WB Game Day V Geelong R14 2021

[Bulldog4life]

No crowds sucks. It’s a deflating experience to watch and I’d rather 30k Cats fans calling out slurs (as usual) than dead silence.

So would our players according to Caleb in an interview I saw a while ago.

[Grantysghost]

I'm less worried about the non-crowd (although we have a decent sample size of listless performances in empty stadiums) and more worried about the dimensions of that toy ground with no wings. We don't win there even when Geelong are average (such as 2015).

Actually I don't think we've won there since 2003, whereas they live and breathe and train there every day - they've barely ever lost there against anyone since their dynasty started 15 years ago.

Love to know the thinking behind the ground dimensions historically.
It's not like they are pushed for space. Anyone know why?

Was just reading when they played a T20 international there it didn't meet the ICC regulations for an oval so the pitch was on an angle. Meant there were short areas at fine leg, but square of the wicket complied.

---

In order for the narrow ground (normally used for Australian Rules football) to comply with International Cricket Council guidelines, the drop-in pitch has been laid off-centre on a northeast to southwest angle.

Traditionally, the pitch at Kardinia Park has followed the goalpost-to-goalpost line, but the 115m-wide ground failed to meet ICC’s guidelines, which demand a distance of at least 137.16m boundary-to-boundary square of the wicket.

The subtle shift opens up more space square of the wicket, allowing the ground to satisfy those requirements, which also dictate that the shorter of the two square leg boundaries must be at least 59.43 metres long.

[ratsmac]

It's certainly an uphill battle there in G town. In saying that this year we have broken a few hoodoo's already so no reason to stop now. Freo at home for some reason always find a way to beat us but this year we won. We never seem to win a lot of games on the trot, we started this year on fire. Saints and Norf always trouble us, we sorted them out. Beating Geelong in Geelong in almost a myth for the dogs but this year is different. Huge challenge but this is the team that can do it.

Dangerfield licks his lips when he comes up against us so I really do hope we have a plan for him if he looks like he's in one of those moods. As for Hawkins and Cameron, I fear we can't control both. We have to cut off the supply it's as simple (not so simple) as that.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Love to know the thinking behind the ground dimensions historically.
It's not like they are pushed for space. Anyone know why?

Was just reading when they played a T20 international there it didn't meet the ICC regulations for an oval so the pitch was on an angle. Meant there were short areas at fine leg, but square of the wicket complied.

---

In order for the narrow ground (normally used for Australian Rules football) to comply with International Cricket Council guidelines, the drop-in pitch has been laid off-centre on a northeast to southwest angle.

Traditionally, the pitch at Kardinia Park has followed the goalpost-to-goalpost line, but the 115m-wide ground failed to meet ICC’s guidelines, which demand a distance of at least 137.16m boundary-to-boundary square of the wicket.

The subtle shift opens up more space square of the wicket, allowing the ground to satisfy those requirements, which also dictate that the shorter of the two square leg boundaries must be at least 59.43 metres long.

What a joke of a ground. AFL shouldn't allow games to be played there. In fact, they should just demolish it, right Sedat?

[bornadog]

Love to know the thinking behind the ground dimensions historically.
It's not like they are pushed for space. Anyone know why?

Was just reading when they played a T20 international there it didn't meet the ICC regulations for an oval so the pitch was on an angle. Meant there were short areas at fine leg, but square of the wicket complied.

In the past Whitten Oval was about the same length as Kardinia Park, but since the Footscray Bulldogs starting playing the ground playing area has been reduced./ Geelong have also slightly reduced the length as well.

Some Ground Size Comparisons:

GMHBA Stadium - 170m - 116m
MCG - 161m - 138m
Marvel Stadium - 160m - 129m
Mars Stadium - 160m - 129m
Adelaide Oval - 167m - 123m
Cazaly’s Stadium - 165m - 135m
Optus Stadium - 165m - 130m
Blundstone Arena - 160m - 124m
Metricon Stadium - 158m - 134m
Gabba - 156m - 138m
SCG - 155m - 136m

[Sedat]

What a joke of a ground. AFL shouldn't allow games to be played there. In fact, they should just demolish it, right Sedat?

Bit too late to demolish it, seeing as well over $300m of tax-payer largesse has already been ploughed in to fund its multi-stage redevelopment. And still it is barely mid 30's capacity.

[bornadog]

There is still a chance for crowds Friday.

[jeemak]

Bit too late to demolish it, seeing as well over $300m of tax-payer largesse has already been ploughed in to fund its multi-stage redevelopment. And still it is barely mid 30's capacity.

But Geelong give so much back and rarely ask of anything from the AFL and broader communities.......

[Grantysghost]

Not a bad insight into how they play the narrow ground.

Own the corridor, force you wide, don't press too high as they want a long kick into defence for their intercept markers.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/...20-p4zsny.html

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Not a bad insight into how they play the narrow ground.

Own the corridor, force you wide, don't press too high as they want a long kick into defence for their intercept markers.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/...20-p4zsny.html

Isn’t that essentially how Melbourne beat us?

[jeemak]

Not a bad insight into how they play the narrow ground.

Own the corridor, force you wide, don't press too high as they want a long kick into defence for their intercept markers.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/...20-p4zsny.html

Wouldn't a pressing defence stifle shorter ball movement and encourage longer kicking to lurking defenders? If the defenders are sitting back then there's surely more opportunity to find a shorter target.........

[jeemak]

Isn’t that essentially how Melbourne beat us?

It's pretty much how every team beats every other team. The main differentiator is pressure at the contest and just after the contest.

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

There is still a chance for crowds Friday.

Insert Lloyd Christmas Meme

[Grantysghost]

Wouldn't a pressing defence stifle shorter ball movement and encourage longer kicking to lurking defenders? If the defenders are sitting back then there's surely more opportunity to find a shorter target.........

I think on the narrow ground their mids can clog the middle without their wings needing to be as wide. So their half backs don't have to push up as much, they own the corridor using their mids/wings.
(I've put no thought into this but I'm running with it).

[Happy Days]

Not a bad insight into how they play the narrow ground.

Own the corridor, force you wide, don't press too high as they want a long kick into defence for their intercept markers.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/...20-p4zsny.html

Firstly, thanks for posting and don’t take anything I’m about to say as an attack on you. But;

I’ve really got a problem with this sort of analysis. “Owning the corridor” and “avoiding intercept markers” are fine and logical ideas on paper, but are terribly difficult to actually execute/succeed with.

Say we do attack the corridor against Geelong. Say we turn it over in doing so, which is likely considering we’ve been forced wide in the first place. Does the resulting opportunity that Geelong will have to attack our biggest weakness (one on one defending inside 50) and play to their biggest strength actually put us in a better position that going wide and likely maintaining possession or forcing a stoppage? I’m not convinced.

Also re avoiding intercept markers - this is HARD for a number of reasons. The intercepters are positioned in the space that is also most likely to lead to scores if we split the contest, as opposed to “lowering the eyes” and hitting a lead on a shallow entry, where the margin for error is so high and even if everything works it only leads to a 3/10 or so shot at goal. Hitting leading players under AFL-level pressure is an elite skill and it can’t be expected of players with every entry. Not to mention the consequence of messing these kicks up is just as bad and if not worse than having an intercept mark taken 15m out from goal.

These are nice ideas but if they worked consistently then everyone would do them.