Running Defenders - Our Achilles Heel

[spert]

It doesn't help when Montagna plays a shocker of a game. His disposal by foot has lost the penetration it once had and he turns over a bit too much. I can't believe that AR would drop Minchington when we are screaming for runners and quality ball users- how does the guy make the next step with this in and out section rubbish. I don't know what's happen to White, as he looked very promising late last season as a quality half back, now is forgotten. I hope DMac at least gets some consecutive games.

[SemperFidelis]

Until we lost Webster I would have thought that this was the least of our problems. Losing Newnes on Saturday was a disaster, Jake had all the confidence of a bloke who'd been flagellated all week, and Monty had a down game.

But I'm not sure it's anything more than a temporary problem. Save for two quarters in each of the Melbourne and Sydney games, I've been pretty happy with out movement out of defence.

[Dis Believer]

Until we lost Webster I would have thought that this was the least of our problems. Losing Newnes on Saturday was a disaster, Jake had all the confidence of a bloke who'd been flagellated all week, and Monty had a down game.

But I'm not sure it's anything more than a temporary problem. Save for two quarters in each of the Melbourne and Sydney games, I've been pretty happy with out movement out of defence.

This.
With Webster out, losing Newnes early on killed us. The opposition only had to shut down Roberton and we became very limited in terms of our avenues out of defence - hence our appalling delivery to our forwards (which had started to improve substantially).

[longtimesaint]

Until we lost Webster I would have thought that this was the least of our problems. Losing Newnes on Saturday was a disaster, Jake had all the confidence of a bloke who'd been flagellated all week, and Monty had a down game.

But I'm not sure it's anything more than a temporary problem. Save for two quarters in each of the Melbourne and Sydney games, I've been pretty happy with out movement out of defence.

This.
With Webster out, losing Newnes early on killed us. The opposition only had to shut down Roberton and we became very limited in terms of our avenues out of defence - hence our appalling delivery to our forwards (which had started to improve substantially).

Maybe we need to bring back Savage until Jimmy is fit.

[Johnny Member]

Until we lost Webster I would have thought that this was the least of our problems. Losing Newnes on Saturday was a disaster, Jake had all the confidence of a bloke who'd been flagellated all week, and Monty had a down game.

But I'm not sure it's anything more than a temporary problem. Save for two quarters in each of the Melbourne and Sydney games, I've been pretty happy with out movement out of defence.

This.
With Webster out, losing Newnes early on killed us. The opposition only had to shut down Roberton and we became very limited in terms of our avenues out of defence - hence our appalling delivery to our forwards (which had started to improve substantially).

But isn't the fact that Roberton's form resulted in our form looking good - suggest that this area of the game is critical?

And the fact that when Roberton has been negated, we've struggled?


It also has me scratching my head as to why, with Webster out and Roberton being tagged now, we kept Dunstan in the team? If we're not going to get that attack from the defenders, where are we expecting to get it from??

In isolation, not getting huge numbers in the R50 stat isn't necessarily an issue - but when you're not setting up attack from the midfield and have a very defensive midfield - it's gotta come from somewhere!

[Johnny Member]

Until we lost Webster I would have thought that this was the least of our problems. Losing Newnes on Saturday was a disaster, Jake had all the confidence of a bloke who'd been flagellated all week, and Monty had a down game.

But I'm not sure it's anything more than a temporary problem. Save for two quarters in each of the Melbourne and Sydney games, I've been pretty happy with out movement out of defence.

This.
With Webster out, losing Newnes early on killed us. The opposition only had to shut down Roberton and we became very limited in terms of our avenues out of defence - hence our appalling delivery to our forwards (which had started to improve substantially).

Maybe we need to bring back Savage until Jimmy is fit.

Savage's role is critical - but I just don't think Savage is any good at it.

[meher baba]

I don't think there are many certainties in life but, barring a miraculous early recovery from Webster, I reckon Savage will run out against the Dogs. Whatever any of you might think of him.

