On the day - The CBD conundrum.

[mjp]

So. Again - Writing this without having watched the telecast.

The move into the ruck of Jackson around the 10-min mark of q3 really (REALLY) seemed to change the game. The ground level follow-up provided by Jackson seemed to be causing a real problem, we weren't holding the point on the defensive side and one of the Melbourne mids (notably Petracca) was disengaging from the contest and pushing forward...

From the telecast, did it look (as it did live) like our centre square group were really over-hunting/over-focussed on possession/winning the ball versus holding structure and keeping their opponents in front of them? We seemed to be trying to address the challenge by trying to 'WIN' it, rather than just taking the air out of the game and halving it for a while - forcing a secondary stoppage, bringing up a 5th (and a 6th, and a 7th) and just slowing it the hell down. I have this memory from early in the 4th - and let's be honest, the game was all but shot at 3/4 time - of Liber starting in the 'receive spot' and trying to win it...and Bont starting in a sweeper style position but leaving that spot and trying to win it...Oliver actually winning it and flipping it out to a streaking Petracca with no-one separating him from the forwards...

Was there any suggestion from the commentators that we should radically change our centre square group or modify our approach to that part of the game? Was anyone else thinking a group of Bailey Williams and Roarke Smith as 'twin sweepers' with one of the Bont/Liber/Macrae group acting as a ball winner and defensive wingers on both sides? Was there any real change in strategy (it didn't seem to change watching at the ground).

To me it seemed we were ready for Gawn but in no way prepared for Jackson and once he started acting as a 4th mid + ruck, the game was up. I guess I was disappointed as this is how Melbourne beat Geelong (albeit with Gawn in the ruck chair) scoring 102 points from Stoppage that night and I assumed we would be 'ready' if things started going awry.

[jeemak]

Daisy Pearce actually mentioned the change of Jackson going in had a massive impact.

It's been noted across a few threads that we clearly had a win it rather than stop it mindset and it cost us. It came through really clearly on the telecast.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Not only should we have expected melbourne to do it, but we’ve been thoroughly beaten like this in previous games this season. Is it perhaps poor awareness from the players to recognise it and adjust accordingly? Poor on field leadership to enforce specific instructions? We’ve got some seasoned guys in there that surely don’t need a quarter time break to get the downlow from Bevo. It’s a really mystery to me how we either a) didn’t see this coming and/or b) didn’t recognise it or know how to adjust to it. Like you said mjp, surely we knew Melbourne love to play exactly like this.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Melbourne did this, or should I say, we setup like this, all through the third quarter too. Even when we were on top, Melbourne were winning all the clearances. We were just fortunate the ball bounced our way a bit with a fumble or two. But the danger signs were there before we went 19 up.

[Mofra]

Gawn mentioned it in the interview immediately after the game too.
Jackson was a 'jumper' as opposed to Martin/Gawn as old-school rucks. Completely changed the look of teh game and our mids didn't adjust their position to adequately defend the space in front of the centre square stoppage.

[Twodogs]

So. Again - Writing this without having watched the telecast.

The move into the ruck of Jackson around the 10-min mark of q3 really (REALLY) seemed to change the game. The ground level follow-up provided by Jackson seemed to be causing a real problem, we weren't holding the point on the defensive side and one of the Melbourne mids (notably Petracca) was disengaging from the contest and pushing forward...

From the telecast, did it look (as it did live) like our centre square group were really over-hunting/over-focussed on possession/winning the ball versus holding structure and keeping their opponents in front of them? We seemed to be trying to address the challenge by trying to 'WIN' it, rather than just taking the air out of the game and halving it for a while - forcing a secondary stoppage, bringing up a 5th (and a 6th, and a 7th) and just slowing it the hell down. I have this memory from early in the 4th - and let's be honest, the game was all but shot at 3/4 time - of Liber starting in the 'receive spot' and trying to win it...and Bont starting in a sweeper style position but leaving that spot and trying to win it...Oliver actually winning it and flipping it out to a streaking Petracca with no-one separating him from the forwards...

Was there any suggestion from the commentators that we should radically change our centre square group or modify our approach to that part of the game? Was anyone else thinking a group of Bailey Williams and Roarke Smith as 'twin sweepers' with one of the Bont/Liber/Macrae group acting as a ball winner and defensive wingers on both sides? Was there any real change in strategy (it didn't seem to change watching at the ground).

