Any more proof of the "modern gameplan"?
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
- Oh When the Saints
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5621
- Joined: Wed 29 Mar 2006 4:25pm
- Location: QLD
- Contact:
Any more proof of the "modern gameplan"?
Both Collingwood and West Coast in particular are showing us a game of football between to sides who are highly disciplined, and attempt to execute the "modern gameplan".
Flood back in numbers, give your opposition some ground and then pressure the ball carrier as they attempt to move it forward.
Win the footy in the back half and then carry it as quickly as possible into your own forwardline.
Intense tackling pressure through the middle of the ground in 50/50 contests.
It might not be pretty to watch, but it works in finals, and it has seen the Eagles and Swans reach to GF's ... and will see either team tonight reach a PF.
Geelong play the same way, make no mistake.
They are just better drilled and have the talent to execute it with more precision that some other teams.
It is the ultimate gameplan that stands up in finals and in pressure, and most teams now use it.
I can see why Ross Lyon believes in it.
Flood back in numbers, give your opposition some ground and then pressure the ball carrier as they attempt to move it forward.
Win the footy in the back half and then carry it as quickly as possible into your own forwardline.
Intense tackling pressure through the middle of the ground in 50/50 contests.
It might not be pretty to watch, but it works in finals, and it has seen the Eagles and Swans reach to GF's ... and will see either team tonight reach a PF.
Geelong play the same way, make no mistake.
They are just better drilled and have the talent to execute it with more precision that some other teams.
It is the ultimate gameplan that stands up in finals and in pressure, and most teams now use it.
I can see why Ross Lyon believes in it.
They should only play AFL games now when it's raining. Slow games of footy are so much better to watch.
-
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2154
- Joined: Mon 06 Aug 2007 1:53pm
- Location: SE Queensland
- Has thanked: 30 times
- Been thanked: 16 times
- saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30089
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 1233 times
- meher baba
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 7196
- Joined: Mon 14 Aug 2006 6:49am
- Location: Tasmania
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 503 times
OWTS
I think you are bundling a few different gameplans up together here.
Ross's gameplan - as we've seen it so far - involves retreating and corralling when they have the ball until they bring it forward to a point where they are outnumbered and kick it to a contest. This, more often than not, creates a turnover. This is the Swans style of play.
Last night, Collingwood in particular were going for the ball and the tackle all over the ground.
This week and last week, the Eagles were flooding a lot more than they usually do: probably because they didn't have the midfield dominance that they generally have.
I don't recall seeing the Eagles flooding a great deal during finals in previous seasons.
Some of it is horses for courses: Port Adelaide are not a major flooding team either, but they did it in a big way in the 2004 GF because Williams figured out that it would upset and panic the Lions.
Like the Eagles players and the Port players, the Saints players already knew how to flood back and how to apply intense tackling pressure before Lyon appeared on the scene.
What we didn't used to have was a rigid gameplan which we played in a highly disciplined manner: a la the Swans. Is that what we needed to "go to the next level"? I'm still not sure: let's ask the Swans. (Oh no: where are they? That's right, they've gone away on their end of season trip already.
)
I think you are bundling a few different gameplans up together here.
Ross's gameplan - as we've seen it so far - involves retreating and corralling when they have the ball until they bring it forward to a point where they are outnumbered and kick it to a contest. This, more often than not, creates a turnover. This is the Swans style of play.
Last night, Collingwood in particular were going for the ball and the tackle all over the ground.
This week and last week, the Eagles were flooding a lot more than they usually do: probably because they didn't have the midfield dominance that they generally have.
I don't recall seeing the Eagles flooding a great deal during finals in previous seasons.
Some of it is horses for courses: Port Adelaide are not a major flooding team either, but they did it in a big way in the 2004 GF because Williams figured out that it would upset and panic the Lions.
Like the Eagles players and the Port players, the Saints players already knew how to flood back and how to apply intense tackling pressure before Lyon appeared on the scene.
What we didn't used to have was a rigid gameplan which we played in a highly disciplined manner: a la the Swans. Is that what we needed to "go to the next level"? I'm still not sure: let's ask the Swans. (Oh no: where are they? That's right, they've gone away on their end of season trip already.
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."
- Jonathan Swift
- Jonathan Swift
Last night's game broke the myth about the importance of a ruckman. Cox dominated the ruck, but Collingwood smashed them in the clearances and won the game. It goes to show it's all about quality in the midfield. I'm sure Kerr, Judd and Cousins would have made a difference. We should concentrate on stockpiling midfield talent, rather than giving up the world to get a Jolly.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18579
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1905 times
- Been thanked: 843 times
good post. i agreeBaz1970 wrote:Last night's game broke the myth about the importance of a ruckman. Cox dominated the ruck, but Collingwood smashed them in the clearances and won the game. It goes to show it's all about quality in the midfield. I'm sure Kerr, Judd and Cousins would have made a difference. We should concentrate on stockpiling midfield talent, rather than giving up the world to get a Jolly.
You could also say that if Cox wasnt so dominent in the ruck they would have lost by more considering the players out. So there are always 2 ways to look at things. But I do agree lets not worry about Jolly.Baz1970 wrote:Last night's game broke the myth about the importance of a ruckman. Cox dominated the ruck, but Collingwood smashed them in the clearances and won the game. It goes to show it's all about quality in the midfield. I'm sure Kerr, Judd and Cousins would have made a difference. We should concentrate on stockpiling midfield talent, rather than giving up the world to get a Jolly.
-
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2324
- Joined: Sat 01 Oct 2005 5:10pm
- Location: F.K.A. saintsforlife
- Been thanked: 3 times
Thanks GrantBaz1970 wrote:Last night's game broke the myth about the importance of a ruckman. Cox dominated the ruck, but Collingwood smashed them in the clearances and won the game. It goes to show it's all about quality in the midfield. I'm sure Kerr, Judd and Cousins would have made a difference. We should concentrate on stockpiling midfield talent, rather than giving up the world to get a Jolly.
![Surprised :o](./images/smilies/icon_surprised.gif)
Cox plus Judd and Cousins = Win
Before Im 85
- meher baba
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 7196
- Joined: Mon 14 Aug 2006 6:49am
- Location: Tasmania
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 503 times
- meher baba
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 7196
- Joined: Mon 14 Aug 2006 6:49am
- Location: Tasmania
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 503 times
Not that there's anything wrong with that, either way (or both)Brewer wrote:One man's 'treat' is another man's emetic...meher baba wrote:When Grant used to wear his tracky daks, we were quite frequently all treated to a bit of crack.
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."
- Jonathan Swift
- Jonathan Swift
- saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30089
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 1233 times
Baz1970 wrote:Last night's game broke the myth about the importance of a ruckman. Cox dominated the ruck, but Collingwood smashed them in the clearances and won the game. It goes to show it's all about quality in the midfield. I'm sure Kerr, Judd and Cousins would have made a difference. We should concentrate on stockpiling midfield talent, rather than giving up the world to get a Jolly.
Or it could be set that having a very good ruckman kept the Weagles with only their second string mids available on the game.
Was most interesting to observe the importnace ofa very good Full Back.
Glass shut Rocca out..Glass goes over ground and Rocca snages 2 golas.
Glass comes back on and rocc does not geta sniff after that.
The REALITY is that many things are important in having a good team.....you can still win without some of them....but if you lack in some areas then you need to be extra good in others.
No one thing wil win youa flag....but you need to get MOST things right...not ALL...but most.
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....