7 minutes ago, A F said:

Here's the thing though, @rpfc, Grundy will be in the 22 for finals, so I'm beginning to think it'll be at the expense of JVR.

Same. Unless BBB just can’t get into a trot.

The helicopter view suggests the team has in the past two weeks opened up its scoring options. I am away so haven't really analysed it too much but it seems we are getting more scoring shots but taking more risks hence the scores against have gone higher. 93 pts and 104 pts are the highest against this year (save for rd 2 when we played bris and conceded 93 pts)

I am wondering whether this is because we are now somewhat locked into a top 4 spot so can break the shackles a little more offensively? And are less concerned about holding teams to low scores?

 

On 7/3/2023 at 2:19 PM, beelzebub said:

The oddest thing just occurred to me about our game plan.  In a sense its like a picture formed by folding a paper about the middle resulting in a mirror image.

Our foward play is all but exactly what we try to force opposition teams to do. Our defenders deny opponents fowards arial superiority, we force the ball wide to the flanks.. We pressure the ball.  We deny the corridor and rebound into attack...   The most bizarre thing then seems to occur once we get past the middle is we adopt all of those attributes. We try to get the ball from the arial entries  ( aka bombing ) only to end up going into the flanks and pockets ourselves. 

You have to ask....if we dont think having the ball towards the boundary is beneficial for our opponents in their fwd 50...why would we suppose it will work for us ??

We seem keen leading to pockets when really you should be leading out of them.

Strange game...our style of footy.

Occurred to me that the kick into the pocket plays a defensive role. If we turn it over, the oppo is already hemmed in and therefore it's easier for us to keep it in our fifty. My 2c

12 hours ago, Grr-owl said:

Occurred to me that the kick into the pocket plays a defensive role. If we turn it over, the oppo is already hemmed in and therefore it's easier for us to keep it in our fifty. My 2c

That is correct Grr-owl. However it should only be used when there are no options available, not a continuous go-to each time. If we can slow it down, calculate at times of "perceived pressure" it would be unstoppable. However that's on the players.

Don't know if there's a link somewhere but thought the comments Joe Montanga made on 360 last night about us was interesting.  Essentially we've gone from being in the top bracket to about 12th in terms of forward half turnovers in the last few weeks.  And at the same time our scoring has lifted as we know.

I've thought this since seeing how Collinwood played us last year - they look so good on turnover as 80% of the players on the field are in our forwardline and then they have an open field to work with on the turnover.  If we force turnovers in the front half, we still have to work through the opposition's defence which is largely in place which is so much harder.

I know Montagna and King can get caught up in meaningless stats but it was interesting to see the shift.

My questions for @binman and the rest of the brains trust are:

1. Is this shift deliberate (or does it say more about our opponents the last few weeks)?

2. If it is deliberate (I think it is), why has it taken us this long to work it out - wasn't this obvious last year?

3. How much of this approach is reliant on Gawn being down the line.  I.e does it still work with Grundy in the team?  Has this occurred because Grundy is not in the team?

3. Does this shift mean we are more vulnerable in defence?  Statistically the last few weeks would say that is correct.  But I actually think if we are aiming to get turnovers further back, it probably makes us harder to score against (particularly) for teams that are skilled at kicking through the hard forward press.  I feel like last year we tried this but often ran out of gas to keep it going for the full game.  

 

4 minutes ago, deelusions from afar said:

Don't know if there's a link somewhere but thought the comments Joe Montanga made on 360 last night about us was interesting.  Essentially we've gone from being in the top bracket to about 12th in terms of forward half turnovers in the last few weeks.  And at the same time our scoring has lifted as we know.

I've thought this since seeing how Collinwood played us last year - they look so good on turnover as 80% of the players on the field are in our forwardline and then they have an open field to work with on the turnover.  If we force turnovers in the front half, we still have to work through the opposition's defence which is largely in place which is so much harder.

I know Montagna and King can get caught up in meaningless stats but it was interesting to see the shift.

My questions for @binman and the rest of the brains trust are:

1. Is this shift deliberate (or does it say more about our opponents the last few weeks)?

2. If it is deliberate (I think it is), why has it taken us this long to work it out - wasn't this obvious last year?

3. How much of this approach is reliant on Gawn being down the line.  I.e does it still work with Grundy in the team?  Has this occurred because Grundy is not in the team?

