Yesterday. Hawks had 26 tackles in forward 50. Us, a total of 8.

A summary of the 3 main forward players  efforts for both sides.

Hogan, Garlett and Watts combine for a grand total  of 3 tackles.  All 3 to Garlett.

Puopolo, Rioli and Gunston combine for a mere total of 26 tackles between them. 

Last week we had a total of 4 forward 50 tackles. Pot had 12.

Our forwards have a lot to answer for. Must be like downhill skiing for opposition defenders.

Edited June 4, 20169 yr by america de cali

I thought our ability to lock it in the forward half was what kept us in it, especially in the first half. Those stats don't look good from an individual perspective, but those players aren't the only ones in the forward line in contested situations - half the team is, so someone must have been tackling.

Just now, Nasher said:

I thought our ability to lock it in the forward half was what kept us in it, especially in the first half. Those stats don't look good from an individual perspective, but those players aren't the only ones in the forward line in contested situations - half the team is, so someone must have been tackling.

I think what it does show is that we need those guys up and about, pressuring and tackling, for us to win games.  I agree that we were able to lock it in our forward half much better than we did last week, but our half forwards need to give us more.  When we rolled the Pies and Richmond our half forwards were sensational, kicking goals and tackling anything in the area.  

I don't agree with the OP in saying that it's not for us.  That's clearly not true.  It just shows how important it is to our structure.

Hogan I can understand as he is the nominated flyer.

I can't grasp a player like Kent not tackling.Particularly as he was lucky to be picked again .

Even Max lays tackles .Big Jake Spencer can tackle.

Lay a tackle or play VFL I say.

I would say it is just about Kent and Harmes' most important role to apply pressure inside 50. Garlett as well considering he couldn't get his hands on the footy.

When they went forward, their forwards played in front and seemed to have a number of players in the vicinity. Whereas in our forward line, we were always caught behind and always seemed outnumbered.

Edited June 4, 20169 yr by Forest Demon

48 minutes ago, Nasher said:

I thought our ability to lock it in the forward half was what kept us in it, especially in the first half. Those stats don't look good from an individual perspective, but those players aren't the only ones in the forward line in contested situations - half the team is, so someone must have been tackling.

May have been deceiving due to the wet conditions. Easier to lock the ball  in slippery conditions and  consequential ineffective disposal. If we matched them for forward 50 pressure it could have been a couple of goals less for them and a couple more for us. 

Edited June 4, 20169 yr by america de cali

59 minutes ago, Nasher said:

I thought our ability to lock it in the forward half was what kept us in it, especially in the first half. Those stats don't look good from an individual perspective, but those players aren't the only ones in the forward line in contested situations - half the team is, so someone must have been tackling.

We did flood the forward line at times though, so I think ADC has a point about the forwards not applying enough pressure, it was generally players like Hunt, vB, Harmes etc who were working hard to keep the ball in our 50.

Extremely disappointed in Hogan yesterday. Dawes didn't look 100% and Garlett was trying, just had an off day, but Hogan was slow and only gave 1 effort in contests he was involved in. You find out a lot about players in wet weather footy, and he needs to lift the defensive workrate side of his game.

 

58 to 50 inside 50's

26 to 8 inside 50 tackles

Look at the heat maps, they held the ball in a lot better than us, we need to improve greatly on this cause we did have our chances going forward. 

Agree generally with the proposition that forward pressure is vitally important.

The tackles inside 50 stat is relevant to that, obviously, and we need to do better than 8 from an entire game, but I actually felt we did better in this area yesterday than last week. Our pressure all over the ground, especially through the middle, was a notch or two above last week.

1 hour ago, Biffen said:

Hogan I can understand as he is the nominated flyer.

I can't grasp a player like Kent not tackling.Particularly as he was lucky to be picked again .

Even Max lays tackles .Big Jake Spencer can tackle.

Lay a tackle or play VFL I say.

Absolutely spot on.

Fan of Kent and Harmes - their build points to them being tackling beasts, but it ain't happening.

Spencer to come in...he tackles!

Our half forward line not applying pressure is our biggest problem at present. It is costing us games. Kent, Harmes and Garlett are the 3 there that need to lock the ball in and they're not.

Garlett had a shocker yesterday but has credits in the bank. The other two need to bring the intensity and pressure or they're out. Kennedy should come in for Harmes next week. Petracca laid another 6 tackles yesterday which is the same as all 3 of them combined probably. Vandenburg needs to be given a rocket as he was manic with tackling last year and this year is a ways off, but given his injuries I'm not as down on him as the others. It doesn't take skill to lay a take, it just takes effort. 

