Did forward pressure dropp off slightly?
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4940
- Joined: Fri 05 Jun 2009 3:05pm
- Has thanked: 343 times
- Been thanked: 491 times
Did forward pressure dropp off slightly?
Haven't got any stats to back this up, and I may be completely wrong. Just a gut feel that our fwd line intensity/tackling at times on Friday night isn't quite what it was at the start of the year. I noticed that many of Carlton's leading stat getters were backman. I reckon they were able to start many of their attacks from half back. Bower in particular became dangerouos in this respect in the second half. I know teams often double up on Riewoldt, however I thought at the start of the year the mark of our team was that teams couldn't get the ball out of our fwd line. It appeared that the ball came flying out on more than a a few occasions on Friday night.
Is it just my perception, or does anyone have stats to back up or shoot down what I have posted?
Is it just my perception, or does anyone have stats to back up or shoot down what I have posted?
I think our pressure all over the ground has dropped off since the Collingwood game, but we've still been good enough to win games against not so great opposition. The break has come at a good time and it would be nice to see it back up after the break because our back 6 don't look so great if it keeps going in the D50.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18635
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1979 times
- Been thanked: 865 times
Re: Did forward pressure dropp off slightly?
we missed gwilt ... or at least someone playing that defensive forward role.
i'm a bit puzzled as to why no-one was assigned it, since our defence is jammed full of tallish guys who can play.
zac was moved forward in the last quarter and kicked the sealer. he'd probably kick more goals than jimmy. whether he'd lock the ball into the forward line as well as jimmy i don't know.
i'm a bit puzzled as to why no-one was assigned it, since our defence is jammed full of tallish guys who can play.
zac was moved forward in the last quarter and kicked the sealer. he'd probably kick more goals than jimmy. whether he'd lock the ball into the forward line as well as jimmy i don't know.
Last edited by bigcarl on Sun 14 Jun 2009 1:56pm, edited 1 time in total.
- saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30096
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 1234 times
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18635
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1979 times
- Been thanked: 865 times
max's return has led to some structural problems.saintsRrising wrote:We played 3 big talls in the forawrd line too often as the ruckman was sent forward..
Such a lumbering set-up hurts your ability to apply forward pressure when the ball spills or the opposition have won the ball.
we went in with five tall defenders and two tall forwards.
would four and three be a better mixture do you think?
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4940
- Joined: Fri 05 Jun 2009 3:05pm
- Has thanked: 343 times
- Been thanked: 491 times
I think someone who doesn't deserve to be dropped will have to make way soon. Either that or play Goose/Blake type player as a second ruckman. This hurts us in the stoppages though. The dilemma that I reckon the club wasn't counting on is the good form of Zac. I reckon they thought that once Max was ok that Zac would just make way for him. To Zac's credit he has made it almost impossible to drop him, but the consequence is that we're a fraction top heavy.
- saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30096
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 1234 times
Two?? I thought we often played 3 against the Blues..Roo, Kosi and a resting ruckman?bigcarl wrote:max's return has led to some structural problems.saintsRrising wrote:We played 3 big talls in the forawrd line too often as the ruckman was sent forward..
Such a lumbering set-up hurts your ability to apply forward pressure when the ball spills or the opposition have won the ball.
we went in with five tall defenders and two tall forwards.
would four and three be a better mixture do you think?
Only time it worked with three was late in the game when the more mobile Zac crept forward and that was helped by his opponent slipping over.
I think our backline lacked one player with good offensive skills.
However even with that the forward structure was not right.
IMO we tried to exloit a perceived "weak" Blues backline with too much height and it backfired.
Playing 3 tall forwards inveriably does not work well.
We needa medoum forward...and npta regular third tall.
Yes a third tall can run forward on ocassion....but having 3 talls there for two much of the game hursts forward pressure and most teams will not play 3 tall backs and the extra nimble player will run off.
