The Game Plan

[Doggies05']

Everytime i saw a kick, mark, kick mark, kick mark from us tonight i couldnt believe my eyes.

I dont know why we chose to play like that tongiht. I do know that Johnno said that we were just trying to keep posession but thats not that type of football that has won us 9 games this season or finals last season.

Saints pushed numbers back tonight and theres no way to beat a flood, other then to break right through it. To run it at the, create the space for leading forwards. Chipping around gives more time for opposition to push back and deprive Johnno the space he needs to work with.

We kicked 9 goals for the first 110 minutes when chipping around and 4 goals in the last 10 minutes by running at all costs. Its clear which is more effective, lets hope we play dogs style of play-on football against the Dees and for the rest of 2007.

Tonight it seemed like we were playing in fear of loss instead of desire to actually win.

 

[W.Bulldogs_Aus_WC06]

We played like that because the last 4 times we've played the Saints with out normal style we got belted by 50+ pts. I do agree that we went a bit over the top with it though. Maybe mixing it up a bit more would have been better but it nearly worked

 

[Gooka]

I'm stoked. We had a different game plan that seemed to work OK - especially seeing as that's the first time we've really used that in a game situation. A plan B is always necessary, so if we can get the ability to switch between that and our free flowing game, then we're in for a show because we'll be able to slow it down when necessary, and accelerate when the opportunities arise.

 

[comrade]

You say that a 'pretty' style of football has won us 9 games this year. It's also lost us 8. I'd rather be successful than attractive.

Well done Rocket and the boys for mixing it up. Now you just need to practice it. There were too many errors, particularly turn overs from short kicks. Surely that is one of the most damaging stats in football.

Let's everyone get there next week and watch the boys belt the Demons.

 

[topdog]

Start of the game, if we knew that between Gehrig, Riewoldt, and Kosi they would score 5 goals. And Dal santo, Harvey, Gram and Hayes will be under control and even all beaten. Then we would have pumped them by 10 goals. I think that all the players played well, just not too happy with the game plan. In the last quarter when we started to run and take some risk then we dominated. Its not a bad game plan if our them is not switched on and not playing well but when their all swithched on and 90% of our players are beating their opponents then there should have been a charge earlier.

 

[sydneydog]

I'm stoked. We had a different game plan that seemed to work OK - especially seeing as that's the first time we've really used that in a game situation. A plan B is always necessary, so if we can get the ability to switch between that and our free flowing game, then we're in for a show because we'll be able to slow it down when necessary, and accelerate when the opportunities arise.

I agree.The fact we could play another style impressed me.Sydney have been doing it successfully for ages.We missed targets but still kept in the game and it gave us the legs to run in the last quarter.Rapt with Skipper's mark.

 

[boydsno1]

i think we had to play liek that tonight. if we attacked and turned the ball over the saints with there talls would have killed us everytime. was boring to watch but it was a very important 4 points up for grabs.

 

[Maverick Dog]

It wasn't pretty but as others have mentioned the saints have belted us of late. I am happy about the defensive mindset. We did not executed it well but it worked. At least we are developing plan b when plan a is not working. Just wondering if Eade is using this year as a developent year. Our contested posession has improved, our defence is being developed. A couple of players have developed especially WIlliams and Everitt. This missing link is a key forward and the run we have lost over the past 2 years. Throw in a fit Gilbee, hahn and Griffen and the run should be back. The key forward i still the problem. I believe we have no choice but to aggressively pursue fev

 

[Doggies05']

Many of you are missing the point.
Yes, we have another game plan.
But was it succesfull?? No.

The only part of our game that was really succesfull last night was the last 10 - 15 minutes and thats the part of the game we ran and played.

So what im saying is that for us to win, and score and attack, i think at the moment, with a small forward line, that is our only choice.

If our skills were as good as they were last year and early this year, then that gamestyle could have been perfect. But with lack of skills and lack of confidence we couldnt execute kicks inside 50. Which cost us dearly.

 

[Hobdog]

I'm stoked. We had a different game plan that seemed to work OK - especially seeing as that's the first time we've really used that in a game situation. A plan B is always necessary, so if we can get the ability to switch between that and our free flowing game, then we're in for a show because we'll be able to slow it down when necessary, and accelerate when the opportunities arise.

I totally agree Gooka. It was obvious that we couldn't get invlolved in a shoot out as we would have met the same fait as usual against the Saints. I thought it was a good idea to position ourselves as close as we could on the scoreboard and then open up later in the game. The Saints don't finish strongly so I thought it was a good plan. For those supporters who have been crying out for a plan B and for our team to play more defensive in the midfield, there you go, you got it last night. Pity we couldn't quite get over the line but I'd take 2 points over 0 anyday.

 

[Ted's Robot]

I don't think our game plan changed that much, we have always played a bit of keepings off, it was just that against a better opposition ie cats and eagles, we just couldn't get the ball to do it.
There only difference I saw was that we didn't have the play on all times mentality which, this year has got us into more trouble because of poor skills and decision making. I quite enjoyed seeing play a more defensive type of game, instead of seeing loose opposition players running riot.