8 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

Our half forward line not applying pressure is our biggest problem at present. It is costing us games. Kent, Harmes and Garlett are the 3 there that need to lock the ball in and they're not.

Garlett had a shocker yesterday but has credits in the bank. The other two need to bring the intensity and pressure or they're out. Kennedy should come in for Harmes next week. Petracca laid another 6 tackles yesterday which is the same as all 3 of them combined probably. Vandenburg needs to be given a rocket as he was manic with tackling last year and this year is a ways off, but given his injuries I'm not as down on him as the others. It doesn't take skill to lay a take, it just takes effort. 

It takes some skill, with so many Academy award nominations going on out there...

Are we still the worst rated side at converting once inside 50? We must be.

Great thread. I have been wondering when our tackling inside forward 50 would get a mention. It is an area that needs immediate improvement.

Garlett is an exception because he generally tackles well. Hogan and Kent don't seem to lay enough tackles. Kent has to change this part of his game. He has the ability and speed to tackle well, he just needs to work on his first and second efforts.

23 minutes ago, Django said:

Are we still the worst rated side at converting once inside 50? We must be.

11th at 48% worst is Essendon at 43% then Carlton at 46% (overall scores idk the stats for just goals)

I think uor issue for tackling and conversion is the same, we have a high volume of shallow inside 50 turnovers, they kill us on the rebound and give the forwards no hope of defending. If the ball hits the ground between 40-50m out then you have very little chance of scoring. Too often this happens, either needs to be sharp accurate hit up pass or long to a contest. Short to a contest is just pointless.


 

Our fwds consistently fail to 'put body' (legitimately) on the opponent when going for marks or contesting the 50/50 ball.  If it happens it is half-hearted.  Fix this 'pressure act' and all the other 'pressure acts' like tackling, 2nd efforts, smothering, knocking the ball down etc would be required less often.

Fully compete at the first opportunity should be the mantra for our fwds!  This would give our other fwds more opportunity/time to get to the contest.  Atm the ball comes out too quickly.  More effort required close to goals!

5 hours ago, Nasher said:

I thought our ability to lock it in the forward half was what kept us in it, especially in the first half. Those stats don't look good from an individual perspective, but those players aren't the only ones in the forward line in contested situations - half the team is, so someone must have been tackling.

I think our midfield played a big role in locking the ball inside forward 50. We needed frenetic pressure from Kent, Harmes and Garlett. For the most part we didn't get it.

11 minutes ago, AdamFarr said:

I think our midfield played a big role in locking the ball inside forward 50. We needed frenetic pressure from Kent, Harmes and Garlett. For the most part we didn't get it.

The whole forward line has to take the blame - Hogan, Watts & Dawes weren't great at holding the ball in either - 1 tackle between all 3 players.  The Hawks were able to set-up their forward forays in a much cleaner fashion (for the most part)  And we don't really need the stats to confirm what we see. 

It's the main reason why we lost the game Adam ... we won in the ruck, in the midfield, in clearances and our defence was reasonable.  You are right in saying that our midfield players were the ones who locked the ball in the forward line (again, for the most part)  We overdid the handballing but that was related to our lack of forward line pressure - all things on the footy field have a connection.

It wasn't a great day for the big blokes but the big blokes can still get to numerous contests and create pressure.  Watts did however play a decent game and the other parts of his game were more than acceptable.

 

2 hours ago, Django said:

Are we still the worst rated side at converting once inside 50? We must be.

I think this is a midfield problem. We still lack class there, so our forward 50 entries are just kicks in hope a lot of the time, rarely to the advantage of our forwards.

I know a lot of people rated Vince's game yesterday, but I can't recall a clearance of his that was thoughtful and directed to the advantage of a forward. He and Jones can win the ball, but they just kick long, high, up and unders.

1 hour ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

11th at 48% worst is Essendon at 43% then Carlton at 46% (overall scores idk the stats for just goals)

I think uor issue for tackling and conversion is the same, we have a high volume of shallow inside 50 turnovers, they kill us on the rebound and give the forwards no hope of defending. If the ball hits the ground between 40-50m out then you have very little chance of scoring. Too often this happens, either needs to be sharp accurate hit up pass or long to a contest. Short to a contest is just pointless.

Good post. Spot on.

28 minutes ago, Macca said:

The whole forward line has to take the blame - Hogan, Watts & Dawes weren't great at holding the ball in either - 1 tackle between all 3 players.  The Hawks were able to set-up their forward forays in a much cleaner fashion (for the most part)  And we don't really need the stats to confirm what we see. 

