First Daniher chopped us up then no Melbourne player went near Brent Harvey & he carved us & now Membrey & Riewoldt(again) destroyed us.

Who the hell is organising the defence at the Club because ATM they look like rabble.  Harry & Jetta have had to pick up players 10cm taller & nobody seems to be able to stick close to his opponent.  Dunn looks shot & Tom Mc leaves his man to chase kicks.

The defensive 6 should work as a tight unit but they are bordering rubbish.

Maybe its time to bring back Grimes & Garland who at least know how to play tight.

I could not agree more CF, however, the saints aren't renowned for their defence but they managed to run it out of our forward line on 30 + occasions yesterday and with their own clearances on top of this it became a bit of an avalanche and score fest for them, I think that we leaked like a sieve forward and back!!

Don't forget Nick's cousin ran rings around us last Sunday and even Travis Cloke snagged two of the easiest goals you're ever likely to see. Tom Lynch will kick 6-10 next week if the Suns are first to the footy.

It's all part of the transition.  Would you rather us go back to 2014/2015 where the defence is sound but the offence is distinctly average?

Getting the balance right between both will take a little time, and as we ramp up the offence it will take us a while to make sure we integrate that well with our defence as well.

Some on here are far too short sighted for their own good.

Grimes and Garland are NOT the solution. TMac needs to get on his bike very quickly with his consistency.

Just now, Soidee said:

Grimes and Garland are NOT the solution. TMac needs to get on his bike very quickly with his consistency.

Making those changes isn't the solution at all.  The solution is to get the defence in sync with the midfield and forwards.  Once we do that on a consistent basis then we'll find that we can defend well while still kicking a winning score.

It doesn't happen overnight, though.

Just now, Soidee said:

Grimes and Garland are NOT the solution. TMac needs to get on his bike very quickly with his consistency.

Making those changes isn't the solution at all.  The solution is to get the defence in sync with the midfield and forwards.  Once we do that on a consistent basis then we'll find that we can defend well while still kicking a winning score.

It doesn't happen overnight, though.

9 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

Making those changes isn't the solution at all.  The solution is to get the defence in sync with the midfield and forwards.  Once we do that on a consistent basis then we'll find that we can defend well while still kicking a winning score.

It doesn't happen overnight, though.

I disagree they are both way better than four players we had running around yesterday.

with the benefit of hindsight beating the Pies and Tigers now looks like no big event.

we got sucked into thinking kids with a few games each are now better than Grimes and Garland clearly they are not.

It is ok to play one or perhaps two at a time but four no way.

At least one of them should be back in next week and IMO both.

Just now, old dee said:

I disagree they are both way better than four players we had running around yesterday.

with the benefit of hindsight beating the Pies and Tigers now looks like no big event.

we got sucked into thinking kids with a few games each are now better than Grimes and Garland clearly they are not.

It is ok to play one or perhaps two at a time but four no way.

At least one of them should be back in next week and IMO both.

Were we sucked in, or are we just seeing what happens when you play kids?  Wagner and Hunt played well for a few weeks and, as many kids do, had an average game.  It was unfortunate that it had to be on the same day, but that's life.

Garland and/or Grimes will probably come back in and I'm not against that at all.  My point is more that it won't matter who we have playing down there unless we get those structures, and the balance (I feel like I use that word a lot), right.

I have total faith it will work in time though, we just need to be a little patient and take the great with the good and the bad.

Trial Dawes down back. He is a gorilla and a leader

They were outnumbered almost every time. They pushed up to the ball carrier and the Saints just always had an extra number to loop it over the top to. We didn't defend their spread all over the ground at all, so the side as a whole defended horribly. Chuck in a couple of Dunn and TMac brain fades for good measure.

1 minute ago, olisik said:

Trial Dawes down back. He is a gorilla and a leader

I prefer safe hands down back, not iron gloves

1 minute ago, olisik said:

Trial Dawes down back. He is a gorilla and a leader

Dawes can't catch a cold, how the hell do you expect him to catch a forward???

Our defence pushes up way too high when we have the ball, then when we turn it over we are so slow when it comes to picking up loose players.

