Game plans, tactics and all that jazz

[Engorged Onion 10,223]

17 hours ago, Grr-owl said:

Great post. Great article. Useful advice in any walk of life. And, yes, mindfulness is more than achieving a desirable state of mind, it’s about pure observation.

I might derive from it a conclusion that our team needs to embrace the experience of footy, the positives and negatives, the ups and downs, the pain and the pleasure, as a totality, and understand that whole as a positive. That’s getting a bit woo woo, but I reckon you know what I mean.

At this point I want to bring something up which I reckon has damaged the group. The pain of the Prelim loss against WC was allowed to linger. I think it has given the group an anxiety of winning. That is, once their performance is high, they embrace the result for a while, but then at the back of the mind is the knowledge that high performance leads to pain, and bad practice creeps in. Not sure what the term is — Success Anxiety? Perhaps this mechanism is also at work in the the drop off of Adelaide after a GF loss, and GWS, possibly.

I know you're been playful here - but it's not Woo woo - it's as if genuinely feeling your strong uncomfortable feelings is problematic in certain contexts! Not when there is death or grief as an example...but on the football field, well THAT's problematic (i say with a rye smile) - only because coaches, players, etc have it culturally embedded not to show 'weakness' whatever version of weakness that is.

 

I once said to a premiership player  what would it be like for your entire team to genuinely accept the fact that football, and finals campaigns was arduous, and at times anxiety provoking, and it could be spoken about ie: pre game in the rooms

Have a read through these two vignettes - is there a different vibe?

P1: How you feeling?

P2 : Pretty anxious mate!

P1: Yeah , I get it, that makes sense, well, have your anxiety and go out and smash it

vs

P1: How you feeling?

P2 : Pretty anxious mate!

P1: [censored] mate, harden up, dont worry about it, you'll be fine

 

Id argue there is a marked difference, in how P2 would have felt

 

Anyway, the players response to me was "it would have been liberating"

If you're all on the same page (power structures from captains who talk about their anx) about the emotional reality of being under scrutiny week after week, then all of a sudden, the emotion (in this case anxiety) becomes less problematic in of itself.

[Diamond_Jim 12,628]

Very interesting article. Deals in depth with blocking as a tactic

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-08-27/secret-to-attacking-success-in-the-afl/12596422

Forwards now lead at a variety of angles instead of simply straight ahead, forcing backmen to cover more ground within their defensive 50.

And the defender's job is becoming ever harder due to the rising prevalence of another tactic: blocking.

[Grr-owl 1,253]

8 hours ago, Engorged Onion said:

I know you're been playful here - but it's not Woo woo - it's as if genuinely feeling your strong uncomfortable feelings is problematic in certain contexts! Not when there is death or grief as an example...but on the football field, well THAT's problematic (i say with a rye smile) - only because coaches, players, etc have it culturally embedded not to show 'weakness' whatever version of weakness that is.

 

I once said to a premiership player  what would it be like for your entire team to genuinely accept the fact that football, and finals campaigns was arduous, and at times anxiety provoking, and it could be spoken about ie: pre game in the rooms

Have a read through these two vignettes - is there a different vibe?

P1: How you feeling?

P2 : Pretty anxious mate!

P1: Yeah , I get it, that makes sense, well, have your anxiety and go out and smash it

vs

P1: How you feeling?

P2 : Pretty anxious mate!

P1: [censored] mate, harden up, dont worry about it, you'll be fine

 

Id argue there is a marked difference, in how P2 would have felt

 

Anyway, the players response to me was "it would have been liberating"

If you're all on the same page (power structures from captains who talk about their anx) about the emotional reality of being under scrutiny week after week, then all of a sudden, the emotion (in this case anxiety) becomes less problematic in of itself.

I reckon. The mere fact of acknowledging it would mean that blokes individually and as a group could discuss strategies for dealing with it. Given our team’s inconsistency, I wonder if something could be improved on that front — could the psychological realities be more honestly addressed???

Edited August 29, 2020 by Grr-owl

[Adam The God 30,421]

The Sydney match up is a fascinating one from a tactical point of view.

