Is our midfield the real problem?

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

6 hours ago, praha said:

You know what's sad? The best, most direct kick to a lead last night came from Frost to Petracca in the third quarter. Frost drilled it down Trac's throat and he fluffed it. They went down the other end and kicked a goal.

Such is life.

I recall that clearly also.  Was a bullet pass lace out and bounced off Tracc's chest.  Damned if you do!

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

3 hours ago, Red and Blue realist said:

Sure it will be, but so many times Oliver in particular went for niggle rather than concentrating on the ball, max then got a good knock down which was sharked by an Essendon player who waltzed out of the centre with our guys trailing behind. I'm just saying that if he's going for the ball rather than the man we'd be so much better. Getting flogged in the centre needs to be fixed

We haven't been flogged in the centre to this point R&B but our lack of defensive awareness, burst speed and structure behind the ball (too many getting sucked into the contest inside or committing themselves forward of the ball) is a real worry.

otherwise our clearance numbers have matched or beaten (vs the Cats) all mid fields in the 3 matches so far.

[DV8 2,271]

9 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

I recall that clearly also.  Was a bullet pass lace out and bounced off Tracc's chest.  Damned if you do!

Frosty seems a confidence type, who needs support...   Mid last year he started to lower his eyes at Casey, and finding his targets...  then earnt his call up, and from there we started our momentum push to the Finals.

He's limited,  but has weapons,  and we are asking too much of him...  he's not a key position player.

[deanox 9,915]

The players have had their shortest preseason due to finals, plus players going for surgery. They are a bit underdone.

Following that, we've kicked off the year out of form: marks not sticking and kicking being terrible are good examples of this. 

We're struggling to adapt this year for a number of reasons:

- We played a zone defense the last few years. We can't set up a zone anymore because the transition from 666 to zone would leave us exposed. 

- We played numbers behind the ball who then entered the contest in 2018. This meant we had extra numbers at the contest, more space in front of us and free runners behind the ball. We can't do this with 666.

- 666 means more 1 on 1 contests, less zonal play. This means the ability to run hard for (and kick well to) uncontested marks or take contested marks becomes even more valuable. We've never been strong at leading for uncontested marks, preferring to win ground contests.  And we've lost Hogan, while May and Lever have been out injured and TMac, Gawn and Weid struggling for form: We've had no big man aerial winners.

I think as we overcome the above, we will find form. I know certain players aren't playing well, but I'm sure it's as bad as it looks on paper. This is mainly because Goodwin has shown himself to be tactically innovative which means he is likely to adapt. We've seen that Goodwin's tactics have been largely based on data/ statistical information,  and he isn't that big on changing tact during a match. These traits may indicate we'll take longer to adjust than other sides, but when we do it will be the right change. 

 

In addition, although here are only 4 unavailable from our semi final against hawthorn (Lewis, Hannan, vandenBerg and Tyson) (Spargo also played by has been dropped). The ins have basically been Hunt, KK, Lockhart and Sparrow (plus a couple of games from Wagners etc.) all young/inexperienced replacements. 

And finally,  I'm also not sure about rounds 2 and 3, but in R1 I understand we had the 2nd youngest 22 in the competition. 

 

 

Yes the above could be seen as excuses but I think it's more about explanation. Yes we need ti improve our output, including 2 way running and kicking skills. Yes leg speed would be nice but we can counter that with game plan and position. 

 

[scarlett 247]

4 minutes ago, deanox said:

The players have had their shortest preseason due to finals, plus players going for surgery. They are a bit underdone.

Following that, we've kicked off the year out of form: marks not sticking and kicking being terrible are good examples of this. 

We're struggling to adapt this year for a number of reasons:

- We played a zone defense the last few years. We can't set up a zone anymore because the transition from 666 to zone would leave us exposed. 

- We played numbers behind the ball who then entered the contest in 2018. This meant we had extra numbers at the contest, more space in front of us and free runners behind the ball. We can't do this with 666.

- 666 means more 1 on 1 contests, less zonal play. This means the ability to run hard for (and kick well to) uncontested marks or take contested marks becomes even more valuable. We've never been strong at leading for uncontested marks, preferring to win ground contests.  And we've lost Hogan, while May and Lever have been out injured and TMac, Gawn and Weid struggling for form: We've had no big man aerial winners.

I think as we overcome the above, we will find form. I know certain players aren't playing well, but I'm sure it's as bad as it looks on paper. This is mainly because Goodwin has shown himself to be tactically innovative which means he is likely to adapt. We've seen that Goodwin's tactics have been largely based on data/ statistical information,  and he isn't that big on changing tact during a match. These traits may indicate we'll take longer to adjust than other sides, but when we do it will be the right change. 