To me it seemed we were ready for Gawn but in no way prepared for Jackson and once he started acting as a 4th mid + ruck, the game was up. I guess I was disappointed as this is how Melbourne beat Geelong (albeit with Gawn in the ruck chair) scoring 102 points from Stoppage that night and I assumed we would be 'ready' if things started going awry.

I vaguely remember the commentators mentioning after Melbourne kicked their 3rd or 4th goal before 3/4 time how all of our mids ended up on the attacking side of the centre circle and couldn't do anything but pretty much stand and watch the Melbourne mids stream into attack.

[Mutz]

So. Again - Writing this without having watched the telecast.

The move into the ruck of Jackson around the 10-min mark of q3 really (REALLY) seemed to change the game. The ground level follow-up provided by Jackson seemed to be causing a real problem, we weren't holding the point on the defensive side and one of the Melbourne mids (notably Petracca) was disengaging from the contest and pushing forward...

From the telecast, did it look (as it did live) like our centre square group were really over-hunting/over-focussed on possession/winning the ball versus holding structure and keeping their opponents in front of them? We seemed to be trying to address the challenge by trying to 'WIN' it, rather than just taking the air out of the game and halving it for a while - forcing a secondary stoppage, bringing up a 5th (and a 6th, and a 7th) and just slowing it the hell down. I have this memory from early in the 4th - and let's be honest, the game was all but shot at 3/4 time - of Liber starting in the 'receive spot' and trying to win it...and Bont starting in a sweeper style position but leaving that spot and trying to win it...Oliver actually winning it and flipping it out to a streaking Petracca with no-one separating him from the forwards...

Was there any suggestion from the commentators that we should radically change our centre square group or modify our approach to that part of the game? Was anyone else thinking a group of Bailey Williams and Roarke Smith as 'twin sweepers' with one of the Bont/Liber/Macrae group acting as a ball winner and defensive wingers on both sides? Was there any real change in strategy (it didn't seem to change watching at the ground).

To me it seemed we were ready for Gawn but in no way prepared for Jackson and once he started acting as a 4th mid + ruck, the game was up. I guess I was disappointed as this is how Melbourne beat Geelong (albeit with Gawn in the ruck chair) scoring 102 points from Stoppage that night and I assumed we would be 'ready' if things started going awry.

That's very perceptive mjp. My recollection of the centre bounces is similar, that it wasn't a clean tap to their mids but a struggle on the deck with the ball ricocheting around. I attributed their clearance domination to a drop in commitment from us but it could well have been Jackson acting a 4th mid combined with an overly aggressive set-up from us.

Groan - I don't really want to watch any part of that game again!

[boydogs]

It looked like we were tired - out jumped, out muscled, out run. Tactics and structure can't hide this

[jeemak]

It looked like we were tired - out jumped, out muscled, out run. Tactics and structure can't hide this

I haven't watched the replay yet, but I will eventually. A family member of mine who isn't close to up to date with strategy or tactics pinpointed that straight away and I was so pissed off with our positioning that I discarded it.

Within an hour or two after the game I softened and called her and admitted she seemed right, on reflection right from the word go they were running on top of the ground better than we were, additionally they seemed to have as far as the TV telecast allows both defencive and offencive advantage in numbers which isn't a good sign.

I've since accepted it's likely we were coming from a long way off, but the media gas-lit me and pretty much everyone else into believing we had the freshness advantage because they had only played once in 28 days and we'd been a one team *!*!*!*! hole for that time. Funnily, nobody ever calls out that one in 28 after the game turned into three in 30.....

They deserved it, we may have been tired, but there's no excuse for not setting up properly when we should have. That's actually the thing you do when you're tired to keep shit together.

[Grantysghost]

I really believe fundamentally there's a game management void in this sport when I compare to my other love the world game for eg.

I find it aggravating at times the rigidity I see with some of the coaching; it shows such a disdain for fluidity and phases and gets stuck in the mire; completely non reactive to game situations.

I know my hobby horse in here is tempo footy, identifying and reacting to situations and I'm flogging it to death in this post!

John Longmire, like the Toe Cutter he knows who I am (well what I'm saying at least!) is one of the really great coaches for mine, seems to have a play book to draw on that works.

Possession, lead, mark, repeat; drain the clock, wrest back control. Suffocate movement where necessary.

https://media.giphy.com/media/wSU1U3h1PFFsc/giphy.gif

Petracca cheats forward, he's done it all season I even mentioned it prior to the game.

