AFLW 2024 - Round 6 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Dont worry if we win this week I will think of a way.
Must have hit a NERVE with that one but the truth does hurtThanks for the instructions on what we can and can't post
Look at it this way we lost lost to Geelong, pies and Saints in the 1st half of the year.
Then we beat Geel and pies round 21&22, lose to geelong in 1st finals game, now we must beat lions, win that & we pay back Saints in pre-lim!!
Into grand final to pay back Geelong again!!! then again it could be a payback to Adelaide for 97-98!!!!
) because you don't have the same amount of lateral space to work with, plus the Saints are insanely fit. But I believe it's through covering more distance in trying to get out of trouble, and through sheer pace. Have a look at the sides who have pushed them this year:
If you make the prelim you will push St Kilda. I believe there is a weakness in their running game that can be exposed on the wider MCG ground, and that is far-reaching ball movement to get out of trouble. Collingwood couldn't do it today because they lack the necessary running capacity (losing Pendlebury didn't help); that's the one thing you've got in spades. This is my take on how the Saints work:
The way the saints force turnovers is through something of a reworking of Adelaide's gameplan from 2005-06, the perfect counter you might say. If you remember, the Crows employed a gameplan that sweated on the opposition to kick down the line to a contest, thus forcing turnovers so they could rebound the footy. This was a gameplan tailored to suit a side without a lot of leg speed - it allowed them time to gather where the footy was to be kicked and then to spread and punish a side on the rebound. It was West Coast that cracked the code in round 17 of 2006 by employing a handball-friendly gameplan - rather than being baited into kicking they ran in waves and sliced through Adelaide's pack of runners with pace and relentless workrate. The key was a leg speed advantage - the Crows tried to close their space but they just couldn't keep up. At the time it was also simply accepted that teams kicked a lot more than they handballed; the coaching staff wasn't at all ready for such a course of action from the Eagles and as a result an 80+ point belting was handed out.
St Kilda's gameplan uses a bit from column A and a bit from column B - they not only sweat on a side to kick to a contest (where they cluster their defenders and rebound the ball), they sweat on them to dish quickfire handballs around in a relatively confined space to try to run themselves out of trouble; they obviously sat down over the pre season, analysed how AFL sides spread to run and coached their players to cover the spread. Anyway, while the opposition is covering little territory in trying to get out of trouble with handball, the St Kilda midfielders have time to reach the contest, close the space down and either force a tackle turnover or make the opposition kick to a nest of defenders.
How do you combat this? Well on a ground like Etihad it's not easy (well it's not "easy" anywhere
Essendon in round 8 - extremely pacy side who like to throw caution to the wind and attack. The Saints struggled to cover this. 9 point margin.
Carlton round 12 - again a lot of runners with leg speed across the ground. 9 point margin.
Geelong round 14 - notorious power running side. 6 point win.
Sydney round 18 - Wide SCG ground. 1 point win.
Essendon round 20 - Again, pace, run, attack. 2 point loss.
North Melbourne round 21 - I didn't watch this game all that closely but I am interested to know where they fell down. Almost certainly a matter of being off the boil and nothing more. 5 point loss
Imo there is a pattern here. The saints are a very, VERY strong outfit and any weakness will take brilliant execution, workrate and class to expose, but on what I've seen I do put stock into them being more vulnerable on the MCG than at Etihad.
I can never understand the pyschology of some bf posters who don't care about a thread topic but take the time out to post on the thread to say that they don't care about it. It has always intrigued me I have to say. I can't understand the logic of it, but no problem, life is better for the world of mysterious thoughts from the soul that creep into our heart.
BTW welcome to the Bulldogs board. Hope you enjoy your posting here
If you make the prelim you will push St Kilda. I believe there is a weakness in their running game that can be exposed on the wider MCG ground, and that is far-reaching ball movement to get out of trouble. Collingwood couldn't do it today because they lack the necessary running capacity (losing Pendlebury didn't help); that's the one thing you've got in spades. This is my take on how the Saints work:
The way the saints force turnovers is through something of a reworking of Adelaide's gameplan from 2005-06, the perfect counter you might say. If you remember, the Crows employed a gameplan that sweated on the opposition to kick down the line to a contest, thus forcing turnovers so they could rebound the footy. This was a gameplan tailored to suit a side without a lot of leg speed - it allowed them time to gather where the footy was to be kicked and then to spread and punish a side on the rebound. It was West Coast that cracked the code in round 17 of 2006 by employing a handball-friendly gameplan - rather than being baited into kicking they ran in waves and sliced through Adelaide's pack of runners with pace and relentless workrate. The key was a leg speed advantage - the Crows tried to close their space but they just couldn't keep up. At the time it was also simply accepted that teams kicked a lot more than they handballed; the coaching staff wasn't at all ready for such a course of action from the Eagles and as a result an 80+ point belting was handed out.
St Kilda's gameplan uses a bit from column A and a bit from column B - they not only sweat on a side to kick to a contest (where they cluster their defenders and rebound the ball), they sweat on them to dish quickfire handballs around in a relatively confined space to try to run themselves out of trouble; they obviously sat down over the pre season, analysed how AFL sides spread to run and coached their players to cover the spread. Anyway, while the opposition is covering little territory in trying to get out of trouble with handball, the St Kilda midfielders have time to reach the contest, close the space down and either force a tackle turnover or make the opposition kick to a nest of defenders.
How do you combat this? Well on a ground like Etihad it's not easy (well it's not "easy" anywhere
Essendon in round 8 - extremely pacy side who like to throw caution to the wind and attack. The Saints struggled to cover this. 9 point margin.
Carlton round 12 - again a lot of runners with leg speed across the ground. 9 point margin.
Geelong round 14 - notorious power running side. 6 point win.
Sydney round 18 - Wide SCG ground. 1 point win.
Essendon round 20 - Again, pace, run, attack. 2 point loss.
North Melbourne round 21 - I didn't watch this game all that closely but I am interested to know where they fell down. Almost certainly a matter of being off the boil and nothing more. 5 point loss
Imo there is a pattern here. The saints are a very, VERY strong outfit and any weakness will take brilliant execution, workrate and class to expose, but on what I've seen I do put stock into them being more vulnerable on the MCG than at Etihad.
Wow
By the way did you find the fault loop in the deathstar and instruct Luke Skywalker on how to blow it up
