Game plans, tactics and all that jazz

[Watson11 1,969]

7 hours ago, binman said:

Will our pressure be enough to disrupt their game and reduce their DE?

The tiger's pressure destroyed them in the second half of their game. I have not seen the port dogs game. I wonder how the power's pressure was in that game?

I thought the powers pressure was pretty good  but miles off Richmonds, especially around the clearances.  The dogs seemed to get outside too easily. Port had 1 quarter (2nd) of quality clearances and they carved up the dogs in that quarter. At one stage just before half time, the dogs had conceded 8 goals from 20 inside 50’s.  

If we can ensure the dogs don’t get easy clearances then I think we will have the dogs measure.

 

[binman 39,522]

9 hours ago, Watson11 said:

I thought the powers pressure was pretty good  but miles off Richmonds, especially around the clearances.  The dogs seemed to get outside too easily. Port had 1 quarter (2nd) of quality clearances and they carved up the dogs in that quarter. At one stage just before half time, the dogs had conceded 8 goals from 20 inside 50’s.  

If we can ensure the dogs don’t get easy clearances then I think we will have the dogs measure.

 

Thanks.

It's intersting port's pressure wasn't at the level it needed to be. Explains how underwhelmed many were about their performance, including their coach.

Agree about the importance of not letting them get on top of clearances. And when they do win them, minimising their effectiveness.

Key to both, and our chances of beating them is our pressure being off the charts.

Which is a potential weakness of our model, particularly in the home and away season, because it is hard to maintain that level.

But it is a weakness we control  not the opposition. We bring the heat, or we dont.

But as you point out the dogs have defensive weakness. And rhe opposition can control that.

The focus in the media and on dl when we play them will be on their crazy good midfield, and their damaging clearnces. Which is fair enough.

But they really have to worry about our clearances. Because with their average backline and no real star interceptor, and our three towers and fritter we will hurt them big time with clean entries (as of course they will  though not as bad becauseour defence is miles better).

But unlike them, we will hurt them even with scrappy inside 50s because we will get it to ground, force stoppages and trap inside our forward half. And our small and medium will go to work.

Cant wait.

 

[binman 39,522]

45 minutes ago, binman said:

Agree about the importance of not letting them get on top of clearances. And when they do win them, minimising their effectiveness.

Key to both, and our chances of beating them is our pressure being off the charts.

Which is a potential weakness of our model, particularly in the home and away season, because it is hard to maintain that level.

But it is a weakness we control  not the opposition. We bring the heat, or we dont.

 

 

In terms of our pressure and how important it is to our game plan, i just read this in the Age:

•  the Demons are ranked No.1 in the pressure factor and in post-clearance pressure

[JimmyGadson 3,455]

52 minutes ago, binman said:

The focus in the media and on dl when we play them will be on their crazy good midfield, and their damaging clearnces. Which is fair enough.

But they really have to worry about our clearances. Because with their average backline and no real star interceptor, and our three towers and fritter we will hurt them big time with clean entries (as of course they will  though not as bad becauseour defence is miles better).

But unlike them, we will hurt them even with scrappy inside 50s because we will get it to ground, force stoppages and trap inside our forward half. And our small and medium will go to work.

Cant wait.

 

I think you're underselling their ball use and ability to hit up leads even when under pressure. 

The reality is that their scrappy entries will still be cleaner and more dangerous than ours due to the fact that their mids have superior kicking skills. 

The past few times we've played the dogs it's been a similar story. Whether that was in a praccie game this year or last year in the middle of the season. The way we've lost has been the same.

I can onky see us beating them if we bring finals type pressure as you say, at the dome. Anything less and we will be rolled. 

They're the slickest team going around and have a history of making us look second rate around the ball and I'm transition if we're off. 

 

[Axis of Bob 10,497]

I have a different idea around the idea of Goodwinpressing. I think think the better tactical equivalence is Diego Simeone at Atletico Madrid. 

Klopp pushes men up to win the ball as soon as the opposition gains possession, which is before they have time to make decisions. This is the 'forward press' that was popularised by Ross Lyon. 

