Glaring weakness in defence

[jnrmac 20,055]

33 minutes ago, Vogon Poetry said:

We are a middle ranked defence.  We are 9th in the league for points against.  But we've found a couple of stats that allow us to say we are the worst.  We're not.

And guess what.  The usual suspects are using a few stats that relate to the whole backline to isolate Oscar and to a lesser degree Frost to again state their views.  No mention of Jetta, Hibberd, Hunt, Salem, Lewis (our backline general and on field coach), Vince or anyone else who has played there.  The problem is Oscar folks, you heard it here first.

No mention of a midfield that isn't applying pressure, no talk of zones, just a couple of stats to freshen up the weekly Oscar attack.  And the stats don't even relate directly to Oscar! Go figure.

I like Oscar, much criticised here by many and I'm as confident he'll turn into a quality tall defender as the detractors say he won't.  I think he's pretty good now and will get better.  And just as STMJ is confident that Jnrmac's criticism of Oscar will fall on deaf ears I'm confidnet my position won't change one view.

My main interest in the Oscar debate now is how many more ways his detractors will find to lay the blame for our failures on him even if their evidence doesn't relate to him.

 

You clearly haven't read the OP. And talk about making stuff up? You would win a gold medal

No one has said we are the worst. We specifically are the worst in the two categories mentioned. You seem to have a problem with facts? What are you? Oscars mum?

"No mention of Jetta, Hibberd, Hunt, Salem, Lewis"? Really? Did you want to read the OP again just to check that because its simply wrong. Again another fact that you don't like so ignore it.

Oscar's a champ mate. Should be AA this year according to you. Well done.

[Cheap Seats 3,310]

Frawley might be on the outer at the hawks (unconfirmed)

We would look at bringing him back since the hawks will be after picks?

[ManDee 7,127]

I said to my son on Saturday when watching the game that this is one of those games where you park Tommy Mac at the scoring end all day. Not rocket science just common sense. Football in windy conditions is not a mystery, well it maybe to our coaches.

[beelzebub 23,313]

8 minutes ago, ManDee said:

I said to my son on Saturday when watching the game that this is one of those games where you park Tommy Mac at the scoring end all day. Not rocket science just common sense. Football in windy conditions is not a mystery, well it maybe to our coaches.

Would have worked a treat

[Cheap Seats 3,310]

17 minutes ago, ManDee said:

I said to my son on Saturday when watching the game that this is one of those games where you park Tommy Mac at the scoring end all day. Not rocket science just common sense. Football in windy conditions is not a mystery, well it maybe to our coaches.

I reckon it is in modern day footy..... ManDee

Off the top of my head....Jordy lewis and was it Bernie in the 3rd coming out of defence and turning it over were coach killers.... So many poor decisions.

Not coach or game plan related errors.

As jnrmac has rightly pointed out there is a clear deficiency in defenve but on Saturday also there were a lot of self inflicted wounds. But it is fair to say brown was the difference.

I also think our current gsmeplan isn't to stop every entry or shutdown the opposition key forwards. Like North Melbourne or Sydney. (It might be personal related i dont know the coaches thoughts/plan. Am only guessing)

I think our game plan is to win contested possession and create pressure up field to create turnovers. We rely on getting first hands on the footy to win games. North tought us a lesson there in that last qtr.

Not saying this is right or wrong but ii rekon stooping 1 player seems opposite to our current plan 

Edited July 31, 2017 by Unleash Hell

[beelzebub 23,313]

Clever boy Bernie...playing in disguise 

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

1 hour ago, Vogon Poetry said:

The problem is Oscar folks, you heard it here first.

The problem is absolutely simple.

We are playing two under-developed, under-performing and inexperienced key defenders in Frost and Oscar for two reasons:

1 - Injuries this year. Our best and most experienced key defender has been playing forward for the obvious reasons and another senior defender in Colin Garland was hit by a season-ending knee injury in pre-season which hasn't helped in regards to players needing to perform at their best to retain their position. In this case, our key defenders.

2 - The footy department took an enormous gamble over the off-season in my eyes, in both not providing a like-for-like replacement for Lynden Dunn and not providing enough cover for injuries. I called for us to bring in a mature-aged key defender to provide stability, depth and room for both Oscar and Frost to develop at VFL level. 

