Round 3, 2008 Opposition Player Focus: Sam Fisher

[LostDoggy]

While there are more obvious choices from our opponents this week (Riewoldt, Dal Santo et al), I have chosen Sam Fisher to profile as the Saints' danger player. As others have pointed out, it is not down back/forward where the game will be won or lost, rather, it is in the midfield battles and how the ball is delivered into the forward 50 that will be crucial. As the key rebounding defender for the Saints, Sam Fisher will be pivotal to creating run out of their back half and setting up attacks.

http://afl.com.au/portals/0/images_saints/2008%20Player%20Images/2008_FISHERSam_med.jpg

DOB : July 10, 1982 (age 25),
Recruited from : West Adelaide Football Club (SANFL)
Height and weight : 191cm / 89kg

[Player profile from Wikipedia:

The versatile defender was selected as pick number 55 in the 2003 AFL Draft. He was 21 years of age when first recruited from West Adelaide, and made his debut in 2004 following some injuries to other key defenders.

In 2005, Fisher took a major step in his career and improved dramatically to hold down a spot of his own in the Saints' defence. He generally played on the third best forward of the opposition, and began to provide terrific run from the half-back line. In 2006, Fisher played every match and racked up 421 disposals for the season. His run and carry from the half-back line was critical to St Kilda's 6th-place finish, and Fisher finish 3rd in the St Kilda Best & Fairest in 2006.

Injuries to other key defenders at the start of the 2007 season saw Fisher assume the mantle at full-back. He performed strongly against the power forwards of the competition, before injuring his hamstring in Round 4. Fisher returned in Round 7, and was able to resume his attacking position across half-back in the second half of the year. He finished off the year strongly, and was nominated in the backline in the squad of 40 players for the All-Australian Team in 2007. Fisher was ranked 8th in total marks, 17th in kicks per game, and second in marks per game.]


WOOF player analysis:
--------------------------

Sam Fisher plays the same role that Lindsay Gilbee plays for the Dogs, a rebounding defender or, as some call it, the 'quarterback' role, essentially using his run to beat his opponent and superior footskills to set up the point of attack. He racks up possessions, averaging 23 a match. He has played well against the Dogs in the past, notching up close to his season high possession count against us in 2005 and 2006 (28 possessions and 10 marks, and 26 possessions respectively). He was quieter last season, averaging below 20 possessions against the Dogs.

He doesn't score many goals, having just kicked 4 in his entire career. Here is one of them:

K0cHLEdWXR4

As mentioned before, he is pivotal to the Saints going into attack. If we can shut down his run we will have gone a long way to cutting off one of their main weapons in loose play. In the past we have used a mobile forward such as Matthew Robbins to stymie his run out of defence by loosely tagging him up the ground. Ross Lyon will try to play him on one of our 'lesser lights', or as a free sweeper in defence, carrying out third man up, crumbing, and clearing off the deck duties. The Dogs cannot allow this to happen, and will have to play man on man in our forward 50, even if it means evening up the numbers around the ground. A player like Aker, Harbrow or even Hill will have to start on Fisher, to keep him honest when we're going forward, while tagging him when he roams further upfield. Rocket could also try to play a larger forward like Hahn on Fisher, to create a height/strength mismatch, however, a more mobile, intelligent forward will probably be a better option as they will be able to chase and put pressure on his disposal.

A double team of a player chasing him out of defence and another coming off their man to attempt a smother or blocking his run would not be a bad option either. Rocket uses players like Aker, Hudson and Cooney to zone across the middle of the park and put pressure on players coming out of defence and try to create a turnover or at least slow our opponents down, which worked a treat last week against Melbourne, and this will be crucial again this week, albeit against a far more skillful opponent and under a roof. If we can keep the quality of the Saints delivery in general play low, then we would have gone a very long way towards helping out our backline against their direct opponents.

--

Interesting factoid: Sam Fisher was an excellent junior golfer, playing off scratch.

[Dry Rot]

Great thread Lantern and a fine start to a regular WOOF focus on an opposition danger man.

I liked the comparison to Gilbee and therefore the threat that Fisher is to us.

