'Dump kicks into the 50'

[DemonBlack 12]

Has anyone else noticed that our team's game style consist mainly of 'dump kicks' into the forward 50, without any consideration to a forward structure. Its all good to lock it in our forward half but for a low return for scoring options. We look better with space than having the whole opposition team in there, guys like kossi can use their speed more effectively.

[Timothy Reddan-A'Blew 5,074]

3 hours ago, DemonBlack said:

Has anyone else noticed that our team's game style consist mainly of 'dump kicks' into the forward 50, without any consideration to a forward structure. Its all good to lock it in our forward half but for a low return for scoring options. We look better with space than having the whole opposition team in there, guys like kossi can use their speed more effectively.

Sometimes I think that's all anyone notices, DB 😄

[RedLegs23 923]

Yeah old news DB. But im actually starting to think that it's the forwards that are having a major play on this.

The footy IQ of our front half is real average... & that's probably being polite.

I'm talking footy craft, & as a foward.

Movement.

As a forward you have to dictate the play. You have to direct the kicker where to go. Doesn't give the kicker many other alternatives but to dump kick it long if our fowards are all running back towards goal saying kick it here.

Lloyd, Hawkins, Reiwoldt (Jack)... could go on & on.

Start leading to the footy!

& just for a moment, imagine this team with the front half of the Daniher era...

[rjay 24,887]

6 minutes ago, RedLegs23 said:

imagine this team with the front half of the Daniher era...

You might just have the answer here...

We don't have the front half of the Daniher era, not even close.

So we need to manufacture something different.

...and to a degree it works.

We are sitting 4th with the 2nd highest %

The art of coaching is to use what you have in the best possible way.

I know it can be frustrating for us fans but it's still only June.

Let's see the finished product.

Maybe Goody can coach.

[Rednblueriseing 824]

7 hours ago, RedLegs23 said:

Yeah old news DB. But im actually starting to think that it's the forwards that are having a major play on this.

The footy IQ of our front half is real average... & that's probably being polite.

I'm talking footy craft, & as a foward.

Movement.

As a forward you have to dictate the play. You have to direct the kicker where to go. Doesn't give the kicker many other alternatives but to dump kick it long if our fowards are all running back towards goal saying kick it here.

Lloyd, Hawkins, Reiwoldt (Jack)... could go on & on.

Start leading to the footy!

& just for a moment, imagine this team with the front half of the Daniher era...

The amount of times I've noticed the ball in our possession and no forwards moving to create options or even drag a defender to make space is unbelievable, surely that's not what the coach has asked. We end up kicking to out numbered forward hoping for a contested mark 

[Jonathan Steffanoni 101]

8 hours ago, RedLegs23 said:

Yeah old news DB. But im actually starting to think that it's the forwards that are having a major play on this.

The footy IQ of our front half is real average... & that's probably being polite.

I'm talking footy craft, & as a foward.

Movement.

As a forward you have to dictate the play. You have to direct the kicker where to go. Doesn't give the kicker many other alternatives but to dump kick it long if our fowards are all running back towards goal saying kick it here.

Lloyd, Hawkins, Reiwoldt (Jack)... could go on & on.

Start leading to the footy!

& just for a moment, imagine this team with the front half of the Daniher era...

This is true to a certain extent… but, leading requires space to move into. Our system sees a lot of forward pressure and therefore sees a lot of bodies inside F50.

I wonder whether the tumble punt could be an interesting addition if forwards simply play in front. It’s unexpected and doesn’t allow defenders a clean attack at the ball.

[monoccular 17,413]

2 minutes ago, Jonathan Steffanoni said:

This is true to a certain extent… but, leading requires space to move into. Our system sees a lot of forward pressure and therefore sees a lot of bodies inside F50.

I wonder whether the tumble punt could be an interesting addition if forwards simply play in front. It’s unexpected and doesn’t allow defenders a clean attack at the ball.

Surely, if not actually leading in the traditional Lockett / Dunstall sense, spreading rather than clustering, with the kick into whatever space there is, is a better option than the bomb to the pack?

[george_on_the_outer 7,579]

The way teams enter the forward line has changed, particularly this year.  And no doubt it is all about statistical outcomes.

We were training for "dump kicks" back in pre-season, and most of the teams at the top of the ladder now play the same way.

The chances of a "contested mark" in the forward line with zone defences is next to zero.  Clubs are depending on a deep kick into the forward line to create ground spillage and a 50:50 chance of getting the ball.  Even better with good crumbing forwards like Pickett, Papley etc. 

Clubs will have done the numbers in terms of goal output.  The argument that we should "lower the eyes" is also now irrelevant because of zone defences.  It rarely happens to have a forward with space to lead into, and if they do it is almost always deep in a pocket = poor goal conversion.

