Zone defence requires smart and disciplined individuals. Garland, Dunn and Tom McDonald are all very limited in this capacity which is evidenced by their regular brain-fades and incredible inconsistency in performance. 

Whilst I agree we lack 'height' and 'size' in our defence, I think what is most evident is that we lack defenders with football smarts, composure and direction. 

It's detrimental to our entire defensive unit. I see no confidence whatsoever between anyone back there and even the dogs yesterday who were without Murphy, JJ, Adams and Suckling still looked just as solid without those guys. 

We'll continue to struggle back there until that area is addressed.

Equally as important however is the speed at which the ball comes into our defensive half and that is obviously to do with the midfield. As much as I'm excited by our young midfield brigade, I have always been concerned that we've been too 'contested ball' conscious and really I think that is to do with the type of midfielders we've drafted. Pretty much all of them have the same first instinct which is 'see ball/get ball' which means they naturally gravitate to the contest, leaving smarter opposition players on the outside who are then able to move the ball forward with speed, potency and little pressure.

It happened a lot yesterday. The doggies just have a better balance to their midfielders. Players like Dahlhaus, Bont, Hunter etc have a better balance of inside/outside attributes and know when to hold space and when to impact a contest. Most of them use the ball better too.

I'm not worrying yet, as I'm sure the coaches identify these things and I'm hoping that next year we will add yet another layer to our list and game. It's obvious we need some line-breaking, smart and skilled users injected into our midfield mix because we're being shown up by those very players from opposition sides. Merrett, Dahlhaus, Zorko, Kelly, Steven etc always kill us and it's because we have a very one-dimensional mix of mids.

Happy with the effort and intent and clearly those non-negotiables are in fact now, non-negotiables for our club.

But the next layer for 2017 onwards is to bring in some class, speed and smarts into the midfield mix as well as an experienced KP defender with a football brain.

Onto Brisbane next week for what should hopefully be a solid win at the G.

Edited May 16, 20169 yr by stevethemanjordan

I think we need a Jake Kolodjashnij type player for the backline, has skill, athleticism and size. Comming through at the right age, unfortunatly geelong has locked him away till end of 2017 but he is the type we need.

1 hour ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Zone defence requires smart and disciplined individuals. Garland, Dunn and Tom McDonald are all very limited in this capacity which is evidenced by their regular brain-fades and incredible inconsistency in performance. 

Whilst I agree we lack 'height' and 'size' in our defence, I think what is most evident is that we lack defenders with football smarts, composure and direction. 

It's detrimental to our entire defensive unit. I see no confidence whatsoever between anyone back there and even the dogs yesterday who were without Murphy, JJ, Adams and Suckling still looked just as solid without those guys. 

We'll continue to struggle back there until that area is addressed.

 

Yep.. We'll struggle with players whose abilities dont quite stretch to the plan

Should we try and recruit Michael Hurley or would that cost too much? What role does Jake Melksham play in all of this for us? Who is a player that can drop back and help out when we need it and trust the forwards to link up with the midfield ? Jack Watts? Should we have kept Daniel Cross ?

Edited May 16, 20169 yr by johndemons

Who do we have that is tall athletic mobile and can play in defence?

FROST

PLAY FROST IN THE BACKLINE!!  FCS

Or OMac or Dawes or Cam Pedersen.

 

No,  we play Judy? Why?

 

 

http://m.melbournefc.com.au/news/2016-05-16/analysis-defending-the-backline

interesting read. Speaks about the team defence and turnover impact.

“The way we’re trying to play – it can make things look susceptible at the time. We were getting goals leaked out the back … and there were just too many, and we couldn’t get enough pressure on the ball to slow them down through the middle of the ground, which made us vulnerable,” - Tom McDonald

7 hours ago, mauriesy said:

I thought Tom was good yesterday. He was the least of our worries, even when he kicked it.

McDonald reminds me of a young Nathan Jones, in that when there is space in front of him so he can run forward and be direct, he is able to make the right call. But when he has to move laterally, he falls in a heap and any logical play goes out the window,

The last 2 weeks have proved beyond doubt (if any doubt existed) that:

1. Colin Garland cannot play as a KPD - (at best, he is just capable of playing the role of the "3rd tall"); and;

2. Tom McD struggles when pitted against gorilla forwards - (physically seems well suited but just doesn't cope well).

With the benefit of hindsight, Dunn would have been the better match up for Redpath - whilst Dunn is not quick, Redpath is not Usain Bolt either.