Whilst I complain about Oscar's form, I can see quite obviously that it's the football department to blame for the predicament that we're in. And it frustrates me to no end. I've said it numerous times but it's completely circumstantial that Oscar and Frost are playing AFL football weekly at the moment. No other team with key defender depth and quality would be playing them as regularly as we are. 

It was a mistake that falls at the feet of the FD and clearly they know it given we're chasing Lever hard. A player who is the same age and games experience as Oscar. Oscar and Frost might well become AFL standard key defenders although I have my doubts. They're missing way too many key ingredients presently and it's my view that with every game we go in to carrying both of them, the risk of us conceding easy goals is increased.

 

Edited July 31, 2017 by stevethemanjordan

[binman 42,736]

I disagree that the glaring weakness in our side is our defence. But am very keen to get Lever as he will fit perfectly into our zone strategy .

As some have noted just as is the case at the Crows he won't be taking the Browns etc. He will do what he does at the Crows and knock up getting intercept marks and set up attacks with smart kicks.  He doesn't address a need so much as value add.  

Funny week to raise this as yes brown played well (he is almost leading the Coleman so no surprise there) but the reality is that whilst the zone had its moments where there was a mismatch the defence did really well given how poor the pressure from our mids was (which  as discussed last week will always cause problems for a zone defence as aggressive as ours, just as it did against the crows).

What stat can i find to back my claim up that the back six did well? Let's see - how about the score. They only scored 7 goals with the wind and 11 all day.  Like they have done for much of the season the whole back six did their job (which has meant Tmac can go up forward and actually get a mark in our forward line) and kept the roos to a score we should have easily been able to eclipse. I mean come on, the roos only scored 76 points in total.

The glaring weakness in this game was our forward line and forward entries. We scored TWO GOALS for the entire second half. Pathetic.  We were level at 3 q time thanks to a terrific effort by the back six after the Roos had the wind in the third. We should have smashed them but could only manage two goals kicking with a gale. Hopeless, just hopeless. Not on the back six though.

But i 100% agree we have a huge issue with contested marks. We simply do not get enough of them. And it is a long standing problem. The last really good contested mark, with the possible exception of Hogan and Gawn, was Clarke. It is one reason Tmac has been so great to watch up forward. He clunks marks. 

For me our poor contested marking is one of our two real glaring weaknesses, the other being how few 'elite' kicks we have in the side. Salem, Watts , Hibberd, maybe Brayshaw, maybe Garlett and funnily enough perhaps Jones are our only elite kicks. That is simply not enough and a huge barrier to sustained success, particularly given our game plan relies so much of aggressive use of the ball. When you add that we have a number of players who are poor by hand you have a serious issue.

[beelzebub 23,313]

Bin...some sage analysis. 

One thing however. The OP sought to highlight the weakness in defence.

Pendantic as might, it didn't say that was particularly the bearing weakness of the day.

Not kicking is goals is right up there, no argument. 

Edited July 31, 2017 by beelzebub

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

A perfect example of our lack of footy IQ in our defence is clearly seen within the last 40 seconds of the match.

Hunt goes in one-hundred miles an hour for a ground ball in the middle only to be beaten to it by Gibson. Hunt both misses the ball and then more importantly the tackle. Low footy IQ move at that time of the game.

Then have a look at the next play and where the ball ends up. We have Oscar zoning what? Absolutely nothing. He has zero awareness that Cunnington has crept forward and ends up taking an uncontested mark. The entire idea of zoning is to eat-up the space so that uncontested marking options aren't so easily identifiable. Oscar is standing way too close to Jetta when this play unfolds and is just generally clueless about how much space he has left on his right side.

Jetta, Salem and Hibberd are our only high IQ defenders. Hunt has some great attributes but isn't a composed footballer. Oscar and Frost do things that are unfathomable. Therein lies the problem. Solid defence and zonal pressure comes from high IQ footballers. 

 

Edited July 31, 2017 by stevethemanjordan

[beelzebub 23,313]

10 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

A perfect example of our lack of footy IQ in our defence is clearly seen within the last 40 seconds of the match.

Hunt goes in one-hundred miles an hour for a ground ball in the middle only to be beaten to by Gibson. Hunt both misses the ball and then more importantly the tackle. Low footy IQ move.

