Analysis Level-Headed Discussion

[MightyPies2010]

I have been/ am a supporter of the rebuild however I'm starting to get a bit nervous.

On a bad day, the 2010 Premiership team would beat our current team by 10 goals. I'm 100% certain of that.

Apparently if you are staying still in this comp, you are going backwards, so by definition we are miles off the 2016 pace.

So what do we do, how do we turn it around moving forward?....

Sadly, I'm dialling down my expectations for 2016. I have to for my own sanity.

We have to find our preferred (available) 22 quick smart and stick fat with it. IF, and its a big IF, we have the talent on the list, we need to back them in, let them grow as a team and master the game plan (whatever it is??). We cant help injuries, however if we keep having 4 in and 4 out for much longer we will end up nowhere. This week we may need to do it again, with Varcoe and Sidebottom critical ins, however beyond that I want to see the coaches settle on a team with some tinkering from time to time. To me, it feels as if we still have no clue as to our best 22.

Ageing veterans need to recapture form and youth need to step up and grab opportunities with both hands.

It's a fascinating period for the club, I'm praying it all comes together however am not delusional enough to think its a given.

Coaches, players and supporters, its time to roll up our sleeves and get to work.

GoPies!!!

 

[Baltimore Jack]

In an attempt at sensible conversation, which is a big ask here most of the time.

In this game, for me, two distinct issues stood out:
1. At every opportunity St Kilda went wide out of defence, they didn't do it occasionally, they did it every time.
They had a ring of players along the boundary line from the defensive 50 to their forward pocket.
Not once did we counter that type of play, not once did we cover those players out wide, not once did we prepare for that play knowing they had been doing it all day.
What we did was protect the corridor where the play wasn't and wasn't likely to be

2. Our defence looked shell-shocked. They looked confused and even with 2 or 3 options available they took none of them but instead kicked to a player who was covered or directly to the opposition.
It wasn't just our inexperienced players it was Reid, Goldsack and Brown

So if I was able to ask level headed questions I would ask:
1. Everyone at the ground saw the St Kilda boundary line play. Why didn't our Coaches or Players see it and counter it?
2. What instructions are given to our defenders

 

[Magnus the Magpie]

I thought I would create a place where we could discuss what actually went wrong with the game, without any theatrics.

We really didn't pressure the Saints enough. Their run was barely even countered, and we couldn't lay a tackle to save our lives. The forward line targets were bested by the Saints defence, but I guess that wasn't helped by the fact oure midfield couldn't get it in cleanly. And our back line... Zoning needs to go out. We play our best when we are man-on-man and backing our players to pressure and win the footy, not when we trust each defender to cover a piece of the field.

And with Williams probably out, our small defender stocks are running low. We really don't have anyone to bring in who plays his role do we?

Watching the Richmond replay, this was the thing that disturbed me the most - and it's come back to hurt us very quickly. Skill problems, we probably can't do much about but, ffs, we should be able to get this very basic element right!

 

[TradeDraft]

The sad thing is the way we are performing, GWS are going to receive a top 4 pick in the draft. if that is the case, it is reasonable to question, regardless of how good treloar is, whether we would have been better off with 2 top ten picks. with 2 top potential talents, you could fill 2 holes with different types of players.

Anyway, I'm hoping what we are seeing is the result of a different training program. Maybe with the second half fadeouts over the past couple of years, the pre-season was modified to be counter this. I look at the game and the guys dont seem to be keeping up. Surely (or hopefully) they arent running hard because their fitness hasnt peaked.

I think it also shows how important Swan has been over the years. Even though he may have slowed a little, he was everywhere. Whether it was running out of congestions, being a link up player, or running around in defense, he played a number of roles. Apart from Sidebottom, I'm not sure we have another player who is as elite a runner.

Is it that we are finding it difficult to adapt to the reduced rotations or 10 metre rule? Anyway, so many unanswered questions.

So we are having a 1st Half Fade out instead on a 2nd Half One

 

[TradeDraft]

You're right with the first point Sherrin.

Aside from say Pendles, Sidebottom, Reid and I'll include Treloar, no other player has a football brain or footy smarts. Our decision making collectively and skill execution is deplorable.

Case in point - Adam Oxley. He did the kick the goal but fcck me, how he did I'll never know!

He is a right foot kick and there's at least four or five blokes within 10 or so metres from where the mark was taken. Why on earth would he call for a handball running onto his left foot and with no space in front of him.

The bloke who took the mark (can't remember) should've never have given it in the first place.

Just dumb football and it happens all the time.