Personally, I think he is quite a good player but, if Webster, Roberton, Montagna and Carlisle (who's not a bad kick out of defence) are all in the first team, we don't need him. But McKenzie didn't deliver on Saturday: his kicking was woeful, and he couldn't break any lines with his running. So replacing him with Savage is the obvious answer.

As I have said in a previous post, if Newnes has to miss a game, then I reckon McKenzie could be retained as we don't have a lot of other viable options.

[Johnny Member]

I don't think there are many certainties in life but, barring a miraculous early recovery from Webster, I reckon Savage will run out against the Dogs. Whatever any of you might think of him.

Personally, I think he is quite a good player but, if Webster, Roberton, Montagna and Carlisle (who's not a bad kick out of defence) are all in the first team, we don't need him. But McKenzie didn't deliver on Saturday: his kicking was woeful, and he couldn't break any lines with his running. So replacing him with Savage is the obvious answer.

As I have said in a previous post, if Newnes has to miss a game, then I reckon McKenzie could be retained as we don't have a lot of other viable options.

I think my point is, that we have guys in that role - but I just don't think any of them barring Roberton is any good.

Webster is better than Savage, but that doesn't mean he's high quality.


Is it breaking down because these running backs can't use it well and as a result our midfield numbers are poor?

Or is the midfield so dour and poor that it doesn't give these guys good options to go to when they come out of defence?

[Johnny Member]

Interesting discussion on SEN this morning regarding 'running defenders'.

Apparently they're the most important role in the game at the moment.


Hmmmmm. Who'd have thought?

[stonecold]

Interesting discussion on SEN this morning regarding 'running defenders'.

Apparently they're the most important role in the game at the moment.


Hmmmmm. Who'd have thought?

That's why Webster is such as big loss, hopefully back this week!!!!!

[Johnny Member]

Interesting discussion on SEN this morning regarding 'running defenders'.

Apparently they're the most important role in the game at the moment.


Hmmmmm. Who'd have thought?

That's why Webster is such as big loss, hopefully back this week!!!!!

He's an upgrade on what we've had back there recently no doubt.

But I still think we need an upgrade on him too.


He's a B. We need an A back there to be the real deal.

[carn_sainter]

We all long to have Aussie Jones back in the team, but let's not get carried away.

Running defender is not the most important role in the game. Clearly not.

Who are the best players in the comp? If you could recruit one player to the saints who would it be? I'm not too well versed on non saints players but names that come up a lot are Dangerfield, Selwood, Bontempelli, Shiel, Kelly, Scully, Martin, Fyfe, Franklin. Not running defenders.

They are important, but let's not get hyperbolic.

Our problem is more to do with options to kick the ball to. A footy travels over 40m faster than a human does and if your running defender, after running free, has nothing to kick to then you're in the same predicament, albeit 30m closer to goal.

Again, they are important. Ours aren't great. But they are not the most important in the game, nor even within the way we play the game.

[Johnny Member]

We all long to have Aussie Jones back in the team, but let's not get carried away.

Running defender is not the most important role in the game. Clearly not.

Who are the best players in the comp? If you could recruit one player to the saints who would it be? I'm not too well versed on non saints players but names that come up a lot are Dangerfield, Selwood, Bontempelli, Shiel, Kelly, Scully, Martin, Fyfe, Franklin. Not running defenders.

They are important, but let's not get hyperbolic.

Our problem is more to do with options to kick the ball to. A footy travels over 40m faster than a human does and if your running defender, after running free, has nothing to kick to then you're in the same predicament, albeit 30m closer to goal.

Again, they are important. Ours aren't great. But they are not the most important in the game, nor even within the way we play the game.

It's not about who the best players in the comp are - it's about who is the best team.

[Legendary]

No coincidence that we started losing when Webster broke his hand.

Most underrated player at the club.

