Key tactical issues v Geelong

[Dee Zephyr 17,421]

The key for me is scoreboard pressure and especially early in the game.

In round 1, they outscored us by 37 points in a 28 minute first half patch. They did it again by outscoring us by 25 points in the last term in our recent after the siren loss. 

Their leaders will know they can come at us again if we don’t take our chances. I’d prefer to see their heads drop early by making the most of our forward entries rather than them hanging around like a bad smell. Our game style should hold up Friday night and we should have ample forward entries to kick a big enough score. 

If our recent match against them is replicated where we do lead by 3-4 goals in the second half, it will be interesting to see how Goody and Co implement a plan to not allow them back in the game.

 

[Clintosaurus 6,421]

2 hours ago, Fifty-5 said:

Geelong will set up 7-6-5 and will have an extra defender when we go 6-6-6.  That's what happened vs GWS. 

Goody should just keep matching up on them. If there is 8 or 9 forwards on 8 or 9 backs then so be it.

[Superunknown 3,311]

57 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

Hit him harder until he’s incapable of whining due to be unconscious or gasping for air. Hit them hard Dees. Make those tackles hurt.

This. Viney to bump him hard and harmes to run around make him accountable and pinchy pinchy.

[Superunknown 3,311]

Age Real Footy Podcast all think Melb.

Bob - < 1 goal

Caro - 4-5goals

Gleeson - Dees 5 points with Gawn goal after siren

Niall - Dees < 1 goal

Caro "Dees infinitely better"

More contra indicators. Deploy the anti bathwater protocol stat!

[Older demon 2,166]

My concern will be Geelong tactics especially at Max. The Scott boys didn't get nicknamed the Cray brothers for nothing. Scott is a brilliant coach and possibly the hardest to coach against as well as being seriously nasty. His team has a habit of jumping into the back of opponents in marking contests, with Hawkins having being suspended already this year. Likewise don't forget the corked bum Hogan copped at GMHBA stadium in a marking contest. Do not be surprised to see Geelong players constantly jumping into Max or trying to nail him in a marking contest, I want our guys to provide support and be aware who is in the aarea around Max. Another thread has already mentioned Guthrie's crash into Nev in the past.

I seriously hope we come out tactically and play like the anti social hawks used to in their premiership yearsand assert some physical pressure on Geelong as I guarantee there will be plenty coming our way

[Deemania since 56 6,132]

1 hour ago, -Ⓥ- said:

Age Real Footy Podcast all think Melb.

Bob - < 1 goal

Caro - 4-5goals

Gleeson - Dees 5 points with Gawn goal after siren

Niall - Dees < 1 goal

Caro "Dees infinitely better"

More contra indicators. Deploy the anti bathwater protocol stat!

Across the last month, Dees superior and transitioning better; learned skills are ripping opponents apart. Focus on hitting the Cats hard and denying positional options will win it. 

[binman 37,945]

48 minutes ago, Older demon said:

My concern will be Geelong tactics especially at Max. The Scott boys didn't get nicknamed the Cray brothers for nothing. Scott is a brilliant coach and possibly the hardest to coach against as well as being seriously nasty. His team has a habit of jumping into the back of opponents in marking contests, with Hawkins having being suspended already this year. Likewise don't forget the corked bum Hogan copped at GMHBA stadium in a marking contest. Do not be surprised to see Geelong players constantly jumping into Max or trying to nail him in a marking contest, I want our guys to provide support and be aware who is in the aarea around Max. Another thread has already mentioned Guthrie's crash into Nev in the past.

I seriously hope we come out tactically and play like the anti social hawks used to in their premiership yearsand assert some physical pressure on Geelong as I guarantee there will be plenty coming our way

To be honest if i was cats fan (shudder) i'd be more worried about the dees physical pressure. 

Cheap shots aside we are playing some of the most ferocious football i have seen. The tackling in the last 3 weeks has been cray cray - from every player.

Then you have players like VDB, Viney and even Maxy who are wrecking balls. VDB reminds me a bit of Dipper in his hey day.

Physicality is one of the reasons i think they will select Tyson and Hannan and perhaps even Smith. All are early to mid twenties, strong and have a bit of weight. Perfect for our game. Mini wrecking balls. 

[The Chazz 4,077]

51 minutes ago, Older demon said:

My concern will be Geelong tactics especially at Max. The Scott boys didn't get nicknamed the Cray brothers for nothing. Scott is a brilliant coach and possibly the hardest to coach against as well as being seriously nasty. His team has a habit of jumping into the back of opponents in marking contests, with Hawkins having being suspended already this year. Likewise don't forget the corked bum Hogan copped at GMHBA stadium in a marking contest. Do not be surprised to see Geelong players constantly jumping into Max or trying to nail him in a marking contest, I want our guys to provide support and be aware who is in the aarea around Max. Another thread has already mentioned Guthrie's crash into Nev in the past.