Aish is a Smart Footballer

 

[Baltimore Jack]

I would also consider using Reid forward and bringing in Frost as a defender
I'm a convert to the idea of using 3 tall forwards I think it stretches opposition defences, the one proviso is that we would need two small forwards and a mid-sized forward to complement the Talls....but like everyone I'm just making an uniformed comment on what I saw at the game

 

[partypie]

I still feel that we have the cattle to put a competitive (and even to some degree successful) side out on the park every week - it's just this all or nothing zone defence / pressure / turnover-focused game plan is dragging us down, because we've never had the right sort of players to implement it.

We don't have enough speed / agility / endurance to maintain the press AND break when we get the ball, we're certainly not skilled enough by foot to pick through the opposition's press (yes I know it's a Captain Obvious call there) and we don't have any genuinely good decision makers with a penetrating kick off half back to set up the forward thrusts when we get the ball in our back line.

As good as Pendles is with the ball in hand I think we all know that he's a bit of a liability as a man-on-man defender, so he's not the answer down back I don't think. All of the good users of the ball off half back that come to mind (eg. Birchall, Murphy, Hodge, Houli, McVeigh, Shaw (gulp), Malceski, etc) are all capable man-on-man defenders as well, but when Pendles is isolated against his man in a defensive position he generally looks lost - not that I'd expect him to be better at it as he's just not a defender in the pure sense of the word.

We're also short a few willing types who are capable of taking the game on and break the lines - and of course doing something intelligent with it when they do dispose of the ball, as opposed to just running themselves into trouble (ala Harry-O towards the end of his tenure at the Westpac Centre). I don't think we should underestimate how much of a loss Ramsay is going to be going forward, just as he was starting to find his feet in that line-breaking role off half back.

At some point Bucks is going to have to acknowledge that if the players are consistently failing to implement the game plan every week then perhaps it's the game plan itself which is at fault, because in a lot of respects it has to mesh with the attributes and skill set of the players you have to work with.

 

[Vankri]

In an attempt at sensible conversation, which is a big ask here most of the time.

In this game, for me, two distinct issues stood out:
1. At every opportunity St Kilda went wide out of defence, they didn't do it occasionally, they did it every time.
They had a ring of players along the boundary line from the defensive 50 to their forward pocket.
Not once did we counter that type of play, not once did we cover those players out wide, not once did we prepare for that play knowing they had been doing it all day.
What we did was protect the corridor where the play wasn't and wasn't likely to be

2. Our defence looked shell-shocked. They looked confused and even with 2 or 3 options available they took none of them but instead kicked to a player who was covered or directly to the opposition.
It wasn't just our inexperienced players it was Reid, Goldsack and Brown

So if I was able to ask level headed questions I would ask:
1. Everyone at the ground saw the St Kilda boundary line play. Why didn't our Coaches or Players see it and counter it?
2. What instructions are given to our defenders

Absolutely, and it's really not just against St Kilda, both Sydney and Richmond did the same thing all game long.

We deliberately set up our forward and midfield zone on the corridor and leave the boundary unmanned. All it takes from teams to progress through the field against us is to switch the play to the other side where they bring an extra man and in 2 seconds they will be 50-65m from our goals, where in theory we're meant to intercept their pass due to our +1 there and our defensive zoning, but in reality we end up enabling the opposition an easy short centering kick more often than not to an uncontested mark inside or just outside the 50m arc.

This isn't how we set up last year so you would think it's possible to switch back to more of an all ground pressure to the carrier and more man on man in defence. It does take a change in the gameplan and an added effort from the team overall (which might come if we adapt our positioning in the field) so hopefully we can adapt on the run.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

Absolutely, and it's really not just against St Kilda, both Sydney and Richmond did the same thing all game long.

We deliberately set up our forward and midfield zone on the corridor and leave the boundary unmanned. All it takes from teams to progress through the field against us is to switch the play to the other side where they bring an extra man and in 2 seconds they will be 50-65m from our goals, where in theory we're meant to intercept their pass due to our +1 there and our defensive zoning, but in reality we end up enabling the opposition an easy short centering kick more often than not to an uncontested mark inside or just outside the 50m arc.

This isn't how we set up last year so you would think it's possible to switch back to more of an all ground pressure to the carrier and more man on man in defence. It does take a change in the gameplan and an added effort from the team overall (which might come if we adapt our positioning in the field) so hopefully we can adapt on the run.

Yes, I think you are right, we have time to say "look what we are doing at the moment isn't working, lets switch back to last years model but keep what we have learned this year in the bank and try it when we think it might be more appropriate"
I have heard Coaches say many times before they have up to 6 styles of game plan, I think we should give a different plan a try.

