Time for structure...

[SaintSimmo]

I would love to see Rhys let loose but i dont think he is ready.
He would add that X Factor to our forward line that we miss with Roo Out.

I think it will be
In: McEvoy, Ray, Gram
Out: Eddy, Clarke, Peake

But I would like it to Be
In: Stanley, Ray, Gram, Steven
Out: Peake, Eddy, McQualter, Clarke

[SainterK]

I don't think it works because of the Two Talls thing - I think it's worked because Roo is one of the talls.

The only time a tall forward line wins enough games to win a flag - is when you have star tall forwards.

What about that cats? Not sure Mooney is a star, and Hawkins definitely isn't. Two tall fwds are important to maintain your structure, ie to have that get out kick into the fwd line. Sat night we lost our structure. We need to deliver the ball to Kosi on the move so he can run and leap at it, whether one on one or in a pack situation.

Our fwd line was NOT the problem on Sat night it was our midfield. We could hardly get it in there, and when we did there was nobody there to contest. I'll say it again, Kosi is being hung out b/c he dropped that mark in the last 1/4. Our mids needed to be cleaner through the centre of the ground and give the fwds more quality and quantity of delivery. In fact the more I think about it there was only about 4-5 players that played serviceable games, and the rest were well down. To lose by only 10 points in that situation is a pretty good effort I reckon.

I don't think Geelong really base their scoring around Two Talls though.

I guess that's my point. If Geelong setup solely around Mooney and whoever he has with him at the time (N Ablett, Hawkins) they wouldn't kick enough goals to win games. Well not enough to win flags anyway.

Their key is their mediums and smalls up forward.

Really, if anything Steve Johnson is their most important forward.


Re you point about the mids - I agree. Losing Ray and Gram from the midfield is a huge loss which naturally had a major influence on our fluency.

Mids are the key this year, for sure.

However our forward line is also set up around the talls bringing the smalls into the match as well.

There just needs to be a good balance between having a shot yourself as a mid, and only going for the get out kick to a forward if you need to.

[bigcarl]

Kosi is not a stay at home forward for the same reason that he is not a good ruckman. He does not know how to use his body.

like zac he needs to make the ball his object.

focus on the ball kosi ... the ball, the ball, the ball.

just to elaborate on this a bit. kosi's a bit like an out of form batsman who is anxious about where his backlift is going and whether he's moving his feet or any number of other technical problems.

more often than not the real problem is that he's not watching the ball out of the bowler's hand.

kosi might be worried about whether he's applying forward pressure, zoning off properly, about what his opponent is doing or any number of things rather than getting the ball into his big mitts.

i wonder how closely kosi is watching the ball.

[Teflon]

I don't think it works because of the Two Talls thing - I think it's worked because Roo is one of the talls.

The only time a tall forward line wins enough games to win a flag - is when you have star tall forwards.

What about that cats? Not sure Mooney is a star, and Hawkins definitely isn't. Two tall fwds are important to maintain your structure, ie to have that get out kick into the fwd line. Sat night we lost our structure. We need to deliver the ball to Kosi on the move so he can run and leap at it, whether one on one or in a pack situation.

Our fwd line was NOT the problem on Sat night it was our midfield. We could hardly get it in there, and when we did there was nobody there to contest. I'll say it again, Kosi is being hung out b/c he dropped that mark in the last 1/4. Our mids needed to be cleaner through the centre of the ground and give the fwds more quality and quantity of delivery. In fact the more I think about it there was only about 4-5 players that played serviceable games, and the rest were well down. To lose by only 10 points in that situation is a pretty good effort I reckon.

I don't think Geelong really base their scoring around Two Talls though.

I guess that's my point. If Geelong setup solely around Mooney and whoever he has with him at the time (N Ablett, Hawkins) they wouldn't kick enough goals to win games. Well not enough to win flags anyway.

Their key is their mediums and smalls up forward.