Do we go with our aggressive three wall game or do we go for the Geelong/West Coast control defensive/smother game?

Sydney have struggled to get the ball on the outside this year and they like to keep it contested. We need to ensure we utilise the likes of Langdon and our other mids to get it on the outside on the spread.

I'd be inclined to go with the aggressive three wall game in the first quarter, go hard after CPs and see if we can break them early and get a lead on them. 

If it's absolutely not working then I'd revert to the control defensive/smother game after quarter time. Even if we get a bit of a lead early on, we could use the defensive/smother game to converse energy and make them force the game, from here we just have to use the ball well from back to front.

Both styles have more methodical and considered ball movement than simply blasting it long inside 50, particularly if Sydney are able to delay our forward entries and slow the game through centre wing and half forward. We'll need to use the ball better going inside this time and this should be a major focus this week, to improve on our ball use, especially that kick that goes to half forward. We butchered it against St Kilda.

Is this how others see it?

[binman 43,813]

14 hours ago, A F said:

The Sydney match up is a fascinating one from a tactical point of view.

Do we go with our aggressive three wall game or do we go for the Geelong/West Coast control defensive/smother game?

Sydney have struggled to get the ball on the outside this year and they like to keep it contested. We need to ensure we utilise the likes of Langdon and our other mids to get it on the outside on the spread.

I'd be inclined to go with the aggressive three wall game in the first quarter, go hard after CPs and see if we can break them early and get a lead on them. 

If it's absolutely not working then I'd revert to the control defensive/smother game after quarter time. Even if we get a bit of a lead early on, we could use the defensive/smother game to converse energy and make them force the game, from here we just have to use the ball well from back to front.

Both styles have more methodical and considered ball movement than simply blasting it long inside 50, particularly if Sydney are able to delay our forward entries and slow the game through centre wing and half forward. We'll need to use the ball better going inside this time and this should be a major focus this week, to improve on our ball use, especially that kick that goes to half forward. We butchered it against St Kilda.

Is this how others see it?

To some extent our tactics will be influenced by the way Longmuire decides to approach this game.

In a couple of recent games (eg the GWS and Port games) the Swans seem to have been trying to go through the corridor a bit more and be a bit more offensive.

And in others they have used an ultra defensive, hold the ball, flood the oppositions front half model (eg the dire match against a similarly defensive freo and the pies game, which they almost pinched with a third of the inside 50s or something crazy). 

Lets hope they look to attack but i fear the desire to stem a big loss might be the way they decide to go. And if so it will be game played n our front half. So ground ball gets, forward half pressure and taking the half chances will be important.

And in that scenario we will set out zone really high, with Lever may and Omac up around the wings. We will need to be smart with our inside 50s. And patient. 

An interesting thing i've noted a few teams doing lately in a crowded front half is really long handballs away from the goals to a free player on our even outside 50. And that player then reloads and goes back in or looks to cross and reset.

We did that couple of times against the saints (one by Jones) and also have been doing something similar with kicks from just inside 50  (which i i think are  automated), where instead of going to the goal square they square it to a spot just on or outside 50 ones (eg Spargo to Brayshaw in the Pies game) - the vacuum of space riewodt described it as, created by defenders pushing forward to crowd the inside 50 space, and in particular the hot spot 20 out from goal. 

On my theory we do well against teams with similar game plans but struggle with those with different game plans this game sets up really well as Longmuire is a type one, defence first, systems coach.

For that very reason he might looked to adopt a more aggressive approach that involves risky kicks wide or to the corridor, but unlike the Dogs they don't have the cattle (to mix animals metaphors) to pull that off and will lead to a shellacking if we are swtiched on as we will smash them on the counter. Lets hope the try it.

[Engorged Onion 10,223]

36 minutes ago, binman said:

To some extent our tactics will be influenced by the way Longmuire decides to approach this game.

In a couple of recent games (eg the GWS and Port games) the Swans seem to have been trying to go through the corridor a bit more and be a bit more offensive.

