Couple of vulnerable spots to attack Collingwood, who are the benchmark at the moment.

1) they bring +2 to contest, so if you can win with a -2, they're flakey behind the ball. Alternatively, if you go 1v1 or only allow them +1 at stoppage, how do they go against that?

2) they're very reliant on their half backs nailing targets, in particular the Daicos boys. I'd be getting one of our wingers to run with Josh Daicos and I'd give one of our half forwards a tagging role on Nick Daicos and see how Collingwood's ball movement goes then. Having Hunter alongside Langdon nowadays, really enables us to sacrifice a winger to a more defensive role, and not lose all your outside drive.

The intriguing thing for me will be when you decide use these sort of tactics. Do you leave your powder dry earlier in the year / during the home and away season, and then in finals play this strategy?

It's unlikely we'd ever tag a player, it's not really a philosophy Goody has, although we were prepared to send Harmes to Libba in 2021 when he was flying, and it had a huge impact. We've done it with Lachie Neale before as well. We denied that the Libba role was a strict tag and Harmes was given licence to go the other way, so I think it's more likely a match up like the above would take that form. 

The King's Birthday game for me has a bit of a Liverpool vs Man Utd feel to it (I'm Liverpool). I don't usually get really excited about one fixture in particular, but this year's fixture has a lot riding on it and should be fascinating. A bit like the Sydney game, we've become their bunnies and we need to arrest that momentum this time, so it'll be telling how we go and how far we're willing to go tactically that early in the season.

The tagging role on Nick Daicos that you suggest: we are so well equipped for that- it could be either Spargo or Nibbler and either would absolutely get the job done.

1 hour ago, A F said:

Couple of vulnerable spots to attack Collingwood, who are the benchmark at the moment.

1) they bring +2 to contest, so if you can win with a -2, they're flakey behind the ball. Alternatively, if you go 1v1 or only allow them +1 at stoppage, how do they go against that?

2) they're very reliant on their half backs nailing targets, in particular the Daicos boys. I'd be getting one of our wingers to run with Josh Daicos and I'd give one of our half forwards a tagging role on Nick Daicos and see how Collingwood's ball movement goes then. Having Hunter alongside Langdon nowadays, really enables us to sacrifice a winger to a more defensive role, and not lose all your outside drive.

The intriguing thing for me will be when you decide use these sort of tactics. Do you leave your powder dry earlier in the year / during the home and away season, and then in finals play this strategy?

It's unlikely we'd ever tag a player, it's not really a philosophy Goody has, although we were prepared to send Harmes to Libba in 2021 when he was flying, and it had a huge impact. We've done it with Lachie Neale before as well. We denied that the Libba role was a strict tag and Harmes was given licence to go the other way, so I think it's more likely a match up like the above would take that form. 

The King's Birthday game for me has a bit of a Liverpool vs Man Utd feel to it (I'm Liverpool). I don't usually get really excited about one fixture in particular, but this year's fixture has a lot riding on it and should be fascinating. A bit like the Sydney game, we've become their bunnies and we need to arrest that momentum this time, so it'll be telling how we go and how far we're willing to go tactically that early in the season.

I feel like if you're going to send someone to Nick Daicos it has to be someone with a tank and quick smarts. You just can't give him an inch with the ball. Maybe Harmes can play the negating HFF role but as you say we much prefer to back the system.

After yesterday’s performance and how easily we were to score against, I wonder if we’ve over corrected too much with prioritising scoring over defence?

I know it’s only 5 games in, but we’re ranked No.1 for points scored but now we’re ranked 8th for points conceded. The past couple of seasons we were always 1st or 2nd in this stat.

17 minutes ago, At the break of Gawn said:

After yesterday’s performance and how easily we were to score against, I wonder if we’ve over corrected too much with prioritising scoring over defence?

I know it’s only 5 games in, but we’re ranked No.1 for points scored but now we’re ranked 8th for points conceded. The past couple of seasons we were always 1st or 2nd in this stat.

Yeah I think they’re still getting the balance figured out. Hopefully that defensive performance was an anomaly though…

One thing that is stark late last year and this year is how easy sides can get inside 50 by switching the ball. 2021 our zone was so good, that we moved in formation, now it is a real issue. Team defence is a mile off. 
Hope things can change, but we are not playing an exciting brand of footy. 

11 hours ago, SPC said:

One thing that is stark late last year and this year is how easy sides can get inside 50 by switching the ball. 2021 our zone was so good, that we moved in formation, now it is a real issue. Team defence is a mile off. 
Hope things can change, but we are not playing an exciting brand of footy. 

This. Our team defence has been poor since r1 last year. Non existent even. We will never win anything unless it is fixed. 

Oh gees. This thread is still a thing.

How did this thread get pushed back so far ??

Your opinions please.