Really, if anything Steve Johnson is their most important forward.


Re you point about the mids - I agree. Losing Ray and Gram from the midfield is a huge loss which naturally had a major influence on our fluency.

so Geelong dont rely on 2 key talls and Stevie J is their most important fwd.....yet they continue to play 2key tall fwds???.......why?

Today against Carlton - they moved Mooney down back.....and replaced him up fwd....a tall option in Harry Taylor...why???

STRUCTURE

Its not just about who your fwd target is- its also about what that you force the opposition to do. Having Mooney/Hawkings up theres means they have to be paid respect.

I think having Kosi as a lone marking option in st kildas fwd line gives our opposition a free hit. I know it does when that ball comes to ground level.

I also think Sam Fisher is a defender who will bob up and kick the odd goal - hes not a genuine longer term prospective fwd and for mine Goddard up there all the time detracts from his uniqueness round the ground.

Im not advoctaing Stanley as the messiah - I just reckon hecan do a job and Id like to see how he responds if given an extended run at it. I know he can add to our ground level fwd pressure cause his pace will certainly add another dimension.

[saintsRrising]

Kosi is not a stay at home forward for the same reason that he is not a good ruckman. He does not know how to use his body.

like zac he needs to make the ball his object.

focus on the ball kosi ... the ball, the ball, the ball.

just to elaborate on this a bit. kosi's a bit like an out of form batsman who is anxious about where his backlift is going and whether he's moving his feet or any number of other technical problems.

more often than not the real problem is that he's not watching the ball out of the bowler's hand.

kosi might be worried about whether he's applying forward pressure, zoning off properly, about what his opponent is doing or any number of things rather than getting the ball into his big mitts.

wonder how closely kosi is watching the ball.

No my point is that Kosi does not know how to use his body.

One on one his opponent will out bustle him, even if that oponent is smaller. And it is being able to ride an opoents jostling that Kois is poor at too.

Think back to the Swans game where Gwilt was on Goodes... Goodes came in and tried to out-jostle Gwilt. Gwilt just rode the contact and marked. You do not see that type of thing from Kois. He loses it his feet....and is then allo over red-rover unless Milne is there to crumb.

In ruck contests Kosi does not know where to stand...or how to use his bod.

[rodgerfox]

so Geelong dont rely on 2 key talls and Stevie J is their most important fwd.....yet they continue to play 2key tall fwds???.......why?

Today against Carlton - they moved Mooney down back.....and replaced him up fwd....a tall option in Harry Taylor...why???

STRUCTURE

I agree with what you're saying about maintaining structure. However my view is that it's not our 'two tall' structure that has been important to us winning - it's been Roo that has.

We don't have the quality medium/smalls that Geelong do. We don't have mediums/smalls up forward who play tall like Geelong do. Geelong play the two talls to accentuate their real strength.

Whereas the 'two talls' is our key strength. And as I've been saying, I believe it only works because Roo is one of them. I think once he isn't there, it won't be a strength at all.


I was talking to a mate the other about Carlton. I felt early in the year they tried to play the same way without Fevola, as they did when they had him.
They played a tall out of the goal square and tried to use him the same way as they did Fevola. What was very evident to me, was that it wasn't the concept of having a FF that was working for Carlton, it was the fact that the FF was Fevola.
Once he was gone, they needed to alter their game plan away from kicking to a true FF.

Watching the match yesterday, and how the Blues did change that and scored via a different method (3 smalls) they were much more effective.


So that's my view. You need to ascertain whether or not it's the structure or the player that is making the method work.
Lots of supporters and possibly the coaches will believe it's our structure.

I think it's the player in the case of our forward line.

[saintsRrising]

so Geelong dont rely on 2 key talls and Stevie J is their most important fwd.....yet they continue to play 2key tall fwds???.......why?

Today against Carlton - they moved Mooney down back.....and replaced him up fwd....a tall option in Harry Taylor...why???