And in others they have used an ultra defensive, hold the ball, flood the oppositions front half model (eg the dire match against a similarly defensive freo and the pies game, which they almost pinched with a third of the inside 50s or something crazy). 

Lets hope they look to attack but i fear the desire to stem a big loss might be the way they decide to go. And if so it will be game played n our front half. So ground ball gets, forward half pressure and taking the half chances will be important.

And in that scenario we will set out zone really high, with Lever may and Omac up around the wings. We will need to be smart with our inside 50s. And patient. 

An interesting thing i've noted a few teams doing lately in a crowded front half is really long handballs away from the goals to a free player on our even outside 50. And that player then reloads and goes back in or looks to cross and reset.

We did that couple of times against the saints (one by Jones) and also have been doing something similar with kicks from just inside 50  (which i i think are  automated), where instead of going to the goal square they square it to a spot just on or outside 50 ones (eg Spargo to Brayshaw in the Pies game) - the vacuum of space riewodt described it as, created by defenders pushing forward to crowd the inside 50 space, and in particular the hot spot 20 out from goal. 

On my theory we do well against teams with similar game plans but struggle with those with different game plans this game sets up really well as Longmuire is a type one, defence first, systems coach.

For that very reason he might looked to adopt a more aggressive approach that involves risky kicks wide or to the corridor, but unlike the Dogs they don't have the cattle (to mix animals metaphors) to pull that off and will lead to a shellacking if we are swtiched on as we will smash them on the counter. Lets hope the try it.

Well @binman, if that strategy proves to be correct - May, Rivers, Salem and Omac to get 3 goals a piece then, pinging in from the 50m arc. Omac can kick 50 off a step right? Right!

Edited September 1, 2020 by Engorged Onion

[binman 43,813]

29 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

Well @binman, if that strategy proves to be correct - May, Rivers, Salem and Omac to get 3 goals a piece then, pinging in from the 50m arc. Omac can kick 50 off a step right? Right!

Omac can indeed kick 50 off a step, but his role is step one in the automated process.

Step one: Omac or one his defensive brethren  kick long to a contest from the wing to just inside 50 near the boundary 

Step two:  Kozzie,  Spargo or a mid  crumb the pack and win a ground ball get from the marking contest and fire it off to the designated spot on the 50 metre arc.

Step three: one of Melk, Brayshaw and Trac take an easy mark.

Step four: one of Melk, Brayshaw and Trac go back and slot a 50 metre goal.

Step five: repeat steps one to four

[Grimes Times 1,278]

15 hours ago, A F said:

The Sydney match up is a fascinating one from a tactical point of view.

Do we go with our aggressive three wall game or do we go for the Geelong/West Coast control defensive/smother game?

Sydney have struggled to get the ball on the outside this year and they like to keep it contested. We need to ensure we utilise the likes of Langdon and our other mids to get it on the outside on the spread.

I'd be inclined to go with the aggressive three wall game in the first quarter, go hard after CPs and see if we can break them early and get a lead on them. 

If it's absolutely not working then I'd revert to the control defensive/smother game after quarter time. Even if we get a bit of a lead early on, we could use the defensive/smother game to converse energy and make them force the game, from here we just have to use the ball well from back to front.

Both styles have more methodical and considered ball movement than simply blasting it long inside 50, particularly if Sydney are able to delay our forward entries and slow the game through centre wing and half forward. We'll need to use the ball better going inside this time and this should be a major focus this week, to improve on our ball use, especially that kick that goes to half forward. We butchered it against St Kilda.

Is this how others see it?

Yes agree. We need to factor in the short turn around into Freo in what will likely be hot humid conditions. If as above we can get of to a fast start and a lead by half time it would be great in the 2nd half to drop back and try and control the game. Play Trac and Clarry deep for a half.

[Grr-owl 1,253]

Just wanna give a nod to Binman for opening this thread, then to he and EO and AoB and AF and everyone else who've chipped in. I'm now convinced that Goodwin is onto something that will gives the team an advantage. Now all we need is a couple more players to lift the skill level, a bit of development, and the confidence to implement the plan under pressure. A couple more seasons and we could be top four consistently... 