Given that Tassie will field a side in what say 4 years, and possibly a Darwin side later to make up the 20.

That's going to diminish the ability of the average footballing side. Plus they , one or both, will get concessions on the number of and age of players.

What strategy as a club would help us navigate the about 10 years of recruiting restrictions.

Given that Max, May, Brodie, Hibbo, TMac, Melksham, and BBB and others will all have retired, possibly before any restrictions come into force, as well Oliver, Brayshaw and Tracca will be near an end of career.

 

Glad I do not have to work out the recruiting.

10 minutes ago, 640MD said:

How did this thread get pushed back so far ??

Your opinions please.

Given that Tassie will field a side in what say 4 years, and possibly a Darwin side later to make up the 20.

That's going to diminish the ability of the average footballing side. Plus they , one or both, will get concessions on the number of and age of players.

What strategy as a club would help us navigate the about 10 years of recruiting restrictions.

Given that Max, May, Brodie, Hibbo, TMac, Melksham, and BBB and others will all have retired, possibly before any restrictions come into force, as well Oliver, Brayshaw and Tracca will be near an end of career.

 

Glad I do not have to work out the recruiting.

My opinion is this is a different thread

15 minutes ago, 640MD said:

How did this thread get pushed back so far ??

Your opinions please.

Given that Tassie will field a side in what say 4 years, and possibly a Darwin side later to make up the 20.

That's going to diminish the ability of the average footballing side. Plus they , one or both, will get concessions on the number of and age of players.

What strategy as a club would help us navigate the about 10 years of recruiting restrictions.

Given that Max, May, Brodie, Hibbo, TMac, Melksham, and BBB and others will all have retired, possibly before any restrictions come into force, as well Oliver, Brayshaw and Tracca will be near an end of career.

 

Glad I do not have to work out the recruiting.

Is this more of a recruiting strategy question?

Probably but this thread is mostly devoid of bickering between posters and opinions are genuine and diverse.

And if you do not read opinions different to what you hold, all one is doing is pissing in your own pocket, not learning anything.
So are there any differing views. 
not based on the costs or funding cos it will happen. interested In all views. Apart from is it financially feasible.

43 minutes ago, 640MD said:

Probably but this thread is mostly devoid of bickering between posters and opinions are genuine and diverse.

And if you do not read opinions different to what you hold, all one is doing is pissing in your own pocket, not learning anything.
So are there any differing views. 
not based on the costs or funding cos it will happen. interested In all views. Apart from is it financially feasible.

Great topic 640MD, I agree it deserves its own thread

On 4/6/2023 at 6:47 PM, layzie said:

I feel like if you're going to send someone to Nick Daicos it has to be someone with a tank and quick smarts. You just can't give him an inch with the ball. Maybe Harmes can play the negating HFF role but as you say we much prefer to back the system.

Harmes too slow why not get ANB to tag him Can run all day and tackle. 

Teams try to attack Melbourne by using handballs, short kicks and overlap running. Thats the Collingwood blueprint.

North tried this after the 1st qtr and attempted to hold onto the ball, switch play and keep possession. They ultimately didn't have the skill to do that for long enough. Collingwood does.

But we have to recognise when teams do this and counter it.

Thats why the Sydney game was important. they play this way as well and we beat them convincingly - albeit they were down on personnel.

Lever needs to put his Hollywood kicks away and take the long options. Pen license revoked!

4 hours ago, jnrmac said:

Teams try to attack Melbourne by using handballs, short kicks and overlap running. Thats the Collingwood blueprint.

North tried this after the 1st qtr and attempted to hold onto the ball, switch play and keep possession. They ultimately didn't have the skill to do that for long enough. Collingwood does.

But we have to recognise when teams do this and counter it.

Thats why the Sydney game was important. they play this way as well and we beat them convincingly - albeit they were down on personnel.

I think that's why we tried adjusting our zone against Richmond, who were doing the same thing. So we play 1v1 20-30m ahead of the ball, and a zone behind it.

That's definitely the way to stop it.

Edited May 1, 20232 yr by A F

When it comes to teams playing fast against us and using the play-on handball run option to catch us out of position and force more ground balls, what is the best way to combat this as a team that has our own system and strategy dialled in?

Is it something that when we sense the opposition is taking this route that we can play a bit more compact? Ie. Squeeze our numbers in more and close the holes through the middle? It’s not a fix but at least if executed quickly enough it forces the opposition to take the longer paths to the outside and give us that bit more time to setup defensively. I understand this is a simplistic way of looking at it but it just seems that currently when teams are doing this to good effect we end up getting sliced through the middle repeatedly. 

What are some other ways to combat this?

22 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

Lever needs to put his Hollywood kicks away and take the long options. Pen license revoked!

I disagree with this. Scoring is now born from winning a turnover and going quickly through the middle of the ground.