Our game is more Simeone, whose philosophy is to flood dangerous positions on the ground (ie, the centre), and allow possession in places that are easy to defend (ie, near the boundary/touch line). Once you can get the opposition pinned in a difficult position that's when you press them hard and force a defensive kick to a place where you are superior (ie, long down the line). So for Atletico this manifests itself as forwards and mids covering the centre of the ground, allowing easy passess to wide backs and mids who are then pressed hard as the defenders shift across to them, causing a pressured long ball or a turnover. For Melbourne, it means blocking the switch kick and allowing an easy chip wide, before pressing that player hard and preventing them from any kick other than the long kick down the line, where we have our superiority in Gawn, May and Lever.

It takes great discipline from players to avoid taking the easy option wide because they are so free. But the next possession becomes extremely difficult, which is where you get the intercepts.

FWIW, Atletico is a tactically disciplined team that usually win low scoring, grinding games against more talented teams. 

[binman 39,522]

1 hour ago, JimmyGadson said:

I think you're underselling their ball use and ability to hit up leads even when under pressure. 

The reality is that their scrappy entries will still be cleaner and more dangerous than ours due to the fact that their mids have superior kicking skills. 

The past few times we've played the dogs it's been a similar story. Whether that was in a praccie game this year or last year in the middle of the season. The way we've lost has been the same.

I can onky see us beating them if we bring finals type pressure as you say, at the dome. Anything less and we will be rolled. 

They're the slickest team going around and have a history of making us look second rate around the ball and I'm transition if we're off. 

 

Fair points.

You're right they are by far the best kicking team in the AFL.

And yes, really good kicking technique will stand up to pressure better than poor technique.

But as the tigers showed apply enough pressure and even their skills will crumble. They turned the ball over time and time again in the second half that game. 

The advantage we have over the tigers is we have a much better defensive system in place and all teams have struggled to transition the ball, which means we can get our defensive system in place.

And as King noted in the vison that was discussed earlier in this thread, even when a team does transition the ball quickly, our structure means they often have to hold it up at their HF line because we have our deep goal keeper back, who is often supported by our two wingers (particularly Gus) and flankers.

So even with their kicking skills. they, like all teams we have played, will struggle to hit a target inside their 50 becuase our zone is so strong and we give opposition forwards so little space.

They will struggle to hit up leading forwards because their forwards will not have any space to lead into, particularly at the docklands. And Naughton will have to deal with May one on one and Lever floating across the contest. Good luck with that. 

We were playing ducks and drakes with the dogs in the preseason game. But that game gave a glimpse of why they will struggle to score against us as we did well to contain them without 3 of our best mids in. 

The challenge for the dogs is similar to the challenge the blues face (albeit of a different level of order) ie that they have defensive weakness. So they need to score 80 plus point to win their games. Whereas we are defensively much stronger.

We can beat them without clicking offensively, whereas i don't think the reverse is true, becuase with their defence, even if we are not 100% on offensively they will struggle to contain us to under 80 points. We can bet them even with a score of say 70 points. 

Edited May 20, 2021 by binman

[Binmans PA 26,711]

1 hour ago, Axis of Bob said:

I have a different idea around the idea of Goodwinpressing. I think think the better tactical equivalence is Diego Simeone at Atletico Madrid. 

Klopp pushes men up to win the ball as soon as the opposition gains possession, which is before they have time to make decisions. This is the 'forward press' that was popularised by Ross Lyon. 

Our game is more Simeone, whose philosophy is to flood dangerous positions on the ground (ie, the centre), and allow possession in places that are easy to defend (ie, near the boundary/touch line). Once you can get the opposition pinned in a difficult position that's when you press them hard and force a defensive kick to a place where you are superior (ie, long down the line). So for Atletico this manifests itself as forwards and mids covering the centre of the ground, allowing easy passess to wide backs and mids who are then pressed hard as the defenders shift across to them, causing a pressured long ball or a turnover. For Melbourne, it means blocking the switch kick and allowing an easy chip wide, before pressing that player hard and preventing them from any kick other than the long kick down the line, where we have our superiority in Gawn, May and Lever.

