As being perfected by Jack Riewoldt and Mason Cox of late with their ability to leap up and get an outstretched hand to the ball and propell it towards the small forward brigade who are there reading the tap, or more often to just 'bash n crash' the ball in a certain direction where they outnumber. We too often have two of our players compete for the mark and spoil each other. If we're more confident that one player can bring the ball to ground, then there will perhaps be less confusion and more numbers at ground level.

I think more so for Hogan who is often out numbered and when Max is up forward and crashing a pack from behind. TMAC does not need to be concerned with changing his marking routine as he seems to have on a pair of invisible gloves. 

We obviously don't want to be too cute or hollywood about it. I think Richmond have really excelled at just predicably getting it to ground at whatever the cost as that is a higher goal scoring probability than the probability of taking a pack mark against the 3rd man up bane of our existence.

I think Hannan and Petracca in particular are the kind of players who would really feed off the ability to take a quick snap on goal or side step an opponent upon recieving the tap. And Garlett could be reinvigorated by feeling that there is much more predictability with the marking contests. And then you've got Oliver who can shark a tap from a forward while he's playing more forward minutes.

Whatever the solution, i'm sure the coaches and players are exploring all options. Thoughts on emulating this tactic? Or more broadly how we can convert more inside 50's?

Edited July 31, 20186 yr by johndemonic

As you say, we kind of do that already. It's called a "clearance". Seems to work ok there so I'd like to see us do it in marking contests.

Edited July 31, 20186 yr by Chook

Don't need to follow other teams' tactics. Just need our forwards to read the opposition's spoils because they raely try to mark the ball but go the spoil that almost always go directly to their crumbers. Where are our crumbers?

 

23 minutes ago, tiers said:

Don't need to follow other teams' tactics. Just need our forwards to read the opposition's spoils because they raely try to mark the ball but go the spoil that almost always go directly to their crumbers. Where are our crumbers?

 

Other teams dominant tactics most certainly have needed to be copied to some degree throughout modern afl history. Zone defences, forward press etc. Reading the opposition spoils is quite a different beast to the tap on. No doubt we have to be able to contain a ball that has been spoiled. But i'm talking about a deliberate concerted effort to get one outstretched hand to a pack contest where a clear mark is not an option, and propell it towards our crumbers, just like the way Max does with a ruck contest. We control its movement.

I just don't think the Hogan at the top of the square has worked well against decent opposition, perhaps due to injury, but more so in that the opposition has more control over where the ball lands. Our players flying for the ball perhaps need to think more about conceding that we cannot pull off a miracle mark, and just try and tap it to advantage. A mindset change more so than going overboard with tapping everything.

Edited July 31, 20186 yr by johndemonic

22 minutes ago, Chook said:

As you say, we kind of do that already. It's called a "clearance". Seems to work ok there so I'd like to see us do it in marking contests.

Clerance indeed. Clearing the forward fifty, I suppose it needs to be renamed to a goal-clearance then. 

Edited July 31, 20186 yr by johndemonic

I think Weideman might be one our players who could really excel at this as he gets better at impacting marking contests. Makes you wonder about our forward dynamic. Hogan up ground playing the Adel-Tom Lynch role I think.

Edited July 31, 20186 yr by johndemonic

We're the highest scoring team in the league by quite a large margin - I'm not sure we need to change up too much in that particular area...

12 minutes ago, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

We're the highest scoring team in the league by quite a large margin - I'm not sure we need to change up too much in that particular area...

We average approx 65 or so against the top 8 teams though don't we? Have to double check, Stat was from a few weeks ago.

Edit: 76. (94 v Geel, 48 v Haw, 56v Rich, 91 v Coll, 65 v Port, 98 v Geel)

Do we want to count 123 v North? I'd say it goes against the sub 100 trend though 

Edited July 31, 20186 yr by johndemonic

2 hours ago, johndemonic said:

As being perfected by Jack Riewoldt and Mason Cox of late with their ability to leap up and get an outstretched hand to the ball and propell it towards the small forward brigade who are there reading the tap, or more often to just 'bash n crash' the ball in a certain direction where they outnumber. We too often have two of our players compete for the mark and spoil each other. If we're more confident that one player can bring the ball to ground, then there will perhaps be less confusion and more numbers at ground level.

I think more so for Hogan who is often out numbered and when Max is up forward and crashing a pack from behind. TMAC does not need to be concerned with changing his marking routine as he seems to have on a pair of invisible gloves. 

We obviously don't want to be too cute or hollywood about it. I think Richmond have really excelled at just predicably getting it to ground at whatever the cost as that is a higher goal scoring probability than the probability of taking a pack mark against the 3rd man up bane of our existence.

I think Hannan and Petracca in particular are the kind of players who would really feed off the ability to take a quick snap on goal or side step an opponent upon recieving the tap. And Garlett could be reinvigorated by feeling that there is much more predictability with the marking contests. And then you've got Oliver who can shark a tap from a forward while he's playing more forward minutes.

Whatever the solution, i'm sure the coaches and players are exploring all options. Thoughts on emulating this tactic? Or more broadly how we can convert more inside 50's?

