Opposition pace is our weakness.
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
Opposition pace is our weakness.
Essendon loaded up on pace to take us on, and combined with Ryder's prodigous leap enabling Watson et al first use of the ball, only injuries prevented them pantsing us.
Other teams will have taken notice, and will implement the same tactics against us.
We have to develop a tall non-traditional ruckman to counteract this tactic. King has got to be pensioned off and replaced with such a player, otherwise in the future we will be at the mercy of Ryder, Natanui, and the other high-leaping ruckmen who will undoubtedly follow.
Other teams will have taken notice, and will implement the same tactics against us.
We have to develop a tall non-traditional ruckman to counteract this tactic. King has got to be pensioned off and replaced with such a player, otherwise in the future we will be at the mercy of Ryder, Natanui, and the other high-leaping ruckmen who will undoubtedly follow.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6043
- Joined: Mon 21 May 2007 5:31pm
- Location: Currumbin, Quoinslairnd
You honestly reckon that at Rd 20 all of a sudden we've been somehow scandalously exposed as slow?
"The inches we need are everywhere around us. They're in every break in the game. Every minute, every second. On this team we fight for that inch. On this team we tear ourselves and everyone around us to pieces for that inch. We claw with our fingernails for that inch. Because we know when we add up all those inches that's gonna make the f***in' difference between winning and losing! Between living and dying!'
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18635
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1979 times
- Been thanked: 865 times
Re: Opposition pace is our weakness.
we did pick one of our slower teams for the year, actually, and the resting up of cj (in particular) and mcqualter hurt us. there's also geary and steven who we can look at to provide more run if we need it.
but good talls have been one of our great strengths this season, so it is very much a balancing act.
as far as developing a non-traditional ruckman is concerned, look no further than rhys stanley, who is going to be a star down the track.
mcevoy already has claims for selection going on yesterday's rucking efforts.
but good talls have been one of our great strengths this season, so it is very much a balancing act.
as far as developing a non-traditional ruckman is concerned, look no further than rhys stanley, who is going to be a star down the track.
mcevoy already has claims for selection going on yesterday's rucking efforts.
- Munga
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5287
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 12:00am
- Has thanked: 525 times
- Been thanked: 98 times
Stanley
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zh7XkBvYFd0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lk7vA01yVsQ
How's he going at Sandy?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zh7XkBvYFd0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lk7vA01yVsQ
How's he going at Sandy?
Gehrig emerged from scans yesterday saying he was "as sweet as a bun"
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6043
- Joined: Mon 21 May 2007 5:31pm
- Location: Currumbin, Quoinslairnd
Re: Opposition pace is our weakness.
Agree. Reckon McEvoy is a big chance of rejoining the squad simply on the strength of his consistent effort and better mobility. King was a bit of a liability last night.bigcarl wrote:we did pick one of our slower teams for the year, actually, and the resting up of cj (in particular) and mcqualter hurt us. there's also geary and steven who we can look at to provide more run if we need it.
but good talls have been one of our great strengths this season, so it is very much a balancing act.
as far as developing a non-traditional ruckman is concerned, look no further than rhys stanley, who is going to be a star down the track.
mcevoy already has claims for selection going on yesterday's rucking efforts.
"The inches we need are everywhere around us. They're in every break in the game. Every minute, every second. On this team we fight for that inch. On this team we tear ourselves and everyone around us to pieces for that inch. We claw with our fingernails for that inch. Because we know when we add up all those inches that's gonna make the f***in' difference between winning and losing! Between living and dying!'
- meher baba
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 7220
- Joined: Mon 14 Aug 2006 6:49am
- Location: Tasmania
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 516 times
All teams with relatively conventional setups and strategies are always going to be occasionally vulnerable to teams that run the ball out of the backline like maniacs, handpassing the ball all over the joint. Adelaide and the Dogs have capitalised on this for years and, this season, the Bombers have joined them.
The point is that, in order to bring the ball out of the backline in this way, you need to take quite a few risks. In some games these risks are going to pay off, in others you are going to turn the ball over and be punished.
I note that no team that plays in this fashion has reached a GF. And the Dogs and Crows and Bombers don't look particularly likely to do it this season either.
It isn't a percentage approach, but you will get the odd upset win, as happened last night.
The point is that, in order to bring the ball out of the backline in this way, you need to take quite a few risks. In some games these risks are going to pay off, in others you are going to turn the ball over and be punished.