Ripper goal that - bet you Fisher is still talking about it.

[BulldogBelle]

Lantern' Lantern, Lantern - excellent report and love the touch with adding the You Tube. Good stuff.

Fisher is a big integral part of the Saints lineup shutting him down would be a good start. Look forward to watching the battle and who plays on him.

[Dogs 24/7]

First up I just want to thank Lantern for his opposition player profile which will be great addition to WOOF. Well done.
Between that and the threads that Mantis and now Griffen have posted lately this place has gone to another level and we all benefit from that.

Back to Fisher, isn't it a shame that we haven't been able to do as well with mature aged recruits like him but its a credit to himself to become such a dangerous player.

Montagna and Gram are very capable of creating play but Fisher is still the non high profile player I think that could really hurt us.

The big question is how do we curb him from having a big influence on the game?

[hujsh]

The problem we may have with Fisher is that simply having a dangerous forward on him may not curb his attack. I doubt Hahn's strength will worry him and i think he can keep up with Murph or Acker. We may need someone to be accountable for him on the rebound.


I think Hahn could go with him because he has similar height and more than enough strength but I'm not sure about speed.

[Go_Dogs]

Great thread Lantern, and agree that Sam is one player we'll have to be cautious of. As much as they're regarded as a shut down team the Saints they have quite a few runners like Sam who'll tear us apart if they have the opportunity.

It'll be interesting to see if we try to play a defensive forward on one of their backline runners or trust our forwards and midfield to take it upon themselves with strong defensive efforts to try to limit these players effect.

[Mantis]

Well done Lantern.

I too think you have picked out one of there most important players. Our big job this week is to make Fisher accountable to a player. He thrives in playing the role as the loose man in defence where he can use his marking ability to cut off forward thrusts and then his running ability to get free and then help set up play.

Not sure who plays on him or possibly who they make him pick up, perhaps Hahn or Murphy if they wont to play him across half back. St.Kilda may even put him on Minson in the hope that he can run off Will at every opportunity.

[The Underdog]

As for who we want to go to him, shouldn't the question be who will he go to?
I mean, he's a defender so I'm sure the Saints will have an opponent in mind for him. The question then is do we say send Murphy (for example) to the backline or the bench to get the matchup we want on Fisher, thus essentially turning one of our forwards into a primarily negative player.
I think we are better off making sure the whole forward group is focused on pressure in the forward half and the same with the midfield group. If we don't allow the ball to be easily gotten out of there and allow Fisher easy possession then he won't hurt us.

[LostDoggy]

As for who we want to go to him, shouldn't the question be who will he go to?
I mean, he's a defender so I'm sure the Saints will have an opponent in mind for him. The question then is do we say send Murphy (for example) to the backline or the bench to get the matchup we want on Fisher, thus essentially turning one of our forwards into a primarily negative player.
I think we are better off making sure the whole forward group is focused on pressure in the forward half and the same with the midfield group. If we don't allow the ball to be easily gotten out of there and allow Fisher easy possession then he won't hurt us.

This is the traditional tactical mindset that modern coaches are exploiting by placing their most dangerous running/kicking player on the least dangerous forward, in the knowledge that a traditional type set up will give this player all the freedom in the world. Traditionally a player like Fisher or Gilbee will play further up the ground as a wingman or centre, but as space has become more and more restricted a playmaker with superior disposal skills has moved further back into the backline. This concept was first floated in soccer at the highest level by the legendary Franz Beckenbauer who moved back from his midfield position to a deep-lying loose playmaker behind the defence, creating the 'libero' position which is different from a sweeper in the sense that they do more than defend.

That's why the player in AFL is sometimes called the 'quarterback', because they do more than just sweep up loose balls, but have to have elite running and disposal skills. Of course all forwards have to put quality pressure in our forward 50, but specifically cutting Fisher out of the rebound play will go a long way to ensuring that the ball coming out of the Saints' backline will not be of anywhere the same quality .. compare Gilbee delivering the ball out of defence versus someone like Addison, or even Lake, for argument's sake. An opposition coach will be more prepared to allow a player with inferior kicking skills loose than Gilbee (one can't just coach for best-case scenarios. There will be passages of play that not every player can be shut down, and therefore have to be prioritised according to the match situation and field position).

