Game plans, tactics and all that jazz

[Its Time for Another 4,051]

56 minutes ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

Good footy comes with confidence, confidence comes from winning and winning comes from method. We've seen 2 wins with good method. Keep that up and the confidence will come and then we'll see more of the good clean footy you want.

Good point. I don't know if anyone else feels the same way but I thought in the second half after fighting back from that Saints run on you could palpably see a growing confidence in the collective body language. It felt to me like they were thinking hey this game plan we've worked on over the summer is actually working. We can do this. The play seemed to reflect what you're saying the longer the game went on. I have a feeling that second half is a lot more significant than we realise.  

[binman 37,791]

16 hours ago, It's Time said:

I don't see how wanting to score from clearances means you win less clearances. Could you explain your thinking there.

 

I think your stats partly answered this question IT, as does part of AOBs post

Set ups for clearances that are more likely to create scoring chances can often be a set up that gives us less chance of actually winning that clearance.

The very first center bounce of the game against the Saint's is a great example.

if the objective was to win that clearance Kossie would not have started in the centre and two players might have gone to the contest.

Instead one player did (i think Viney?), won it, fed it out to kossie who handballed to Oliver who had gone to the goal side of the contest, some 10 metres away, who then fed it back to Viney, who could run inside 50 and kick a goal.  

That aggressive clearance set up increased the chance of creating a scoring opportunity from that stoppage. But conversely reduced the likelihood we would win it. 

In 2019 Viney and Oliver would have gone to the contest, won it but not be able to spread it so well (one reason being one less player to give it to) and often the player who received the ball was on the defensive side of the contest and then would get tackled 

Edited March 31, 2021 by binman

[Axis of Bob 10,168]

53 minutes ago, binman said:

Set ups for clearances that are more likely to create scoring chances can often be a set up that gives us less chance of actually winning that clearance.

The other way to think about this is that you can set up your team to win clearances by throwing an extra 4 forwards into the stoppage. Eventually opposition defenders will stop following them in and instead will just camp out behind the stoppage and any clearance won will result in a kick to a 5 on 2 situation. By adding extra numbers to the stoppage you increase your ability to win the clearance but you may reduce your ability to score from it.

[binman 37,791]

6 hours ago, NeveroddoreveN said:

Great last few posts!

Have noticed something that we are doing quite differently this year so far.

Maybe the new rules have something to do with it but there seems to be a concerted effort to take tacklers on, then get it through the contest to someone who is free.  In previous years we see the tackle coming and generally a panic disposal ensued which resulted in a turnover or quite often at best another stoppage.

We are playing to our strengths of backing in contested ball winners to take more accountability, and draw the tackle or break it.  

Just a small part of our game that really stood out to me. Will continue to watch us with interest as we continue to evolve and add layers to what seems a much more balanced overall game plan.

That's a really interesting observation.

I reckon you're right. In part it might be related to a having a stronger more seasoned team. But perhaps also a conscious decision to take on the tackle more.

Tracc, viney and Oliver do so regularly now. Tracc and viney are both beasts.

But the best example was Jones near the end of the third.

Took butler on 30 from their goal, risking a sure goal. Instead started a scoring chain that resulted in fritters goal. A goal I reckon that sealed the win.

[Its Time for Another 4,051]

1 hour ago, binman said:

I think your stats partly answered this question IT, as does part of AOBs post

Set ups for clearances that are more likely to create scoring chances can often be a set up that gives us less chance of actually winning that clearance.

The very first center bounce of the game against the Saint's is a great example.

if the objective was to win that clearance Kossie would not have started in the centre and two players might have gone to the contest.

Instead one player did (i think Viney?), won it, fed it out to kossie who handballed to Oliver who had gone to the goal side of the contest, some 10 metres away, who then fed it back to Viney, who could run inside 50 and kick a goal.  

That aggressive clearance set up increased the chance of creating a scoring opportunity from that stoppage. But conversely reduced the likelihood we would win it. 

