Backing off the mark... the worst tactic ever employed by a Bulldogs coach?

[doggies ftw]

Why not Charlie. What more damming stats or evidence do you need?

What stat can you show me that its working? All the stats point to the fact we should be in the 8. Contested ball, clearances, scores etc. Like I said, we have only changed Easton Wood out of a backline which performed well last year. Something is putting them under enormous sustained pressure and has been like this all year. The defensive structure is clearly broken (All the stats back this up) and backing off the mark is part of it. There are times we just forget to even man the mark which happened a few times on friday, so that makes it even harder for our defenders. There are plenty of reason why we are having a bad year, yet this is something which should be changed immediately.

Yeah this is all there really needs to be said on it. There’s lots of reasons our backline is struggling right now, but the personnel hasn’t changed, the way we set up our defensive 50 hasn’t changed - the only clear change is the manning of the mark, and the results are much much different. Again there’s more that go into it, whether players are just down on form, the general non-mark pressure is down too etc that’s all very possible or probable even.

But there’s one clear obvious change that anyone with eyes can surely see at this point

 

[Charlie Bucket]

Why not Charlie. What more damming stats or evidence do you need?

What stat can you show me that its working? All the stats point to the fact we should be in the 8. Contested ball, clearances, scores etc. Like I said, we have only changed Easton Wood out of a backline which performed well last year. Something is putting them under enormous sustained pressure and has been like this all year. The defensive structure is clearly broken (All the stats back this up) and backing off the mark is part of it. There are times we just forget to even man the mark which happened a few times on friday, so that makes it even harder for our defenders. There are plenty of reason why we are having a bad year, yet this is something which should be changed immediately.

None of the stats suggest the issue is the the 5m tactic. That’s what I’ve posted.

You and others are only going on the fact our defenders have shat the bed once the balls inside 50. So it must be that tactic.

Our low inside 50 concede numbers suggest at the very least, what’s being done in the 2/3’s forwards of defence 50 is working. That includes the majority of the field where we are giving up a couple of meters at the mark.

Theres no argument that our defence is a shambles, but pinpointing a tactic as basic as the mark thing is pretty narrow minded I reckon.

Our defenders are poor 1v1 compared to last year, they struggle with ground balls, they lack confidence in the air, they at times don’t even contend marking contests. The get on each others way. They are a mess. This is a coaching issue as much a personnel issue, both line and head coach and needs to be rectified ASAP. But, if you think removing the 5m tactic is going to fix any of the above, I reckon you’re pretty wrong.

 

[Foxman98]

None of the stats suggest the issue is the the 5m tactic. That’s what I’ve posted.

You and others are only going on the fact our defenders have shat the bed once the balls inside 50. So it must be that tactic.

Our low inside 50 concede numbers suggest at the very least, what’s being done in the 2/3’s forwards of defence 50 is working. That includes the majority of the field where we are giving up a couple of meters at the mark.

Theres no argument that our defence is a shambles, but pinpointing a tactic as basic as the mark thing is pretty narrow minded I reckon.

Our defenders are poor 1v1 compared to last year, they struggle with ground balls, they lack confidence in the air, they at times don’t even contend marking contests. The get on each others way. They are a mess. This is a coaching issue as much a personnel issue, both line and head coach and needs to be rectified ASAP. But, if you think removing the 5m tactic is going to fix any of the above, I reckon you’re pretty wrong.

You can show countless times over the past weeks of our defenders simply putting no body pressure on their opponent and letting them waltz in front of a pack to take either an uncontested or slightly contested mark. I have no issue with it being used in defensive half however it does become less effective closer to defensive 50 as they get more dangerous and deeper entries

 

[Charlie Bucket]

Yeah this is all there really needs to be said on it. There’s lots of reasons our backline is struggling right now, but the personnel hasn’t changed, the way we set up our defensive 50 hasn’t changed - the only clear change is the manning of the mark, and the results are much much different. Again there’s more that go into it, whether players are just down on form, the general non-mark pressure is down too etc that’s all very possible or probable even.