McDonald needs a rocket sent up him. What's he going to do with the ball when he goes chasing kicks....turn it over? He should stick on his man and that is it. Let player's with more talent and better decision making get the ball, if those player's are too lazy to do so, then that's where it falls on Roos & Co to either get results or drop them.

I don't really get what we are trying to do with our defence .

It looks like some sort of zone but when Jetta ends up matching one on one with Riewoldt something's not quite right.

You could see the ball coming in from their long kick outs to the wing and the Stkilda forwards starting to run towards goal but none of our guys went with them.

Really hope they can sort this out as it was very painful to watch.

I could see it happening in the first quarter but nothing changed all day.

sometimes I wonder about the coaches role.

the only change I saw was Pederson and Dunn swapping roles,but still no one really ran with Riewoldt or stood with Membrey.

In preseason and vs gws we didn't press up the ground.  4/5 of our backs rarely stepped out of the d50 arc.  Our mids defended the middle really well. So we didnt leak out the back and were always in a position to rebound from hb even when behind on the scoreboard.

Whether the game plan has changed to press up or players making poor decisions and not sticking to it is the unknown.  I would guess the latter.

We need to rebalance our defensive structures but not make wholesale changes to the players out there.

The saints were able to move the ball from our 50 to theirs much too easily, the same thing happened against the dons.

Every game we have conceded a few like that but more than made up for it by creating turnovers in the midfield. It's a team defence and team offence now. No use just blaming the final link in the chain, that's just like blaming the forwards in previous years for not kicking enough goals when it only came in 30 time a game

48 minutes ago, olisik said:

Trial Dawes down back. He is a gorilla and a leader

Playing with one leg seldom cuts it olisik.

Zone defence requires fairly smart individuals. Understanding positioning, when and where to run and cover and when not to. When to go on the counter, when to switch play and when to hold.

In all honestly I believe we're trying to play a system with blokes who simply don't have the attributes to master it. 

Of course it takes time but I've seen enough brain fades from Dunn and McDonald in my time to know that they're not players who are suited to playing a zone defence. 

Everyone is forgiven for an error or turnover. But not time and time and time again. 

Etihad is a fast deck. We're not a fast team and generally we're not the most skilled side and our defenders are pretty reactionary and slow.

It's a problem no doubt and what doesn't help is that fact that we don't have a settled back-six. It's the most unsettled part of the ground at the moment. All of these weaknesses were highlighted on the weekend.

Garland and Grimes are both playing reserves who like Dunn and T-Mac are just so up and down in form. Wagner and Hunt haven't played six games between them. Lumumba just had his worst game for the club and Salem has been handy but hardly inspiring.

It's definitely a worry and I'm interested in knowing what the plan will be going forward and into next year also.

9 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Zone defence requires fairly smart individuals. Understanding positioning, when and where to run and cover and when not to. When to go on the counter, when to switch play and when to hold.

In all honestly I believe we're trying to play a system with blokes who simply don't have the attributes to master it. 

Of course it takes time but I've seen enough brain fades from Dunn and McDonald in my time to know that they're not players who are suited to playing a zone defence. 

Everyone is forgiven for an error or turnover. But not time and time and time again. 

Etihad is a fast deck. We're not a fast team and generally we're not the most skilled side and our defenders are generally pretty reactionary and slow.

It's a problem no doubt and what doesn't help is that fact that we don't have a settled back-six. It's the most unsettled part of the ground at the moment.

Garland and Grimes are both playing reserves who like Dunn and T-Mac are just so up and down in form. Wagner and Hunt haven't played six games between them. Lumumba just had his worst game for the club and Salem has been handy but hardly inspiring.

It's definitely a worry and I'm interested in knowing what the plan will be going forward and into next year also.

Interesting thoughts.

Not having seen much of him, is Melksham a 'smart' footballer who would help in this regard? I'm just thinking if you take away the 'dumbest' and put in someone who's better at the zone than anyone we currently have, that exchange would make a huge difference.

9 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Zone defence requires fairly smart individuals. Understanding positioning, when and where to run and cover and when not to. When to go on the counter, when to switch play and when to hold.