In 2019 Viney and Oliver would have gone to the contest, won it but not be able to spread it so well (one reason being one less player to give it to) and often the player who received the ball was on the defensive side of the contest and then would get tackled 

 

44 minutes ago, Axis of Bob said:

The other way to think about this is that you can set up your team to win clearances by throwing an extra 4 forwards into the stoppage. Eventually opposition defenders will stop following them in and instead will just camp out behind the stoppage and any clearance won will result in a kick to a 5 on 2 situation. By adding extra numbers to the stoppage you increase your ability to win the clearance but you may reduce your ability to score from it.

Thanks for both these explanations. I thought that was what you were getting at.

It's probably a matter of semantics but I don't think with the dominance created by Gawn and our midfield beasts that there would ever be a plan to lose a stoppage. I think your example of that first centre bounce is possibly more a demonstration of a better game plan on how to clear the ball from a clearance to the outside instead of having too many players inside and none in an effective place outside which is what has been happening the past couple of years.  The Doggies are masters of setting up outside clearances. The irony is that we were losing clearances with more players at the ball than we are with a better structure. From my observation so far this season the players are setting up better away from the ball so they are better at defending the first kick away from the clearance and also better at being in a position to receive the clearance in attack if we win it.  

[binman 37,791]

To be clear I'm not saying they would ever plan to lose a clearance.

Its just that it is no longer priority one. 

And they are backing their mids to win their fair share of clearances with fewer players at the contest, sometimes just one.

And for maxy to sometimes hit it to spots that only give us say a 50 50 chance of winning the clearance as opposed to say 70-30.

Bottom line is we were winning clearances and inside 50s against good teams. And getting beaten.

[Binmans PA 25,897]

On 3/30/2021 at 4:14 PM, binman said:

Funny you should ask that binman. I was wondering the same thing. Here are my thoughts on that question:

 

From Goody's first two seasons we have made some pretty big tactical changes to way we play the game.

In some respects some of the fundamentals have changed.

For example winning clearances is not as an important indicator/focus as it was in 2018 and 2019.

To be clear clearances are still important - just not central to our game plan. If i was to put a figure on it i reckon the club would be happy to end the year on break even in clearance differential as opposed to being say plus three in 2018

And some fundamentals have not changed - for example winning contested ball remains critical.

The tactical shift commenced in 2019, when we took the opportunity of a lost season to introduce tempo footy (which also helped mitigate the risk of demoralising thrashings), something we took into 2020, and was on display in both our two games this season.

In 2020, particularly the second half of the season, we moved away from being a stoppage and clearance based team first and foremost to a team :

• that has shifted the dial to trying to win pure clearances that result in scoring opportunities - even though in doing so we 'lose' more clearances than we have historically done
• when we 'lose' clearances we put the ball carrier under pressure, force a poor kick or handball and look to create a  turnover from HB that we can counter attack from and set up scoring chains
• that is now all about intercept marks (Cameron will  now be sweating on how to prevent  Lever and May having field day)

This tactical shift has been really evident this year.

As evidence of this shift we have had different mixes in our center square set ups - eg Kossie starting each quarter there, Jordon playing as a mid (unlike the bulls, most of his possessions are uncontested), Nibbler and Harmes  (they used Melksham this way too last the end of last year).     

Another example is letting one player try and win the contested ball (instead of multiple players at the contest) and having players on the outside to receive if they do win it - which if it is Viney, Trac or Oliver is more often than not the case.

Jordon, Spargo and Kossie have all been great this year being that outside the contest receiver, as was Salem on the weekend.

Another shift, albeit a less dramatic one, is we are now all about territory. I guess we always have been - and in some ways it was key to our tactics in 2018 - but territory is a kpi again. Get it forward. The difference between now and 2018 is that we are prepared to give ground to make ground now. 

All of the above speaks to a team that is evolving tactically and contradicts the erroneous narrative that Goody as coach has not evolved.

I also think it speaks to some of our challenges - these sort of big tactical shifts can't be easy to implement and some players will find it harder than others to change. I wonder if brayshaw is one such example.

On Gus, he better learn how to adapt because his future at the dees is on the wing. With our new way of playing the very last thing we need is another inside bull.   

 

Good post mate.

I think the biggest change has finally been in the uncontested possession area. It's long hamstrung us when we've come up against good outside teams, but I suspect a combination of mental maturity, fitness and experience is starting to shift the dial on this part of our game.

