Rd 9: Post Game Pain: Carlton vs. North Melbourne

[cookie2]

Thanks Cookie - I was almost sure it was White on Petrie, but just wanted to be backed-up on that. In that case, White played an excellent game it has to be said.

Anyone else disappointed in our midfield setup for centre bounces? Surely we had to play tight man-on-man, but I did not see this tactic at any stage & thought our coaches got it horribly wrong in that regard. They knew Goldstein would have free reign at the centre bounces, but I don't think Bolton & co. hatched a good enough plan to counter that.....thought it was Bolton's biggest fail so far this year (not the result, but the inability to formulate a tactic to counter a dominant opposing ruckman).

BB is far from stupid so I guess the only conclusion we can draw atm is that the set up is a WIP that we haven't yet mastered or perfected?? Just guessing but hopefully we'll improve over time. Things under development can sometimes fall apart under stress and North's mids are just the class of guys who can apply that stress in spades in terms of probing to find weak points.

[Thryleon]

team defence should start in our fwd line,easy turnover cause no structure going fwd so the opp just run it out ,think all the easy goals nth got and even collingwood game

Pretty easy to blame the forwardline for an easy turnover.

If we lowered our eyes and hit targets rather than just bombing it long, we might actually be able to keep it in there.

How often did our "forward entry" end up going straight to a 3 on 1 contest against us with Robbie Tarrant taking a very easy mark?

The answer isnt to do with what our forwards were not doing, and very much to do with the lack of intelligence in our ball use.

[LP]

Pretty easy to blame the forwardline for an easy turnover.

If we lowered our eyes and hit targets rather than just bombing it long, we might actually be able to keep it in there.

How often did our "forward entry" end up going straight to a 3 on 1 contest against us with Robbie Tarrant taking a very easy mark?

The answer isnt just to do with what our forwards were not doing, and very much to do with the lack of intelligence in our ball use.

I sort of agree with an edit!

I think the forward line is weak, but the ball use is worse!

Even with Buckley out of the side, as he is often a horrendous decision maker and ball user, we haven't really improved.

Players like Lamb, Plowman and Sumner should improve over the next two or three seasons, the older players it is already too late for them I am afraid.

PS; I am not sure Weitering can get any better than he already is, having said that we haven't really seen him use his feet with confidence yet. Wait until he starts hitting 40-50m bullet like passes and 70m shots at goal. He did it at junior level and in the TAC Cup but we haven't seen much of it as yet, he is playing it safe and also his team-mates are not switched on to the range the kids leg has! 60m away they are often not watching or leading!

[Gointocarlton]

DELETED

[cimm1979]

Tim Clarke - Midfield
John Barker - stoppages

Bolts thinks they're going well.

[crashlander]

Bolts thinks they're going well.

Clarke and Barker MAY be going well, but that doesn't mean we don't have problems in this area.
It has been VERY clear from Day 1 that we have a new midfield setup. In particular, it is clear that we are working on getting the ball out quickly, and we are not worrying so much about stopping our opponents getting the ball out (the opposite to what things were like under Malthouse), an almost recklessly attacking approach compared to our old defensive mindset. Guys have roles there and they are working to a plan. You could see it in both the seniors and the NBs: the setup is distinct and designed to have someone who is quick and can kick the ball well and long to get the pill. It appears to be a high risk - high reward strategy and it definitely didn't work early in the piece.
It was most obvious to me in the Suns game, where Ablett and Hall picked off Murphy and Gibbs as they handballed to where they expected players to be and they were not there.
It also depended on the rucks at least breaking even, managing to minimize the taps to advantage that the opposition got. Like Hawthorn, it didn't matter so much that we did not get the tap, as long as the opposition did not get dominance from it.

Therein lies most of our problems.
Our ruckmen have made significant improvements, but they are not yet doing everything that the coaches want them to do. That our senior ruckmen have been dropping like flies does not help the team or the centre square structures.
For example, early in the season Kreuzer was being effected the way he was trying to effect others: his taps were being interfered with at the centre bounce and did not go quite in the right spot or at the right speed. The GC ruckman was particularly good at doing this. And against Richmond neither Kreuzer nor Philips could get on top of Hampson, who managed to direct his taps very well. In the Sydney game things were like the Suns game: our midfield possessions were being interfered with, leading to fumbles and tackles, or being picked off, leading to uninterrupted clearances going the other way.
Our mids are getting better at our new structures: they have improved their clearance work a lot and no not get picked off like they were. Kreuzer and Phillips were doing a better job and gaining some confidence while they were doing it, leading to more marks around the ground.
Unfortunately  injury then stuffed us up. Gorringe tried, but he was not able to effect Goldstein enough. Goldstein had a huge number of taps to advantage, which left us open and vulnerable.
Our mids came back well, but the Roos' structures were going perfectly to plan because of their total ruck dominance.

I do not expect to have the same problems this week, Geelong's ruck combination is not as good as Goldstein is. However, they are likely to get first use of the ball and they do have some quality midfielders.
I am more fearful of playing West Coast. NicNat is as good a ruckman as anyone, and more athletic than most. When he gets taps, they are usually to advantage. It is rare competing ruckmen interfere with his taps: he either gets them or he doesn't. That is something we do not yet have the ability to combat.

