How is the game plan holding up?

[Friday 71]

this irritates me.

There is no A, B or C.

It's a roving offence that continues constantly.

We used to call it "motion" in basketball and we would run it constantly.

There is just the motion and running through it. Everyone knows if they're in a certain area they have to move to the next. You learn it enough in training and just find yourself doing it.. When you see where the ball is, you automatically move to the right area (1, 2, or 3 possessions ahead)

Playing on all the time just like geelong.

the handball or kick more would be a directive from the coach, but wouldn't change the motion.

If at any stage you call it a 'plan b' it's when a team holds it up. And that is ONLY because the opposition has a defensive flood on the midfield.

The only reason we do it is to balance our offence and get everyone in position to start the motion again.

We never hold it up for more than a couple of possessions before the switch comes and then it's into the motion again.

Edited August 25, 2010 by Friday

[titan_uranus 25,045]

The one thing about the 'game plan' I don't like is that our forward structure doesn't hold deep enough. I think that it's our forwards getting sucked into play, as DB has also commented that we should have guys deeper at times. What I don't like is that we end up turning it over through the middle because there's no one to kick to, or kicking long to out-numbered forwards (how many times did we try and go through Wona at half-forward vs Hawthorn, expecting him to mark long kicks against 2-3 defenders?).

Welcome to the debate. You're about 3 months late though...

This point was talked about ad nauseum earlier in the year, especially after the Hawthorn loss. It seemed to me, and others, that, whether it was an instruction or just something that was happening during games, the forwards were pushing too far up the ground and weren't providing adequate targets. At times it seemed that this was the idea, in that we would then have our forwards running back towards goal and the kick was designed to go over the top into the space. But that only really worked against sides who played man on man; against Hawthorn in Round 1, they zoned off, and we were destroyed, but against Collingwood in Round 2, they went man on man, which benefited us a lot more.

As the season progressed, though, it seemed to me that the forwards began to hold their position a lot more. Rather than pushing the entire forward line up to the wing, we at least were leaving someone (often Green) a lot closer to goal, and to me we played a lot better when this happened.

[DeeSpencer 26,082]

This point was talked about ad nauseum earlier in the year, especially after the Hawthorn loss. It seemed to me, and others, that, whether it was an instruction or just something that was happening during games, the forwards were pushing too far up the ground and weren't providing adequate targets. At times it seemed that this was the idea, in that we would then have our forwards running back towards goal and the kick was designed to go over the top into the space. But that only really worked against sides who played man on man; against Hawthorn in Round 1, they zoned off, and we were destroyed, but against Collingwood in Round 2, they went man on man, which benefited us a lot more.

As the season progressed, though, it seemed to me that the forwards began to hold their position a lot more. Rather than pushing the entire forward line up to the wing, we at least were leaving someone (often Green) a lot closer to goal, and to me we played a lot better when this happened.

Chicken and egg I believe.

When we play better and the ball is constantly moving or trapped in our forward line we keep more forwards deep. When the midfield is getting beaten and the defenders can't get the ball out you have move forwards up the ground. Geelong when they were getting beaten by Collingwood had the same problem that we have had many times this year.

[H_T 3,049]

Chicken and egg I believe.

When we play better and the ball is constantly moving or trapped in our forward line we keep more forwards deep. When the midfield is getting beaten and the defenders can't get the ball out you have move forwards up the ground. Geelong when they were getting beaten by Collingwood had the same problem that we have had many times this year.

Agreed. When our forwards aren't holding deep enough, we aren't winning our share of the ball. ie. stoppages & clearances.

[e25 5]

I thought Plan B was to accuse the victim?

How times change...

I think Plan B is actually to get a big paintbrush and paint a target on Bailey's back.

Then we just sit back, let nature take it's course until our new coach's "gameplan stalls", then we repeat the process.

[rpfc 28,779]

No-one watched The Practice evidently...

[GOLF 13]

The strategy is fast moving attack.

The first tactic (plan A) is to do this through the corridor. Looks fantastic and wins games when it is working. But sometimes we came up against sides with stronger, tougher midfields who choked us in the corridor (and bullied us, but that will change with time).