Given we have multiple guys that can rack up possessions in a contested situation, complimenting this with a greater uncontested focus I think makes us much harder to beat. And as you say, less of this bees to the honeypot stuff means we can defend territory and stoppage better. I hope Yze really continues to work hard on this area of our game.

As for Gus, I think there'll be injuries this year that open the door for him as a pure mid, but in the meantime, I'm comfortable with where he is at and what he can offer on the outside. He's also had a year of playing wing, albeit a bit of a struggle last year. Good players learn though and I like the positions he takes up off the back of stoppages. They provide both cover and offence.

My premiership favourite is the Bulldogs. Their midfield is simply awesome. It bats deeper than ours but I think we have a stronger potential list across the rest of the ground with at least two A grade midfielders too. The Eagles and Port might be thereabouts again, but the Bulldogs and Richmond are the teams to beat IMO. On our day I think we could beat any of them.

It'll be interesting to see whether we can get everything to click this year, if we do, I think we'll wipe a few sides off the park.  

[dworship 3,342]

12 minutes ago, A F said:

Good post mate.

I think the biggest change has finally been in the uncontested possession area. It's long hamstrung us when we've come up against good outside teams, but I suspect a combination of mental maturity, fitness and experience is starting to shift the dial on this part of our game.

Given we have multiple guys that can rack up possessions in a contested situation, complimenting this with a greater uncontested focus I think makes us much harder to beat. And as you say, less of this bees to the honeypot stuff means we can defend territory and stoppage better. I hope Yze really continues to work hard on this area of our game.

As for Gus, I think there'll be injuries this year that open the door for him as a pure mid, but in the meantime, I'm comfortable with where he is at and what he can offer on the outside. He's also had a year of playing wing, albeit a bit of a struggle last year. Good players learn though and I like the positions he takes up off the back of stoppages. They provide both cover and offence.

My premiership favourite is the Bulldogs. Their midfield is simply awesome. It bats deeper than ours but I think we have a stronger potential list across the rest of the ground with at least two A grade midfielders too. The Eagles and Port might be thereabouts again, but the Bulldogs and Richmond are the teams to beat IMO. On our day I think we could beat any of them.

It'll be interesting to see whether we can get everything to click this year, if we do, I think we'll wipe a few sides off the park.  

This is a bit I've really noticed more in the practice matches and the first two real games. The separation and holding of width has been evident. It's why I wasn't as harsh on Baker as some here as he performed the role and kept his width and was only drawn to the contest when it was necessary. What augers well is the whole team now playing to the plan. Now if we can just stop the occasional 4 defenders all flying for the high ball I will be very happy.

[Binmans PA 25,897]

9 hours ago, Axis of Bob said:

Some interesting discussion about stoppages, which has been a theme since we were dominant here in 2018. A few interesting things from the weekend:

This is a typical stoppage from the weekend.

Notice that we are playing one short in here, with the extra player being Sinclair on the far right. His counter, Salem, is sitting 30 metres defensive side of the contest (left of screen). We lose this clearance, but the the ball is just dumped straight to Salem who launches a counterattack. 

We leveled the clearances on the weekend but that only tells part of the story. We are committing our resources away from the stoppages because we've got such talent in there. We are diverting it from stoppages and into a structure behind the ball, minimising the danger of any lost clearances. Effectively we are saying that one of our lost clearances is kicking to a defensive outnumber for us, but any won clearance goes forward to an even contest for us. 

This is what a gameplan that maximises our strengths looks like. We've been talking about our gun inside players cannibalising each other's possessions and clearances, but this game plan actually maximises the value we get from two of the best contested ball winners in the league (Oliver and Viney), even if they'll actually have fewer clearances because of it, and also having Max. 

The plan is in several parts:
1- We go into a stoppage with a numerical disadvantage but superior behind the stoppage.
2- Max can direct the ball away from the spare players in the stoppage and to where we have 50/50 numbers, so that the impact of the opposition extra numbers in the stoppage is lessened.
3- Oliver/Viney/Trac can win a lot of these clearances now and get it forward to 50/50 contests. But if the extra numbers win out, we have defensive cover.