I note that no team that plays in this fashion has reached a GF. And the Dogs and Crows and Bombers don't look particularly likely to do it this season either.
It isn't a percentage approach, but you will get the odd upset win, as happened last night.
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."
- Jonathan Swift
- Jonathan Swift
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6043
- Joined: Mon 21 May 2007 5:31pm
- Location: Currumbin, Quoinslairnd
There's little doubt that plenty went right for the Bombers last night.meher baba wrote:All teams with relatively conventional setups and strategies are always going to be occasionally vulnerable to teams that run the ball out of the backline like maniacs, handpassing the ball all over the joint. Adelaide and the Dogs have capitalised on this for years and, this season, the Bombers have joined them.
The point is that, in order to bring the ball out of the backline in this way, you need to take quite a few risks. In some games these risks are going to pay off, in others you are going to turn the ball over and be punished.
I note that no team that plays in this fashion has reached a GF. And the Dogs and Crows and Bombers don't look particularly likely to do it this season either.
It isn't a percentage approach, but you will get the odd upset win, as happened last night.
"The inches we need are everywhere around us. They're in every break in the game. Every minute, every second. On this team we fight for that inch. On this team we tear ourselves and everyone around us to pieces for that inch. We claw with our fingernails for that inch. Because we know when we add up all those inches that's gonna make the f***in' difference between winning and losing! Between living and dying!'
- QuestionOfAccuracy
- Club Player
- Posts: 610
- Joined: Wed 11 Jul 2007 3:00pm
- Contact:
The first time we played Essendon this year their pace also really hurt us. But on that occasion we were still able to apply enough pressure on them to make their ball use ineffective. Yesterday though, they were winning the ball in and under and were able to run in numbers without pressure. And that really exposed our back 6.
Pace has never been our strength all year, but we've been able to counter that by applying enormous pressure.
Pace has never been our strength all year, but we've been able to counter that by applying enormous pressure.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 212
- Joined: Mon 08 Sep 2008 1:33pm
- Location: Somewhere south of Linton Street
essendon are a russian roulette type team . . .just like freo and the tigers.
when the ball is in dispute . . they back themselves and run forward hoping they will get the pill.
it doesnt work when the ball is turned over.
this system doesnt win finals games.
the only difference is their skills are a little bit better than freo and richmond.
they get burned very often on the counter attack.
their style of play doesnt win finals games when you have to play two way football.
a side with good technique, positioning and structure will lock them down and beat them.
thats why they have lost alot of games to middle of the road teams this year.
their defensive structure is suspect and after we negated their run in the 3rd they folded.
was good to see the saints come up against a team like this and adapt on the fly.
during the 2nd quarter when they got a run on they were hittin all targets and kicking goals from anywhere.
we couldnt snag a goal.
i turned to my mate and said "experimenting" when i saw fisher line up forward.
good to see lyon doing somethin different and seeing how postitional changes affect the structure
when the ball is in dispute . . they back themselves and run forward hoping they will get the pill.
it doesnt work when the ball is turned over.
this system doesnt win finals games.
the only difference is their skills are a little bit better than freo and richmond.
they get burned very often on the counter attack.
their style of play doesnt win finals games when you have to play two way football.
a side with good technique, positioning and structure will lock them down and beat them.
thats why they have lost alot of games to middle of the road teams this year.
their defensive structure is suspect and after we negated their run in the 3rd they folded.
was good to see the saints come up against a team like this and adapt on the fly.
during the 2nd quarter when they got a run on they were hittin all targets and kicking goals from anywhere.
we couldnt snag a goal.
i turned to my mate and said "experimenting" when i saw fisher line up forward.
good to see lyon doing somethin different and seeing how postitional changes affect the structure
#35 - Thanks for the Memories.
21 Great Season's
Simply Remarkable
21 Great Season's
Simply Remarkable
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6043
- Joined: Mon 21 May 2007 5:31pm
- Location: Currumbin, Quoinslairnd
This post insinuates that Richmond are a team.Geezer wrote:essendon are a russian roulette type team . . .just like freo and the tigers.
With respect, you cannot be serious.
"The inches we need are everywhere around us. They're in every break in the game. Every minute, every second. On this team we fight for that inch. On this team we tear ourselves and everyone around us to pieces for that inch. We claw with our fingernails for that inch. Because we know when we add up all those inches that's gonna make the f***in' difference between winning and losing! Between living and dying!'
