13 hours ago, fr_ap said:

We are now a turnover & transition team that can on it's day, win contest and clearance. But we don't have to. See GC17. 

 

13 hours ago, fr_ap said:

-Deliberately conceding outnumbers at centre clearances (our wings no longer tuck in - even if their opponents join the centre to handball receive, ours rarely follow), stoppage clearances and drop of ball, in so doing training our clearance players (across a broader player cohort) to deal with outnumber situations and punch above their weight whilst also leaving other players open for effective turnover scoring, as we've shown so far

-Relying on our defensive strength, 1v1 ability and nature to limit the impact of conceded clearances on the scoreboard (this is risk/reward - Essendon the example of how it looks when our defenders aren't up to the task) 

This is a great post. I just want to highlight these sections.

I think we've read the tea leaves over the summer and set ourselves up to beat Collingwood's method, rather than anyone else's. Because, as you say, our system relies on winning 1 v 2s or even 1 v 3s or breaking even, or at the very least applying enough post clearance pressure to make the clearance a scrubby clearance that gives our defenders a chance.

Given the +2 to stoppage from Collingwood, if our mids (two of them are certainly top 5-10 mids in the game) can win the stoppage, the players we'll have on the outside to capitalise on this, should lead to scores, particularly given how deadly accurate we've been on turnover.

Collingwood leak goals a bit anyway, but with our mids, we seem to be set up to beat them without adjusting +2 at the contest.

I wouldn't be surprised if we don't even run someone specifically on Daicos on KB and just go head to head with him. I'd be inclined to actually send someone to Daicos in the second half (unless he turns it on significantly in the first). It'd be a great 'in game' experiment and mean that one player doesn't have to run with him the whole game.

Edited May 10, 20232 yr by A F

 

14 hours ago, fr_ap said:

We are now a turnover & transition team that can on it's day, win contest and clearance. But we don't have to. See GC17. 

I wonder if part of the thinking of Petty forward is gaining more run (extra small) from the back half to help on the turnover/transition.

Fantastic post, thanks for all the quality insight guys, I'm a stats dope and would never have noticed this sort of thing.

Edited May 10, 20232 yr by AzzKikA

1 hour ago, A F said:

 

This is a great post. I just want to highlight these sections.

I think we've read the tea leaves over the summer and set ourselves up to beat Collingwood's method, rather than anyone else's. Because, as you say, our system relies on winning 1 v 2s or even 1 v 3s or breaking even, or at the very least applying enough post clearance pressure to make the clearance a scrubby clearance that gives our defenders a chance.

Given the +2 to stoppage from Collingwood, if our mids (two of them are certainly top 5-10 mids in the game) can win the stoppage, the players we'll have on the outside to capitalise on this, should lead to scores, particularly given how deadly accurate we've been on turnover.

Collingwood leak goals a bit anyway, but with our mids, we seem to be set up to beat them without adjusting +2 at the contest.

I wouldn't be surprised if we don't even run someone specifically on Daicos on KB and just go head to head with him. I'd be inclined to actually send someone to Daicos in the second half (unless he turns it on significantly in the first). It'd be a great 'in game' experiment and mean that one player doesn't have to run with him the whole game.

On Sunday it looked like the Swans had Clarke running with him in open play but handing off at stoppage.

His run and carry was not what it usually is and I could see a scenario like this especially when Daicos heads into the middle. 

This has been really interesting and heartwarming to read.  BUUUUT...

for mine we are too early in the season to get a proper gauge.  In my view we got the dogs at the best time.   We've beaten Sydney but they are not the team they were last year.  We lost to Essendon and Bris - everyone drops some but who have we beaten really?  I rate the suns (up there) but it will be an uphill battle for them making the finals.

Of course we're kicking more goals and different ways - we're not playing the contenders.

But they're coming up over the next 6-7 rounds.  

 

2 hours ago, A F said:

 

This is a great post. I just want to highlight these sections.

I think we've read the tea leaves over the summer and set ourselves up to beat Collingwood's method, rather than anyone else's. Because, as you say, our system relies on winning 1 v 2s or even 1 v 3s or breaking even, or at the very least applying enough post clearance pressure to make the clearance a scrubby clearance that gives our defenders a chance.

Given the +2 to stoppage from Collingwood, if our mids (two of them are certainly top 5-10 mids in the game) can win the stoppage, the players we'll have on the outside to capitalise on this, should lead to scores, particularly given how deadly accurate we've been on turnover.

Collingwood leak goals a bit anyway, but with our mids, we seem to be set up to beat them without adjusting +2 at the contest.

I wouldn't be surprised if we don't even run someone specifically on Daicos on KB and just go head to head with him. I'd be inclined to actually send someone to Daicos in the second half (unless he turns it on significantly in the first). It'd be a great 'in game' experiment and mean that one player doesn't have to run with him the whole game.

Pretty sure they'll experiment for some ideas going into finals. But you don't want to disclose all of your weapons this early.

2 hours ago, A F said:

 

This is a great post. I just want to highlight these sections.

