Unofficial Preview Changes & Pre-match Discussion - Qualifying Final vs. Geelong, Sat 03/09, 4:35pm MCG

[Pistol Night]

We quite like our home ground thank you

View attachment 1493904

Looks like Max Gawn after mad Monday

 

[NMBB]

Looks like Max Gawn after mad Monday

Was thinking Chris Scott if things don't go according to plan (for him)

 

[Heater3923]

He's not being minded by Madgen this time so I don't expect him to be as dominant.

I think people are forgetting how much stronger our 22 is going into this game vs the last one. Not only that, we had a new coach in his 4th(?) game still bedding down a new gameplan

Despite that, game still should have been over at half time had we kicked straight. Especially when combined with that third quarter.

Agree 100%. Certainly changed how we play in the back 6 since then.


From memory, Quaynor also cost us several goals that night - he wasn’t suited to being the loose defender behind stoppages. Him and pendlebury were arguing at times bit where he should stand etc.

He got caught in no man’s land several times bit which then put pressure on key defenders to win one on ones and cost us goals. He also got caught and hand balled to no one in the middle which cats pounced on.

A few games later, Quaynor got moved back to being a more traditional defender and has thrived, along with the team as a whole.

The defensive system as a whole has also been tighter with less zoning off allowed, Murphy being a revelation and (champion data said recently) by exiting def50 via the flanks more rather than kamikaze up the middle.

It’s a real credit to the Head Coach to be so flexible and willing to change the game-plan on the run to maximise the chance of us winning



Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[manicpie]

Agree 100%. Certainly changed how we play in the back 6 since then.


From memory, Quaynor also cost us several goals that night - he wasn’t suited to being the loose defender behind stoppages. Him and pendlebury were arguing at times bit where he should stand etc.

He got caught in no man’s land several times bit which then put pressure on key defenders to win one on ones and cost us goals. He also got caught and hand balled to no one in the middle which cats pounced on.

A few games later, Quaynor got moved back to being a more traditional defender and has thrived, along with the team as a whole.

The defensive system as a whole has also been tighter with less zoning off allowed, Murphy being a revelation and (champion data said recently) by exiting def50 via the flanks more rather than kamikaze up the middle.

It’s a real credit to the Head Coach to be so flexible and willing to change the game-plan on the run to maximise the chance of us winning



Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Spot on, I also have a feeling that our coaching panel has even more tweaks for finals football

 

[Anzacday]

Their W/L record at the MCG over the last two years is around 9/2.
Two of those were against us.
Clear favourites.

 

[The Magnificent Seven]

Huh. Must have been a weird weekend but I don't recall ever watching Round 3. Just caught up then.

So essentially we did a Carlton. 3rd quarter blitz, lost it in 4th not knowing how to slow down the game.

I reckon we have learnt a few things since then.

 

[Frankie23]

Their W/L record at the MCG over the last two years is around 9/2.
Two of those were against us.
Clear favourites.

Thanks for reminding me of that atrocious match last year where we only lost by a couple kicks, but deserved to lose by 10 goals.

 

[FromTheBoundaryLine]

Bang on, iGNITER! I think this will be the (winning) selection.

As I was reading through it, I had only one slight frisson of doubt. Sorry; I've probably just been infected by an uncharacteristic touch of Kappessimism, and it's really nothing, but...

Does anyone else share my slight sinking feeling about Darcy Cameron's inclusion, based on his recent contributions?

Just asking; not at all sure who'd be a suitable replacement, in any case...

Any suggestions? For example, covering his current ruck duties by using AJ in our forward half and promoting one of your named emergencies into the team (maybe even Henry, to square the difference in forward pressure that DC brings)?

