Review Good/Bad v Dead Rubber, Round 23

[Golumless]

The thought of Mackay getting dropped makes me wet....but it wont happen either.
So there we have it - three underperformers who wont be dropped. WTF have we gone wrong?

The thing is, for two of these "under-performers" they're not even doing that. They're just hitting on average pass mark in Atkins and Knight.

Mackay goes because he is our last selected outside midfielder, and Seedsman did enough to justify being selected.

Cameron is the one that should be under more pressure, but even then, his main replacement has a broken jaw; Menzel is an option but we've shown no real interest in selecting him for the most part of this season.

 

[GameofSloanes]

Good
No injuries or suspensions
Hartigan
Seed
Crouches and Sloane

Meh
Pulling out of contests
Not putting heads over the ball
The flooding and functioning of our forward line
Jenkins
Lynch
CC

Bad
If any of the mehs happen next week
Umpiring

Ugly
Zero. Just win next week or it's all for nothing

 

[Rear Admiral]

Great analysis.

I agree, it is a attempt at locking the ball in. But we end up essentially flooding our own forward line and shooting ourselves in the foot.

Precisely.

To score goals, you don't want every player on the field jammed into your Forward 50, but Pyke seems to be entirely focussed on sticking with it. And it's not working. In wet weather, it's often a good tactic, as opposition teams often slip or fumble the ball, where ball movement in wet weather is often slow and awkward. So in those conditions, we often force turnovers and score opportunist goals when the opposition is trying to rebound. And this is exactly what happened in two games that had wet conditions.

But in clean, dry conditions, opposition teams typically don't fumble and can effect a string of clean handballs and kicks, and if they're able to get through/around the press (which Sydney and West Coast were able to do, repeatedly), they can waltz into an open goal. Rinse and repeat. Against Sydney, we lost because of shanked kicks in front of goal, but the nonsense we served up against West Coast, I lay a lot of the blame at Pyke's feet. To persist with that press tactic....sure, we had a lot of the ball up Forward, but it was blatantly obvious we couldn't score. I'm not saying we should stop using the press tactic altogether, no. If we can score from it, and the opposition struggle to work their way through the press, then stick with it. But if it becomes obvious you're just flogging a dead horse and can't put the runs on the board, then you need to open the game up and get players into more traditional positions.

Pyke needs to learn when to pull the trigger and opt for an alternate game plan....during a game.

 

[Paladin]

Precisely.

To score goals, you don't want every player on the field jammed into your Forward 50, but Pyke seems to be entirely focussed on sticking with it. And it's not working. In wet weather, it's often a good tactic, as opposition teams often slip or fumble the ball, where ball movement in wet weather is often slow and awkward. So in those conditions, we often force turnovers and score opportunist goals when the opposition is trying to rebound. And this is exactly what happened in two games that had wet conditions.

But in clean, dry conditions, opposition teams typically don't fumble and can effect a string of clean handballs and kicks, and if they're able to get through/around the press (which Sydney and West Coast were able to do, repeatedly), they can waltz into an open goal. Rinse and repeat. Against Sydney, we lost because of shanked kicks in front of goal, but the nonsense we served up against West Coast, I lay a lot of the blame at Pyke's feet. To persist with that press tactic....sure, we had a lot of the ball up Forward, but it was blatantly obvious we couldn't score. I'm not saying we should stop using the press tactic altogether, no. If we can score from it, and the opposition struggle to work their way through the press, then stick with it. But if it becomes obvious you're just flogging a dead horse and can't put the runs on the board, then you need to open the game up and get players into more traditional positions.

Pyke needs to learn when to pull the trigger and opt for an alternate game plan....during a game.

You do realise West Coast have tactics and a game plan as well? They love to push all their numbers back and attack on the rebound. Not as simple as creating some space up forward!

 

[Golumless]

Precisely.

To score goals, you don't want every player on the field jammed into your Forward 50, but Pyke seems to be entirely focussed on sticking with it. And it's not working. In wet weather, it's often a good tactic, as opposition teams often slip or fumble the ball, where ball movement in wet weather is often slow and awkward. So in those conditions, we often force turnovers and score opportunist goals when the opposition is trying to rebound. And this is exactly what happened in two games that had wet conditions.

But in clean, dry conditions, opposition teams typically don't fumble and can effect a string of clean handballs and kicks, and if they're able to get through/around the press (which Sydney and West Coast were able to do, repeatedly), they can waltz into an open goal. Rinse and repeat. Against Sydney, we lost because of shanked kicks in front of goal, but the nonsense we served up against West Coast, I lay a lot of the blame at Pyke's feet. To persist with that press tactic....sure, we had a lot of the ball up Forward, but it was blatantly obvious we couldn't score. I'm not saying we should stop using the press tactic altogether, no. If we can score from it, and the opposition struggle to work their way through the press, then stick with it. But if it becomes obvious you're just flogging a dead horse and can't put the runs on the board, then you need to open the game up and get players into more traditional positions.

Pyke needs to learn when to pull the trigger and opt for an alternate game plan....during a game.

The press is about suffocating the opposition, and for example had we not been incredibly wasteful against Sydney, we beat them; we controlled the game and it's apart of it. Sure they got through 2-3 times, but every team, and coach will happily give up 2-3 goals for control of the game.

There is nothing you can take from the West Coast game, as our entire attitude was just get through as bruise free as possible.

 

[Rear Admiral]

You do realise West Coast have tactics and a game plan as well? They love to push all their numbers back and attack on the rebound. Not as simple as creating some space up forward!

