Glaring weakness in defence

[monoccular 17,417]

I don't watch enough of other games in detail but can anyone answer who at which teams do better v the likes of Daniher and Frankenstein and Ben Brown and Hawkins and Walker?

Edited September 4, 2017 by monoccular

[BigMacjnr 283]

I heard recently from a reliable source that we actually changed our defense from a zoning defense which we had practiced all pre-season and had used for the majority of the season to a man-on-man defense. The change happened from the Port Adelaide game. According to the source, a number of our backmen lost confidence and it showed with really poor positioning which led to easy goals. The problem with this strategy is it relied on our midfield to win the battle in the middle and put unbelievable pressure on sides, when they couldn't we leaked goals.

To me this would explain why we leaked goals against Port when their mids got on top in small portions, and against GWS and the Kangaroos where our mids lost/broke even. Games in which we retained the man on man approach in defense after this inexplicable 3/4 season defensive change in system set up. Some players form really dropped as a result which made it really hard to pick back up for the tail part of the season.

The source said that the midfield has picked up the new system set up, but it still very much a work in progress for our defenders and forwards, which tells me we are a pre-season away from fully 'getting' it, and why we still hear that the team hasn't fully bought into the system/hasn't been fully implemented.

Also heard that a number of key players were playing injured to the point that in the last few games they were receiving injections just to get on the park...but the injuries were to the point that even with the injections they couldn't make much of a contribution. Would have preferred we play fully fit players than players who were not themselves because their body wasn't allowing them to have their normal impact (will let you deduce which players I refer to). Not very happy with our medical team for allowing those players to play and would have preferred some fully fit Casey players and play these players when they were fully healthy.

All in all, positive that with another preseason the team should be:

- fully across the system, and hopefully across both zone and man to man, which would be a boon strategically to be able to switch styles at a drop of a hat.

- Surely have a healthier team (never had this for the whole season), and with less suspensions we will give ourselves a fighting chance.

- Trade/draft/develop well so we have better depth so that coaches don't feel they need to play injured stars, who will lose form/confidence when played seriously injured (can't have their usual impact).  

- Not making the finals should give us a better draw than those making the finals...should give us some more marquee games as well.

[Red and Blue realist 2,051]

58 minutes ago, BigMacjnr said:

I heard recently from a reliable source that we actually changed our defense from a zoning defense which we had practiced all pre-season and had used for the majority of the season to a man-on-man defense. The change happened from the Port Adelaide game. According to the source, a number of our backmen lost confidence and it showed with really poor positioning which led to easy goals. The problem with this strategy is it relied on our midfield to win the battle in the middle and put unbelievable pressure on sides, when they couldn't we leaked goals.

To me this would explain why we leaked goals against Port when their mids got on top in small portions, and against GWS and the Kangaroos where our mids lost/broke even. Games in which we retained the man on man approach in defense after this inexplicable 3/4 season defensive change in system set up. Some players form really dropped as a result which made it really hard to pick back up for the tail part of the season.

The source said that the midfield has picked up the new system set up, but it still very much a work in progress for our defenders and forwards, which tells me we are a pre-season away from fully 'getting' it, and why we still hear that the team hasn't fully bought into the system/hasn't been fully implemented.

Also heard that a number of key players were playing injured to the point that in the last few games they were receiving injections just to get on the park...but the injuries were to the point that even with the injections they couldn't make much of a contribution. Would have preferred we play fully fit players than players who were not themselves because their body wasn't allowing them to have their normal impact (will let you deduce which players I refer to). Not very happy with our medical team for allowing those players to play and would have preferred some fully fit Casey players and play these players when they were fully healthy.

All in all, positive that with another preseason the team should be:

- fully across the system, and hopefully across both zone and man to man, which would be a boon strategically to be able to switch styles at a drop of a hat.

- Surely have a healthier team (never had this for the whole season), and with less suspensions we will give ourselves a fighting chance.

