Robbo's solution to stopping the Demons.

Is it time to tag Petracca, Oliver and Langdon?

It’s radical because clubs generally don’t like running with a single tag or stoppage “cooler”, but it might take something radical to disrupt the all-conquering Demons. Because on Sunday Christian Petracca, Clayton Oliver and Ed Langdon had 39, 38 and 36 disposals. The week before it was 33, 31 and nine (when Langdon was tagged). The week before that it was 41, 25 and 30. St Kilda pitted its system against Melbourne’s system and failed. They will need to adjust. Does every team need to adjust and try something different because you seriously can’t expect to win when Oliver Petracca and Landon each have 35-plus disposals. How could a three-way cooling process work? The obvious answer from coaches is it won’t because their “system” won’t allow it, but as we speak, there’s not a system without taggers threatening the Demons. So, why not be radical? It’s time to explore and maybe the Saints will do that next time they meet. On Sunday, Oliver and Petracca didn’t have a direct opponent and Langdon played mainly on Daniel McKenzie. That surely has to change.

I tend to agree.  Coaches these days are reluctant to tag,.  Intead they back their zone defence to do the job, but a zone defence is not the same as someone constanttly pushing, shoving and getting in your way.  

LMFAO!! Wow, Robbos football knowledge knows no depths. So only one attacking mid at any stoppage, with Viney, Sparrow and Harmes for company. Only one attacking wing and you’re playing the best Defense in the comp. Yeah, Melbourne would be really scared, not to mention our ruck’s ability to get clearance themselves, and Trac and Clarry’s ability to break tackles and get the ball out from contested situations to our advantage. I hope a team tries this.

I have a theory that Melbourne nearly prefer opposition to have the ball.

 

Obviously that's ridiculous but they are so comfortable in their roles without the ball that's it's like the default. The attacking is far less structured.

 

I'm not sure how you beat a team that is most comfortable without the ball 🤷🏽‍♂️

It would just mean that other players would stand up. There is no way all 3 could be hard tagged all day. 
 

back to sleep Slobbo

4 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

There is no way all 3 could be hard tagged all day.

Three tags is probably over the top but why not tag Oliver and Petracca and play a sixteen man zone defence?

Edited May 9, 20223 yr by one_demon

Last year it was why doesn't anyone tag Salem!!  Recently it was a tag on May.  Now it is tag Langdon as well as Petracca and Oliver.  We could easily add Gus. Where do they stop tagging; they can't tag the whole team!!

Its a defeatist game to tag these guys just as it is defeatist to play defensive against us from the get go.  Defensiveness won't win a team the game. 

Given the idea is to win rather than minimise the loss, the most successful strategy so far is attack and attack through the corridor.  But we know how to shut that down so it can't be sustained for 4 quarters.

We need to have a bad day for another team to win.

Just now, one_demon said:

Three tags is probably over the top but why not tag Oliver and Petracca and play a sixteen man zone defence?

When that was tried earlier this year Sparrow, Brayshaw and iirc Bowey had a field day. 

Stop one and someone else steps up.

I'd be stunned if we hadn't already war-gamed multiple tags.

Robinson being ridiculous again. How many clubs would have 3 midfield taggers who could match it with Petracca, Oliver and Langdon.

How Robbo has managed to reach the levels he has in the AFL media is one of life's great mysteries.

Edited May 9, 20223 yr by Bates Mate

17 minutes ago, one_demon said:

Three tags is probably over the top but why not tag Oliver and Petracca and play a sixteen man zone defence?

16 free players on the opposition?

it would be an interesting excercise 

Can see Goody getting a hard tag too on the bench soon.

I’ve often thought that the best way to beat us is to almost be over the top physical, to get players to focus on push and shove instead our gameplan

Why not tag all our players. That way have a chance of a nil all draw. It's better than a loss

and this is why he is the dumbest person in football, does not think it through just blurts out crap.

Clubs have tried tagging Oliver...it doesn't work.

