The Z Word

[boydogs]

WOOFers,

One of our greatest challenges this season to matching and exceeding our success in 2008 would appear to be our approach to playing sides employing the dreaded rolling zone.

We were worse against zone kings Hawthorn than Geelong in last years finals, and have been continually turning the ball over in our last 3 losses to sides using this well.

The Saints have also come off a preliminary final berth but over the summer appear to have mastered the art of zoning to the point where they are now 6-0 and an amazing 195%, yet we are clearly struggling with this.

Why aren't we coping with this? What is our answer to be able to beat good zoning teams?

My view -

The zone is designed to pressure the player with the ball and his outs to force a turnover and use the spread of players that were zoning and now free to move the ball the other way and score.

This means there are less opposition players further down the ground, and so we should be kicking long as opposed trying to handball our way through the mass of opponents surrounding the man in possession. This will at least mean the ball will be in dispute or turned over a lot further down the ground to allow us to reset in defense. The key to this is good ball users behind the ball and good marking and crumbing players in front of it.

The main reason why we have not been doing this or succeeding when trying is when approaching the forward line both our mids and forwards are so drilled to keep handballing to create space for delivery to a leading forward rather than kicking long to the spot that we have been overusing the ball and turning it over. The zone appears to be the antidote to our run and carry game.

We need to restructure our forward line to include some tall, strong, marking forwards and crumbers as opposed to just mid-sized lead up players. Some of the moves considered on this forum including Skipper and Minson in the same side, Harbrow and Lake going forward would help, whereas more lead up players in Murphy and Grant would not as the zone does not allow the mids or forwards the time and space to hit a leading target often enough, remembering we already have Hahn, Welsh, Aker and Johnno.

There is also the other side of the zone, how we are implementing it ourselves to produce turnovers and easy goals - to me it seems as though we sit back off the player with the ball too much and do not apply enough direct pressure

I could be well off base with a lot of this, but I want to stimuate the many great minds on this forum to create some ideas for how the team can overcome this and get back to the top of the table :)

Thoughts?

[Rance Fan]

I know in basketball zones the way to unsettle it is thru quick ball movement. By moving the ball from left to right for example it prevents the opposition from setting up there zone in time. Of course fast precise passing and movement is required. Also its often best to try and get a pass into he middle this can often break up a press or zone set by the defence.
Although this may be dangerous in that you open the corridor up, it can also open up the defense. The defense are wanting you to kick wide down the line then they bottle you up and corner you. Inturn pressuring you into losing the ball/ creating a turnover.

What we need to do is have confidence, skills, run and support. Not sure we have that at the moment.
I recall we beat the hawks last year in Tas, by playing that brand of footy. Still basically the same team as last year, they just need to switch on.
I also think having a basketball coach as part of the football coaching dept would be useful. Brian Gorgeion?? Or maybe a soccor coach....

[LostDoggy]

The soccer zone is a lot more similar to the AFL zone than a basketball zone.

The main difference being that in soccer you can use the offside rule to your advantage when you zone, as forwards can't lurk behind your back four when you push up to tighten the zone.

As some have already pointed out, and gogriff has mentioned, in AFL, when defenders push up to tighten the zone they leave heaps of space behind them that can be exploited if you have a long target to kick to. The Dogs have been trying to counteract the zone in a similar way to soccer, with forwards coming back towards the midfield to get a possession and bring the midfield into play (the Arsenal watchers around here will know what I'm talking about). The problem with this is what we've seen in the past few weeks, where the entire forward 50 is left vacant. This is actually unnecessary in AFL as there is no offside rule.

This is why I've been saying that we leave a marking target isolated in the forward 50 at all times -- Brad Johnson is my pick, as good as anyone one-on-one -- and go quick and long to him, while other forwards swarm forward to crumb. The midfield and defence cannot/should not push up all at once because that's when you get exposed by the turnover. Take a leaf out of the zone-book and when the ball is in your forward 50, midfielders and defenders actually look to get in DEFENSIVE position (counter-intuitive I know), so don't push too high up the ground, and trust your forwardline to do the job man-on-man. Even if they lose it, most of your midfield and defence is still sitting deep so your opponent can't penetrate and go coast-to-coast in any case. Soccer coaches know this and so you see teams sitting deep and allow opponents possession up to a certain point - the halfway line, for example. Every well-drilled soccer team has a line of allowance, up to which they allow their opponents to have possession, but after which they press to win possession back: Manchester United's is around five to ten metres behind the halfway line, while Liverpool's is a lot higher as they like to press opponents in their own half. It's a very efficient method of defending instead of chasing the ball all over the park.

