People talk about "game plans". I would really like to understand each club's game plan in just 4 or 5 bullet points. We could start with our own and then address the others alphabetically.

The way it looks to me:

WCE, Pies, Hawks, Cats:  Control and Possession football:  Use the width of the ground, stretch the defence.  Precision kick/ mark to move the ball downfield.  Zone and man-to-man defence.  Need great disposal skills and discipline to follow the game plan/positioning/leading etc.

Richmond, Bulldogs, Demons:  Chaos football:  Get the ball to ground, move it forward as fast as possible in any way possible.  Predominately zone defence.  Highly dependent on winning contests.

Adelaide:  don't know but looks like a hybrid.

Ess, Carlton, Freo, GCS, Saints, North:  no discernible system that looks like either of the top two.

Port, Sydney, Brisbane, Giants are more like the first group but not as refined/skilled at it.

From my listening to post match footy fan talkback I've gleaned the following...

Losing teams don't have plan 'B'...

do the coaches get access to the aerial shots of competing teams.

I would expect that the methods of play by the opposition are highly analysed.... at least I hope they are.

This is where the pay tv product can shine with fans being able to get multiple camera angles on replay.

 

10 hours ago, Fanatique Demon said:

People talk about "game plans". I would really like to understand each club's game plan in just 4 or 5 bullet points. We could start with our own and then address the others alphabetically.

that you Woosha?

8 hours ago, rjay said:

From my listening to post match footy fan talkback I've gleaned the following...

Losing teams don't have plan 'B'...

We once employed a coach that didn't have Plan A

So if we take LH's excellent post as a base 8 out of the 18 teams are playing controlled possession football whereas only three are playing the chaos brand.

Interesting and when people complain of bad delivery into the forward line that is what the chaos brand entails... just push it forward. Problem is that it just doesn't work if you don't have forward pressure..ergo the last two weeks

12 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

So if we take LH's excellent post as a base 8 out of the 18 teams are playing controlled possession football whereas only three are playing the chaos brand.

Interesting and when people complain of bad delivery into the forward line that is what the chaos brand entails... just push it forward. Problem is that it just doesn't work if you don't have forward pressure..ergo the last two weeks

First, thanks LH for a great summary. And Diamond Jim, I agréé. We can drive it in 37, 73 or even 100 times. The number makes no difference if we turn it over and it exits straight away. Last year we (mostly) marked it or crumbed it. This year we just watch it sail back to where it came from.

14 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

So if we take LH's excellent post as a base 8 out of the 18 teams are playing controlled possession football whereas only three are playing the chaos brand.

Interesting and when people complain of bad delivery into the forward line that is what the chaos brand entails... just push it forward. Problem is that it just doesn't work if you don't have forward pressure..ergo the last two weeks

Besides the lack of forward pressure the other problem with our chaos brand is the predictability of our play. We never seem to switch it when we are moving forward. Chaos needs unpredictability.

We play clumsy football. As highlighted ^^^

It's all too predictable. It's so predictable other clubs just wait.. we'll eventually cough it up saving them half their effort.

If as also suggested we had a number of real options to pick from at any given moment with players able to literally adapt on the run ..well that would be truly chaotic for any opposition to deal with.

Currently we just play at playing chaotic football. Bit like a bag of crisps...all advertising...all air and f all to speak of actually going on.

We don't have a game plan in my view...just an attitude to the ball...all in at the contest rah rah.

We have a brand....dumb.

Chaos footy teams will be found out this year ,with 666 , as there is more space for the precision teams to play keepings off.

23 minutes ago, DeeZee said:

Chaos footy teams will be found out this year ,with 666 , as there is more space for the precision teams to play keepings off.

Exactly.

If we continue our brand/style as is... we'll go backwards.....oh wait ?

2 hours ago, Wrecker45 said:

Besides the lack of forward pressure the other problem with our chaos brand is the predictability of our play. We never seem to switch it when we are moving forward. Chaos needs unpredictability.

Lack of forward and defensive pressure. If any of our current defenders were playing in Norm Smith's days, they would never get another game.

You quite rightly say that chaos needs unpredictability.  Perhaps the problem is that very unpredictability means that it is also unpredictable to Melbourne. Defenders not knowing where to kick and not kicking to targets and forwards not knowing where to run.

Our ability to get the ball moving quickly is also far too slow and easy for the enemy to cover our poor old forwards. Our forwards have the worst job in the world (at the moment). 

I posted it elsewhere...but probably should be here. Cheers (or no cheer )

7 hours ago, DeeZee said:

Chaos footy teams will be found out this year ,with 666 , as there is more space for the precision teams to play keepings off.