In previous seasons, Crameri has given Dunn a real 'touch up' because Crameri is too mobile - no such issues yesterday.

Really need to get Hurley - ghastly hairdo and all.

14 hours ago, Petraccattack said:

His dropped marks will be a hell of a lot more costly in the backline than forward line

 

At least Dawes halving a contest and bringing the ball to the deck is better then Garland and McDonald getting out marked one on one. The most important thing for a key defender to do is nullify a key forward. He would still be handy when the ball is on the ground.

McDonald only seems to take a grab as 3rd man up, he useless in a wrestle.

i think Dawes could be a good full back but this zone defence would still make it hard

I am not sure dawes is good enough with his body work to be a backman, as he seems to get pushed under or out of the contests far too often.

 

There's little point trying Dawes down back, as he should be off the list come years' end. Freeing up a bit of cap space too.

A few interesting comments by Demonlanders and especially interesting to see who everyone blames for the zone defence breakdown - I hope those commenting were all at the ground, because otherwise you really have no idea trying to piece it together. I was at the game and it was really hard to sort who was most responsible in each instance.

You could lay blame at Roos and say, why didn't you just send an extra man forward to man the Dogs, rather than trying to zone out with an extra in defence, but that's a tactic from yesteryear. To be honest we didn't seem to have enough experience down back to know who to use as our spare - Michie was good in this role, but hardly compelling in the air, while when Wagner was used as spare he was having a shocker with his disposal after a huge game the week before. Lumumba was missed, because he can do that role and Vince was playing Bont for most of the game, so wasn't tried in the role. As a result you were talking about two guys being asked to do the spare job for pretty much the first time! Obviously not having an experienced spare like Crossy is hurting and it must have really hurt our 23rd man (Grimes) that he was again overlooked for the role that once made him so indispensible that he was made our captain. Michie can beat him on skill, but he is nowhere near as good a mark - or as courageous in the air.

In the first quarter the Dogs seemed to be able to break through the middle of the ground and found a man in the centre of the corridor free and once over the back it became really difficult to sort out responsibility. I think they scored something like four goals from kick-ins for the game, which is really high, but just shows that once through, we couldn't slow and stop them.

To be honest, the person with the biggest blame would be our defensive coach, although he'd probably reckon our midfielders weren't working hard enough on Hunter and Bont etc.

 

 

57 minutes ago, Deespicable said:

To be honest, the person with the biggest blame would be our defensive coach, although he'd probably reckon our midfielders weren't working hard enough on Hunter and Bont etc.

Time and again, when the dogs won it in defence, their forwards were already free.

By the time the ball got to them, they were still free.

That's a recipe for cheap goals no matter how hard our mids work.

On 15 May 2016 at 6:17 PM, McQueen said:

Hogan, Watts, Weideman and Hulett are the now and future tall forwards. Why the hell they persist with Frost in the forward line when he plays seniors is mind boggling.

He was drafted as a defender with the view that we were thin on stocks in that area. With both Dunn and Garland losing form at an alarming rate, I would love to know why the coaches persist with the Frost forward plan. 

Imo, frost and Pedo competed for the fwd/ruck spot at the start of the year with Pedo taking the honours, albeit not that convincingly. Now that that's settled until Dawes comes back in the frame, Frost is finally now being groomed  for his predestined KpD spot. 

I reckon the Spencer/Gawn combination could be a good one now that big Maxy is playing with so much confidence. Stick him in the goal square when he's not rucking and he'll be anightmare matchup for opposition defences, the way Sandilands used to always worry defenders when he went forward.

14 hours ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Zone defence requires smart and disciplined individuals. Garland, Dunn and Tom McDonald are all very limited in this capacity which is evidenced by their regular brain-fades and incredible inconsistency in performance. 

Whilst I agree we lack 'height' and 'size' in our defence, I think what is most evident is that we lack defenders with football smarts, composure and direction. 

It's detrimental to our entire defensive unit. I see no confidence whatsoever between anyone back there and even the dogs yesterday who were without Murphy, JJ, Adams and Suckling still looked just as solid without those guys. 

We'll continue to struggle back there until that area is addressed.

Equally as important however is the speed at which the ball comes into our defensive half and that is obviously to do with the midfield. As much as I'm excited by our young midfield brigade, I have always been concerned that we've been too 'contested ball' conscious and really I think that is to do with the type of midfielders we've drafted. Pretty much all of them have the same first instinct which is 'see ball/get ball' which means they naturally gravitate to the contest, leaving smarter opposition players on the outside who are then able to move the ball forward with speed, potency and little pressure.