[Engorged Onion 10,223]

11 minutes ago, Grr-owl said:

Just wanna give a nod to Binman for opening this thread, then to he and EO and AoB and AF and everyone else who've chipped in. I'm now convinced that Goodwin is onto something that will gives the team an advantage. Now all we need is a couple more players to lift the skill level, a bit of development, and the confidence to implement the plan under pressure. A couple more seasons and we could be top four consistently... 

Best thread on here - and loving the fact that is analytical, in depth  and free of personal grievances. 

[Adam The God 30,421]

2 hours ago, binman said:

To some extent our tactics will be influenced by the way Longmuire decides to approach this game.

In a couple of recent games (eg the GWS and Port games) the Swans seem to have been trying to go through the corridor a bit more and be a bit more offensive.

And in others they have used an ultra defensive, hold the ball, flood the oppositions front half model (eg the dire match against a similarly defensive freo and the pies game, which they almost pinched with a third of the inside 50s or something crazy). 

Lets hope they look to attack but i fear the desire to stem a big loss might be the way they decide to go. And if so it will be game played n our front half. So ground ball gets, forward half pressure and taking the half chances will be important.

And in that scenario we will set out zone really high, with Lever may and Omac up around the wings. We will need to be smart with our inside 50s. And patient. 

If they do go for the dire contested game you discuss, I'd be inclined to match it with our strangle system and sit the zone way back, pick them off and then use the ball way better going inside 50 this week than last. It's basically a counter attacking game from the middle of the ground.

Quote

An interesting thing i've noted a few teams doing lately in a crowded front half is really long handballs away from the goals to a free player on our even outside 50. And that player then reloads and goes back in or looks to cross and reset.

We did that couple of times against the saints (one by Jones) and also have been doing something similar with kicks from just inside 50  (which i i think are  automated), where instead of going to the goal square they square it to a spot just on or outside 50 ones (eg Spargo to Brayshaw in the Pies game) - the vacuum of space riewodt described it as, created by defenders pushing forward to crowd the inside 50 space, and in particular the hot spot 20 out from goal. 

Yep, good call mate. Now that you mention it, I've noted other teams doing it too. The automated reload. 

Quote

On my theory we do well against teams with similar game plans but struggle with those with different game plans this game sets up really well as Longmuire is a type one, defence first, systems coach.

For that very reason he might looked to adopt a more aggressive approach that involves risky kicks wide or to the corridor, but unlike the Dogs they don't have the cattle (to mix animals metaphors) to pull that off and will lead to a shellacking if we are swtiched on as we will smash them on the counter. Lets hope the try it.

Yeah, interesting point. It's difficult to work out how to beat us if we're switched on though. If it's to switch the ball repeatedly ala Bulldogs, IMV this doesn't work if we cover the the ground properly. If it's to go the corridor, you want to be sure that your players can execute repeatedly or it could be very dangerous on the counter.

Edited September 1, 2020 by A F

[Adam The God 30,421]

1 hour ago, binman said:

Omac can indeed kick 50 off a step, but his role is step one in the automated process.

Step one: Omac or one his defensive brethren  kick long to a contest from the wing to just inside 50 near the boundary 

Step two:  Kozzie,  Spargo or a mid  crumb the pack and win a ground ball get from the marking contest and fire it off to the designated spot on the 50 metre arc.

Step three: one of Melk, Brayshaw and Trac take an easy mark.

Step four: one of Melk, Brayshaw and Trac go back and slot a 50 metre goal.

Step five: repeat steps one to four

Yeah, I don't see Oscar ever pressing high enough to get a chance to score.

You might occasionally see our half backs like Hibberd get a chance to score, but the defenders don't press that high anymore. It's mostly the mids and forwards.

[binman 43,813]

4 minutes ago, A F said:

It's difficult to work out how to beat us if we're switched on though. If it's to switch the ball repeatedly ala Bulldogs, IMV this doesn't work if we cover the the ground properly. If it's to go the corridor, you want to be sure that your players can execute repeatedly or it could be very dangerous on the counter.

Agree.

