OK. I've criticised it, you've criticised it. We've all criticised it. but WHAT exactly is our gameplan? We need to be in agreeance on what exactly it is before we all decide whetehr or not a) we like it or b) we think it will get us anywhere.
To me there are two phases to the plan - phase one is to jump out of the blocks and get the early ascendancy. We did this three times this year - against Sydney, Bulldogs and Geelong. Some better kicking against geelong and we might have been in a better position against Geelong.
Once we have established the early lead, we move to hase two of the gameplan. To preserve the lead. We used to consolidate our lead in 2004-2005. (Yes I know I've been harping on about that all week). my main gripe is not the fact that this provides a boring style of game for the spectator, but the fact that we don't have the skill or fitness or desire to play this way.
Sydney are a team built around a solid defense, with an excellent midifled and a decent forward line. But ont only are they solid in defence. They are solid at DEFENDING ALL OVER THE GROUND. We have a decent midfield, an excellent forward line and a poor defence. We have for four years now. We are not good at defending all over the ground and we are not good at backing ourselves.
geelong play the all-out attack version of the game we implemented in 2004 and 2005 but they also have a sublime team-effort style that is close to the best I have ever seen. They know what their other teammates are doing and they share it around with each other. No Geelong player has kicked more than five goals in a match since 2006, round 12 I think. Yes, that includes the 35 goal slaughter last year too!
Hawthorn play a similar version to Geelong but can also revert to the keepings off game that Richmond hav ebeen known to play. The difference between Hawthorn and Richmond is that they don't overuse the ball and it works better for them. Hawthorn play ruthlessly and take full advantage of their forwards.
The bulldogs and Essendon play fast, direct and are accountable. They take more risks and they also try and share the ball around. Some say they are the most exciting teams to watch, but I find geelong's and Hawthorn's games are more enjoyable with the teamwork aspect.
Richmond, as I said play a keepings-off style game similar to Sydney's defensive type gameplan. their gameplan is built around get the ball, chip it around and not let the opposition get it. Not to be mistaken for Sydney's ability to dominate the clearances, they are more commited to not letting the opposition contest the ball. There is no better side in the league than Richmond and getting uncontested possessions - harsh I know, while there are no other sides than Sydney who seem to back themselves in contested situations so much.
Anyway, I don't dislike the gameplan we play. Despite what I may have said in the other thread, it isn't boring. I just love high-scoring games and it disappoints me that for a while, we won't be kicking scores like we were three eyars ago. but I just don't think we are able to play the game this way. Its almost like we try to play it liek that and then revert back to our all-out-attack variety and confuse ourselves. Our inabilty to hit a target, our decision making, our disposal and our accuracy when shooting for goal can hurt us.
Since 2006, we have been playing to a different style than what suits us. I think our highest score was about 176 or so against a poor Rihcmond side, which is good but our next highest is about 126. apart from that we've barely been able to crack the ton.
I think the gamplan can stay the same if we work on four things:
Mental and physical toughness. We fall apart when we are vulnerable - last two weeks are proof of that.
Accuracy for goal - an obvious. We need to back ourselves when having a shot at goal for a start and we need to nail the important ones. How can we expect to do well if we can't do either of these?
Fitness - pace and fitness almost run hand in hand, our midfield is slow and predictable and unaccountable when it counts the most. If we can improve in this area, we will get the most out of the rest of the team too.
Disposal. Another obvious one. Disposal and discipline are two things that are a problem for us. Giving away too many free kicks, disposing of the ball in a dangerous way, overusing the ball, making bad decisions. We need to eliminate all of these factors to improve on this area.
And of course, the team selection needs to incororate all of these factors. If the player does not do three or more of the things mentioned, they should not be in the team. I would be harsher and say two or more but the fact is we have so little players who actually do two of the above that we wouldn't be able to field a team.
Its not too late to make these changes. It may be difficult and it may take a while to get used to, but in my humble opinion, if we don't work on these things, the game plan we a re currently employing is NOT going to work.