Don’t watch Geelong much so happy to be corrected by those with more insight but they often seem to prefer to play one ruck with Blicavs chopping out and Hawkins used in the forward line. In this scenario I think we need Cameron and Cox as I think it gives us a slight advantage. Perhaps if Krueger had been playing and taking some of the ruck duties we could consider it but that’s probably unlikely given his injury and lack of match practice. Still a sneaky option I guess. At this stage I’d stick with what’s been working for us. Also think that Chris Scott will overthink his selections and due to arrogance make a blunder for us

 

[The Magnificent Seven]

...Does anyone else share my slight sinking feeling about Darcy Cameron's inclusion, based on his recent contributions?

Nope. In Round 3 he had De Koning's measure. He applied bodywork, managed to out mark him twice (and goal) and generally gave good pressure.

In 19 rounds a lot has changed, but there is already evidence of a good match-up, so I'd be very happy to keep him in the side. Darcy can also be fantastic at drifting back and giving our calls a chop-out in defence, too.

 

[RobJD]

I had a look at cats games stats.

Over the season Cats rankings:

*1st turnovers (as in they have least turnovers)
*12th in Contested possession
*7th in clearances
*1st in marks ins50
*4th in marks
*1st ins50
*16th in tackles ins fwd 50
*9th in clangers
*9th disposal efficiency
*6th intercepts
*18th in rebound 50s

So overall, obviously, the Cats are extremely efficient and don’t need to rely on tackles ins fwd 50 as they hit targets and mark.

A weakness appears to be CP and clearance. Which is our same weakness.

Most games Geelong win they have around 45% or higher efficiency going ins50.

They average 57.7 ins50s and 34.5 rebound 50s.

So the bulk of their ins50s come from combination of clearance work, repeat in50s and intercepts/turnovers in the fwd half. They like the game in their fwd half.

I looked at cats wins and losses to see if there was any stat that stood out or repeated to demonstrate a path to victory.

When opposition make 8 or more tackles inside their fwd 50, the cats record was 10-4.

When the opposition make 12 or more tackles inside their fwd 50, the cats record was 3-3.

In those 3 losses (hawks, Freo and Stk) the opposition only had 47, 47 and 52 inside 50s. But they had 15, 18 and 12 tackles inside 50.

The wins came against North (16 tackles), Port Adelaide (13) and Dogs (19).

Interestingly, in the dogs first game vs Cats - they had 57 in50 and 7 tackles ins50s and lost by 13.

The 2nd game the dogs had 47 ins50s but 19 inside fwd 50 tackles.

That’s a pretty different style or way to play the Cats only 8 weeks after the first game when they did enough to have won the first meeting.

My suspicions is that the Dogs identified tackles inside fwd 50 was a key to beating the Cats but run out of legs, and the Cats adapted and readjusted over the game to run away winners.

If I recall, most of dogs inside fwd defensive pressure was in the 1st qtr and they never really took full advantage of opportunities. And as with most clubs that change their playing style it works for a while but they can’t sustain it.

In contrast to Cats, Pies average 53.8 inside 50s and 40.2 rebound 50s. Most or at least a lot, of our fwd 50 entries seem to come from the back half.

So what do I take from all these stats…

It’s essentially a team that loves to play in the fwd half vs a team that loves to counter from defence.

So pressure needs to be high to disrupt Cats delivery inside 50. If their efficiency inside 50 drops to 45% or less we doing well.

When Pies get it inside fwd 50, we have to be efficient and ready to tackle like maniacs to get repeat chances and stoppages.

My suspicion, I could be wrong as I don’t watch many cats games, is that Cats concede goals from either stoppages or chaos inside opponents fwd 50.

I don’t think their defence is built for rebound 50 - or at very least they aren’t used to having to repel from defence and turn into coast to coast goals.

And that’s not bagging the Cats, it’s just that they dominate in the fwd half so we’ll they most likely don’t concede alot of inside defensive 50s.

So that lack of practice in transition from the back half to fwd line can actually be a weakness Collingwood can exploit by pressure and intercepts.

