Game Day 2011 - R1 Western Bulldogs vs Essendon

[mjp]

Stepping back a little and looking at the game without too much emotion, we could not break through Essendon's zone today, we tried to just bomb it out of defense as quickly as possible and most times didn't hit a target. The midfield was killed after the first quarter and guys like Cooney had 16 possessions in the first half ended up with only 20 for the game.

OK - your point is valid (we couldn't break through the zone) but from that point you have to ask 'Why not?'.

The reasons I would point too are as follows:

1/.Mids and forwards getting caught on our attacking side on the rare occasions we did put the ball inside 50. We simply did a poor job of keeping the ball in front of us and basically allowed Essendon to run the ball forwards unimpeded. I know, I know, we didn't chase...I get that. But if you think we are going to run down opposition players after giving them a 10m start when handball options are available, you are wrong. The lack of chase was a symptom of the real problem - poor positioning in the forward line.

2/.Lack of a defensive release point. Now, Markovic was fine, but where we really missed Lake was his ability to sit off the contest and position himself effectively for a handball receive / spread laterally to space to receive by foot. No-one played this role today - we therefore forced the ball forward under pressure (which only encouraged Essendon to press up higher making the exit even more difficult).

3/.Identified elsewhere, but our d50 exits were very one dimensional today. Criticise Harbrow's kicking by all means, but he would have certainly broken laterally today and enabled us to open up Essendon on the fatside of the ground.

What would I have tried?
- Move Murphy deeper back and instruct him to act as the behind the ball release point (or quarterback, or whatever you want to call it) that Lake does so well.

- Moved one of Cooney or Griffen to the HBF (and maybe even both). They will run laterally with the ball which would have helped trying to get the ball to open space. Griffen's kicking depth may have also helped here - this was another area where we missed both Shaggy and Gilbee.

- Moved Picken forward with strict instructions not to EVER move ahead of the ball. The contest on the HFF in the last q summed up his ability to simply hold up play and find a way to cut out the opposition forward handball.

In all that though, you have to remember that early in the game we won the contested ball and consequently won the ball forward / kicked goals...after the 1st break, we were smashed for contested footy - so maybe the 'problem' was as simple as that!

The moves we did make such as Cooney forward seemed a bit counter intuitive to what I was watching...

The lack of a second ruckman was a concern, but I dont really think it cost us the game. I am not really a Stack fan but he tried very hard today...certainly wasn't the problem.

[Hotdog60]

You post reminds me of this guy sitting next to us at the game with his mates and early in the last quarter he stood up and said .."It's only Round 1 and I don't need this stress in my life" and with that he got up and left - by that stage quite a few people were leaving in the area I was in.

If you can't stand the heat don't become a Doggie supporter, we have always put up with a roller coaster of a ride one day it will straighten out.

I just hope I live to se it.

[Hotdog60]

OK - your point is valid (we couldn't break through the zone) but from that point you have to ask 'Why not?'.

The reasons I would point too are as follows:

1/.Mids and forwards getting caught on our attacking side on the rare occasions we did put the ball inside 50. We simply did a poor job of keeping the ball in front of us and basically allowed Essendon to run the ball forwards unimpeded. I know, I know, we didn't chase...I get that. But if you think we are going to run down opposition players after giving them a 10m start when handball options are available, you are wrong. The lack of chase was a symptom of the real problem - poor positioning in the forward line.

2/.Lack of a defensive release point. Now, Markovic was fine, but where we really missed Lake was his ability to sit off the contest and position himself effectively for a handball receive / spread laterally to space to receive by foot. No-one played this role today - we therefore forced the ball forward under pressure (which only encouraged Essendon to press up higher making the exit even more difficult).

3/.Identified elsewhere, but our d50 exits were very one dimensional today. Criticise Harbrow's kicking by all means, but he would have certainly broken laterally today and enabled us to open up Essendon on the fatside of the ground.

What would I have tried?
- Move Murphy deeper back and instruct him to act as the behind the ball release point (or quarterback, or whatever you want to call it) that Lake does so well.

- Moved one of Cooney or Griffen to the HBF (and maybe even both). They will run laterally with the ball which would have helped trying to get the ball to open space. Griffen's kicking depth may have also helped here - this was another area where we missed both Shaggy and Gilbee.

- Moved Picken forward with strict instructions not to EVER move ahead of the ball. The contest on the HFF in the last q summed up his ability to simply hold up play and find a way to cut out the opposition forward handball.

In all that though, you have to remember that early in the game we won the contested ball and consequently won the ball forward / kicked goals...after the 1st break, we were smashed for contested footy - so maybe the 'problem' was as simple as that!The moves we did make such as Cooney forward seemed a bit counter intuitive to what I was watching...