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18635
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1979 times
- Been thanked: 865 times
we play five - zac, blake, max, gilbert and fisher. six if you include the ruckman dropping back.saintsRrising wrote:most teams will not play 3 tall backs and the extra nimble player will run off.
what i would do is move gilbert forward to play gwilt's role. sammy is a tall who plays like a medium ... no mug when it hits the ground and very fast.
only problem is it would rob us of run out of defence (which is a concern in a backline that contains hudghton, blake and a lesser offender in dawson).
putting max back in has upset the balance a bit, wouldn't you agree?
as has been mentioned, one possible way to get the extra tall in is to use blake or even dawson (who seems to be able to play just about anywhere) as second ruck.
that would enable us to bring in another runner.
Good point, I forgot about that. Having McEvoy in there is like having Steven King in there. Damn he is slow.saintsRrising wrote:We played 3 big talls in the forawrd line too often as the ruckman was sent forward..
Such a lumbering set-up hurts your ability to apply forward pressure when the ball spills or the opposition have won the ball.
-
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 2927
- Joined: Mon 28 Apr 2008 4:56pm
- Location: victoria
- Has thanked: 264 times
- Been thanked: 121 times
Looks more and more like the 2ndruck needs to be more mobile and flexable,other sides are starting to look at this Brisb...Brennan@ Clarke,Carl Kruise....? rich...Vickery WC...Natanuts,maybe time to get Stanley on the board .If we are slow with 2 bigs atm ,cant see a Blake etc getting us through a final if our 1st ruck goes down
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23243
- Joined: Sat 13 Mar 2004 11:44pm
- Has thanked: 741 times
- Been thanked: 1798 times
thats the problem then you rob your forward set up of struture.Cro wrote:Wouldn't Kozi then fill in?bergsone wrote:cant see a Blake etc getting us through a final if our 1st ruck goes down
Kosi also is good round the ground - horrible tap ruckman and nimble Paddy Ryders would climb over him all day winning taps.
“Yeah….nah””
- saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30096
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 1234 times
You misunderstand me..by TALL I mean 193+ and particularly when 2 of them are lumberers of over 195+.bigcarl wrote:we play five - zac, blake, max, gilbert and fisher. six if you include the ruckman dropping back.saintsRrising wrote:most teams will not play 3 tall backs and the extra nimble player will run off.
.
The 5 you named are mainly very mobile....
No opposition will have two lumbering backmen....and we do not either.
Our tallest and least mobile is Zac at 195..and he is reasonably nimble for his size.
Gilbert is exceptionally nimble for his size.
So we do not play 5 TALL backs.
If you had 3 Riewoldts yes you could play all 3 up forward...as Roo is very mobile.
But you cannot play a forward line of Roo, Kosi and Ben/Gardi.
Therefore if we have Kosi and a ruckman both playing as forwards we lose ability to apply forward pressure.
You might remember my posts early last season when I was against playing 3 tall forwards when 2 are lumberers. My opinion on this has not changed.
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18635
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1979 times
- Been thanked: 865 times
the backline looks a bit light on for run with max back in it. he's a great spoiler, but lacks a bit offensively imo.saintsRrising wrote:we do not play 5 TALL backs.bigcarl wrote:we play five - zac, blake, max, gilbert and fisher. six if you include the ruckman dropping back.saintsRrising wrote:most teams will not play 3 tall backs and the extra nimble player will run off.
not sure that we can have all of him, dawson and blake in the same backline and, having thought about it, i don't know whether we can afford to lose the run of either gilbert or fisher from the back six either.
none of dawson, blake or max deserve to be dropped, but we probably need to think about giving one of the above a different role.
max is pretty much a one position player nowadays, so you can't move him.
i'd be tempted to try zac as second ruck/drifting forward. since mcevoy (who will be okay down the track) is who he would replace i'm not sure you'd actually lose a lot. blake to second ruck is another option that i'm sure will be explored.
zac apparently played a bit of his junior football as a ruckman. he has a good leap, good hands and uses his body very well.
that would allow us to bring in another runner (or jimmy gwilt), which i thought we probably missed against the blues.