 

In addition, although here are only 4 unavailable from our semi final against hawthorn (Lewis, Hannan, vandenBerg and Tyson) (Spargo also played by has been dropped). The ins have basically been Hunt, KK, Lockhart and Sparrow (plus a couple of games from Wagners etc.) all young/inexperienced replacements. 

And finally,  I'm also not sure about rounds 2 and 3, but in R1 I understand we had the 2nd youngest 22 in the competition. 

 

 

Yes the above could be seen as excuses but I think it's more about explanation. Yes we need ti improve our output, including 2 way running and kicking skills. Yes leg speed would be nice but we can counter that with game plan and position. 

 

Lever and may aren't the answer, either are spargo and tyson. Goodwin mentioned that we're getting slaughtered in ground balls either end. 

Well our drafting over the last few years has been for competitors, over the last few years i would have backed us in to win most contests, if we dont, pressure their disposal. We're not.

The amount of times I've seen nathan jones jogging in no mans land this year is horrible from a leader. He's always had a couple of these a game but this year, he's lost and doesnt know his role. When he does get near a contest he is in the wrong spot to impact attackingly and wrong side defensively so just watches and jogs back to guarding pointless space.

My point here is, our captain, veteran of 250+ games cant execute what the coaches are wanting(if this is what the coaches are instructing, sack the coaches) then what chance do the role players and young guys have?

Confidence is a huge thing and when you dont know what is required of the role you play, you lose confidence. Nathan Jones inside ball winner wouldnt be caught ball watching a contest. Nathan Jones doesnt know how to play to what the coaches are directing. Jetta same, hibberd same, forwards the same.

Too many players are worrying about where they should be in the zone and forgetting to play football.

 

[RalphiusMaximus 6,049]

Our biggest issue is the kick into the forward 50.  I have no doubt that this is a team rule given how often we see it happen.  Petracca from the pocket yesterday was a classic example.  He's a forward, he was 30m out, he should be taking the shot.  Instead, he followed the team rule, kicked it to the Hot Spot and it was taken the length of the field for a Bombers goal. 

Goodwin's entire gameplan is based around weight of numbers.  The ball is in dispute in the middle?  Get more players to throw themselves in there than the opposition and you'll win it.  Marking contest?  Have more players fly for the mark and the opposition won't be able to mark it.  Goals?  The best place to score from is 10-30m out directly in front of goal, so let's keep putting the ball there and if we have more inside 50s than anybody else we'll score more goals.  Last year that plan worked enough of the time because teams tried to play us at our own game.  West Coast showed the entire competition the way to handle it.  You concede the extra men around the ball and have your players waiting on the outside.  You set up your defence to cover that zone 10-30m in front of goal exclusively.  You send one person up to compete for the mark against three demons knowing that they'll get in each other's way and you have the advantage of more crumbers.  You have pacey outside runners who break early to the space knowing that their defence have it covered and will get the ball out to them. 

We're going to see this from every team this year and unless Goodwin has a plan B hidden somewhere that none of the players have found yet it's going to get very ugly. 

Edited April 6, 2019 by RalphiusMaximus

[scarlett 247]

6 minutes ago, RalphiusMaximus said:

Our biggest issue is the kick into the forward 50.  I have no doubt that this is a team rule given how often we see it happen.  Petracca from the pocket yesterday was a classic example.  He's a forward, he was 30m out, he should be taking the shot.  Instead, he followed the team rule, kicked it to the Hot Spot and it was taken the length of the field for a Bombers goal. 

Goodwin's entire gameplan is based around weight of numbers.  The ball is in dispute in the middle?  Get more players to throw themselves in there than the opposition and you'll win it.  Marking contest?  Have more players fly for the mark and the opposition won't be able to mark it.  Goals?  The best place to score from is 10-30m out directly in front of goal, so let's keep putting the ball there and if we have more inside 50s than anybody else we'll score more goals.  Last year that plan worked enough of the time because teams tried to play us at our own game.  West Coast showed the entire competition the way to handle it.  You concede the extra men around the ball and have your players waiting on the outside.  You set up your defence to cover that zone 10-30m in front of goal exclusively.  You send one person up to compete for the mark against three demons knowing that they'll get in each other's way and you have the advantage of more crumbers.  You have pacey outside runners who break early to the space knowing that their defence have it covered and will get the ball out to them. 

We're going to see this from every team this year and unless Goodwin has a plan B hidden somewhere that none of the players have found yet it's going to get very ugly. 

Excellently put. I recall melksham leading hard from the square, demanded his team mate hit him up, he dropped the mark, but because he was a moving target essendon didnt have numbers at the fall and we goaled.

Last year tmac lead hard, it often got kicked over his head to hogan in the hotspot out numbered, but he atleast dragged his defender away.  This year he and weid seem spent, bring keilty in to save them from rucking. If all three are leading their opponents either for a mark or to create space, it wont effect f50 pressure as they would have taken away the defender from impacting the rebound.