But there’s one clear obvious change that anyone with eyes can surely see at this point

I think having a new coach taking the line this season is far bigger change than the 5m tactic.

Smith has been great in years past. But so had Malthouse and Sheedy and Clarko and Lyon before it all turned to shit for them.

Why does no one what to consider it could be coaching issue away from the 5m tactic? Don’t hear anyone mention Smith. Is it blasphemy to speak negatively of club legends? Lol. Seems like it might be. Radio silence from everyone.

 

[doggies ftw]

I think having a new coach taking the line this season is far bigger change than the 5m tactic.

Smith has been great in years past. But so had Malthouse and Sheedy and Clarko and Lyon before it all turned to s**t for them.

Why does no one what to consider it could be coaching issue away from the 5m tactic? Don’t hear anyone mention Smith. Is it blasphemy to speak negatively of club legends? Lol. Seems like it might be. Radio silence from everyone.

Smith was also taking the line last year I believe? I dunno I can’t really pinpoint anything else that’s changed tactically in our defensive system, I hate the way we set up in there I’m one of the biggest advocates that our defensive system is just way too aggressive but it was the same last year and was much more functional.

I just fail to buy that every single player that was there last year is just horribly down on form this year - there’s got to be reasons for that.

I just wrote in another thread that I think Bubba is more suited to player development role, I don’t really want him in charge of our defence anymore. But tbf I think whoever you put there is just a mouth piece for Bevo anyway, it’s clear this aggressive high press has been a non negotiable of Bevo coached teams from day 1, I don’t see anything really changing massively whilst he’s head coach.

 

[Charlie Bucket]

You can show countless times over the past weeks of our defenders simply putting no body pressure on their opponent and letting them waltz in front of a pack to take either an uncontested or slightly contested mark. I have no issue with it being used in defensive half however it does become less effective closer to defensive 50 as they get more dangerous and deeper entries

I’ve thought about what it could be. Possibly just a blanket direction anywhere outside Def 50 so it’s easier for the players to not **** it up.

It might also be a deliberate tactic to encourage opposition teams to go long and direct. I’ve said it previously, anything not out in space or on a lead is far easier to defend. Especially if you’re a peel off/3rd defender in team, which we try to be. You also narrow right down how teams use their entry opportunities making it easier for the players. If you know the opposition are going to take advantage of the space to play on, you know how that balls coming in. In theory, it should be easier to defend.

I don’t know. These things are hard to pinpoint unless you watch every game from behind the goals on Level 3 or are involved within the club.

 

[doggies ftw]

I’ve thought about what it could be. Possibly just a blanket direction anywhere outside Def 50 so it’s easier for the players to not * it up.

It might also be a deliberate tactic to encourage opposition teams to go long and direct. I’ve said it previously, anything not out in space or on a lead is far easier to defend. Especially if you’re a peel off/3rd defender in team, which we try to be. You also narrow right down how teams use their entry opportunities making it easier for the players. If you know the opposition are going to take advantage of the space to play on, you know how that balls coming in. In theory, it should be easier to defend.

I don’t know. These things are hard to pinpoint unless you watch every game from behind the goals on Level 3 or are involved within the club.

I agree the theory is to force the opposition to go long and direct, it’s not having that affect though because it’s allowing the opposition more time to move the ball faster and catch our defence out of position, and it’s allowing them more space to hit up targets as their not under any real or even inferred pressure.

The only time it forces them to go long and direct is in a slow build up that we’re already set behind the ball, but even then we give them an extra 10ms and it lets them get deep entries from anywhere up to 80m out from goal. You want them going long and direct but not with deep entries and our weak backline who can’t mark and all fly and spoil each other and let easy goals out the back etc, high entries are only good when they’re in the 30-50m range and are easier to pick off and rebound.