bj would be the best option in the third forward role, i've no doubt. he's brilliant wherever he plays but whether we can afford to use him as a forward is something for the powers that be at the club.
we did miss jimmy's forward pressure and i like him as a player. the only drawback with him as third forward is that he doesn't contribute much in the way of goals.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9142
- Joined: Wed 29 Jun 2005 10:39pm
- Location: A distant beach
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 437 times
One big thing I noticed on Friday night, in yet another win, was that we missed Gwilt's body work in the forward line..and although he doesn't kick a lot of goals, he does good work in keeping the ball in the forward line. I think RL may have been trying some new things out by dropping Gwilt, but I think he will be back next game.
- BAM! (shhhh)
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2134
- Joined: Thu 24 May 2007 5:23pm
- Location: The little voice inside your head
Don't know that the pressure's dropped (we still had something like 67 tackles), I think teams are simply more ready to fight the good fight. Note the focus many teams take on getting to HB and only then attacking the middle with handballs to facilitate the forward switch, or performing a normal switch.
Also, Ratten's move to "tag" Fisher had some good results for them, including him being ineffectual and simply creating crowding when Lyon sent him forward.
The big differences I saw in St Kilda form:
- some easy marks missed in defense.
- outside groundball, Carlton's 2nd tier players were fantastic.
- O'Hailpin beat Blake.
Big things from Cartlon:
- young inexperienced defense was fantastic.
- small generally outside players stepped up.
Teams were never going to play into our hands (ala the 2 Adelaide sides) for the entire year - what we do need to extract from the forward pressure is advantage to be taken in defense. On Friday the opportunities for mark and rebound were too often missed, so instead of rebound, the ball spills out the back of the zone.
Were I going to be concerned, it would be that the two teams likely to be able to take advantage of a game like that are the Cats and Dogs, who have the compliment of inside and outside players to create the scenario again... but the biggest problems are resolved if the defense catches the ball (likely), and/or competes better when the balls at ground level before the onballers arrive (needs some work).
Also, Ratten's move to "tag" Fisher had some good results for them, including him being ineffectual and simply creating crowding when Lyon sent him forward.
The big differences I saw in St Kilda form:
- some easy marks missed in defense.
- outside groundball, Carlton's 2nd tier players were fantastic.
- O'Hailpin beat Blake.
Big things from Cartlon:
- young inexperienced defense was fantastic.
- small generally outside players stepped up.
Teams were never going to play into our hands (ala the 2 Adelaide sides) for the entire year - what we do need to extract from the forward pressure is advantage to be taken in defense. On Friday the opportunities for mark and rebound were too often missed, so instead of rebound, the ball spills out the back of the zone.
Were I going to be concerned, it would be that the two teams likely to be able to take advantage of a game like that are the Cats and Dogs, who have the compliment of inside and outside players to create the scenario again... but the biggest problems are resolved if the defense catches the ball (likely), and/or competes better when the balls at ground level before the onballers arrive (needs some work).
"Everything comes to he who hustles while he waits"
- Henry Ford
- Henry Ford
- markp
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 15583
- Joined: Mon 26 Mar 2007 4:22pm
- Has thanked: 63 times
- Been thanked: 82 times
Best summary I've seen yet. Spot on.BAM! (shhhh) wrote:Don't know that the pressure's dropped (we still had something like 67 tackles), I think teams are simply more ready to fight the good fight. Note the focus many teams take on getting to HB and only then attacking the middle with handballs to facilitate the forward switch, or performing a normal switch.
Also, Ratten's move to "tag" Fisher had some good results for them, including him being ineffectual and simply creating crowding when Lyon sent him forward.
The big differences I saw in St Kilda form:
- some easy marks missed in defense.
- outside groundball, Carlton's 2nd tier players were fantastic.
- O'Hailpin beat Blake.
Big things from Cartlon:
- young inexperienced defense was fantastic.
- small generally outside players stepped up.
