Game Day Round 9 2016 - GWS Giants V Western Bulldogs

[bornadog]

It does but it doesn't make the point incorrect. Our forwards don't lead anywhere near enough.

which goes back to my original point - is it coaching, or the players aren't good enough.

The reason I mention the TV aspect is some posters don't go to games, yet feel watching on TV they can work out what is happening at the ground. On TV you don't see the bigger picture and the movement of all 18 players. I don't know if TBB goes to many games or not so not directed at him. The way the ball moves these days from back to forward, and the way players cover the forwards in that move, there is almost no chance to prop, and then lead.

Our forwards move up the ground to help the defenders and mids and when we gain possession, we have to run quickly into the forward line and often we don't have players there, and sitting back taking marks are guys like Shaw, or Tarrant/Thompson on their own.

It certainly helps Stringer, Dickson to have a big forward in the forward line. Stringer is not superman, and I think people expect more from a 58 game player.

[EasternWest]

To be fair, expecting a 58 game player to lead once in a while is not unrealistic. I'm not bagging Stringer because he's a gem, but he does need to mix his repertoire up.

[1eyedog]

Tom Boyd doesn't do it either - at all!

[Bulldog4life]

Tom Boyd doesn't do it either - at all!

Let's hope he learns to.

[Hotdog60]

I kinda wonder if Boyd might make a better CHF and use Redpath at FF.

[Remi Moses]

I think it effects Jake mentally not having another target there.
You put Jack or T Boyd, and Crameri next season makes a massive difference

[stefoid]

On forward structure, we spend a lot of time bottling the ball in our forward half, or flooding back.

In the first situation, there is nowhere to lead to. I have noticed we like to create a small crowd of dogs about 45m out. I guess this is a 'hot spot' for us, but also guards the corridor transition if an opposition defender kicks it long out of our F50 - he has to go to the boundary to be safer.

Flooding back, there is often nobody to kick to. This is where a steeple chaser like Princess Riewolt comes in very handy - our version is Crameri who got quite a lot of his goals leading his man back to the goalsquare. Stringer would dominate at this if he could sprint further than 50m without blowing up.

That doesnt leave many minutes in a game where:
a) the forwards are deep in a relatively clear forward line and
b) the ball isnt in our forward half

Center bounces and very quick turnovers, I guess, where the opposition has rebounded the ball out of our F50 and promptly turned it over in the midfield.

[jeemak]

On forward structure, we spend a lot of time bottling the ball in our forward half, or flooding back.

In the first situation, there is nowhere to lead to. I have noticed we like to create a small crowd of dogs about 45m out. I guess this is a 'hot spot' for us, but also guards the corridor transition if an opposition defender kicks it long out of our F50 - he has to go to the boundary to be safer.

Flooding back, there is often nobody to kick to. This is where a steeple chaser like Princess Riewolt comes in very handy - our version is Crameri who got quite a lot of his goals leading his man back to the goalsquare. Stringer would dominate at this if he could sprint further than 50m without blowing up.

That doesnt leave many minutes in a game where:
a) the forwards are deep in a relatively clear forward line and
b) the ball isnt in our forward half

Center bounces and very quick turnovers, I guess, where the opposition has rebounded the ball out of our F50 and promptly turned it over in the midfield.

Good work Stefoid.

I have little doubt our strategy for forward movement in the last few weeks has been close to the Bmac strategy of getting the ball forward and creating as much scoring opportunity through repetition as we possibly can, because we've had so much of our half back drive taken away from us due to injury.

It will be interesting to see whether or how it might change to a more open structure with Boyd and Suckling back in the side this week, and Stringer freed up with Red's inclusion.

[stefoid]

I dont think what Ive described is a new thing, its just how we play under Bev always, as far as I can tell. The difference with Bev vs Bmac is we defend space rather than a man, obviously, and that we retain the ball by kicking it around to create space rather than instantly give up if there are no easy options and kick it down the line for another stoppage.

We still kick down the line sometimes, but according to bev, that an admission of defeat (plan C) rather than an integral part of plan A. (there was no plan B under Bmac)

I dont think we can survive with only one tall marking threat because of the frequency with which we are forced to kick deep into the F50. And we have to push up into the F50 so aggressively because our young key backs are so inexperienced, they need all the help they can get. We need the 2nd tall marking threat to split their tall defenders and force them to make decisions.