He's the best contested ball winner in the game for a reason.

At the moment we are the the team we are because we play a whole team system where there are no weaknesses or gaps and where all 22 players contribute to the system.

If any one player is down or tagged then the others step up to compensate. Unlike some pretenders, we are not a one, two or even three man team, we are a 22 man team so that tagging alone cannot defeat us.

Except for occasional days "off" when we lose the thread, the only way to beat us is to have a team of 22 players playing a better system. So far I have not seen this.

GO GOODY GO DEES

Robbo's plan could equally be called play "man-on-man" instead of zone defence. It won't work because our 22 men, overall, will be better than any opponent's best 22.

Teams would be better off to go a full ground hard man on man structure rather than just tagging 3 guys. Not sure if any other teams have the fitness, but it'd be a better bet than removing 3 of their own mids to at best break even but then leave the rest of their mids against Viney, Harmes, Brayshaw etc. 

Do you think we will ever get a better analysis from our media than "player X had Y possessions and that means they played well"?

1 minute ago, Red and Blue realist said:

Teams would be better off to go a full ground hard man on man structure rather than just tagging 3 guys. Not sure if any other teams have the fitness, but it'd be a better bet than removing 3 of their own mids to at best break even but then leave the rest of their mids against Viney, Harmes, Brayshaw etc. 

The idea in theory could work but these days the way teams set up defensively is important to create opportunities offensively. What I mean by that is manning up across the ground is a defensive strategy that involves your whole game being dictated by the opposition. When we turn the ball over where are players positioned on the opposition to make the offensive transition? The modern game requires knowing when you win the ball back in certain areas of the ground that there is an outlet available in parts A/B/C of the ground. Zoning defenses allows greater structure and system when winning the ball back (as evident in our game). Younger teams with less experience will suffer most in this area if this structure is broken.

Apart from St.Kilda being incredibly slack defensively most of the game and being too safe for large parts of the game with ball in hand/playing too slow. They were actually alright when they changed the angles. They simply lacked polish to transition the ball with some of the higher risks they were taking.

Team's like Freo and Brisbane will be much better transitioning the ball with speed to really challenge us. Looking forward to the challenge!

Tagging Ed is quite a commitment with his ability to cover ground being the best in the comp. There's not quite enough evidence that it dramatically upsets our game plan (GF Ed was pretty ineffective as a big example). Traditionally wing's don't really get a hard tag. Having Ed loose as he was on the weekend certainly isn't ideal as it makes out game so much easier. So its a bigger conundrum for coaches than a simple tag. 

It makes sense to tag Langdon between the 50m arcs because that's where he's most damaging. But Robbo needs to realise that Oliver and Petracca are generally manned up at stoppages, but their talent is in winning stoppages. Add Viney to the mix as well.

If we win the stoppages, we dominate time in our forward 50, and we have time to set up our defensive structures. And we generally win stoppages with fewer numbers around the ball. 

Back to the drawing board Robbo.

 

i don't understand why nobody at the hun tags slobbo. 

his top drawer must be overflowing with some tasty pics

50 minutes ago, Young Blood said:

The idea in theory could work but these days the way teams set up defensively is important to create opportunities offensively. What I mean by that is manning up across the ground is a defensive strategy that involves your whole game being dictated by the opposition. When we turn the ball over where are players positioned on the opposition to make the offensive transition? The modern game requires knowing when you win the ball back in certain areas of the ground that there is an outlet available in parts A/B/C of the ground. Zoning defenses allows greater structure and system when winning the ball back (as evident in our game). Younger teams with less experience will suffer most in this area if this structure is broken.

Was going to say something very similar.

The defensive structures team employ are the launch pad for their offense. Whilst the chaos of tagging 3 players could disrupt us momentarily, our system would still overwhelm the opposition quite quickly because they have 3 less offensive contributors.

Man on man across the ground could be an approach to try, although I don't think too many blokes can defend well individually these days