Nor are we alone. When Hawthorn had their ruck woes at the start of the season, they lost. Their young ruckman could not interfere with his opponents successfully. Their opponents got the ball out cleanly and beat them. The next week Hawthorn got a ruckman back, and they managed to hold on to win. They did the trick 3 times in 3 close ones.
Mind you, Hawthorn are also very dependent on Mitchell. But that is another tale.

Barker and Clarke still have a fair bit of work to do to straighten out our midfield structures. I won't cry for them to abandon their plans yet, but they have to modify them to suit what we can put out on the field. That I have not seen yet.

[cookie2]

@Crash

An interesting read Crash, thanks for your efforts. On the subject though of BB modifying his plans to suit the cattle, if I understand him at all I think that he will pursue his plans relentlessly and will eventually move on those players that can't execute them properly. I just don't think he will be prepared to compromise.

[Thryleon]

Clarke and Barker MAY be going well, but that doesn't mean we don't have problems in this area.
It has been VERY clear from Day 1 that we have a new midfield setup. In particular, it is clear that we are working on getting the ball out quickly, and we are not worrying so much about stopping our opponents getting the ball out (the opposite to what things were like under Malthouse), an almost recklessly attacking approach compared to our old defensive mindset. Guys have roles there and they are working to a plan. You could see it in both the seniors and the NBs: the setup is distinct and designed to have someone who is quick and can kick the ball well and long to get the pill. It appears to be a high risk - high reward strategy and it definitely didn't work early in the piece.
It was most obvious to me in the Suns game, where Ablett and Hall picked off Murphy and Gibbs as they handballed to where they expected players to be and they were not there.
It also depended on the rucks at least breaking even, managing to minimize the taps to advantage that the opposition got. Like Hawthorn, it didn't matter so much that we did not get the tap, as long as the opposition did not get dominance from it.

Therein lies most of our problems.
Our ruckmen have made significant improvements, but they are not yet doing everything that the coaches want them to do. That our senior ruckmen have been dropping like flies does not help the team or the centre square structures.
For example, early in the season Kreuzer was being effected the way he was trying to effect others: his taps were being interfered with at the centre bounce and did not go quite in the right spot or at the right speed. The GC ruckman was particularly good at doing this. And against Richmond neither Kreuzer nor Philips could get on top of Hampson, who managed to direct his taps very well. In the Sydney game things were like the Suns game: our midfield possessions were being interfered with, leading to fumbles and tackles, or being picked off, leading to uninterrupted clearances going the other way.
Our mids are getting better at our new structures: they have improved their clearance work a lot and no not get picked off like they were. Kreuzer and Phillips were doing a better job and gaining some confidence while they were doing it, leading to more marks around the ground.
Unfortunately  injury then stuffed us up. Gorringe tried, but he was not able to effect Goldstein enough. Goldstein had a huge number of taps to advantage, which left us open and vulnerable.
Our mids came back well, but the Roos' structures were going perfectly to plan because of their total ruck dominance.

I do not expect to have the same problems this week, Geelong's ruck combination is not as good as Goldstein is. However, they are likely to get first use of the ball and they do have some quality midfielders.
I am more fearful of playing West Coast. NicNat is as good a ruckman as anyone, and more athletic than most. When he gets taps, they are usually to advantage. It is rare competing ruckmen interfere with his taps: he either gets them or he doesn't. That is something we do not yet have the ability to combat.

Nor are we alone. When Hawthorn had their ruck woes at the start of the season, they lost. Their young ruckman could not interfere with his opponents successfully. Their opponents got the ball out cleanly and beat them. The next week Hawthorn got a ruckman back, and they managed to hold on to win. They did the trick 3 times in 3 close ones.
Mind you, Hawthorn are also very dependent on Mitchell. But that is another tale.

Barker and Clarke still have a fair bit of work to do to straighten out our midfield structures. I won't cry for them to abandon their plans yet, but they have to modify them to suit what we can put out on the field. That I have not seen yet.

Where you are building a team, and clearly focussing on recruiting new blood and transitioning game styles you dont change it up every week unless you do so by design to see what limitations you have in your group.

Realistically though, you teach players to play your way which involves accepting they will get it wrong often, right sometimes, but it wont improve without repeating the process.

You can accept that you don't have the cattle and change the plan but that may effect everything else accordingly resulting in a year where you changed plans to something that isnt what you want to be doing moving forward, and is completely counter productive because it fits the team better.  Thats a waste of time IMHO.

Realistically, the coach should stick to how he wants to play and we all need to accept that whether or not we are suited to it, is irrelevant as players will learn in time how it works and react accordingly and if they don't learn or wont play the way the coach plays, then in the market they are free to find somewhere else that will play the way they want to.

If we believe we have the right coach, then we need to accept that any stubborn sticking to a particular way of playing is for the longer term benefit at the expense of now in order for everyone to learn what to do accordingly.

[crashlander]

@Crash

An interesting read Crash, thanks for your efforts. On the subject though of BB modifying his plans to suit the cattle, if I understand him at all I think that he will pursue his plans relentlessly and will eventually move on those players that can't execute them properly. I just don't think he will be prepared to compromise.

Looks a bit that way to me. I am not complaining.

[LP]

Looks a bit that way to me. I am not complaining.

I see it that way, and keep in mind for years we won clearances and lost everywhere else!