For chaos into attack...  we need numbers forward.  We didn't have that  'early',  against the Cats. 

Chaos I think can still work, with the mongrel bomb,  because it always did work.  But we have to create from it...  Or cause a stoppage in our front half.

But we will need some sort of rolling Press to  'stop',  they're counter attack.

Edited April 4, 20196 yr by DV8

7 hours ago, beelzebub said:

We play clumsy football. As highlighted ^^^

It's all too predictable. It's so predictable other clubs just wait.. we'll eventually cough it up saving them half their effort.

If as also suggested we had a number of real options to pick from at any given moment with players able to literally adapt on the run ..well that would be truly chaotic for any opposition to deal with.

Currently we just play at playing chaotic football. Bit like a bag of crisps...all advertising...all air and f all to speak of actually going on.

We don't have a game plan in my view...just an attitude to the ball...all in at the contest rah rah.

We have a brand....dumb.

We were very clumsy early in the game at Geelong...  because we were trying to be  'manic'  with the footy...  flipping it player to player.   But our players were all corralled,  so we were handling the ball unnecessarily,  as the Cats waited outside us,  trying to let us panic and lose the ball...  which is exactly what happened.

 

We were winning most of the inside contested footy at that stage,  And so we needed to be more composed with its use.   We should have shepherded,  and blocked for the ball carrier, instead and multi-handling the ball,  for no gains.

Ideally we should have got a kick out or even back, to a loose player to take a mark,  and then... we could have used the ball with thought.  Directing it better to setup our entries.

 

When we Demons play Anxiety brand footy, we lose.   That's when we give the ball up easily and frequently...   secret ingredient.  composure

 

Add to this,  the lack of a settled structure down back...  and it was Anxiety central.

I think in Hindsight,  if May did not come back early for this game. we would have played more within ourselves, and been more cautious with the footy.

 

I think we went in,  trying to dominate the Cats from first bounce...  and it backfired on us big-time.  Because were not ready to play slick like that.   We are just not settled enough yet.

This week we'll be much better.

On 4/3/2019 at 8:03 AM, Lucifer's Hero said:

The way it looks to me:

WCE, Pies, Hawks, Cats:  Control and Possession football:  Use the width of the ground, stretch the defence.  Precision kick/ mark to move the ball downfield.  Zone and man-to-man defence.  Need great disposal skills and discipline to follow the game plan/positioning/leading etc.

Richmond, Bulldogs, Demons:  Chaos football:  Get the ball to ground, move it forward as fast as possible in any way possible.  Predominately zone defence.  Highly dependent on winning contests.

Adelaide:  don't know but looks like a hybrid.

Ess, Carlton, Freo, GCS, Saints, North:  no discernible system that looks like either of the top two.

Port, Sydney, Brisbane, Giants are more like the first group but not as refined/skilled at it.

Tigers play a very similar run and gun game off HB not unlike how the Cats played us last week IMO (when Houli & Rance are playing anyway.  Style is impacted when either or both are out).  Through the mid field a little chaotic at times.

When the Tiges are on they certainly don't  chaos / bomb / kick the ball wildly i50 the majority of the time.

They often caress and hit targets on a lead (Reiwoldt a major benefactor here) with some very high level pin point precision short to medium passing which is a joy to watch (accept when it's against us).  We would be a much more formidable unit if we could do the same more often.

Edited April 4, 20196 yr by Rusty Nails

On 4/3/2019 at 7:40 AM, Diamond_Jim said:

So if we take LH's excellent post as a base 8 out of the 18 teams are playing controlled possession football whereas only three are playing the chaos brand.

Interesting and when people complain of bad delivery into the forward line that is what the chaos brand entails... just push it forward. Problem is that it just doesn't work if you don't have forward pressure..ergo the last two weeks

First, thanks LH for a great summary. And Diamond Jim, I agréé. We can drive it in 37, 73 or even 100 times. The number makes no difference if we turn it over and it exits straight away. Last year we (mostly) marked it or crumbed it. This year we just watch it sail back to where it came from.

So, is our game plan doomed? After three rounds, the two most "chaos" teams are... Melbourne 0-3; Richmond 1-2. Add Collingwood's semi chaos game plan... 1-2. Or is it more about last year's finalists struggling to find form early in the year? 

On 4/3/2019 at 8:03 AM, Lucifer's Hero said:

The way it looks to me:

WCE, Pies, Hawks, Cats:  Control and Possession football:  Use the width of the ground, stretch the defence.  Precision kick/ mark to move the ball downfield.  Zone and man-to-man defence.  Need great disposal skills and discipline to follow the game plan/positioning/leading etc.