It takes great discipline from players to avoid taking the easy option wide because they are so free. But the next possession becomes extremely difficult, which is where you get the intercepts.

FWIW, Atletico is a tactically disciplined team that usually win low scoring, grinding games against more talented teams. 

Great post mate. Still waiting for the Axis of Bob newsletter. Would gobble it up.

[Dr. Gonzo 22,806]

On 5/19/2021 at 11:04 AM, binman said:

That play that petty almost got caught out on was the perfect example. He got aggressive and pushed up super high and almost got caught out. Good thing he got back, but had to sprint super hard to do so.

That play it looked as though Carlton were headed for an easy goal - their player was out the back on his own at least 40m in space. We had at least 4 players running back to cover (can't remember who but I think at least one of Langdon/Hunt was there if not both) and Petty ultimately took an uncontested mark. I was impressed by the level of hard running multiple players did to get back to cover the player out the back to ensure we did not give up an easy goal. If Petty hadn't have marked it at least one of the other players would have made the spoil.

[Dr. Gonzo 22,806]

3 hours ago, binman said:

In terms of our pressure and how important it is to our game plan, i just read this in the Age:

•  the Demons are ranked No.1 in the pressure factor and in post-clearance pressure

Don't you love it how they add it into the last paragraph, almost as an afterthought? There should be an entire article explaining and breaking this down like you guys have in this thread.

3 hours ago, JimmyGadson said:

I think you're underselling their ball use and ability to hit up leads even when under pressure. 

The reality is that their scrappy entries will still be cleaner and more dangerous than ours due to the fact that their mids have superior kicking skills. 

The past few times we've played the dogs it's been a similar story. Whether that was in a praccie game this year or last year in the middle of the season. The way we've lost has been the same.

I can onky see us beating them if we bring finals type pressure as you say, at the dome. Anything less and we will be rolled. 

They're the slickest team going around and have a history of making us look second rate around the ball and I'm transition if we're off. 

 

They're not unbeatable though, far from it. They have a stacked midfield but similar to us when it was "match them on the inside beat them on the outside" I think it's "match them in the stoppages and you can beat them in the offense" because their defense is lacking.

[Watson11 1,969]

3 hours ago, JimmyGadson said:

I think you're underselling their ball use and ability to hit up leads even when under pressure. 

 

Bont, Smith, MacRae are all excellent by foot. Treloar and Libba not so much.  But the games I’ve watched they had far too much space on the outside from clearances.  When Richmond shut that down they looked ineffective.  I’m not convinced we will be able to shut it down next week, but hope by the end of the season with Viney back and more time to fix stuff we will be able to.

If they lose clearances to us they are toast.  If we lose clearances to them, we are still a chance. IMO that is a good position to be in at this time of year with a 9-0 record. 
 

 

[binman 39,522]

4 hours ago, Axis of Bob said:

I have a different idea around the idea of Goodwinpressing. I think think the better tactical equivalence is Diego Simeone at Atletico Madrid. 

Klopp pushes men up to win the ball as soon as the opposition gains possession, which is before they have time to make decisions. This is the 'forward press' that was popularised by Ross Lyon. 

Our game is more Simeone, whose philosophy is to flood dangerous positions on the ground (ie, the centre), and allow possession in places that are easy to defend (ie, near the boundary/touch line). Once you can get the opposition pinned in a difficult position that's when you press them hard and force a defensive kick to a place where you are superior (ie, long down the line). So for Atletico this manifests itself as forwards and mids covering the centre of the ground, allowing easy passess to wide backs and mids who are then pressed hard as the defenders shift across to them, causing a pressured long ball or a turnover. For Melbourne, it means blocking the switch kick and allowing an easy chip wide, before pressing that player hard and preventing them from any kick other than the long kick down the line, where we have our superiority in Gawn, May and Lever.

It takes great discipline from players to avoid taking the easy option wide because they are so free. But the next possession becomes extremely difficult, which is where you get the intercepts.