Well understood. Then you don't bomb the ball in long. You make efforts to work the ball in their with handball and carry, or you chip the ball around the 50m arc until an opportunity presents itself. If you know and see that an opposition is flooding their defence, then you don't kick it to them.

 

[Vader]

There is nothing you can take from the West Coast game, as our entire attitude was just get through as bruise free as possible.

This is correct. Adelaide's only intention for that game was to get through it without any injuries. Winning was a bonus, but not a high priority. There was nothing to be gained by going in hard, the way we did against Sydney & Geelong - that would only increase the likelihood of injuries, without any benefits in return.

That Adelaide stayed as close as they did, while coasting and playing bruise-free footy, despite West Coast going full bore - speaks volumes for what Adelaide are capable of doing.

 

[GreyCrow]

This is not a bad thing.

I read an article in the paper years ago by 'Roo. The general gist of it was that entirely too many players are petrified of being tackled and give off panicked handballs, and it's these f*cked up panicked disposals are what mostly result in turnovers, and it's turnovers that cost goals. If you get caught in a tackle, but don't cough up the pill, what's the worst thing that can happen? You get caught holding the ball and the opposition gets a free kick. Now this is bad news if you're deep inside your Defensive 50, but in general field play away from Defence, you're far, far better off giving away holding the ball frees all day long, in comparison to panicked disposals and turnovers. When you give away a free, you get to slow up play, give your team mates an opportunity to man up; much better than a fast turn over.

Sure, Atkins doesn't get away with it every time, but I'm fairly certain he succeeds more than he gets caught. I'm fairly certain this taking on the tackler is a directive from Pyke to all the players, and it's one that should've been implemented years ago. The more of it, the better. I'd rather see that, in comparison to the Hospital Handballs of the Craig era. Players need to be taught how to evade tacklers, not simply rely on disposing of the ball to avoid getting caught.

I think we also talked about this earlier. Its also a Hawthorn thing. They take the tackle on and either get it free or accept the HTB and have time to defensively spread.

There was 1 tackle I thought Atkins copped it on the chin because a handball out would have been worse than the free.

 

[GreyCrow]

I agree losing 2 games isnt ideal but I can excuse yesterday on the basis of a no-nothing game to be played without injuries.

I hope we dont cruise through the next 2 weeks with both us , supporters and media, pumping the club up saying it will be easy. To stop this internally I would come out and drop someone on Wednesdays presser. Tell the group and the fans we are serious about this and that CC is omitted already.

That might wake the group up that this serious mum

 

[mick500]

Hartigan cost us about 4 goals in 30 minutes that i saw

Glad someone noticed. Will cost us a final.

 

[Iron]

I don't care if it was a "dead rubber" I hate losing! and the way we played was terrible! I cant remember the last time a team losing their last 2 minor round games in a reason and going on to win the flag....
We cant take Keath, Cameron & Milera into finals! noway!! get them out!

2012? Deep breath.

 

[Sanders]

Glad someone noticed. Will cost us a final.

Man oh man. You and muzza, there's a pairing

 

[JPetro83]

2012? Deep breath.

You're right.. good old afltables.com.au
Swans lost to the hawks at home then down in Geelong last game. Pretty much same margins we lost by the past 2 weeks

 

[mick500]

Man oh man. You and muzza, there's a pairing

Haha, that's actually not a bad game.. come up with our crows equivalent. I can be otten. You can be van berlo. Elite crow can be Neil Craig. Vhaluus can be keathy. Who would muzza be? I don't know much about "muzza" but if he can see Hartigan will cost us a final he's ok by me.

 

[skoobydoo]

This is not a bad thing.

I read an article in the paper years ago by 'Roo. The general gist of it was that entirely too many players are petrified of being tackled and give off panicked handballs, and it's these f*cked up panicked disposals are what mostly result in turnovers, and it's turnovers that cost goals. If you get caught in a tackle, but don't cough up the pill, what's the worst thing that can happen? You get caught holding the ball and the opposition gets a free kick. Now this is bad news if you're deep inside your Defensive 50, but in general field play away from Defence, you're far, far better off giving away holding the ball frees all day long, in comparison to panicked disposals and turnovers. When you give away a free, you get to slow up play, give your team mates an opportunity to man up; much better than a fast turn over.

Sure, Atkins doesn't get away with it every time, but I'm fairly certain he succeeds more than he gets caught. I'm fairly certain this taking on the tackler is a directive from Pyke to all the players, and it's one that should've been implemented years ago. The more of it, the better. I'd rather see that, in comparison to the Hospital Handballs of the Craig era. Players need to be taught how to evade tacklers, not simply rely on disposing of the ball to avoid getting caught.

Good points. Coughing up the ball when tackled. The top teams have been using and refining the 'squeeze the ball out to advantage' from tackles for a few years. It was a great weapon for WB premiership year. As far as correct disposal goes it is all over the place, but the umpires have generally been in love with it because it tends to keep the game moving. Crows have only recently started to bring this skill into their game and sometimes it works. However, in the last two games (at least), as you point out, we are just coughing up the ball at in opportune times. Last two games I have found myself yelling for the player to hold the ball in the tackle, just don't let it out in some fancy squeeze-out disposal, for we seem to be too readily stripped and lose possession. As you say, we need to be stronger and stretch the risk of HTB by hanging onto the pill, particularly around the midfield, when the odds are against a squeeze give-off.
All this ball work at the inside of multiple player tackles is pretty iffy but nontheless skilful, and knowing when to release is so important. I agree with your pickup and take on this

 

[Crow_Magnon]

Not sure if mentioned but exactly the same score as last year's game

Last three games have been 29 point margins actually...