Richmond, Bulldogs, Demons:  Chaos football:  Get the ball to ground, move it forward as fast as possible in any way possible.  Predominately zone defence.  Highly dependent on winning contests.

Adelaide:  don't know but looks like a hybrid.

Ess, Carlton, Freo, GCS, Saints, North:  no discernible system that looks like either of the top two.

Port, Sydney, Brisbane, Giants are more like the first group but not as refined/skilled at it.

I respect the way Geelong and Collingwood control the ball. More than willing so switch it back or back again if they dont like their options inside 50 or that link into deep forward.

Means they tire out the opposition defence, maintain possession and greater chance of scoring with a more meaningful kick inside 50 once they find a target. Antithetical to what we do.

Ps, great summary.

3 hours ago, Fanatique Demon said:

So, is our game plan doomed? After three rounds, the two most "chaos" teams are... Melbourne 0-3; Richmond 1-2. Add Collingwood's semi chaos game plan... 1-2. Or is it more about last year's finalists struggling to find form early in the year? 

I was wondering the same thing after Richmond lost by 8 goals.  Like us they were missing their first choice defenders (Rance, Houli, Grimes).  Certainly they and our Lever, May, Lewis are greatly missed but one would think a solid game plan should still stand up, albeit not as well as with those guys playing.

So, I'm thinking with 6-6-6 and longer space to kick in hurt the 'chaos' game plan as its harder to create congestion in the center and harder to trap the ball into your i50.   As a result there are a lot less stoppages in which to create congestion and ground balls, important requirements for 'chaos' football.

Chris Scott on Thursday:  New Rules Help

• With fewer players floating in the defensive area, the new regulation also appears to have afforded veteran superstar Gary Ablett renewed freedom at half-forward.
• "Our observation is, with the new rules in particular, there's a few more one-on-one battles in the forward half,"
• "Some of the good players were getting clamped by plus two or three, behind the ball at centre bounces.

Given that Scott has done a brilliant job of changing their game plan and recruiting for the new rules, it is worth listening to what he says.

It will be interesting to watch the Bulldogs as they also won a GF with 'choas' style.  Haven't watched Bulldog's games so don't know to what extent Beveridge has adapted.  If they start to struggle like Demons and Tigers then it is time to really worry about our game plan. 

Goodwin seems very committed to our style but he is very astute and will quickly realise where changes need to be made.  Nothing major can happen in season but small things can.  Certainly we seem to be behind other teams in adapting to the new rules.

From what I've seen Geelong and Lions are the front runners so far in adapting to the new rules.  (WCE, Hawks, Pies already had 'control' style game plans that work well with the new rules).  Port also seem to have done a good job of adjusting and moving to control and possession.

Edited April 6, 20196 yr by Lucifer's Hero

I honestly think that 6-6-6 is being completely overplayed. It affects the initial centre bounce only. 

If I had to pick a rule change which has hurt us the most, I'd pick the kick ins.

Our game focuses on CPs and clearances and keeping the ball locked in our forward half with a high forward press. The new kick in rule lets our opponents get out of their back 50 much easier than it previously did, and I don't think we've properly worked out how to set up on defensive kick ins. I also don't think we're making the most of our kick ins, we seem to always go long to the 50 on the boundary where Gawn is.

2 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

I honestly think that 6-6-6 is being completely overplayed. It affects the initial centre bounce only. 

If I had to pick a rule change which has hurt us the most, I'd pick the kick ins.

Our game focuses on CPs and clearances and keeping the ball locked in our forward half with a high forward press. The new kick in rule lets our opponents get out of their back 50 much easier than it previously did, and I don't think we've properly worked out how to set up on defensive kick ins. I also don't think we're making the most of our kick ins, we seem to always go long to the 50 on the boundary where Gawn is.

I'd suggest many read this through a number of times.

I tend to agree 666 does or should be limited in effect.  For whatever reason it's affecting us greatly, more than it should. I have a suspicion that our lack of two way often sees players caught in less than perfect position...and then that snowballs.

We certainly are not masters of the new kick-in environment.. Others are . This is where the rabid fwd 50 chaos theory falls flat in a second....as the ball is simply kicked over it. Hardly rocket science is it.

Our style... whatever needs to morph. There needn't be so many at the contest... someone has to guard the backdoors.

And as another astute observer noted maybe lift some common sense from under age footy...and not have every one going for a mark. It's not a playground speccy contest after all.

In the end teams play to instructions. Ours are flawed.

the chaos game is inefficient. You need quick skilful players etc and you need very high possession rates.

It has a role but as an only gameplan it will be unlikely to get you there. Sure you can luck in but statistically the odds are low.

Do we have the players for an alternative gameplan. Who knows as we've never tried it.