Did forward pressure dropp off slightly?

[Moods]

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?

[hAyES]

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.

[bigcarl]

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.

[saintsRrising]

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.

[bigcarl]

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.

max's return has led to some structural problems.

we went in with five tall defenders and two tall forwards.

would four and three be a better mixture do you think?

[Moods]

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]

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.

max's return has led to some structural problems.

we went in with five tall defenders and two tall forwards.

would four and three be a better mixture do you think?

Two?? I thought we often played 3 against the Blues..Roo, Kosi and a resting ruckman?

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.

[bigcarl]

most teams will not play 3 tall backs and the extra nimble player will run off.

we play five - zac, blake, max, gilbert and fisher. six if you include the ruckman dropping back.

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.

[hAyES]

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.

Good point, I forgot about that. Having McEvoy in there is like having Steven King in there. Damn he is slow.

[bergsone]

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

[Cro]

cant see a Blake etc getting us through a final if our 1st ruck goes down

Wouldn't Kozi then fill in?

[Teflon]

cant see a Blake etc getting us through a final if our 1st ruck goes down

Wouldn't Kozi then fill in?

thats the problem then you rob your forward set up of struture.

Kosi also is good round the ground - horrible tap ruckman and nimble Paddy Ryders would climb over him all day winning taps.

[saintsRrising]

most teams will not play 3 tall backs and the extra nimble player will run off.

we play five - zac, blake, max, gilbert and fisher. six if you include the ruckman dropping back.

.

You misunderstand me..by TALL I mean 193+ and particularly when 2 of them are lumberers of over 195+.

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.

[bigcarl]

most teams will not play 3 tall backs and the extra nimble player will run off.

we play five - zac, blake, max, gilbert and fisher. six if you include the ruckman dropping back.

we do not play 5 TALL backs.

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.

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.

[spert]

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)]

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).

[markp]

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).

Best summary I've seen yet. Spot on.

[saintsRrising]

Big things from Cartlon:
- young inexperienced defense was fantastic.
- small generally outside players stepped up.

.

Agree.

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.

[saintsRrising]

Some jave reported that Kosi played with the flu/heavy cold..and if so that may have explained his realtive lack of movement compared to his other games this year.

[saintspremiers]

Milne wasn't much chop - he missed a few weeks and should be back to his best soon.

Milne on fire makes an enormous difference to our forward structure remember!

[saint patrick]

Big things from Cartlon:
- young inexperienced defense was fantastic.
- small generally outside players stepped up.

.

Agree.

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.

The blues can't play any better.We definitely can and WE won

Will own Carlton for some time yet

[Moods]

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).

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.

[aussiejones]

1 Scnieder was good all night
2 Gram especially early .
3 Baker was always in there.

Two things .. I noticed on the replay
..some of our kicks were floaters alowinig time for the op to get to the contest.

.. Our taclkes didnt stick often enough.