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4432
- Joined: Sun 25 May 2008 5:39pm
I aggree with everything you said, we had a shyte night and evrything worked for them, and yes we had our slowest side in last nightThinline wrote:There's little doubt that plenty went right for the Bombers last night.meher baba wrote:All teams with relatively conventional setups and strategies are always going to be occasionally vulnerable to teams that run the ball out of the backline like maniacs, handpassing the ball all over the joint. Adelaide and the Dogs have capitalised on this for years and, this season, the Bombers have joined them.
The point is that, in order to bring the ball out of the backline in this way, you need to take quite a few risks. In some games these risks are going to pay off, in others you are going to turn the ball over and be punished.
I note that no team that plays in this fashion has reached a GF. And the Dogs and Crows and Bombers don't look particularly likely to do it this season either.
It isn't a percentage approach, but you will get the odd upset win, as happened last night.
I love this club
-
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3465
- Joined: Fri 29 Oct 2004 1:01pm
- Has thanked: 91 times
- Been thanked: 162 times
Re: Opposition pace is our weakness.
I don't think they can. We're going into round 21. By now teams are fairly set in what they do. Essendon have been playing like that for most of the year. It worked particularly well yesterday. There have been other times where it hasn't. Adelaide and the Dogs also like to run, but they haven't fared too well against us. I don't think Geelong, Collingwood, the Dogs, etc will take too much from that game.GrumpyOne wrote:Other teams will have taken notice, and will implement the same tactics against us.
The thing that stands out for me is that we were so badly beaten in the contested ball. -28 is our worst result for the season. Our other worst games all resulted in close games. -12 against Geelong; -14 against Carlton; -16 against Sydney. It's something we pride ourselves on winning, and it's important to our structure that we do. A number of players critical to this area were well down (Gilbert, Goddard, Hayes) or missing (Jones, McQualter). Hopefully we can get back to our best by finals.
Yeah nah pleasing positive
-
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3152
- Joined: Tue 02 Jun 2009 2:44am
- Location: Next to what's next to me.
- Has thanked: 71 times
- Been thanked: 35 times
I agree that opposition pace is clearly our main weakness. Both times against Essendon and also against Carlton (when they had a few very quick little guys cutting us up, forward of centre) we've been exposed. We could easily have lost all 3 of those games.
It's been obvious that we've needed some extreme pace for about 3 years now and it's very important that we have that as our main objective at trading and draft times this year, IMO. I'd send some of our recruiting guys up to the NT for as long as possible. We need at least one or two guys in our team who have lightning speed and great skills over the next few years. Hopefully Tungatalum will be one of them. Essendon for one, will only get better.
It's been obvious that we've needed some extreme pace for about 3 years now and it's very important that we have that as our main objective at trading and draft times this year, IMO. I'd send some of our recruiting guys up to the NT for as long as possible. We need at least one or two guys in our team who have lightning speed and great skills over the next few years. Hopefully Tungatalum will be one of them. Essendon for one, will only get better.
YOU GET WHAT YOU SETTLE FOR.
- Winmar7Fan
- Club Player
- Posts: 756
- Joined: Thu 08 May 2008 5:31pm
- Location: Gold Coast
Re: Opposition pace is our weakness.
Grumpy one you are spot on. When we played them earlier this year their speed also gave us trouble but our talent and structure managed to over come them but they've grown a bit in that area since.GrumpyOne wrote:Essendon loaded up on pace to take us on, and combined with Ryder's prodigous leap enabling Watson et al first use of the ball, only injuries prevented them pantsing us.
Other teams will have taken notice, and will implement the same tactics against us.
We have to develop a tall non-traditional ruckman to counteract this tactic. King has got to be pensioned off and replaced with such a player, otherwise in the future we will be at the mercy of Ryder, Natanui, and the other high-leaping ruckmen who will undoubtedly follow.
They are a super fast bunch of young kids but what I believe did the damage was the way we responded. Rather than challenge them and just stick with what we do best and live or die by our attacking structure we let them throw us off our game.
Then in the last quarter when we had no option but to go for broke look how quickly they made up the score.
IMO we can be our own worst enemy when we are under pressure and have a tendency to get rattled a bit easy when things aren't going our way and shut down a bit and stop moving the ball on quickly.
-
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3152
- Joined: Tue 02 Jun 2009 2:44am
- Location: Next to what's next to me.
- Has thanked: 71 times
- Been thanked: 35 times
Re: Opposition pace is our weakness.
