Ben Long. Furious

[Templar]

Is it another symptom of the failing "bomb it to a pack inside 50" end play?

I saw the Saints bomb it to packs of weagles players on more than a few occasions yesterday

"Look up for god sake. Kick it to a loose fwd." I scream repeatedly as they drag me into the ward in a strait jacket.

[loris]

The one with Members was the worst. I said to my partner , he better kick this and of course he missed.

I wasn’t thinking of that one saynta..... so that’s 3 times Members ignored him.
On that occasion I accepted him not popping it over to Long who made a clear lead into centre of goal about 35 metres out. If he didn’t hit Long, the ball would have rebounded out through the corridor very quickly as both Shuey & Ryan were in the vicinity. So I forgave Membery that time. However if Members had reacted quickly, he could have got it to Long in any sloppy manner and Long would have been away with a certain goal. Often IMHO Members is a bit too stop & prop to make his decision and the intuitive moment is lost.

[shanegrambeau]

Did anyone feel the same way as me?

I know it is just emotional and not rational, but when it looked as if Long would come on, I was pleased. Then, when Billings got up and started jogging, I was slightly flattened, thinking that Long would not come on.

He did of course come on and kick a nice goal.

I read about 'pressure acts' etc., and I don't think i know enough about football* to comment, but it does look like he is always behind the play...like there is always an oppo player between him and the ball in contested situations. Hence he gets a lot of tackles, but few first hand possessions. he is rarely first to the ball and often fumbly when so. (notwithstanding the immense pressure and speed as the ball comes in)

When he is running along the wings he looks great.

I think Billings might be cooked now. That was ominous...no idea of course, but based on the fact that he was already injury prone (hammies) and now the back is playing up. Many players recover from bad backs, but they do not retain their full repertoire of tricks or speed. Will he be able to bend down and scoop off the deck? Something Long can do.

* Just because I admit I do not have footy smarts doesn't mean I wont comment...I play the field..and some fine posters on here do the same.

[Vortex]

Is it another symptom of the failing "bomb it to a pack inside 50" end play?

I saw the Saints bomb it to packs of weagles players on more than a few occasions yesterday

"Look up for god sake. Kick it to a loose fwd." I scream repeatedly as they drag me into the ward in a strait jacket.

Loose forwards is the problem, Richmond's game plan circa 2017 changed the game to get over the defensive zone and ironically to overcome their lack of tall forward marking options via the long bomb over the zone and into F50.

Knuckle Heads on here carry on like Richo and Ratts designed the long bomb exclusively for the Saints game plan.

Loose forwards has been a myth for over 5 years now and as I say from since about circa 2017 and also the introduction of 2 way running. And so now we evolve to the need for at least 2 tall forwards, and not necessarily to mark but to drop the ball to the foreground and then let the forward press and forward defensive profile swarm in and do its thing. It's also to get within 30m of goal to raise the scoring percentages from a stoppage or contested ground ball.

The tweaks to Geelongs game plan seems to be taking us back to the future with a midfield trying to win the corridor and then spread the defence on the F50 entry which is often still via a long bomb but the kicker now has two tall forwards to choose from WHO are spreading to different locations and the profile of the swarm chooses the obvious location to swarm.

We are predictable which is why we are failing because we don't have the extra tall forward and it gets worse if our forward defensive effort and 2 way running is poor which ours has been.

In short loose forwards are hard to find in the modern game but recent rule changes are helping especially late in games when fatigue kicks in and the game opens up but when the tall guys might have a better chance at a mark. AND all teams exploit the long bomb as part of thier game plan, it's not something we are doing accidentally. We just don't have 2 key tall forwards and enough skill and class to execute the long bomb set play....see Geelong for the perfect example. Also see Dogs who are now looking much better with Bruce back...much better.

[saintly]

...reasonable pressure player in very small patches...

3rd in the Saints tackle count after coming on at quarter time.
Had west coast players ducking for cover and all totally legal.
Nailed a shot on goal from distance.

And last week Long's intensity as emergency sub with short amount of game time was in stark contrast to the rest of the team.

