Strategy 2014 game plan improvements

[El Dubya]

Not sure I follow. Are you saying you can't have Kersten in the side - or any third tall forward - because it denies a midfielder a rest down there (not that it's much of a rest these days)?

In my mind they have to be able to do something else, like play second ruck. I'm definitely not of the opinion that you have to play three talls, we played Mooney andAblett , Mooney and Hawkins, and Hawkins and Pods in our three recent premierships, there wasn't a third tall in any of the Grand Final teams. I don't know why it's a necessity now.

 

[Partridge]

In my mind they have to be able to do something else, like play second ruck. I'm definitely not of the opinion that you have to play three talls, we played Mooney and Ablett , Mooney and Hawkins, and Hawkins and Pods in our three recent premierships, there wasn't a third tall in any of the Grand Final teams. I don't know why it's a necessity now.

There were occasions in 2007 where we did play Mooney, Nathan Ablett and Hawkins. But of course Ablett had freakish skills for a big guy at ground level.

I'm not saying we must play three tall forwards either, but as long as Kersten doesn't move like a ground sloth it shouldn't be too big an impediment. Besides that's what the pre-season is for as well.

 

[dazbroncos]

In my mind they have to be able to do something else, like play second ruck. I'm definitely not of the opinion that you have to play three talls, we played Mooney andAblett , Mooney and Hawkins, and Hawkins and Pods in our three recent premierships, there wasn't a third tall in any of the Grand Final teams. I don't know why it's a necessity now.

I guess it depends on the argument. Some people say Kersten is only 191 and can't be KPF or 3rd tall. Others say he is 191 and now is a 3rd tall.
Poor bloke can't win….

As for the resting MF - i get your point in general about positional players going forward to rest in the FP. I don't think that it should, or will, preclude a player being selected in the 22 as a Forward because it limits the resting time if a MF player…

Go Catters

 

[El Dubya]

I guess it depends on the argument. Some people say Kersten is only 191 and can't be KPF or 3rd tall. Others say he is 191 and now is a 3rd tall.
Poor bloke can't win….

As for the resting MF - i get your point in general about positional players going forward to rest in the FP. I don't think that it should, or will, preclude a player being selected in the 22 as a Forward because it limits the resting time if a MF player…

Go Catters

No, but when you could play someone like Menz as a forward, and also give him a run in the midfield, Kersten will struggle. In my ideal 22 Dawson Simpson plays first ruck, Blicavs second ruck, and we play two key talls. In that set up Kersten is competing with Nate Vardy for a spot. The rest of the forwards spots would be taken up by guys who can play mid sized forward and also have a run through the midfield, like Menzel or Murdoch.

 

[manboob]

IMO, Hamish, Menzel, Kersten and Vardy are all far better players than Blicavs and this will probably remain true for the rest of his career. So, to me it seems silly to cut one of those blokes and negatively impact team balance just to fit him in. Unless his skilz become madikal he's just going to be a ruck plodder ala West and Blake. Suffice to say whilst that is "useful" we can do better.

 

[Partridge]

IMO, Hamish, Menzel, Kersten and Vardy are all far better players than Blicavs and this will probably remain true for the rest of his career. So, to me it seems silly to cut one of those blokes and negatively impact team balance just to fit him in. Unless his skilz become madikal he's just going to be a ruck plodder ala West and Blake. Suffice to say whilst that is "useful" we can do better.

Minus the ability to win hitouts.

It's why the idea to learn a position in the VFL and get really good at that - for instance on a wing - could have a lot of merit to it. He'll only be much stronger and with hopefully better footy skills in another year too. And if there are injuries he's available.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

But there's also the possibility it doesn't solely rely on planning at all.

There can be more mundane explanations - sometimes players aren't in the right spot, sometimes players are tired and can't get there in time, sometimes they're injured and shouldn't be out there, and sometimes they just aren't good enough. It's dangerous to think a gameplan and only a gameplan makes the difference. As with most things in modern footy I suspect it's one component out of dozens.

But there's also the possibility it doesn't solely rely on planning at all.

