CHANGES: Rd 18 vs Hawthorn

[binman 37,923]

On all of the above port provided the perfect example of the risks of the traditional model of kicking to the hot zone. Their game plan is built around kicking it to Dixon 20 metres out straight in front.

Which works great against average teams because Dixon marks it more often and if he doesn't they win the front and center ground ball and kick goals.

But against us he barely can take a mark and WE win the ground ball, in the corridor and bounce it out of their back half.

How many crumbing goals did they get?

I can only think of two - amon and rozeee - and neither were from crumbing Dixon,  who i don't think took a mark

Edited July 12, 2021 by binman

[Webber 10,006]

20 minutes ago, binman said:

who i don't think took a mark

He did. Last act of the game. Was touched on the way, but I’m not sure the ump could care. 

[Dwight Schrute 16,749]

No change. 

a positional change i'd consder however is giving Jayden Hunt some stints forward at times, 

[Tricky 337]

3 hours ago, Dwight Schrute said:

No change. 

a positional change i'd consder however is giving Jayden Hunt some stints forward at times, 

Interesting. I do love the way he & Langdon link up on the wing

[Longsufferingnomore 1,463]

57 minutes ago, Tricky said:

Interesting. I do love the way he & Langdon link up on the wing

I keep getting mixed up which is which. Yelling out like a fool for the wrong one. They are so similar although I think Langers is a little smoother in his running and Jaydn  a bit more frantic.  Love them both and so pleased for Jayden how he is playing because at one stage he looked like he wouldn't be at the Club for much longer.

[Tricky 337]

2 minutes ago, longsuffering said:

I keep getting mixed up which is which. Yelling out like a fool for the wrong one. They are so similar although I think Langers is a little smoother in his running and Jaydn  a bit more frantic.  Love them both and so pleased for Jayden how he is playing because at one stage he looked like he wouldn't be at the Club for much longer.

I hear you. I think Jayden might be a tad quicker & taller - unsure about speed. They really add a touch of magic when they get going.  

[Supreme_Demon 3,009]

I would be surprised if there were any changes.

Nevertheless, it would be nice if Jake Bowey was the medical substitute as I am sure he is getting close to earning a senior game for the Demons.

 

[whatwhat say what 18,881]

28 minutes ago, Supreme_Demon said:

I would be surprised if there were any changes.

Nevertheless, it would be nice if Jake Bowey was the medical substitute as I am sure he is getting close to earning a senior game for the Demons.

 

no thanks

the notion of a player 'debuting' in a game where they might not even take the field is a terrible thing to do 

[Fat Tony 4,397]

7 hours ago, binman said:

It does make sense.

It is really important each player sticks to the team rules from the first whistle to the last. Discipline.

Or else at some important juncture a player goes of script and we lose an important contest.

And in your scenario who makes the call to kick to the hot zone? Presumably the kicker. How do his teamates know he is not going to follow team rules?

The only way for it to work is for some sort of signal , and then practising it, which would waste their time.

And they clearly don't want unpredictability. A tenet of the game plan is predictable ball movement. Like kicking it to the pocket.

Repetition builds predictability, not random off script plays.

Another tenet is percentage play. Kicking to the hotspot is low percentage. Sure we might score more often (with that specific kick), might being the operative word.

We want to trap the ball inside our forward half and get repeat entries

But very few pack marks get taken these days and so the likelihood is that the ball hits the deck.

If it does and is won by the opposition they win it in the corridor it makes it super hard for us to defend the next kick as the field is open.

And so conversely much easier for them to transition out of their back half as it is impossible to cover the whole ground with a zone

But a contest in the pocket that is not marked might go over the boundary line. So we then reset. Tick.

And if they win the ground ball their only safe option is a pressured kicked down the line. Where we have pressed up, mark/intercept and go back inside 50. Because we know that's where it is likely to go and CAN cover that space.

If they decide they are sick of kicking it back to us down the line their other options - eg cross or try to hit a target in the corridor- are super risky and if turned over highly likely to concede a score.

A great example was kossies first goal where we had pressed up, book tried to hit a man 20 odd metres away rather than kick down the line, missed it and after the ball was in dispute fritter tapped to kossie who goaled from just inside 50.

On percentages we we will score more often, and concede less coast to coast goals by sticking to the plan. 

Not sexy, a little boring perhaps, but smart.

And sticking to tbe plan at all times will help us win finals.

. 

 

 

Binman, do you think the percentages change enough in our favour to kick it to the hot spot when Max is in the forward line? I think they probably do and we should be a bit bolder with our entry if he is there.