The Gameplan Thread
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
chook23
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 7282
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 9:31am
- Has thanked: 11 times
- Been thanked: 142 times
Re: The Gameplan Thread
Highlighted in boldOneEyedSainter77 wrote:OK. I've criticised it, you've criticised it. We've all criticised it. but WHAT exactly is our gameplan? We need to be in agreeance on what exactly it is before we all decide whetehr or not a) we like it or b) we think it will get us anywhere.
To me there are two phases to the plan - phase one is to jump out of the blocks and get the early ascendancy. We did this three times this year - against Sydney, Bulldogs and Geelong. Some better kicking against geelong and we might have been in a better position against Geelong.
Once we have established the early lead, we move to hase two of the gameplan. To preserve the lead. We used to consolidate our lead in 2004-2005. (Yes I know I've been harping on about that all week). my main gripe is not the fact that this provides a boring style of game for the spectator, but the fact that we don't have the skill or fitness or desire to play this way.
Sydney are a team built around a solid defense, with an excellent midifled and a decent forward line. But ont only are they solid in defence. They are solid at DEFENDING ALL OVER THE GROUND. We have a decent midfield, an excellent forward line and a poor defence. We have for four years now. We are not good at defending all over the ground and we are not good at backing ourselves.
geelong play the all-out attack version of the game we implemented in 2004 and 2005 but they also have a sublime team-effort style that is close to the best I have ever seen. They know what their other teammates are doing and they share it around with each other. No Geelong player has kicked more than five goals in a match since 2006, round 12 I think. Yes, that includes the 35 goal slaughter last year too!
Hawthorn play a similar version to Geelong but can also revert to the keepings off game that Richmond hav ebeen known to play. The difference between Hawthorn and Richmond is that they don't overuse the ball and it works better for them. Hawthorn play ruthlessly and take full advantage of their forwards.
The bulldogs and Essendon play fast, direct and are accountable. They take more risks and they also try and share the ball around. Some say they are the most exciting teams to watch, but I find geelong's and Hawthorn's games are more enjoyable with the teamwork aspect.
Richmond, as I said play a keepings-off style game similar to Sydney's defensive type gameplan. their gameplan is built around get the ball, chip it around and not let the opposition get it. Not to be mistaken for Sydney's ability to dominate the clearances, they are more commited to not letting the opposition contest the ball. There is no better side in the league than Richmond and getting uncontested possessions - harsh I know, while there are no other sides than Sydney who seem to back themselves in contested situations so much.
Anyway, I don't dislike the gameplan we play. Despite what I may have said in the other thread, it isn't boring. I just love high-scoring games and it disappoints me that for a while, we won't be kicking scores like we were three eyars ago. but I just don't think we are able to play the game this way. Its almost like we try to play it liek that and then revert back to our all-out-attack variety and confuse ourselves. Our inabilty to hit a target, our decision making, our disposal and our accuracy when shooting for goal can hurt us.
Since 2006, we have been playing to a different style than what suits us. I think our highest score was about 176 or so against a poor Rihcmond side, which is good but our next highest is about 126. apart from that we've barely been able to crack the ton.
I think the gamplan can stay the same if we work on four things:
Mental and physical toughness. We fall apart when we are vulnerable - last two weeks are proof of that.
Accuracy for goal - an obvious. We need to back ourselves when having a shot at goal for a start and we need to nail the important ones. How can we expect to do well if we can't do either of these?
Fitness - pace and fitness almost run hand in hand, our midfield is slow and predictable and unaccountable when it counts the most. If we can improve in this area, we will get the most out of the rest of the team too.
Disposal. Another obvious one. Disposal and discipline are two things that are a problem for us. Giving away too many free kicks, disposing of the ball in a dangerous way, overusing the ball, making bad decisions. We need to eliminate all of these factors to improve on this area.
And of course, the team selection needs to incororate all of these factors. If the player does not do three or more of the things mentioned, they should not be in the team. I would be harsher and say two or more but the fact is we have so little players who actually do two of the above that we wouldn't be able to field a team.