There can be more mundane explanations - sometimes players aren't in the right spot, sometimes players are tired and can't get there in time, sometimes they're injured and shouldn't be out there, and sometimes they just aren't good enough. It's dangerous to think a gameplan and only a gameplan makes the difference. As with most things in modern footy I suspect it's one component out of dozens.

the things you mentioned i highlighted are important components of a game plan, especially if players arent getting into the right positions. if players arent getting into the right spots, then you have to ask why? they train all six months of the off season relentlessly on it more than anything else, they practice it week in week out all season. if players arent getting into the right positions, then either the coach isnt doing his job right, or a player needs a serious boot up the ass.

i remember hearing mick malthouse talk during his time in 2012 about some basics of tactics in a team, and he said that you need to train and drill each and every player to know what to do, because if you have anyone unsure of where and how to move the ball, then your going to have confusion and poor decisions being made. that its important to have every player out on the field understanding what one another is going to do and having everyone in on an overall plan.

 

[Rosso]

Surely this season there will be more importance placed on winning clearances. Last year we were (due to injuries) forced to attack from take aways as not having a dominant ruck made it really hard work. Fingers crossed the big blokes stay healthy and our mids can start running forward at the clearances.

Centre breaks are massive for momentum and getting the ball in quickly makes sense of having the likes of Hawkins, Vardy, Kersten and Bartel inside the arc. All are very handy overhead meaning defenders that normally try and play loose, really need to be more accountable otherwise they'll get found out.

As a defensive unit, from what I've read and heard, it appears as though we may be looking to run the ball out more often. With Taylor Hunt and Varcoe spending time down back, you would expect more run and carry. Makes sense given the loss of Josh Hunt's massive boot combined with the fact that we did tend to look a little slow at times in the back half last year.

So perhaps a more attacking brand of footy for the cats this season. Of course a lot will depend on those being entrusted to take that next step up, especially the on ball brigade. The performance of guys such as Duncan, Bundy, GHS & Caddy will go a long way in determining how deep we go in September. Blokes that have shown they are capable of producing at a very high level, we need one or two (ideally 4 though ) to really step up a la Motlop last year. Dayne Beams went from missing out on selection in the 2011 GF after playing 16 games to not missing a beat and averaging over 30 possies in 2012, winning the Pies B&F. That should be the aim, especially for Duncan and Bundy, this season. They really need to become more consistent with their performances because you'd love to be able to take a tight tag away from Selwood or SJ a few weeks of the year!!!

 

[Jon Douglas]

We can always do better re a game plan - make tweaks or modify it.

However I think most people would agree that had we had a real ruckman, Hawkins not injured and won more midfield clearances we could have won a flag last season.

So only a few tweaks for me - and that is in the midfield. Hawkins will either be fit or not, HMac and Simpson should be fine as a genuine ruckman and that just leaves for us to meddle with the midfield.

So for me just develop a stronger more effective midfield and we should be ok.

If we have Mots, Varcoe, Murdoch, Bundy, THunt, McCarthy and possibly a few others we should some decent pace on the field which could make quite dangerous with ball in hand. With extra leg speed on the field that might see a slight adjustment to the game plan. Maybe.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Surely this season there will be more importance placed on winning clearances. Last year we were (due to injuries) forced to attack from take aways as not having a dominant ruck made it really hard work. Fingers crossed the big blokes stay healthy and our mids can start running forward at the clearances.

Centre breaks are massive for momentum and getting the ball in quickly makes sense of having the likes of Hawkins, Vardy, Kersten and Bartel inside the arc. All are very handy overhead meaning defenders that normally try and play loose, really need to be more accountable otherwise they'll get found out.

As a defensive unit, from what I've read and heard, it appears as though we may be looking to run the ball out more often. With Taylor Hunt and Varcoe spending time down back, you would expect more run and carry. Makes sense given the loss of Josh Hunt's massive boot combined with the fact that we did tend to look a little slow at times in the back half last year.

So perhaps a more attacking brand of footy for the cats this season. Of course a lot will depend on those being entrusted to take that next in step up, especially the on ball brigade. The performance of guys such as Duncan, Bundy, GHS & Caddy will go a long way in determining how deep we go in September. Blokes that have shown they are capable of producing at a very high level, we need one or two (ideally 4 though ) to really step up a la Motlop last year. Dayne Beams went from missing out on selection in the 2011 GF after playing 16 games to not missing a beat and averaging over 30 possies in 2012, winning the Pies B&F. That should be the aim, especially for Duncan and Bundy, this season. They really need to become more consistent with their performances because you'd love to be able to take a tight tag away from Selwood or SJ a few weeks of the year!!!