While our structures were better and more spaced out, our forwards dont lead hard and demand the defender go with them.  When forwards lead hard it makes the spare mans job so much harder.  More chance of him getting stuck in between contests. 

Same goes for contests around the ground, back our guns in, we often go for the same ball or hang to close, when theres a contest, and if you're not impacting it first, run to an attacking position, your opponents going to chase you. If we lose the contest it drags them away from impacting their spread forward.

 

[Red and Blue realist 2,051]

8 hours ago, Rusty Nails said:

We haven't been flogged in the centre to this point R&B but our lack of defensive awareness, burst speed and structure behind the ball (too many getting sucked into the contest inside or committing themselves forward of the ball) is a real worry.

otherwise our clearance numbers have matched or beaten (vs the Cats) all mid fields in the 3 matches so far.

Yes we have, we might have matched the clearance numbers but that includes those we win which go virtually no where, I want us winning ones which go directly deep into our forward 50 like port, Geelong and Essendon have done so easily and so often. Ours went to about 65-75 out and caused another stoppage. My point is that Oliver and Brayshaw are more than capable but only when trying to get the ball rather than playing the man, which they have been getting caught up doing. 

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

2 hours ago, Red and Blue realist said:

Yes we have, we might have matched the clearance numbers but that includes those we win which go virtually no where, I want us winning ones which go directly deep into our forward 50 like port, Geelong and Essendon have done so easily and so often. Ours went to about 65-75 out and caused another stoppage. My point is that Oliver and Brayshaw are more than capable but only when trying to get the ball rather than playing the man, which they have been getting caught up doing. 

Spot on R&B.  There is the quality over quantity aspect.  Also by being proactive instead of reactive we reduce the number of their clearances.

If you can keep the Opp to about 10 less clearances or more for the match i reckon the chances you win the match must go up considerably.  Provided they are quality vs quantity.  Would love to see some analysis on that historically.

Edited April 7, 2019 by Rusty Nails

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

9 hours ago, RalphiusMaximus said:

Our biggest issue is the kick into the forward 50.  I have no doubt that this is a team rule given how often we see it happen.  Petracca from the pocket yesterday was a classic example.  He's a forward, he was 30m out, he should be taking the shot.  Instead, he followed the team rule, kicked it to the Hot Spot and it was taken the length of the field for a Bombers goal. 

Goodwin's entire gameplan is based around weight of numbers.  The ball is in dispute in the middle?  Get more players to throw themselves in there than the opposition and you'll win it.  Marking contest?  Have more players fly for the mark and the opposition won't be able to mark it.  Goals?  The best place to score from is 10-30m out directly in front of goal, so let's keep putting the ball there and if we have more inside 50s than anybody else we'll score more goals.  Last year that plan worked enough of the time because teams tried to play us at our own game.  West Coast showed the entire competition the way to handle it.  You concede the extra men around the ball and have your players waiting on the outside.  You set up your defence to cover that zone 10-30m in front of goal exclusively.  You send one person up to compete for the mark against three demons knowing that they'll get in each other's way and you have the advantage of more crumbers.  You have pacey outside runners who break early to the space knowing that their defence have it covered and will get the ball out to them. 

We're going to see this from every team this year and unless Goodwin has a plan B hidden somewhere that none of the players have found yet it's going to get very ugly. 

R&M that is a supurb piece of analysis but if correct (re Goody actually coaching this way and wanting numbers at the contest at the cost of structure and outside set ups etc) we are in dire straits and will return to being the AFL's easy beats and once again the laughing stock of the comp.

Can only hope you are wrong and it's a bit of a "thicky" issue with some of the players

[Deecisive 1,709]

our midfield got the ball into the forward line more than Essendon. we had just as many players as Essendon down there it was just that ours always seemed to be in the wrong spot or could not win the ball. yes delivery at times was bad, but that should not have resulted in as many rebounds as it did, it still should have statistically given us more chances at goal than what we had.

Our forwards just did not put in, as has been the case all year so far. We lost the game with our [censored] poor defence. Too many of our players getting sucked up the ground to cover an opposition player not covered by a team member. That often left the player he was on free, and so on down the field.  Too many players were flying for the same marking contest in the backline spoiling their own men more often than not, while essendon smalls crumbed to us.

Essendon had at least 6 goals and multiple points from players standing all by themselves in the forward line unattended, and no pressure on them. how many times did that happen for us?

[RalphiusMaximus 6,049]

6 hours ago, Deecisive said:

our midfield got the ball into the forward line more than Essendon. we had just as many players as Essendon down there it was just that ours always seemed to be in the wrong spot or could not win the ball. yes delivery at times was bad, but that should not have resulted in as many rebounds as it did, it still should have statistically given us more chances at goal than what we had.