At 3 and a bit goals down they were going to roll the dice with their attacking setup we just had to be aware of this and setup accordingly.

One more goal we have them really starting to panic.

Hindsight is wonderful but I would have loved to see a ten minute phase of defending the stoppage.

Someone call it!

I want to see the mid group huddled calling a play.

You put your park the bus / maintain the status quo midfield in (Dunks, Libba, Treloar, Cordy for eg) and you play the game in the proper phase for the situation.

https://media.giphy.com/media/dAQgHOv2Yci5D4qQwi/giphy.gif


Running the same play hoping for the best well...

https://media.giphy.com/media/3oz8xIHoB64uYksaLm/giphy.gif

With 666 you just have to have this is your arsenal. One of the most bruise free GF's I've seen, 666, stand no third man up etc really hasnt done the game any favours for mine.

I know the best players have basket ball backgrounds but enough already with the attacking circle jerk.

https://media.giphy.com/media/26vIeWW4o1M38F8qY/giphy.gif

A quote from the Cauldron re the US and "Soccer" describes my sentiment well :

"Fans don’t inherently love scoring, they love the plays that most affect what they do love: winning."

I'd expand on that and say, plays that also stop you losing (think Duryea v Lions).

Back on topic; in the world game, you're a goal up in the 65th in a knock-out final, you adjust!

Back 5? Your wing backs don't push forward, your attacking midfielder sits in the pocket, players all sit deeper and narrower, soak up the heat, attack on the counter.

What do we do? Drop the +1? Take a leaf out of the Ross Lyon playbook of genius and put your extra where you need it?

https://media.giphy.com/media/eka6qC0NF0K7C/giphy.gif

103 - 7, in a GF in 40 mins and we barely reacted. I'm still in shock to be honest.

Not sure I'll ever work out the lack of urgency, the blank pages in the playbook.

I'm not sure this makes any sense at all but it feels good to post again haha.

Plus I got a Mad Max reference in so for me...

Nothing but net! :cool:

https://media.giphy.com/media/kZvZjN94f4QO4/giphy.gif

[1eyedog]

Great post Granty I'm still at a loss why defending our 19 point lead midway through the third wasn't high on the radar. I get you can lose a game by not trying to win it but we really needed to adjust after they kicked the goal against the flow of play that put them to within 13 points.

The quarter needed to be shut down and it wasn't. We needed to make the end of the 3rd a battle of attrition but we didn't seem to have anything left to give.

[Grantysghost]

Great post Granty I'm still at a loss why defending our 19 point lead midway through the third wasn't high on the radar. I get you can lose a game by not trying to win it but we really needed to adjust after they kicked the goal against the flow of play that put them to within 13 points.

The quarter needed to be shut down and it wasn't. We needed to make the end of the 3rd a battle of attrition but we didn't seem to have anything left to give.

Agree. We really do appear from the outside to have very few levers to pull when things go awry.

Maybe that's more systemic of the coaching attitudes across the board, we believe in our way ergo our system or bust type mentality?

[bulldogsthru&thru]

The lead up to the game was all Melbourne. The aftermath has been all Melbourne. I’m surprised there hasn’t been more talk about our collapse to be honest. It was one of the most dramatic collapses ever seen. Melbourne are good but I’m just not going to give them all the credit for it. Not when we’ve allowed far inferior teams to do the same thing.

[Grantysghost]

The lead up to the game was all Melbourne. The aftermath has been all Melbourne. IÂ’m surprised there hasnÂ’t been more talk about our collapse to be honest. It was one of the most dramatic collapses ever seen. Melbourne are good but IÂ’m just not going to give them all the credit for it. Not when weÂ’ve allowed far inferior teams to do the same thing.

That 2019 draft they absolutely killed it. Jackson and Pickett, I mean Jackson went after Rowell and Anderson. Pickett they moved up the order to get him ?

They missed the 18 super draft early too by trading out for Lever in 17 (future) and 6 (Hogan) for May and Kolodjashnij (6 was GC King) but still managed to get Sparrow and Jordan with later picks. Amazing recruiting.

But yes ultimately agree it’s probably the biggest blow out in almost any game I can recall. I mean 97 was what 4 goals and that was unheard of. I’m worried about the long term psychological effect but time will tell and really, yes I’m going to be that guy….it wasn’t a level playing field in the finals series so I do have a big asterisk next to this flag.

Of course on the day, considering the scenario for both teams the Demons were better, I think they play a great territory game forward and have a resolute defence back. Have guys sacrificing for the greater good (Brayshaw) so “Trac” can play the Dusty role.