I seriously hope we come out tactically and play like the anti social hawks used to in their premiership yearsand assert some physical pressure on Geelong as I guarantee there will be plenty coming our way

Without doubt they will try and intimidate us.  I'm certain they will also try and physically take Gawn out of the game, especially given he will likely dominate against Abbott.

The challenge for us will be how we respond.  Oliver does get a bit distracted with this stuff, so this is where our leaders will need to keep an eye on it.

The other thing will be the likely match-up for when Danger goes forward.  Does Hibberd go to him?  Could this be why Joel Smith is being considered?

 

[SPC 2,790]

Not so much tactical, but I’m worried about playing under lights. 

[binman 37,945]

1 minute ago, SPC said:

Not so much tactical, but I’m worried about playing under lights. 

Do you have trouble with your eyes?

[The Chazz 4,077]

In recent weeks, they have been playing Scott Selwood as a defensive forward.  I can see him tagging Salem, so I think we will need to have Fritsch sweeping across half back to make sure we are hitting targets coming out.

Edited September 4, 2018 by The Chazz

[SPC 2,790]

24 minutes ago, binman said:

Do you have trouble with your eyes?

Haha.. worried out lack of experience and lack of training under lights will make it difficult. 

[Cards13 9,117]

One of the key tactical issues I see for Friday night is managing a clean entry and exit from the G.

Storm playing over the road, Queens of the Stoneage playing at Margret Court. Going to be very busy around the area, focus on what bars, places you want to eat and give yourself plenty of extra time to arrive before the bounce and on getting out of the area.

Plan well folks.

[Clintosaurus 6,421]

1 hour ago, Deemania since 56 said:

Across the last month, Dees superior and transitioning better; learned skills are ripping opponents apart. Focus on hitting the Cats hard and denying positional options will win it. 

I reckon Goody has held the team back a bit during the season, which has probably led to the Flat Track Bullies tag. Even running at 75% we were too good for most opponents, but in the last couple of games the spread is better and the team looks quicker. May have burnt out going at full gameplan for the whole season. 

[Deemania since 56 6,132]

11 minutes ago, Clintosaurus said:

I reckon Goody has held the team back a bit during the season, which has probably led to the Flat Track Bullies tag. Even running at 75% we were too good for most opponents, but in the last couple of games the spread is better and the team looks quicker. May have burnt out going at full gameplan for the whole season. 

Very possible, quite observable in some games. Let us hope that is the actual case, albeit a step-up to a harder style of game but we have youth, most now with 2 years of hard training behind them. 'Carna Dees!

[Deemania since 56 6,132]

1 hour ago, The Chazz said:

The other thing will be the likely match-up for when Danger goes forward.  Does Hibberd go to him?  Could this be why Joel Smith is being considered?

I'd reckon that HIbberd serves best as an intercept/break-away style of player; I agree if Joel Smith is luckily considered, he would possibly match up on Dangerfield height-wise, speed & recovery wise, and maybe in the physical positioning/blocking role. 

[Engorged Onion 9,255]

23 minutes ago, Clintosaurus said:

I reckon Goody has held the team back a bit during the season, which has probably led to the Flat Track Bullies tag. Even running at 75% we were too good for most opponents, but in the last couple of games the spread is better and the team looks quicker. May have burnt out going at full gameplan for the whole season. 

This makes no sense to me at all... practically how that plays out game day, or even the arrogance to choose to do so (see St Kilda)... BUT - I hope you'er right @Clintosaurus

[old55 21,265]

6 hours ago, Clintosaurus said:

Goody should just keep matching up on them. If there is 8 or 9 forwards on 8 or 9 backs then so be it.

And have 3 v 3 in their fwd 50?

No thanks!

[Lucifers Hero 36,991]

Collingwood seriously exposed Viney not having a 'right side'.  Wherever Viney went they plonked a player on his left so he struggled getting the ball out or if he did it wasn't cleanly (DE 60.9%) which led to many turnovers. 

Would it be too much to hope that Viney has learnt to play a bit with his right side while out of action?  If not, hopefully he is awake to that tactic and figured out a way to counter it.

[Lucifers Hero 36,991]

4 hours ago, SPC said:

Not so much tactical, but I’m worried about playing under lights. 

This is the beauty of the ANZAC Eve match. 