 

[Maggie5]

I would also consider using Reid forward and bringing in Frost as a defender
I'm a convert to the idea of using 3 tall forwards I think it stretches opposition defences, the one proviso is that we would need two small forwards and a mid-sized forward to complement the Talls....but like everyone I'm just making an uniformed comment on what I saw at the game

Reid did go forward in the last but I do agree with Frost he seems to take the game on.

You are also right, too many times, players in the forward line did make space and provided good options and the player kicks it to a two one one situation.

Are they too anxious with the ball in hand? Lack confidence?

 

[gtrain23]

It could be worse people.
We could be richmond.
Also dont we have some special warchest at seasons end to get like 10 stars. Lol

 

[Baltimore Jack]

Reid did go forward in the last but I do agree with Frost he seems to take the game on.

You are also right, too many times, players in the forward line did make space and provided good options and the player kicks it to a two one one situation.

Are they too anxious with the ball in hand? Lack confidence?

To me, they looked confused and unsure about what they should be doing

 

[Greening Magic]

I had to rip out a kitchen yesterday and then went and bought a much needed new car.
When I returned at 4.30 I decided not to watch the delayed telecast. That's pretty level headed.

Anyhow, we simply can't cover Swan, Steele, Varcoe, Elliott (Half Baked Pendles). With our list they are the wrong players to have on the sidelines.

Good news is I'll be at the G next Sunday for a thrilling encounter against the Dees.

Here comes the PIES !!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Hardas]

Contested possession is far from irrelevant. Like a lot of key indicators it can suffer from people placing too much emphasis on it, but it still matters... Having said that, I watched Bucks' post-match, and he seemed a bit hung up on the fact that we won the CP. He seemed to find it baffling, which I found baffling. We had to win our ball, then we had to keep winning it back after coughing it up. The Saints just played keepings off, which we allowed them to do.

Just watched that presser - it is a genuine worry.

 

[Hardas]

So are we Lazy/Don't Care or Not Fit enough?

Whatever the reasons are, it's not a new problem.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

I would also consider using Reid forward and bringing in Frost as a defender
I'm a convert to the idea of using 3 tall forwards I think it stretches opposition defences, the one proviso is that we would need two small forwards and a mid-sized forward to complement the Talls....but like everyone I'm just making an uniformed comment on what I saw at the game

Which ever end Reid plays at, he should be the "third" tall. A lot more creative options that way. Bringing Goldsack in for Frost was a mistake.

 

[Hardas]

I know we're fitter than some clubs and aren't as fit as others, but the difference isn't enough for us to be so far off breaking even and I think the effort has been there since round 1.
For mine those numbers are a pure system breakdown and a lack of emphasis on the importance of spreading plus shutting the opposition spread down.
It isn't an age issue and isn't an experience issue because Fremantle are in the same spot. What we're doing just isn't working and I'd love us to have the courage to make serious changes over the next month. The changes may not save the season, but like the Bulldogs in 2014 when they started to emphasise uncontested ball it may set up the platform for future success.

THIS and THIS.

 

[Hardas]

I remember watching the pre season game against Geelong where we were playing on at all costs and kicking the ball to the "hot spot" 45m out from goal. Gerard Healy made the comment a number of times that his spies reported that the Pies were practicing this all the time.
Where has this game plan gone I wonder because the games I've seen so far doesn't resemble that at all
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Again and again and again I found myself saying, 'Keep going' [after a mark on HBF or BP] and/or 'Come to him'. Every now and then players may not be giving multiple options to the ball carrier - not routinely!
If players don't routinely offer these options further afield, it's only natural that players will start to hesitate and stagnate.

 

[Dubaimagpie]

Again and again and again I found myself saying, 'Keep going' [after a mark on HBF or BP] and/or 'Come to him'. Every now and then players may not be giving multiple options to the ball carrier - not routinely!
If players don't routinely offer these options further afield, it's only natural that players will start to hesitate and stagnate.

Against the Tigers in the last quarter we moved the ball quickly and look what happened. I cannot understand why we do not play like this all the time.

 

[wicksy]

Yes, I think you are right, we have time to say "look what we are doing at the moment isn't working, lets switch back to last years model but keep what we have learned this year in the bank and try it when we think it might be more appropriate"
I have heard Coaches say many times before they have up to 6 styles of game plan, I think we should give a different plan a try.

I have never known Buckley to have a plan B to be honest.

