WB Game Day V Collingwood R1 2020

[GVGjr]

Re: WB Game Day V Collingwood R1 2020

I'm pretty baffled by this comment.

I guess it is chicken and egg, but to me it is impossible to tell if the structure is/will work when the effort is so poor. There are a lot of comments on this thread about 'missed tackles' but they aren't being missed - they just aren't being laid at all. We had 7 players - including our #1 ruckman who was at one million clearances - who didn't lay a single tackle (the others in numerical order were Young, Wood, Cordy, Bailey Dale, Williams and JJ). No tackles for running players like JJ and Williams? That's almost impossible! No tackles for a player like Dale who must have it on the very tip top of his IDP?

It gets worse. There were another 8 freaking players who only had ONE. Now - I think Cavarra has been robbed since he is listed with one and I have him with two, but we were MINUS 70 for possession (get your head around that for a second) AND somehow still MINUS 8 for tackles. That should be completely impossible.

Basically, I don't think we have any idea about our game - either style or structure - based on Friday's game 'cos we simply didn't play football.

All the signs of one of our effort/energy deficient games. Led to the ball for the majority of the game but did lift our intensity with our work ethic. I'd normally be all over the Match Committee thread but it's hard to predict what direction we will take. History indicates we might have one and potentially another change but it's hard to see the 3 to 5 changes we probably need to make happening

[EasternWest]

Re: WB Game Day V Collingwood R1 2020

I'm pretty baffled by this comment.

I guess it is chicken and egg, but to me it is impossible to tell if the structure is/will work when the effort is so poor. There are a lot of comments on this thread about 'missed tackles' but they aren't being missed - they just aren't being laid at all. We had 7 players - including our #1 ruckman who was at one million clearances - who didn't lay a single tackle (the others in numerical order were Young, Wood, Cordy, Bailey Dale, Williams and JJ). No tackles for running players like JJ and Williams? That's almost impossible! No tackles for a player like Dale who must have it on the very tip top of his IDP?

It gets worse. There were another 8 freaking players who only had ONE. Now - I think Cavarra has been robbed since he is listed with one and I have him with two, but we were MINUS 70 for possession (get your head around that for a second) AND somehow still MINUS 8 for tackles. That should be completely impossible.

Basically, I don't think we have any idea about our game - either style or structure - based on Friday's game 'cos we simply didn't play football.

I'm just impressed that you knew what you were going to watch and still sat through that absolute tripe.

[Danjul]

Re: WB Game Day V Collingwood R1 2020

I'm pretty baffled by this comment.

I guess it is chicken and egg, but to me it is impossible to tell if the structure is/will work when the effort is so poor. There are a lot of comments on this thread about 'missed tackles' but they aren't being missed - they just aren't being laid at all. We had 7 players - including our #1 ruckman who was at one million clearances - who didn't lay a single tackle (the others in numerical order were Young, Wood, Cordy, Bailey Dale, Williams and JJ). No tackles for running players like JJ and Williams? That's almost impossible! No tackles for a player like Dale who must have it on the very tip top of his IDP?

It gets worse. There were another 8 freaking players who only had ONE. Now - I think Cavarra has been robbed since he is listed with one and I have him with two, but we were MINUS 70 for possession (get your head around that for a second) AND somehow still MINUS 8 for tackles. That should be completely impossible.

Basically, I don't think we have any idea about our game - either style or structure - based on Friday's game 'cos we simply didn't play football.

The numbers you quote suggest something deeper is going on. It is impossible for so many to be disinterested in what they are doing. Even this virus is not that contagious.

The answer is simply
“ our tactics are based on only 2 of - the ball, our players, their players - being in the same place at the same time “

When it’s the first two: the Essendon game.
when it’s one and three: GWS, second half against Port, Collingwood.

The solution is simply
get closer to your opponent.

Stop letting the opposition chip the ball around in space from half back to half forward to set up an easy kick Into the goal zone .

[mjp]

Re: WB Game Day V Collingwood R1 2020

The solution is simply
get closer to your opponent.

Stop letting the opposition chip the ball around in space from half back to half forward to set up an easy kick Into the goal zone .

But isn't that effort and intensity?

I agree that we are/seemed quite happy to concede the 'hit up' space BTA. It is interesting as BTA the general rule is to take the hit up space if your opponent is in front of the ball and take the advantage space if your opponent is lateral/behind the ball. But we dont (or at least didn't) do that on Friday. I can't agree with you that this is 'structural' because the whole 'who plays where' (or rather, what type of player plays where) shouldn't impact on these sort of fundamentals.

But we do seem happy to do this defensively and even at our best are often happy to concede the 'easy one' from which our opponents can use a kicking game to transition the ball...I don't think it is structural but a bit more urgency at the D2 layer certainly wouldn't go astray with regards minimising opposition entries into D50 and ultimately exposing our defenders to marking contests.

[mjp]

Re: WB Game Day V Collingwood R1 2020

I'm just impressed that you knew what you were going to watch and still sat through that absolute tripe.