.

I only watched the last quarter...but did not Geelong play 3 tall forwards for most of the day?

Pods, Hawkins, Mooney and Taylor later?

Personally I reckon that any side would like to try and have two tall forwards as part of it's forward set up.

If you only have absolute stall spuds then you might try something different. If you are really string in other ways you also might try something different.


However I still see the ideal as :
Two Talls (BUT, both cannot be lumberers. ie not two Kosi types).
1 or 2 Mediums
2 or 3 Smalls


The talls help bring in the smalls into the game.

Now if you had say two really good mediums you might try and play with one tall. But one tall and 5 smalls wouldd not be optimal.

Though you may play 5 in total if you are playing a 7 man defense.

If you had 3 Roos you might try and play 3 talls..but you definitely do not want three lumbering forwards like the Cats are trying to play.


That the Cats are trying to play 3 smalls that are all lumberers is I believe exposing them to rebound from their opponents.

[meher baba]

I just wanted to comment belatedly that, while Teffers and I rarely agree on anything much, I think the OP is pretty much on the money, although I'm not sure it's so much a question of "two talls" as of "two genuine leading/marking forwards".

Without two of them, our structure just doesn't seem to be working. Apart from anything else, we currently pull so many of our players back behind the ball when our opponents get it that we simply have to have a number of tall targets to hit further up the field when win it back through a turnover or after they kick a behind. Kosi and the ruckman provided one too few of these on Saturday night, which is one of the reasons that we found it so hard to get out of our defensive 50.

I agree that Gwilt isn't quite there as a leading forward: he does a lot of things right, but he simply isn't able to take the required grabs.

BJ gives every sign that he does not want to play as a leading forward, but would prefer to having a roving brief to contribute over the field (he's reminding me more and more of Hird in this respect). While he can play the role better than most, using him directly in place of Riewoldt is limiting his ability to contribute. I reckon he's better used ATM as a sort of roving third forward: a bit like how they tried to use Gwilt for much of last season. (When Riewoldt comes back, I would expect BJ would go back largely to the midfield).

Now would be a perfect time for Lynch to be given a proper go: he's a first round draft pick forward and has been at the club long enough to expect to be thrown into this situation without much warning or preparation time. However, unfortunately he is injured ATM (who knows for how long?).

So it really does seem to come down to a choice of Stanley, McEvoy or Pattison: none of whom are full-time forwards but all of whom have played VFL and/or AFL in that role. Personally, I would put Stanley third on that list for the upcoming game against the Dogs: Morris and Lake are excellent defenders and it's a big ask for a debutant to go up against them.

[rodgerfox]

Now if you had say two really good mediums you might try and play with one tall. But one tall and 5 smalls wouldd not be optimal.

I think the opposite.

If you have good mediums (who are good overhead) then having two talls means the medium will almost definitely get a 'small' defender who would be vulnerable in marking contests.

We don't have any smalls/mediums who are good overhead.

The other thing with that Cats is that none of their talls are what I'd call 'lumbering'.

They've always played talls who are active and leading forwards.

[rodgerfox]

However I still see the ideal as :
Two Talls (BUT, both cannot be lumberers. ie not two Kosi types).
1 or 2 Mediums
2 or 3 Smalls

I don't think the question is what is perfect in an ideal world - it's what is perfect in the current world (ie. no Roo).

So how do we structure our forward line with what we've got?

Personally, I believe the chicken comes before the egg. Meaning, you base your structure on who you have available, not vice versa.

[SainterK]

Interesting RF, I think your right about Carlton, their forward line is very unpredictable and dare I say, Collingwood like?

Our forward line was similar through the NAB cup and up until round 2, very unpredictable with goal contributions from resting ruckman, midfielders and guys running from defence.

Strange given that it got progressively worse once Roo and Kosi didn't play, you think that it would it cause an opposite effect, perhaps you are right and it's the fact that we are setting up as if they were still there.