Our second tactic (yet to be developed) should be to spread fast and go round the wings (Plan B). The trick is to realise when Plan A isn't working and switch to plan B.

If we could get these two appraoches ingrained in the players (and maybe fix the kickins up) we would have something for the players to practice, become totally familiar with, get to trust each other in the execution, and hang any other variations on.

Hope it starts happening in 2011.

[rpfc 28,779]

The strategy is fast moving attack.

The first tactic (plan A) is to do this through the corridor. Looks fantastic and wins games when it is working. But sometimes we came up against sides with stronger, tougher midfields who choked us in the corridor (and bullied us, but that will change with time).

Our second tactic (yet to be developed) should be to spread fast and go round the wings (Plan B). The trick is to realise when Plan A isn't working and switch to plan B.

If we could get these two appraoches ingrained in the players (and maybe fix the kickins up) we would have something for the players to practice, become totally familiar with, get to trust each other in the execution, and hang any other variations on.

Hope it starts happening in 2011.

A better effort of trying to argue for (and argue that we don't have) a plan B.

But I reject it.

Plan A is go through the corridor, Plan B is spread to the wings if they are in the corridor? Please...

It's called kicking to, and running into, space. Hopefully through the guts, but sometimes down the wing. We do that.

It's not Plan B, it's Plan A when there are blokes in the middle filling the space.

You can think we don't do it properly but it isn't a new gameplan - which is what the 'Plan B-ers' are all about.

[John Crow Batty 8,879]

A lot of interesting comments. What has struck me most from the past three games is that IMO it appears that the opposition have tried very hard to suffocate us with forward defensive pressure to our back line. In the past it was us that were being reactive and trying to counter the opposition. I don't know what all this really means at this stage. Defensive pressure from forwards seems to be a current trend in the game as first pioneered by St Kilda. Or are opposition sides paying us some kind of respect by changing their game plan to counter ours? Have they spotted flaws in the way we play? I don't see this forward defensive aspect of the game being played by us in return.

BTW, I won't be posting for a month or so. Off to China on Business.

Edited August 26, 2010 by america de cali

[jackaub 1,402]

A better effort of trying to argue for (and argue that we don't have) a plan B.

But I reject it.

Plan A is go through the corridor, Plan B is spread to the wings if they are in the corridor? Please...

It's called kicking to, and running into, space. Hopefully through the guts, but sometimes down the wing. We do that.

It's not Plan B, it's Plan A when there are blokes in the middle filling the space.

You can think we don't do it properly but it isn't a new gameplan - which is what the 'Plan B-ers' are all about.

If you want to see plan A and plan B look at a replay of the Sydney game earlier this year-

that is our game plan.Plan B is to spread wide when flooded and Plan B is to use the corridor when its not

Both plans require fast slick skills which is what we are developing this year

I think we will se a few more Sydney type games in 2011 when we will be un beatable on our day

[e25 5]

Geelong succeed by having unwavering confidence and belief in each other and by sticking to the gameplan at all costs.

They have the skill, ability, experience, but the gameplan is the vehicle they use to make it all come together and they never deviate from that.

[H_T 3,049]

If you want to see plan A and plan B look at a replay of the Sydney game earlier this year-

that is our game plan.Plan B is to spread wide when flooded and Plan B is to use the corridor when its not

Both plans require fast slick skills which is what we are developing this year

I think we will se a few more Sydney type games in 2011 when we will be un beatable on our day

Two Plan B's ? That will confuse 'em.

[H_T 3,049]

You know, the best plan is Plan 'Take Risk', it's the plan that enables players to back themselves, take risks, play on at every opportunity (without being stupid) with efficient disposal(s) and making it up as they go.

Whether this is A,B or Z it is the most exciting and formidable plan that has been executed by our team. It enables our players to become dangerous all over the field. Come to think of it, I'm pretty sure we have seen glimpses of it. We most certainly see it with some other sides too.

[rpfc 28,779]

Geelong succeed by having unwavering confidence and belief in each other and by sticking to the gameplan at all costs.

They have the skill, ability, experience, but the gameplan is the vehicle they use to make it all come together and they never deviate from that.

Right.

It's about being predictable to your teammates.

And before some of you scoff and say 'yeah, and predictable to the opposition.'