Which is the weakness in the game plans of the dogs and saints - if the opposition counter them with a super effective all team defensive zone (of whatever variation - one line, two lines, swarming etc), with all players plying their role and working super hard it breaks down. 

[Adam The God 30,421]

9 minutes ago, binman said:

Agree.

Which is the weakness in the game plans of the dogs and saints - if the opposition counter them with a super effective all team defensive zone (of whatever variation - one line, two lines, swarming etc), with all players plying their role and working super hard it breaks down. 

If we were to play a team that was willing to counter us with the same system, it'd be about who could use the ball better on forward entry, and whether our CP game could give us an advantage. Obviously, this is on the basis that both teams bring the required work rate to implement their defensive systems.

Edited September 1, 2020 by A F

[binman 43,813]

6 minutes ago, A F said:

If we were to play a team that was willing to counter us with the same system, it'd be about who could use the ball better on forward entry, and whether our CP game could give us an advantage. Obviously, this is on the basis that both teams bring the required work rate to implement their defensive systems.

Agree. Which is why we are not yet a top 4 team. 

[binman 43,813]

19 hours ago, binman said:

To some extent our tactics will be influenced by the way Longmuire decides to approach this game.

In a couple of recent games (eg the GWS and Port games) the Swans seem to have been trying to go through the corridor a bit more and be a bit more offensive.

And in others they have used an ultra defensive, hold the ball, flood the oppositions front half model (eg the dire match against a similarly defensive freo and the pies game, which they almost pinched with a third of the inside 50s or something crazy). 

Lets hope they look to attack but i fear the desire to stem a big loss might be the way they decide to go. And if so it will be game played n our front half. So ground ball gets, forward half pressure and taking the half chances will be important.

And in that scenario we will set out zone really high, with Lever may and Omac up around the wings. We will need to be smart with our inside 50s. And patient. 

An interesting thing i've noted a few teams doing lately in a crowded front half is really long handballs away from the goals to a free player on our even outside 50. And that player then reloads and goes back in or looks to cross and reset.

We did that couple of times against the saints (one by Jones) and also have been doing something similar with kicks from just inside 50  (which i i think are  automated), where instead of going to the goal square they square it to a spot just on or outside 50 ones (eg Spargo to Brayshaw in the Pies game) - the vacuum of space riewodt described it as, created by defenders pushing forward to crowd the inside 50 space, and in particular the hot spot 20 out from goal. 

On my theory we do well against teams with similar game plans but struggle with those with different game plans this game sets up really well as Longmuire is a type one, defence first, systems coach.

For that very reason he might looked to adopt a more aggressive approach that involves risky kicks wide or to the corridor, but unlike the Dogs they don't have the cattle (to mix animals metaphors) to pull that off and will lead to a shellacking if we are swtiched on as we will smash them on the counter. Lets hope the try it.

Interestingly I just listened to the Max gawn interview on rsn yesterday and asked about rhe swans game he said they play a similar style to the digs and saints - look to go through the corridor and switch and run (which is half consistent wirh my comments above)

I also listended to Rodney eade on rsn, also yesterday, and he said that goal to trac was the fault of Dougal who failed to maintain the defensive structure.

Dougal should have been on the last line as the goal keeper, the role omac plays, which is where he started when the ball came in but got sucked to the trac contest (which is why there was 3 saints at that contest - like bees to a honeymoon he said - a familiar refrain for dees fans in the past).

If he had stayed where should have, he would have stopped the goal (and my additional comment would have gathered under no pressure and cleared the area).

Instead he got caught in no man's land and couldn't touch the ball.

I hadn't picked that up. It highlights how important roles and structure are.

Telling that Eade as a coach zeroed in on that aspect of the goal. Didn't even mention the video controversy. 

Can't seem to put the links up from my phone. Will try later from a pc. But they can be found on the rsn website under the program pages (the breakfast club).

[deanox 9,989]

4 hours ago, binman said:

Interestingly I just listened to the Max gawn interview on rsn yesterday and asked about rhe swans game he said they play a similar style to the digs and saints - look to go through the corridor and switch and run (which is half consistent wirh my comments above)

I also listended to Rodney eade on rsn, also yesterday, and he said that goal to trac was the fault of Dougal who failed to maintain the defensive structure.