FWIW, Atletico is a tactically disciplined team that usually win low scoring, grinding games against more talented teams. 

Like it.

I think you  EO and AF are all right,  in so far as model has elements of the three systems you each describe.

The model you describe has many similarities to tacti's employed in basketball, particularly forcing the opposition to  have their  possession in places that are easy to defend - which in basketball is the sidelines and the end of court lines.

Using the lines as extra defender is basketball 101 and it has the added benefit of reducing the exit options, so making any exit easier to defend (eg by squeezing with numbers) and more predicable. 

The other benefits are that it slows transition and makes any attempt to 'cross' the ball to other side of the court or middle lane side risky in terms of turning the ball over.

And if it is turned over in that scenario it often results in a fast break and easy lay up basket, something that we replicate sometimes (eg our third goal of the game against the blues that started in a defensive pocket up against the boundary line and ultimately went end to end with Clarry roving and kicking a goal from 2 meters). 

 

[binman 39,522]

1 hour ago, Watson11 said:

Bont, Smith, MacRae are all excellent by foot. Treloar and Libba not so much.  But the games I’ve watched they had far too much space on the outside from clearances.  When Richmond shut that down they looked ineffective.  I’m not convinced we will be able to shut it down next week, but hope by the end of the season with Viney back and more time to fix stuff we will be able to.

If they lose clearances to us they are toast.  If we lose clearances to them, we are still a chance. IMO that is a good position to be in at this time of year with a 9-0 record. 
 

 

Agree.

It will be fascinating to to see if Goodwin runs a tag on one of their mids.

You'd have to think he will be tempted to run Harmes on one of them given the importance of negating their impact from clearances.  

Who would you tag?

 

 

[Watson11 1,969]

1 hour ago, binman said:

Agree.

It will be fascinating to to see if Goodwin runs a tag on one of their mids.

You'd have to think he will be tempted to run Harmes on one of them given the importance of negating their impact from clearances.  

Who would you tag?

 

 

I’d put Harmes to Macrae. He gets more of the ball than the others and has the best efficiency by foot.  Bont is probably harder to stop so I’d put him head to head with Petracca.  Oliver and Libba to go head to head.

Smith is an interesting one as when he is rotated through he tends to run forward all the time.  He looks a million dollars when on the end of chains, and is pretty good by foot.  But IMO he is a weak link. Id like to see Jordan go to him when we want to negate clearances, and Kossie go to him if Max is feeling like he is getting clean taps to advantage.

[titan_uranus 23,181]

8 hours ago, JimmyGadson said:

I think you're underselling their ball use and ability to hit up leads even when under pressure. 

The reality is that their scrappy entries will still be cleaner and more dangerous than ours due to the fact that their mids have superior kicking skills. 

The past few times we've played the dogs it's been a similar story. Whether that was in a praccie game this year or last year in the middle of the season. The way we've lost has been the same.

I can onky see us beating them if we bring finals type pressure as you say, at the dome. Anything less and we will be rolled. 

They're the slickest team going around and have a history of making us look second rate around the ball and I'm transition if we're off. 

Whilst I'm concerned about stoppages, I'm probably equally concerned about transition scores from our turnovers.

If we don't pressure through the forward half and middle, with their midfield they are the most likely side in the comp to be able to generate scoring chains through our defence.

If we bring the level of pressure we brought vs Richmond, then our advantage is clearly an aerial one, and IMO at both ends of the ground. Naughton is good but so are May and Lever, and Bruce IMO can be quelled. 

But first we need to beat Adelaide.

[binman 39,522]

25 minutes ago, Watson11 said:

I’d put Harmes to Macrae. He gets more of the ball than the others and has the best efficiency by foot.  Bont is probably harder to stop so I’d put him head to head with Petracca.  Oliver and Libba to go head to head.

Smith is an interesting one as when he is rotated through he tends to run forward all the time.  He looks a million dollars when on the end of chains, and is pretty good by foot.  But IMO he is a weak link. Id like to see Jordan go to him when we want to negate clearances, and Kossie go to him if Max is feeling like he is getting clean taps to advantage.