- Trade/draft/develop well so we have better depth so that coaches don't feel they need to play injured stars, who will lose form/confidence when played seriously injured (can't have their usual impact).  

- Not making the finals should give us a better draw than those making the finals...should give us some more marquee games as well.

Very interesting if true, I did think we all of a sudden looked very tired again in the last 3 or 4 games, which we did last year. Could also explain why we suddenly seemed to drop off the drive we had from defense early in the season.

I wonder if this was done with the intention of preparation for finals where the games seem to go a lot more man on man? Although we didn't make it, hopefully it might help over the next few years if players are again required to adapt with finals in mind. 

[Lucifers Hero 39,644]

1 hour ago, BigMacjnr said:

I heard recently from a reliable source that we actually changed our defense from a zoning defense which we had practiced all pre-season and had used for the majority of the season to a man-on-man defense. The change happened from the Port Adelaide game. According to the source, a number of our backmen lost confidence and it showed with really poor positioning which led to easy goals. The problem with this strategy is it relied on our midfield to win the battle in the middle and put unbelievable pressure on sides, when they couldn't we leaked goals.

To me this would explain why we leaked goals against Port when their mids got on top in small portions, and against GWS and the Kangaroos where our mids lost/broke even. Games in which we retained the man on man approach in defense after this inexplicable 3/4 season defensive change in system set up. Some players form really dropped as a result which made it really hard to pick back up for the tail part of the season.

The source said that the midfield has picked up the new system set up, but it still very much a work in progress for our defenders and forwards, which tells me we are a pre-season away from fully 'getting' it, and why we still hear that the team hasn't fully bought into the system/hasn't been fully implemented.

Also heard that a number of key players were playing injured to the point that in the last few games they were receiving injections just to get on the park...but the injuries were to the point that even with the injections they couldn't make much of a contribution. Would have preferred we play fully fit players than players who were not themselves because their body wasn't allowing them to have their normal impact (will let you deduce which players I refer to). Not very happy with our medical team for allowing those players to play and would have preferred some fully fit Casey players and play these players when they were fully healthy.

All in all, positive that with another preseason the team should be:

- fully across the system, and hopefully across both zone and man to man, which would be a boon strategically to be able to switch styles at a drop of a hat.

- Surely have a healthier team (never had this for the whole season), and with less suspensions we will give ourselves a fighting chance.

- Trade/draft/develop well so we have better depth so that coaches don't feel they need to play injured stars, who will lose form/confidence when played seriously injured (can't have their usual impact).  

- Not making the finals should give us a better draw than those making the finals...should give us some more marquee games as well.

Its a worry that our coaches saw fit to change our fundamental game plan midseason!  And supporters want to blame the players! 

Fundamental game plan change is for the preseason and not when we are in contention for the top half of the 8! 

The coaches have a lot to answer for in our failed season!

 

[jnrmac 20,055]

The facts are we played our best football when we had the most injuries. Coaches and players rose to the challenge when we won 3 of the 4 games with 6 day breaks. We were innovative, unpredictable and the acid was on players to step up.

I find it hard to believe we made a fundamental change to game style as suggested by BigMac Jnr. Not saying it didn't happen but it didn't look to me like we did and no-one here appeared to pick up on if we did (which would be unusual).

The form of individual players dropped off which may have been related to injury or maybe related to fitness or not being able to keep up wit the game plan (both physically and mentally).

It is beyond dispute that the coaching staff failed in the last round. For that team to run out and play as poorly as they did the first quarter is unforgivable. Particularly given our poor starts throughout the year. The fact is we lost 3 of our last 5 games - against lowly sides - and nearly lost a further one against the Lions after leading by 29 pts at the 15m mark of the last quarter.

I don't believe this relates to game style being changed.

