How will the gameplan evolve with a forward line?

[drdrake 3,187]

What having the talls does is gives us a plan A and plan B and a combination of Plan A/B. Plan A we saw on Friday, keep the footy control the footy and tempo. Plan B, more attacking footy, kicking long to our talls and getting numbers to the fall of the ball and the combined plan controlling the footy out of the back half then pulling the trigger to send the ball deep inside 50m.

Options different game plans, we saw one on Friday is the basic keep the footy model that we turn to when we are trying to get control of the game and once in control we will see a very attacking plan.

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

I am a little concerned the 3 talls and Howe might be too crowded. will be interesting to see how it's managed,

Howe's an extremely versatile player so I wouldn't worry about it being overcrowded. He is deceptively quick and agile and has beautiful hands so once the ball hits the deck, he still very dangerous and can absolutely be another crumbing option if not in the marking contest. We saw the forward pressure he applied on Friday night. He's a ripper, Howe.

As far as the forward line itself, I agree with WYL. Hogan, Clark and Dawes are only going to provide more chances of scoring. It's all about our midfield. We need to be able to win enough of the ball, keep hold of it and defend fantastically when we don't have it to remain competitive during games this year. We saw some really positive early signs on Friday, however Geelong and Hawthorn will be great tests for those three key midfield indicators as to whether or not we can stay with the best. If Geelong and Hawthorn play strong sides against us, we'll be up against stronger bodies at the contest, we'll be under greater pressure when we try and play our possession game, and they'll be smoother on the fly when attacking. I can't wait to see how we standup.

It's just a bonus that we have such a dangerous forward line on paper, but as many have pointed out on this thread already, it's the midfield that will decide whether or not we're competitive throughout games.

Positive signs though..

Go Dees

Edited February 17, 2014 by stevethemanjordan

[Gipsy Danger 1,067]

I am a little concerned the 3 talls and Howe might be too crowded. will be interesting to see how it's managed,

Howe can just find space on top of Dawes head

[Dees2014 2,377]

I think that people are right on the money when they say more long kicks to powerful forward targets. The way we are prepared to give up space and time to get more 'comfortable' ball use will mean that there is a lot of space between the player holding the ball and the goalsquare. We already saw a lot of hard-working and patient efforts to provide short kicks to methodically gain a bit of ground, I think that will be supplemented by smart, long, hard leads from a CHF line (Dawes' speciality) which break up the opponents defensive patterns and mean that a quick burst can get inside 50 before our opponents can push back in good order.

Personally, I'm convinced that the 'modern' game calls for having two CHFs and a FF in place so that there are always options to kick to and to provide a way of covering that final 70m as quickly as possible. With the bonus that for us, the ball is moving fast, but for our opponents a dozen midfielders and defenders are all having to run back to try to cover the breach.

I also think that having a more potent ruck in place would have the effect of allowing us the occasional direct break forward from a centre bounce, or at least give us that half-second advantage so that our spreading for space wont require giving up quite as much ground initially.

I've long been fascinated by the evasiveness and awareness of Sam Mitchell, which I think on it's own saves Hawthorn 10m every second time they spread from a stoppage.

Very good post LG. very insightful. I think we are in for a good year .

[BarnDee 287]

I said it early last year and will say again , Clarke and dawes will never play together in a game for mfc I also said I hope im sooooo wrong , but its lookin that way , I so hope im wrong on this

[Lordweaver 235]

it's foolish to rule it out, if clark can play I'm sure he will at some stage this year then they will play together

[hughtinkler 22]

Dawes - Clarke - Howe

JKH - Hogan - Kent

As long as it gets in there and goals are the result, I'm happy

[Dees2014 2,377]

Dawes - Clarke - Howe

JKH - Hogan - Kent

As long as it gets in there and goals are the result, I'm happy

I prefer either:

Howe. Dawes. Trengove

JKH. Clark. Hogan

OR

Howe. Dawes. Hogan

JKH. Clark. Fitzpatrick

although the latter may be a bit top heavy inspite of Fitzy's speed and agility. Maybe we would be better off with the first option and play Watts and Fitz on opposite wings as I have advocated before on here. That configuration would be a nightmare for opposition sides to match up on particularly as both Watts and Fitz are so mobile. It might even change the modern game!

[old dee 23,872]

it's foolish to rule it out, if clark can play I'm sure he will at some stage this year then they will play together[/quote ]

"IF". Lord weaver?

[Barney Rubble 1,576]

First time i have ever been called Gramps!!

Thanks.

But i do want multiple Premiership Cups at regular intervals soon!!

Relative term that wyl

For someone 20 that could easily mean next decade.

For me that means 2016.

But to be honest in reality it probably means 2018-20

GRAMPS.

Not a bad quaffer. But not top shelf like we so rightly deserve WYL & OD

Edited February 17, 2014 by Chippy

[old dee 23,872]

GRAMPS.