It happened a lot yesterday. The doggies just have a better balance to their midfielders. Players like Dahlhaus, Bont, Hunter etc have a better balance of inside/outside attributes and know when to hold space and when to impact a contest. Most of them use the ball better too.

I'm not worrying yet, as I'm sure the coaches identify these things and I'm hoping that next year we will add yet another layer to our list and game. It's obvious we need some line-breaking, smart and skilled users injected into our midfield mix because we're being shown up by those very players from opposition sides. Merrett, Dahlhaus, Zorko, Kelly, Steven etc always kill us and it's because we have a very one-dimensional mix of mids.

Happy with the effort and intent and clearly those non-negotiables are in fact now, non-negotiables for our club.

But the next layer for 2017 onwards is to bring in some class, speed and smarts into the midfield mix as well as an experienced KP defender with a football brain.

Onto Brisbane next week for what should hopefully be a solid win at the G.

I agree with your comments on the back 6, Steve, but can't entirely agree with your comments RE: the midfield.

Our midfield is young and needs to both learn the required work rate needed for modern footy (gut-two-way-running) and they need to build their endurance bases. This leaves us struggling often (at the moment) and is not a result of leg speed, but a result of a lack of endurance.

Also, contested ball will always be the gold in footy. Five, ten, fifteen years from now. That will never go away. But, you can ensure your team plays to the strengths of your list game plan-wise. Hawthorn's inside brigade isn't quick, but their game plan doesn't expose them and they've also managed to get a lot of good outside run to compliment this, as you imply we need. But that talent can be added later. The inside beasts are the building blocks. The foundation of any side. We now have those blocks in place. We also have a once in a generation CHF. That only makes things more exciting.

Seriously though, we've built our list to perfection and the list build will continue to go on and as you imply, it isn't done yet.

11 hours ago, The heart beats true said:

http://m.melbournefc.com.au/news/2016-05-16/analysis-defending-the-backline

interesting read. Speaks about the team defence and turnover impact.

“The way we’re trying to play – it can make things look susceptible at the time. We were getting goals leaked out the back … and there were just too many, and we couldn’t get enough pressure on the ball to slow them down through the middle of the ground, which made us vulnerable,” - Tom McDonald

Roos also mentioned in his presser something about turn overs getting you back quickly the other way. Essentially suggesting we're turning it over too often at half back and in the midfield. We do need better ball users coming off half back, but we also need to adjust to the game plan and learn to take the right option time and again. When we do this, it's a matter of having role players come in and perform. We don't want to become one dimensional or too easy to defend. All our defenders must attack as well as defend. This was another idea issued by Roos during his most recent presser.

BUMP

Wonder if we're one of the two teams? Personally think we should look into both if we're not into Hurley  (which we should be).

http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/collingwood/afl-trades-collingwood-defender-nathan-brown-on-rival-clubs-radars-after-battling-to-win-spot-for-pies/news-story/28cb50653d4efe80d7ffb624088c1775

Edited June 3, 20169 yr by AngryAtCasey

Has anyone seen Frost play a good game? I haven't...

Anyone know where we plan on playing Melksham? He played across the half forward and midfield with his former club. Wouldn't be surprised if he played half back/midfield with us. 

Half back flank

don't like how our names aren't linked to Cam Marchbank like other clubs are. 

31 minutes ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

Anyone know where we plan on playing Melksham? He played across the half forward and midfield with his former club. Wouldn't be surprised if he played half back/midfield with us. 

That's the plan

1 hour ago, Gawn-Cam said:

Has anyone seen Frost play a good game? I haven't...

I thought he was good before his toe injury last year.

His presence down back certainly helped Tom McDonald.

On ‎16‎/‎05‎/‎2016 at 1:08 PM, ManDee said:

Who do we have that is tall athletic mobile and can play in defence?

FROST

PLAY FROST IN THE BACKLINE!!  FCS

Or OMac or Dawes or Cam Pedersen.

 

No,  we play Judy? Why?

I think we should try him in the forward line as the 3rd tall and play Watts wing/half forward. Garland's days a defender are over.

 

 

 

10 hours ago, The Song Formerly Known As said:

don't like how our names aren't linked to Cam Marchbank like other clubs are. 

Talented player. But he's not the gorilla keeper that i think we're really after.