[Bay Riffin 1,473]

4 hours ago, BigMacjnr said:

I heard recently from a reliable source that we actually changed our defense from a zoning defense which we had practiced all pre-season and had used for the majority of the season to a man-on-man defense. The change happened from the Port Adelaide game. According to the source, a number of our backmen lost confidence and it showed with really poor positioning which led to easy goals. The problem with this strategy is it relied on our midfield to win the battle in the middle and put unbelievable pressure on sides, when they couldn't we leaked goals.

To me this would explain why we leaked goals against Port when their mids got on top in small portions, and against GWS and the Kangaroos where our mids lost/broke even. Games in which we retained the man on man approach in defense after this inexplicable 3/4 season defensive change in system set up. Some players form really dropped as a result which made it really hard to pick back up for the tail part of the season.

The source said that the midfield has picked up the new system set up, but it still very much a work in progress for our defenders and forwards, which tells me we are a pre-season away from fully 'getting' it, and why we still hear that the team hasn't fully bought into the system/hasn't been fully implemented.

Also heard that a number of key players were playing injured to the point that in the last few games they were receiving injections just to get on the park...but the injuries were to the point that even with the injections they couldn't make much of a contribution. Would have preferred we play fully fit players than players who were not themselves because their body wasn't allowing them to have their normal impact (will let you deduce which players I refer to). Not very happy with our medical team for allowing those players to play and would have preferred some fully fit Casey players and play these players when they were fully healthy.

All in all, positive that with another preseason the team should be:

- fully across the system, and hopefully across both zone and man to man, which would be a boon strategically to be able to switch styles at a drop of a hat.

- Surely have a healthier team (never had this for the whole season), and with less suspensions we will give ourselves a fighting chance.

- Trade/draft/develop well so we have better depth so that coaches don't feel they need to play injured stars, who will lose form/confidence when played seriously injured (can't have their usual impact).  

- Not making the finals should give us a better draw than those making the finals...should give us some more marquee games as well.

that is very very interesting. I have used that Port game as an example many times. we absolutely shellacked them first half and should have been 10 goals up. but all the games since then seemed to be like another team out there, we went back into our shell, and by the end looked cooked. I like many just was stunned by those last few games.

[beelzebub 23,313]

Its the sort of thing that BMJ suggests that reinforces in my mind that just about everything out of a FD persons mouth is just rubbish.  It may be for public consumption...doesnt mean it has any real value.

[binman 42,736]

Interesting comments from bmjnr.

I have no doubt we had many players playing injured. Gawn is an obvious one. Watts wasn't right. Viney obviouly. Hogan of course. Even jones. All struggled to come up from serious injuries. And it would make sense also that injuries played a role in the mid field pressure dropping off, which was the key reason our season fell away.

I have always maintained injuries are the biggest determinant of a teams success. And the culture in footy is still strong not to blame injuries. Gives another soldier a chance and all that palaver. Its not just the games lost it is players struggling to get back to their optimal level. Often they simply don't until the following season.

 A key factor in the tigers this year has been their run with injury. And obviously a big factor in gws struggles is their shocking run. Amazing they are top 4.

The zone comment is interesting. Im pretty sure they were full zone against port. My sense is that tmac was  largely man on man when he went back which disrupted the set up. I wasn't against dropping frost at the time but they also dropped salem. And then tmac went back. And he was actually pretty poor down back. Particularly against the pies but also the lions. Robbed us of a really good forward and hurt our backline. In hindsight goody made a big error.

Edited September 5, 2017 by binman

[Bitter but optimistic 22,223]

On ‎9‎/‎3‎/‎2017 at 1:16 AM, A F said:

I worry that Gawn is a one-hit-wonder, much like Jamar was. I hope I'm wrong.

I reckon you will be AF. 

The key difference is about 200mm!

[Cheap Seats 3,310]

10 hours ago, jnrmac said:

The facts are we played our best football when we had the most injuries. Coaches and players rose to the challenge when we won 3 of the 4 games with 6 day breaks. We were innovative, unpredictable and the acid was on players to step up.