So to me just based off the stats pies 4 keys to victory seem to be:

1. breaking even stoppage, CP and clearance (both teams are equally ordinary in these stats)

2. intercept, disrupt Cats inside 50 efficiency and counter attack (this has been our strength for alot of the year)

3. tackle inside forward 50 like maniacs (this is also a key strength for the pies - we were top 3 prior to the blues game and our average of 11.1 a game was dragged down due to only laying 3 tackles ins50 last week).

4. execute scoring opportunities. Pies will need to make the most of every opportunity. Cats are quality and won’t just roll over.

The best thing is, unlike the Western Bulldogs, we don’t even have to change our style to focus on the 4 keys to victory. We’ve been practicing it for 22 matches now.

I think our gameplan (if executed well) is perfect for undermining the Cats strengths, especially on the MCG.



Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Like the analysis. As an observer of the Cats, the last thing we should be doing is to try and penetrate their backline by going down the line and attempting to outmark their defensive unit - they set-up really well and are extremely difficult to beat that way. We need to switch and carry with overlap through the centre/fat side to get the ball into our forward line quickly and in a way that allows us to compete one on one - that means chaos ball/hit up pass to a leading player - I'd be happy with plays that simply generate a forward half stoppage to a long bomb to a pack. Cox and Cameron are key to us getting the ball outside the D50 - they'll need to take a lot of contested marks either as an option exiting D50 or intercepting inside our D50 - as you mentioned, all that suits our gameplan, we need to: run like we just stole something, tackle like, er, like Beau McC, and dispose the ball with all the care that you'd have giving a mate a look at your winning lotto ticket.

 

[My Tilly]

Don’t watch Geelong much so happy to be corrected by those with more insight but they often seem to prefer to play one ruck with Blicavs chopping out and Hawkins used in the forward line. In this scenario I think we need Cameron and Cox as I think it gives us a slight advantage. Perhaps if Krueger had been playing and taking some of the ruck duties we could consider it but that’s probably unlikely given his injury and lack of match practice. Still a sneaky option I guess. At this stage I’d stick with what’s been working for us. Also think that Chris Scott will overthink his selections and due to arrogance make a blunder for us

It's a weird one because I don't think anyone in here would argue against Grundy being the superior ruckman to anything you have at the moment and when he last played against Geelong, he dominated in most areas.
But for whatever reason, the pairing of Cox and Cameron just seems to work it's way through a game better than if you had Grundy/Cox or Grundy/Cameron.
Perhaps this is due to the fact Cameron is a natural key position player but also excels as ruckman and the same applies to Cox?

Geelong are having similar experiences with the Stanley/Blicavs partnership. Stanley, in my opinion, was never destined to be a first choice ruckman. He looked more capable as a key position prospect. He knows how to push forward and kick a goal really well.

Given Geelong have not faced your current rucking setup (Cox & Cameron), it could be an element of the game which takes a hold late in the match.

 

[FromTheBoundaryLine]

It's a weird one because I don't think anyone in here would argue against Grundy being the superior ruckman to anything you have at the moment and when he last played against Geelong, he dominated in most areas.
But for whatever reason, the pairing of Cox and Cameron just seems to work it's way through a game better than if you had Grundy/Cox or Grundy/Cameron.
Perhaps this is due to the fact Cameron is a natural key position player but also excels as ruckman and the same applies to Cox?

Geelong are having similar experiences with the Stanley/Blicavs partnership. Stanley, in my opinion, was never destined to be a first choice ruckman. He looked more capable as a key position prospect. He knows how to push forward and kick a goal really well.

Given Geelong have not faced your current rucking setup (Cox & Cameron), it could be an element of the game which takes a hold late in the match.

Yeah I think it will be an interesting aspect of the game for sure.

 

[Matrix10]

Looks like Max Gawn after mad Monday

Max Gawn looks like that everyday, be it mad Monday or no Mad Monday , it’s the weekly look for him

 

[Pie eyed]

Agree 100%. Certainly changed how we play in the back 6 since then.


