Try this one if the others are not working.

 

 

Thanks rev  

David King thinks it great.

It's nothing new however.

Half backs running through the middle is an old one.

The trick is to wait until you have the ball in control otherwise you are deserting your opponent.

 

8 hours ago, Fork 'em said:

Screwed over by the diamond.
Riewoldt just kept running to Neville Jetta while Dunn and TMac seemed more worried that the diamond had a nice shape.

 

 

 

8 hours ago, beelzebub said:

It often looks like that, like a dance

It was funny to watch T McD at the Diamond Setup prior to the bounce.

He was standing next to Roughead then paced out 5 paces to his right and 2 paces forward.

In the meantime Roughy just walked away to his left. Robotics 101.

48 minutes ago, Biffen said:

David King thinks it great.

It's nothing new however.

Half backs running through the middle is an old one.

The trick is to wait until you have the ball in control otherwise you are deserting your opponent.

 

That's the ideal scenario, except when do we ever have control of the ball, after the 4th or 5th handball.

19 hours ago, Lord Travis said:

Modernized Bailey-ball. All attack off half back and we either score heavily or get done.

Would prefer we don't push both halfbacks up as our defense gets sucked up the ground too in our losses. Seeing guys like N Reiwoldt just standing by himself inside 50 is just stupid.

 

19 hours ago, beelzebub said:

Stringer seemed to have his own paddock at times.  Just does my head in at times.

Compared to the Bailey era, though, and we either smashed the opposition, or they absolutely pasted us by 10+ goals. The Bulldogs didn't kill us on the weekend. It was a comfortable win but hardly a smashing. If we're only 5-6 goals off a top 4 team, well then I'm pretty happy about that. This team is far more accountable defensively then the Bailey teams. I remember in 2010, parts of 2011, where we couldn't get it out of the defensive 50, not because we didn't have the players, but because you had a bunch of blokes who didn't have the urgency or confidence to demand the ball. The loose players and goals over the back that we've seen this year is a breakdown in communication. I don't think it's through lack of urgency or confidence.

22 minutes ago, praha said:

 

Compared to the Bailey era, though, and we either smashed the opposition, or they absolutely pasted us by 10+ goals. The Bulldogs didn't kill us on the weekend. It was a comfortable win but hardly a smashing. If we're only 5-6 goals off a top 4 team, well then I'm pretty happy about that. This team is far more accountable defensively then the Bailey teams. I remember in 2010, parts of 2011, where we couldn't get it out of the defensive 50, not because we didn't have the players, but because you had a bunch of blokes who didn't have the urgency or confidence to demand the ball. The loose players and goals over the back that we've seen this year is a breakdown in communication. I don't think it's through lack of urgency or confidence.

Yep, the problem with Bailey's team wasn't so much the gameplan as the lazy/unfit squad at his disposal. To be expected when you let the players dictate when and how hard they can train.

Well, can't wait til we get MFC Diamond ver 2.1

The one that works !! 

2 hours ago, Barney Rubble said:

 

It was funny to watch T McD at the Diamond Setup prior to the bounce.

He was standing next to Roughead then paced out 5 paces to his right and 2 paces forward.

In the meantime Roughy just walked away to his left. Robotics 101.

You mean Roughy moved into a less dangerous position? That is exactly what they want. They want players marking the ball deep in the pockets. A long, high contested kick out of the middle allows Tom to get to most contests aside from ones deep in the pockets whicho only results in a low % shot at goal. Thats a success. The zone leaves us vaulnerable to uncontested accurate low worm burning kicks but with an extra 2 in the middle that shouldn't happen. I emphasise shouldn't because right now while we're learning and we will make mistakes. Give it time, its gonna be frustrating to watch for now, but we will get there. 

2 minutes ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

You mean Roughy moved into a less dangerous position? That is exactly what they want. They want players marking the ball deep in the pockets. A long, high contested kick out of the middle allows Tom to get to most contests aside from ones deep in the pockets whicho only results in a low % shot at goal. Thats a success. The zone leaves us vaulnerable to uncontested accurate low worm burning kicks but with an extra 2 in the middle that shouldn't happen. I emphasise shouldn't because right now while we're learning and we will make mistakes. Give it time, its gonna be frustrating to watch for now, but we will get there. 

or teams who are quick with effective slick handballing who look to kick a shorty  quickly...BANG !! split wide open...Goal !!  every single bloody time

18 hours ago, Fifty-5 said:

Frost is no-brainer for tall back role IMO - his closing speed is incredible and he has the size to spoil anyone.  His kicking is even more dodgy than TMacs - that's the downside - the opposition will let him have it in his hands deep.

