SA Footy

Let's see if the keepings off works against the Eagles Bubbles.

regards,

REB

Great Win Fruit Tingles !
Keeps up the Great Record at the Dome !

REB

Let me say this, yes ideally we would love to see entertaining footy for 100 minutes per game, 8 games per round, 22 rounds per year.

Let me kick off by saying, if the Crows played the same style as Sydney has over the past 12 months for the entire game I would be concerned, but lets keep last nights game and that particular strategy in perspective.

Throughout the 70's, 80's and 90's when a side got a run on against a quality side like Port Adelaide in the SANFL or the Hawks or Bombers of the 80's in the VFL, ask yourself how did these sides stop the 3 or 4 goal run on.

Answer, through premeditated physicality, it was part and parcel with the game, for that era. Now, you get 4 weeks for an attempted strike, you just can't use that strategy

So sides need to develop a strategy to delivery the same outcome, "which is to stop the run on and bring the game back on your terms". To do this you have a couple of options, as the Crows did last night slow the tempo of the game through possession footy, you other option is to flood numbers behind the ball.

Most sides currently put numbers behind the ball, reason being, they do not have the skill base to execute 5-7 minutes of hitting targets......... Malthouse stated today that the Pies would not have the confidence or skill level to not only execute as the Crows did but to create a scoring option in the process

Yes it was not pretty, but it was 7 minutes out of 100.......... and it got the momentum back

REB. Mate this may hurt, but if the Cats emkployed such a strategy in the 90's "to win ugly when required", they would have a couple of extra flags on their club wall, instead they went out and played all out attack aimed at kicking 15-20goals, but the problem was they allowed a couple of sides to kick 16-21 goals....... which cost the Cats Premierships

In summary, the Cats were the obvious stand outs fopr round 1, both St Kilda and West Coast did not put the fear of god in me, but lets remember, this is only round 1, and most importantly the season is not a sprint, it's a marathon

I'll take 4 away points away from home anytime no matter the spectacle, and given the Cats record interstate, "during the regular season" I'm sure Bomber Thompson would say the same

Dunc7 "man up" spot on buddy. End Of Story.

I understand all of that Syd, I'm just saying that it is ugly football that is crap to watch and more than one fan turned the TV off on Monday night. What will happen when the Crows try this and heaven help them, the oppo does man up as duncs and Coowrong have suggested?

regards,

REB

Rik E Boy wrote:I understand all of that Syd, I'm just saying that it is ugly football that is crap to watch and more than one fan turned the TV off on Monday night. What will happen when the Crows try this and heaven help them, the oppo does man up as duncs and Coowrong have suggested?

regards,

REB

Still this tactic might break the momentum of a winning burst, before the opposition realise what's happening and man up. Why didn't Collingwood man up, are they thick or something? It's a fairly clear that if the marks are contested you can neutralise this tactic. This tactic is ugly, but coaches are paid to win matches and anyone who beats Collingwood is OK in my book

Think you'll find they didn't man up quickly is because they are highly vulnverable in defence without having advantage in numbers back there, and this forms the basis of their defensive strategy ... They start manning up and all of a sudden it's a 3 on 3 or 4 on 4 50m area, and I'm sure the Crows owuld have been more than happy to go long if this were the case ..

REB

I definitely did not turn off the tv, where talking about 7 mins of the game, either side of the 7 minb period, the Crows managed 7 goals in the second 1/4 and 5 in the last.......

I aplaud there skill to execute the strategy effectively as they did and I aplaud the coaching staff for having more then one play in their play book........

If Richmond or Brisbane had the tactic or skill to execute, maybe they might of been in the contest a little longer......

More particularly, Sydney allowed the Bombers to skip away to 9 to 2 in the first 1/4 last week, if they did what the crows did, they may of went in to 1/4 time 6 goals to 2 down, given the end margin, there lack of ability to stop the bombers run, cost them the game.........

The tackle stat can be misleading some times - a side will and can have a lot more tackles if they are second to the ball

Bit like the 'hard ball get' stats.

Remember one press conference a few years back when Port were riding high - might have even been the premiership year:

JOURNO: You're ranked 14th in the comp in hard ball gets. Is that a concern?
CHOCKO: No. Because we win clear possession most of the time.

The bottom line is,this tactic is not new,it is just a little different to what we have grown familiar with.

