Terry Wallace on Why the Dees Lost

[Clintosaurus 7,848]

The Cats goal in the third quarter annoyed me as everyone flew for the ball and left Menzel on his own just outside the goal square for an easy finish. We MUST always have someone stay down to deal with the crumb.

[hemingway 7,627]

2 minutes ago, Clintosaurus said:

The Cats goal in the third quarter annoyed me as everyone flew for the ball and left Menzel on his own just outside the goal square for an easy finish. We MUST always have someone stay down to deal with the crumb.

agree, it happened time and again we had players flying for the ball and no-one crumbing.

 

[hemingway 7,627]

55 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

It's more complex than this.

In tight, we don't look to break away before we give it off. We tend to panic and handball it off straight away without actually trying to create some space before doing so.

What is also frustrating is when we tackle opposition players they still can get a handball off yet we seem to just drop it.

 

spot on

[grey wolf 226]

This was the first game I had watched live in nearly 2 years and the first half was very disheartening but not because of our over use of handball but our tactics come/game plan for me.

Centre bounces...our plan didn’t work of having 8 defenders with two Melsham and Hunt running off the back of the square for two reasons

1. Because it leaves the Cats with 6 on 4 in our forward line and one of the loose guys being Toohey Even if we win it They were able to chip it back to the centre and bang it over our heads to one on ones 

2. It assumes we will win the centre clearance or break even and this is very possible if we have Clarry in there (at least twice he ran out to the wing because we had 5 in the centre) but against Ablett Selwood and Duncan he had to have Jones and Trac with him not Salem and Hannan or Maynard and Harmes!!! First time I had seen Clarry live and he was sensational in those centre bounces fighting Selwood and Ablett by himself... he must be at every centre bounce and play on ball the entire time he is on the ground don’t sit him at full forward..

and TOG % stats ... Salem 73%, Melksham 67%, Harmes 66%, Jones 76%, Maynard 75%, ANB 75%, Hannan 72% ... so all these guys only played 3 quarters of the match

Ablett 93%, Selwood 80%, Duncan 86%, Kelly 91%, !!

 

[jnrmac 20,065]

Our first move is to handball.

The good players surge 3 or 4 steps to space before disposig the ball.

[dl4e 5,851]

Funnily enough I thaught our lack of defensive pressure in the 2nd term is what cost us the match.

[Tony Tea 2,809]

10 hours ago, Doodle Dee said:

Our mids haven't fully developed to the level of clearing packs with speed or stiff arms to give them the space necessary to kick accurately and not bomb it to an easy opposition rebound, pretty unfair to heap any blame on them over over handballing. At least they win it.

Yes. Kicking cleanly into the forward line is a product of midfielders finding clear space in which to kick. Our onballers are either too light to break tackles and get into space, or not quick enough to get themselves into space (or both).

[Mach5 4,767]

1 hour ago, Clint Bizkit said:

It's more complex than this.

In tight, we don't look to break away before we give it off. We tend to panic and handball it off straight away without actually trying to create some space before doing so.

What is also frustrating is when we tackle opposition players they still can get a handball off yet we seem to just drop it.

 

 

I think we suffered from a series of poorly executed handballs, while having the right idea.

A good well-placed handball releases a teammate into space, or give another quick handball linking to a player bursting past.

We displayed too many awkward slow poorly-placed draw-and-dish handball moves, just allowing the cats to collapse on us and putting us under more pressure until the turnover.

The quality of the handball either creates space and opportunities for a teammate, or it puts them under pressure, leading to another poor rushed handball, and then another... until the inevitable turnover.

Once we get the execution right, or eliminate the players making the critical errors, we'll cut sides to pieces.
Maybe we were too easy to read, but then we need to be good enough to recognise that, dummy the handball and go the other way or put it on the boot.

It's all about slight adjustments.

[Mach5 4,767]

35 minutes ago, Clintosaurus said:

The Cats goal in the third quarter annoyed me as everyone flew for the ball and left Menzel on his own just outside the goal square for an easy finish. We MUST always have someone stay down to deal with the crumb.

Leadership and awareness. This will come.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

12 minutes ago, Mach5 said:

 

I think we suffered from a series of poorly executed handballs, while having the right idea.

I'm not taking about going for a run down the wing, just a couple of bursting quick steps to give themselves a metre or two of space to then execute a handball.

[Moonshadow 17,676]

He has a point. Oliver, Jones and Lewie are all good kicks and don't do it enough, particulary Oliver, of course.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,755]

31 minutes ago, grey wolf said:

This was the first game I had watched live in nearly 2 years and the first half was very disheartening but not because of our over use of handball but our tactics come/game plan for me.