Good call. 

Macrea is rated highly, but still under rated i reckon. A gun. And with Caleb Daniel the best kick in the AFL in my humble. An important payer in the way they move the ball, so reducing the number of clean possessions he gets would  disrupt their system a bit.

As you say Bont is too big to stop to an extent. Key will be trying to ensure he gets any clearances under pressure and if possible on the defensive side of the stoppage. That said i'd sit Hibberd on him when he goes forward.  

[Flag 2021 141]

I AGREE WITH YOU THERE, BINMAN : dANIEL DOESN'T WASTE A POSSESSION. HE REALLY IMPRESSED LAST WEEK AND ADMITTEDLY IT'S THE FIRST LOOK AT HIM I'D SEEN!

HIBBERD TO TAKE HIM AT CERTAIN STAGES IS ALSO A GOOD SUGGESTION.

 

[rpfc 27,684]

19 minutes ago, Flag 2021 said:

I AGREE WITH YOU THERE, BINMAN : dANIEL DOESN'T WASTE A POSSESSION. HE REALLY IMPRESSED LAST WEEK AND ADMITTEDLY IT'S THE FIRST LOOK AT HIM I'D SEEN!

HIBBERD TO TAKE HIM AT CERTAIN STAGES IS ALSO A GOOD SUGGESTION.

 

[binman 39,522]

Good article in terms of the discussion about our clearnce set up at stoppages and how it relates to our intercept game.

It is after the blues game, but poses an interesting question about how we will fare against the dogs. A question we answered pretty emphatically 

 

https://www.zerohanger.com/footy-talking-points-melbournes-defensive-structure-and-the-plus-one-2021-84050/

Edited June 1, 2021 by binman

[dworship 3,342]

1 hour ago, binman said:

Good article in terms of the discussion about our clearnce set up at stoppages and how it relates to our intercept game.

It is after the blues game, but poses an interesting question about how we will fare against the dogs. A question we answered pretty emphatically 

https://footytalkingpoints.com.au/2021/05/05/ftp-7/

 

Kudos Binman, I've loved reading your insightful analysis together with the great input from AF, Engorged, Axis and others. You posed the question about using Harmes to shut a Dogs midfielder down and sure enough that's what happened. I think there have been a number of times when a player has been set a role/ challenge to quell the influence of a dangerous oppo player eg, Hibberds  job on Dusty. Likewise the Swans had a plan to control Fritsch and it worked. Regarding that, I would imagine it would be the first time he had received that much attention. I've been wondering how much effort is going into combating the tactic when it happens to us? One thing I saw against the Dogs was Fritsch at times being well up the ground and even in the backpocket in support of the defence. Would that be part of his "learning" to break a tag and to also remind him he can make other contributions beside Goals? As I've written this I've also realised that all the small forwards have been doing this a lot more than I've ever seen previously.

We move on to another challenge this week. A team that plays a completely different style to the Dogs, dare I say closer to ours.  What will we change, if anything and will we send someone to quell Zorko? It will be fascinating to watch and hope someone will do another in-depth analysis.

 

[Binmans PA 26,711]

2 hours ago, binman said:

Good article in terms of the discussion about our clearnce set up at stoppages and how it relates to our intercept game.

It is after the blues game, but poses an interesting question about how we will fare against the dogs. A question we answered pretty emphatically 

https://footytalkingpoints.com.au/2021/05/05/ftp-7/

 

This doesn't seem to discuss it. Wrong link? It mentions how we tried to exploit Ziebell with Fritsch after the North game.

[binman 39,522]

Its a good question who we might tag, or indeed if we will. 

Hibberd to Cameron is an obvious one. 

I got hsrmes tagging a mid right, but got the mid wrong. Terrific move to [censored] down libba.

The lions are brilliant at stoppages and McCluggage is as important as libba for them. Logic suggests they will send harmes to him.

But rich is really important to the way they move the ball. They'll want to put some work onto him. Different positions, but Salem plays a similar role and is similarly important. 

The other player who worries me is bailey. Exactly the sort of player who troubles our defence. And boy, is he going to be a gun.