[Johnny Member]

No coincidence that we started losing when Webster broke his hand.

Most underrated player at the club.

Maybe.

I have may have underrated him, as I don't really rate him very highly.

However it could just be that that role is the most underrated at the club and as a result, we've suffered having him out?

[carn_sainter]

It's not about who the best players in the comp are - it's about who is the best team.

Absolutely. The point was that you can't say that the running defender is the most important role in the game if all the best players are not running defenders. Clearly their skills are being used in more important areas and/or the influence they have in those other areas is what make them the best players.

And of the things this team lacks at the moment, I think our biggest concerns lie ahead of the ball, not behind it.

[White Winmar]

It's not about who the best players in the comp are - it's about who is the best team.

Absolutely. The point was that you can't say that the running defender is the most important role in the game if all the best players are not running defenders. Clearly their skills are being used in more important areas and/or the influence they have in those other areas is what make them the best players.

And of the things this team lacks at the moment, I think our biggest concerns lie ahead of the ball, not behind it.

Indeed. We get plenty of the ball into the front half. We are struggling up there. 118 points in two weeks highlights the problem.

[Johnny Member]

It's not about who the best players in the comp are - it's about who is the best team.

Absolutely. The point was that you can't say that the running defender is the most important role in the game if all the best players are not running defenders. Clearly their skills are being used in more important areas and/or the influence they have in those other areas is what make them the best players.

And of the things this team lacks at the moment, I think our biggest concerns lie ahead of the ball, not behind it.

I understand your point.

However these days, I think that what happens in front of the ball - starts from behind the ball.

That's why Hawthorn famously 'didn't care abou tht e contested ball' - because they let you get it, then pressured you into giving it back to them at HB. At which point their running backs (the name itself doesn't really describe the role that well) in Hodge, Burgoyne, Birchall etc. would set up scoring opportunies from the back half of the ground.

The Bulldogs mimicked it lasy year and Johnanison became arguably their most important player as a result. Not their best necessarily - but their most importnt. If not very close to it.


Basher Houli will be tagged next week. You watch.

Because whilst Martin and co. are getting all the glory, he's the one setting up offensive plays back in the D50 and getting the pill to the big guns in the middle.


It's no coincidnce that when Roberton was in AA form (according to some) we were beating GWS and looking pretty dangerous.

A combination of him being tagged since the GWS game and Webster going down, has meant we've averaged only 60 points since!



Check this out:

Rounds 1-7 (up to and incl. the GWS game): Points For 98.4
Rounds 8-10: Points For 67.6

Dylan Roberton
Rounds 1-7
Kicks:20
Handballs: 4.8
Marks: 7.5
Tackles: 3.14
I50s: 2.4

Post-GWS:
Kicks:18.6
Handballs: 8
Marks: 7.3
Tackles: 0.6
I50s: 1.6

So although he's getting his hands on the ball only marginally less overall, he's not getting the space to kick like he did. They've tightened up on him and he's being forced to handball. His I50s have dropped 33%.

But whilst this has been going on, look at our midfielders numbers during this time:



Seb Ross
Rounds 1-7
Kicks: 14.7
Handballs: 13.8
Marks: 3.7
Tackles: 3.7
I50s: 4.1

Post-GWS:
Kicks: 13.6
Handballs: 19
Marks: 4
Tackles: 6.3
I50s: 4.6

Jack Steven
Rounds 1-7
Kicks: 11.1
Handballs: 9.1
Marks: 2.4
Tackles: 3.4
I50s: 3.8

Post-GWS:
Kicks: 13
Handballs: 12.3
Marks: 3.3
Tackles: 5.6
I50s: 4

Jack Steele
Rounds 1-7
Kicks: 6.5
Handballs: 13.8
Marks: 4.1
Tackles: 7.5
I50s: 2

Post-GWS:
Kicks: 7.6
Handballs: 16.6
Marks: 4.6
Tackles: 7.3
I50s: 2.6

Jack Billings
Rounds 1-7
Kicks:10.7
Handballs: 9.7
Marks: 4.5
Tackles: 3
I50s: 4.2

Post-GWS:
Kicks:14.3
Handballs: 11.6
Marks: 7
Tackles: 3
I50s: 3.6



So in a nutshell, Roberton's figures have dropped pretty sharply, and obviously Webster's have driopped completely - but our midfielder's (I chose 4 of the key ones) have improved pretty dramatically! So their output has grown considerably - yet our Points For during this period has dropped over 30 points per game!