For fans it isn't as spectacular as the big forward taking marks, it's just how the game is played in 2023.

[layzie 33,752]

12 minutes ago, Jonathan Steffanoni said:

This is true to a certain extent… but, leading requires space to move into. Our system sees a lot of forward pressure and therefore sees a lot of bodies inside F50.

I wonder whether the tumble punt could be an interesting addition if forwards simply play in front. It’s unexpected and doesn’t allow defenders a clean attack at the ball.

I think this is a better last resort than a low percentage up and under into the 50. I always thought our forward line was better when there was uncertainly and defenders were on the back foot, messy ball in the 50 and pinging around. The more predictable, the more they setup, the more they can rebound easily. 

[NeveroddoreveN 1,034]

13 minutes ago, george_on_the_outer said:

The chances of a "contested mark" in the forward line with zone defences is next to zero.  Clubs are depending on a deep kick into the forward line to create ground spillage and a 50:50 chance of getting the ball.  Even better with good crumbing forwards like Pickett, Papley etc. 

Is it really a 50/50 chance though....What percentage do you think we are winning these ground balls.   My guess would be less than 10% we turn into a score.

 

16 minutes ago, george_on_the_outer said:

Clubs will have done the numbers in terms of goal output.  The argument that we should "lower the eyes" is also now irrelevant because of zone defences.  It rarely happens to have a forward with space to lead into, and if they do it is almost always deep in a pocket = poor goal conversion.

If you ever played Footy at ANY level....Lowering the eyes, ie not playing like a blind man is actually neccessary to hiit targets.   Really hope it has some relevance or we are majorly stuffed!

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

1 hour ago, Jonathan Steffanoni said:

I wonder whether the tumble punt could be an interesting addition if forwards simply play in front. It’s unexpected and doesn’t allow defenders a clean attack at the ball.

The trouble is many don't play or work hard enough to get to the front often enough though JS.

In addition you can have all the tumble punts/dump kicks you like but we lack any system to take advantage of those either in the sense of ....

1.  The first point above.  They mostly fall short.  You need to be in front to take advantage;  and

2.  We structurally 'usually' play our talls too deep.  Most pressured tumble punts aren't going to have the penetration of a drop punt with someone coming off the square in plenty of space under not much pressure.

That means a big fella that could take the ball at a higher point usually isn't sitting in the spaces where the tumbles drop.  Therefore not many clear marks, but also not enough contested marks with spillage for smalls to work amongst.

3.  Instead.... we appear to prefer to use small / small medium forwards to play the higher CHF position for some reason.  Usually the oppo are smart and play someone slightly taller and/or bigger bodied to either halve the contest or win it here.

In the many times i've watched this set up from behind the goals this year, it certainly hasn't been a winning strategy for us and will often see the oppo slingshot the ball straight out & up the other end putting our defenders under immediate pressure and mids chasing tails.

I didnt watch the Geelong game with as much intent as usual due to being very crook but as far as i know we were still persisting with this unsuccesful strategy prior to this match.

I'd need to watch the Geelong game again to confirm if that was still the case on Thurs night.  Maybe we came to our senses but from what i recall through the haze i'm pretty sure we didn't.

Edited June 25, 2023 by Demon Dynasty

[layzie 33,752]

There is one thing that I did like from us in quarters 2 and 3 on Thurs night. When we finally realised it was raining and wet weather football, we would seem to kick to the contest and rather than try to take possession of the ground ball or ricochet we would tap it on and keep the ball in motion. A 'surge ball forward' mentality and it would get in behind Cats defenders who now had to turn around to defend(A little bit like a through ball in Soccer getting in behind central defenders). We kicked a few goals from this and most notably Kozzie's second where I believe it was ANB rather than jumping to catch the ball in the air and being met with a tackle the moment he returned to ground, going with a solid punch into space where Kozzie pounced on it and put it through. This was the only moment I can recall where Kozzie was able to run into any sort of space. 

 

[dazzledavey36 54,285]

We've been doing this since 2021.

I don't mind the dump kick here and there especially when we move the ball quick and fast. This is why it worked in 2021 because we had McDonald, Brown and Jackson as our 3 talls. If they weren't marking it they would at least bring it to ground for our smalls to pounce on

What I do hate is that the last few weeks we're just doing dump kicks on the top of the likes of Chandler, Pickett and even ANB deep inside 50 against much taller opposition.

At one stage Sparrow kicked to a Pickett vs De Koning deep inside our forward 50 in the 3rd quarter I think. 

If we're going to do a dump kick then bring in Brown if we have too. He draws defenders and at least we can halve the contest once the ball hits the ground with our smalls.