But they came from outside the 8 in the previous two seasons, so it’s really almost unheard of the way they dominated after half time in that rd 23 game v the Cats. I’d written them off they looked pathetic in that second quarter where the cats kicked 8 goals to 2 and had a 7 goal break at the half and 5 goal break at 3/4 time.

I don’t think they’re that much of an outrider that forward line isn’t A grade, but crikey they either have Steven Dank back there somewhere (Goodwin’s mate) or they just had one of the all time great seasons from former Arsenal man Burgess.

Fitness and Recruiting, put those guys on the podium with Yze.

As for them mocking our celebration, expected nothing less and tbh I’m not sure it was wise for us to do it in the first place.

[mjp]

I want to see the mid group huddled calling a play.


The scarey part is mate the midfield group WERE huddling together before each CBD. What they were actually talking about though is the question that should be asked.

[EasternWest]

The scarey part is mate the midfield group WERE huddling together before each CBD. What they were actually talking about though is the question that should be asked.

Bailey Smith's rig I bet.

[Grantysghost]

Bailey Smith's rig I bet.

https://i.postimg.cc/TYGhMcF3/80-C59-EF3-4229-4350-9370-E0-D897910-D2-D.jpg (https://postimages.org/)

Or why he has a frilled neck lizard on his scapula.

My interpretation: they have ice in their veins. (I’ll see myself out)

[Cyberdoggie]

The scarey part is mate the midfield group WERE huddling together before each CBD. What they were actually talking about though is the question that should be asked.

Having no plan for this was inexcusable for me. It was the glaring obvious in the Geelong game that was the difference, and yet our guys in the mid just were scratching their heads.

We suddenly looked as slow as the Washington Generals in the middle, Bont was always stretching for a Petracca running away, Libba and Macrae were like sign posts. Surely we had a plan B, perhaps get some quicker legs in there such as Smith to stay goal side of Petracca and not allow him to run directly out. Or trying Treloar and Dunks perhaps.
For a team with such reported midfield depth we seemed to have no options, that's what bothered me.


Also picking Cordy over Gardner was a huge mistake, just thought i'd put that out there again.

[FrediKanoute]

Having no plan for this was inexcusable for me. It was the glaring obvious in the Geelong game that was the difference, and yet our guys in the mid just were scratching their heads.

We suddenly looked as slow as the Washington Generals in the middle, Bont was always stretching for a Petracca running away, Libba and Macrae were like sign posts. Surely we had a plan B, perhaps get some quicker legs in there such as Smith to stay goal side of Petracca and not allow him to run directly out. Or trying Treloar and Dunks perhaps.
For a team with such reported midfield depth we seemed to have no options, that's what bothered me.


Also picking Cordy over Gardner was a huge mistake, just thought i'd put that out there again.

Why? I don't think this made one bit of diffference to the result. Cordy did his job.

[Mantis]

Having no plan for this was inexcusable for me. It was the glaring obvious in the Geelong game that was the difference, and yet our guys in the mid just were scratching their heads.

We suddenly looked as slow as the Washington Generals in the middle, Bont was always stretching for a Petracca running away, Libba and Macrae were like sign posts. Surely we had a plan B, perhaps get some quicker legs in there such as Smith to stay goal side of Petracca and not allow him to run directly out. Or trying Treloar and Dunks perhaps.
For a team with such reported midfield depth we seemed to have no options, that's what bothered me.



Treloar was in there a fair bit, well a fair but compared to the 2 previous finals, but really surprised to read that Dunks only had 3 CBA's.

If Dunks isn't in there crashing bodies I'm not sure what his role is going forward because as we saw in the GF his ball use in open play isn't his greatest strength.

[mjp]

That 2019 draft they absolutely killed it. Jackson and Pickett, I mean Jackson went after Rowell and Anderson. Pickett they moved up the order to get him?

Be careful. Don't be messing with the Vic-centric bias of the AFL media come draft time. Surely the ruckman from the unbeaten championship winning team would be selected way, way below two of the mids from the Vic Metro team that I think finished dead last?

Be careful GG. Rowell was the best player in that draft, no questions about it. Please ignore the fact that Jackson was all in the National u19 Basketball team (a starter) and also led WA to that national championship...

[The Pie Man]

Treloar was in there a fair bit, well a fair but compared to the 2 previous finals, but really surprised to read that Dunks only had 3 CBA's.

