Analysis The Ideal Contest

[PIrOed]

I've been reading these forums for a while and what's most garnered my interest has been the discussions around topics such as team selection and game plan. Particularly when posters have been arguing from completely different starting points without acknowledging it and hence doomed to go around in circles.

This all got me thinking and it got to a point where I started writing my own thoughts on the subjects down in an attempt to keep track of them. This has now morphed into a formatted document. I'm not the talkative type so have never felt the need to join up and take part in the discussions taking place on here but since these forums have led me to write this document I feel I should post it here as someone else may find it interesting, perhaps even inspiring a train of thought in them as your posts have in me.

I'm not sure where to post it so I've chosen this thread as it looked as good any other to me. If any of the mods disagree I harbour no ill will if they want to move or delete it.

 

[WalterBlaknWhte]

I've been reading these forums for a while and what's most garnered my interest has been the discussions around topics such as team selection and game plan. Particularly when posters have been arguing from completely different starting points without acknowledging it and hence doomed to go around in circles.

This all got me thinking and it got to a point where I started writing my own thoughts on the subjects down in an attempt to keep track of them. This has now morphed into a formatted document. I'm not the talkative type so have never felt the need to join up and take part in the discussions taking place on here but since these forums have led me to write this document I feel I should post it here as someone else may find it interesting, perhaps even inspiring a train of thought in them as your posts have in me.

I'm not sure where to post it so I've chosen this thread as it looked as good any other to me. If any of the mods disagree I harbour no ill will if they want to move or delete it.

Welcome aboard PIrOed

Your pdf is a massive first post - thank you!

 

[Anzacday]

I'm not sure where to post it so I've chosen this thread as it looked as good any other to me. If any of the mods disagree I harbour no ill will if they want to move or delete it.

Welcome aboard PIrOed

Your pdf is a massive first post - thank you!

Sure is and I'm not sure how we do it the justice it deserves.

 

[Maggie5]

I've been reading these forums for a while and what's most garnered my interest has been the discussions around topics such as team selection and game plan. Particularly when posters have been arguing from completely different starting points without acknowledging it and hence doomed to go around in circles.

This all got me thinking and it got to a point where I started writing my own thoughts on the subjects down in an attempt to keep track of them. This has now morphed into a formatted document. I'm not the talkative type so have never felt the need to join up and take part in the discussions taking place on here but since these forums have led me to write this document I feel I should post it here as someone else may find it interesting, perhaps even inspiring a train of thought in them as your posts have in me.

I'm not sure where to post it so I've chosen this thread as it looked as good any other to me. If any of the mods disagree I harbour no ill will if they want to move or delete it.

How does our current list compare to the attributes you have identified for each position?

 

[Magpie Girl]

Welcome to our new poster PIrOed and his fantastic report

 

[doodles98]

Good work PIrOed . I think you are missing "good kick for goal" as a required attribute/skill for a full forward. (indeed it's got to be a preferred attribute for all forwards/mids as well.

 

[nahnah]

Like this a lot and I usually skip over long winded posts

 

[jmac70]

I've been reading these forums for a while and what's most garnered my interest has been the discussions around topics such as team selection and game plan. Particularly when posters have been arguing from completely different starting points without acknowledging it and hence doomed to go around in circles.

This all got me thinking and it got to a point where I started writing my own thoughts on the subjects down in an attempt to keep track of them. This has now morphed into a formatted document. I'm not the talkative type so have never felt the need to join up and take part in the discussions taking place on here but since these forums have led me to write this document I feel I should post it here as someone else may find it interesting, perhaps even inspiring a train of thought in them as your posts have in me.

I'm not sure where to post it so I've chosen this thread as it looked as good any other to me. If any of the mods disagree I harbour no ill will if they want to move or delete it.

Just wow. Will find the time to read your very impressive analysis. Awesome work!

 

[left at home]

great first post and thread, great work

 

[jmac70]

PIrOed's post to like ratio could set a new BF record.

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Huge and terrific first post.
Welcome aboard

 

[Apex36]

PIrOed's post to like ratio could set a new BF record.

Nah, can't ever see him breaking the record Reece McKenzie set with his thank you post on the Richmond board after retiring. Solid first post though!

 

[76woodenspooners]

I watched the Sydney Derby tonight and couldn't help but notice that AFL has adopted some of the strategies from soccer.

Especially the patiently passing around the back to transfer play to the other side (or back again), or to change the angles up going into attack - they're barely distinguishable from soccer.

 

[the_champ_2004]

One thing I will say about your offensive forward half structures is you've gone for 'building a wall'. This would get cut open very easily as a straight line of players is easy to run past.

If you scattered these players to make more of a zig zag you'd have more success at locking in the play.

Build a wall is hands down the worst thing I can ever hear at the footy and it kills junior footballers and their development. Half of them don't know what they're doing or why they're doing it, they've just been told to do it.

Also I assume with you defensive forward half structures you wouldn't expect full back to be in that position? In today's game, two kicks away from the footy in too far away, three kicks away is useless.

 

[76woodenspooners]

One thing I will say about your offensive forward half structures is you've gone for 'building a wall'. This would get cut open very easily as a straight line of players is easy to run past.

If you scattered these players to make more of a zig zag you'd have more success at locking in the play.

Build a wall is hands down the worst thing I can ever hear at the footy and it kills junior footballers and their development. Half of them don't know what they're doing or why they're doing it, they've just been told to do it.