I think we need to do the opposite, we need to improve our defensive game vastly if we want to challenge for a flag this season. We were extremely poor at getting the ball off opposition once they broke through our ring or cluster of pressure around the contests. And sides did figure it out in the second half of the year. At times it was like watching opposition sides stroll pressure less into open fifties with loose targets everywhere, it was hair tearing stuff! I definitely want to see massive improvement to our defensive structure, it had way way too many chinks in it. And this has nothing to do with the players but the way we set up

 

[BIGANT]

2011

hamling
kersten
murdoch
mccarthy
bews

2012

thurlow
hartman
stringer

2013

lang
jansen
kolo

not inc rookie selections over those drafts, but would love a 50% rtn on each yr would be exciting. Not sure on a whole afl wide what the success rate is of draftees becoming 100+ - 200+ players

Sent from my GT-S7500T using Tapatalk 2

 

[winty]

I think we need to do the opposite, we need to improve our defensive game vastly if we want to challenge for a flag this season. We were extremely poor at getting the ball off opposition once they broke through our ring or cluster of pressure around the contests. And sides did figure it out in the second half of the year. At times it was like watching opposition sides stroll pressure less into open fifties with loose targets everywhere, it was hair tearing stuff! I definitely want to see massive improvement to our defensive structure, it had way way too many chinks in it. And this has nothing to do with the players but the way we set up

IMO, both what you and Rosso are suggesting kind of go hand in hand. If we have the ball in our hands, the opposition will have to worry about getting it back off us, rather than the other way around. A lot of this has to do with having a fit ruckman in the middle. As gallant as the likes of Blicavs and Vardy were at the end of the season, they simply couldn't get their hand on the ball first when it mattered. Never was this more evident than in the final against Fremantle when they got two simple goals from clearances deep inside 50. Although it could be argued we should've defended better, when the ruckman has such an advantage in both experience and sheer physical presence as Sandilands had over our ruck duo in that game, we were pretty much powerless to prevent it from happening. The hit-out stats over the last two months of the season make for depressing reading:

Round 19 - North Melbourne 57 hitouts (Goldstein 42, Petrie 13) vs Geelong 27 (West 14, Blicavs 8)
Round 20 - Port Adelaide 64 (Lobbe 59) vs Geelong 28 (Vardy 17, Walker 6)
Round 21 - West Coast 47 (Cox 29, Lycett 16) vs Geelong 32 (Blicavs 18, Vardy 13)
Round 22 - Sydney 51 (Mumford 33, Pyke 18) vs Geelong 24 (Blicavs 11, Vardy 9)
Round 23 - Brisbane 43 (Leuenberger 31, Michael 11) vs Geelong 46 (West 25, Blicavs 20)
Qualifying Final - Fremantle 53 (Sandilands 31, Clarke 19) vs Geelong 16 (Blicavs 7, Vardy 6)
Semi Final - Port Adelaide 35 (Lobbe 28) vs Geelong 32 (Vardy 17, Blicavs 11)
Preliminary Final - Hawthorn 43 (Bailey 18, Hale 18) vs Geelong 25 (Vardy 17, Blicavs 8)

In total, over the last 8 games of the season, we had 230 hitouts to 393, or over 20 less hit-outs a game than our opponents. That potentially gives our opposition a huge chance to dictate play from the get-go.