3. Does this shift mean we are more vulnerable in defence?  Statistically the last few weeks would say that is correct.  But I actually think if we are aiming to get turnovers further back, it probably makes us harder to score against (particularly) for teams that are skilled at kicking through the hard forward press.  I feel like last year we tried this but often ran out of gas to keep it going for the full game.  

 

I think a big part of the reason for less turnovers in our front half is, as you intimate, because we are trying to be more attacking.  Kossie is playing higher up the field so we have lost our best pressure forward deep, and Brown and Melksham coming into the team hurt us in this area because they don't add any forward pressure.  Even Petracca forward hurts a bit I think.  In @WheeloRatings stats post he was our highest pressure acts and points player but IMO he a surprisingly poor tackler who seems easy to wrong foot. 

As I posted elsewhere, it's a bit of a left-field idea, but I'd like to see Joel Smith come in for Woey and Grundy for Brown, both of whom would give more forward pressure and we'd also get more aerial threat.

12 minutes ago, old55 said:

I think a big part of the reason for less turnovers in our front half is, as you intimate, because we are trying to be more attacking.  Kossie is playing higher up the field so we have lost our best pressure forward deep, and Brown and Melksham coming into the team hurt us in this area because they don't add any forward pressure.  Even Petracca forward hurts a bit I think.  In @WheeloRatings stats post he was our highest pressure acts and points player but IMO he a surprisingly poor tackler who seems easy to wrong foot. 

As I posted elsewhere, it's a bit of a left-field idea, but I'd like to see Joel Smith come in for Woey and Grundy for Brown, both of whom would give more forward pressure and we'd also get more aerial threat.

That all makes sense. 

I guess what I'm wondering though is whether we are taking a similar approach to our shift in centre bounce strategy a few years back eg where we're not as concerned about winning them as we used to be - it's more about winning them well when we do and (ideally) preventing the opposition from winning them well.  Ie scoring opportunities rather than hack kicks.

To apply this to turnovers, of course we want turnovers in our F50 through intercepts / tackle pressure etc but have we realised that we are more likely to score from turnovers we get at halfback rather than half forward?  And if so, have we rejigged things so that that's what happens?

Wasn't sure where else to post this so figured here.

Did anyone else hear Daniel Hoyne from Champion Data talking about May?

He noticed that this week May played higher up the ground, winning 43% of his possessions across half-back (his highest for the year) and 43% inside D50 (his lowest for the year). Noted that in Round 6 he took Riewoldt but this week we left that to Tomlinson and let May push higher up the ground.

Do we think this is going to become a trend for us, or more of a one off? If the former, would support the idea that we're going to keep playing Tomlinson (at least so long as Petty stays forward).

1 minute ago, titan_uranus said:

Wasn't sure where else to post this so figured here.

Did anyone else hear Daniel Hoyne from Champion Data talking about May?

He noticed that this week May played higher up the ground, winning 43% of his possessions across half-back (his highest for the year) and 43% inside D50 (his lowest for the year). Noted that in Round 6 he took Riewoldt but this week we left that to Tomlinson and let May push higher up the ground.

Do we think this is going to become a trend for us, or more of a one off? If the former, would support the idea that we're going to keep playing Tomlinson (at least so long as Petty stays forward).

why wouldn't Petty stay forward?

 

2 minutes ago, Kent said:

why wouldn't Petty stay forward?

 

He will. All I meant was that if we are going to push May up the ground, we need someone else playing key defence and with Petty forward, that is almost certainly going to be Tomlinson (not Hibberd, for example).

1 minute ago, titan_uranus said:

He will. All I meant was that if we are going to push May up the ground, we need someone else playing key defence and with Petty forward, that is almost certainly going to be Tomlinson (not Hibberd, for example).

Couldn't agree more Titan  Its been strange that we didn't persist with Petty sooner BB TMAc now gone

Always wanted Tommo in but he is better on a big body than a smaller player where I prefer Hibbo

Horses for courses in my view

 

5 minutes ago, Kent said:

Couldn't agree more Titan  Its been strange that we didn't persist with Petty sooner BB TMAc now gone

Always wanted Tommo in but he is better on a big body than a smaller player where I prefer Hibbo

Horses for courses in my view

 

That's right.

Tommo in when the 3rd tall defender is required, not just for the sake of having the third tall. Keeping Smith as sub gives us flexibility. 

1 hour ago, titan_uranus said:

Wasn't sure where else to post this so figured here.