It’s also taken our intercept game completely and utterly out of the picture as intercepts are built on turnovers due to pressure, us allowing space and time on the turnover means they’re either hitting up targets inside 50, so not pressured entries resulting in intercepts. Or long, deep entries which are again hard to intercept.

 

[Charlie Bucket]

Smith was also taking the line last year I believe? I dunno I can’t really pinpoint anything else that’s changed tactically in our defensive system, I hate the way we set up in there I’m one of the biggest advocates that our defensive system is just way too aggressive but it was the same last year and was much more functional.

I just fail to buy that every single player that was there last year is just horribly down on form this year - there’s got to be reasons for that.

I just wrote in another thread that I think Bubba is more suited to player development role, I don’t really want him in charge of our defence anymore. But tbf I think whoever you put there is just a mouth piece for Bevo anyway, it’s clear this aggressive high press has been a non negotiable of Bevo coached teams from day 1, I don’t see anything really changing massively whilst he’s head coach.

Don’t know about last season he may have been. If so, it narrows things down.

I don’t think the drop off of defenders happened all at once. Gards started the year pretty well then slowed up. Keith missed a few, but just hasn’t managed to get going. Dale’s been pretty good. Williams dropped right off from day dot. Duryea been pretty good all year and Ed has had a break out year. Seems it’s been a slow burn. Crozier dropped right off.
I think as a whole though, the bottom has dropped right out the last month. For all of them. It’s an absolute brothel down there. Their confidence looks farked. I haven’t seen our backline perform as badly as this for over a decade.

Whatever the issue, I’m farkin over it. It’s horrible to be playing so poorly. I hope they make the right decisions to correct things between now and Rd1 next season. List wise, assistants wise, defensive structure... whatever the **** it is, just get it right.

 

[doggies ftw]

Don’t know about last season he may have been. If so, it narrows things down.

I don’t think the drop off of defenders happened all at once. Gards started the year pretty well then slowed up. Keith missed a few, but just hasn’t managed to get going. Dale’s been pretty good. Williams dropped right off from day dot. Duryea been pretty good all year and Ed has had a break out year. Seems it’s been a slow burn. Crozier dropped right off.
I think as a whole though, the bottom has dropped right out the last month. For all of them. It’s an absolute brothel down there. Their confidence looks farked. I haven’t seen our backline perform as badly as this for over a decade.

Whatever the issue, I’m farkin over it. It’s horrible to be playing so poorly. I hope they make the right decisions to correct things between now and Rd1 next season. List wise, assistants wise, defensive structure... whatever the * it is, just get it right.

Well we found something we agree on, happy days buckets

 

[LondonBulldog]

18th in opposition transition from kick in to goal. That’s one of many damming stat against our back off the mark. Yet I do agree our defenders are rubbish yet I don’t think this is helping.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[stefoid]

Our individual 6 defenders arent the best, but ability to score from inside 50 entries will be tied to getting it in there before the opposition defence is set up. Either move the ball fast from end to end or bang it back in after a turnover while they are out of position.

When we play poorly we are bad at moving the ball, and also bad at stopping the opposition moving the ball. Dodgy individual defenders is just the icing on the cake.

 

[ScragCity]

Whether or not there's any advantage to be gained from the "outside 5" tactic needs to be weighed against the fact that the umpires don't adjudicate this rule very well or with any consistency.

1. It costs us at least one or two 50-metre penalties in every game.

2. The umpires make our players stand closer to 15m away from the mark that 5m.

3. I noticed several times last night when our players were well outside 5m and still called to stand anyway...

 

[Mantis Toboggan]

Whether or not there's any advantage to be gained from the "outside 5" tactic needs to be weighed against the fact that the umpires don't adjudicate this rule very well or with any consistency.