Max is a big part of this because, whilst getting a clean tap to advantage is really hard, having a big dominant ruck advantage means that we can direct the area of the stoppage that the clearance battle will take place in (ie, where we have even numbers). For instance, in the above stoppage, Max directed the ball front left, which gave Oliver, Petracca and Langdon a fair go at it before the extra opposition numbers can arrive.

The end result of this is that we play a pretty distinctive style of game. We're in the middle of the pack league wide for most statistics but we are currently first in intercepts (quite comfortably) and first in intercept differential (by an absolute mile). Check out the intercept differential below:

So we intercept the ball 11.5 times more than our opponents every game. If we can stay in the ballpark with clearances then we're getting a massive advantage. 

Often the biggest strengths of a team are used counter-intuitively because that's where you get the most incremental value. I think about it in terms of the late 2000s premiership teams, Sydney, West Coast, Geelong and Hawthorn. Sydney and Hawthorn both had their strengths in their forward line. Barry Hall, Micky O, Goodes .... Buddy, Roughy. Both those teams played defensive game styles, with Sydney crowding stoppages and Hawthorn employing a very aggressive defensive zone to cover their defensive weakness (Croad and Brichall, then later threw Hodge in as cover, whilst Sydney had Bolton and Barry, who were both undersized). Conversely, Geelong and West Coast had very strong defences (Scarlett, Enright, Mackie, Milburn, Harley etc, and Glass, Wirrpanda, Banfield, Waters) but comparatively weak forward lines (Mooney and N Ablett as keys, and Hansen and Hunter as keys), so they played very aggressive, creative and expansive game styles so make it easier for their less talented forward to score (although they still had Stevie J!).

You can solve your weaknesses with numbers but you can back your best players to win contests if given a sniff. Like Richmond does with Riewoldt, Lynch and Dusty up forward, who have to fight against extra numbers but they'll win enough of them to kick you a score, whilst they throw extra number behind the ball to cover their less talented defenders. 

Unlike previous years, we aren't doubling down on our big midfielders to smash the opposition in clearances every week, we are backing in their ability to win difficult contests and committing our numbers outside the contests where we are weaker. Our mids must be respected, but our ability to commit numbers outside is making it easier for us to defend but also making it easier for our less formidable forwards to kick goals. 

We evened the clearances last week, which is a great effort when we go into each stoppage outnumbered. If we split the clearances with the opposition this year then that will be a massive win for us.

I'm very happy with how our game style has looked over the first two weeks. 

This is an absolute ripper of a post, but without sounding like a sycophant, I expect it now from you, Bob.

If this analysis is right, we've completely reversed our 2018 formula, which was to have an extra at the stoppage (the sliders) and sometimes even two extras off the back stoppages ala 2017. Given the elite contested talent we have in there, it's a genius move, particularly as it gives us 1 v 1s forward of the contest.

[binman 37,791]

40 minutes ago, A F said:

This is an absolute ripper of a post, but without sounding like a sycophant, I expect it now from you, Bob.

If this analysis is right, we've completely reversed our 2018 formula, which was to have an extra at the stoppage (the sliders) and sometimes even two extras off the back stoppages ala 2017. Given the elite contested talent we have in there, it's a genius move, particularly as it gives us 1 v 1s forward of the contest.

I think an important element is that tracc, Oliver and viney are all close to their prime years as players. 

All are excellent inside, contested ball winners but are physically stronger than two years ago, particularly tracc who is dangerfield strong now.

All 3 have become very difficult to beat in a contested ball situation and as Aob so astutely noted you can take that to the bank and reduce players at rhe contest.

I said last night on the podcast that I questioned drafting jordon on the basis I thought he was another inside mid.

But that is not how they are playing him. I was amazed to see of his 20 possessions, 18 were uncontested. 

I am also amazed how good he is.

I was thinking petty was the only young,  potential A grader who didn't play last year to come into the side.

But jj looks as if he is 100 game veteran. Not flashy, but high footy iq, neat skills and makes great decisions. A natural. Giving him 23 was genius.

Edited March 31, 2021 by binman

[Binmans PA 25,897]

19 minutes ago, binman said:

I think an important element is that tracc, Oliver and viney are all close to their prime years as players. 

All are excellent inside, contested ball winners but are physically stronger than two years ago, particularly tracc who is dangerfield strong now.