This is where Goodwin is falling down.  Statistically, we should be scoring.  Across the AFL, most teams have scored from around 50% of their inside 50s. This year it's more like 40%.  In the last couple of years, we've been a little over 50% when we won, and down closer to 30% when we lost.  This year so far, we are on exactly 30%.  We went down to 22.2% against Geelong, while against Port we hit our season high of 35.6%.  So yes, if we were an average side moving the ball into our forward 50, statistically we would be winning.  Unfortunately, we are the worst side in the league at this skill.  Unless Goodwin stops looking at statistics and starts looking at forward structures and kicking skills we aren't going to improve. 

For reference, here are the numbers across the league at the moment.  They are a little off because the Sunday afternoon games haven't been included yet. 

Cats 77 from 154 = 50%
Dockers 54 from 114 = 47.4%
Hawks 49 from 104 = 47.1%
Lions 81 from 174 = 46.6%
Giants 79 from 175 = 45.1%
Eagles 65 from 145 = 44.8%
Crows 73 from 164 = 44.5%
Tigers 69 from 159 = 43.4%
Pies 66 from 153 = 43.1%
Saints 46 from 110 = 41.8%
Swans 65 from 156 = 41.7%
Suns 68 from 168 = 40.5%
Bombers 65 from 159 = 40.3%
Power 75 from 190 = 39.5%
Blues 60 from 155 = 38.7%
Bulldogs 76 from 200 = 38%
Roos 34 from 90 = 37.8%
Melbourne 54 from 180 = 30%

[DV8 2,271]

11 hours ago, Deecisive said:

our midfield got the ball into the forward line more than Essendon. we had just as many players as Essendon down there it was just that ours always seemed to be in the wrong spot or could not win the ball. yes delivery at times was bad, but that should not have resulted in as many rebounds as it did, it still should have statistically given us more chances at goal than what we had.

Our forwards just did not put in, as has been the case all year so far.

IMO, this is where we are missing Spargo, VDB & Hannan.  Also a fit TMc, dropping back in.

.

[Watson11 2,240]

17 hours ago, RalphiusMaximus said:

This is where Goodwin is falling down.  Statistically, we should be scoring.  Across the AFL, most teams have scored from around 50% of their inside 50s. This year it's more like 40%.  In the last couple of years, we've been a little over 50% when we won, and down closer to 30% when we lost.  This year so far, we are on exactly 30%.  We went down to 22.2% against Geelong, while against Port we hit our season high of 35.6%.  So yes, if we were an average side moving the ball into our forward 50, statistically we would be winning.  Unfortunately, we are the worst side in the league at this skill.  Unless Goodwin stops looking at statistics and starts looking at forward structures and kicking skills we aren't going to improve. 

For reference, here are the numbers across the league at the moment.  They are a little off because the Sunday afternoon games haven't been included yet. 

Cats 77 from 154 = 50%
Dockers 54 from 114 = 47.4%
Hawks 49 from 104 = 47.1%
Lions 81 from 174 = 46.6%
Giants 79 from 175 = 45.1%
Eagles 65 from 145 = 44.8%
Crows 73 from 164 = 44.5%
Tigers 69 from 159 = 43.4%
Pies 66 from 153 = 43.1%
Saints 46 from 110 = 41.8%
Swans 65 from 156 = 41.7%
Suns 68 from 168 = 40.5%
Bombers 65 from 159 = 40.3%
Power 75 from 190 = 39.5%
Blues 60 from 155 = 38.7%
Bulldogs 76 from 200 = 38%
Roos 34 from 90 = 37.8%
Melbourne 54 from 180 = 30%

Compare that to % of scores we concede from inside 50s.  We are well over 50% defensively. 

We have also lost contested possession every game which is our strength.  The fact Port and Essendon didn’t smash us, and Geelong only put us to the sword from half way though the 3rd quarter after 1 1/2 quarters of our forward time dominance without scoring, is because we actually have a champion midfield (even if they are not in great form).  

Our problems in the prelim last year were so different (smashed in contested possession and we turned it over in our defensive half and midfield).  This year it has been all our forward 50 dysfunction that has started our problems.  Ben Guthrie summed it up perfectly. We are not winning contests down there and terrible structures are leaving free opponents everywhere.  Has been the issue from JLT1. https://m.afl.com.au/news/2019-04-07/nine-things-we-learned-from-round-three

We will win a flag when our structures allow us to beat teams even when we lose contested possession.  

[WERRIDEE 5,478]

We have problems everywhere our team defence is poor. 40 points for centre clearances for Essendon their 5th best in history.

Our forwards lead the wrong way. Twice on the couch they showed Weideman and Tommy leading to wrong areas.

Twice they should Oscar leaving his man and expecting someone to take him resulting in goals. Fritsch also left his man to create a 3 on 1 only to leave his opponent out the back.

Hard to see us beating the Swans with this many problems to confront.