Did anyone else hear Daniel Hoyne from Champion Data talking about May?

He noticed that this week May played higher up the ground, winning 43% of his possessions across half-back (his highest for the year) and 43% inside D50 (his lowest for the year). Noted that in Round 6 he took Riewoldt but this week we left that to Tomlinson and let May push higher up the ground.

Do we think this is going to become a trend for us, or more of a one off? If the former, would support the idea that we're going to keep playing Tomlinson (at least so long as Petty stays forward).

He also mentioned how over the past three seasons, Tomlinson is (I think) 3rd for negating defensive one-on-one's (e.g., his opponent didn't win it), and 5th for winning defensive one-on-one's. It shows that when he can keep up with his opponent, he is a great defender. 

1 hour ago, titan_uranus said:

Wasn't sure where else to post this so figured here.

Did anyone else hear Daniel Hoyne from Champion Data talking about May?

He noticed that this week May played higher up the ground, winning 43% of his possessions across half-back (his highest for the year) and 43% inside D50 (his lowest for the year). Noted that in Round 6 he took Riewoldt but this week we left that to Tomlinson and let May push higher up the ground.

Do we think this is going to become a trend for us, or more of a one off? If the former, would support the idea that we're going to keep playing Tomlinson (at least so long as Petty stays forward).

Actually noticed he was lot further up the ground for most of game.  My guess would be as last line of defence he was struggling if the ball hit the deck.  Being further up the ground it is not so catastrophic if he fumbles a ground ball.

Personally i think he has been pretty out of form the last few weeks and actually struggling to bend over and pick up the ball.  Also he has more opportunities to use his reasonably good foot skills to better effect having more options through half back and middle of the ground.

As great as both Lever and May have been in last line of defence, i think both are a little flaky if they do not mark or spoil it out of bounds.  Bowey/Mcvee/Tomlinson/Rivers...even our wings are probably more suited to that last line for us these days.

Edited August 2, 20231 yr by NeveroddoreveN

1 hour ago, titan_uranus said:

Wasn't sure where else to post this so figured here.

Did anyone else hear Daniel Hoyne from Champion Data talking about May?

He noticed that this week May played higher up the ground, winning 43% of his possessions across half-back (his highest for the year) and 43% inside D50 (his lowest for the year). Noted that in Round 6 he took Riewoldt but this week we left that to Tomlinson and let May push higher up the ground.

Do we think this is going to become a trend for us, or more of a one off? If the former, would support the idea that we're going to keep playing Tomlinson (at least so long as Petty stays forward).

Hoyne was really interesting.  He also reeled off some impressive stats regarding Thomo and one on one contests.

With regard to May I suspect it will all come down to match ups as to how far up the ground he plays.  He's more versatile than Thomo as a defender and the FD will look at who they want him to play on rather than where. 

8 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

Wasn't sure where else to post this so figured here.

Did anyone else hear Daniel Hoyne from Champion Data talking about May?

He noticed that this week May played higher up the ground, winning 43% of his possessions across half-back (his highest for the year) and 43% inside D50 (his lowest for the year). Noted that in Round 6 he took Riewoldt but this week we left that to Tomlinson and let May push higher up the ground.

Do we think this is going to become a trend for us, or more of a one off? If the former, would support the idea that we're going to keep playing Tomlinson (at least so long as Petty stays forward).

I think if that continues then we will bring Hibberd back asap. See what eventuates

12 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

Wasn't sure where else to post this so figured here.

Did anyone else hear Daniel Hoyne from Champion Data talking about May?

He noticed that this week May played higher up the ground, winning 43% of his possessions across half-back (his highest for the year) and 43% inside D50 (his lowest for the year). Noted that in Round 6 he took Riewoldt but this week we left that to Tomlinson and let May push higher up the ground.

Do we think this is going to become a trend for us, or more of a one off? If the former, would support the idea that we're going to keep playing Tomlinson (at least so long as Petty stays forward).

Good get mate.

I wonder if this correlates with us playing a higher press and committing more numbers forward vs Richmond than we usually would. Risk reward style that Collingwood play.**

Or, have we simply identified that Tomlinson's best bet is as the deepest anchor and that if we have that stability set behind the ball, if sides try to target May and drag him outside 50, it won't bother us, because he'll just win contests and intercept higher up the ground and allow us to protect our deepest backs? (what a sentence!)