Not a bad quaffer. But not top shelf like we so rightly deserve WYL & OD

Too true Chippy.

However I would happily drink Yarra water from the Cup on September 27th.

[Dees2014 2,377]

I prefer either:

Howe. Dawes. Trengove

JKH. Clark. Hogan

OR

Howe. Dawes. Hogan

JKH. Clark. Fitzpatrick

although the latter may be a bit top heavy inspite of Fitzy's speed and agility. Maybe we would be better off with the first option and play Watts and Fitz on opposite wings as I have advocated before on here. That configuration would be a nightmare for opposition sides to match up on particularly as both Watts and Fitz are so mobile. It might even change the modern game!

You could also argue that by playing Watts and Fitz on the wings, that it provides another avenue to goal over and above the keepings off, chipping looking for a space to open up which we saw on Friday night. Comming off half back, going to Fitz or Jack in a one on one situation, their size and skill will almost invariably result in a contested mark in their favour. to counter it would involve the opposition putting key position players on them which would weaken their defences in other areas, Whether by design or good fortune, the MFC has been left with unique advantages, none more so than our forward set up, and the presence of two very mobile and highly skilled big men who can play in a lot of positions on the ground.

Yet another reason to be very optimistic about our future.

[mdemonski2 403]

Not sure about fitzy and skill but yes to height and speed. Agree watts has all three, he now has to use these assets effectively.

[rpfc 28,779]

Having a decent forward line won't change the gameplan.

You only have one gameplan - what you saw on Friday; possession footy with hard running into space and honouring of that running.

If we have tall forwards to kick to - great, we might actually kick it in the 50 more.

Tactics change, gameplans don't - or shouldn't...

Our players were surprised that Roos was teaching them only one way to play because his predecessors evidently had a myriad of instruction for the players:

The game plan he arrives with at Melbourne is not a surprise, and yet it has surprised his suspicious players who were disarmed by his insistence that there was only one game plan. They heard his words, but remained circumspect, waiting for the sting in the tail.

“They keep asking me, 'So 90 per cent will be us [what we do]?' “Yeah, yeah, yeah,” he laughs, explaining his task of convincing the sceptics. “So that was a big thing in their minds that they wanted to stand for something as a player group.

“That was a real key focus, reinforcing to them 'We will do this'. They'd ask, 'Will we do it against every team?' And we'd be, 'Yeah, we will do it against every team, it will change slightly, but yes'. And they'd be like, 'Oh, OK'.”

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/new-coach-paul-roos-shocked-by-demons-scars-20140207-327i4.html#ixzz2tdPPAbKe

[jabberwocky 2,301]

Having a decent forward line won't change the gameplan.

You only have one gameplan - what you saw on Friday; possession footy with hard running into space and honouring of that running.

If we have tall forwards to kick to - great, we might actually kick it in the 50 more.

Tactics change, gameplans don't - or shouldn't...

Our players were surprised that Roos was teaching them only one way to play because his predecessors evidently had a myriad of instruction for the players:

Spot on. Tall targets may mean we will have better efficiency going forward, but I don't think it will or should change too much.

I would hope that we don't start bombing it in just because there are some big blokes up there.

[binman 43,803]

Spot on. Tall targets may mean we will have better efficiency going forward, but I don't think it will or should change too much.

I would hope that we don't start bombing it in just because there are some big blokes up there.

Grimes made the point in his interview on 3aw that it actually might have helped them not having the talls against the tiges as it forced them to 'lower the eyes', chip the ball around and not just bomb away as they might have done in the past

[Dees2014 2,377]

Spot on. Tall targets may mean we will have better efficiency going forward, but I don't think it will or should change too much.

I would hope that we don't start bombing it in just because there are some big blokes up there.

I agree: one gameplan, with a few variations. The point I was making was that it provides us with more options, but possession footy with defensive walls will be paramount. It is just we will now have a few ways to go into attack which will keep the opposition guessing while still making ball retention the number one aim. Roos admitted himself after the game Friday that the attack was a bit one dimensional through lack of big marking options, which in turn put more running pressure on the small forwards (hence their running out of puff at the end)

It will be fascinating to watch it unfold. No doubt we will get a sneak preview on Thursday.

[rjay 25,092]

You could also argue that by playing Watts and Fitz on the wings, that it provides another avenue to goal over and above the keepings off, chipping looking for a space to open up which we saw on Friday night. Comming off half back, going to Fitz or Jack in a one on one situation, their size and skill will almost invariably result in a contested mark in their favour. to counter it would involve the opposition putting key position players on them which would weaken their defences in other areas, Whether by design or good fortune, the MFC has been left with unique advantages, none more so than our forward set up, and the presence of two very mobile and highly skilled big men who can play in a lot of positions on the ground.

Yet another reason to be very optimistic about our future.

The point when we have the ball is not to put it into a contested situation.