[Smokey 4,389]

Moneyball theory probably suggests the dump kick yields better returns I'm guessing. Our drop in scoring likely correlates with our small forwards drop in form. 

[jnrmac 20,055]

2 hours ago, george_on_the_outer said:

Clubs will have done the numbers in terms of goal output.  The argument that we should "lower the eyes" is also now irrelevant because of zone defences.  It rarely happens to have a forward with space to lead into, and if they do it is almost always deep in a pocket = poor goal conversion.

For fans it isn't as spectacular as the big forward taking marks, it's just how the game is played in 2023.

This is where Stafford is poor. Good teams create space by leading out and opening up gaps. But you can't do that if we are slow moving the ball in or dumping it high.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

Add Ben Brown to the forward line and remove one or two small forwards and suddenly the entries into the forward line will look a lot better.

The team has been out of balance for much of the year, highlighted by the Petty forward / Ben Brown injured and then playing for Casey “situation”.

[Sydee 4,387]

I'm starting to feel we shoot ourselves in the foot some games with the high press (trying to keep the ball in the F50 and get repeat entry)

The problem with this strategy is that most players on the field find themselves sucked into our forward half and this in itself reduces the space and time our forwards have to work in.

It was painfully evident against Geelong in the last quarter where we pushed up high, lost possession and then got severely punished on turnover. Our key position backs are sound when the ball comes in slowly but I don't think they are the best when it comes in quick on transition - May in particular is very vulnerable when the ball hits the ground IMO.

[DeeSpencer 25,477]

Just about the only way to avoid long high kicks inside 50 is to move the ball quickly from the back half forward or across to the fat side.

To do that requires switching, run and carry or kicking up the corridor. Short kicks along the thin side flanks take more than the 15 or so seconds it takes an oppositions midfield and half forwards to transition to clogging space across half back.

Salem helps, but he mostly mops up and uses it safely. Riv has been trying with various levels of success. May’s largely lost the ability to break through tackles and take the game on. Hibbo’s the same. McVee is great at getting out of trouble but otherwise has a limited attacking game. Lever is a mess. Petty barely tries to attack. Tomlinson looks like Bruce Doull in the VFL but given he only runs in straight lines he doesn’t find the same space at afl level.

Eddie Langdon is/was a master of the wide but fast run, but he’s struggling to get runners to feed him and isn't picking  out targets. Hunter, refuses to pull the trigger on anything that involves more risk than him behind the wheel of a car. 

Viney, Sparrow and Gus can get the ball moving but you don’t want them taking risky kicks too often. So it’s Tracc or bust without Clarry’s corridor charge.

The half forwards have stopped leading because the ball never comes so you get a pack 60 out from goal, followed by a scrimmage then often a dump to the pack 15 out.

Now, there’s still plenty of situations where the ball moves well to half forward and things break down, we are good at those too. 

And I’d argue some of those are by design looking for deep inside 50’s because a mark inside 30 on a good angle is probably worth 4+ expected score, a mark 45 out on a 45 degree angle is probably worth 2.5 at most.

But there’s a coaching issue of forwards blocking for each other, timing leads and the half forwards playing on or dishing well timed handballs to mids on the roll by for the hit up kick.

JVR takes a strong grab 60 out, flips handball to PLAYERX then hits up PLAYERY.

The only answers that I can picture are Spargo to Fritsch. Which is hard if Spargo is in the 2’s. And I can’t see JVR giving the handball to begin with!

[rjay 24,887]

8 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Tomlinson looks like Bruce Doull in the VFL

Balding with headband?

[biggestred 5,016]

Stafford out. 

[demon3165 2,711]

11 hours ago, Timothy Reddan-A'Blew said:

Sometimes I think that's all anyone notices, DB 😄

Because maybe that's the problem then......

[DeeSpencer 25,477]

5 minutes ago, rjay said:

Balding with headband?

Less of the flying doormat and more  the trundling crew cut 

[Smokey 4,389]

26 minutes ago, biggestred said:

Stafford out. 

we've kicked the 5th most goals in the comp this year, calm down 

[biggestred 5,016]

30 minutes ago, Smokey said:

we've kicked the 5th most goals in the comp this year, calm down 

Sure. But weve been having forward line issues for years. No one ever leads at the footy. The personell changes but the method doesnt. Change is needed imvho

[Smokey 4,389]

4 minutes ago, biggestred said:

Sure. But weve been having forward line issues for years. No one ever leads at the footy. The personell changes but the method doesnt. Change is needed imvho

With all due respect, what might need to change is your perception of how effective forward lines actually function in 2023 and what yields the best results based on our personnel. I won't fully dismiss it, but I'm not sure this is necessarily a forward coaching issue.