But the haters want him dropped for someone with more elegance and finess. Maybe he should go to Geelong where most of them play like with that level
of damaging intensity.

We can trade him for a sleek looking outside posession gatherer.

and if half our team also only had 5 possessions per game, Saints would not win a game.

[B.M]

As a HHF

A serviceable game is 15 possessions and 3-4 tackles

Obviously he defended well

But his offensive game is poor, to touch the ball 5 times in three quarters is extremely low output

He need to find the pill more!

[Annoyedsaint]

Five possessions lol

It’s not even a duscussion.
Wouldn’t get a game in Geelong’s reserves with 5 possessions.

He’s 24 years old.
Seriously, how much more do you wait??
He’s in delisted territory given he cannot find the ball and doesn’t kick any goals

So look at stats and drop Long and Battle? Bring in two player from the magoos that had higher numbers under the D column. Got it.

You’re having a lend here.
If you think Long getting 5 possessions and a few tackles in a game (consistently) is acceptable then you clearly don’t want to play finals any time soon.

Battle in that role is fine, but again if you want to rise up the ladder, that position should also be a 12-18 possession game that can be damaging. Being just a stopper doesn’t cut it. Look at Tom Stewart. Same size, can run, mark, intercept.

Do you actually want to win a flag one day?
Time to get ruthless. It’s way overdue.

[bangaulegend]

The one with Members was the worst. I said to my partner , he better kick this and of course he missed.

Yeah he was 25 meters out straight in front arms waving & not an opponent with in 20m & Members was kicking from outside 50 & yeah missed

[Teflon]

Interesting isn’t it
Long gets 5 possessions but pressure’s immediately
And I’d still take that over Billing’s invisible 25….
Just proof in the modern game disposals are overrated (unless damaging)
Ask Hill - he gets half his running behind a player to receive a handball…

[takeaway]

The one with Members was the worst. I said to my partner , he better kick this and of course he missed.

Yeah he was 25 meters out straight in front arms waving & not an opponent with in 20m & Members was kicking from outside 50 & yeah missed

I thought the player waving his arms was Butler, not Long.

[Teflon]

Is it another symptom of the failing "bomb it to a pack inside 50" end play?

I saw the Saints bomb it to packs of weagles players on more than a few occasions yesterday

"Look up for god sake. Kick it to a loose fwd." I scream repeatedly as they drag me into the ward in a strait jacket.

Loose forwards is the problem, Richmond's game plan circa 2017 changed the game to get over the defensive zone and ironically to overcome their lack of tall forward marking options via the long bomb over the zone and into F50.

Knuckle Heads on here carry on like Richo and Ratts designed the long bomb exclusively for the Saints game plan.

Loose forwards has been a myth for over 5 years now and as I say from since about circa 2017 and also the introduction of 2 way running. And so now we evolve to the need for at least 2 tall forwards, and not necessarily to mark but to drop the ball to the foreground and then let the forward press and forward defensive profile swarm in and do its thing. It's also to get within 30m of goal to raise the scoring percentages from a stoppage or contested ground ball.

The tweaks to Geelongs game plan seems to be taking us back to the future with a midfield trying to win the corridor and then spread the defence on the F50 entry which is often still via a long bomb but the kicker now has two tall forwards to choose from WHO are spreading to different locations and the profile of the swarm chooses the obvious location to swarm.

We are predictable which is why we are failing because we don't have the extra tall forward and it gets worse if our forward defensive effort and 2 way running is poor which ours has been.

In short loose forwards are hard to find in the modern game but recent rule changes are helping especially late in games when fatigue kicks in and the game opens up but when the tall guys might have a better chance at a mark. AND all teams exploit the long bomb as part of thier game plan, it's not something we are doing accidentally. We just don't have 2 key tall forwards and enough skill and class to execute the long bomb set play....see Geelong for the perfect example. Also see Dogs who are now looking much better with Bruce back...much better.

