16 minutes ago, Little Goffy said:

I'm currently working on a personal side-project (which might one day become a book) where I'm going through all the classics of military theory and collecting the notes and quotes which may be of interest from a football perspective.  It has been a very interesting ride with a slightly surprisingly huge amount of content on cultivating behaviours, understanding the hearts of men, the nature of courage and panic, all that.

There's also, of course, an awful lot on using tactics to take the initiative in a battle or at campaign level.

In all of that, one thing I've never, ever come across is an endorsement of a tactic which allows your opponent to not have to worry about dealing with a counter-attack. Multiple authors have gone into quite angry rants about the psychological death that comes from having troops deployed in a strictly defensive posture. It is often described as the product of cowardice and (in various terms) groupthink on the part of officers and senior commanders who can only think in terms of simple risk and who are intimidated by the danger to their reputation if they attempt something bold and it fails.  Doing the same as everyone else incurs little reputational risk even when it does fail.

I think Australian football has very much fallen into that trap when it comes to pressing all the numbers back to defence and leaving a vacated forward line.

For this example the situation is precisely the same in football as in the military theory; having a force deployed in a way that can threaten multiple crucial enemy positions compels the enemy to protect ALL of the various positions that force might attack, thus forcing them to distribute both garrison forces to provide delaying strength as well as an 'observation' force at least as strong as your offensive force, ready to respond.

The analogy to football is pretty clear; if you have one or two forwards stay 'home' even when the ball is up the other end of the ground, the opposition then has to consider the full range of places those forwards might become a threat. Got a CHF in position? Are they going to lead out to provide a connection? In the corridor, on the wings? Are they going to lurk around the 50m line ready to provide a short lead marking target or to suddenly break towards goal to run onto the long bomb to space over their head? Even on that simple level of consideration, that one forward has just forced the opposition defence to actively consider about a hectare of the field as under threat. A second forward doesn't expand the range as much but it also makes planning that defence even more complicated.

Key is - your opponents MUST respond, or they would just be giving away goals every time you broke out of defence.

#letforwardsbeforwards !!!

 

Agree completely. If Ben Brown stands in the goalsquare, it would take a very, very confident defender to be anywhere else other than within 20m of him. The modern game can allow the ball to transition from end to end in under 15 seconds, that doesn't give someone a lot of time to react to get back to the opponent, as well as keeping an eye on where the ball will be coming from.

Leaves some space in the opposition zone too.

 

 

Great topic ? 

With brown coming in - can someone with a good understanding of the game (I’ve come to the right place right!) help me understand why a stay at home forward role is no longer employed or no longer possible in the modern game.

2 hours ago, Rusty Nails said:

Possibly yes.  That would be also due to the retirement of Boomer and the falling away of Goldy's around the ground dominance as he aged IMV.

Goldstein has played more minutes this year than Max. Just sayin..

21 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

Great topic ? 

With brown coming in - can someone with a good understanding of the game (I’ve come to the right place right!) help me understand why a stay at home forward role is no longer employed or no longer possible in the modern game.

I think that Little Goffy mentioned this on page 1 in a militaristic scenario by having a couple of forwards stay back in the forward line it puts pressure on opposing defenders to try and protect space in the event of a rapid counter attack from our defenders and mid fielders and I agree you need to utilise every strategy in the arsenal, sow doubt and uncertainty in the oppositions mindset.

Surely we have to leave two forwards inside 50 when the ball is between the arcs, or the front edge of the centre square when in our D50?

53 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Goldstein has played more minutes this year than Max. Just sayin..

Yes i was just making the point that he is not the same Goldy we were seeing two to three years or so ago Jnr

1 hour ago, Engorged Onion said:

Great topic ? 

With brown coming in - can someone with a good understanding of the game (I’ve come to the right place right!) help me understand why a stay at home forward role is no longer employed or no longer possible in the modern game.

Unfortunately the game has changed too much for the deep stay home forward out of the goal square to come back any time soon. It's mostly due to defensive structures. Most teams play a zone defense these days meaning they defend space as well as their man. Having a forward stay deep is problematic as most of the time opposition either play an extra defender or have a defender zone off their man to fill the hole between the key forward and the play up field. You would see many more two on one's if the strategy was to play someone predominantly deep. It's too predictable. The only time you see genuine one on ones in the forward half is usually off a turnover causing a transition where the deepest forward (about 50m mark on average) pushes hard enough back before the opposition get back to set up the zone (or you catch defenders ball watching/napping)

May and Lever are so successful because they play predominantly inside forward 50 and zone off their men so well. Hence why opposition are now trying to pull them out and make them more accountable away from their forward 50 where they eat up intercepts.