This year we will be OK. I am concerned that with a couple of new coaches coming in, and teams like Essendon and West Coast showing the benefit of good drafting, we could see some game plans change considerably over the off season.vacuous space wrote:I don't think they can. We're going into round 21. By now teams are fairly set in what they do. Essendon have been playing like that for most of the year. It worked particularly well yesterday. There have been other times where it hasn't. Adelaide and the Dogs also like to run, but they haven't fared too well against us. I don't think Geelong, Collingwood, the Dogs, etc will take too much from that game.GrumpyOne wrote:Other teams will have taken notice, and will implement the same tactics against us.
We have to field a team in the future that is adaptable to whatever game plan the opposition brings in, whilst still maintaining the strength of our own. If we want to have a decade at the upper end of the ladder, we have to enhance our versatility.
-
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3465
- Joined: Fri 29 Oct 2004 1:01pm
- Has thanked: 91 times
- Been thanked: 162 times
Re: Opposition pace is our weakness.
I think we've proven as adaptable as anyone over the first 20 rounds. I'm still not sure that we are weak against quicker running teams. Yesterday wasn't the first time we had face a team that tried to run against us. We played Adelaide and the Bulldogs in rounds 16 and 17 and they didn't come close. We'd previously beaten Essendon, Brisbane and Geelong - all of whom like to run and carry. I think it's false logic to say we lost to Essendon, Essendon like to run, therefore we are weak against the run.GrumpyOne wrote:We have to field a team in the future that is adaptable to whatever game plan the opposition brings in, whilst still maintaining the strength of our own. If we want to have a decade at the upper end of the ladder, we have to enhance our versatility.
Yeah nah pleasing positive
-
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3266
- Joined: Fri 16 Mar 2007 4:05pm
- Been thanked: 390 times
I agree that Essendon had one of those nights when everything went right for them.
Mongrel kicks under pressure went 15 metres to a chest - inside the 50 and a goal.
Gilbert getting not one but two fickle bounces when he had every right to control the ball - but did not so the ball remained in contest and another goal.
It just seemed that every toe poke on the ball went to Essendon's advantage.
But, of course, this game was under the roof at Docklands.
IF the game was played at the MCG, under the outside weather conditions such as we had yesterday, where is Essendon's game and what is their alternate game?
It may be that Watson would still dominate standing under the rucking contests - but what after that?
Ironically Essendon claim that Lucas and Lloyd were absent, but the structure of the back line we went in with would have accomodated Lucas and Lloyd better than it did the smaller, nippier forward line we did confront.
Our problem was the lack of control by our on-ballers, the lack of defensive pressure by them and that magnified to pressure on our defensive 6 being Max, Dawson, Blake, Fisher (after quarter time), Gilbert, Baker and Clarke.
And too often they were zoning off and finding themselves chasing shadows.
Baker, for all his efforts and endeavour, was slow.
Clarke was accountable for an opponent, but found that opponent with just to much uncontested support.
And the rest were made to look cumbersome by comparison with their opponents and those in support of their opponents.
They just got too many players far too free far too often - and they made their own luck accordingly.
There ruck tactic was to jump early - and that worked also.
As I mentioned elsewhere pre match, but no one seems to have picked up on, I would have gone with King and 3 mid-fielders as the bench from the 7 named on Thursday night.
The reason was that we knew what Essendon were going to try because they tried last time and pestered us - and to have the likes of Blake and Dempster as 2 of the 7 retained off the extended interchange bench played into their hands particularly when we had Max, Dawson and Fisher named in our back 6.
The position of needing mid-fielder support (and I look at particularly Steven after his promising debut) was accentuated when Jones withdrew.
Simply, against the way Essendon played at Docklands under the roof, Ball and Armitage of our mids were exposed.
IF the game was at the MCG under those weather conditions they would not have been so exposed.
That is the conundrum.
Incidentally, the one very, very good piece of news was that Kosi did not finish with a fractured jaw - then again the spoiling hit that had him being tested for concussion and reflex abilities at quarter time could not have been accross the head because no free kick was paid - and it was inside our F50.
But do not get me started on the green maggots!
Mongrel kicks under pressure went 15 metres to a chest - inside the 50 and a goal.
Gilbert getting not one but two fickle bounces when he had every right to control the ball - but did not so the ball remained in contest and another goal.
It just seemed that every toe poke on the ball went to Essendon's advantage.