I find it hard to believe we made a fundamental change to game style as suggested by BigMac Jnr. Not saying it didn't happen but it didn't look to me like we did and no-one here appeared to pick up on if we did (which would be unusual).

The form of individual players dropped off which may have been related to injury or maybe related to fitness or not being able to keep up wit the game plan (both physically and mentally).

It is beyond dispute that the coaching staff failed in the last round. For that team to run out and play as poorly as they did the first quarter is unforgivable. Particularly given our poor starts throughout the year. The fact is we lost 3 of our last 5 games - against lowly sides - and nearly lost a further one against the Lions after leading by 29 pts at the 15m mark of the last quarter.

I don't believe this relates to game style being changed.

Teams change set ups and styles all season.

I'm not saying you have to believe it but to completely discredit it is silly. YOu can have your point on coaching falures etc I don't really care but strategies and set ups change in season. 

You could say good teams don't change - that would work for your point

Notable game style changes

Hawthorn rounds 1 - 7 v Hawks onwards

The men in defence strategies

etc etc

 

 

 

 

Edited September 5, 2017 by Unleash Hell

[binman 42,736]

see below

Edited September 5, 2017 by binman

[binman 42,736]

33 minutes ago, Unleash Hell said:

Teams change set ups and styles all season.

I'm not saying you have to believe it but to completely discredit it is silly. YOu can have your point on coaching falures etc I don't really care but strategies and set ups change in season. 

You could say good teams don't change - that would work for your point

Notable game style changes

Hawthorn rounds 1 - 7 v Hawks onwards

The men in defence strategies

etc etc

 

 

 

 

It is indisptuable our pressure dropped of significantly in the last 6-8 games. Injuries and general tiredness took their toll. As i have been at pains to say that pressure drop exposes zone defences.

But given our scoring was also based partly on that same zone defence through run off hb and super quick ball movement and transition our scoring also suffered. 

If we had - as seems to be the case - simply ran out of gas goody had to respond somehow. And dropping tmac back to play man on man and essentialy replacing frosty's aggressive run might have been that response.

[Cheap Seats 3,310]

I was commenting re teams changing structure and tactics in a response to jnrmac disagreent.

I agree with what you've said @binman

 

[jnrmac 20,055]

SEN Player Ratings Oscar McDonald.

I'll just leave this here....

2017 Season

1	StK	Improved as day wore on as there was less pressure from St Kilda	5
2	Carl	Still gives Dees fans the heebie-jeebies with ball in hand but also did some good things in back half.	5
3	Geel	Surprisingly went to Hawkins but that didn’t last and was moved to Menzel who also fried hm.	2
4	VFL	Okay down back without starring. Needs a few more weeks to totally regain his confidence.	-
5	VFL	Just fair in defence, but had less and less to do as the night wore on.	-
6	Ess	Steady enough on return to the team down back. Had Hooker for long periods and did a reasonable job.	6
7	Haw	“Bottom bunk” McDonald mixed good and bad. Okay without getting fans overly aroused with his effort.	5
8	Adel	Strong in defensive fifty and stopped Josh Jenkins from dominating.	7
9	NM	If he threw a stick at the ground it would probably miss. Beaten defensively and butchered footy offensively.	2
10	GCS	Dropped marks, turned the ball over for three quarters, then showed some physical intent late. Has to get better.	3
11		Bye.
12	Coll	Panicky early on with ball in hand, then came of age in back half. Something to build a career on.	7
13	WB	Backed up last week’s effort with another strong, assertive performance in defence. Used ball very well.	7
14	WCE	Had his hands full defensively. The key forwards at West Coast were good.	4
15	Syd	Led a merry dance early by Rohan out of goalsquare, but then settled. Fair, but down on recent weeks.	4
16	Carl	Struggled at times down back but kept battling away. Like teammates Casboult’s marking troubled the Dee defence.	5
17	Adel	When he has to play on an opponent with nous/movement, his slow reactions are shown up. Walker made him look silly at times.	2
18	Port	Took plenty of intercept marks and got back to some better form after a poor one in Darwin.	6
19	NM	Terrible defensively. Flogged by Brown when on him. Just so slow to react to his opponent’s movements.	1
20	GWS	Watched the ball sail over his head with regularity in first term. But overall was okay down back.	7
21	StK	Mixed and matched down back and generally did a solid job. Played with poise.	6
22	Bris	Other than a couple of iffy kicks, was steady enough down back opposed to Close.	6
23	Coll	Went to Cox and Grundy when they were resting in attack. Other than one turnover in attack, was far from the worst.	6