Yeah, well, what can I say. I have a sickness. I love the dogs and this might be the only time they play this year.

[Hotdog60]

Re: WB Game Day V Collingwood R1 2020

I was just reading some tweets on the Dogs site that were from America.
All their sport has been cancelled and so they are discovering AFL and they are excited about our sport since their blinkers have been removed.
Fantastic results for the AFL if the big US sports media get on board if there is a boost in interest.
The most disappointing aspect of this whole thing is we are Red, Whits and Blue, So we could gain a good size following if it took off over there and we blow our opportunity by show casing the tripe on Friday night.
If we could have turned on a late last year performance the Yanks would have been even more impressed.
Instead mentioned in those tweets was Essendon.

[Mantis]

Re: WB Game Day V Collingwood R1 2020

Yeah, well, what can I say. I have a sickness. I love the dogs and this might be the only time they play this year.

And what fond memories we will all have from that experience.

[Danjul]

Re: WB Game Day V Collingwood R1 2020

But isn't that effort and intensity?

I agree that we are/seemed quite happy to concede the 'hit up' space BTA.

But we do seem happy to do this defensively and even at our best are often happy to concede the 'easy one' from which our opponents can use a kicking game to transition the ball...I don't think it is structural but a bit more urgency at the D2 layer certainly wouldn't go astray with regards minimising opposition entries into D50 and ultimately exposing our defenders to marking contests.

A friend pointed out to me in 2016 that our strategy seemed to be allow the opposition to take the ball close to goal. If Morris didn’t get it we had Hamling and Roberts spoil in the air. Then use Boyd and Biggs to mop up and run the ball out to players set up to receive.

If this is still the game plan it cannot work with Cordy at full back (too short) and Keath (an interceptor- not body on body).

At present , when the opposing team gets the ball on the backline they chip it wide to someone who knows to run in for a mark. Their opponent then arrives to stand the mark. Then there’s 2 scenarios.

1. Four chips to the 50 metre arc.
2. An outside runner at full speed spears a long pass directly towards goal.

See this repeatedly most games since mid 2017. It works well against us. We continue to allow it.

[Bornadog]

Re: WB Game Day V Collingwood R1 2020

A friend pointed out to me in 2016 that our strategy seemed to be allow the opposition to take the ball close to goal. If Morris didn’t get it we had Hamling and Roberts spoil in the air. Then use Boyd and Biggs to mop up and run the ball out to players set up to receive.

If this is still the game plan it cannot work with Cordy at full back (too short) and Keath (an interceptor- not body on body).

At present , when the opposing team gets the ball on the backline they chip it wide to someone who knows to run in for a mark. Their opponent then arrives to stand the mark. Then there’s 2 scenarios.

1. Four chips to the 50 metre arc.
2. An outside runner at full speed spears a long pass directly towards goal.

See this repeatedly most games since mid 2017. It works well against us. We continue to allow it.

The second half of last year we had one of the best defences in the AFL - fact, because we conceded the least amount of goals.

It fell apart in the elimination final and the Collingwood game. Not because we didn't have a great defence, but because, when you lose the centre clearances continually and the ball is pumped into the backline continually it makes it hard to defend.

Football is pretty predictable these days. You win the clearances, and stoppages, you generally win most games, and to do that you need a crack midfield - that is why mids dominate the Brownlow counts. Our mids in the last two games got done like a dinner. Maybe that is directly because of the rucks as you point out, but that is also fact.

[GVGjr]

Re: WB Game Day V Collingwood R1 2020

From foxsports

It’s only Round 1, but Collingwood coach Nathan Buckley has already set the blueprint for 16 other clubs on how to tame the Western Bulldogs this season.

The Magpies on Friday night produced one of the more powerful Round 1 statements for sometime, thumping their fellow finals fancies by 52 points at Marvel Stadium.

While Collingwood managed 86 points itself, it restricted the Bulldogs – the third-best offence in the AFL last season – to a miserly 34 points. Even more startling was the fact the Dogs only registered 22 inside 50s for the match.

And it all came about because of the Magpies’ relentless defensive pressure, according to legendary Hawthorn goalkicker Jason Dunstall.

At half-time, the Pies had a Champion Data pressure rating of 219, which was a club record.

“That’s noticeable out there. When Collingwood’s got the ball, the Bulldogs press is very, very average. But when it’s the other way around, they’re savage,” Dunstall told Fox Footy.

Dual premiership Kangaroo David King said the Dogs “couldn’t move the ball” and lauded “fantastic defensive coaching” from the Pies.

“The Dogs want to counter-attack from the defensive end of the ground … but the Pies didn’t give them an inch,” King told Fox Footy.

“We were watching this all night, how quickly they closed the space, and even if they got one pass free, the next pass was clamped. That’s why the Dogs only had 22 inside 50s.”

St Kilda legend Nick Riewoldt added: “They want to get the ball in motion, the Bulldogs, but the link and overlap-type play that makes them so dangerous … it was all this stagnant, kick-mark, back-off-the-mark pressure until the mistake would come – and it came often.”