So clearly for us, good midfield numbers don't equate to goals. Whereas lower midfield numbers with higher 'running defender' numbers equals decent footy.

[carn_sainter]

So in a nutshell, Roberton's figures have dropped pretty sharply, and obviously Webster's have driopped completely - but our midfielder's (I chose 4 of the key ones) have improved pretty dramatically! So their output has grown considerably - yet our Points For during this period has dropped over 30 points per game!

So clearly for us, good midfield numbers don't equate to goals. Whereas lower midfield numbers with higher 'running defender' numbers equals decent footy.

Good post. Firstly, let's not get carried away with stats. Roberton's inside 50s have dropped 33%. Or, Roberton's inside 50s have dropped by 0.8. Let's round up to 1. It would be one heck of an inside 50 that nets us a 30 point goal.

Johnny, in another thread you were questioning the value of some stats, like disposal efficiency. Well here, we again need to question the value of stats without context. Kicks and handballs...great. The point I'm emphasising more than you are is that those kicks and handballs have nowhere to go because of problems in front of the ball.

We both agree that there are problems behind the ball and problems in front of the ball, but I think that the problems in front of the ball cause the problems behind the ball. ie, they have nothing to kick to. Midfielders too...hence their increase in kicks and handballs without any material impact. Newnes is not a dud, but he had 35 touches without impact last week. Largely because he had nothing to kick to. Same for Leigh Montagna.

We can go and find stories in the stats or we can watch the game and see St Kilda players with the ball in hand looking further afield to stationary non targets who aren't moving, aren't presenting, aren't making space behind them, aren't forcing the defenders to move and thus lose their defensive structure/position. Of course, having a gun (again I pine for Aussie Jones) kick of the ball would be nice but until he has options to kick to, well, he can't kick to himself.

Your point about Roberton confirms this a bit. Yes, he was on fire then he got tagged. Now he is not on fire. If that is so, let's say we get Johannison and he gets tagged? Same problem. I prefer we have forwards who work to create holes in the defensive structure and allow for fast ball movement. The ball moves like it's treacle and that is a problem that starts with the target of the ball carrier, not the ball carrier.

[Johnny Member]

So in a nutshell, Roberton's figures have dropped pretty sharply, and obviously Webster's have driopped completely - but our midfielder's (I chose 4 of the key ones) have improved pretty dramatically! So their output has grown considerably - yet our Points For during this period has dropped over 30 points per game!

So clearly for us, good midfield numbers don't equate to goals. Whereas lower midfield numbers with higher 'running defender' numbers equals decent footy.

Good post. Firstly, let's not get carried away with stats. Roberton's inside 50s have dropped 33%. Or, Roberton's inside 50s have dropped by 0.8. Let's round up to 1. It would be one heck of an inside 50 that nets us a 30 point goal.

Johnny, in another thread you were questioning the value of some stats, like disposal efficiency. Well here, we again need to question the value of stats without context. Kicks and handballs...great. The point I'm emphasising more than you are is that those kicks and handballs have nowhere to go because of problems in front of the ball.

We both agree that there are problems behind the ball and problems in front of the ball, but I think that the problems in front of the ball cause the problems behind the ball. ie, they have nothing to kick to. Midfielders too...hence their increase in kicks and handballs without any material impact. Newnes is not a dud, but he had 35 touches without impact last week. Largely because he had nothing to kick to. Same for Leigh Montagna.