Once we get either McIntosh and Simpson, or both, back on the park, the advantage some opposition sides have over us in the ruck will be greatly diminished.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

IMO, both what you and Rosso are suggesting kind of go hand in hand. If we have the ball in our hands, the opposition will have to worry about getting it back off us, rather than the other way around. A lot of this has to do with having a fit ruckman in the middle. As gallant as the likes of Blicavs and Vardy were at the end of the season, they simply couldn't get their hand on the ball first when it mattered. Never was this more evident than in the final against Fremantle when they got two simple goals from clearances deep inside 50. Although it could be argued we should've defended better, when the ruckman has such an advantage in both experience and sheer physical presence as Sandilands had over our ruck duo in that game, we were pretty much powerless to prevent it from happening. The hit-out stats over the last two months of the season make for depressing reading:

Round 19 - North Melbourne 57 hitouts (Goldstein 42, Petrie 13) vs Geelong 27 (West 14, Blicavs 8)
Round 20 - Port Adelaide 64 (Lobbe 59) vs Geelong 28 (Vardy 17, Walker 6)
Round 21 - West Coast 47 (Cox 29, Lycett 16) vs Geelong 32 (Blicavs 18, Vardy 13)
Round 22 - Sydney 51 (Mumford 33, Pyke 18) vs Geelong 24 (Blicavs 11, Vardy 9)
Round 23 - Brisbane 43 (Leuenberger 31, Michael 11) vs Geelong 46 (West 25, Blicavs 20)
Qualifying Final - Fremantle 53 (Sandilands 31, Clarke 19) vs Geelong 16 (Blicavs 7, Vardy 6)
Semi Final - Port Adelaide 35 (Lobbe 28) vs Geelong 32 (Vardy 17, Blicavs 11)
Preliminary Final - Hawthorn 43 (Bailey 18, Hale 18) vs Geelong 25 (Vardy 17, Blicavs 8)

In total, over the last 8 games of the season, we had 230 hitouts to 393, or over 20 less hit-outs a game than our opponents. That potentially gives our opposition a huge chance to dictate play from the get-go.

Once we get either McIntosh and Simpson, or both, back on the park, the advantage some opposition sides have over us in the ruck will be greatly diminished.

Good post, agree with what your saying. I would back Simpson in against any other ruck in the AFL, could be AA if he stays on the park. I'm a firm believer in defence is everything. You work on your defensive structures getting them the best in the competition, and from there on you can wield your attacks and scoring power from it. If you are able to continually strip opposition of the ball, then your 70% of the way towards a premiership. We were very poor at getting the ball back this season thought around the ground. I agree getting your hand on the footy first is a priority, but foremost as a priority is defending and creating turn overs, then everything else should follow once we have that sound

 

[AM]

Hope the following link hasn't been posted elsewhere.

Really chuffed Vards body seems to have stood up to all the pre-season work.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-02-08/vardy-happily-hand-over-ruck-role

 

[geelong_crazy26]

IMO, both what you and Rosso are suggesting kind of go hand in hand. If we have the ball in our hands, the opposition will have to worry about getting it back off us, rather than the other way around. A lot of this has to do with having a fit ruckman in the middle. As gallant as the likes of Blicavs and Vardy were at the end of the season, they simply couldn't get their hand on the ball first when it mattered. Never was this more evident than in the final against Fremantle when they got two simple goals from clearances deep inside 50. Although it could be argued we should've defended better, when the ruckman has such an advantage in both experience and sheer physical presence as Sandilands had over our ruck duo in that game, we were pretty much powerless to prevent it from happening. The hit-out stats over the last two months of the season make for depressing reading:

Round 19 - North Melbourne 57 hitouts (Goldstein 42, Petrie 13) vs Geelong 27 (West 14, Blicavs 8)
Round 20 - Port Adelaide 64 (Lobbe 59) vs Geelong 28 (Vardy 17, Walker 6)
Round 21 - West Coast 47 (Cox 29, Lycett 16) vs Geelong 32 (Blicavs 18, Vardy 13)
Round 22 - Sydney 51 (Mumford 33, Pyke 18) vs Geelong 24 (Blicavs 11, Vardy 9)
Round 23 - Brisbane 43 (Leuenberger 31, Michael 11) vs Geelong 46 (West 25, Blicavs 20)
Qualifying Final - Fremantle 53 (Sandilands 31, Clarke 19) vs Geelong 16 (Blicavs 7, Vardy 6)
Semi Final - Port Adelaide 35 (Lobbe 28) vs Geelong 32 (Vardy 17, Blicavs 11)
Preliminary Final - Hawthorn 43 (Bailey 18, Hale 18) vs Geelong 25 (Vardy 17, Blicavs 8)

In total, over the last 8 games of the season, we had 230 hitouts to 393, or over 20 less hit-outs a game than our opponents. That potentially gives our opposition a huge chance to dictate play from the get-go.