Or they've copied it from soccer, which has the offside rule to protect a straight line.

Also I assume with you defensive forward half structures you wouldn't expect full back to be in that position? In today's game, two kicks away from the footy in too far away, three kicks away is useless.

+1

 

[PIrOed]

How does our current list compare to the attributes you have identified for each position?

In terms of first choice players every role is covered except centre half forward.

In terms of depth the back line is stacked and they have a full compliment of in/out mids. With the delisting of Goodyear they're probably one short in the inside department but I assume that is a case of making room for Callum Brown. Obviously if Witts leaves they will also need another ruck. I see three players I like as wingman in Sidebottom, Varcoe and Phillips but they could use a couple more as an injury to one of them leaves the team light on and is also short a yard in terms of pace. Up forward as stated centre half forward is a problem with Moore the only real good option but he is better suited to playing full forward imo. There's probably room for another player in both the forward poacket and utility roles. The only two roles in the forward line I'd consider to have adequate depth on the list are the full forward and the gound level defensive role. At full forward you'd have Moore and Cox which in my opinion apart from being inexperienced is fine. At ground level you have Blair and Broomhead with Greenwood able to cover from the midfield if both were unavailable, which is good depth even if not a particularly exciting line up for most fans.

I hope that was what you were looking for. If you want I could list each role with the names of the players I think would suit.

 

[Maggie5]

In terms of first choice players every role is covered except centre half forward.

In terms of depth the back line is stacked and they have a full compliment of in/out mids. With the delisting of Goodyear they're probably one short in the inside department but I assume that is a case of making room for Callum Brown. Obviously if Witts leaves they will also need another ruck. I see three players I like as wingman in Sidebottom, Varcoe and Phillips but they could use a couple more as an injury to one of them leaves the team light on and is also short a yard in terms of pace. Up forward as stated centre half forward is a problem with Moore the only real good option but he is better suited to playing full forward imo. There's probably room for another player in both the forward poacket and utility roles. The only two roles in the forward line I'd consider to have adequate depth on the list are the full forward and the gound level defensive role. At full forward you'd have Moore and Cox which in my opinion apart from being inexperienced is fine. At ground level you have Blair and Broomhead with Greenwood able to cover from the midfield if both were unavailable, which is good depth even if not a particularly exciting line up for most fans.

I hope that was what you were looking for. If you want I could list each role with the names of the players I think would suit.

Thanks, for the reply.
Will ponder...

 

[PIrOed]

One thing I will say about your offensive forward half structures is you've gone for 'building a wall'. This would get cut open very easily as a straight line of players is easy to run past.

If you scattered these players to make more of a zig zag you'd have more success at locking in the play.

Build a wall is hands down the worst thing I can ever hear at the footy and it kills junior footballers and their development. Half of them don't know what they're doing or why they're doing it, they've just been told to do it.

On this I wholeheartedly agree. This highlights the problem with using a single still image to try and communicate a dynamic structure. I tried to use the colour coding to overcome it but I appear to have failed at that.

In general positions marked green are intended as resting points for a player rather than some rigid position they must stand in. For example in that structure the full and centre half forwards would not stand stationary in the goal square. As for the midfield positions you pointed out, assuming for instance the ball is in the hands of the centre half back, the intention is that of the six of them some would hold those positions, some would offer leads to the ball carrier and the others would make shallow incursions into the 50 where the opportunity presents. As far as I'm concerned the defensive merits of these positions comes from bodies occupying space, anything else is a bonus. The six defenders are the defensive heroes here, my philosophy being when deep in attack thats what most the players should be focused on.

Also I assume with you defensive forward half structures you wouldn't expect full back to be in that position? In today's game, two kicks away from the footy in too far away, three kicks away is useless.

Would I expect the full back to be standing in the middle of the defensive 50 when the ball is down the other end? No.
Would I expect the full back to be standing an opponent or standing at the back of the centre square, whichever is closest to the defensive goal line? Yes.

I get the point that if a player is two kicks or more from the play they are not able to have any impact on the play. However they can have an impact on the next play. The clearest example of the utility of defenders being that far behind play is when trying to solve the problem of out the back goals, the sort that Adelaide turned into an art form this year. If you look at the Geelong vs Adelaide game at skilled from late in the year even the commentators picked up on the Geelong defense holding it's shape in the back half just like a soccer team. This stymied Adelaide's attack brilliantly.
More generally free space is valuable to an offense and dangerous to a defense. In the absence of an offside rule to protect you, you have to decide if you leave that space behind your defense and back yourself to prevent your opponent getting behind you or do you seperate your defense leaving the space between a first and second line. Personally I'm a fan of hammer and anvil tactics so I prefer the second option. The plan is that in situations where the opposition gets out the back of the first line of defense they are not greeted by wide expanses and blue sky beckoning them like a siren song to an open goal, but rather another line of defense(the anvil), hopefully forcing them to second guess and hold up allowing the players further up the field(the hammer) to fall back on them. At best effecting a turn over, at worst getting back to set up a proper defense and forcing the opposition into a slower and more thoughtful forward foray.
Therefore from my perspective it's not a question of whether those defenders are too deep but rather how many should be that deep. On that question I'm not particularly fussed one way or the other as it boils down to a question of personal preference with the right and wrong answer being decided by upfield structures rather than those where the ball isn't.