All 3 have become very difficult to beat in a contested ball situation and as Aob so astutely noted you can take that to the bank and reduce players at rhe contest.

I said last night that I questioned drafting jordon on the basis I thought he was another inside mid.

But that is not how they are playing him. I was amazed to see of his 20 possessions, 18 were uncontested. 

I am also amazed how good he is.

I was thinking petty was the only young,  potential A grader who didn't play last year to come into the side.

But jj looks as if he is 100 game veteran. Not flashy, but high footy iq, neat skills and makes great decisions. A natural. Giving him 23 was genius.

Jordon played off half back for CGS/Oakleigh, so not surprised he's being used in a similar outside role. But it shows the potential evolution of an outside player in the modern game with his tackle numbers. It's not just about cheap possessions. It's about defending and then peeling off when your ball winners win it at stoppage.

[CHF 2,585]

Two simple elements I noticed from the Saints game. Generally there was one player committed to the contest with a single backup just on the defensive side. The player in the contest worked hard with a number of additional efforts at the contest. This was across all areas of the ground.

The other thing I noticed was that at center restarts our players are not engaging in close contact with the opposition as much as they have done in the past. in some cases they are standing 2m off and are well in motion prior to the tap. It was a marked difference from our setup in Round 1.

[Binmans PA 25,897]

33 minutes ago, CHF said:

Two simple elements I noticed from the Saints game. Generally there was one player committed to the contest with a single backup just on the defensive side. The player in the contest worked hard with a number of additional efforts at the contest. This was across all areas of the ground.

The other thing I noticed was that at center restarts our players are not engaging in close contact with the opposition as much as they have done in the past. in some cases they are standing 2m off and are well in motion prior to the tap. It was a marked difference from our setup in Round 1.

I noticed Oliver was the one often starting 5m wider with his opponent. It's brilliant, because his acceleration through the contest is elite. Not only does it give him greater separation at the stoppage (5m off the ball there'll be less tugging of jumpers), it allows him to enter it or stay on the outside and receive.

[binman 37,791]

Just now, A F said:

I noticed Oliver was the one often starting 5m wider with his opponent. It's brilliant, because his acceleration through the contest is elite. Not only does it give him greater separation at the stoppage (5m off the ball there'll be less tugging of jumpers), it allows him to enter it or stay on the outside and receive.

Good points. He is so dangerous hitting contests at pace.

And on Saturday many of kicks inside 50 were flatter  - and much more dangerous as a result given how much quickly it comes in.

Playing him that way does two related challenges for the opposition.

One I reckon it creates a headache in terms of how to guard him/limit his impact. Can tag him but that won't stop him hitting the contest at pace.

And two any efforts to block or impede him become really obvious, meaning he might start winning some deserved frees.

Closer to the contest he is constantly scragged and held - and rarely protected by the umps.

[Engorged Onion 9,239]

17 minutes ago, binman said:

 

Closer to the contest he is constantly scragged and held - and rarely protected by the umps.

It's strange that the media have always downplayed or invalidated Oliver. From 'taking a dive' as a 19yo or preferencing Cripps, it has always astounded me the treatment that Oliver receives as a midfielder both from the umpires, and the limited recognition from the media due to his statistics. He's not a dirty player, he backs up game after game after game...

It can't just be as he plays for Melbourne - because the counterpoint to that would be the adulation of Pickett.

Edited March 31, 2021 by Engorged Onion

[dworship 3,342]

5 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

It's strange that the media have always downplayed or invalidated Oliver. From 'taking a dive' as a 19yo or preferencing Cripps, it has always astounded me the treatment that Oliver receives as a midfielder both from the umpires, and the limited recognition from the media due to his statistics. He's not a dirty player, he backs up game after game after game...

It can't just be as he plays for Melbourne - because the counterpoint to that would be the adulation of Pickett.

It would be wise not to get me started on the media.... or umpires for that matter.

[Binmans PA 25,897]

46 minutes ago, binman said:

Good points. He is so dangerous hitting contests at pace.

And on Saturday many of kicks inside 50 were flatter  - and much more dangerous as a result given how much quickly it comes in.

Playing him that way does two related challenges for the opposition.

One I reckon it creates a headache in terms of how to guard him/limit his impact. Can tag him but that won't stop him hitting the contest at pace.