FWIW, Goody's philosophy is defence first and contest, so I'd expect us to eventually settle on a better balance between offence and defence, one that values defence slightly higher, but that still manages to kick 100 points. 

** I didn't get a good look at this against Richmond as I took my 2 year old to his first game and I spent half the time caring for him and not watching structures in front or behind the ball.

12 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

He will. All I meant was that if we are going to push May up the ground, we need someone else playing key defence and with Petty forward, that is almost certainly going to be Tomlinson (not Hibberd, for example).

Hibberd played some anchor for us against Collingwood. Was often the deepest defender. But I agree with what you're saying. I don't think we'll abandon the three tall defensive set up, nor should we.

9 hours ago, A F said:

Hibberd played some anchor for us against Collingwood. Was often the deepest defender. But I agree with what you're saying. I don't think we'll abandon the three tall defensive set up, nor should we.

Must admit, I am grateful to you guys who can observe structures during the game, as due to the fact that I am watching more games on TV than attending live, I am really only seeing passages of play and vision of the whole field is therefore restricted.

I enjoy reading your comments on this aspect of our games.

May not needing to run up and down the d50 will good for him. And we get to use his amazing intercepting marks and play making monster left boot more often too. Tommo can put in the grunt and muscle work to beat the best tall. I hope we stick with this plan. 

12 hours ago, A F said:

Good get mate.

I wonder if this correlates with us playing a higher press and committing more numbers forward vs Richmond than we usually would. Risk reward style that Collingwood play.**

Or, have we simply identified that Tomlinson's best bet is as the deepest anchor and that if we have that stability set behind the ball, if sides try to target May and drag him outside 50, it won't bother us, because he'll just win contests and intercept higher up the ground and allow us to protect our deepest backs? (what a sentence!)

FWIW, Goody's philosophy is defence first and contest, so I'd expect us to eventually settle on a better balance between offence and defence, one that values defence slightly higher, but that still manages to kick 100 points. 

** I didn't get a good look at this against Richmond as I took my 2 year old to his first game and I spent half the time caring for him and not watching structures in front or behind the ball.

Well done in taking your 2 year but it is an important part of his development to understand structures in front and behind the ball.  For goodness sake Adam what were you thinking of. 

1 hour ago, hemingway said:

Well done in taking your 2 year but it is an important part of his development to understand structures in front and behind the ball.  For goodness sake Adam what were you thinking of. 

He was asleep in the car for the first quarter, so got there at the end of the 2nd, he lasted the third quarter (I didn't realise ear muffs were a thing for the youngsters), and found it too loud, so we went home at 3/4 time. I had to watch it all on replay when we got home. 

But if all I teach him is structures and not being a nuffy at the footy, I'll be happy. ❤️

On 8/2/2023 at 9:30 AM, titan_uranus said:

Wasn't sure where else to post this so figured here.

Did anyone else hear Daniel Hoyne from Champion Data talking about May?

He noticed that this week May played higher up the ground, winning 43% of his possessions across half-back (his highest for the year) and 43% inside D50 (his lowest for the year). Noted that in Round 6 he took Riewoldt but this week we left that to Tomlinson and let May push higher up the ground.

Do we think this is going to become a trend for us, or more of a one off? If the former, would support the idea that we're going to keep playing Tomlinson (at least so long as Petty stays forward).

I think in his post-game interview Goody said he sent May to Dusty in the second half after he got a hold of McVee a bit. Maybe that's why he ended further up the ground?

On 7/27/2023 at 12:18 PM, old55 said:

I think a big part of the reason for less turnovers in our front half is, as you intimate, because we are trying to be more attacking.  Kossie is playing higher up the field so we have lost our best pressure forward deep, and Brown and Melksham coming into the team hurt us in this area because they don't add any forward pressure.  Even Petracca forward hurts a bit I think.  In @WheeloRatings stats post he was our highest pressure acts and points player but IMO he a surprisingly poor tackler who seems easy to wrong foot. 

As I posted elsewhere, it's a bit of a left-field idea, but I'd like to see Joel Smith come in for Woey and Grundy for Brown, both of whom would give more forward pressure and we'd also get more aerial threat.

Taking more marks inside 50 certainly helps  Thats where we have improved

@WheeloRatings - can you confirm how the Marks Inside 50 Rate is derived? Cheers

Nice to see we are slightly above average. Never feels like it when watching the game!!

Edited August 3, 20231 yr by Engorged Onion