The Salem goal versus GWS was something I would like to see more of from us. We went from the wing on a 45-degree angle with two 30m kicks. The risk of going from the wing to CHF with a long kick is high, so going in with two shorter 45-degree kicks is a better strategy. I also think the opposition should know by now that we are 95% going long into the pocket from the wing, so there should be a few holes inboard as they fold back to the pocket and so mixing it up a bit makes sense.

The other option to mix it up is to do a full switch from the wing across the middle of the ground, which we never do on a slow play. This is clearly not a percentage play unless we have someone 100% on.

[mauriesy 6,787]

2 hours ago, longsuffering said:

I keep getting mixed up which is which. Yelling out like a fool for the wrong one. They are so similar although I think Langers is a little smoother in his running and Jaydn  a bit more frantic.  Love them both and so pleased for Jayden how he is playing because at one stage he looked like he wouldn't be at the Club for much longer.

One's number 15 and one's number 29. ?

[daisycutter 28,484]

can't see any changes this week.....barring any mystery injury of the week

[bing181 8,163]

Maybe Melksham for Neil-Bullen? Melksham has been consistently decent and "a class above" at VFL level for a while now, while ANB is probably the least effective of the forwards. Equally, we'd lose some tackling intensity, but perhaps it's something they'd consider.

At some point soon the selectors will be looking at bedding down the team to take us into/through the finals - is ANB in that team over Melksham (or Jones)?

Similar conversation perhaps re VDB - he'd bring more pressure and agression than ANB, though he's a long way behind Melksham as a disposer.

Yes I know, Melksham is a frustrating player, or has been over the past couple of seasons.

[Deecisive 1,651]

no change, I dont see anyone breaking down the door to play, until they do, keep the side the same

[DubDee 20,525]

Hawks are missing: Wingard, Scrimshaw, Jaith, Impey, Day, Gunston, Sicily, Hardwick

Hawks by 2 goals

[Older demon 2,166]

No changes but if the weather prediction is correct it will be cold and wet. Leave changes for the Darwin excursion the week after.

[picket fence 15,097]

10 hours ago, Older demon said:

No changes but if the weather prediction is correct it will be cold and wet. Leave changes for the Darwin excursion the week after.

So we play in Antarctica one week and the Sahara Desert next !sounds promising!

Edited July 13, 2021 by picket fence

[Diamond_Jim 11,727]

16 hours ago, bing181 said:

Maybe Melksham for Neil-Bullen? Melksham has been consistently decent and "a class above" at VFL level for a while now, while ANB is probably the least effective of the forwards. Equally, we'd lose some tackling intensity, but perhaps it's something they'd consider.

At some point soon the selectors will be looking at bedding down the team to take us into/through the finals - is ANB in that team over Melksham (or Jones)?

Similar conversation perhaps re VDB - he'd bring more pressure and agression than ANB, though he's a long way behind Melksham as a disposer.

Yes I know, Melksham is a frustrating player, or has been over the past couple of seasons.

was wondering the same and you can throw in Jones.

On the who goes out you could put in Harmes as well.

Time also to perhaps consider goal kicking accuracy in selection. It's one of our biggest weaknesses.

[Jaded No More 57,771]

12 hours ago, DubDee said:

Hawks are missing: Wingard, Scrimshaw, Jaith, Impey, Day, Gunston, Sicily, Hardwick

Hawks by 2 goals

Nothing surer! 

[binman 37,923]

17 hours ago, Fat Tony said:

Binman, do you think the percentages change enough in our favour to kick it to the hot spot when Max is in the forward line? I think they probably do and we should be a bit bolder with our entry if he is there.

 

Max has played forward enough this year to provide enough evidence of how Goody, Yze etc assesses those percentages.

And on that evidence the answer is no, the percentages don't change enough in our favour to kick it to the hot spot, because they don't' do so even when max is there.

Which make sense because even with max there statistically we do not take many contested marks inside 50.

The percentages might even favor a kick to the pocket because with max there there is an increased chance that the ball will be at least brought to ground, which is what we want and are set up for. 

On that, if a defender spoils a marking attempt in the the pocket it would almost never be hit toward the corridor. The first option is hitting it towards the boundary, or if that is not possible at least no worse than directly in from to the pack. Again this is predicable and we can practice it.

And when the ball hits the ground in that scenario, it is the defence that is under most pressure. Even the best defenders can panic a bit and try and hack kick it out, or give away a free to one of our smalls. The free and goal Spargo got against Port was the perfect example of the benefits of our system. 