Then have a look at the next play and where the ball ends up. We have Oscar zoning what? Absolutely nothing. He has zero awareness that Cunnington has crept forward and ends up taking an uncontested mark. The entire idea of zoning is to eat-up the space so that uncontested marks aren't so easily identifiable. Oscar is standing way too close to Jetta when this play unfolds and is just generally clueless about how much space he has left on his right side.

Jetta, Salem and Hibberd are our only high IQ defenders. Hunt has some great attributes but isn't a composed footballer. Oscar and Frost do things that are unfathomable. Therein lies the problem. Solid defence and zonal pressure comes from high IQ footballers. 

 

Unfortunately much of what you say is correct.

Hunt will evolve with a better gearbox 

The back setups leave a lot to desire.

[binman 42,736]

18 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Bin...some sage analysis. 

One thing however. The OP sought to highlight the weakness in defence.

Pendantic as might, it didn't say that was particularly the bearing weakness of the day.

Not kicking is goals is right up there, no argument. 

We have largely done a good job of keeping sides to manageable scores all season. Which is the job of the back six. It is why we have a percentage over 100. Compare to bombers who really leak goals and might i add have one the best man on man defenders in the league in hurley.

As i said our defence is not our problem

 

 

[beelzebub 23,313]

3 minutes ago, binman said:

We have largely done a good job of keeping sides to manageable scores all season. Which is the job of the back six. It is why we have a percentage over 100. Compare to bombers who really leak goals and might i add have one the best man on man defenders in the league in hurley.

As i said our defence is not our problem

 

 

107.3 v 107.1

Yep ...see where ya coming from 

[Satyriconhome 10,740]

25 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

A perfect example of our lack of footy IQ in our defence is clearly seen within the last 40 seconds of the match.

Hunt goes in one-hundred miles an hour for a ground ball in the middle only to be beaten to it by Gibson. Hunt both misses the ball and then more importantly the tackle. Low footy IQ move at that time of the game.

Then have a look at the next play and where the ball ends up. We have Oscar zoning what? Absolutely nothing. He has zero awareness that Cunnington has crept forward and ends up taking an uncontested mark. The entire idea of zoning is to eat-up the space so that uncontested marking options aren't so easily identifiable. Oscar is standing way too close to Jetta when this play unfolds and is just generally clueless about how much space he has left on his right side.

Jetta, Salem and Hibberd are our only high IQ defenders. Hunt has some great attributes but isn't a composed footballer. Oscar and Frost do things that are unfathomable. Therein lies the problem. Solid defence and zonal pressure comes from high IQ footballers. 

 

You mean the footy IQ you get from playing games especially over 50, shame on Omac, Hunt and Frosty for not doing that yet, I love the effect a loss has on this forum     we had 22 who didn't play well as a team, we lost, end of world is nigh

[ManDee 7,127]

Other than not planting T Mac at the goal scoring end for the entire match, the defenses greatest weakness was the failure of the midfield. 

[beelzebub 23,313]

2 minutes ago, ManDee said:

Other than not planting T Mac at the goal scoring end for the entire match, the defenses greatest weakness was the failure of the midfield. 

This goes to my thinking the FD should shoulder the brunt of our derision. Failed to make best use of personnel, both positionally and tactically.

[Chris 2,892]

I don't really agree that our defense is a huge issue, although I do readily concede that it can be improved.

Overall our defense has been fairly solid, where we are weak is against the big forwards, that is obvious, and is also for a few reasons.

1: TMac has barely been back all year, he has been in the ruck and forward due to injuries. Put TMac back with OMac and Frost (or even one in the VFL at times) ad things against the big boys would be different. Not completely solved but far better.

2: The games in which our big backs have struggled have been the games where our mids have boon off, which means the delivery int eh forward line is fast and generally pretty good. That is very hard to defend. In the games where our mids are pressuring the ball carrier our backs do a good enough job. Both Frost and OMac are young and will improve, unfortunately they have ad to this on the big stage, although that could stand them in good stead in future. 

The answer to our issue with big backs is to get another big back in there so we have some sort of depth. That could be TMac going back again or bringing in someone else. Currently we simply don't have the depth and if one of them was to go down we are stuffed. The other answer is the make sure the whole team is defending, when we do that we are fine, if the mids and forwards have an off day the backs are screwed.

I actually thought all our backline did a pretty good job on the weekend. Sideshow only got 4 (yes I said only, if we had been bad down there he would have had 10), teh other talls were basically unsighted, and our small backs did a good job (with the exception of Lewis' disposal)

[YesitwasaWin4theAges 6,690]

17 hours ago, Biffen said:

We were out marked because North waited behind the pack with the wind and in front of the pack with it.