We can go and find stories in the stats or we can watch the game and see St Kilda players with the ball in hand looking further afield to stationary non targets who aren't moving, aren't presenting, aren't making space behind them, aren't forcing the defenders to move and thus lose their defensive structure/position. Of course, having a gun (again I pine for Aussie Jones) kick of the ball would be nice but until he has options to kick to, well, he can't kick to himself.

Your point about Roberton confirms this a bit. Yes, he was on fire then he got tagged. Now he is not on fire. If that is so, let's say we get Johannison and he gets tagged? Same problem. I prefer we have forwards who work to create holes in the defensive structure and allow for fast ball movement. The ball moves like it's treacle and that is a problem that starts with the target of the ball carrier, not the ball carrier.

Good points. Good discussion.

Just for the record, I totally agree that stats don't give the full picture. It's just that often, they support what you 'feel' when you watch the footy.


As for both 'running defenders' getting tagged - that is hard for an opposition to do. Most teams have a defensive forward, but very few can afford two in the team at once.

And I agree that running defenders are less critical if your midfield is capable of splitting open the game offensively - but ours just isn't. And the problem is that it's not designed that way either. Ross, Armo, Dunstan and Jack. That was Richardson's 'go to' for years. It's a very slow, dour, defensive midfield - so where does the run and play making come from?? It has to come the half back line.

So we recruited Stevens and Steele. Two more 'slow' defensive, dour type mids - but never addressed where the run was going to come from still. I don't know where Richardson thinks we are going to generate the play from?

I can live with us 'ignoring' the running back role - if we have a Dangerwood style midfield. But we don't - and I can't see us getting it either. So for mine, we need to be able to generate legitimate offence from the back half.

[Toy Saint]

Excellent discussion and getting to the neucleus of our problem.

Some of the better teams have 10 midfielders, they include the traditional half back and half forward flankers as well as the wings and rovers.

Too many of our guys are one dinensional.....our key mids, with the exception of Jack Steven lack zip and precision kicking.

Because we don't have a specialist small forward of the calibre of Stephen Milne or Eddie Betts, I reckon we should use that position to rotate mids. Billings and Gresham could probably rotate through the middle but Dunstan, Ross , Stevens and Steel appear to lack the flexability to go forward. It would be good if Mav Weller could go through the middle but I don't think he's got the necessary tools. Membrey is playing the Aaron Hamil role adequately as a medium forward, but I don't think we can carry both Membrey and Weller in the same team.

As a previous poster suggested, a good team either needs the run and carry (with precision kick) from defence OR a quality midfield with outside run and breakaway pace. We need a couple more Jack Stevens.

Another interesting observation. Against Melbourne we were smashed in the ruck by Max Gawn, he gave the Melboune mids 1st use and they tore us apart. So we bring in Billy Longer, he's given our own mids a lot more 1st use, but our mids have been unable to take advantage. It's probably because we lack the breakaway pace.

Our running defenders are lacking the Goddard or Hodge "Quarterback" set up guy role, as well as lacking the breakaway pace. Of our smaller defenders, I reckon Roberton, Webster and Newnes are the right type with McKenzie a potential to develop. Sadly I feel that Joey is lacking the run these days and may not have much left. Geary is our Captain and tough as nails, but he doesn't exactly run and carry and his disposal is moderate at best. Geary is probably best suited to tag a quality mid or dangerous small forward. Sam Gilbert is interesting, especially as a 2nd ruck in recent weeks. Gilbert has the pace and he can play tall or small, but lacks precise disposal. Savage is a bit dissapointing, he would probably struggle for a game at Hawthorn these days, I'm not surprised they offered him as the 'steak knives' in the McEvoy deal.

We may only be 3-4 players away from a good team, a couple of the GWS mids would be very welcome replacement for the likes of Savage, Weller, Minchington, Dunstan (or a slow mid), and as much as I hate to say it probably Montagna and Geary may struggle to deserve selection in a Grand Final team. Bring in a couple more talanted mids, and a couple of them could rotate through our backline.