1. It costs us at least one or two 50-metre penalties in every game.

2. The umpires make our players stand closer to 15m away from the mark that 5m.

3. I noticed several times last night when our players were well outside 5m and still called to stand anyway...

Weightman 100% got told to stand after the umpire had called ‘outside 5’ last night. He almost complained about it…and we know what that gets you.

Agree with all 3 points.

 

[glenashley]

I'm still on the fence over it.

It can't be looked at in isolation, but in direct comparison to 'losing' a player who is stuck on the mark and often just gets run around anyway by the ball carrier.

 

[bullish23]

often just gets run around anyway by the ball carrier.

That was happening when it was first introduced, however umpires call play on much earlier now.

 

[BEaston]

1. It costs us at least one or two 50-metre penalties in every game.

This is the main reason I'm against it.

I think it actually worked pretty well last night, but it's a strategy that is hard to measure it's effectiveness. Especially when we don't know what metrics the club are using to determine it's value.

 

[Mutt]

This is the main reason I'm against it.

I think it actually worked pretty well last night, but it's a strategy that is hard to measure it's effectiveness. Especially when we don't know what metrics the club are using to determine it's value.

It may be utilised to help keep the correct shape and distance/spacing in our defensive triangles. Our players often go back 10 to 15 meters off the mark, rather than 5. I might be wrong but it is all I can think of to explain why we go back so deep and consistently.

 

[Struggle]

Seems to be much more effective at Marvel than other grounds

 

[ScragCity]

Pay close attention to the player who moves off the mark to go outside 5. Notice how he does absolutely nothing to affect any of the subsequent play? He just treats it like he is on the mark, only 10m behind where he needs to be and with the ability to move laterally, which provides no benefit given how far away he is from the player in possession. He doesn't run off to go and cover some important space or affect the next contest.

 

[Pippu d'Angelo]

It is hands down the worst tactic I've seen in my time watching footy.

We play a game where territory matters, but we happily cede 800 metres every game.

I've seen dogs defenders on a mark near the 50 arc step back 5m thereby giving the opposition a chance on goal.

Anytime the mark is on the boundary, that's where you stand to force the player up against the fence, not this sociable step back business.

The closer you are to the kicker, the more the angle is cut.

 

[jdz101]

It's the worst and most detrimental pivot to in-game defensive strategy I've seen in my time watching the bulldogs play football.
.
And I've been a fan through some absolutely diabolically poor bulldogs teams.

 

[jdz101]

Pay close attention to the player who moves off the mark to go outside 5. Notice how he does absolutely nothing to affect any of the subsequent play? He just treats it like he is on the mark, only 10m behind where he needs to be and with the ability to move laterally, which provides no benefit given how far away he is from the player in possession. He doesn't run off to go and cover some important space or affect the next contest.

This is the key point. The additional resource that the tactic is meant to provide adds nothing. And it means the kicker has no forward pressure on their skills. So we get pinpointed by the opposition coming out of defense.

You're essentially giving the ball to the best professionals in the country, applying no pressure to their disposal, and hoping they make a mistake. Funnily enough, they're not making many mistakes.

 

[doggies ftw]

I'm still on the fence over it.

It can't be looked at in isolation, but in direct comparison to 'losing' a player who is stuck on the mark and often just gets run around anyway by the ball carrier.

If it worked why would no other club do it, you know all the other clubs which have won much more games than us and aren’t ranked 18th for scores from def 50 against

 

[doggies ftw]

Pay close attention to the player who moves off the mark to go outside 5. Notice how he does absolutely nothing to affect any of the subsequent play? He just treats it like he is on the mark, only 10m behind where he needs to be and with the ability to move laterally, which provides no benefit given how far away he is from the player in possession. He doesn't run off to go and cover some important space or affect the next contest.

This this this, then he just runs to try and smother anyway so ends up contesting as he’s on the mark, but 10m further down the ground

 

[DognBones]

Has Beveridge actually been asked about this by anyone in the media? Have any commentators discussed it on panel shows? If so, what was his response?
Need some clarification.