Centre bounces...our plan didn’t work of having 8 defenders with two Melsham and Hunt running off the back of the square for two reasons

1. Because it leaves the Cats with 6 on 4 in our forward line and one of the loose guys being Toohey Even if we win it They were able to chip it back to the centre and bang it over our heads to one on ones 

2. It assumes we will win the centre clearance or break even and this is very possible if we have Clarry in there (at least twice he ran out to the wing because we had 5 in the centre) but against Ablett Selwood and Duncan he had to have Jones and Trac with him not Salem and Hannan or Maynard and Harmes!!! First time I had seen Clarry live and he was sensational in those centre bounces fighting Selwood and Ablett by himself... he must be at every centre bounce and play on ball the entire time he is on the ground don’t sit him at full forward..

and TOG % stats ... Salem 73%, Melksham 67%, Harmes 66%, Jones 76%, Maynard 75%, ANB 75%, Hannan 72% ... so all these guys only played 3 quarters of the match

Ablett 93%, Selwood 80%, Duncan 86%, Kelly 91%, !!

 

I agree with your first point but not sure about your second. If we expect Gawn to win more tapouts than he loses, we should also expect to win more centre clearances. The one or two forwards running off the back of the square might increase the chances of winning the clearance, but to what end? The forwards are outnumbered so we make it so much harder for Hogan and co. I had thought the forward(s) running off the backline was a good idea, and perhaps it is when Gawn isn't rucking. But I now think when Gawn is rucking, we should have more confidence in winning the ball without needing the forwards to run off the back of the square. We should keep them forward to stop the opposition having one or two spare men in defence.

[JV7 2,351]

There is no coincidence our best wins under Goodwin have been when we have kicked the ball more & not overused the handball... Totally agree with Plough

Edited March 27, 2018 by JV7

[Older demon 2,741]

If I can add to the discussion I think we missed too many tackles in the first half. And the tackles made were brushed away except for Ablett who got pinged a few times for incorrect disposal. The tackling and intensive pressue was much better after half time.

Richmond have set the standard for tackling and forward defensive pressure. Agree that we need more lead up forward passes rather than bombing it in.

[BAMF 4,353]

8 hours ago, Clint Bizkit said:

It's more complex than this.

In tight, we don't look to break away before we give it off. We tend to panic and handball it off straight away without actually trying to create some space before doing so.

What is also frustrating is when we tackle opposition players they still can get a handball off yet we seem to just drop it.

 

It seems that every year we get an NRL expert to come teach us how to tackle correctly.

Tackling in the NRL is based around stopping your opponent.

AFL tackling should be about forcing incorrect disposal. Pin the bloody arms please. So frustrating to see opposition get rid of it often to advantage.

[TGR 1,367]

19 hours ago, Demonland said:

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2018/03/26/plough-outlines-why-demons-lost/

We handball too much.

“I think Melbourne could have won the game by three or four goals, and not waited for the Max Gawn kick,” Wallace told SEN’s KB and The Doc.

“The top-three possession winners for Melbourne don’t kick the ball enough.

“They over hand pass the ball and don’t kick it enough."

Do you agree?

 

Our hands in tight are scintillating.  Too simplistic for mine here.  As long as we are exiting or getting out of congestion as soon a practical.

 

I am not worried about Oliver for example.  The kid is often in the heaviest traffic.  In heavy traffic, you can rarely kick.

[bing181 9,238]

9 hours ago, grey wolf said:

and TOG % stats ... Salem 73%, Melksham 67%, Harmes 66%, Jones 76%, Maynard 75%, ANB 75%, Hannan 72% ... so all these guys only played 3 quarters of the match

I noticed that as well, not sure what's behind it, especially Melksham and Harmes, they're quite low figures. Cramping?

[RalphiusMaximus 6,053]

20 hours ago, Demonland said:

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2018/03/26/plough-outlines-why-demons-lost/

We handball too much.

“I think Melbourne could have won the game by three or four goals, and not waited for the Max Gawn kick,” Wallace told SEN’s KB and The Doc.

“The top-three possession winners for Melbourne don’t kick the ball enough.

“They over hand pass the ball and don’t kick it enough."

Do you agree?

 

Can't agree with this.  It's the directionless kicks forward and poor planning in the forward line that cost us.  Our conversion of i50s to scores is abysmal. 

[titan_uranus 25,020]

15 hours ago, praha said:

All this talk of "blazing away" is nonsense. Nothing better for a forward than to get the ball in quickly. Our forward setup is based around key forwards bringing the ball down and crumbers picking up the pieces. When we win, ANB, Harmes, Melksham, Garlett tend to all have a contribution. Pederson and Hogan both played their roles. Our small forwards didn't. We went forward, Geelong swept it out, went forward, and scored from a fairly empty forward line. It is as simple as that. That's where we lost it. Throw in poor defensive efforts from our midfielders, and minimal two-way running, and you have the second quarter. 

If your small forwards aren't pressuring and scoring from contested packs, you'll struggle to win, regardless of your opponent.

Agree, but as has been said I think there's more to it than this.

That plan doesn't work as well when we're consistently down a number in the forward line, because we've set up with a player off the back of the square at the centre bounce.

We're too often kicking to a 1-on-2 or a 2-on-3 and so we ask Hogan/Pedersen to bring it to ground but, even if they do, our smalls/mediums are outnumbered. It can work, but too many times it doesn't, because we're outnumbered, hence the +23 inside 50s but a loss.