If Dunks isn't in there crashing bodies I'm not sure what his role is going forward because as we saw in the GF his ball use in open play isn't his greatest strength.

Without watching back, I recall he was at plenty of stoppages around the ground. Ended up with 25 disposals

[Grantysghost]

Be careful. Don't be messing with the Vic-centric bias of the AFL media come draft time. Surely the ruckman from the unbeaten championship winning team would be selected way, way below two of the mids from the Vic Metro team that I think finished dead last?

Be careful GG. Rowell was the best player in that draft, no questions about it. Please ignore the fact that Jackson was all in the National u19 Basketball team (a starter) and also led WA to that national championship...

Have you got any more hidden gems over there mate? Surely there's an overlooked ruckman wasting away in the WAFL.

[Testekill]

I haven't rewatched the game but what I remember and other people have said is that Libba was positioned as a sweeper out the back but he kept on getting sucked into the contest.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

I haven't rewatched the game but what I remember and other people have said is that Libba was positioned as a sweeper out the back but he kept on getting sucked into the contest.

Yep - I remember being filthy on Libba few times in that third quarter capitulation.

He also looked like he could barely move - out of gas?

[mjp]

I haven't rewatched the game but what I remember and other people have said is that Libba was positioned as a sweeper out the back but he kept on getting sucked into the contest.

Hmm.

I remember Liber in what I would call the 'opposition hit zone' and Bont nominally in the sweeper spot but making zero effort to hold - that simply didn't seem to be part of the plan!

To be fair, what we were doing was pretty effective until Jackson went in there.
To be fair (#2), it wasn't like Melbourne played any kind of defensive structure at all either.
To be fair (#3), once the opposition decide on a 'charge forward' strategy, it is very hard to stop it unless you take a highly defensive strategy. Most footy depends on one team showing at least SOME regard for the opposition - that way, when the turnover comes they aren't all sitting forward of the play lapping up the cream. Melbourne pretty much rolled the dice and charged ahead...and flipped the footy ahead of the play. I know that sounds blindingly obvious but it is so hard to stop and it is why 5 goal games turn into 12-goal games in seemingly the blink of an eye...

[jeemak]

I've said it fifty times, but the CBD where Libba was blind turned by Petracca was the one that had me cussing most.

[Twodogs]

https://i.postimg.cc/TYGhMcF3/80-C59-EF3-4229-4350-9370-E0-D897910-D2-D.jpg (https://postimages.org/)

Or why he has a frilled neck lizard on his scapula.

My interpretation: they have ice in their veins. (I’ll see myself out)

Just to make sure you find the way we might get the butler to show you where it is.

[Grantysghost]

Hmm.

I remember Liber in what I would call the 'opposition hit zone' and Bont nominally in the sweeper spot but making zero effort to hold - that simply didn't seem to be part of the plan!

To be fair, what we were doing was pretty effective until Jackson went in there.
To be fair (#2), it wasn't like Melbourne played any kind of defensive structure at all either.
To be fair (#3), once the opposition decide on a 'charge forward' strategy, it is very hard to stop it unless you take a highly defensive strategy. Most footy depends on one team showing at least SOME regard for the opposition - that way, when the turnover comes they aren't all sitting forward of the play lapping up the cream. Melbourne pretty much rolled the dice and charged ahead...and flipped the footy ahead of the play. I know that sounds blindingly obvious but it is so hard to stop and it is why 5 goal games turn into 12-goal games in seemingly the blink of an eye...

They cheat forward like nothing I've ever seen because they sag Brayshaw back and trust their floater Lever to read any dump kicks.
It's coaching to your strengths perfectly, with all players bought in.
Yze has been a big acquisition.
I'm not sure our guys are as drilled. Not sure I say doesn't mean I think they aren't.
Lachie Hunter. I just said his name is all.

[jeemak]

They cheat forward like nothing I've ever seen because they sag Brayshaw back and trust their floater Lever to read any dump kicks.
It's coaching to your strengths perfectly, with all players bought in.
Yze has been a big acquisition.
I'm not sure our guys are as drilled. Not sure I say doesn't mean I think they aren't.
Lachie Hunter. I just said his name is all.

Our structural deficiencies versus our ability to compete might mean you're underselling just how well drilled we are. We don't have the luxury of exposing our defence because of personnel, which means that when we're winning the ball around the contest things are that little bit more difficult for us in getting the ball forward on the burst because a turnover is likely of a higher consequence to us.