The lack of a second ruckman was a concern, but I dont really think it cost us the game. I am not really a Stack fan but he tried very hard today...certainly wasn't the problem.

Hit the nail on the head, well put

[LostDoggy]

Well. Lovely news to wake up to on a Sunday morning -- a loss to the flippin' Bombers. Mjp's post helps me understand what went wrong (will download the torrent and watch it later) but it sounds like we were pretty one-dimensional down back without Lake and Harbrow. Harbs is gone, Hargrave has serious injury issues; is there going to be another option to run 'laterally' out of the backline? I thought Wood was the direct Harbs replacement -- how did he go? I'm reading that we looked 'slow' as well.. worrying, as we've recruited for speed, and our oldies have retired. And if Jobe Watson is making us look slow, we may as well pack it in. And how do we lose the contested ball stats as mjp is implying with the centremen that we have? If Crossy and Boydy aren't winning the contested ball they may as well not be playing as they don't do much else around the ground. With Libba (he made his debut? Boy this kid has come from nowhere!) and Ward in there as well, do we really need four slow, one-dimensional ball winners (especially when they're not winning the ball?).

Anyway, it's Round 1. I remember a lot of weird results in round 1 that are long forgotten by Round 10 -- hopefully an aberration.

ps. Wait, wait -- was Essendon good? Mark Thompson (more than Hirdy) would have a major impact, especially without the extra game-day and media pressure of being head coach.

[LostDoggy]

Very disappointed....key things that stuck out to me:
1) a lack of urgency after 1/4 time. No one was willing to work hard enough to either shut their opponent down or to positively impact the game.
2) Hudson as the lone Ruckman doesnt work. Roughie needs to come in and be our forward / ruck option.
3) whatever our zone setup was - it didnt work and we didnt seem to be able to change things around to stop the flow Essendon had.
4) Grant was a positive i thought, as was young Libba. Stack i thought was ok given the frequency and way that the ball just kept coming into our defensive 50.
5) Match committee / game day coaching was not good - strange decisions with 1 ruckman / lack of a plan 'b' / how to get some of our better players back into the game.

Lets put this one behind us and start notching up the wins.

[The Underdog]

I thought Wood was the direct Harbs replacement -- how did he go?

I'm reading that we looked 'slow' as well.. worrying, as we've recruited for speed, and our oldies have retired.

And how do we lose the contested ball stats as mjp is implying with the centremen that we have?

With Libba (he made his debut? Boy this kid has come from nowhere!) and Ward in there as well, do we really need four slow, one-dimensional ball winners (especially when they're not winning the ball?).

Anyway, it's Round 1. I remember a lot of weird results in round 1 that are long forgotten by Round 10 -- hopefully an aberration.

ps. Wait, wait -- was Essendon good? Mark Thompson (more than Hirdy) would have a major impact, especially without the extra game-day and media pressure of being head coach.

In answer to your questions, Wood was average and finished off with an ankle injury that will likely keep him out 6-8 weeks.

We lost the contested ball because we didn't support or block for each other and Essendon just basically outworked us.

Libba was excellent in contested ball situations particularly early but some of his disposal by foot was terrible. It's a legitimate question whether we can carry that many slow mids who win contested ball but make poor decisions by foot.

Essendon were very good, they destroyed us in every facet of the game. Their defensive structures and discipline were excellent and their run and disposal as well as the contested ball work was outstanding. Hille and Ryder murdered us.
We've got some structural issues that the sub rule doesn't help and Essendon exploited them.

[alwaysadog]

We can get our whips out for the usual suspects, but in doing so we will miss the real import of today.

We were beaten as a team. We were not competitive in the possession counts for any quarter and only in front at quarter time because the opposition were inaccurate. Lead the tackle count for most of the day because we were chasing all day.

Early on it was obvious we were being denied space and that the dons attempt was to create the ground ball at every opportunity and to clear it to a player in space, which they showed commitment and skill in doing.

They unerringly found a player in space and we seemed unable to cover this. I don't care how many possessions some got, we never got clean ball, whereas most of their's was.


So what was our response? Nothing, we had no answer, we ineffectively chased tail all afternoon.

Outplayed, outcoached and lacked leadership.

It's a tough call... and it's only round one.

I didn't expect the selected team to win; we have had patchy to ordinary form leading in and the dons have been flying.

I thought we'd be close and give a good account of ourselves, and we'd find some positives... but I can't think of any other than that the humiliation finally came to an end.

All I can do is pretend it never happened and hope that between now and next week we find some form and belief.

[AndrewP6]

Yes, time to get rid of Rocket. The man born with a silver spoon in his mouth, the man who makes poor decisions and squanders opportunities.

Huh?

[LostDoggy]

We can get our whips out for the usual suspects, but in doing so we will miss the real import of today.

