Jump to content

Point Kick ins and defence of kick ins

Featured Replies

What is involved in the kick in?

1. The ability to kick a football accurately to a team mate.

Problem: We have few with this attribute.

Solution: Don't let those who can't kick accurately kick out.

2. A plan for kicking out or kickout strategy.

Problem: We don't seem to have one or one that the players understand.

Solution: Get a coach who has some idea how to implement a kick in plan and is able to communicate it to the team.

3. Players being willing to work to make a kick in plan effective.

Problem: Our players don't work to make position and give options.

Solution: Play players who are prepared to work and who buy in.

4. The ability to keep possession after the kick in.

Problem: We can't.

Solution: Implementing a series of drills over summer that deal with ball movement from full back to full forward under severe pressure.

5. The old perennial, our players turn over the ball much more than the other teams.

Problem: Too many of our players lack AFL standard skill.

Solution: Recruit players who can dispose of a ball under pressure and eliminate those that can't. Make that a high priority in your list of attributes sought in recruits, or players you trade for.

PS. Feel free to add more as required. I was using KISS in this post.

 

Wow. Just wow.

Find me the strategies that work, the skilled and hard players able to carry them out and the disciplined players able to do the running needed to do the running to make it work and you'll fix the problem.

I just don't understand why kicks out are some magic thing we can train and get better at when we can't even hold the ball in uncontested possession for a decent switch or kick it anywhere near our leading forwards (if we have any leading forwards).

In fact most weeks this year we haven't even got step one right which is run and pick up your opponents and if the ball comes near you put your head over it and win it.

To me wondering why we are so bad at kick outs is like wondering why the number 100 ranked player in tennis can't win a tough tiebreaker against a top 30 opponent.

When Aaron Davey plays like he did yesterday you realise how bad the real skill level of our team is. When Chris Dawes comes in and gets chest marks on the lead you wonder where the other forwards are leading. When Dean Terlich looks by far our best run and carry player from our back half you wonder who on earth is coaching our defenders to run and spread and take the game on.

I highly doubt all that much focus has been put on this tbh. Point kick in strategy seems like fine tuning to me, and given that our players need reminding to run hard at the ball I struggle to work out how there would be time to go in to monumental levels of detail on this.

Edit: missed the master's post who said the same thing but way better.

 

As a group (ie, we Demonlanders) we bemoan coaches who don't try different things. More precisely, we bag our own coach for allegedly not trying things. Yesterday we tried the huddle approach for kick ins. I didn't think it worked, but at least Neeld was trying something.

What I'm really struggling to understand, though, is the kick inboard from the half back flank boundary. Not the switch, but the kick from the 40m out HBF basically toward centre half back. We did that a lot. Especially Terlich (but I'm not blaming him. He did it most because he got the ball most). Why?

As a group (ie, we Demonlanders) we bemoan coaches who don't try different things. More precisely, we bag our own coach for allegedly not trying things. Yesterday we tried the huddle approach for kick ins. I didn't think it worked, but at least Neeld was trying something.

What I'm really struggling to understand, though, is the kick inboard from the half back flank boundary. Not the switch, but the kick from the 40m out HBF basically toward centre half back. We did that a lot. Especially Terlich (but I'm not blaming him. He did it most because he got the ball most). Why?

What's wrong with that kick? As long as its not under pressure and to a free man it then opens up both sides of the field.

I always thought the classic Malthouse/Neeld game plan was the move the ball via the boundary when under pressure and to players leading towards the boundary so a missed kick goes out of bounds or over the back but it is also designed to open large chunks of room in the middle of the ground to take advantage of.

From the CHB position the player should always be able to find someone back wide if there aren't any sensible safe options more directly towards goal.

EDIT: That said if the options are a loose man on the wing or a slow kick to CHB I'd rather the long kick and get things moving.


What's wrong with that kick? As long as its not under pressure and to a free man it then opens up both sides of the field.

I always thought the classic Malthouse/Neeld game plan was the move the ball via the boundary when under pressure and to players leading towards the boundary so a missed kick goes out of bounds or over the back but it is also designed to open large chunks of room in the middle of the ground to take advantage of.

From the CHB position the player should always be able to find someone back wide if there aren't any sensible safe options more directly towards goal.

EDIT: That said if the options are a loose man on the wing or a slow kick to CHB I'd rather the long kick and get things moving.

I think what's wrong is less the option but more the execution. I appreciate your argument, but with our (1) foot skills being so poor and (2) our spread so poor, I think the inboard kick is still a high risk option. That being said, if that's what the future holds, I guess we have to be patient while the team leans to execute it successfully.