[Fat Tony 5,221]

2 hours ago, jnrmac said:

SEN Player Ratings Oscar McDonald.

I'll just leave this here....

2017 Season

1	StK	Improved as day wore on as there was less pressure from St Kilda	5
2	Carl	Still gives Dees fans the heebie-jeebies with ball in hand but also did some good things in back half.	5
3	Geel	Surprisingly went to Hawkins but that didn’t last and was moved to Menzel who also fried hm.	2
4	VFL	Okay down back without starring. Needs a few more weeks to totally regain his confidence.	-
5	VFL	Just fair in defence, but had less and less to do as the night wore on.	-
6	Ess	Steady enough on return to the team down back. Had Hooker for long periods and did a reasonable job.	6
7	Haw	“Bottom bunk” McDonald mixed good and bad. Okay without getting fans overly aroused with his effort.	5
8	Adel	Strong in defensive fifty and stopped Josh Jenkins from dominating.	7
9	NM	If he threw a stick at the ground it would probably miss. Beaten defensively and butchered footy offensively.	2
10	GCS	Dropped marks, turned the ball over for three quarters, then showed some physical intent late. Has to get better.	3
11		Bye.
12	Coll	Panicky early on with ball in hand, then came of age in back half. Something to build a career on.	7
13	WB	Backed up last week’s effort with another strong, assertive performance in defence. Used ball very well.	7
14	WCE	Had his hands full defensively. The key forwards at West Coast were good.	4
15	Syd	Led a merry dance early by Rohan out of goalsquare, but then settled. Fair, but down on recent weeks.	4
16	Carl	Struggled at times down back but kept battling away. Like teammates Casboult’s marking troubled the Dee defence.	5
17	Adel	When he has to play on an opponent with nous/movement, his slow reactions are shown up. Walker made him look silly at times.	2
18	Port	Took plenty of intercept marks and got back to some better form after a poor one in Darwin.	6
19	NM	Terrible defensively. Flogged by Brown when on him. Just so slow to react to his opponent’s movements.	1
20	GWS	Watched the ball sail over his head with regularity in first term. But overall was okay down back.	7
21	StK	Mixed and matched down back and generally did a solid job. Played with poise.	6
22	Bris	Other than a couple of iffy kicks, was steady enough down back opposed to Close.	6
23	Coll	Went to Cox and Grundy when they were resting in attack. Other than one turnover in attack, was far from the worst.	6

Pretty fair assessment IMO. Although I thought his game against the Dogs was excellent and better than a 7. 

He was much better after the bye and should improve again with another preseason in the gym. Also, I think his kicking is much better than he gets credit for, probably due to his brother being an ordinary kick. 

[DeezNuts 624]

Ok, we've all seen the numbers this year on how many goals we've conceded. With all the trade talk of Lever plugging our backline etc, I was wondering what people's thoughts are on our defence.

Is it that we fail to gut run the zone back in support, by over committing forward? Is it that the numbers en mass and the handball game exposes the backline? Or is it the individual talent/development of the backline that is the problem? 

Most games I watched this year, OMAC who has been the subject of a lot of criticism, has always been pretty good at spoiling a mark. Same for TMAC. Frost probably is best at taking the game on. All of their other skills require work no doubt, but I don't think it's purely their individual skills that have consistently failed. With that in mind, does one person (Lever) fix the problem, or do other things also need to change?