In AFL, however, it seems that we're trying to press all over the field, with our forwards killing themselves tiring themselves out to create pressure. It's strange, as the footy field is actually a lot bigger than a soccer field, and we see all the time teams just chasing tail and players chasing the ball carrier and just be one step too slow as the ball goes the length of the field. We would do better conserving energy by allowing opponents space up to a certain point, and get numbers back and strategically set traps to punish turnovers (this is essentially what zoning is trying to do).

What we do need to do is win the midfield possession battle, which we have been doing. What we don't need to do is run forward in waves like madmen so that we're exposed on the turnover, which we love to do.

AFL purists will hate it because it will slow the game down and scoring will fall dramatically, but defence wins premierships (well it helps)!

[Sockeye Salmon]

So all we need is someone who can kick 110 metres?

[LostDoggy]

I think you'll find that in Rd 15 2008, we were the only team capable of braking down that zone and subsequently gaving Hawthorn a spanking.

The Zone is not the problem, it's our workrate defensively and decision making with the ball in our hands is the problem and those are not mutually exclusive.

When the ball comes bounding out of half back and we dont get hands on it until a kick in or across the back pocket, it gives the opposition ample to to zone up and kill our space.

We need to work harder up the ground, creating preceived pressure which will open more cracks and make it easier to hit up options. We smashed Hawthorn around the middle and half forward last year, they turned the ball over constantly allowing us time to work it from the middle of the ground and morew times than not we found the right target.

[LostDoggy]

So all we need is someone who can kick 110 metres?

Yep.

Q.Lynch x 10.

[LostDoggy]

So all we need is someone who can kick 110 metres?

Look, not saying the transition game becomes unimportant, of course there's a lot more to tactics than can be covered in a short blurb on a forum, but in broad strokes, conveying that a basketball style run up, run back, run up, run back that we play is exciting when it comes off, but zonal teams that are a bit more efficient with their defensive movement are picking off the 'transition only', high-risk teams (like the Dogs) when they make turnovers.

I don't even think the zone is all that advanced tactically -- as many AFL coaches have already alluded to, AFL defensive tactics only started to really take off in the past 10 years, while other sports have been evolving these concepts for the past 80 - 100 years. What Paul Roos and Alistair Clarkson and Ross Lyon have done is learn from other field sports and adapt it to AFL.

My solution of isolating forwards is hardly revolutionary, even in AFL, but many teams in field hockey, which hasn't had an offside rule since it was abolished in the late '90s, are doing precisely that now, with a predatory forward lurking all over the front while the rest of the team sits deeper to draw the opposition forward and hit them on the counter. The Australian men's hockey team has had to learn how to play this style in the past 10 years in order to become successful -- the traditional Aussie style of high-line, high-risk pressing was being taken apart by the more methodical European teams that were just sitting back and picking us off on the counter (using an isolated high forward as an outlet). We've now learnt to meld a more defensive game with the natural Australian style and are enjoying a far more successful time of it.

I would argue that a team with the Dogs personnel (hard inside, quick to break in waves) is better off drawing teams forward so that space is opened up behind them and within the zone (as the zone is stretched forward so spaces between opposition players are bigger, then hitting them on the counter. This would give the backline a huge chop out in terms of numbers, clogs up space in our backline (yes, a form of flooding) and makes the half-back line the most important in terms of giving a team its forward drive. You see this with the Saints now with Gilbert, Ray and Fisher being their most important players in terms of getting forward, and players like Dawson aren't being isolated with their direct opponent.