We were beaten as a team. We were not competitive in the possession counts for any quarter and only in front at quarter time because the opposition were inaccurate. Lead the tackle count for most of the day because we were chasing all day.

Early on it was obvious we were being denied space and that the dons attempt was to create the ground ball at every opportunity and to clear it to a player in space, which they showed commitment and skill in doing.

They unerringly found a player in space and we seemed unable to cover this. I don't care how many possessions some got, we never got clean ball, whereas most of their's was.


So what was our response? Nothing, we had no answer, we ineffectively chased tail all afternoon.

Outplayed, outcoached and lacked leadership.

It's a tough call... and it's only round one.

I didn't expect the selected team to win; we have had patchy to ordinary form leading in and the dons have been flying.

I thought we'd be close and give a good account of ourselves, and we'd find some positives... but I can't think of any other than that the humiliation finally came to an end.

All I can do is pretend it never happened and hope that between now and next week we find some form and belief.

Some good points. For the life of me I can't work out what we stand for? Game plan wise it just seems like helter skelter. Hard to lead by example when there just is no plan. Eade talked about defensive pressure including a forward press but the only thing I seen was us getting forward of the ball.

[The Underdog]

Huh?

Didn't ye know lad, he's not like us boys from the working classes. He's never had to work a day in his life. He's moneyed and the rich can't be trusted, especially not with defensive structures...

[AndrewP6]

Didn't ye know lad, he's not like us boys from the working classes. He's never had to work a day in his life. He's moneyed and the rich can't be trusted, especially not with defensive structures...

Ha (that's an 'almost laugh')... tell that to the boys on our list who went to exclusive Grammar Schools!

[AndrewP6]

Just so disappointed again. A loss is a loss, but that was embarrassing. No spirit, no run, no structure to speak of. Looked like we'd only got together today, not just had six months preseason.

At this point, I'm looking forward to our game in Round 4.

[alwaysadog]

Some good points. For the life of me I can't work out what we stand for? Game plan wise it just seems like helter skelter. Hard to lead by example when there just is no plan. Eade talked about defensive pressure including a forward press but the only thing I seen was us getting forward of the ball.

Funny as it seems from what I've seen at the odd training run and the praccie matches the way the dons played is what I thought we were trying to develop. Pressure the ball carrier, win the ball and use quick hand passes to find a free man then spot someone up and keep the ball flowing. Quick ball movement is the key.

The initial stages require some risk taking and some low percentage moves but with practice they can be made to work in most situations.

But when you can't execute step one, it's time for plan B or C or D.

These are the ones that aren't clear to me, in fact I wonder if they exist as other than figments of an overworked imagination.

[anfo27]

well well well what can i say about that performance? surprising? no but i'll just leave it as disappointing.
I am the number one ticket holder of the 'Stack the hack' fan club but I thought he wasn't that bad to day and he was far from our worst.
It wouldn't have mattered if we had our team of the century defence out there today if you give a team that many easy entries you have no chance.
Felt sorry for Hudson today, to play a lone hand against the best ruck duo in the comp was an almighty ask. I'm not against the one ruckman idea but i am when its against the best ruck duo going around.
As soon as i saw Fletcher on Liam Jones today I knew he would not get a touch, felt he just accepted that it was going to be a tough day for him.
Cooney was short of a gallop and for christs sake give Griff a spell so he can get that shoulder right cause there is no way that is just a stinger. I tipped the Dons because I thought we were short of a gallop and i wasn't convinced with what i saw in the pre-season. I honestly think we will struggle to make the 8 and think we will finish anywhere from 7-12.
It was hard to watch the second quarter. It felt like our game plan was lets play like we're in the 80's and bomb it every chance we get. Maybe people who were there can tell why were we continously going long at every oppourtunity? no options? under too much pressure? under instructions? I can't recall us going short to a free man once.
If I've said it once I've said it a thousand times we are the worst tackling team going around and rocket has not improved this area one bit in his time here. I lost count on how many missed tackles we had today. If i hear rocket talk about its more about the intent to tackle then the number of tackles one more time I'll spew up.
All this talk about pressure and how its been a real focus, well you wouldn't have know by that performance.
I also can't remember losing soo many times at stoppages in one quarter like that 2nd quarter.
I know James went a bit early about sacking Rocket but there is no way he should be there next year. I wanted him gone after last year but realistically we couldn't with a year to go on his and Micks contract. For me he doesn't make the hard decisions he gets paid for.

[LostDoggy]

Felt sorry for Hudson today, to play a lone hand against the best ruck duo in the comp was an almighty ask. I'm not against the one ruckman idea but i am when its against the best ruck duo going around.

Why is Huddo excused, he was very poor today. Going on past form why wouldn't you trust him against the Essendon 2. Hille and Ryder are alright but not sure about the best ruck duo.