Windy footy 101.

The effort looked ok- the energy levels low .

I'm not about to set myself on fire over this weeks loss.

We got out scrapped in the last half and allowed them to run down the clock.

Very ugly game-too many stoppages.

Terrible spectacle, Third world facilities by all reports but the AFL don't care as long as they have footy in every state.

[binman 42,736]

8 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

107.3 v 107.1

Yep ...see where ya coming from 

Well there is somw nuance. On 10 occasions they have scored over 100 to our 7. And 5 times they have conceded more than 100 points to our 3.

The highest score we have conceded is 126.  Theirs is 153 with a good amoount of 110 point plus losses

[DeeMfc 621]

If our mids aren't lowering their eyes when delivering inside forward 50 then put TMac back to take the big forwards and slot Joel Smith in at full forward.

[Ouch! 2,258]

3 hours ago, beelzebub said:

We haven't enough elite stock. We need more. Need it now.

Just confirming this is referring to players in the backline? because in terms of top draft picks, and players who should be 'elite' I find it hard to swallow that we don't have enough elite players...?

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

39 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

You mean the footy IQ you get from playing games especially over 50, shame on Omac, Hunt and Frosty for not doing that yet, I love the effect a loss has on this forum     we had 22 who didn't play well as a team, we lost, end of world is nigh

It's not Sat-man, look at the positives in life. Relax.

As for your footy IQ comment, I agree that you'd expect those youngsters to improve in that regard. But by how much? Not all players are blessed with that attribute as a natural ability so I think it's foolish to expect that they'll reach any great heights in that aspect of the game. 

Generally, high footy IQ is something players possess before they come into the system. Yeh you'd expect Frost, Oscar and Jayden to make less errors during games the more experience they gain. But they'll never be high IQ footballers.

[beelzebub 23,313]

1 hour ago, binman said:

Well there is somw nuance. On 10 occasions they have scored over 100 to our 7. And 5 times they have conceded more than 100 points to our 3.

The highest score we have conceded is 126.  Theirs is 153 with a good amoount of 110 point plus losses

Strangely Bin the nuance possibly more potent yet left off is we have won ONE more game than Ess for hardly any advantage in % .

Edited July 31, 2017 by beelzebub

[jnrmac 20,055]

1 hour ago, binman said:

We have largely done a good job of keeping sides to manageable scores all season. Which is the job of the back six. It is why we have a percentage over 100. Compare to bombers who really leak goals and might i add have one the best man on man defenders in the league in hurley.

As i said our defence is not our problem

 

 

The earth is flat. If you read the OP you will see the problem I have highlighted. you simply cannot argue against the fact clubs score on 53% of occasions they go inside 50 against us. The worst in the AFL.

We also lose 35% of one on ones in our defence, the worst in the AFL. If you want to shut your eyes and ignore that go ahead. I prefer to be realistic about what strengths and deficiencies we have.

That we have largely kept teams to manageable scores is, I would say, a result of two of our defenders having AA-type seasons - Jetta and Hibberd.

[Chris 2,892]

Just watched the final two minutes of the game again as I wanted to see a few of the mistakes mentioned in here. Four things stood out.

1: The free to Brown for in the back on the wing was soft, may not have made a huge difference though as they had the ball anyway.

2: Hunts sort pass was high risk high reward, it didn't come off as the pass itself was off line, had it been on line then who knows.

3: Who ever posted that OMac was too close to Jetta in the zone right at the end when they took the mark is spot on.

4: OMac (99% sure it was but apologies if it wasn't) did what I see many players do when taking a kick from an out on the full, but this one may have had dire consequences. Players seem not to realise that once they set foot inside the boundary again then it is play on. OMac never actually got to the outside of the boundary, took the ball that was thrown to him, and as soon as he wasn't moving to get to the outside of the boundary the ump correctly called play on. That left his kick rushed and short which fell into Daw's hands with Maxy and few others trying to make up the distance he lost.

I really can't believe how many AFL players I see that miss this basic understanding of the rules. If it is out on the full boys, get yourself over the boundary and don't step back in until you are ready to kick. I have similar rant about players being called to play on while over the boundary taking a kick and it not being deemed out of bounds, but I will leave the full version of that for another day.