We're trying to play from the middle and overwhelm teams, but I don't really think our personnel is suited to that style of play as (for some reason) we don't seem to be much chop one-on-one. That could be because our players tend to be specialists with only one main skill (in-and-under, outside flankers, quarterback, forward crumbers) rather than all-rounded/complete players (apart from Coons, Griff and Boyd), so are actually better in tandem complementing each other instead of in isolation trying to beat their opponent.

[boydogs]

Anyone catch the Bombers v Hawks game tonight? Commentators were remarking after the game what a worry it was for Hawthorn that their zone was beaten so badly they had to resort to one on one in the last quarter, in which they struggled even more so than in the preceeding three quarters.

Through the game they said Hawthorn were pressing up on the ball carrier with their zone but Essendon were more willing to let Hawthorn bring the ball forward of centre.

It appeared to me that Essendon were not playing a midfield or rolling zone, but just flooding back and when winning the ball they were sprinting off half back with their best runners through the corridor. With the result being a 40 point win over the reigning premiers and zone kings there are surely lessons to be learned.

Is our failure then to penetrate the opposition zone as much to do with our own defensive tactics and pressure to generate turnovers for ourselves as it is to do with our ball use and decision making when we have the ball?

Maybe this is why Eade has been playing Harbrow down back. Perhaps also we need to have Griffen back with Everitt and Gilbee to pressure and get the attacks started from our backline when we do win the ball. Our mid sized forward line will be able to use their strength in leading into space if we are on the 'fast break'.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Essendon have about 50 times more legspeed than we do

[GVGjr]

Essendon have about 50 times more legspeed than we do

They are a very quick side.
Using their pace as well as they did last night is certainly one way to beat the zone.

[Go_Dogs]

They are a very quick side.
Using their pace as well as they did last night is certainly one way to beat the zone.

Yes, they looked very good playing on at all costs, much like we were in Eade's first years.

Really made me want Stack in the team.

[bulldogtragic]

Yes, they looked very good playing on at all costs, much like we were in Eade's first years.

Really made me want Stack in the team.
Precisely.

We have some very, very quick players in our squad. Just not in the 22 currently.

I hope young Daniels kicks on, from all reports he's one fast white boy.

[Mantis]

Precisely.

We have some very, very quick players in our squad. Just not in the 22 currently.

I hope young Daniels kicks on, from all reports he's one fast white boy.

Most of these fast guys are battling away in the Williamstown 2's and are a million miles away from senior footy.

I can't see our speed improving in the short to medium term, perhaps Stack can push for selection over the next month and he might help a little.

[Hot_Doggies]

Most of these fast guys are battling away in the Williamstown 2's and are a million miles away from senior footy.

I can't see our speed improving in the short to medium term, perhaps Stack can push for selection over the next month and he might help a little.

Although Stack is fast enough for AFL, i wouldnt call him super quick.

[GVGjr]

Really made me want Stack in the team.

I rate Stack but he has to do more to command a spot. I saw him a couple of years back playing for Werribee at Frankston and he just had the ball on a string that day so I hope he has another good one tomorrow.
If he can start getting back to playing some consistent football for Williamstown he might sneak in for a couple of senior games. He was close a couple of times last year but copped a couple of injuries.

[GVGjr]

We have some very, very quick players in our squad. Just not in the 22 currently.

I hope young Daniels kicks on, from all reports he's one fast white boy.

I don't think our squad is overly quick at all.
When they are up and running they do push forward quickly though.

Shame that there is no definite date on Daniels return but quad injuries tend to be like that.

[GVGjr]

Although Stack is fast enough for AFL, i wouldnt call him super quick.

Agreed but when he is in full flight he won't get run down too many times.

[AndrewP6]

I don't think our squad is overly quick at all.
When they are up and running they do push forward quickly though.

Shame that there is no definite date on Daniels return but quad injuries tend to be like that.

What's changed over the last couple of seasons, when we were often referred to as "fleet-footed"...only thing I can think of is the loss of Ray and McMahon...

[Hot_Doggies]

Matty Robbins, Rohan Smith a few years back.

[azabob]

What's changed over the last couple of seasons, when we were often referred to as "fleet-footed"...only thing I can think of is the loss of Ray and McMahon...

It's all about perception. Not much has changed, but if you can't get the footy you look slow regardless of how quick you are.