[jabberwocky 2,301]

Grimes made the point in his interview on 3aw that it actually might have helped them not having the talls against the tiges as it forced them to 'lower the eyes', chip the ball around and not just bomb away as they might have done in the past

Yep and I think we are dreaming if we think that Dawes, Hogan, Clark and and maybe Fitzy are just going to make us instantly better. I think given the place that each of these players is coming from we may actually go backwards for a while once they start to trickle back in.

Roos will know that there will need to be a defensive balance up forward, and that 2 or 3 big blokes up front may cause us issues coming back the other way.

It will take time to get it right.

Edited February 18, 2014 by jabberwocky

[Whispering_Jack 30,673]

I know it's not de rigeur around here to compliment former coaches but, after viewing Friday night's game in replay, I couldn't help but think what a genius Neil Balme was in his latter days as coach at the club. I remember back in those days, he introduced the same sort of keepings off backwards, sideways chip passing game that worked well for us on Friday night. Unfortunately, our players rarely looked forward (possibly because the Ox and Garry Lyon were often out injured), had trouble scoring and eventually he was sacked.

Clearly, a man ahead of his times.

[IvanBartul13 2,564]

I know it's not de rigeur around here to compliment former coaches but, after viewing Friday night's game in replay, I couldn't help but think what a genius Neil Balme was in his latter days as coach at the club. I remember back in those days, he introduced the same sort of keepings off backwards, sideways chip passing game that worked well for us on Friday night. Unfortunately, our players rarely looked forward (possibly because the Ox and Garry Lyon were often out injured), had trouble scoring and eventually he was sacked.

Clearly, a man ahead of his times.

1994 team is without doubt the best melbourne team of my lifetime and the style of the football played by it was exhilarating. Balme had thad fantastic cattle no doubt but what's under mentioned is that we lost a dynasty through awful luck.

Schwarz - best player I've ever seen play for Melbourne - knee/never really the same

Prymke - quality tall back - debilitating back which killed his career

Glenn Lovett - quality midfielder and infinitely better than Nathan jones - Cruelled by Hammies

Tingay - all-aus wingman - barely played after this year

Lyon - back - never the same after 95

jakovich - back - finished/never played again

Charles - cusp of belng superstar forward - never the same post injury

Martin pike - effectively expelled from the club

At the end of 94 we drafted yze and farmer.

It's actually frightening how good that side would have if it stayed together, particularly if Schwarz, Tingay, Lovett and Lyon stayed healthy.

[Goodvibes 3,596]

Please don't Goodoil. This kind of stuff keeps me up nights.

1994 is always the year I highlight as a missed opportunity. Twenty years ago now. Scary.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

1994 team is without doubt the best melbourne team of my lifetime and the style of the football played by it was exhilarating. Balme had thad fantastic cattle no doubt but what's under mentioned is that we lost a dynasty through awful luck.

Schwarz - best player I've ever seen play for Melbourne - knee/never really the same

Prymke - quality tall back - debilitating back which killed his career

Glenn Lovett - quality midfielder and infinitely better than Nathan jones - Cruelled by Hammies

Tingay - all-aus wingman - barely played after this year

Lyon - back - never the same after 95

jakovich - back - finished/never played again

Charles - cusp of belng superstar forward - never the same post injury

Martin pike - effectively expelled from the club

At the end of 94 we drafted yze and farmer.

It's actually frightening how good that side would have if it stayed together, particularly if Schwarz, Tingay, Lovett and Lyon stayed healthy.

When you review the game results of 1994, we really had a special team that was only stopped by the West Coast Eagles juggernaut.

FWIW, Stinger was good again in 1998 and we made the finals but he was gone after that.

Pike's behaviour at MFC overran his talent and his position became untenable.

And Schwarz was a case of what might have been ......

[IvanBartul13 2,564]

When you review the game results of 1994, we really had a special team that was only stopped by the West Coast Eagles juggernaut.

FWIW, Stinger was good again in 1998 and we made the finals but he was gone after that.

Pike's behaviour at MFC overran his talent and his position became untenable.

And Schwarz was a case of what might have been ......

No doubt -

Stinger was fantastic any time he played, but like Glenn Lovett they never had much continuity after that year and or played injured.

Pike had to go but was a loss, as they all were.

Schwarz was jus a freak.

Even post 95 they rolled the dice with him coming back to get Ingerson, Turley, Grant but he went down again. As WJ says, Balme was very stiff.

[dpositive 1,692]

"Balme was very stiff". "Clearly, a man ahead of his times."

Not so Sure

He had some great players and great opportunities may even have had a great game plan

but I can recall his reactionary tactics or non tactics so many times when there was no coaching response to an obvious problem.

I recall particularly one day at Princes park when Neitz was at FF and the opposition (I recalll West Coast but not sure if that possible ) was just streaming through CHB time after time

The total crowd including embarrassed opposition supporters were calling out for Neitz to go to CHB and make a more respectable game while Balmey sat in the coaches box with his head in his hands not even looking.

It was a sad and sorry day when some of us knew that his time was limited.