Loose forwards you say??
Interesting theory….I suspect loose posting…..cause what a load of bollocks
Geelong forwards lead up at the kicker
Swans too via Buddy
Carlton also shatter this myth
Sure if forwards can’t mark it they bring it to ground
But the % of entries are mixed between lead up forwards and a long kick in
We have 1 trick and everyone knows it
Ironically we have a super star forward whose power is on the lead ….
But we are instructing him to stand still 30 out while we bomb on your head
Go figure

[Teflon]

The one with Members was the worst. I said to my partner , he better kick this and of course he missed.

Yeah he was 25 meters out straight in front arms waving & not an opponent with in 20m & Members was kicking from outside 50 & yeah missed

I thought the player waving his arms was Butler, not Long.

Was Long

[bangaulegend]

The one with Members was the worst. I said to my partner , he better kick this and of course he missed.

Yeah he was 25 meters out straight in front arms waving & not an opponent with in 20m & Members was kicking from outside 50 & yeah missed

I thought the player waving his arms was Butler, not Long.

Definitely not on the incident I was referring to

[takeaway]

The one with Members was the worst. I said to my partner , he better kick this and of course he missed.

Yeah he was 25 meters out straight in front arms waving & not an opponent with in 20m & Members was kicking from outside 50 & yeah missed

I thought the player waving his arms was Butler, not Long.

Was Long

If that was when Membrey kicked a point I reckon it was No.16.

[Teflon]

The one with Members was the worst. I said to my partner , he better kick this and of course he missed.

Yeah he was 25 meters out straight in front arms waving & not an opponent with in 20m & Members was kicking from outside 50 & yeah missed

I thought the player waving his arms was Butler, not Long.

Was Long

If that was when Membrey kicked a point I reckon it was No.16.

Couldn’t be arsed checking 5ape but I saw Long on a few occasions free and not hit up

[Templar]

Time to get ruthless. It’s way overdue.

I thought his tackling and pressure in the past two games WAS ruthless.

But you disagree and are dropping Long for the rest of the year so
we can play finals? Who is having the lend?

For me I am tired of watching other teams like Geelong, bash, crash and throw our players around like rag dolls and reducing our interchange options. Sometimes it is like watching men playing against boys. Particularly that game against the cats last year.

I find it refreshing to have someone in the team who doesn't hesitate in giving it back. Plus in the past few weeks Longy seems to be channeling that aggression perfectly legally. Controlled aggression. That was part of his remit. Well done I say.

In what appears to be a tail between the legs like attitude from the majority of the squad since the bye you want to punish this improvement, this aggressive footy, and drop Long for who? Someone else from our long list of tough guys?

For mine I want more players like him not less. Players who will scare the bedevil out of the opposition.

[bangaulegend]

The one with Members was the worst. I said to my partner , he better kick this and of course he missed.

Yeah he was 25 meters out straight in front arms waving & not an opponent with in 20m & Members was kicking from outside 50 & yeah missed

I thought the player waving his arms was Butler, not Long.

Was Long

If that was when Membrey kicked a point I reckon it was No.16.

Couldn’t be arsed checking 5ape but I saw Long on a few occasions free and not hit up

I couldn't see his number as he was looking straight at Membrey & in the incident I'm referring to it was Long but maybe you saw something different & if that's what you saw well I'm happy to leave it at that

[Annoyedsaint]

Time to get ruthless. It’s way overdue.

I thought his tackling and pressure in the past two games WAS ruthless.

But you disagree and are dropping Long for the rest of the year so
we can play finals? Who is having the lend?

For me I am tired of watching other teams like Geelong, bash, crash and throw our players around like rag dolls and reducing our interchange options. Sometimes it is like watching men playing against boys. Particularly that game against the cats last year.

I find it refreshing to have someone in the team who doesn't hesitate in giving it back. Plus in the past few weeks Longy seems to be channeling that aggression perfectly legally. Controlled aggression. That was part of his remit. Well done I say.

In what appears to be a tail between the legs like attitude from the majority of the squad since the bye you want to punish this improvement, this aggressive footy, and drop Long for who? Someone else from our long list of tough guys?