In 2019, the Bulldogs were the No. 1 team in the AFL at transitioning the ball from their defensive 50 to attacking 50, according to Champion Data.

It’s why they averaged 34 points per game from their defensive half of the ground.

But on Friday night, they only managed a paltry seven points from their back-half.

“They did not look like it, the Dogs – and you have to take your hat off to Nathan Buckley and the planning they did to combat the change of direction and movement of the Dogs,” Dunstall told Fox Footy.

“That’s as good as you’ll see.”

[angelopetraglia]

Re: WB Game Day V Collingwood R1 2020

At least the match committee is going to have 10 weeks to review the game.

[azabob]

Re: WB Game Day V Collingwood R1 2020

At least the match committee is going to have 10 weeks to review the game.

I’m afraid the MC already had 5 months to review our game plan and we still came up blank.

[GVGjr]

Re: WB Game Day V Collingwood R1 2020

I’m afraid the MC already had 5 months to review our game plan and we still came up blank.

The players had they same time to address their energy levels and the effort they brought to the game as well and now will have another period of time to have a rethink. If the elimination final was a wake up call for them that they seemed to say then our planning just hasn't worked. GWS and Collingwood have shown the competition what works against us so we have to know it's coming again and again

[Mantis]

Re: WB Game Day V Collingwood R1 2020

The players had they same time to address their energy levels and the effort they brought to the game as well and now will have another period of time to have a rethink. If the elimination final was a wake up call for them that they seemed to say then our planning just hasn't worked. GWS and Collingwood have shown the competition what works against us so we have to know it's coming again and again

Interesting how the FS article refers to our lack of run from behind the ball, but when you have a starting backline of Crozier & Wood who just bomb it down the line, Cordy & Gardner who both can’t kick and then Keath & Williams who are pretty much new players it doesn’t give you many options. Why JJ started on a wing, Suckling started up forward and Daniel on the bench is beyond me.

We also started an AA mid on the pine in lieu of a 19yo ( abit a hugely talented 19yo) which had me scratching my head. If you have what is lauded as the best midfield in the comp then in card playing style ‘lead them like you got them!’

[jeemak]

Re: WB Game Day V Collingwood R1 2020

From foxsports

It’s only Round 1, but Collingwood coach Nathan Buckley has already set the blueprint for 16 other clubs on how to tame the Western Bulldogs this season.

The Magpies on Friday night produced one of the more powerful Round 1 statements for sometime, thumping their fellow finals fancies by 52 points at Marvel Stadium.

While Collingwood managed 86 points itself, it restricted the Bulldogs – the third-best offence in the AFL last season – to a miserly 34 points. Even more startling was the fact the Dogs only registered 22 inside 50s for the match.

And it all came about because of the Magpies’ relentless defensive pressure, according to legendary Hawthorn goalkicker Jason Dunstall.

At half-time, the Pies had a Champion Data pressure rating of 219, which was a club record.

“That’s noticeable out there. When Collingwood’s got the ball, the Bulldogs press is very, very average. But when it’s the other way around, they’re savage,” Dunstall told Fox Footy.

Dual premiership Kangaroo David King said the Dogs “couldn’t move the ball” and lauded “fantastic defensive coaching” from the Pies.

“The Dogs want to counter-attack from the defensive end of the ground … but the Pies didn’t give them an inch,” King told Fox Footy.

“We were watching this all night, how quickly they closed the space, and even if they got one pass free, the next pass was clamped. That’s why the Dogs only had 22 inside 50s.”

St Kilda legend Nick Riewoldt added: “They want to get the ball in motion, the Bulldogs, but the link and overlap-type play that makes them so dangerous … it was all this stagnant, kick-mark, back-off-the-mark pressure until the mistake would come – and it came often.”

In 2019, the Bulldogs were the No. 1 team in the AFL at transitioning the ball from their defensive 50 to attacking 50, according to Champion Data.

It’s why they averaged 34 points per game from their defensive half of the ground.

But on Friday night, they only managed a paltry seven points from their back-half.

“They did not look like it, the Dogs – and you have to take your hat off to Nathan Buckley and the planning they did to combat the change of direction and movement of the Dogs,” Dunstall told Fox Footy.

“That’s as good as you’ll see.”

Isn't this the blueprint for beating every team in the league? Even Geelong with their slow movement from the back half are stymied when they don't dominate the middle of the ground and the space on the exit is closed by an effective zone defence.

So much of what Collingwood was able to do to us was between the ears. Once we turned up lethargic or disinterested, or whatever the dumpster fire attitude was, and Collingwood played to their capacity we were always going to witness what we witnessed.

If our midfield doesn't compete and continually relinquishes territory this will be the outcome against only mildly competent sides. Good sides will do to us what Collingwood did. That so called experts can't put two and two together to figure that out, and think that pressure on the exit is some type of coaching brilliance is a bit surprising to me.