There are a few other reasons it's not working IMO though.

Mini is out of form, he has only kicked 2 goals this year, and it's just not enough.

Milne is not a target inside 50 enough, he has an incredible knack of using his body to body his opponent off marking the ball, and quite often will win the contest once the ball spills (see Freo game)

McEvoy was dropped because of his poor form in the hitouts, but I think he is crucial around the ground. Especially up forward, where he provides much more of a target and an opportunity to goal. Gardiner and King have only managed one goal between them resting forward.

Jack Steven needs to come into the side if he is ready, as from all reports, he is a goal kicking mid and the kid can lead by example.

Play Kosi in the ruck a little bit, and get him into the game. I think he brings much more to the game when he is able to take a few contested marks around the ground rather than always resting deep in FF. Round one he started in the ruck, and provided 7 hitouts, 2 tackles, 3 shots on goal, and played a part in two other goals.

[saintsRrising]

The other thing with that Cats is that none of their talls are what I'd call 'lumbering'.

.

I guess that depends what you define lumbering as.

I see all of Mooney, Hawkins and Pods as quite slow, and not that good at ground level that can be exploited by an agile defense. Two can be balance. But with all 3 you really do create a situation that the opposition can exploit.

I would much pefer that the Cats play all 3 when they play us.

[rodgerfox]

Interesting RF, I think your right about Carlton, their forward line is very unpredictable and dare I say, Collingwood like?

It is now, because they changed their structure recently. Whereas at the start of the season they tried to persist with their old structure minus Fevola and slotted O'Hailpin and or Kruezer in there. It didn't work.

It was Fevola that made the structure work - not the structure itself.

I think we need to do the same thing without Roo.

[bergholt]

Milne is not a target inside 50 enough, he has an incredible knack of using his body to body his opponent off marking the ball, and quite often will win the contest once the ball spills (see Freo game)

nah. for mine, he's a target too often.

milne gets a very good small defender - eg surjan this week - who's usually as quick as him and always good enough to spoil overhead. (it's not hard to spoil milne as he's not a good overhead mark.) and the small is usually smart enough to wrap milne up when the ball hits the ground, knowing that he's going to twist and turn. kicking it to him one out with that defender is a recipe for disaster.

if he's on a good, fast lead then kick it to him low and hard. otherwise, he's the crumber, not the inside 50 target.

[meher baba]

If you have good mediums (who are good overhead) then having two talls means the medium will almost definitely get a 'small' defender who would be vulnerable in marking contests.

We don't have any smalls/mediums who are good overhead.

Actually, we do have one: Farren Ray. So there's a left field idea.

[SainterK]

If you have good mediums (who are good overhead) then having two talls means the medium will almost definitely get a 'small' defender who would be vulnerable in marking contests.

We don't have any smalls/mediums who are good overhead.

Actually, we do have one: Farren Ray. So there's a left field idea.

Hmm, he does have a great reach MB, I like it

[bergholt]

Actually, we do have one: Farren Ray. So there's a left field idea.

i think the dogs already tried that. fazza played forward pocket or half-forward flank in a short forward line quite a bit at the dogs, and never really looked much chop.

[jonesy]

I don't see why we should change anything in the absence of Rewoildt.

Robbing the defence to try and make the attack better,is taking away everything 'saints footy' was created on. We are just another side if we start stuffing around with the defence.

Continue with the old structures...sides will only kick 5-10 goals a week against us. Most of the time we will find enough goals to beat this.

I was concerned with what I saw against Freo....we played good attacking footy.....but the defence,just wasn't Stkilda.

The Port game I'm willing to forget about,we've won 6-7 of those close encounters in the past 12 months,we were going to lose one sooner or later. Umpire pays that blatantly deliberate behind 3 mins to go,who knows,we could of pinched that one also.