Nathan Jones has no confidence at all in his kicking for goal - Ref: That's Good For Footy

Puts him ahead of Jake Spencer.

 

Just now, beelzebub said:

or teams who are quick with effective slick handballing who look to kick a shorty  quickly...BANG !! split wide open...Goal !!  every single bloody time

yeah thats what happens when you're playing against a better side. We will get better and will be able to compete against that in a couple of years. Right no we just can't, that's where we are at.  We gave up 5 more goals than we kicked against arguably the best attacking side in the comp... that is not a bad result. Expecting to beat the best yet is foolish. Scream at them if they lose this week, but against the best you have to wear the loss. 

15 minutes ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

You mean Roughy moved into a less dangerous position? That is exactly what they want. They want players marking the ball deep in the pockets. 

I'm not sure opposition teams want Jack Watts marking deep in that city end pocket.

The problem with this  Gem of a defense is that any coach with a modicum of savvy  who has at least a few  fleet of foot types  with ability will tell them to just take us on head on. The pressure is ALL on us.. And we'll often fluff it. 

Why ? because we  invariably wont be there for starters. Too busy trying to keep to this "plan" Other sides strategy dept will no we will have a weakness here. We aren't commensurate with our appointed tasks. e DONT really have the right or enough cattle to perform the compressed coal conundrum.

We are defending according to what we expect the other team will PROBABLY do...and when they dont do that....we're  F@#$&D

Diamonds are great..  Some nice jewelry out there that combines  with other stones.    Im for that personally.

1 minute ago, Wrecker45 said:

I'm not sure opposition teams want Jack Watts marking deep in that city end pocket.

Haha not eveyone is kicking ~80% from set shots. 

Just now, ArtificialWisdom said:

Haha not eveyone is kicking ~80% from set shots. 

NO.... they're not 

similar to "the web" that the weagles have implemented in their defence, most teams often set up to guard the space and result in players guarding palyers in the space looking to halve the contest more than win. The reason that this falls apart is based aroudn the midfield more than the backline, if the backline is out of position it is pivotal for them to push at the ball carrier and hope to slow the play for the mids/flankers etc to return back defensive side of the contest. There was a really brief reference to this in Jones on the couch, but more in relation to the bulldogs when he referenced on ball/off ball. The biggest issue for us is that we dont often slow the ball movement and our return from our offensive spread is poor, when we have been playing poor. It will improve, i like it. I remember watching games earlier in the year and Viney who was in sweeper went hard forward and this was my biggest issue, but the clearance often was shut down by pressure put on from the half backs.

It will continue to improve as we play it for longer, game plans get better as the players are able to understand it and work through it. I really like the "system based" team approach as all of the good sides have it, and implementing clear structures and roles is pivotal for creating sustainable success, just ask Sydney and Hawthorn

It's better than the cubic zirconia defence we used under Neeld.

The Diamond Defense only works if the ball is not turned over. Once they get the ball back our defenders are usually out of position.

13 minutes ago, Samael said:

The Diamond Defense only works if the ball is not turned over. Once they get the ball back our defenders are usually out of position.

somewhat glaringly obvious isn't it

Im thinking it might be better described as the Poncho Defense....an attempt at One size fits all whilst trying to cover up any other glaring inadequacies

It's almost like we are sacrificing possible wins in order to practice this and get it right.

 

The other thing about the Diamond Defence that just occurred to me. The Dogs often defended by pushing us out wide, but attacked through the corridor, which is what we were trying to do. For long periods of the game, they owned the corridor. I don't know this for sure, but it may well be that Diamond Defence works better against attacks from out wide than from through the corridor.

28 minutes ago, Samael said:

The Diamond Defense only works if the ball is not turned over. Once they get the ball back our defenders are usually out of position.

If we didn't turn the ball over we wouldn't even bother with a defence.

Just now, DeeZee said:

It's almost like we are sacrificing possible wins in order to practice this and get it right.

 

It's how it looks to me.  There is some merit in perseverance, but I dont get why it's an absolute with little possibility of also playing other styles.  Al that will happen is  an opposition will work out who to target and how to break teh defense all the whiles knowing the Coaching Day Gurus will do SFA !!

Giving it to them on a plate...wtf