I'd love to see some stats on how many spoils, intercept marks and turnovers the guys have achieved relative to inside 50's that have come their way. 

That might tell us if they're efficient defenders, or just over utilised due to structural issues/game style further up the ground. 

What are your thoughts?

[Demon Disciple 12,072]

I don't think it's that we fail to gut run back, but more because our turnovers are soooooooo bad that not even the best defense would be able to get back to defend with any chance of stopping the counter.

[binman 42,736]

Ugh

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

1 hour ago, binman said:

Ugh

 

Thoughts on O Mac Binman?

...

........

Edited September 7, 2017 by stevethemanjordan

[Wiseblood 24,637]

1 hour ago, binman said:

Ugh

Steve paid him 50 dollars to start this thread. 

[Moonshadow 17,675]

Yawn....

[dimmy 1,307]

Food for thought

According to AFL Stats:

Disposal % :  Jetta 88% (Highest ranked MFC Player) Next  OMac 79%

1% :  OMac 160 (Ranked 7 in AFL) TMac 128 ( 13) : Frost 96 (29) : Jetta 87 (39) : Hunt 76 (56) : Hibberd 59 (84)

Overall Player Rankings (AFL Rank up to 100) : Oliver (6),Jones (21),Hibberd (22), Lewis (34), Tyson (45), Viney (76)

Contested Disposals : Oliver 344 (Ranked 2 in AFL), Petracca 236 (26),Viney 212 (38), Tyson 190 (60) and Lewis 174 (75)

Hibberd (14), Hunt(20), Jones (84) and Tyson (89) were all ranked in top 100 for metres gained, but that does not necessarily include quality of disposal

[jnrmac 20,055]

Interesting that we are apprently interested in J Trengrove from Port. Not sure if this is as a back up for the Lever plan or additional to. If true it adds weight to the argument that we have a problem in defence that the club wants to fix.

We'll see at the end of trade period I guess....

[jnrmac 20,055]

On 7/30/2017 at 12:14 PM, jnrmac said:

I have said all year our defence leaks goals. Yet again we got taken to the cleaners.

The elephant in the room are our key tall backs. Hibberd has had a great year. Jetta is outstanding, Hunt has done well but OMac and Frost while doing some good things have been toweled up by bigger bodied tall fwds like Brown, Roughhead, Walker, Daniher, Reiwoldt, Casboult, Hawkins etc

We desperately need a Lever.

Facts are:

1. teams score 53% of the time they enter our fwd 50 - last in the AFL

2. We lose 35% of defensive one on ones - last in the AFL

You cannot win finals with a defence like that. In fact you will struggle to make finals.

OMac is simply a liability. May become a footballer one day but gets outbodied regularly, has no urgency or intensity and frankly plays a lot of dumb football. He flies to spoil and either misses the ball or or hits it straight into a dangerous spot like the corridor. Plenty on here bang on about what a massive improvement he has made this year but I maintain if we had a decent tall back he wouldn't be playing.  

Frost has some great attributes but makes a lot of errors spoiling. leaving his man, fumbling and taking on more than he can chew.

We cannot take a contested mark to save ourselves. We rank 17th in contested marks. Clearly we have had to move TMac to the fwd line and so rob our defence but the evidence is pretty clear that he makes a good forward and so won't be returning any time soon.

Until we fix our defence we aren't going anywhere. Throw the kitchen sink at Lever.

BUMP for this thread,

Clearly the footy dept has decided that we have a big weakness in defence. Should be some people embarrased by what they have written in this thread trying to justify our defensive efforts. 2018 was better than 2017 but clearly a massive issue for the coaching staff. 

It's taken us two years to get Lever and May for 3 first round picks and we have lost a gun forward in the process. A big price to pay. Let's hope its worth it.