I'm sure i saw Hogan flick one back to Oliver who goaled against the dogs

3 hours ago, johndemonic said:

As being perfected by Jack Riewoldt and Mason Cox of late with their ability to leap up and get an outstretched hand to the ball and propell it towards the small forward brigade who are there reading the tap, or more often to just 'bash n crash' the ball in a certain direction where they outnumber. We too often have two of our players compete for the mark and spoil each other. If we're more confident that one player can bring the ball to ground, then there will perhaps be less confusion and more numbers at ground level.

I think more so for Hogan who is often out numbered and when Max is up forward and crashing a pack from behind. TMAC does not need to be concerned with changing his marking routine as he seems to have on a pair of invisible gloves. 

We obviously don't want to be too cute or hollywood about it. I think Richmond have really excelled at just predicably getting it to ground at whatever the cost as that is a higher goal scoring probability than the probability of taking a pack mark against the 3rd man up bane of our existence.

I think Hannan and Petracca in particular are the kind of players who would really feed off the ability to take a quick snap on goal or side step an opponent upon recieving the tap. And Garlett could be reinvigorated by feeling that there is much more predictability with the marking contests. And then you've got Oliver who can shark a tap from a forward while he's playing more forward minutes.

Whatever the solution, i'm sure the coaches and players are exploring all options. Thoughts on emulating this tactic? Or more broadly how we can convert more inside 50's?

I think we're not dangerous enough at ground level, so defenders can afford to peal off and double/triple team Jesse. The way the Richmond smalls pressure the ground balls in their forwardline is really something to behold. It means that Riewoldt or Moore can get a jump at the footy, because the second or third defender is held accountable to another on the ground.

I like your general thesis though. In general, we need to get better at making the right selection going inside 50 and if we have more pace on the ground, I think we'd find our efficiency going up. We rarely crumb goals (Jeffy's the other night being the exception), so it means defenders can gamble a bit more and they're really not that worried about what our smalls can do at ground level. Certainly, not in the same way you'd be fearful as a defender in Richmond's forwardline. They create goal scoring chances purely out of inferred pressure. If we can couple that manic implied pressure with our clearance dominance (consistently), we'll win a premiership. 

18 minutes ago, A F said:

I think we're not dangerous enough at ground level, so defenders can afford to peal off and double/triple team Jesse. The way the Richmond smalls pressure the ground balls in their forwardline is really something to behold. It means that Riewoldt or Moore can get a jump at the footy, because the second or third defender is held accountable to another on the ground.

I like your general thesis though. In general, we need to get better at making the right selection going inside 50 and if we have more pace on the ground, I think we'd find our efficiency going up. We rarely crumb goals (Jeffy's the other night being the exception), so it means defenders can gamble a bit more and they're really not that worried about what our smalls can do at ground level. Certainly, not in the same way you'd be fearful as a defender in Richmond's forwardline. They create goal scoring chances purely out of inferred pressure. If we can couple that manic implied pressure with our clearance dominance (consistently), we'll win a premiership. 

Probably fair to say that the small forward position has been one of our biggest revolving doors at selection these past 3 years. At what point do we make it a priority to chase another small pressure forward and ready made crumber as a trade? And with all due respect to Garlett on his career with us and last weeks decent match, He does not look that hungry or even that excited with kicking goals. Going through the motions it seems? Vandenberg will be an interesting if he can carve out a spot as a tough pressure forward in the remaining month.

Edited July 31, 20186 yr by johndemonic

I think this is where it gets really interesting and why Goody says we're not that far off.

How many goals do we concede through rebound 50s? I would've thought the majority of goals against fall into this category. Considering (prior to last week) we were breaking records for inside 50s, if you combine that with how many rebound goals we concede, each goal we score means fewer opposition goals. The old 12 point turnaround trick.

If we can fix our i50 to goal ratio, there's no team in the comp that can beat us. [censored] it, there's no team in the world!

6 hours ago, johndemonic said:

Probably fair to say that the small forward position has been one of our biggest revolving doors at selection these past 3 years. At what point do we make it a priority to chase another small pressure forward and ready made crumber as a trade? And with all due respect to Garlett on his career with us and last weeks decent match, He does not look that hungry or even that excited with kicking goals. Going through the motions it seems? Vandenberg will be an interesting if he can carve out a spot as a tough pressure forward in the remaining month.

yep. Richmond have Butler, castagna, higgins, rioli. 

None superstars but are quick n forwards first. Goal sense n know forward craft. 

Neal bullen, harmes, bugg are mids turned fwd who have none of that.

Edited July 31, 20186 yr by jacey

Chris Dawes must be kicking himself, that tactic would’ve suited him perfectly as the ball used to bounce off his hands repeatedly 

I would hate to see a rule come in that would further advantage Collingwood and Richmond. This is AFL conspiracy stuff. 

Would definitely be nice to see a bit more of this at least. If you can't mark the ball at least flick it in the direction of a running player. Sounds too simplistic but anything would be better than constantly spoiling each other.