From memory, Quaynor also cost us several goals that night - he wasn’t suited to being the loose defender behind stoppages. Him and pendlebury were arguing at times bit where he should stand etc.

He got caught in no man’s land several times bit which then put pressure on key defenders to win one on ones and cost us goals. He also got caught and hand balled to no one in the middle which cats pounced on.

A few games later, Quaynor got moved back to being a more traditional defender and has thrived, along with the team as a whole.

The defensive system as a whole has also been tighter with less zoning off allowed, Murphy being a revelation and (champion data said recently) by exiting def50 via the flanks more rather than kamikaze up the middle.

It’s a real credit to the Head Coach to be so flexible and willing to change the game-plan on the run to maximise the chance of us winning



Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Last time they met.

FULL TIME: Collingwood vs Geelong

Saturday 2nd April 2022, 7:25pm at MCG.

www.zerohanger.com

The replay.

Full Replay | AFL Round 3

Watch a full replay of Geelong's Round 3 clash against Collingwood at the MCG.

www.geelongcats.com.au

The 3rd was a 9 goal quarter for the Pies.

 

[Chrispiesssss]

Ginni might take the week off I reckon.

 

[unplugged]

Ginni might take the week off I reckon.

Eh?

 

[leon123]

Ginni might take the week off I reckon.

Why

 

[thommo_legend]

The photo isn't bad at all, he just wouldn't want it out there

 

[rdangelo]

Who cares about last time we played with Geelong.

Game starts at 0-0 and no two games are the same.

 

[Quicky]

Agree 100%. Certainly changed how we play in the back 6 since then.


From memory, Quaynor also cost us several goals that night - he wasn’t suited to being the loose defender behind stoppages. Him and pendlebury were arguing at times bit where he should stand etc.

He got caught in no man’s land several times bit which then put pressure on key defenders to win one on ones and cost us goals. He also got caught and hand balled to no one in the middle which cats pounced on.

A few games later, Quaynor got moved back to being a more traditional defender and has thrived, along with the team as a whole.

The defensive system as a whole has also been tighter with less zoning off allowed, Murphy being a revelation and (champion data said recently) by exiting def50 via the flanks more rather than kamikaze up the middle.

It’s a real credit to the Head Coach to be so flexible and willing to change the game-plan on the run to maximise the chance of us winning



Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

I've found the commentary on this interesting and kinda lazy. There's a perception, incorrect I think, that we alway's attack the corridor. I think what we actually do is attack space and that depends where the opposition allows it.

I've noticed some games we actually favour the flanks because that's where there is space allowing quick transition. The team heat maps show this in some games where we favour one flank. I haven't gone back to confirm but I'd bet those sides of the field are where position Sidebottom wing and then WHE at HFF who run so hard and combine so well.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

We have an adequate choice of subs assuming adams comes back.

It should probably be a midfielder, probably Carmichael would be my choice but macrae brown and Bianco are decent options too.

Henry the other option but I think a midfielder adds more flexibility.

Good to see Kreuger back but he won’t be selected unless we suffer injuries in later finals.

 

[No SPIN]

Pressure rankings last 6 weeks:
1 - Swans
2- Coll






13- Geel
Source: Footy Classified

 

[TheGreatGrundy]

We have an adequate choice of subs assuming adams comes back.

It should probably be a midfielder, probably Carmichael would be my choice but macrae brown and Bianco are decent options too.

Henry the other option but I think a midfielder adds more flexibility.

Good to see Kreuger back but he won’t be selected unless we suffer injuries in later finals.

Where was Krueger played in the VFL game? (Only saw first quarter and posters comments on the game dissuaded me from seeking out the rest of the game later). The one time I saw him he appeared to have a wandering sort of role.

 

[NMBB]

.......... The one time I saw him he appeared to have a wandering sort of role.

Hilarious - conjures up all sorts of possibilities

 

[RGpies]

Does anyone know if the team will be training today? And if so, what time?
Cheers