 

[Hardas]

Reid did go forward in the last but I do agree with Frost he seems to take the game on.
You are also right, too many times, players in the forward line did make space and provided good options and the player kicks it to a two one one situation.
Are they too anxious with the ball in hand? Lack confidence?

I think it might be both together - our I50 entries have been poor long enough that they rarely just go for it.

 

[Hardas]

I have never known Buckley to have a plan B to be honest.

So, he did learn something from MM after all.

 

[didaksrightfoot]

Disclaimer- i turned off the game 10 mins before 3QT and have tried not to get too angry at the result.

For me there were 2 key things that cost us the game:

1. Our players were constantly outnumbered. This is probably a combination of both structures and players just not putting the effort in... I worry too much its the 2nd. As a club we always have a lot of attention on us, and the way Bucks talks of hope in this group and the way we played in preseason has many of our guys playing like they think they are already greats: they think they can win with just a few slick runs of play, without putting in 100% effort all the time. Whenever St Kilda had the ball we defended well to a point but then slacked off - they just had to be patient and holes opened up. Now the structures may not have helped - but all too often we would be caught out when someone just left their man run free... You can't blame that on the coach.

2. We had a serious lack of leadership all around the ground. With Varcoe, Sidebottom and Swan all missing we were desperate for a group of guys to put their hand up and lead the way - there was too few and it was too infrequent. Some of this improves with these guys returning, but it has been a problem with this group for a while.

This group deserves an almighty spray, and a serious lesson taught over the next few days. I dont know whether you take the players somewhere and just lock them away from family and media - but some very frank and hard truths need to be shared amongst the entire group. (im just not sure if Bucks has enough of that old fashioned coach to do this).

I also agree with others who have suggested that for n3xt week we just go to simple 1-on-1 football. Forget trying to be fancy - give everyone a single ovjective: Work Harder Than Your Opponent for 120 mins... That's it. That's what is needed.

Having said all that- i stilk have some optimism for this group. We have a good spread of talent, and if players develop properly the future should still be bright... BUT a line must be drawn after a loss like that. (ideally it shouldve been draw at halftime or sometime in the 3rd quarter... I know Bucks wouldnt have approved - but was anyone else half hoping one of our player would just throw down the gauntlet and start a bit of biffo - its not the way its done, but we needed something to seriously change and it never happened)

 

[swiftdog]

In an attempt at sensible conversation, which is a big ask here most of the time.

In this game, for me, two distinct issues stood out:
1. At every opportunity St Kilda went wide out of defence, they didn't do it occasionally, they did it every time.
They had a ring of players along the boundary line from the defensive 50 to their forward pocket.
Not once did we counter that type of play, not once did we cover those players out wide, not once did we prepare for that play knowing they had been doing it all day.
What we did was protect the corridor where the play wasn't and wasn't likely to be

2. Our defence looked shell-shocked. They looked confused and even with 2 or 3 options available they took none of them but instead kicked to a player who was covered or directly to the opposition.
It wasn't just our inexperienced players it was Reid, Goldsack and Brown

So if I was able to ask level headed questions I would ask:
1. Everyone at the ground saw the St Kilda boundary line play. Why didn't our Coaches or Players see it and counter it?
2. What instructions are given to our defenders

It looked to me like we zone-off half the ground, length-ways. Naturally, the easiest thing for St.Kilda to do is kick out of it sideways and then it's smooth sailing from there.

Defence had a tough gig yesterday. Zones don't work at AFL level if the ball-carrier isn't under pressure, it's too easy to kick through them. They can be very efficient when forcing teams to kick long to a contest, should be able to outnumber the opposition then. The question is then, is the problem in the back 50 or up the ground where pressure needs to come from? Probably both but I can somewhat understand Bucks' desire to stick with it. He could be backing in the team to provide pressure up the ground to help out the backs and tweaking that part of the gameplan. Something needs to happen though as it's been cut up for 3 weeks running now.


On a different note, one thing I did notice going forward is how often we looked to Pendlebury to launch an attack from the back 50. What are people's thoughts on this? I'm still undecided. Pendles is busting a gut to get in position for a handball receive and is our best user of the footy. It just looks so stilted and awkward at times though.

 

[TheBaron]

At last a thread where Chicken Little is not allowed. I'm an optimist. Last year when Richmond belted us I was criticized for suggesting things might be better against Geelong the following week. This season has a long way to go but I'd like to see more signs that we're on the cusp. I believe Buckley has a good football brain and I recognise that we have some good young talent. Clearly so do the other clubs. I'm prepare to give these guys time but I need to see commitment every week.