I think we've read the tea leaves over the summer and set ourselves up to beat Collingwood's method, rather than anyone else's. Because, as you say, our system relies on winning 1 v 2s or even 1 v 3s or breaking even, or at the very least applying enough post clearance pressure to make the clearance a scrubby clearance that gives our defenders a chance.

Given the +2 to stoppage from Collingwood, if our mids (two of them are certainly top 5-10 mids in the game) can win the stoppage, the players we'll have on the outside to capitalise on this, should lead to scores, particularly given how deadly accurate we've been on turnover.

Collingwood leak goals a bit anyway, but with our mids, we seem to be set up to beat them without adjusting +2 at the contest.

I wouldn't be surprised if we don't even run someone specifically on Daicos on KB and just go head to head with him. I'd be inclined to actually send someone to Daicos in the second half (unless he turns it on significantly in the first). It'd be a great 'in game' experiment and mean that one player doesn't have to run with him the whole game.

I would be holding a few things back from our up coming KB and Feral Park contests to be honest. A fair chunk of our Pre Season would have been dedicated to stopping and exploiting two teams and their method Cats and Pies.

Hit them with whatever strategies we have been working on most during our Pre Season in a final when they don't have time to Prepare or adjust.

e.g Match ups, stoppage structures, tags on certain players, players in different positions, less reliance on Clarry, Tracc and JV7 in the guts i.e Petty as a Forward etc.

To his credit Simon has been changing things up and learning different aspects to our play.

Whether it be three talls, floating rucks into our forward line or a smaller forward line set up we seem to have a few more structured set ups going forward.

 

37 minutes ago, YesitwasaWin4theAges said:

To his credit Simon has been changing things up and learning different aspects to our play.

Yet others would see this as being unsettled - whilst also having no Plan B...

4 hours ago, YesitwasaWin4theAges said:

I would be holding a few things back from our up coming KB and Feral Park contests to be honest. A fair chunk of our Pre Season would have been dedicated to stopping and exploiting two teams and their method Cats and Pies.

Hit them with whatever strategies we have been working on most during our Pre Season in a final when they don't have time to Prepare or adjust.

e.g Match ups, stoppage structures, tags on certain players, players in different positions, less reliance on Clarry, Tracc and JV7 in the guts i.e Petty as a Forward etc.

To his credit Simon has been changing things up and learning different aspects to our play.

Whether it be three talls, floating rucks into our forward line or a smaller forward line set up we seem to have a few more structured set ups going forward.

 

I think we want to fire our best shot in these games against Collingwood and Geelong this is the time to see if it works, and if it does - have them worrying about how to combat us while we can come up with more innovation for finals.

2 hours ago, old55 said:

I think we want to fire our best shot in these games against Collingwood and Geelong this is the time to see if it works, and if it does - have them worrying about how to combat us while we can come up with more innovation for finals.

Yep, you don't want to be experimenting when it comes to the finals. Well, at least not knowing whether it works or not.

2 hours ago, old55 said:

I think we want to fire our best shot in these games against Collingwood and Geelong this is the time to see if it works, and if it does - have them worrying about how to combat us while we can come up with more innovation for finals.

Interesting to think about the season in this way. 
Bit of cat and mouse strategy. Appropriate, maybe even a tad too much risk in certain games but it’s the risk you take to discover your strengths or weaknesses early on in the conquest.

It must be a very satisfying role at the club to be the ‘oppo analyst’ and help the coaches choose line ups, match ups and certain styles of play to adopt for other clubs. 

10 hours ago, deelusions from afar said:

This has been really interesting and heartwarming to read.  BUUUUT...

for mine we are too early in the season to get a proper gauge.  In my view we got the dogs at the best time.   We've beaten Sydney but they are not the team they were last year.  We lost to Essendon and Bris - everyone drops some but who have we beaten really?  I rate the suns (up there) but it will be an uphill battle for them making the finals.

Of course we're kicking more goals and different ways - we're not playing the contenders.

But they're coming up over the next 6-7 rounds.  

 

What made Round 1 the "best time" to get the Dogs?

Sydney in Round 3 were as close to full strength as they've been all year. 

11 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

What made Round 1 the "best time" to get the Dogs?

Sydney in Round 3 were as close to full strength as they've been all year. 

Dogs round 1 were believing in the 4-headed forward monster (Naughton, UH, Lobb and Darcy).  I don't think it's been tried since.  They also were missing all their small crumbing forwards.  I'm not saying we wouldn't beat the dogs if we played now... but I think they have made a few structural  personnel changes which have improved them.

Sydney round 3 was arguably our best win of the year... but due to their subsequent injuries they haven't really got going and now look to be facing an uphill battle to make the 8.  They've only got 3 wins (Rich, GC and Haw).  They may still get it together, but they don't seem close to the side they were last year.  

The ladder is still sorting itself  out but against the top 10, we are 1 W and 2 L (As a point of comparison the pies against the same top 10 are 5 W and 1 L).  That's ok - we've got plenty of room to improve and premierships are not won in May... but I think we have to be careful reading too much into these stats when we haven't played (m)any teams of note in 2023. 