The next fortnight will be telling. If we try and have shoot outs like we did against Freo,we will find ourselves 4-3

[saintsRrising]

However I still see the ideal as :
Two Talls (BUT, both cannot be lumberers. ie not two Kosi types).
1 or 2 Mediums
2 or 3 Smalls

I don't think the question is what is perfect in an ideal world - it's what is perfect in the current world (ie. no Roo).

So how do we structure our forward line with what we've got?

Personally, I believe the chicken comes before the egg. Meaning, you base your structure on who you have available, not vice versa.

As I wrote if you only have absolute spuds you will try somethiing different. ie the Dogs in past years.


In the abscence of Roo I am of the view that we need to keep trying other options.

Losing Ray and Gram meant Goddard could not spend as much time rotating forward. When they return so can BJ.

Apart from BJ....Zac, Ben, Stanley and possibly even Gilbert are all options that could be explored. BJ at 191 is tall enough to be a tall.

None of our small are great marks. This is one reason I believe we need to have two marking targets.

However Milne is very leading small forward.

However I am a fan of keeping both Gilbert and Sam across our HB line as it strengthens our defense while also providing great attacking rebound.

The 2010 Mini has not been in the form of the 2009 Mini...so after some good form by Steven it may now be time to Steven a try.

Gram is now quite important to our forward structure for with the zoning/flooding he is needed as one source of rapid running entries.

Peake is being used in this role too, and has been getting to right positions quite often. But only in the Roos game has he nailed the goals.

Farren Ray (187)is very good overhead and he may be worth a trial at HF.

It is pity that Lynch has had injuries at present.

Gaerner is alsoa rookie that may be worth a try up forward. He is agile and very quick and so should be caable of also applying good forward pressure. He is only being used down back at Sandy at present though.

[Solar]

I don't think it works because of the Two Talls thing - I think it's worked because Roo is one of the talls.

The only time a tall forward line wins enough games to win a flag - is when you have star tall forwards.

What about that cats? Not sure Mooney is a star, and Hawkins definitely isn't. Two tall fwds are important to maintain your structure, ie to have that get out kick into the fwd line. Sat night we lost our structure. We need to deliver the ball to Kosi on the move so he can run and leap at it, whether one on one or in a pack situation.

Our fwd line was NOT the problem on Sat night it was our midfield. We could hardly get it in there, and when we did there was nobody there to contest. I'll say it again, Kosi is being hung out b/c he dropped that mark in the last 1/4. Our mids needed to be cleaner through the centre of the ground and give the fwds more quality and quantity of delivery. In fact the more I think about it there was only about 4-5 players that played serviceable games, and the rest were well down. To lose by only 10 points in that situation is a pretty good effort I reckon.

I don't think Geelong really base their scoring around Two Talls though.

I guess that's my point. If Geelong setup solely around Mooney and whoever he has with him at the time (N Ablett, Hawkins) they wouldn't kick enough goals to win games. Well not enough to win flags anyway.

Their key is their mediums and smalls up forward.

Really, if anything Steve Johnson is their most important forward.


Re you point about the mids - I agree. Losing Ray and Gram from the midfield is a huge loss which naturally had a major influence on our fluency.

so Geelong dont rely on 2 key talls and Stevie J is their most important fwd.....yet they continue to play 2key tall fwds???.......why?

Today against Carlton - they moved Mooney down back.....and replaced him up fwd....a tall option in Harry Taylor...why???

STRUCTURE

Its not just about who your fwd target is- its also about what that you force the opposition to do. Having Mooney/Hawkings up theres means they have to be paid respect.

I think having Kosi as a lone marking option in st kildas fwd line gives our opposition a free hit. I know it does when that ball comes to ground level.

I also think Sam Fisher is a defender who will bob up and kick the odd goal - hes not a genuine longer term prospective fwd and for mine Goddard up there all the time detracts from his uniqueness round the ground.