Teams were never going to play into our hands (ala the 2 Adelaide sides) for the entire year - what we do need to extract from the forward pressure is advantage to be taken in defense. On Friday the opportunities for mark and rebound were too often missed, so instead of rebound, the ball spills out the back of the zone.
Were I going to be concerned, it would be that the two teams likely to be able to take advantage of a game like that are the Cats and Dogs, who have the compliment of inside and outside players to create the scenario again... but the biggest problems are resolved if the defense catches the ball (likely), and/or competes better when the balls at ground level before the onballers arrive (needs some work).
- saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30096
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 1234 times
Agree.BAM! (shhhh) wrote:
Big things from Cartlon:
- young inexperienced defense was fantastic.
- small generally outside players stepped up.
.
Whether we like it or not...the cold hard fact is that the Blues are now stepping up asa football team with their fringe and younger players improving.
Even their Irish experiment played quitea good game and would seem to have at last come to grips with the oval ball.
Some of the young "unknown" Blues are actually quite decent players.
This the best I have seen the Blues play against us fora long long time.
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
- saintsRrising
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 30096
- Joined: Mon 15 Mar 2004 11:07am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 711 times
- Been thanked: 1234 times
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 25303
- Joined: Tue 01 Feb 2005 4:25pm
- Location: Trump Tower
- Has thanked: 142 times
- Been thanked: 284 times
- saint patrick
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4338
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 5:20pm
- Location: mt.martha
The blues can't play any better.We definitely can and WE wonsaintsRrising wrote:Agree.BAM! (shhhh) wrote:
Big things from Cartlon:
- young inexperienced defense was fantastic.
- small generally outside players stepped up.
.
Whether we like it or not...the cold hard fact is that the Blues are now stepping up asa football team with their fringe and younger players improving.
Even their Irish experiment played quitea good game and would seem to have at last come to grips with the oval ball.
Some of the young "unknown" Blues are actually quite decent players.
This the best I have seen the Blues play against us fora long long time.
Will own Carlton for some time yet
Never take a backward step even to gain momentum.....
'It's OK to have the capabilities and abilities, but you've got to get it done." Terry Daniher 05
"We have beauty in our captain and we have a true leader in our coach. Our time will come"
Thinline.Post 09 Grand final.
'It's OK to have the capabilities and abilities, but you've got to get it done." Terry Daniher 05
"We have beauty in our captain and we have a true leader in our coach. Our time will come"
Thinline.Post 09 Grand final.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4940
- Joined: Fri 05 Jun 2009 3:05pm
- Has thanked: 343 times
- Been thanked: 491 times
Bam - the reason I started this thread was b/c I knew someone would be able to figure out why we aren't quite as effectual as we were at the start of the year. I couldn't put my finger on it, but it appears you have. Thanks mate.BAM! (shhhh) wrote:Don't know that the pressure's dropped (we still had something like 67 tackles), I think teams are simply more ready to fight the good fight. Note the focus many teams take on getting to HB and only then attacking the middle with handballs to facilitate the forward switch, or performing a normal switch.
Also, Ratten's move to "tag" Fisher had some good results for them, including him being ineffectual and simply creating crowding when Lyon sent him forward.
The big differences I saw in St Kilda form:
- some easy marks missed in defense.
- outside groundball, Carlton's 2nd tier players were fantastic.
- O'Hailpin beat Blake.
Big things from Cartlon:
- young inexperienced defense was fantastic.
- small generally outside players stepped up.
Teams were never going to play into our hands (ala the 2 Adelaide sides) for the entire year - what we do need to extract from the forward pressure is advantage to be taken in defense. On Friday the opportunities for mark and rebound were too often missed, so instead of rebound, the ball spills out the back of the zone.
Were I going to be concerned, it would be that the two teams likely to be able to take advantage of a game like that are the Cats and Dogs, who have the compliment of inside and outside players to create the scenario again... but the biggest problems are resolved if the defense catches the ball (likely), and/or competes better when the balls at ground level before the onballers arrive (needs some work).
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1357
- Joined: Wed 07 Apr 2004 8:42pm