Once we get either McIntosh and Simpson, or both, back on the park, the advantage some opposition sides have over us in the ruck will be greatly diminished.

Re quote, will emphasise the importance of keeping defense a priority with an example from 2010. The way we attacked and moved forward in 2010 or in general the Thompson 07-10 game plan, is that we would have all our players spread out, each ready to run past and receive and carry on for the next player moving by. We would have our players spread out all over to run past and create differing options so the person possessing the ball had 2-4 options to pick from to keep the ball in continual motion going. What collingwood did in 10, is that when we passed the ball by hand or foot, ins they had their press set up, which meant it was 1 Geelong player within the radius vs 3-5 collingwood players swarming in., and almost every single time it resulted in a turnover and a collingwood score. This was the absolute biggest killer in the prelim and why the match was over at half time! In 11 Scott began putting heavy numbers around the ball and moving it in large congestions. He made our ball movement much more rebound proof and stable, and the results spoke for themselves!

I think with everything even attacking in football you do, you have to prioritise making sure it isn't at a risk of creating too many turnovers. That if you happen to get caught out, the worst result should be to aim for a ball up.

 

[winty]

Good post, agree with what your saying. I would back Simpson in against any other ruck in the AFL, could be AA if he stays on the park. I'm a firm believer in defence is everything. You work on your defensive structures getting them the best in the competition, and from there on you can wield your attacks and scoring power from it. If you are able to continually strip opposition of the ball, then your 70% of the way towards a premiership. We were very poor at getting the ball back this season thought around the ground. I agree getting your hand on the footy first is a priority, but foremost as a priority is defending and creating turn overs, then everything else should follow once we have that sound

In regards to the bolded, I'm pretty sure we were so good at doing it at the start of the season, there were a few articles around the place highlighting the fact. I think once teams started working us out and planning for it was when we started to look ordinary.

 

[cynical]

I think we need to do the opposite, we need to improve our defensive game vastly if we want to challenge for a flag this season. We were extremely poor at getting the ball off opposition once they broke through our ring or cluster of pressure around the contests. And sides did figure it out in the second half of the year. At times it was like watching opposition sides stroll pressure less into open fifties with loose targets everywhere, it was hair tearing stuff! I definitely want to see massive improvement to our defensive structure, it had way way too many chinks in it. And this has nothing to do with the players but the way we set up

Game plan should be based on strengths and weaknesses.

Our biggest strength over the top clubs (Hawthorn, Freo, Sydney) is our pace. So we should be playing a fast play on brand of football.

Our defence was weak because of our terrible ruck situation and too many slow guys in the backline. When your rucks are getting killed the opposition gets more clean breaks, making it easier for them to hit up leading forwards.

Fixing the ruck situation and adding a bit more youth into the backline will fix up leaking goals.

 

[Whit3y]

We can always do better re a game plan - make tweaks or modify it.

However I think most people would agree that had we had a real ruckman, Hawkins not injured and won more midfield clearances we could have won a flag last season.

we did have a real ruckman available but we chose not to play him

 

[Whit3y]

we seem to go alright the start of last season minus hmac and simpson, seems that fact gets lost

 

[Jon Douglas]

we did have a real ruckman available but we chose not to play him

As I wrote in another post the fact they elected to play Blicavs over West when it was pretty obvious to most West was a better option (Premiership player and Blicavs had a broken hand) - says that GFC wanted to get as many games into Blicavs and saw no real future in West.

So yes GFC chose not to play our one true ruckman - and that says as much about how the club views Blicavs as they do West. That is why I have a strong belief that Blicavs will play 12 + senior games this season. And I cannot see where he will play except as second ruckman.

It will be interesting to see if they can find another position for him but for now I cannot see it.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Game plan should be based on strengths and weaknesses.

Our biggest strength over the top clubs (Hawthorn, Freo, Sydney) is our pace. So we should be playing a fast play on brand of football.

Our defence was weak because of our terrible ruck situation and too many slow guys in the backline. When your rucks are getting killed the opposition gets more clean breaks, making it easier for them to hit up leading forwards.