A player like Fisher or Gilbee do more than just kick it out, they are also involved two or three times in the chain of handballs to find space to deliver quality ball. Taking this specific player out of the play changes the dynamic and quality of that play entirely. That's why the concept of a 'defensive forward', while limiting in itself, is entirely valid. The forward has to first and foremost be a quality forward, of course, but there are players more suited to tagging in the forwardline than others. There could also be instructions for one of our midfielders (a good tackler like Cooney or Cross, perhaps) to play a kick behind play, thus 'sweep' the area just behind our CHF line and track the running line of rebounding defenders coming out of the forward 50. This is precisely what their brief was in the Melbourne game.

[The Underdog]

This is the traditional tactical mindset that modern coaches are exploiting by placing their most dangerous running/kicking player on the least dangerous forward, in the knowledge that a traditional type set up will give this player all the freedom in the world. Traditionally a player like Fisher or Gilbee will play further up the ground as a wingman or centre, but as space has become more and more restricted a playmaker with superior disposal skills has moved further back into the backline. This concept was first floated in soccer at the highest level by the legendary Franz Beckenbauer who moved back from his midfield position to a deep-lying loose playmaker behind the defence, creating the 'libero' position which is different from a sweeper in the sense that they do more than defend.

That's why the player in AFL is sometimes called the 'quarterback', because they do more than just sweep up loose balls, but have to have elite running and disposal skills. Of course all forwards have to put quality pressure in our forward 50, but specifically cutting Fisher out of the rebound play will go a long way to ensuring that the ball coming out of the Saints' backline will not be of anywhere the same quality .. compare Gilbee delivering the ball out of defence versus someone like Addison, or even Lake, for argument's sake. An opposition coach will be more prepared to allow a player with inferior kicking skills loose than Gilbee (one can't just coach for best-case scenarios. There will be passages of play that not every player can be shut down, and therefore have to be prioritised according to the match situation and field position).

A player like Fisher or Gilbee do more than just kick it out, they are also involved two or three times in the chain of handballs to find space to deliver quality ball. Taking this specific player out of the play changes the dynamic and quality of that play entirely. That's why the concept of a 'defensive forward', while limiting in itself, is entirely valid. The forward has to first and foremost be a quality forward, of course, but there are players more suited to tagging in the forwardline than others. There could also be instructions for one of our midfielders (a good tackler like Cooney or Cross, perhaps) to play a kick behind play, thus 'sweep' the area just behind our CHF line and track the running line of rebounding defenders coming out of the forward 50. This is precisely what their brief was in the Melbourne game.

I understand what you are saying and indeed the concept of the highly skilled quarterback a la Gilbee and the defensive forward. The way I put my argument may have been a little simplistic and outmoded, but what I may have unsuccesfully tried to get across is that Lyon will undoubtedly have a preferred match up for Fisher that he feels will be the one which best exploits a player in our forward line. The question is do we then try to change that match-up and if so with who? Or do we basically tell the group that whoever he goes to has to be aware of of trying to shut Fisher down but that he'll get help from his teammates (and indeed those further up the ground who will do exactly as they did last week in shutting down options up the field)? My reluctance I guess to specify a matchup to shut Fisher down is that I'm not sure who would be the best first shot. This reluctance is 2 part, 1) I think a majority are similiarly suited and 2) a couple certainly aren't.
Considering our likely forward set-up, these are the possible match-ups.

Johnson - not a bad option for them in that he is not renowned for his defensive efforts, but do they really want their offensive backman having to worry about the oppositions mst dangerous forward?

Minson - could be easily run off from, but massively outsizes Fisher. On the whole not a win for us I wouldn't think and one Eade would be quick to change.

Welsh - again not a bad option for St.Kilda but Welsh has shown some excellent defensive capabilities in the first 2 weeks, and might be too strong in the air.