Edited July 7, 20213 yr by Yung Blood

On 7/7/2021 at 11:31 AM, CYB said:

Problem with this is that neither Weid or Brown are renowned for their body work and contested marking. In fact i would go as far and say that is a major flaw in their game. If we do play them deep and stretch the oppositions defensive structure we inevitably create space in the forward line for our forwards to run and lead into - this a strength of both Brown & Weid. If we chip kick and move the ball slow, the defense floods back and we are often bombing into an outnumbered contest. We are also turnover kings when we try to put speed on the ball. It ultimately boils down to knowing when to go full pelt vs slow and deliberate and having the forward connection in the sense that the forwards are on the same page as the midfield so that they can adjust positioning and leading patterns. When we get it right, it looks beautiful and we have that seamless transition. 

What did I say? It worked pretty good last exactly what I said 

Something I didn't fully appreciate until last night's game: Pickett can kick 50m snaps off a couple of steps in traffic.

Twice in a game is ridiculous and it is enough of a weapon that it could affect how we and our opponents plan.

Welcome back, Kozzie.

2 hours ago, Deemac said:

What did I say? It worked pretty good last exactly what I said 

BBB did better than i thought in contested marking. But he was one-on-one in most of the situations i can recall- a few of them were lead up contested marks.

THe major diff last night was our quicker and more precise ball movement and connection in forward 50. We still did the odd bomb here and there (Oliver, Viney) and that does nobody any favours. There was one play where we want the centre clearance and kicked to a leading TMac -> Goal. That inside 50 delivery was much much better. Our best ball users rarely find that much time and space forward of centre - maybe something else that needs a bit of thinking from the coaches as the Doggies seem to do this with ease. 

48 minutes ago, Little Goffy said:

Something I didn't fully appreciate until last night's game: Pickett can kick 50m snaps off a couple of steps in traffic.

Twice in a game is ridiculous and it is enough of a weapon that it could affect how we and our opponents plan.

Welcome back, Kozzie.

But it remains a mystery why he can't do that for set shots.

By getting the Weid to do more than being just a forward is going to give him more confidence . His current lack of form is in his head. I could see him making a recall in 3 weeks time.

Forward line defensive pressure is the key ... apart from this year, when have we ever consistently displayed that feature of the modern game?

Structurally we're ok up forward but not great.  But we don't have to be great

Pound for pound our forward line personell isn't A grade but as long as our talls are involved in the game deep forward, around the arc and up around the attacking wing, we give ourselves a chance

But the real pressure comes from the small forwards combined with our midfield pushing & pressing up

Often leads to the rushed kick from the opposition landing in the hands of our 3rd line of defence (Salem, Brayshaw, Rivers, Hunt etc) 

Then May, Lever, Petty & Hibberd as the back 4

We are going to be hard to beat as long as we can maintain the disciplines that we've put in place ... shy away from all that and even the lesser lights can knock us off

Edited July 9, 20213 yr by Macca

18 hours ago, sue said:

But it remains a mystery why he can't do that for set shots.

Like many players, he prefers kicking for goal in free play where the rigid construct of the front on shot for goal is not an inherent action. He tries to get some momentum into the approach in his set shot to mimic a more natural action but it can be to no avail or success.

What? How he fixes it? 

Dunno. 

Practice makes perfect.

 

On 7/9/2021 at 2:23 PM, Little Goffy said:

Something I didn't fully appreciate until last night's game: Pickett can kick 50m snaps off a couple of steps in traffic.

Twice in a game is ridiculous and it is enough of a weapon that it could affect how we and our opponents plan.

Welcome back, Kozzie.

There has been discussion above regarding a “conventional stay home “ and why it isn't a part of the modern game.

Just speculating, would it be worth trying Kozzie as an isolated forward even when the ball is deep into our back line?   A quick long over their heads forward kick to Kozzie one on one with any defender would be a nightmare.  Sort of a “Pagan’s paddock” scenario.  Jackson with his athleticism could also be worth a run in this scenario.  No defender is likely to run off either player. 

Edited July 16, 20213 yr by monoccular

1 hour ago, monoccular said:

There has been discussion above regarding a “conventional stay home “ and why it isn't a part of the modern game.

Just speculating, would it be worth trying Kozzie as an isolated forward even when the ball is deep into our back line?   A quick long over their heads forward kick to Kozzie one on one with any defender would be a nightmare.  Sort of a “Pagan’s paddock” scenario.  Jackson with his athleticism could also be worth a run in this scenario.  No defender is likely to run off either player. 

I just gave myself permission to imagine a few years from now when Pickett and Jackson have the experience and preseasons to go with their initiative and talent.

Terrifying.