes next saturday as to how the team will play.

[Roost It 1,434]

Absolutely right GV..If i were dean Bailey that is exactly what i would say..Throw most tactics out the window and tell the team to run, talk Tackle shepherd for your mates, move the ball forward as simply as possible, and don't look at the scoreboard-Look for the ball.

We will know the answer within 5 minutes next saturday as to how the team will play.

This is probably what he told them last week!