Aker- depending which Aker shows up probably a win for them. He's dangerous going forward, but his defensive work is spotty at best.

Murphy - Could, I think, worry Fisher with his workrate and ability in the air, but would need to be switched on to stick with Fisher once the ball is in St.Kilda's hands.

Hahn - Could be a win for either side. He could certainly match Fisher in certain areas, and supply defensive pressure but isn't the quickest across the ground.

Hill - Possibly but may not be ready for a job such as this yet. Deserves plaudits for his defensive work last week though.

Other than that sending someone like Hargrave forward to pick him up is a possibility.

If it seems like I'm sitting on the fence it's possibly because I'm not sure there is a clear cut winner for the best match-up from our end. That's why I'm tempted to let Fisher go to one of our forwards and see how it works out. Obviously we can change it pretty quick smart if it isn't working.
I'm sure you're right and someone will be set for the job of shutting him down, the question remains who?

[Sockeye Salmon]

If Lyon wants Fisher on someone there's not much you can do about it other than take the guy off the ground/move him to the backline or send him to the goalsquare.

If you try to send a defensive forward to him you end up with a 2-on-1 which means they have a loose man somewhere else in their backline.

The reason Fisher is dangerous is because he is perfectly comfortable being taken back to the square, Gram will just become the main rebounder (he probably is anyway).

[GVGjr]

If Lyon wants Fisher on someone there's not much you can do about it other than take the guy off the ground/move him to the backline or send him to the goalsquare.

If you try to send a defensive forward to him you end up with a 2-on-1 which means they have a loose man somewhere else in their backline.

The reason Fisher is dangerous is because he is perfectly comfortable being taken back to the square, Gram will just become the main rebounder (he probably is anyway).

I agree with this. It will be interesting to see which player Fisher gets. Lyon really rates our midfield, and with good reason, so if it is someone like Murphy then I guess one way to break the tag is to move into defence for a while. Actually Murphy is the sort of player that could still beat him in the forward line anyway.

[LostDoggy]

Setting up a forward defensive strategy cannot be strictly man-on-man, as offensive structures by design are about getting our players away from their direct opponent and defensive rebounds often occur in broken play where strict match-ups at every play is unfeasible/impossible and trying to 'get back on your man' is just an exercise in chasing tail. Thus most modern 'forward defensive' set ups these days are about running to designated zones to cut off space and running avenues while a couple of players closest to the ball chase to slow down the ball carrier and apply pressure and 'herd' the play towards pre-determined areas ie. towards the boundary/into the corridor etc. where we have pre-planned the numerical advantage (thus one of the reasons teams try to go back and switch the play, to get away from an opponent's pre-set hotspot areas, which, for safety, are usually set towards the nearest boundary. An exception is Geelong, which generally herds their opponents into the corridor where they have the current best contested players in the business).

Talking about a forward 'tagging' Fisher is a play by play situation, and in a contested forward situation where there is 50/50 chance the ball could end up going either way there should be a suitably mobile and intelligent player (and knowing Rocket, there will be) designated to immediately keep tabs on where Fisher is and either move into his space or move across to cover his run, my guesses are Hahn (who usually doesn't get involved in the broken play up forward), Aker, who has been used as a tackling forward at times the last two games, and/or Gia, who reads the play better than most. Meanwhile the centreline will have moved into an 'umbrella' line behind the CHF line in a zone type set up to sweep up the defensive rebound, reading the play and immediately cutting off the running line of the rebounding defender.

Well, that's how we've been lining up this year anyway.

ps. btw, your Clarkes and Montagnas feed off Fisher's handballs etc. so even though they run it out occasionally, they are more your 'outside runners' (btw, I hate these simplistic terms to describe players, I certainly never use them while coaching and I don't know anyone who does, just using mediaspeak shorthand to get across the idea), but suffice to say cutting off Fisher will mean cutting off a lot of these guys' supply of ball. Some of these other guys are downhill skiers.. when the going gets tough only a few guys in the Saints (and Fisher is one of them) pick up hardball gets (hmm.. sounds familiar). Lyon has been trying to get them more accountable, but they are no Sydney.