[To the top]

As I have put consistently there was a reason Montagna became a plus 1 in our defensive structure

Incisive and damaging rebound

But the need to so deploy Montagna was an indictment

Our abilities to add decisive and incisive rebound have improved in 2017, due to the deployment of Roberton, the deployment of Gilbert ex other responsibilities being thrust upon him and some improvement from Webster who, at least, keeps his feet better in a contest now

The good sides are decisive and insisted, including by switching

It is necessary therefore to have leg speed and to have an ability to kick 60 metres, flat and accurately to create opportunity

In addition to the first requirement, being defence

Brown we can accomodate, and Carlisle brings a different dimension

Then we get to the problem

The remaining 4 plus Montagna as the plus one ALL need to have incisive and decisive skills with the ball in hand

They have to be able to drop off as switch targets, and to be able to hit up that switch target over 60 metres to create space and force two on one down a flank

One weak link and we are in trouble - because it only takes one

So who of our potential 4 or 4 plus 1 would not be the subject of being defended as Roberton is being defended currently?

Forcing him not only to handball but to kick off the left?

The problem is who says "Thank you" when Roberton and Montagna are defended - and Gilbert is otherwise deployed?

That is our problem

Then we can not use Longer when we have the ball - and we have to cover for him defensively around the ground

Plus we do not play Bruce

That means the likes of Minchington and Sinclair get games - and they are just short of the mark as has been consistently shown

And we don't have Armo - and Roo fit

So our side is not structured and is not efficient, hence the results of late

We need to improve our depth and that means Hickey, Bruce, White - and then Armitage, a fit Roo and Freeman

So there are 6 holes in our current side

Hence we are losing and losing badly - and that is the measure no matter anyone's bias in regards players currently in the side

[Joffa Burns]

I agree we have an issue out of defence, but the issue IMO is players with precise kicking and leg speed as opposed to positional players such as defenders.
We lack speed and high level kicking skills all over the ground.
Far too often our game plan is exposed by poor foot skills.

A lot of good players who played their junior careers as midfielders play the run and carry quaterback role like Wilson and Kennedy at GWS.
We desperately lack kicing skills and pace in the midfield.
Too many of our fringe players are hard as a cats head but lack the footskills required at AFL level such as Wright & DMac & O'Kearney (though he isstill learning).
White looks to kick it ok and Rice looks a player but looks one paced and not overly quick to me.

Pace and footskills please???
But then every club is looking for this!

[Johnny Member]

Your point about Roberton confirms this a bit. Yes, he was on fire then he got tagged. Now he is not on fire. If that is so, let's say we get Johannison and he gets tagged? Same problem. I prefer we have forwards who work to create holes in the defensive structure and allow for fast ball movement. The ball moves like it's treacle and that is a problem that starts with the target of the ball carrier, not the ball carrier.

Interestingly, one of the Crows keys to success have been their running defenders. This is where they set up the bulk of their offence and why they've been able to blow teams away.

The teams that have beaten them recently, have done so by shutting this down.


It reminds of back in the day when we were unstoppable for a shortish period with Matty Young and Frankie Peckett running amok off half back. They averaged about 5 bounces each per week and we were flogging sides. It didn't take the opposition long to work it out and they easily shut them down. As a result, we were rooted.

I think the lesson is - that really good 'running backs' that win their own ball and create are hard to stop and are arguably the most valuable players in football (ala Hodge, Enright, Chris Johnson etc.). The ones that are merely receivers can allow you to blow teams out of the water when they're getting the pill easily and are on top - but are easy to shutdown.


Maybe it's not as simplistic as simply having great users and runners back there? Maybe they are easy to shutdown?

[To the top]

So you need every mid size defender to have decisive and insisive skills with the ball

That is what we need to work out on