53 minutes ago, deelusions from afar said:

Dogs round 1 were believing in the 4-headed forward monster (Naughton, UH, Lobb and Darcy).  I don't think it's been tried since.  They also were missing all their small crumbing forwards.  I'm not saying we wouldn't beat the dogs if we played now... but I think they have made a few structural  personnel changes which have improved them.

Sydney round 3 was arguably our best win of the year... but due to their subsequent injuries they haven't really got going and now look to be facing an uphill battle to make the 8.  They've only got 3 wins (Rich, GC and Haw).  They may still get it together, but they don't seem close to the side they were last year.  

The ladder is still sorting itself  out but against the top 10, we are 1 W and 2 L (As a point of comparison the pies against the same top 10 are 5 W and 1 L).  That's ok - we've got plenty of room to improve and premierships are not won in May... but I think we have to be careful reading too much into these stats when we haven't played (m)any teams of note in 2023. 

Yep we have some tough games coming up and it will really give us a better barometer of how we compare. I dothink the ammount of travel we have done has been a factor. Qland twice, Perth once and Adelaide once. Also both our back and forward lines have never really had the chance to fully settle due to injuries. The Port game in ten days will be very interesting and I'm hoping we make another statement this round like we did against North but with Jvr out its a concern.

not good enuff?

 

Thanks for all your amazing insights guys, there’s definitely some very interesting ways to look at it.

Cant wait to see what we do when we play Collingwood, and what tactics we use against them.

Personally I think we will get them this time as they leave their backs wide open for the turnover.

On 5/7/2023 at 3:37 PM, needafullback said:

reckon our rucks should often just belt the ball forward, allowing our mids to swarm in that direction, Clark Keating

Max is more likely to do this but I have noticed that Grundy is much better at tapping it to someone. I actually think he may be better at rucking than Max even if he doesn't seem to get as high in the air. I'm also surprised at Grundy's  ball use at ground level. And speed of hands. He just needs to work on his marking. In fact this has been an issue for a few. GCS out marked us by a big margin.

30 minutes ago, leave it to deever said:

Max is more likely to do this but I have noticed that Grundy is much better at tapping it to someone. I actually think he may be better at rucking than Max even if he doesn't seem to get as high in the air. I'm also surprised at Grundy's  ball use at ground level. And speed of hands. He just needs to work on his marking. In fact this has been an issue for a few. GCS out marked us by a big margin.

As a pure 'palmer downerer' of the ball I think Grundy just shades Gawn, especially when it comes to putting the right amount of weight on it, but that's just one facet of tap work of course. 

Edited May 11, 20232 yr by layzie

3 hours ago, layzie said:

As a pure 'palmer downerer' of the ball I think Grundy just shades Gawn, especially when it comes to putting the right amount of weight on it, but that's just one facet of tap work of course. 

I find Grundy just taps it straight down to the ground on a lot of occasions.

6 minutes ago, AzzKikA said:

I find Grundy just taps it straight down to the ground on a lot of occasions.

have noticed that as well..

2 hours ago, AzzKikA said:

I find Grundy just taps it straight down to the ground on a lot of occasions.

This is actually something I like about his taps, doesn't work all the time but quite often he'll put a nice tap to grass and to our mids' advantage to run onto. 

The answer to question in tbe op can be divined in the ga.e being played right now grass hopper.

End of quarter one.

The reigning premiers are smashing the lowly tigers in clearances - 10 up in fact. That's a big differential after only one quarter.

The tigers are 18 points up.

Being a turnover team and winning clearances don’t have to be mutually exclusive.

Out clearances are poor, we are often flat-footed around stoppages which is why a player like Noah Anderson who is quick off the mark destroyed us last week.

We literally won the 2021 Grand Final because we fixed our clearances in the third quarter, it’s extremely important.

I’ve seen so many random midfield combos this year from us that I think we are genuinely taking the [censored] sometimes. When push comes to shove you’ll see Gawn, Clarry, Trac and Viney do 90% of the centre clearance work and you’ll see us win or at least break even in most of them. 

This year has been the most mid rotations I’ve seen us use under Goodwin. 
Trac is playing forward way more and Clarry is on the bench more often than ever. As is Viney. Gawn spends half the game at FF.

This is not how things will pan out in September. But doing this now means that come September I’m not watching our best midfield combo limping on the field barely able to give a yelp like last year. 

Edited May 14, 20232 yr by Jaded No More

1 hour ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Being a turnover team and winning clearances don’t have to be mutually exclusive.

Out clearances are poor, we are often flat-footed around stoppages which is why a player like Noah Anderson who is quick off the mark destroyed us last week.

We literally won the 2021 Grand Final because we fixed our clearances in the third quarter, it’s extremely important.

No one has said they are mutually exclusive. The point is we don't have to rely on them and we're still in the top 4 for scores from clearances.

And the GF is in September. We're in Round 9. Plenty of time to experiment and still win by 9 goals.