For mine I want more players like him not less. Players who will scare the bedevil out of the opposition.

Ok then, find better players that can have 25-30 possessions then that play like Long.

Point being we will always miss finals with these players in the side with current output. Fact.

We always have these half forward sink hole players.
Long
Billings
Kent

In the past:
Weller
Minchington

They are crap!!! Draft a dumpy kid that can rack them up for once.

Playing with 3-4 every week that offer nothing offensively = cannot possibly win on a regular basis

[Templar]

So you aren't dropping him this week. Cool.

[Templar]

Is it another symptom of the failing "bomb it to a pack inside 50" end play?

I saw the Saints bomb it to packs of weagles players on more than a few occasions yesterday

"Look up for god sake. Kick it to a loose fwd." I scream repeatedly as they drag me into the ward in a strait jacket.

Loose forwards is the problem, Richmond's game plan circa 2017 changed the game to get over the defensive zone and ironically to overcome their lack of tall forward marking options via the long bomb over the zone and into F50.

Knuckle Heads on here carry on like Richo and Ratts designed the long bomb exclusively for the Saints game plan.

Loose forwards has been a myth for over 5 years now and as I say from since about circa 2017 and also the introduction of 2 way running. And so now we evolve to the need for at least 2 tall forwards, and not necessarily to mark but to drop the ball to the foreground and then let the forward press and forward defensive profile swarm in and do its thing. It's also to get within 30m of goal to raise the scoring percentages from a stoppage or contested ground ball.

The tweaks to Geelongs game plan seems to be taking us back to the future with a midfield trying to win the corridor and then spread the defence on the F50 entry which is often still via a long bomb but the kicker now has two tall forwards to choose from WHO are spreading to different locations and the profile of the swarm chooses the obvious location to swarm.

We are predictable which is why we are failing because we don't have the extra tall forward and it gets worse if our forward defensive effort and 2 way running is poor which ours has been.

In short loose forwards are hard to find in the modern game but recent rule changes are helping especially late in games when fatigue kicks in and the game opens up but when the tall guys might have a better chance at a mark. AND all teams exploit the long bomb as part of thier game plan, it's not something we are doing accidentally. We just don't have 2 key tall forwards and enough skill and class to execute the long bomb set play....see Geelong for the perfect example. Also see Dogs who are now looking much better with Bruce back...much better.

If the opposition defensive tactic is to crowd Max King with two or three defenders (which seems to happen more often than not) then doesn't that create an opportunity as it leaves two Saints players unmarked. Isn't that basic math?

Yet we continue to bomb to the 3 on 1 rather than look for these unmarked players. Worse still is when these unmarkwd players join the Max pack and congest things further.

Happy to be called clueless, but it seems fairly logical to me as both teams have 18 players on the field and when King is getting triple tagged that must create opportunity. But we don't appear to be cognisant of this nor do we look for them.

If I had to summarise our current fwd strategy in four words it would be Jack In The Pack. Or in two words: Dumb Footy.

[The Fireman]

Spot on templar
I think most realise this yet it doesn’t appear to play out on the field
Is it simply a lack of skill and awareness of our mids ? Or lack of direction from the coach or the pressure,,,actual or perceived..from opposition?
Frustrating

[Vortex]

Is it another symptom of the failing "bomb it to a pack inside 50" end play?

I saw the Saints bomb it to packs of weagles players on more than a few occasions yesterday

"Look up for god sake. Kick it to a loose fwd." I scream repeatedly as they drag me into the ward in a strait jacket.

Loose forwards is the problem, Richmond's game plan circa 2017 changed the game to get over the defensive zone and ironically to overcome their lack of tall forward marking options via the long bomb over the zone and into F50.

Knuckle Heads on here carry on like Richo and Ratts designed the long bomb exclusively for the Saints game plan.

Loose forwards has been a myth for over 5 years now and as I say from since about circa 2017 and also the introduction of 2 way running. And so now we evolve to the need for at least 2 tall forwards, and not necessarily to mark but to drop the ball to the foreground and then let the forward press and forward defensive profile swarm in and do its thing. It's also to get within 30m of goal to raise the scoring percentages from a stoppage or contested ground ball.