Dougal should have been on the last line as the goal keeper, the role omac plays, which is where he started when the ball came in but got sucked to the trac contest (which is why there was 3 saints at that contest - like bees to a honeymoon he said - a familiar refrain for dees fans in the past).

If he had stayed where should have, he would have stopped the goal (and my additional comment would have gathered under no pressure and cleared the area).

Instead he got caught in no man's land and couldn't touch the ball.

I hadn't picked that up. It highlights how important roles and structure are.

Telling that Eade as a coach zeroed in on that aspect of the goal. Didn't even mention the video controversy. 

Can't seem to put the links up from my phone. Will try later from a pc. But they can be found on the rsn website under the program pages (the breakfast club).

 

Very good insight. 

Some takeaways:

- that loose ball gather would have been a contested possession for Dougal, unless he marked it and then it would have been an uncontested possession. Stats can be useless. 

- we could have been in trouble if that happened, with loose saints able to rebound while our defensive zone was out of position (we were swarming forward)

- the value of players like OMac and probably Lockhart, ANB and Spargo, isn't always in what they obviously do (on camera) its in how they hold the team together in those crucial moments. Their continued selection is a balance of whether their positioning discipline out weighs their other deficiencies, with respect to players competing for their spots (Smith, Bennell, Hunt etc. who aren't getting the games). 

- Given the importance of structure in the modern game,  selection must be a nightmare given the reserves are playing 12 on 12, so structure can't be assessed.

 

[Adam The God 30,421]

13 minutes ago, deanox said:

Very good insight. 

Some takeaways:

- that loose ball gather would have been a contested possession for Dougal, unless he marked it and then it would have been an uncontested possession. Stats can be useless. 

- we could have been in trouble if that happened, with loose saints able to rebound while our defensive zone was out of position (we were swarming forward)

- the value of players like OMac and probably Lockhart, ANB and Spargo, isn't always in what they obviously do (on camera) its in how they hold the team together in those crucial moments. Their continued selection is a balance of whether their positioning discipline out weighs their other deficiencies, with respect to players competing for their spots (Smith, Bennell, Hunt etc. who aren't getting the games). 

- Given the importance of structure in the modern game,  selection must be a nightmare given the reserves are playing 12 on 12, so structure can't be assessed.

I'd be keen to hear what people think of how we should have defended that fast break from Sinclair out of the middle at the end of the second. Oscar and May were both sucked up to 20m from goal and they got that easy goal out the back.

If the defenders didn't go with their opponents, the forwards would have had an uncontested mark, so they had to go. Is it just a case of poor defending from Petracca at the centre stoppage that enable Sinclair to run and good early movement from the Saints forwards or was there another way our defenders could have played this given we'd lost the centre clearance so convincingly? 

[binman 43,813]

12 minutes ago, deanox said:

 

- we could have been in trouble if that happened, with loose saints able to rebound while our defensive zone was out of position (we were swarming forward)

- the value of players like OMac and probably Lockhart, ANB and Spargo, isn't always in what they obviously do (on camera) its in how they hold the team together in those crucial moments.

-Their continued selection is a balance of whether their positioning discipline out weighs their other deficiencies, with respect to players competing for their spots (Smith, Bennell, Hunt etc. who aren't getting the games). 

 

Good points. 

On the first point, as you say if Dougal had done his job not only would he have saved what might have been the match winning goal he could have launched an attack that MAY have resulted in a goal (so potentially a two goal turn around, a possibly they win the game).

Yet Eade was the only persons anywhere i read or heard criticize Dougal. Which highlights how little people understand about the importance of structure and role (which is in large part down to the boneheaded coverage of the game - but that's another topic!.)

The second point relates to this lack of understanding  = you are spot on , mots fans and paid football commemorators and journalist simply don't get the importance of playing the assigned role, structure, discipline to not break teams rules (eg 3 players to the tracc contest) etc etc.

