An Interesting Comment from Moloney on Triple M

[Hellaintabadplacetobe 4,166]

I agree with your comment but WHY do we have to put up with it?

Our forwardline is the final piece of the jigsaw puzzle.

We already have a very good backline which will only improve, our midfield will be the best in the comp in 2 to 3 years time.

Sadly, our forwardline is very ordinary. Watts will take years, Bate/Sylvia are frustratingly inconsistent, Miller is finished (thanks for the Darwin win though), Jetta is coming on, Jurrah is hopelessly missed and Green is the only shining light. Don`t be surprised if we look for a Podsiadly this coming draft, because until we get a gorilla up there who stays deep and presents every time our mids are streaming thru, our forwardline will continue to be ordinary until Watts and Jurrah are seasoned campaigners in 2 to 3 years.

[Binmans PA 26,723]

At times it did seem to bother Moloney as he regularly turned the ball over to a Carlton player. He is not the smartest user of the ball.

He does a lot of pointing for someone who regularly turns the ball over or is almost always caught in possession of it. It amazed me to hear today that he is actually leading the competition for clearances. It's the ball use, as you say RR which is really letting him down.

[Binmans PA 26,723]

I think our gameplan requires a 22 player effort. You only have to look at the games we've played well in this season - we've had even contributions across the ground. In all of those games players have been running hard for each other, making space, position, demanding the ball and delivery quickly up the ground. Our gameplan looks very good and is extremely exciting to watch when it comes off, but when we're off, we're really off. Our lack of intensity and willingness to run and provide for team mates can be minimal at best (in our weaker games). This amazingly is where our forwardline is made to look ordinary, lacking direction and structure. But it's actually the backs and midfielders responsibility to run and create from the other half of the ground. Particularly, when we play such a counter attacking game. So when the backs and midfielders basically refuse to work hard, our structures fall down everywhere else.

We won the clearances today (I'm pretty sure), as we did the hit outs, but our disposal efficiency was in the mid 30s (in comparison to 72% Carlton). This poor delivery made it incredibly difficult for the forwardline to function, but more crucial to our demise was the lack of intensity, not necessarily in the packs and scrummages, but on the outside. We look like a bottom four side when we don't work hard for each other.

It seems like an obvious thing to say, but if we're to have any chance next week, we have to bring the intensity that we showed against them earlier in the season. You can tell oh so very early whether we're switched on or not. Today it was obvious after witnessing the first goal that we hadn't turned up to play.

Edited June 5, 2010 by AdamFarr

[agent_orange 0]

I think our gameplan requires a 22 player effort. You only have to look at the games we've played well in this season - we've had even contributions across the ground. In all of those games players have been running hard for each other, making space, position, demanding the ball and delivery quickly up the ground. Our gameplan looks very good and is extremely exciting to watch when it comes off, but when we're off, we're really off. Our lack of intensity and willingness to run and provide for team mates can be minimal at best (in our weaker games). This amazingly is where our forwardline is made to look ordinary, lacking direction and structure. But it's actually the backs and midfielders responsibility to run and create from the other half of the ground. Particularly, when we play such a counter attacking game. So when the backs and midfielders basically refuse to work hard, our structures fall down everywhere else.

We won the clearances today (I'm pretty sure), as we did the hit outs, but our disposal efficiency was in the mid 30s (in comparison to 72% Carlton). This poor delivery made it incredibly difficult for the forwardline to function, but more crucial to our demise was the lack of intensity, not necessarily in the packs and scrummages, but on the outside. We look like a bottom four side when we don't work hard for each other.

It seems like an obvious thing to say, but if we're to have any chance next week, we have to bring the intensity that we showed against them earlier in the season. You can tell oh so very early whether we're switched on or not. Today it was obvious after witnessing the first goal that we hadn't turned up to play.

Ordinary forward line. Both Miller and Bate struggle to mark the pill all season.

We don't have any real midsize forwards now that Pettered is gone.

[titan_uranus 23,225]

About the only times we looked at all likely to score was when the ball was kicked forwards over the heads of our up ground forwards who then were running towards goal.

IF so many of our players are to push up to help the mids, then they will have to be prepared to run towards goal following a big bomb, ahead of their direct opponents.

I've been of the view that this is part of the style Bailey wants us to be playing. An open forward line with forwards running towards goal, rather than away from it, and the ball being popped over the top. It happened once yesterday, Watts' goal in the first, but other than that it created more problems than goals.

Moloney's comments last night made me question whether or not this is what Bailey wants, hence this thread.

[jabberwocky 2,301]

I've been of the view that this is part of the style Bailey wants us to be playing. An open forward line with forwards running towards goal, rather than away from it, and the ball being popped over the top. It happened once yesterday, Watts' goal in the first, but other than that it created more problems than goals.

Moloney's comments last night made me question whether or not this is what Bailey wants, hence this thread.

I don't think that the forward line are being coached to use this method solely. I would suggest that this would be one of the set ups that would be coached. It is handy when you have opposition players occupying space at half back.

It is however not the most reliable method for a young skinny key postion player to pick up goals. Maybe Green is being drilled as the lead up player and Jack is the deep contested player. Either way it is not working and needs to be looked at.