Its not too late to make these changes. It may be difficult and it may take a while to get used to, but in my humble opinion, if we don't work on these things, the game plan we a re currently employing is NOT going to work.
comments
To jump out of the blocks is not the gamplan but the result of it...
SUSTAINING has been the problem....Result of opp adjusting?? our lack ability to re-adjust....??
I do not think as part of our initial gameplan (as you say) is to preserve lead........
I don't think we have an excellent forward line.....using all criteria
very weak at contested ground level.......ball run out far to easy etc
As you have mentioned fitness/mental toughness
disposal and accuracy at goal would destroy any version of any gameplan.
We can not sustain our efforts.......
fitness/overall ability(all facets) and depth in rotations...............
saint4life
-
The_Dud
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 13781
- Joined: Sun 27 May 2007 9:53pm
- Location: Bendigo
- Has thanked: 1313 times
- Been thanked: 2051 times
-
kaos theory
- Club Player
- Posts: 1521
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 8:38pm
- Been thanked: 25 times
To me there are two phases to the plan - phase one is to jump out of the blocks and get the early ascendancy. We did this three times this year - against Sydney, Bulldogs and Geelong. Some better kicking against geelong and we might have been in a better position against Geelong.
Once we have established the early lead, we move to hase two of the gameplan. To preserve the lead. We used to consolidate our lead in 2004-2005. (Yes I know I've been harping on about that all week). my main gripe is not the fact that this provides a boring style of game for the spectator, but the fact that we don't have the skill or fitness or desire to play this way.
No offence, but this is garabge...
NO ONE, EVER has a game plan of get an early lead in the first qty, and try to defend the lead for the rest of the game....
This is nonsense!!
FFS, when are people going to realise that players are not robots where every single movement they perform on the field is controled from the coaches box and or some pre-worked out plan...
Our poor performances are the result of a number of more influential and interrelated factors, such as skill level, execution, concentration, confidence, opposition, decision-making....
RL has made it clear that he wants an attacking style of play, with a little more accountability and pressure on the forward line. The fact that is hasn't all come together as yet is probably due to a number of factors, that I, and others can only guess at....
-
Otiman
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8587
- Joined: Thu 28 Jul 2005 11:09pm
- Location: Elsewhere
- Has thanked: 191 times
- Been thanked: 614 times
Our gameplan is fine behind the centre of the ground, and in clearance/pack situations.
Once we pass the centre, whether we are going through the corridor or out wide, we fail to have the structure to provide good targets. I don't believe this is a cattle issue, more about where players are situated on the ground.
Once we pass the centre, whether we are going through the corridor or out wide, we fail to have the structure to provide good targets. I don't believe this is a cattle issue, more about where players are situated on the ground.
-
saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30089
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 1233 times
Fully agree...kaos theory wrote:To me there are two phases to the plan - phase one is to jump out of the blocks and get the early ascendancy. We did this three times this year - against Sydney, Bulldogs and Geelong. Some better kicking against geelong and we might have been in a better position against Geelong.
Once we have established the early lead, we move to hase two of the gameplan. To preserve the lead. We used to consolidate our lead in 2004-2005. (Yes I know I've been harping on about that all week). my main gripe is not the fact that this provides a boring style of game for the spectator, but the fact that we don't have the skill or fitness or desire to play this way.
No offence, but this is garabge...
NO ONE, EVER has a game plan of get an early lead in the first qty, and try to defend the lead for the rest of the game....
This is nonsense!!
FFS, when are people going to realise that players are not robots where every single movement they perform on the field is controled from the coaches box and or some pre-worked out plan...
Our poor performances are the result of a number of more influential and interrelated factors, such as skill level, execution, concentration, confidence, opposition, decision-making....
RL has made it clear that he wants an attacking style of play, with a little more accountability and pressure on the forward line. The fact that is hasn't all come together as yet is probably due to a number of factors, that I, and others can only guess at....
The suggestion that we could have a game plan of play a big first quarter and then just look to wind the clock down for the last 3 quarters is just silly.
Now I don't agree with 100% of our gameplan (for example I am no fan of a our current 3 tall forward set up), but the coach is on record several times as stating that he wants the team to playa more dirrect attacking style that what is delivered.