And two any efforts to block or impede him become really obvious, meaning he might start winning some deserved frees.

Closer to the contest he is constantly scragged and held - and rarely protected by the umps.

Yep, my thinking also mate.

[Binmans PA 25,897]

29 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

It's strange that the media have always downplayed or invalidated Oliver. From 'taking a dive' as a 19yo or preferencing Cripps, it has always astounded me the treatment that Oliver receives as a midfielder both from the umpires, and the limited recognition from the media due to his statistics. He's not a dirty player, he backs up game after game after game...

It can't just be as he plays for Melbourne - because the counterpoint to that would be the adulation of Pickett.

It's very Sam Mitchell. He's always reminded me of Mitchell in the way that he plays and for years, Mitchell was overlooked until he started winning premierships. I hope the same thing will happen with Clarry at Melbourne.

[RedBlueandTrue 217]

This thread should be password protected, bet Leon is secretly trawling through right now. Such insightful analysis, thanks all! 

[deelusions from afar 1,608]

2 hours ago, CHF said:

Two simple elements I noticed from the Saints game. Generally there was one player committed to the contest with a single backup just on the defensive side. The player in the contest worked hard with a number of additional efforts at the contest. This was across all areas of the ground.

The other thing I noticed was that at center restarts our players are not engaging in close contact with the opposition as much as they have done in the past. in some cases they are standing 2m off and are well in motion prior to the tap. It was a marked difference from our setup in Round 1.

Good pickups - the first one was noticeably different from the Freo game where they opened us a couple of times when they won the clearance.  Potentially this could also be to the fact that Freo's midfielders are better at the clearance than St Kildas.

[deelusions from afar 1,608]

1 hour ago, Engorged Onion said:

It's strange that the media have always downplayed or invalidated Oliver. From 'taking a dive' as a 19yo or preferencing Cripps, it has always astounded me the treatment that Oliver receives as a midfielder both from the umpires, and the limited recognition from the media due to his statistics. He's not a dirty player, he backs up game after game after game...

It can't just be as he plays for Melbourne - because the counterpoint to that would be the adulation of Pickett.

Genuinely think it's because he's a ranga.  

[Axis of Bob 10,168]

14 hours ago, A F said:

 

My premiership favourite is the Bulldogs. Their midfield is simply awesome. It bats deeper than ours but I think we have a stronger potential list across the rest of the ground with at least two A grade midfielders too. The Eagles and Port might be thereabouts again, but the Bulldogs and Richmond are the teams to beat IMO. On our day I think we could beat any of them.

Funnily enough I've been thinking about the Dogs. I'm trying to work out how good they actually are.

Their best 6 players (Caleb Daniel aside) all play the same role in the team (Bont, Macrae, Libba, Dunkley, Treloar and Smith), which is different to pretty much every other team. They monopolise the ball with all their mids and they often flood the stoppages with numbers, making it difficult to get the ball out cleanly. Then they pretty much just have those midfielders follow the ball around everywhere as they try to make it a midfield slog. But if the ball gets out and away from their midfield then they just don't have the talent around the ground, especially aerially. We saw that in the final last year, where they dominated the inside 50s but then struggled to contain any reasonable St Kilda forward entry, They conceded 20+ contested marks in a shortened game, and are conceding 18.5 a game already this season, which is easily the worst. So it looks like they're doubling down on last year's game. I just worry that they're spending so many of their resources in an overpowering midfield that they're going to get diminishing returns as they eat each other's lunch.

[binman 37,791]

3 hours ago, Axis of Bob said:

Funnily enough I've been thinking about the Dogs. I'm trying to work out how good they actually are.

Their best 6 players (Caleb Daniel aside) all play the same role in the team (Bont, Macrae, Libba, Dunkley, Treloar and Smith), which is different to pretty much every other team. They monopolise the ball with all their mids and they often flood the stoppages with numbers, making it difficult to get the ball out cleanly. Then they pretty much just have those midfielders follow the ball around everywhere as they try to make it a midfield slog. But if the ball gets out and away from their midfield then they just don't have the talent around the ground, especially aerially. We saw that in the final last year, where they dominated the inside 50s but then struggled to contain any reasonable St Kilda forward entry, They conceded 20+ contested marks in a shortened game, and are conceding 18.5 a game already this season, which is easily the worst. So it looks like they're doubling down on last year's game. I just worry that they're spending so many of their resources in an overpowering midfield that they're going to get diminishing returns as they eat each other's lunch.