In years gone by,teams would knock the ball over the boundary,kick it to a contest and develop a pack in which to keep the ball in getting numbers around the contest and holding the ball in for ball up after ball up.Now,the powers that be have introduced interpritations of old rules which now penalise such tactics,it was only a matter of time before coaches and clubs developed different ways of maintaining posessionor,halting a run-on from other teams.

As ruckman have had to adapt,as full-backs(who in my mind are the most harshly dealt with) have had to adapt with the modern rule interpitations,so will other teams in countering this tactic.

Magpiespower wrote:

The tackle stat can be misleading some times - a side will and can have a lot more tackles if they are second to the ball

Bit like the 'hard ball get' stats.

Remember one press conference a few years back when Port were riding high - might have even been the premiership year:

JOURNO: You're ranked 14th in the comp in hard ball gets. Is that a concern?
CHOCKO: No. Because we win clear possession most of the time.

Hard ball gets need to be looked at in consideration with loose ball gets. To look at them in isolation is pure folly, the ball is either in one of three situations, we've got it, they've got it it is in dispute - Allan Jeans.

Stand to reason if you can win it more times than the opposition through LBG's and HBG's you will have more opportunities to score....

HBG's and LBG's also need to be considered with tackles, smoothers , shephers, chases spoils etc as they create the opportunities for the LBG's and HBGs

Coorong wrote:Dunc7 "man up" spot on buddy. End Of Story.

Man on Man may work in the amateurs but it don't work in the AFL in that situation otherwise it would have occured 15 years ago when sides first started to wind down the clock....

Manning up results in a one-on-one contest up the field (inside the 50 m) because the side with the ball (Adelaide) will have sucked the defendes (Collingwood) up the ground out of the defensive area there by creating more space for the forwards to lead into. Then it is a matter of putting the ball out in front of the leading forward - the defender has as much of getting it as I have of making my AFL debut....

Reilly and Goodwin will hit some inside 30 m (of goals) from the centre square leading (notice how they had it 2 or 3 times in that buiild up as the designated kicker....)

That reason why teams zone off or set up the zone defence is because man on man you have no chance. Even then Adelaide were able to create the one on one with hentschell and his defender and one of the Adelaide players provided a block/shepherd (n.b. please I didn't use the the term screen as that is for infantile sports such as basketball).

That is why this tactic is here to stay as it breaks up the zone by getting the ball goal side of the minor axis of the ground where the skilled footabllers Buckleys, Voss, Black, Goodwin, Williams Judd etc can hit a target on the chest leading out or a team has provided a shepherd for them.

Rik E Boy wrote:Let's see if the keepings off works against the Eagles Bubbles.

regards,

REB

I agree not a good tactic to try against the Eagles but we were playing Collingwood and the tactic absolutely killed their run, if we try against the Eagles I predict failure, they just apply more pressure than the pies did. i think Craig might try it if the Eagles get a run on and will be very interesting REB

1980 Tassie Medalist wrote:

Coorong wrote:Dunc7 "man up" spot on buddy. End Of Story.

Manning up also makes it easier to set a "screen" and give one person an unrestricted run into an unzoned area ...

Reports were that not one of the Collingwoods forward players were their side of the centre circle during the Crows 3 minutes of "keepies off". Ever thought the reason for it was cause the Pies were flooding? What do you expect the Crows to do? Bomb it long to a 3 on 1 contest? Then you'll be bitching about that.

MW wrote:Reports were that not one of the Collingwoods forward players were their side of the centre circle during the Crows 3 minutes of "keepies off". Ever thought the reason for it was cause the Pies were flooding? What do you expect the Crows to do? Bomb it long to a 3 on 1 contest? Then you'll be bitching about that.

Exactly - it is a way to break up the flood. I didn't find it irritating. I found it amusing that Collingwood couldn't get a touch on the ball. The Crows kept possession until they could create an opportunity. Whats wrong with that?

I find it amusing that Neil Craig doesn't have a great finals record (although it wasn't appreciated during his time at Norwood I can tell you) and that in recent games against good sides the Crows have been beaten at Football Park, West Coast yesterday, NAB Granny, St Kilda final last year. This exciting beautiful flowing style of football that has been presented as a winning game plan really stands up under pressure doesn't it?

Well, it does against the 15th ranked side and that's the main thing!!


regards,

REB

Once again the Cows show that their forward line (minus Ruccutio) dont have the natural instinct as forwards to move to the right spots.Welsh and Hentschel the best two at it.

Thompson,as I suspected,gets it but burns it,and the forward structure is far from what it should/could be.