[Binmans PA 26,723]

People still don't seem to understand -- results won't come over night. It's going to take at least one or two (perhaps more) seasons to get the forwardline chemistry right. Just as it did with the backline. Warnock, Frawley and Garland all looked ordinary in their early careers, but with games under their belt, they've become essentials to our long term plan. The same should therefore be expected of our forwardline. Give players like Watts time. We still have LJ, Tappscott and Petterd to come in. Once we've pumped 40 odd games into these kids, then we can judge them. Until then, to make judgements just proves a lack of footballing experience, on behalf of shortsighted supporters.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

People still don't seem to understand -- results won't come over night. It's going to take at least one or two (perhaps more) seasons to get the forwardline chemistry right. Just as it did with the backline. Warnock, Frawley and Garland all looked ordinary in their early careers, but with games under their belt, they've become essentials to our long term plan. The same should therefore be expected of our forwardline. Give players like Watts time. We still have LJ, Tappscott and Petterd to come in. Once we've pumped 40 odd games into these kids, then we can judge them. Until then, to make judgements just proves a lack of footballing experience, on behalf of shortsighted supporters.

You are in fine form Adam. Keep it up

[Weedster 174]

I think it is a sad fact that Bailey has no idea about how to develop a forwardline. You only have to look at the development of most of our forwards and you wonder if any of the coaches actually have any experience in developing forwards.

We need a forward coach who has some ideas and experience.

So true - Saturday was not an isolated event - it's unfortunately the norm - how often do we see midfielders propping looking for a target or bombing to an empty space.

When the hell will the coaching staff take some responsibility for the way they set up ?

[Allen Jakovich 516]

The reason this keeps happening is because we find ourselves 5 goals down in the first 15 minutes of almost every game, and hence play defensive catch-up football for the rest of the game.

We have to stop losing games in the first quarter. We are NEVER at the contest until half way through the second quarter, by which time we need to defend against big scores being kicked against us, while also trying to create enough scoring opportunities ourselves.

Exactly, and that's the first thing Brent mentioned when quizzed in the interview OP is referring too.

[Binmans PA 26,723]

As I keep saying, it's not a structural issue. It's a work ethic issue. If we don't work hard enough up the ground, then our plan falls down. When our midfielders aren't switched on everything else breaks down, unless our backs are really rebounding strongly (Frawley, Grimes etc). It's the overlap and run and carry, which creates our exciting footy. Without any of the former, our forwardline is made to look ordinary. When our plan works, they're made to look very good (ie the Port game). I don't deny there needs to be a Plan B, but let's learn the Plan A first. Gain more consistency with it and then once we've got that mastered, Plan B is the go. Like Geelong, they started with their Plan A in the mid 2000s and started to win more games than they lost. But they had no Plan B and so lost out in the Prelims. They spent the next two or three seasons developing their Plan B and finally in 07 everything clicked. That's what we need to follow.

[Rogue 585]

As I keep saying, it's not a structural issue. It's a work ethic issue.

Everyone heard you the first time.

They just missed the part where it was decreed that you were the football Oracle

[45HG 1,539]

The reason this keeps happening is because we find ourselves 5 goals down in the first 15 minutes of almost every game, and hence play defensive catch-up football for the rest of the game.

We have to stop losing games in the first quarter. We are NEVER at the contest until half way through the second quarter, by which time we need to defend against big scores being kicked against us, while also trying to create enough scoring opportunities ourselves.

Melodrama.

We've won 4 of the 11 first quaters we've played this year. Of the 7 we've lost, only 2 have been by over 4 goals (only 3 by over 14 points).

In fact, I would argue that this weekend's game was the first game this year where the first quarter has cost us the game.

Edited June 7, 2010 by 45HG16

[Binmans PA 26,723]

Everyone heard you the first time.

They just missed the part where it was decreed that you were the football Oracle

Fair enough.:D Time will tell, I suppose.

[Tricky 340]

As I keep saying, it's not a structural issue. It's a work ethic issue.

I think it's both.

Edited June 7, 2010 by Tricky

[Guest DeesPower]

The reason this keeps happening is because we find ourselves 5 goals down in the first 15 minutes of almost every game, and hence play defensive catch-up football for the rest of the game.

We have to stop losing games in the first quarter. We are NEVER at the contest until half way through the second quarter, by which time we need to defend against big scores being kicked against us, while also trying to create enough scoring opportunities ourselves.

Yeh, and guess what? Which were the games we won the first quarter in?

Collingwood

Lions

Port

Tigers

Crows

Anything common here? Yes we played our running, attacking, centre corridor gameplan most of the day.

Edited June 7, 2010 by DeesPower

[agent_orange 0]

Yeh, and guess what? Which were the games we won the first quarter in?

Collingwood

Lions

Port

Tigers

Crows

Anything common here? Yes we played our running, attacking, centre corridor gameplan most of the day.

We don't have any real strong marking forwards. Bate and Miller drop too many marks. Newton seems to drop soft marks that should be taken. Petterd look like the only player who can really take contested marks. Who knows if he'll be there next year. At least Watts has shown he can take contested marks and Jurrah seems to find space to be a suitable target but we need a strong marking forward.

Not sure who on our list will take this role.

[armstrong35 262]

im glad someone at the club can also see it.

why bailey does it i do not know.

its killing the team

we can get the ball out of the back great but then we cant move it forward.

keep greeny up in the forward line so they have A target!!