One problem is that we flood the backline far too much, meaning there are opposition players everywhere.

If we reduce it to a few one-on-ones, its easier for players to lead to space. If we have guys like Garland, Watts, and Strauss kicking it 50m+ to the likes of Howe, Gawn, Tapscott, and maybe Trengove (i.e. guys who can/should take a mark) we've got far more of a chance of retaining possession which should be the priority. We're much better at using the ball around the centre of the ground where there is more space.

Short kicks don't work as there aren't enough good ball users in defence. Kicking it 30m to McDonald or Sellar in the back pocket is nowhere near a get out of jail card. Their job shouldn't be to lead, but to keep the best markers in the opposition side out of the equation.

One thing I found amazing yesterday was we huddled for point kick ins, no issue most of the players went to one side of the ground good plan get numbers around the footy, but the amount of times we kicked to the other side of the ground was just stupid, we kicked long to a 3 on 1 their way, as soon as the ball hit the deck they had open players everywhere. Just silly, the plan was in place but we went the dumb option.

  • 1 year later...
 

Interesting that we never ever kick it straight.

I can't remember how many times this season we've had someone free 30 m out and ignored it and kicked to a contest.

Also, even if we can't get a clean chain of possession, I'd rather us take the short 30 m pocket option then bomb long from that kick putting the ball 80 m out than taking the long option first and kicking the ball long from the square and putting it 60 m out.

demons and Port seem to be the odd ones out with little spread.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Featured Content

  • REPORT: Hawthorn

    There was a time during the current Melbourne cycle that goes back to before the premiership when the club was the toughest to beat in the fourth quarter. The Demons were not only hard to beat at any time but it was virtually impossible to get the better them when scores were close at three quarter time. It was only three or four years ago but they were fit, strong and resilient in body and mind. Sadly, those days are over. This has been the case since the club fell off its pedestal about 12 months ago after it beat Geelong and then lost to Carlton. In both instances, Melbourne put together strong, stirring final quarters, one that resulted in victory, the other, in defeat. Since then, the drop off has been dramatic to the point where it can neither pull off victory in close matches, nor can it even go down in defeat  gallantly.

    • 0 replies
    Demonland
  • CASEY: Footscray

    At twenty-four minutes into the third term of the game between the Casey Demons and Footscray VFL at Whitten Oval, the visitors were coasting. They were winning all over the ground, had the ascendancy in the ruck battles and held a 26 point lead on a day perfect for football. What could go wrong? Everything. The Bulldogs moved into overdrive in the last five minutes of the term and booted three straight goals to reduce the margin to a highly retrievable eight points at the last break. Bouyed by that effort, their confidence was on a high level during the interval and they ran all over the despondent Demons and kicked another five goals to lead by a comfortable margin of four goals deep into the final term before Paddy Cross kicked a couple of too late goals for a despondent Casey. A testament to their lack of pressure in the latter stages of the game was the fact that Footscray’s last ten scoring shots were nine goals and one rushed behind. Things might have been different for the Demons who went into the game after last week’s bye with 12 AFL listed players. Blake Howes was held over for the AFL game but two others, Jack Billings and Taj Woewodin (not officially listed as injured) were also missing and they could have been handy at the end. Another mystery of the current VFL system.

    • 0 replies
    Demonland
  • PREGAME: Brisbane

    The Demons head back out on the road in Round 10 when they travel to Queensland to take on the reigning Premiers and the top of the table Lions who look very formidable. Can the Dees cause a massive upset? Who comes in and who goes out?

    • 90 replies
    Demonland
  • PODCAST: Hawthorn

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 12th May @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we dissect the Demons loss to the Hawks. Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show. If you would like to leave us a voicemail please call 03 9016 3666 and don't worry no body answers so you don't have to talk to a human.

    • 39 replies
    Demonland
  • POSTGAME: Hawthorn

    Wayward kicking for goal, dump kicks inside 50 and some baffling umpiring all contributed to the Dees not getting out to an an early lead that may have impacted the result. At the end of the day the Demons were just not good enough and let the Hawks run away with their first win against the Demons in 7 years.

    • 340 replies
    Demonland
  • VOTES: Hawthorn

    After 3 fantastic week Max Gawn has a massive lead in the Demonland Player of the Year award from Jake Bowey, Christian Petracca, Kade Chandler and Ed Langdon who round out the Top Five. Your votes please. 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 & 1.

    • 32 replies
    Demonland