And part of the problem is related the points you have made in a number of post about the how rubbish most of the stats are and that most people assess performance though the lens of those rubbish stats. A problem exacerbated by Supercoach and Fantasy football. 

As an example of discipline and playing a role in the structure Oscar took a mark on the last line in i think the last quarter. He was all by himself, so dead easy mark. He then kicked short to a free dees player and we cleared their 50.

Most would not give him any credit for that play, given how easy it was to mark and hit a free target. But most would not credit him for doing the job Dougal failed to do. If he did not keep his assigned shape (a role he plays really well as there are times where has to go to the contest, like the one AF highlighted with Sinclair, or push forward) that goes though for point, they set up defensive wall and try and get a repeat inside 50. And maybe in doing score goal. A goal that would have been Omacs fault. Though ironically few would blame him for it.

The third point is particular relevant for Omac. His deficiencies are pretty evident, and really seem to drive some people nuts hence the dear in the highlights comments that are at odds with the composure he showed in that critical last quarter. But he plays his role. A role Tomlinson clearly couldn't, which is no knock on Thomo i'll hasted to add.

The ability to know when to move forward or go to contest or push back an play the goal keeper role takes skill and judgement. And no small measure of courage because mistakes are exposed and costly.   

[binman 43,813]

30 minutes ago, A F said:

I'd be keen to hear what people think of how we should have defended that fast break from Sinclair out of the middle at the end of the second. Oscar and May were both sucked up to 20m from goal and they got that easy goal out the back.

If the defenders didn't go with their opponents, the forwards would have had an uncontested mark, so they had to go. Is it just a case of poor defending from Petracca at the centre stoppage that enable Sinclair to run and good early movement from the Saints forwards or was there another way our defenders could have played this given we'd lost the centre clearance so convincingly? 

I don't think our defenders did anything wrong, or at least not our bigs. As you say both Omac and may had to go to the contest. It was 2 on 2.

If there was an issue it was that a Hibberd (who might have been off the ground?) or Wagner was not there to crumb, though that it is a bit tough given the speed it came out of the square.

Ironically i think our biggest defensive issue is stopping the medium and small forwards, who score by far most of the opposition's goals not their bigs. I say ironic because it was Marshall (or maybe Ryder?) who crumbed that not a small, but it a typical small or medium forwards goal.

[640MD 3,433]

22 hours ago, Engorged Onion said:

Best thread on here - and loving the fact that is analytical, in depth  and free of personal grievances. 

Just this     totally agree

[Adam The God 30,421]

36 minutes ago, binman said:

I don't think our defenders did anything wrong, or at least not our bigs. As you say both Omac and may had to go to the contest. It was 2 on 2.

If there was an issue it was that a Hibberd (who might have been off the ground?) or Wagner was not there to crumb, though that it is a bit tough given the speed it came out of the square.

Ironically i think our biggest defensive issue is stopping the medium and small forwards, who score by far most of the opposition's goals not their bigs. I say ironic because it was Marshall (or maybe Ryder?) who crumbed that not a small, but it a typical small or medium forwards goal.

Yeah, that one was Marshall's goal. It's very rare we get done out the back, but if the ball comes in quickly from the centre clearance, we have been done out the back a couple of times that way. We probably wouldn't get done this way if it weren't for 6-6-6.

Edited September 2, 2020 by A F

[deanox 9,989]

31 minutes ago, binman said:

Good points. 

On the first point, as you say if Dougal had done his job not only would he have saved what might have been the match winning goal he could have launched an attack that MAY have resulted in a goal (so potentially a two goal turn around, a possibly they win the game).

Yet Eade was the only persons anywhere i read or heard criticize Dougal. Which highlights how little people understand about the importance of structure and role (which is in large part down to the boneheaded coverage of the game - but that's another topic!.)

The second point relates to this lack of understanding  = you are spot on , mots fans and paid football commemorators and journalist simply don't get the importance of playing the assigned role, structure, discipline to not break teams rules (eg 3 players to the tracc contest) etc etc.