In all honestly I believe we're trying to play a system with blokes who simply don't have the attributes to master it. 

Of course it takes time but I've seen enough brain fades from Dunn and McDonald in my time to know that they're not players who are suited to playing a zone defence. 

Everyone is forgiven for an error or turnover. But not time and time and time again. 

Etihad is a fast deck. We're not a fast team and generally we're not the most skilled side and our defenders are generally pretty reactionary and slow.

It's a problem no doubt and what doesn't help is that fact that we don't have a settled back-six. It's the most unsettled part of the ground at the moment.

Garland and Grimes are both playing reserves who like Dunn and T-Mac are just so up and down in form. Wagner and Hunt haven't played six games between them. Lumumba just had his worst game for the club and Salem has been handy but hardly inspiring.

It's definitely a worry and I'm interested in knowing what the plan will be going forward and into next year also.

Its gonna be a roller coaster of success as they learn but lets face it, the zone worked the last 2 weeks so they have shown they can do it. Giving up goals doesnt mean its failing its all about increasing scores off turnovers and the last 2 weeks we have done that. This week we didnt, its gonna happen, as a supporter it stings however I do think this is best for the future. But i very much agree that our unsettled back 6 is the biggest issue I think the gameplan is there.

2 minutes ago, Choke said:

Interesting thoughts.

Not having seen much of him, is Melksham a 'smart' footballer who would help in this regard? I'm just thinking if you take away the 'dumbest' and put in someone who's better at the zone than anyone we currently have, that exchange would make a huge difference.

No, that's the trouble. I wouldn't say Melksham is known for his 'smarts'.

What he'd definitely offer is really hard two-way running as a back-flanker who can rotate through the middle but again his skills aren't much chop.

Really, I just see a mess in the way that our defence is playing with this zoning. It seems that the 'roles' of our players have now been confused as we have so many players covering the arses of of each other when the ball comes inside defensive 50. Dunn, McDonald and Jetta all play their best football when assigned a single opponent. All of them. I think adding both Hunt and Wagner is unsettling. They're both really inexperienced. 

It's just really messy.

 

4 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

No, that's the trouble. I wouldn't say Melksham is known for his 'smarts'.

What he'd definitely offer is really hard two-way running as a back-flanker who can rotate through the middle but again his skills aren't much chop.

Really, I just see a mess in the way that our defence is playing with this zoning. It seems that the 'roles' of our players have now been confused as we have so many players covering the arses of of each other when the ball comes inside defensive 50. Dunn, McDonald and Jetta all play their best football when assigned a single opponent. All of them. I think adding both Hunt and Wagner is unsettling. They're both really inexperienced. 

It's just really messy.

 

I'd agree with this assessment.

Sad to hear Melksham isn't the answer. So if 50% of our backline works better one on one, why are we trying to zone? Is it because it allows us to push up the ground more offensively?

I'm all for the zone if it's tactically sound, but if we don't have the cattle we don't have the cattle.

Who does that leave that's capable of this style of play? Salem? Vince?

Looking at their last (and only) couple of games, Hunt and Wagner look like they might have the potential to pull it off. But a back line with 3 one-on-oners, 2 potentials and Salem doesn't scream "let's implement the zone" to me. I dunno, maybe Roos has more faith in these guys. But even in the wins we've had this season, we've bled goals.

The ease of the goals we are giving up tell me we are struggling with the press we are trying to implement.

And that struggle doesn't mean that the direct opponent of Riewoldt or Membrey screwed up. It means that the team function of running a press is failing consistently. They would have vision of who that is, so it might be telling at selection - if you can't play AFL structures, you won't be there long...

1 hour ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Zone defence requires fairly smart individuals. Understanding positioning, when and where to run and cover and when not to. When to go on the counter, when to switch play and when to hold.

Where we failed on the weekend was our tackles didn't stick. THhe Aints dished off to outside runners and played checkers with our defence. We had no failsafe mechanism in place becuase our defenders, if they were back, would leave their man and run fwd 40m to man the mark. Bingo the ball would sail over their head to a St K foward on his lonesome.

Time and time again....

The ineptitude of the coaching box to alter the trajectory of this game was world class.