 

[GoAds]

I thought the gameplan last night was ok, but, there was still some fundamental flaws in it.
Against partial floods like what st kilda were doing (and most sides that flog us), you have to play smart and create space, st kilda were zoning off 50m back from the guy that had the ball and we were just filling that space also.
What needed to happen was those dogs players caught in the zone needed to push up the ground but not behind the ball (it creates numbers for us), then a couple of players needed to go back to the goal line. What then "should" happen is the st kilda players then collapse in on their zone so the bulldogs players can still be marked up. So what has effectively happened is instead of the zone being 50m, it becomes 45m or even 40m and from the edge of the zone to the goal line is all space to run into. Then those two guys in on the goal line can then lead hard to a long kick from the guy who has the ball who can now kick the ball over the zone to the leading players, the bulldog players who have pushe up the ground double back to the forward 50 to either crumb or put tackling pressure on st kilda should they get it and try to rebound from inside our forward 50.
OR the st kilda players don't collapse, we have numbers close to the ball, we can short pass or handball 10-15 forward, then have the st kilda players try and run backwards or move to the ball, but then we can move the ball quickly and kick it over the zone to the leading players.
I wish I had a whiteboard to explain this better.
But all we did was have one guy sit at 40m out in no mans land (usually gia) and every kick that was going to be kicked to him was going to have to be a high ball for a contested mark, not giving our bloke the best possible advantage to win the ball. And all the guys that were in the zone would just stand there and not keep running.
Also the amount of times we would create a void to run into in the centre, and no one would lead into it, and we would continue along the wings....it was frustrating to watch....
Fans sitting near me thought I was bagging the team, I call it contructive critisism. I have the rationale to back up my frustration. Eade said when he came to the club that he wanted to teach players to be able to adapt and make their own decisions based on what is going on out on the field. Some players 3 years on either don't get it or have a lot to learn.

 

[jd hot stuff]

For a little while i thought the Swans had tunred up for us with that kicking Backwards SH**.

 

[ErnieSigley]

Its wasn't our game plan, it was a combination of the Saints and ours.
If both teams flood, both teams are forced to chip it around.
We were just too slow at times going forward and we made a few errors.
The style of the game that was played last night required us to have another 1 or 2 class runners off HB(Gilbee/Griff).

 

[Bulldog4life]

Many of you are missing the point.
Yes, we have another game plan.
But was it succesfull?? No.

The only part of our game that was really succesfull last night was the last 10 - 15 minutes and thats the part of the game we ran and played.

So what im saying is that for us to win, and score and attack, i think at the moment, with a small forward line, that is our only choice.

If our skills were as good as they were last year and early this year, then that gamestyle could have been perfect. But with lack of skills and lack of confidence we couldnt execute kicks inside 50. Which cost us dearly.

Have a read of todays Herald Sun and read about all the various players who had specific jobs to do on certain St.Kilda players. From Power on Harvey to Ray on Del Santo. Our game plan was 100% successful but not executed as good skill wise. There is a difference.I have been there previously each time as St.Kilda has smashed us.It didn't happen last night.We might not have come away with the 4 points but it certainly wasn't the game plans fault.

 

[since82eags]

The idea that Eade shutting the game down for three quarters and then when he knew St Kilda are suspect i.e. the last quarter is smart coaching if the Bullies had played all out attack you guys would have been thumped. The game plan is just that a game plan it changes depending on injuries opposition teams when he instructed you guys to play as normal against the Eags you got pantsed. The Saints are the one who should be whinging you got points after being thumped for the previous two weeks be happy.

 

[since82eags]

As for collapsing a flood the Saints would just refuse to get sucked in watch eags vs Adelaide for how that game plan doesn't work.

 

[DexterTan]

Many of you are missing the point.
Yes, we have another game plan.
But was it succesfull?? No.

The only part of our game that was really succesfull last night was the last 10 - 15 minutes and thats the part of the game we ran and played.

So what im saying is that for us to win, and score and attack, i think at the moment, with a small forward line, that is our only choice.

If our skills were as good as they were last year and early this year, then that gamestyle could have been perfect. But with lack of skills and lack of confidence we couldnt execute kicks inside 50. Which cost us dearly.

But the dogs skills HAVEN'T been as good as last year and the dogs Plan A has not been working. I would prefer for the dogs to play, accountable, smart football, rather than running and then turning the ball over.

In Gridiron - if your running game isn't working, you use the passing game plan more. I reckon the dogs running game wasn't working - so they had to do SOMETHING!

If Plan B which had it's first outing for the season didn't work, then by rights, the dogs should not have 2 points. NO ONE gave the dogs a chance in hell of beating the Saints. So IMHO, the game plan did work, because the dogs were not beaten. I'lLtake a draw over a loss by 50 points any time...although the win would have been better of course

And the dogs have finally shown the ability to CHANGE game plans when they need to. For most of the year, the dogs had one game plan and when it didn't work, they didn't know what else to do.

