I noticed a tactic used by Collingwood that I'd like our guys to use. A couple of times we got a free, but they had possession, and pretended not to know whose free it was, and to continue on with the ball ,run, and take 2 bounces, but NOT kick it (avoiding a 50m. penalty). The result was a deliberate delay getting the ball back to the free kick recipient, allowing the defenders, and midfield running back,to crowd the forward line before the free could be taken.

i actually think that it should be a 50, but it will be interesting to see if we and other clubs do try and use it.

i actually think that it should be a 50

Agreed.

Yeah, but if WE try it they'll ping us 50.

i was was screaming at my tv when they pulled that crap. Collingwood are buggers at pulling that kinda stunt. We get done for everything.....remember Rivers underhand throw back to the opposition player (cant remember which team we were against) who deliberately made no effort to catch the ball- 50 metres against Rivers. Still makes my blood boil. Maybe we should try a new tactic. Kick to a free man not a contest in our 50 all the time. Sydney hold up play from 60-80 metres out but we rarely ever do. We just bang it long hoping that Robbo or Neita takes a grab. I hate Sydney by the way., but hey they are winning games.

was against sydney, that dirty shneider and his limp-wristed effort

was against sydney, that dirty shneider and his limp-wristed effort

dont think it was sneider was it?

okeefe?

It was Schneider (however you spell it), ah well we won, Brucey kicked the winner from memory

It was Schneider (however you spell it), ah well we won, Brucey kicked the winner from memory

Yer come to think about it .. im pretty sure ur right....

yer... great game

shifty bastards i hate the filth ... they shuld all get fined for that acting ...

I noticed another possible one-percenter while rewatching our triumph v. Coll.

Remember when Godder's long kick found Robbo with a chest mark in the left forward pocket? He goaled after running off from an acute angle.

When Robbo marked it near the boundary line, there was no opponent within at least 10 m.. What if he deliberately juggled it while running round, reducing the angle??!! In this case, it would have made no difference, since he goaled anyway, but it could be a useful tactic, esp. with a mark near the goalpost, but not in the square, where a metre difference could reduce the angle by more than 50%.

Another, possibly more usable opportunity for this tactic could be to "fudge" your way from 51 to 45 m. by deliberately juggling, bringing yourself into range.

Obviously, this tactic could only be used when the opponent was about 10m. away. Any more, and "play on" would be the tactic . If the opponent was less than 5m. away, it could give him a chance to spoil.

I know most Demonlanders aren't the slightest bit interested in this topic, but another "one-percenter" was mentioned by G. Lyon on his Ch 9 Footy programme on Mon night.

He said how basic it was for the tallest man to stand the mark when a guy's shooting from the 50 m. line. If you do the geometry, it makes a huge difference to how big the kick's got to be with a 200cm bloke on the mark cf. a 185 cm player. I have noticed that WE DON'T DO THIS. Other sides do. I know that talls are needed at the fall of the ball, and each opposition tall must be manned up appropriately, but in my opinion , the over-riding necessity is to make the player kick from as far out as possible, by having a very tall man on the mark. This is ESPECIALLY true with longshots for goal after the siren.

(See also my previous post on one -percenters where I discuss practising torpedoes for the 55m. set shot after the siren.)

I reckon we could collect lots of one-percenter suggestions, which, if followed by our coaches, could make a discernable difference to our results.

yeah your right 15cm does make a big difference to the geometry but the boys seem to always have the tallest on the last line of defence...perhaps they are worried that a tall would be run around easier?could you have two on the makr? one lifting another up? lol

At least you READ my post, Deanox, though I'm devastated that you ridiculed it. As you know, there's a rule against "piggy-backing" on the mark. Anyway, it'd be "play-on" and end of quarter if the player ran round the man on the mark and the kick was after the siren.

You didn't deride my suggestion about deliberate juggling, or taking a couple of bounces to waste time. Are they worthwhile suggestions,or just not worth commenting on?

hey i wasnt having ago about the tallest guy on the mark...i reckon thats a good idea, but i am worried about the quick side step. if it was white on the mark the player could run around him no worries. i wasnt sure about the piggy backing rule, though it is vaguely familiar. what about a run up and attempted speccy by a player over the person on the mark?if the kicker has already kicked it, it couldnt be 50 for going over the mark if he falls forward?

the juggling one i thought about, but i think the definition is controlled the ball. if i was umpiring i'd call play on if you went too far. and i think this would be too hard tp pull off unless you were already running in that direction. ie if you were leading towards the boundary line, youd have to change direction, it would look pretty obvious.

the couple of bounces. i had noticed the pies do this as well and was ropable. imo that was really really poor umpiring, but they did have an average game with the deliberates (although they got every hands in the back spot on, except for one ). i think it should have been 50. i'd bring it up with umpiring dept. if they say its only 50 if you kick it then we should do it. but collingwood did that every time, and always took 2 bounces, like they new theyd get away with it. it bugs we that deliberate acts like that go un penalised while jared rivers got pinged last year against sydney...and brock got done in the same game.

just out of interest:

a player kicking from the 50, where the man on the mark is at 47m from goal. assuming the player kicks the ball 1 metre over the man on the mark (extended arms plus jumping).

if the player is 185 cm:

the ball must be kicked on an angle of 43.5 degrees with the ground.

if the player is 200 cm:

the ball must be kicked at 45 degrees.

not a massive angle. i am not a big maths guys but it could be enough to change the kick. doesnt seem very significant though does it? perhaps if it is a weaker kicker of the ball from a long distance out...

one meter over the man on the mark, or one meter from the man on the mark?

Normally, if say Sandilands is on the mark, the player taking the kick will just kick from a metre or two further out so its the same angle (I presume - not about to get the calculator out!)

Maybe should have a player who's not that tall but with a huge vertical standing leap. That could surprise the person kicking it.

The real question is not comparing the angles but keeping the angle the same - how much further back do you have to go to clear the taller man on the mark.

We're looking for distance not hang-time - 45 degrees would give good hangtime but I'm guessing the launch angle for distance is something more like 30 degrees - someone may have some real knowledge.

1/TAN of 30 degrees is 1.73, so for every cm taller the guy on the mark is, you've got to go back 1.73 cms. So 200cm compared with 185cm, you need to be back 26 cm further (maybe a bit more if the guy on the mark has longer arms and can jump higher).

It's not a huge amount, but there are plenty of balls touched on the line or nearly on the line - see us vs Adelaide at Carrara last year and vs North this year.

(I knew that trig stuff would be useful some day - hey I once even used simultaneous equations!)

(I knew that trig stuff would be useful some day - hey I once even used simultaneous equations!)

yeah trig what a joke lol. i had to use simultaneous equations yesterday, i was surprised i remembered!

one meter over the man on the mark, or one meter from the man on the mark?

i said 1 metre over the man on the mark to ensure that he ca jump and put his hands up. and i had the player kicking the ball from three metres away from the player...

i spose we really need a kicking or physics expert to sort this out for us. i wonder if the club has done the maths and realises there is no major benefit in having an extra 15cm on the mark?