When it started Roos said it was great preparation for when we play finals:  Under lights, Big Crowd, Lots of fanfare.  Lots of noise.  So not too worried.

[Bring-Back-Powell 13,128]

55 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Collingwood seriously exposed Viney not having a 'right side'.  Wherever Viney went they plonked a player on his left so he struggled getting the ball out or if he did it wasn't cleanly (DE 60.9%) which led to many turnovers. 

Would it be too much to hope that Viney has learnt to play a bit with his right side while out of action?  If not, hopefully he is awake to that tactic and figured out a way to counter it.

If you're worried about Viney being a liability, there's a simple solution...don't play him.

Our midfield has been purring for most weeks since he's been out.

[Lucifers Hero 36,991]

11 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

If you're worried about Viney being a liability, there's a simple solution...don't play him.

Our midfield has been purring for most weeks since he's been out.

I wasn't suggesting leave him out, altho I do agree our midfield is purring along just nicely.  I suspect that is why Goodwin is going to play him fwd/mid.

Scott will use every bit of tactical nouse so being one-sided is a weakness for Viney and ripe for the taking.  I'm just hoping he has practiced his right side - turn the tables and catch the cats by surprise.

 

Edited September 4, 2018 by Lucifer's Hero

[demon3165 1,917]

6 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

If you're worried about Viney being a liability, there's a simple solution...don't play him.

Our midfield has been purring for most weeks since he's been out.

I hope they don't play him it would be a big mistake playing him would not be conditioned enough for a Final plus you cannot have two players of the same ilk (Jones and Viney).

 

[Chook 14,467]

1 hour ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Collingwood seriously exposed Viney not having a 'right side'.  Wherever Viney went they plonked a player on his left so he struggled getting the ball out or if he did it wasn't cleanly (DE 60.9%) which led to many turnovers. 

Would it be too much to hope that Viney has learnt to play a bit with his right side while out of action?  If not, hopefully he is awake to that tactic and figured out a way to counter it.

Over the weekend I rewatched all our wins from this year.
From that, I observed that Viney was nowhere near what he offered in 2017, and is almost a downgrade on form for what our midfield did without him this year. I think he'd be a good defensive forward/mid in bursts to lock the game down, but I'd rather stick with our Gawn/Oliver/Brayshaw/Harmes setup — especially when it really starts to count and we need to get a lead or get back in it.

[titan_uranus 22,287]

On 8/30/2018 at 6:49 PM, Bring-Back-Powell said:

If Geelong hold us to under 100 points, then we ain’t winning this game.

We are 1-5 when the oppo restricts us to less than 100 with our sole win being against Adelaide in Adelaide.

We're actually 1-7 (all losses bar St Kilda, we scored under 100).

Still, that's 14 games where we scored 100+ points. Who'd have thought that imaginable back in 2015?

As to the argument, of the 7 losses two were the Geelong games which we should have won, one was the Port loss (should have won), one was the Sydney game (we weren't terrible) and one was the Richmond game (we were better than them for significant periods).

Flip the Geelong games and our record is 3-5 and not that much of an issue.

On 9/3/2018 at 11:11 AM, jnrmac said:

Geelong are 16th for centre clearances. Its their defensive rebound where they will be confident of winning it. That's why our last two weeks have been so important. Hitting up targets i50 AND stopping run from defence.

19 fwd marks against WC.

From memory, in the fourth quarter in Geelong they dominated in the middle, and that's where the game turned around. But in general, you're absolutely right - their defence is their strong suit and they'll be banking on mopping up our inefficient inside 50s and turning them into scoring chains.

The work we did vs West Coast and GWS to get more efficient going inside 50 and setting up our zone defence to lock the ball in our forward half will hopefully stand up against Geelong.

12 hours ago, Fifty-5 said:

Geelong will set up 7-6-5 and will have an extra defender when we go 6-6-6.  That's what happened vs GWS. 

Agreed.

Setting up 6-6-6 is still an important tactical change from us, though. We've seen the 7th forward running in off the back of the square at centre bounces pretty much every week until last week. IMO we looked better without it - Gawn and our midfielders are more than capable of generating clearances and inside 50s without that running player and it means we're down 6-7 and not 5-7, as is often the case.

8 hours ago, SPC said:

Not so much tactical, but I’m worried about playing under lights. 

We're 3-3 in night games this year, and of the losses one was the Port loss (we should have won) and one was the Geelong loss (we should have won).

In the second half of the year alone, we stood up and played solid football against Port (Friday night on the road in hostile territory), Geelong (Saturday night, road, hostile) Adelaide (Saturday night, road, hostile), Sydney (51,424 crowd) and West Coast (55,824 crowd, road, hostile).