Last night's performance, showed the dogs could turn it on, when they needed to.

I don't think the dogs need to use Plan B againt the Dee's though. All out attack!

 

[stefoid]

the saints and the crows beat us EASILLY earlier in the year with a certain gameplan of this 'rolling zone' where they would form a zone across the field about 30-40m in front of the ball carrier.

our plan this week was specifically to negate their plan. insteda of trying to chip and run through the zone, we went back and forth sideways to break it up, then spotted up a short pass - often a very short pass, to work the ball up the field.

and I believe we plays adelaide again as well, so there you go. you will probably see this game plan wheeled out again against the crows.

theres also this 'tempo footy' that the crows and swans play were if they get a bunch of goals kicked on them in a hurry, they go into damage control mode for a while and chip the ball around and around to reagin their composure and break the momentum of the other side. thats somethin we dont do and perhaps should have that tool in our bag.

its boring footy, but I guess these days you have to treat it a bit like a chess game at tiimes and just appreciate the tactics, if nothing else.

 

[cleveland]

Christ..............................what is wrong with some of you

For a number of years now there has been whingeing on here that we dont have a plan b. Well last night we saw a plan b and it worked ok but i still see people bitching. What did you want them to do, play our normal gameplan??? We would have been belted by 10 goals. Wake up to yourselves. I was happy to see something different and it almost came off.

 

[GoAds]

the saints and the crows beat us EASILLY earlier in the year with a certain gameplan of this 'rolling zone' where they would form a zone across the field about 30-40m in front of the ball carrier.

our plan this week was specifically to negate their plan. insteda of trying to chip and run through the zone, we went back and forth sideways to break it up, then spotted up a short pass - often a very short pass, to work the ball up the field.

Yep you are right, but that short kick HAS to be forward or sideways to someone moving forward who can then kick the ball long and quick over the rolling zone to beat it, we then have to find a target (which with our forward structure is difficult) or try to hold the ball in to create a stoppage.

This is where the Kangas have been good this season, they are hard at the ball to create stoppages and always aim to move the ball forward preferably be kicking long at every opportunity

 

[The Standfield Principle]

It was actually good to see the dogs have a go at controlling the pace of the game. During periods of time when the opposition are dominant , we wil have the capacity to stop teams going quickly from two goals up to six goals up. It is something we have to learn; but not use every week, or all the time during the game.It will really be valuable if we have a forward who can contest in the air, and even just bring the footy to ground front and square. Time for McDougall to get a run

 

[memberforever]

Have a read of todays Herald Sun and read about all the various players who had specific jobs to do on certain St.Kilda players. From Power on Harvey to Ray on Del Santo. .

Also Eagleton did well on Montagna, Cooney roaming in the backline for parts of the game, as well as Murphy doing a Gilbee type of role. We actually had 70 more disposals than the Saints, we just didn't kick enough goals in the second and third quarters.

 

[MrChristo]

Many of you are missing the point.
Yes, we have another game plan.
But was it succesfull?? No.

The only part of our game that was really succesfull last night was the last 10 - 15 minutes and thats the part of the game we ran and played.

So what im saying is that for us to win, and score and attack, i think at the moment, with a small forward line, that is our only choice.

If our skills were as good as they were last year and early this year, then that gamestyle could have been perfect. But with lack of skills and lack of confidence we couldnt execute kicks inside 50. Which cost us dearly.

Just flat out wrong. Sorry.

Hate to (well, getting slightly sick of!) saying it, but the stats are in, and it's another nail in the "our small forward line sucks" coffin.

We only went into our 50 41 times on Friday night, yet we scored 25 times. That's a score every 1.64 entries!
It's our 3rd best efficiency for the year, and obviously a good deal better than our (and every other teams) average.

Does that not tell us that we are better off holding the ball up until a good option presents, rather than runnihng forward in a mad panic just to get it forwrd quickly??

And, just to add the other obvious benefit of holding the ball up...we allowed the Saints just 48 I50's...which is our second best effort of the season. (We av. 56 against...Saints av. 50 for)

We are more efficient going forward, and the opp get less opertunities to score.
Terribly unsuccessful game plan really!

 

[cleveland]

Just flat out wrong. Sorry.

Hate to (well, getting slightly sick of!) saying it, but the stats are in, and it's another nail in the "our small forward line sucks" coffin.

We only went into our 50 41 times on Friday night, yet we scored 25 times. That's a score every 1.64 entries!
It's our 3rd best efficiency for the year, and obviously a good deal better than our (and every other teams) average.

Does that not tell us that we are better off holding the ball up until a good option presents, rather than runnihng forward in a mad panic just to get it forwrd quickly??

And, just to add the other obvious benefit of holding the ball up...we allowed the Saints just 48 I50's...which is our second best effort of the season. (We av. 56 against...Saints av. 50 for)

We are more efficient going forward, and the opp get less opertunities to score.
Terribly unsuccessful game plan really!

Great thoughts