[binman 39,522]

13 minutes ago, A F said:

This doesn't seem to discuss it. Wrong link? It mentions how we tried to exploit Ziebell with Fritsch after the North game.

Ta. Fixed.

https://www.zerohanger.com/footy-talking-points-melbournes-defensive-structure-and-the-plus-one-2021-84050/

[Ted Lasso 17,315]

Don't mind the double tag idea... Jordan on Zorko,  Harmes to McLuggage 

[Binmans PA 26,711]

23 minutes ago, dworship said:

Kudos Binman, I've loved reading your insightful analysis together with the great input from AF, Engorged, Axis and others. You posed the question about using Harmes to shut a Dogs midfielder down and sure enough that's what happened. I think there have been a number of times when a player has been set a role/ challenge to quell the influence of a dangerous oppo player eg, Hibberds  job on Dusty. Likewise the Swans had a plan to control Fritsch and it worked. Regarding that, I would imagine it would be the first time he had received that much attention. I've been wondering how much effort is going into combating the tactic when it happens to us? One thing I saw against the Dogs was Fritsch at times being well up the ground and even in the backpocket in support of the defence. Would that be part of his "learning" to break a tag and to also remind him he can make other contributions beside Goals? As I've written this I've also realised that all the small forwards have been doing this a lot more than I've ever seen previously.

We move on to another challenge this week. A team that plays a completely different style to the Dogs, dare I say closer to ours.  What will we change, if anything and will we send someone to quell Zorko? It will be fascinating to watch and hope someone will do another in-depth analysis.

 

I reckon Neale could well get up for this game, which will pose a problem for us. Do we go Zorko or Neale? I'd be tempted to still go Harmes to Neale and if Neale doesn't get up, then play Harmes on Zorko. But as Harmes mentioned in his post match interview the other night, he'll join in on offence as well as stoppage watch, so it's not like we'd be committing a completely negative role to the midfield.

Neale may have some questions over his body, so I'd make sure Harmes is ultra physical (but fair) with him to put that question in his mind.

If it ends up just being Zorko that plays, he is a slightly different sort of match up to Neale or Libba in that he's quick. Harmes has the pace to go with him of course, but he might have to play him a different way.

@george_on_the_outer on podcast made a really good point that Harmes played from in front of Libba. I need to rewatch the match to see how he did this, but there's a danger if he plays Zorko that way that he gets done on the outside. Zorko is also clever enough to push his opponent into stoppages, so he'd have to be very carefully if he played it the same way.

I did think Neale wasn't due back for another week yet, but Fagan said last night on 360 that he trained last week and would push for selection this week. AFL Tonight this evening showed some footage of him at training that seemed quite ambiguous as to whether it was light ot medium level work for him at training, but he's no doubt training with the main group again. I just wonder if there are a few games being played by Brisbane and that in fact he won't be back this week, but they'll force us to plan for him just in case.

It'll be interesting to see. I think it's clear they want Harmes to have a clearly defined defensive role most weeks, so I think you're right and that they'll plan some sort of negating role for Harmes.

[Binmans PA 26,711]

5 minutes ago, binman said:

Its a good question who we might tag, or indeed if we will. 

Hibberd to Cameron is an obvious one. 

I got hsrmes tagging a mid right, but got the mid wrong. Terrific move to [censored] down libba.

The lions are brilliant at stoppages and McCluggage is as important as libba for them. Logic suggests they will send harmes to him.

But rich is really important to the way they move the ball. They'll want to put some work onto him. Different positions, but Salem plays a similar role and is similarly important. 

The other player who worries me is bailey. Exactly the sort of player who troubles our defence. And boy, is he going to be a gun.

There's always that fine balance between trying to shut down half the opposition's playmakers versus playing the game a bit more head to head and backing in our guys.

I think they'll have plans for all those guys you mention, but since they score such a high percentage of their scores from stoppage, I think we'll go to stopping them at the source again, which will hopefully nullify the influence of the likes of McLuggage, Rich and these types. 

The question remains, is the source Neale or someone else?