The tweaks to Geelongs game plan seems to be taking us back to the future with a midfield trying to win the corridor and then spread the defence on the F50 entry which is often still via a long bomb but the kicker now has two tall forwards to choose from WHO are spreading to different locations and the profile of the swarm chooses the obvious location to swarm.

We are predictable which is why we are failing because we don't have the extra tall forward and it gets worse if our forward defensive effort and 2 way running is poor which ours has been.

In short loose forwards are hard to find in the modern game but recent rule changes are helping especially late in games when fatigue kicks in and the game opens up but when the tall guys might have a better chance at a mark. AND all teams exploit the long bomb as part of thier game plan, it's not something we are doing accidentally. We just don't have 2 key tall forwards and enough skill and class to execute the long bomb set play....see Geelong for the perfect example. Also see Dogs who are now looking much better with Bruce back...much better.

If the opposition defensive tactic is to crowd Max King with two or three defenders (which seems to happen more often than not) then doesn't that create an opportunity as it leaves two Saints players unmarked. Isn't that basic math?

Yet we continue to bomb to the 3 on 1 rather than look for these unmarked players. Worse still is when these unmarkwd players join the Max pack and congest things further.

Happy to be called clueless, but it seems fairly logical to me as both teams have 18 players on the field and when King is getting triple tagged that must create opportunity. But we don't appear to be cognisant of this nor do we look for them.

If I had to summarise our current fwd strategy in four words it would be Jack In The Pack. Or in two words: Dumb Footy.

Its not a static set up from the 90s. Our forward defensive pressure is 17th or 18th. The loose forwards you refer to could be having a smoke up the ground for all we know and couldn't be stuffed running back or were just completely caught out of position becaue they refuse to play the 2 way running game and get around those 2 or 3 loose defenders who decidesld not to have a smoke and run back with Max who was not having a smoke and was running back hard.

The "loose forards" are loose, just loose in the wrong part of the ground. It's why just about all our small forwards and flankers gave all been dropped this year.

[shanegrambeau]

Is it another symptom of the failing "bomb it to a pack inside 50" end play?

"

..
Geelong forwards lead up at the kicker
....

Geelong have Mitch Duncan...

He delivers into forward 50 so nicely, the forwards are ready and race forward without a thought...they know they will get it lace out.

When we have Ross, Gresh, Jones and Crouch ...it is anyone's guess. It makes sense for a contested bomb as long as the numbers are in our favour...and they are often not.

Mighty Max is a contested freak, but he can't beat four on his own..

Recruit Duncan!

[saynta]

Time to get ruthless. It’s way overdue.

I thought his tackling and pressure in the past two games WAS ruthless.

But you disagree and are dropping Long for the rest of the year so
we can play finals? Who is having the lend?

For me I am tired of watching other teams like Geelong, bash, crash and throw our players around like rag dolls and reducing our interchange options. Sometimes it is like watching men playing against boys. Particularly that game against the cats last year.

I find it refreshing to have someone in the team who doesn't hesitate in giving it back. Plus in the past few weeks Longy seems to be channeling that aggression perfectly legally. Controlled aggression. That was part of his remit. Well done I say.

In what appears to be a tail between the legs like attitude from the majority of the squad since the bye you want to punish this improvement, this aggressive footy, and drop Long for who? Someone else from our long list of tough guys?

For mine I want more players like him not less. Players who will scare the bedevil out of the opposition.

Excellent post. Weagles also ragged dolled a few of our players. We need to toughen up.

[B.M]

Sorry to bust your bubble

Few if any, if they reach that level are scared on a footy ground

To be drafted, you need to be a star junior or state league player

Doesn’t happen if you’re scared

A 181cm 79kg Ben Long aint scaring many/any AFL players

He might pressure them, he might lay a big tackle or two - but that happens in footy

Does David McKay scare anyone? Because he put Hunter Clark in hospital - nope - not even Hunter