Strategy and Tactics Timeline

Remove this Banner Ad

Didn't Wallet do something similar at the Doggies when he inflicted Essendon's only loss for the 2000 season? Was right at the end of the year too, when Bomber fans were talking up Essendon gong undefeated. I remember Sheedy was fuming at his press conference and said something along the lines of "If people want to pay to watch that crap they can always go and watch basketball".


He said that after Richmond's tactics in the '06 game against the Crows.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

2010
*Forward Press (Malthouse Version) players would put a defensive zone on their forward line designed to keep the ball close to their forward line so they could kick goals from turnovers. The zone would roll out to the centre as well if the ball got past HF.

2009
* Forward press (lyon version) similar to Clarko's cluster but added the factor of opposition players moving in on the ball carrier as a zone to put them under pressure and create turnovers. Mostly occurred in the midfield.

2008
* Clarko's cluster - defensive zoning of the midfield to stop Geelongs run and carry game.

2007
*Geelong's free running and play on at all costs using the centre corridor to deliver the ball to the forward line before opposition players could flood back and so kick goals. (dubbed Tsunami football by Robert walls).

Good analysis. It was all a development on Clarko's cluster to beat Geelong, now the Hawks have gone with a 'keep possession with short accurate kicks' plan to beat all the zoning. Next someone will come up with something to beat that.

Clarkson is the most underrated coach in the league imo.
 
Updated

2011
*Since the zones were now so high up the field (Malthouse style) to concentrate pressure in your own forward line, some sides (like Geelong) overcome this by using long kicks over the zone and relied on contested marking especially from power forwards and crumbing by small forwards. More use of the boundary line instead of the corridor and less use of hand balling was observed.

2010
*Forward Press (Malthouse Version) players would put a defensive zone on their forward line designed to keep the ball close to their forward line so they could kick goals from turnovers. The zone would roll out to the centre as well if the ball got past HF. Attack from the backline was predominantly along the boundary to minimise turnovers.

2009
* Forward press (lyon version) similar to Clarko's cluster but added the factor of opposition players moving in on the ball carrier as a zone to put them under extreme pressure and create turnovers. Mostly occurred in the midfield.

2008
* Clarko's cluster - defensive zoning of the midfield to stop Geelongs run and carry game.

2007
*Geelong's free running and play on at all costs using the centre corridor to deliver the ball to the forward line before opposition players could flood back and so kick goals. (dubbed Tsunami football by Robert walls).

Mid 2000's
*Flooding - Vlad criticised the Swans for this ugly style but it won them a flag

Early 2000s
* Recruiting athletes thinking that they could be turned into footballers (Haw)

1999
* Playing two ruckmen at centre bounces (Ken Judge)[/quote]
 
How could Geelong have created that style in 2007 when most of the elements were employed by the Eagles in 2006?

High possession. Check.

Running the ball in waves down the wing or corridor. Check.

High use of handball to break the flood. Check.

Play on often at all costs. Check.


Geelong of 2007 didn't do anything new, they just did it better. Which is the only reason you keep updating that list, out of a childish attempt to see no one changes it. Then to try and use Polly Farmer to claim a direct lineage for your gameplan, bro give me a break.

Geelong borrowed it off WC, who borrowed elements from the WB. Nothing revolutionary about Geelongs gameplan in 07, they were just an excellent team who played the gamestyle perfectly.
 
Not so much creating tactics, but evolving them I think.
Exactly, they simply borrowed a gameplan and refined it. Nothing new about the way they played. They just did it exceptionally well.

It is the height of arrogance by some Geelong supporters, who conflate being a great team with doing something revolutionary. The are not the same thing.

I still remember some of the hilarious posts in 07, talking about how their club was saving football and rescuing it from the flood. Derp.
 
How could Geelong have created that style in 2007 when most of the elements were employed by the Eagles in 2006?

High possession. Check.

Running the ball in waves down the wing or corridor. Check.

High use of handball to break the flood. Check.

Play on often at all costs. Check.


Geelong of 2007 didn't do anything new, they just did it better. Which is the only reason you keep updating that list, out of a childish attempt to see no one changes it. Then to try and use Polly Farmer to claim a direct lineage for your gameplan, bro give me a break.

Geelong borrowed it off WC, who borrowed elements from the WB. Nothing revolutionary about Geelongs gameplan in 07, they were just an excellent team who played the gamestyle perfectly.


Dude get a grip. There is nothing new under the sun in football and I am not claiming Geelong created anything new in 2007. But they did it so well it deserves mention because tactics after 2007 evolved to counter-act them specifically.

I really couldn't give a rats ass if high handball started in freakin timbucktoo.

In the VFL it was Geelong that took handball to new level in matches (in the 60's) and they probably stole the idea from WA footy too or someone else.We had several WA players come into a squad then so it's not hard to see where it came from.

Sides have been stealing ideas since the day dot. I am personally not interested in getting into a pissing contest over where such and such tactics originated from. The idea for defensive zoning was stolen from other sports, as was flooding, and the huddle. Nothing new under the sun dbag!
 
Dude get a grip. There is nothing new under the sun in football and I am not claiming Geelong created anything new in 2007. But they did it so well it deserves mention because tactics after 2007 evolved to counter-act them specifically.