But, of course, this game was under the roof at Docklands.
IF the game was played at the MCG, under the outside weather conditions such as we had yesterday, where is Essendon's game and what is their alternate game?
It may be that Watson would still dominate standing under the rucking contests - but what after that?
Ironically Essendon claim that Lucas and Lloyd were absent, but the structure of the back line we went in with would have accomodated Lucas and Lloyd better than it did the smaller, nippier forward line we did confront.
Our problem was the lack of control by our on-ballers, the lack of defensive pressure by them and that magnified to pressure on our defensive 6 being Max, Dawson, Blake, Fisher (after quarter time), Gilbert, Baker and Clarke.
And too often they were zoning off and finding themselves chasing shadows.
Baker, for all his efforts and endeavour, was slow.
Clarke was accountable for an opponent, but found that opponent with just to much uncontested support.
And the rest were made to look cumbersome by comparison with their opponents and those in support of their opponents.
They just got too many players far too free far too often - and they made their own luck accordingly.
There ruck tactic was to jump early - and that worked also.
As I mentioned elsewhere pre match, but no one seems to have picked up on, I would have gone with King and 3 mid-fielders as the bench from the 7 named on Thursday night.
The reason was that we knew what Essendon were going to try because they tried last time and pestered us - and to have the likes of Blake and Dempster as 2 of the 7 retained off the extended interchange bench played into their hands particularly when we had Max, Dawson and Fisher named in our back 6.
The position of needing mid-fielder support (and I look at particularly Steven after his promising debut) was accentuated when Jones withdrew.
Simply, against the way Essendon played at Docklands under the roof, Ball and Armitage of our mids were exposed.
IF the game was at the MCG under those weather conditions they would not have been so exposed.
That is the conundrum.
Incidentally, the one very, very good piece of news was that Kosi did not finish with a fractured jaw - then again the spoiling hit that had him being tested for concussion and reflex abilities at quarter time could not have been accross the head because no free kick was paid - and it was inside our F50.
But do not get me started on the green maggots!
Re: Opposition pace is our weakness.
How will other teams implement the same tactics against us?GrumpyOne wrote:Essendon loaded up on pace to take us on, and combined with Ryder's prodigous leap enabling Watson et al first use of the ball, only injuries prevented them pantsing us.
Other teams will have taken notice, and will implement the same tactics against us.
"Mr Mumford, we need you to jump like Patty Ryder"
"Didak, mate, run faster"
No matter how good a side is, they can always get beat.
When a side get a run-on as Essendon did last night, there's not much you can do to stop it. We switched off momentarily. They were in a zone.
We've been good enough to stop that happening for 19 games which is an extraordinary effort.
What last night proved is that for a side to beat us, they need to be play football at an unbelievable level.
The Bombers may never reach that level again for the remainder of the season. In fact, I bet they don't.
- saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30094
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 1234 times
Re: Opposition pace is our weakness.
The reason why the Dons dominated several quarters was that they beat us easily in winning the contested ball.GrumpyOne wrote:Essendon loaded up on pace to take us on,.
Importantly they did this in the centre BEFORE we could get numbers at an around the contest.
Ryder's deft palm work gave the Dons a big advantage and provided an abject Case study to those that do not believe that ruckwork can provide an advantage.
After all that yes their pace helped...but it only helped. Their contested ball winning ability was the difference.
Fortunately none of our main finals opponents have a high leaping ruckman that can tap well. But they do have midfields that can win good contested ball...so we need to be on our game.
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
- saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30094
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 1234 times
Re: Opposition pace is our weakness.
Have no fear..Stanley is on his way.GrumpyOne wrote:
We have to develop a tall non-traditional ruckman to counteract this tactic. .
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
Re: Opposition pace is our weakness.
That's a bit simplistic OLB.OLB wrote:How will other teams implement the same tactics against us?GrumpyOne wrote:Essendon loaded up on pace to take us on, and combined with Ryder's prodigous leap enabling Watson et al first use of the ball, only injuries prevented them pantsing us.
Other teams will have taken notice, and will implement the same tactics against us.
"Mr Mumford, we need you to jump like Patty Ryder"
"Didak, mate, run faster"
My point is the player of the next five years will be running faster and jumping higher. Skill levels will keep some of the plodding midfielders in the game, but the monster-shuffling ruckman's days are numbered.
I don't want just one premiership, I want a decade or more at the top, so that future premierships will become routine.