Fixing the ruck situation and adding a bit more youth into the backline will fix up leaking goals.

I agree it should be taken into account strengths and weaknesses, but that is a very small aspect of the whole picture, probably 5% of it. The starting blocks to how you build and create your game plan knowing your limitations. How your team structures up and strategises a game plan is what's important, it isn't about strengths or weaknesses, it's about how you have a game plan that is better than the teams challenging you. Il elaborate even further, it's about analysing how other sides move and set up on and off the ball that is the important thing you need to plan for and figure out how to beat, but I agree their personnel comes into it. This is why it's often so hard now going back to back as you get scrutinised so heavily over the off season and teams plan how to beat you.

We tried playing a fast on brand of play on football against hawthorn in the prelim, and in the end it was their slow running side that kept constantly running into open forward fifties for easy goals, this wasn't to do with the pace of the two sides as we are quicker like you pointed out, but because of the way both sides were trained to set up and move the ball.

And game plans aren't a week to week fluctuating thing like your making it out either, you train for six months on a certain style of play, then come the season start, you make slight tweaks and alterations all year long, but you can't go too far off the main track, otherwise you cause all sorts of issues with players come game day knowing what to do.

 

[BIGANT]

well by scotties view, blitz will be playing elsewhere other then ruck.

Sent from my GT-S7500T using Tapatalk 2

 

[cynical]

I agree it should be taken into account strengths and weaknesses, but that is a very small aspect of the whole picture, probably 5% of it. The starting blocks to how you build and create your game plan knowing your limitations. How your team structures up and strategises a game plan is what's important, it isn't about strengths or weaknesses, it's about how you have a game plan that is better than the teams challenging you. Il elaborate even further, it's about analysing how other sides move and set up on and off the ball that is the important thing you need to plan for and figure out how to beat, but I agree their personnel comes into it. This is why it's often so hard now going back to back as you get scrutinised so heavily over the off season and teams plan how to beat you.

Game plans are like rock, paper, scissors there is no best game plan that beats every other game plan. You use what you have.

How well you do is based on the players and having minimal exploits. Our ruck and KPF situation was too easily exploited in finals so we were always going to struggle. It wasn't our game plan that failed.

Playing a defensive game with young fast players is illogical. The game gets clogged up and the bigger stronger bodies win.

- 2007 we were young and fast and won the flag
- 2008 we choked
- 2009 we only just won
- 2010 we weren't young and fast anymore and the pies countered by being faster and more desperate
- 2011 we were older and slow but stronger and our gameplan was more defensive

2014 we are young and fast again and the contenders are mostly old and slow. Sydney, Hawthorn and Freo will all play a defensive game because they have big bodies and little pace in the midfield.

Freo do have a quick forward line which does exploit our slow backline with fast ball movement, but its up to us to develop players to defend against Walters and Ballantine.

We tried playing a fast on brand of play on football against hawthorn in the prelim, and in the end it was their slow running side that kept constantly running into open forward fifties for easy goals, this wasn't to do with the pace of the two sides as we are quicker like you pointed out, but because of the way both sides were trained to set up and move the ball.

We lost by a goal, because we ran out of gas.

They had an extra weeks break.
We had Vardy and Blicavs in the ruck.
Hawkins was half fit.
Josh Hunt was in the team.
We carried Varcoe.

If we had a no1 ruck, a fit Hawkins and a weeks break we win by 5 goals+.

Hawthorn have very good disposal and very good 1 on 1 players in Franklin, Roughie and Gunston. You aren't going to completely shut those guys out of the game by playing defensive cos they will hit them up on the lead.

 

[Partridge]

well by scotties view, blitz will be playing elsewhere other then ruck.

He did seem to indicate that yeah. Be very interesting to see who lines up where in the next 3 games.

 

[vinum coupe]

He did seem to indicate that yeah. Be very interesting to see who lines up where in the next 3 games.

I just tried to do a team based on the comments we've heard such as.

Guthrie in the middle.
Thurlow, Hunt, Smedts down back
The ruck situation and the comment that all 3 of Simpson, Hmac, and Blicavs probably wont play together.
Kersten to be a member of the forward line
Vardy to be CHF
Bartel to go forward.

And I honestly gave up !