I really couldn't give a rats arse if high handball started in freakin timbucktoo. In the VFL it was Geelong that took it a new level and they probably stole the idea from WA footy too. Sides have been stealing ideas since the day dot. I am personally not interested in getting into a pissing contest over where such and such tactics originated from. The idea for defensive zoning was stolen from other sports, as was flooding, and the huddle. Nothing new under the sun dbag!
Exactly, your 2007 gameplan was borrowed from the previous years premiership winners.

Glad you can acknowledge that.
 
How could Geelong have created that style in 2007 when most of the elements were employed by the Eagles in 2006?

High possession. Check.

Running the ball in waves down the wing or corridor. Check.

High use of handball to break the flood. Check.

Play on often at all costs. Check.


Geelong of 2007 didn't do anything new, they just did it better. Which is the only reason you keep updating that list, out of a childish attempt to see no one changes it. Then to try and use Polly Farmer to claim a direct lineage for your gameplan, bro give me a break.

Geelong borrowed it off WC, who borrowed elements from the WB. Nothing revolutionary about Geelongs gameplan in 07, they were just an excellent team who played the gamestyle perfectly.

We still moved the ball a hell of a lot faster than the Weagles did. We didn't run in waves though - we never did, and still don't, have players who are great carriers of the ball. No one player - bar perhaps the Little Master - held the ball for long.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

He shouldn't have, its a legitimate tactic used in other sports such as soccer, but is frowned upon in AFL unless it's used in the last 2-3 minutes of game.

It shouldn't be. It's the coach's job to do everything possible to win, even if it means pissing off the crowd. I personally enjoy really enjoy football it when it's tactical and the coach's influence is visible.

I remember watching that game and being fascinated.
 
yes but we did it soooooooooooo much better than them and it got us 3 flags, not just a piddly one!
We still made two grand finals and yes, won one flag.

The Geelong side won so often after 2007, not just because of the strength of the gameplan but because of the strength of the playing group.

WC 2006 had an amazing midfield, very good defence and passable forward line. Geelong had an amazing midfield, amazing defence and very good forward line.

The thread was bout sides creating and employing a revolutionary gameplan and whether it gave a tactical edge. Geelong did not create the gameplan, they borrowed it and refined it. Most of the elements were employed by the previous years premiers, who were no doubt inspired tactically by the WB team of that era.

Geelongs edge came in how effectively they used it and the strength of their playing group.
 
We still moved the ball a hell of a lot faster than the Weagles did. We didn't run in waves though - we never did, and still don't, have players who are great carriers of the ball. No one player - bar perhaps the Little Master - held the ball for long.
This refers to players pealing off their direct opponents to run forward of the ball and break into space.

WC definitely carried the ball a little more via Judd, Kerr and Cousins, but all the principle elements were the same. Geelong simply employed the best parts and had the whole squad well drilled and capable. That though was definitely a break from how we played.

WC would also occasionally bomb it long, or play tempo footy before running and gunning it, again Geelong did this less.

There was no doubt Geelong mastered a certain gamestyle but they weren't the first to successfully employ it.
 
1991- Mick Malthouse invokes Ivan Drago like weight training techniques to build a team of powerhouses.

The cats poster saying Geelong invented the handball happy style of play is hilarious. Playing a style well=/= you inventing it.

It's like saying Toyota invented the car
 
Good analysis. It was all a development on Clarko's cluster to beat Geelong, now the Hawks have gone with a 'keep possession with short accurate kicks' plan to beat all the zoning. Next someone will come up with something to beat that.

Clarkson is the most underrated coach in the league imo.

Possibly, but you'd have to say only one strategy had any long term success in that period - Geelong's game. 3 premierships says it all
 
Possibly, but you'd have to say only one strategy had any long term success in that period - Geelong's game. 3 premierships says it all
3 premierships says basically nothing about this one issue in particular. You can't just look at the final score and go, well Team A amassed more total points than team B so Team A's strategy was better. Gameplan and execution are both important factors in the final performance.

2007 - All the strategies we are talking about are from 2008 onwards.
2008 - Moderately effective, Hawks were competitive at the end of the season but Geelong were better in general play for the majority of the GF.
2009 - Effective, St Kilda outplayed Geelong in the general play and the game should have been over at half time, similar to the previous year.
2010 - Extremely effective, self explanatory
2011 - Chris Scott arrives and Geelong's game plan changes more than it had the previous few years.

Edit: I agree no long term success, but no game plan does. Teams work hard to find a way to get around each new game style that proves effective, and so everyone evolves.

No gameplan includes 'miss goals from 10m out'.
 
1991- Mick Malthouse invokes Ivan Drago like weight training techniques to build a team of powerhouses.

The cats poster saying Geelong invented the handball happy style of play is hilarious. Playing a style well=/= you inventing it.

It's like saying Toyota invented the car
If we want to think we invented football, let us do this.

**** Toyota - except for Cruisers
 
Old thread, but reading through it, I didn't see anyone mention Peter McKenna's popularization of the drop punt (which had been around for ages, but for some inexplicable reason, never found favor until McKenna started kicking bags of goals).
 
Old thread, but reading through it, I didn't see anyone mention Peter McKenna's popularization of the drop punt (which had been around for ages, but for some inexplicable reason, never found favor until McKenna started kicking bags of goals).



Didn't the drop punt come from Jack Dyer?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Strategy and Tactics Timeline

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top