And part of the problem is related the points you have made in a number of post about the how rubbish most of the stats are and that most people assess performance though the lens of those rubbish stats. A problem exacerbated by Supercoach and Fantasy football. 

As an example of discipline and playing a role in the structure Oscar took a mark on the last line in i think the last quarter. He was all by himself, so dead easy mark. He then kicked short to a free dees player and we cleared their 50.

Most would not give him any credit for that play, given how easy it was to mark and hit a free target. But most would not credit him for doing the job Dougal failed to do. If he did not keep his assigned shape (a role he plays really well as there are times where has to go to the contest, like the one AF highlighted with Sinclair, or push forward) that goes though for point, they set up defensive wall and try and get a repeat inside 50. And maybe in doing score goal. A goal that would have been Omacs fault. Though ironically few would blame him for it.

The third point is particular relevant for Omac. His deficiencies are pretty evident, and really seem to drive some people nuts hence the dear in the highlights comments that are at odds with the composure he showed in that critical last quarter. But he plays his role. A role Tomlinson clearly couldn't, which is no knock on Thomo i'll hasted to add.

The ability to know when to move forward or go to contest or push back an play the goal keeper role takes skill and judgement. And no small measure of courage because mistakes are exposed and costly.   

I'll go back and have a look at that goal and provide my thoughts, but I'm those breaks it's often that the other defenders or mids don't overlap back into their defensive positions fast enough.

The one on one defenders who are competing do have a subtle job though: slow down the play, without giving away the 50. I've noticed Lockhart do this well a couple of times, bringing down his opponent in the contest so that seconds are lost as they regain their feet. 

 

I've always thought Oscar's strength has been his decision making on whether to hold position or pressure the player/contest. He rarely leaves his position or man and doesn't at least impact the contest (ie doesn't get stuck in between). He may not win that contest he gets too, but the goal is to slow it down so that help can arrive.

When assessing his performance, he isn't great one on one or on a lead. But not many are. And we don't want him to be defending one on one or on a lead. If he is, we've already broken down somewhere else,  so we need to pick him on the requirements of his role, not on Steven May's.

[Grr-owl 1,253]

23 hours ago, binman said:

Agree. Which is why we are not yet a top 4 team. 

To invoke a cliche, it would be about which is the better team on the day, and we aren't that consistently enough.

[Engorged Onion 10,223]

1 hour ago, deanox said:

The ability to know when to move forward or go to contest or push back an play the goal keeper role takes skill and judgement. And no small measure of courage because mistakes are exposed and costly.   

Great acknowledgement there @deanox - the subtleties and nuance of playing your role (vs merely playing on your man, which feels as though you need to think about less) is immense from a cognitive perspective. But also being able to contextualise it to what is happening around you.

Now, I don't subscribe to the fact that one error (or even multiple errors) are indicative of the talent of a player - if structures break down up the field (ie: workrate) - then it makes your job so much harder as there is very little pressure applied to the person delivering the ball.

1 hour ago, deanox said:

And we don't want him to be defending one on one or on a lead. If he is, we've already broken down somewhere else,

As you said here, the problem is essentially if a ball is being delivered easily, it's not the defenders fault, it never was - the fault has already occurred and they're doing their best to remedy it.

 

1 hour ago, deanox said:

The second point relates to this lack of understanding  = you are spot on , mots fans and paid football commemorators and journalist simply don't get the importance of playing the assigned role, structure, discipline to not break teams rules (eg 3 players to the tracc contest) etc etc.

I would give my left (anatomically correct spelling of 'nut') to have some decent tactical commentary when I watch a game, how it is not a legitimate part of calling the game really upsets me. I also understand the need to appeal to the lower denominator who are viewing... making it 'palatable' -but its to the detriment of the knowledge of the broader communities understanding of the mechanics of the game.

I also understand that quite literally in my life time (another 40 years or so hopefully) it will not change.

(which feeds me into my only broad stab here, that the conversation in this thread, the depth and richness ALSO seems to interest only some people, whilst others continue their black and white statements in other threads, and thank gawd for that).

 

Edited September 2, 2020 by Engorged Onion