Doesn't matter if they are not good enough to stop it...

Our gameplan (and there is only one) as HT says is, at its heart, Operation: Play On.

When we get bogged down in our forward line it is because the players have tensed up and refused to get to the backline, get behind the ball, and run the effing thing out of there.

[Akum 2,660]

A lot of interesting comments. What has struck me most from the past three games is that IMO it appears that the opposition have tried very hard to suffocate us with forward defensive pressure to our back line. In the past it was us that were being reactive and trying to counter the opposition. I don't know what all this really means at this stage. Defensive pressure from forwards seems to be a current trend in the game as first pioneered by St Kilda. Or are opposition sides paying us some kind of respect by changing their game plan to counter ours? Have they spotted flaws in the way we play? I don't see this forward defensive aspect of the game being played by us in return.

I think the bolded parts are it. Our worst games this year have been when the opposition have done their homework on us and tried in various ways to shut down our playmakers and our game plan. That's what happened against North, West Coast & Carlton in particular, all teams that we have the measure of. Frankly I'm amazed that these clubs would bother to prepare so hard for games against the wooden spooners, but it says something for their flakiness of these clubs. But that's going to happen more and more from now on. No matter how many "game plans" we have, we need to know what to do against teams that put the clamp on us. It'll come, but it was the weakness this season, partly because we didn't expect it to happen. And it will happen against North, that's their only chance of beating us at the G.

[John Crow Batty 8,879]

I think the bolded parts are it. Our worst games this year have been when the opposition have done their homework on us and tried in various ways to shut down our playmakers and our game plan. That's what happened against North, West Coast & Carlton in particular, all teams that we have the measure of. Frankly I'm amazed that these clubs would bother to prepare so hard for games against the wooden spooners, but it says something for their flakiness of these clubs. But that's going to happen more and more from now on. No matter how many "game plans" we have, we need to know what to do against teams that put the clamp on us. It'll come, but it was the weakness this season, partly because we didn't expect it to happen. And it will happen against North, that's their only chance of beating us at the G.

I agree. One thing that has irked me this year is how how our game plan is likened to Geelong's. When they are switched on they have the talent, strength and experience to shake constant pressue off on most occasions. Tactics that have been developed to try to counter the cats seem to be far more effective when applied to us. We just seem to wilt. What concerns me is that our current game plane might become passe when we eventually are good enough to implement it. Football is evolving so fast. At this stage I believe our game plan is still immature and not flexible enough to counter negative tactics.

One of the most telling games IMO this year was the last game against Richmond. Despite the huge incentive we had to beat them. I thought we would crack several times during the game. They tried to suffocate us and it was their inexperience and tiring in the final quarter that allowed us to beat them. This shook my confidence that we could ever beat Hawthorn the next week if they applied similar tactics.

Edited August 27, 2010 by america de cali

[jabberwocky 2,301]

Geelong did not wake up one morning and begin playing thier game plan well.

[rpfc 28,779]

With all due respect, I think there are those on this board with groundless fears for the future.

Save for the fact that they are Melbourne supporters...

I am pretty effing certain that Geelong supporters felt uneasy about life in 2006.

And we haven't had our 'year we went backwards because of various reasons.'

All we have seen is steady progression, but as MFC supporters, we have to hand-wring and second guess.

It's what we know best.

[John Crow Batty 8,879]

Is this a discussion board or what? Whats wrong with discussing issues and tactics about the way the club is playing? Some poster seem to prefer this forum to be a "love in" only.

[e25 5]

Is this a discussion board or what? Whats wrong with discussing issues and tactics about the way the club is playing? Some poster seem to prefer this forum to be a "love in" only.

???

You mean, you're happy with discussion as long as other people agree with you and get all excited about a non-issue?

The problem is that the topic of this thread is horribly misguided and that is what the discussion is focusing on.

[45HG 1,559]

I am pretty effing certain that Geelong supporters felt uneasy about life in 2006.

Round 5, 2007 more like it.

[Grandson of a gun 276]

???

You mean, you're happy with discussion as long as other people agree with you and get all excited about a non-issue?

The problem is that the topic of this thread is horribly misguided and that is what the discussion is focusing on.

+1