I think the first quarters of both Cats, Dogs and Swans games are evidence of what happens when things go reasonbly right (though greater accuracy woulavve made for even better quarters)...
When we have a run on we look good...except that we are missing easy goals. The problems we have include that when good opposition get a run on that they kick more accuately for goal. well at least 2 out of 3 anyways as the Swans kicking at goal was as woeful as ours.
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
Maybe the game plan we have is impossible to play for 4 quarters because there has to a reason we drop off so quickly. Or maybe our plan never changes so if the opposition make changes we have nothing to counter act that. Or maybe we are just not good enough and can only sustain the effort for a short perion.
-
kaos theory
- Club Player
- Posts: 1521
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 8:38pm
- Been thanked: 25 times
SR -
Yes, look at the way we played for most of the cats game. With resonable kicking, we could have been much further in front in the first qtr. This would have put more pressure on the cats to make up the difference, and that's not easy...
Also, early in the last, we were playing all over the cats, and we had 3 shots easy shots for goal that either went for a point or out of bounds. If those easy shots went through, we would have been 2 goals down, with momentum and the crowd behind us. Momentum is a BIG confidence factor that can swing a game...it tightens up the opposition, makes them a little more hesitant, the the team riding it plays like a different outfit.
Not saying we would have won, but we would all be now saying "we now have a good game plan because we matched it with the cats"...
Plugger66 -
- Maybe some of those things are factors, but I think its a case of it taking time for the full team to gel together under RL. We have not had these group of players playing together under RL all at once that much. His first yr, we had a shocking injury list, so he had a patch work of players & no consistency.
- Also IMO we are not as talented, relative to the opposition, as we were in 04 & 05. So that effects confidence, decsion-making, etc... As I keep saying we dropped the ball in many areas of the footy dept over the period from 04 to 07.
Yes, look at the way we played for most of the cats game. With resonable kicking, we could have been much further in front in the first qtr. This would have put more pressure on the cats to make up the difference, and that's not easy...
Also, early in the last, we were playing all over the cats, and we had 3 shots easy shots for goal that either went for a point or out of bounds. If those easy shots went through, we would have been 2 goals down, with momentum and the crowd behind us. Momentum is a BIG confidence factor that can swing a game...it tightens up the opposition, makes them a little more hesitant, the the team riding it plays like a different outfit.
Not saying we would have won, but we would all be now saying "we now have a good game plan because we matched it with the cats"...
Plugger66 -
- Maybe some of those things are factors, but I think its a case of it taking time for the full team to gel together under RL. We have not had these group of players playing together under RL all at once that much. His first yr, we had a shocking injury list, so he had a patch work of players & no consistency.
- Also IMO we are not as talented, relative to the opposition, as we were in 04 & 05. So that effects confidence, decsion-making, etc... As I keep saying we dropped the ball in many areas of the footy dept over the period from 04 to 07.
-
OneEyedSainter77
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3792
- Joined: Tue 02 Aug 2005 10:24pm
-
Gilbert=Legend
-
OneEyedSainter77
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3792
- Joined: Tue 02 Aug 2005 10:24pm
Well whatever anyway.
Who cares what the gameplan is? the point is the bolded bits that someone mentioned...
We are innacurate, we have poor disposal, we are mentally weak and physically soft and unaccuntable. Its not Ross' fault, its the players... btu I think the gameplan Ross wants us to play doesn't suit our players at the moment. i'm not saying there's no hope. I'm just saying that we need to make a great deal of changes both psychologiocal and physically.
But I don't even care anymore... football takes a back seat to my life from now on cos I'm just sick of it.
meh.
Who cares what the gameplan is? the point is the bolded bits that someone mentioned...
We are innacurate, we have poor disposal, we are mentally weak and physically soft and unaccuntable. Its not Ross' fault, its the players... btu I think the gameplan Ross wants us to play doesn't suit our players at the moment. i'm not saying there's no hope. I'm just saying that we need to make a great deal of changes both psychologiocal and physically.