Im not advoctaing Stanley as the messiah - I just reckon hecan do a job and Id like to see how he responds if given an extended run at it. I know he can add to our ground level fwd pressure cause his pace will certainly add another dimension.

really well said,

look it would be fine at our current situation if roo was to be out for a month to pinch hit with a defender or two. But this is not a long term process.

Agree that BJ is also not the answer, lovely third tall floating down from midfield but CHF.... no

stanley or cahill seem the only options. macca plays very deep as a rucking forward and we would still struggle to have the hit up forward coming out from half back.

Supposedly the reason patto got a game was stanley did not have the base to play his first game (but lyon said he was ahead of him). Stanley has had the game time for sandy now and it makes sense to give him a 6 week period with kosi and a third tall next to him to develop a forward line.
This could be lyons toughest assignment yet

[bergholt]

stanley or cahill seem the only options. macca plays very deep as a rucking forward and we would still struggle to have the hit up forward coming out from half back.

cahill is probably not an option. he was dropped to sandy reserves on the weekend, despite the fact that lynch is still out injured. sounds to me like he's a long, long way from afl footy.

[SainterK]

Milne is not a target inside 50 enough, he has an incredible knack of using his body to body his opponent off marking the ball, and quite often will win the contest once the ball spills (see Freo game)

nah. for mine, he's a target too often.

milne gets a very good small defender - eg surjan this week - who's usually as quick as him and always good enough to spoil overhead. (it's not hard to spoil milne as he's not a good overhead mark.) and the small is usually smart enough to wrap milne up when the ball hits the ground, knowing that he's going to twist and turn. kicking it to him one out with that defender is a recipe for disaster.

if he's on a good, fast lead then kick it to him low and hard. otherwise, he's the crumber, not the inside 50 target.

I don't agree, only because I have been watching him closely and then decided to have a look at it.

Following is how often he is an inside 50 target, and his conversion.

Rd 1 - 2 = 1 goals, 1 behinds
Rd 2 - 6 = 3 goals, 2 behinds
Rd 3 - 6 = 1 goals, 0 behinds, 1 goal assist
Rd 4 - 13 = 5 goals, 0 behinds, 1 goal assist
Rd 5 - 3 = 1 goals, 1 behinds

I was going to post this today, may as well here because it's relevant.

[spert]

It is time for the midfield to really step up in goal kicking, and as much as Lenny gets the hard ball, he and Dal need to float deeper into the forward line to try and get a few goals. McEvoy would do better around the ground than King or Gards, though not a great tap ruckman, he does most other things well, and is more likely to kick a goal than any of our other talls. Kosi is just plain no good in the forward line at the moment and it may be worth trying him at full back or change ruck and put Zac at FF. Kosi on Hall would be worth seeing. RL probably needs to give Stanley a run at CHF, even though he is a bit raw. The forward line has been exposed, and while Schneids is doing his job as a small forward, there should be pressure at the selection table for a couple of forward positions.

[saintsRrising]

Kosi on Hall would be worth seeing. .

If you like nightmares.

[bigcarl]

Kosi is not a stay at home forward for the same reason that he is not a good ruckman. He does not know how to use his body.

like zac he needs to make the ball his object.

focus on the ball kosi ... the ball, the ball, the ball.

just to elaborate on this a bit. kosi's a bit like an out of form batsman who is anxious about where his backlift is going and whether he's moving his feet or any number of other technical problems.

more often than not the real problem is that he's not watching the ball out of the bowler's hand.

kosi might be worried about whether he's applying forward pressure, zoning off properly, about what his opponent is doing or any number of things rather than getting the ball into his big mitts.

wonder how closely kosi is watching the ball.

No my point is that Kosi does not know how to use his body.

yes, i agree with that and was making a point of my own which i believe also might be a factor in kosi's game.

on your point, some players have an innate ability to nudge their opponent at the right time to back their strength in a marking/ruck contest. kosi isn't one of them and i don't think it is a skill that can be learnt or taught. you either have it or you don't.