It's the main reason why we lost the game Adam ... we won in the ruck, in the midfield, in clearances and our defence was reasonable.  You are right in saying that our midfield players were the ones who locked the ball in the forward line (again, for the most part)  We overdid the handballing but that was related to our lack of forward line pressure - all things on the footy field have a connection.

It wasn't a great day for the big blokes but the big blokes can still get to numerous contests and create pressure.  Watts did however play a decent game and the other parts of his game were more than acceptable.

I completely agree, but Harmes and Kent are getting games purely to bring tackling pressure. Harmes has said as much in interviews. His game is built around frenetic tackling pressure. Even if he only gets 5 or 6 kicks, if he lays 8 or 9 tackles then he becomes a vital cog in our team. Kent's KPIs are probably exactly the same and yet neither are delivering. Jeffy is a goal kicker, so he won't be measured only by the forward pressure he brings, but whether he can bob up and kick a few goals.

Hogan needs to stop dropping his head when he doesn't win the first contest. You can see him become totally dejected as soon as it happens and he rarely gives a full chase after that. He's had a number of doughnuts in the tackle category this year. For a man of his size, this shouldn't be an issue. But it's all about attitude and work rate, both of which are intrinsically linked.

I'd argue that our lack of forward pressure from the forward group was one of two major factors why we lost the game. The second was our midfield was simply less efficient and untidy when delivering the ball upfield. Agree that we overdid the handballing too, but I felt we did that a lot off half back too, which is not linked to forward line pressure, it's linked to poor decision making. You could argue it's a lack of work rate up the ground from our forwards too, in failing to provide a clear option to kick it to. 

Yeah, I was pretty happy with Watts' game, although he did fade in and out of the game, which is disappointing. 

Edited June 5, 20169 yr by AdamFarr

• 18 minutes ago, AdamFarr said:

  I completely agree, but Harmes and Kent are getting games purely to bring tackling pressure. Harmes has said as much in interviews. His game is built around frenetic tackling pressure. Even if he only gets 5 or 6 kicks, if he lays 8 or 9 tackles then he becomes a vital cog in our team. Kent's KPIs are probably exactly the same and yet neither are delivering. Jeffy is a goal kicker, so he won't be measured only by the forward pressure he brings, but whether he can bob up and kick a few goals.

  Hogan needs to stop dropping his head when he doesn't win the first contest. You can see him become totally dejected as soon as it happens and he rarely gives a full chase after that. He's had a number of doughnuts in the tackle category this year. For a man of his size, this shouldn't be an issue. But it's all about attitude and work rate, both of which are intrinsically linked.

  I'd argue that our lack of forward pressure from the forward group was one of two major factors why we lost the game. The second was our midfield was simply less efficient and untidy when delivering the ball upfield. Agree that we overdid the handballing too, but I felt we did that a lot off half back too, which is not linked to forward line pressure, it's linked to poor decision making. You could argue it's a lack of work rate up the ground from our forwards too, in failing to provide a clear option to kick it to. 

  Yeah, I was pretty happy with Watts' game, although he did fade in and out of the game, which is disappointing. 

Our midfield was also under pressure with a lot of their possessions which partly explains the lack of efficiency ... the rest of it I see as such (presuming we're playing against a decent side)

• Lack of forward line pressure creates easier pathways for an opposition defence
• The opposition's defence therefore will have easier transitions to their own forward line (via the midfield of course)
• This in turn creates undue pressure on our own defence
• Our own defence then has a far more difficult pathway towards our forward line (again, via the midfield or as is so often the case with haphazard forward forays starting from an under siege defence, via the boundary line)
• In turn our forward 50 entries become haphazard and without clean uninterrupted pathways.

Fix the first part and everything else becomes a much easier task.

 

 

Edited June 5, 20169 yr by Macca

Any coach that plays Dawes is outdated everyone knows what he offers nothing, Garlett needs to go back to the VFL that's 2 out of 6 not contributing add Kents cameos and u can't beat the good sides, our defence is crap and that's surprising considering the first 2 roos years was based around defending, the only thing that's improved is the mids and rucks and Hogan and Watts snapping a few each week.

Garlett looked bereft of any confidence yesterday

6 hours ago, Biffen said:

Hogan I can understand as he is the nominated flyer.

I can't grasp a player like Kent not tackling.Particularly as he was lucky to be picked again .

Even Max lays tackles .Big Jake Spencer can tackle.

Lay a tackle or play VFL I say.

We lost to Eagles last year up north by 70 odd points and Howe played 4 quarters in defence and never laid a tackle he's papers marked that night I would expect the same with Kent.