I reckon one of the strengths of our back six (and helpers like Langdon and Gus) is that they don't often panic. They are quite comfortable working it to a  player under less pressure with handballs to work their way out of the defensive 50 and avoid a dump kick.

But when that is not possible they are also ok with the dump kick because they are confident of winning the next contest, or if they don't, getting back into shape quickly to protect the re entry kick 

[deelusions from afar 1,608]

17 hours ago, bing181 said:

Maybe Melksham for Neil-Bullen? Melksham has been consistently decent and "a class above" at VFL level for a while now, while ANB is probably the least effective of the forwards. Equally, we'd lose some tackling intensity, but perhaps it's something they'd consider.

At some point soon the selectors will be looking at bedding down the team to take us into/through the finals - is ANB in that team over Melksham (or Jones)?

Similar conversation perhaps re VDB - he'd bring more pressure and agression than ANB, though he's a long way behind Melksham as a disposer.

Yes I know, Melksham is a frustrating player, or has been over the past couple of seasons.

Would be very surprised to see ANB dropped for someone like Melksham.  If you listen to how Goody and the other coaches / players talk, its all about playing your role and sacrificing for them team.  ANB is critical to our forward line and overall structure due to his ability to run at high speeds all day.  While Melksham might be a better player with ball in hand, each would have the ball less than 5% of the total game time - so the pressuring, running etc is more important.  Particularly with BBB in the side.

I would love to see the 2018 Melksham in this side - but from what we've seen, either he's no longer able to play at this level or the game / game plan has changed.  Would love to be proven wrong but would be very surprised if ANB is on the chopping block unless its for someone who can match his running and pressure.

[Demon17 4,541]

On 7/13/2021 at 10:29 AM, Dwight Schrute said:

No change. 

a positional change i'd consder however is giving Jayden Hunt some stints forward at times, 

Hunt should stay back.  Its where he can use his speed, he links with Langdon, but has no tricks as a forward (see GWS errrors).

As Jack Dyer used to say "...ratbags to the backline.." Not that Hunts a ratbag - just not a success as a forward.

[Dwight Schrute 16,749]

Just now, Demon17 said:

Hunt should stay back.  Its where he can use his speed, he links with Langdon, but has no tricks as a forward (see GWS errrors).

As Jack Dyer used to say "...ratbags to the backline.." Not that Hunts a ratbag - just not a success as a forward.

I definitely see Hunt as a half back, but i think he also as we saw last year, can offer us a different look up forward in short bursts. i think it could be a weapon come finals time

[Fat Tony 4,397]

46 minutes ago, binman said:

Max has played forward enough this year to provide enough evidence of how Goody, Yze etc assesses those percentages.

And on that evidence the answer is no, the percentages don't change enough in our favour to kick it to the hot spot, because they don't' do so even when max is there.

Which make sense because even with max there statistically we do not take many contested marks inside 50.

The percentages might even favor a kick to the pocket because with max there there is an increased chance that the ball will be at least brought to ground, which is what we want and are set up for. 

On that, if a defender spoils a marking attempt in the the pocket it would almost never be hit toward the corridor. The first option is hitting it towards the boundary, or if that is not possible at least no worse than directly in from to the pack. Again this is predicable and we can practice it.

And when the ball hits the ground in that scenario, it is the defence that is under most pressure. Even the best defenders can panic a bit and try and hack kick it out, or give away a free to one of our smalls. The free and goal Spargo got against Port was the perfect example of the benefits of our system. 

I reckon one of the strengths of our back six (and helpers like Langdon and Gus) is that they don't often panic. They are quite comfortable working it to a  player under less pressure with handballs to work their way out of the defensive 50 and avoid a dump kick.

But when that is not possible they are also ok with the dump kick because they are confident of winning the next contest, or if they don't, getting back into shape quickly to protect the re entry kick 

Thanks for the detailed reply.

I would argue we that we have rarely ever gone to the hot spot with a congested forward 50, so it has not really been tested this year . I am sure it has in previous years though, which is when the percentages were developed.

The other question is if we will persist with the same tactics if we go behind. Against GWS and Collingwood we abandoned the game plan in Q4 and in both games we got a bit lost with our tactics. It would be good to have a few games in the back end of the year which are not close (preferably winning by a lot) and we look to be a bit more attacking. We don't want to go behind in a final and not know what to do.

[The heart beats true 16,086]

Out: Crowds? Wonder what the government will do given today’s numbers in Vic.

[WalkingCivilWar 31,342]

I just heard on the news that the MCG is now an exposure site. It seems to be related to the Geelong vs. Carlton match. I can’t find anything online to this effect so I hope I’ve misheard.