From a tactical perspective the dogs are really interesting I reckon.  Of all the clubs their model is the most different from the tigers territory, forward half, high pressure template. 

The dogs like a fast game that is based on speed of  ball movement, aggressive transition from the back half and above all (fast) precise transition that involves lots of super quick, high risk handballs/throws and kicks (as opposed to the dees and tigers who of course will link up when there is a clear option to do so, but otherwise will kick for territory - which makes players like Kozzie and Spargo critical in terms of winning the ground ball).

Super exciting to watch with lots of complex scoring chains, high risk kicks, incredible amount of in close handballs/throws and bullet passes to leading forwards. 

Clearly they have recruited to support this model and as result the ace in the pack for the dogs is how many excellent kicks they have. And leaving aside how often they throw the ball they are brilliant at in close handballs and moving the ball by hand

When they have the game on their terms they are going to very hard to beat.

The challenge for them I reckon is when the game is not on their terms.

The tigers are obviously the benchmark - and we have adopted many elements of their game plan. One example is going into tempo mode at different points in games, as we did so effectively against  bot the dockers and Saints when they were pressing to stop their momentum and/or suck time out of the clock.

Tempo footy really disrupts the dogs, in large part because it stops the game being played on their terms. The dogs eagles game was fascinating from this perspective as both teams wrestled to get their game on their terms. Great game.

Th other query about the dogs game is how well their model holds up under finals pressure. 

The other team with a different tactical model is the Saints, who like the dog's rely on fast ball movement and transition, but are much more reliant on switching across the ground to get around zones (the dogs  likes to switch too but are more than happy to go straight through a zone, or down the corridor).

The Saints model is weaker I reckon. As the dees showed if you can stop their switch the Saints really struggle on transition. We did that brilliantly last Saturday night and it all but took their medium forwards and runners out of the game as they had no space ahead of them or to lead into. 

Edited April 1, 2021 by binman

[NeveroddoreveN 1,034]

On one of the footy shows on Fox last night they highlighted the differences between Collingwood in Round 1 and 2.

They completely changed their style simply by looking forward and not looking wide for switches, and looked much more cohesive and damaging.  They did not do anything too drastic just a resolve from the whole group to look for forward options.  It was noticeable they did not look left or right in much of their ball movement.

Would expect with rule changes, many teams are going to be altering their styles and tinkering until they find what really works.

Sydney is the one that most surprises imo.   Was expecting them to be somewhere in bottom 4.  They are suddenly playing an attacking brand i doubt any of us have seen under a Longmire coached team, they are exciting to watch.  They have some great young players but their style is barely recongnisable  from previous years. 

Adelaide also looking like a team suddenly ready to compete again, after a few years in the wilderness.

There are not going to be many easy games this year. GWS & Essendon look like they may fight it out for wooden spoon currently.

Should be a lot of teams contending for top 8.  Going to be a great season of footy!

[fr_ap 2,136]

14 hours ago, deelusions from afar said:

Genuinely think it's because he's a ranga.  

It's three things:

-The way he looks - not just a ranga but a rough sort with a shocking hair cut

-General likeability impacted by a range of diving type incidents (in the west and then against Carlton at the G) and his lack of interest in any sort of public speaking that tows the line; and

-his relatively messy style of play at times

The first two being the most important in footys popularity stakes. If he looked like Heeney or Cripps they'd be all over him like a rash.

Majority of fans and media still sleeping on him as a result - been an absolutely phenomenal player from day 1, has fronted up every week since and has a very rare combination of attributes not many in the league possess. There's no one I'd switch him out of our team for, with the exception of Bont and Dusty and if we're projecting forward, perhaps Bailey Smith. The comparison has always been with Cripps but Clarry wins ball with speed, nous and balance not pure muscle & size. Cripps is more effective forward as he has the frame of Wayne Carey; they're very different players. I know who I prefer.

Edited April 1, 2021 by fr_ap