But I don't even care anymore... football takes a back seat to my life from now on cos I'm just sick of it.
meh.
I think the problem is structural.
No half forwards to lead up to the wings creating space behind them.
Need some strong bodies to hold the ball in especially in the forward line.
We are winning clearances, so the more ball ups the better.
Our halfbacks aren't getting free to run and create. Nobody is blocking for
anybody off the ball. Geelong did it all day long.
I also believe some players are running themselves into trouble, giving
the ball off to some one else in a worse position which creates poor
disposal.
I also believe we need one more tall defender. If Chips and Raph have to
play against taller, stronger players it takes away from their strengths
which is to run.
No half forwards to lead up to the wings creating space behind them.
Need some strong bodies to hold the ball in especially in the forward line.
We are winning clearances, so the more ball ups the better.
Our halfbacks aren't getting free to run and create. Nobody is blocking for
anybody off the ball. Geelong did it all day long.
I also believe some players are running themselves into trouble, giving
the ball off to some one else in a worse position which creates poor
disposal.
I also believe we need one more tall defender. If Chips and Raph have to
play against taller, stronger players it takes away from their strengths
which is to run.
-
cwrcyn
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4241
- Joined: Fri 15 Sep 2006 10:35am
- Location: earth
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 1390 times
The game plan seems to focus on anyone behind the stoppage ( I mean all the way back to the defensive goal square) watching his opponent as his first priority, and then leaving him when we think we have control of the ball. It's mostly a case of 'Whoops, too late"
Big problem with this strategy is that our players are in two minds, and won't run in support early enough - too many players standing still with the ball in their hands and waiting for their team mates to catch up to them so they can release the ball. How many times have we seen this situation in the zone from wing to half-back? A kind of ring around the rosey occurs, and our forwards are left wondering when they should actually make their move.
The player receiving the ball then finds himself in a congested zone, with his forwards 80 metres away, so he has no where to kick the damn thing, and the whole shamozzle starts again.
The other problem withour game plan is the defensive focus of our midfielders. It does serve a purpose, but unfortunately, hardly any of our midfielders have the opportunity to run forward of the ball. And some of us wonder why our mids don't kick goals.
Structurally, we are not very balanced, with odd arrangements like having Blake and King at the centre bounces at the same time. Now, there's some breakaway speed for you.
I'd be instructing our running half backs to follow their instincts and run to position early and back our midfielders to win the ball. It may help to have a loose man at half back while trying to re-introduce this. Meanwhile, we have two of our tall forwards pushing from 25 metres out from goal leading hard up the ground, with one tall forward parked in the goal square with plenty of space around him.
Big problem with this strategy is that our players are in two minds, and won't run in support early enough - too many players standing still with the ball in their hands and waiting for their team mates to catch up to them so they can release the ball. How many times have we seen this situation in the zone from wing to half-back? A kind of ring around the rosey occurs, and our forwards are left wondering when they should actually make their move.
The player receiving the ball then finds himself in a congested zone, with his forwards 80 metres away, so he has no where to kick the damn thing, and the whole shamozzle starts again.
The other problem withour game plan is the defensive focus of our midfielders. It does serve a purpose, but unfortunately, hardly any of our midfielders have the opportunity to run forward of the ball. And some of us wonder why our mids don't kick goals.
Structurally, we are not very balanced, with odd arrangements like having Blake and King at the centre bounces at the same time. Now, there's some breakaway speed for you.
I'd be instructing our running half backs to follow their instincts and run to position early and back our midfielders to win the ball. It may help to have a loose man at half back while trying to re-introduce this. Meanwhile, we have two of our tall forwards pushing from 25 metres out from goal leading hard up the ground, with one tall forward parked in the goal square with plenty of space around him.
Ross Lyon lied to us all over the summer. He gave us this false hope and everyone seemed to jump on board. He said he wanted a more attacking team. A team that uses the corridor and piles on the goals. I've seen all of our games this year and I think I can count the number of times we've used the corridor. The game has changed and Ross' gameplan is too risk-free which doesn't suit our list whatsoever.