I know some don’t like it, but it’s high risk, high reward. It’s fascinating to look at the scores from the weekend. I think teams are now aware that they’ll turnover some, but it’s the most efficient way to score. Geelong let Essendon kick over 100 points. Most teams that won scored well over 100. So coaches aren’t trying to win 70 to 50 anymore. They acknowledge that they have to take more risks through the middle, and that they will get scored on if it doesn’t work.

I also think this is having an impact on where teams are kicking goals from, and the subsequent effect on goal kicking efficiency.

The game has changed a lot this year I think. Last year felt like competing styles. This year on the whole most teams are quicker and embracing more risk.

19 minutes ago, The heart beats true said:

So coaches aren’t trying to win 70 to 50 anymore.

Most coaches, anyway.  

40 minutes ago, The heart beats true said:

I disagree with this. Scoring is now born from winning a turnover and going quickly through the middle of the ground.

I know some don’t like it, but it’s high risk, high reward. It’s fascinating to look at the scores from the weekend. I think teams are now aware that they’ll turnover some, but it’s the most efficient way to score. Geelong let Essendon kick over 100 points. Most teams that won scored well over 100. So coaches aren’t trying to win 70 to 50 anymore. They acknowledge that they have to take more risks through the middle, and that they will get scored on if it doesn’t work.

I also think this is having an impact on where teams are kicking goals from, and the subsequent effect on goal kicking efficiency.

The game has changed a lot this year I think. Last year felt like competing styles. This year on the whole most teams are quicker and embracing more risk.

The game plan is fine, but there needs to be some players who have more licence to go for the risky corridor kicks (like Bowey, Salem, Pickett and McVee) and others who play the percentages. Lever needs to put the Hollywood kicks away.

With Gawn back in the side, we don't have to be so aggressive with our ball movement all the time because we have the advantage kicking long to the contest. Particularly when we lead marginally in the last quarter like against Richmond.

On 4/6/2023 at 6:47 PM, layzie said:

I feel like if you're going to send someone to Nick Daicos it has to be someone with a tank and quick smarts. You just can't give him an inch with the ball. Maybe Harmes can play the negating HFF role but as you say we much prefer to back the system.

“Every game this year Nick Daicos would run back and get the ball back from the kick-in,” former St Kilda player Leigh Montagna said on First Crack.

“And he would set up the offence and set up the play but by having Ben Keays there it takes away those handball receives that Nick Daicos was able to get all year without any attention.

Let me guess who also said that after their Lions game?

 

22 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

Lever needs to put the Hollywood kicks away.

What's a hollywood kick @Fat Tony? Is it the one that you think you can make (based on the evidence that you have done it in games before), and fail to make? Or something different?

If the instructions for Lever are to where possible head up the centre, then so be it.

Otherwise he'd be lambasted for slowing it down too much, getting cheap kicks and going too much to the boundary.

Edited May 1, 20232 yr by Engorged Onion

11 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

What's a hollywood kick @Fat Tony? Is it the one that you think you can make (based on the evidence that you have done it in games before), and fail to make? Or something different?

If the instructions for Lever are to where possible head up the centre, then so be it.

Otherwise he'd be lambasted for slowing it down too much, getting cheap kicks and going too much to the boundary.

Lever tried to hit leading players in the corridor from 40m against both the Tigers and Kangaroos. Both times were on a slow play against a set zone and both resulted in turnovers.

I am all for attacking aggressively if we can get a goal out the back before the zone is set. But on the slow plays, the corridor kicks need to be shorter (30m) and to a stationary player in those instances.

On 5/1/2023 at 9:53 AM, A F said:

I think that's why we tried adjusting our zone against Richmond, who were doing the same thing. So we play 1v1 20-30m ahead of the ball, and a zone behind it.

That's definitely the way to stop it.

So we definitely didn't play 1v1 for 20-30m from half forward and zone behind it against the Suns.

I'm wondering if it was actually something Richmond were employing against us, rather than us to them. We haven't done it since and we only seemed to do it for a quarter.

I know we looked cooked off another 5 day break with the addition of interstate travel, but the ease with which the Suns could pick through our zone to at least the middle of the ground, requires system adjustments IMO.

The chip game kills us. They didn't get enough handball overlap against us, but that's mostly because they didn't seem to try. It was more about quick chips to shift the ball along different angles to get from 45m D50 to centre wing. We didn't have an answer for it, other than we were lucky that they missed a few simple targets.

I'm not exactly sure how you beat the system I describe above (1v1 over 20-30m and zone behind), other than to beat us in the contest in the air and on the ground. And therefore, I hope we make an adjustment like this to our zone. I'd hope it's doable in season. Or perhaps, it's something we're even holding back from at this stage, and something we'll introduce in the second half of the year?

Edited May 6, 20232 yr by A F