Keeping the ball in our forward 50

[samoht]

I don't usually start threads - but, I had to express my thoughts ...

When the ball hits the ground in our F50 from a spillage - we are hardly ever there to pick it up or to apply pressure on the opposition players who are quick to pounce.
It's potentially a 2 goal turn around every time the ball comes straight out.

So we need tenacious, quick, hard tackling players to put the pressure on in our forward 50 - Connellan, Wright, Paton ... play 2 in the F50?
Connellan is surely a better option than the slow smalls we are playing, who have no chance of marking the ball, anyway.

[saynta]

I don't usually start threads - but, I had to express my thoughts ...

When the ball hits the ground in our F50 from a spillage - we are hardly ever there to pick it up or to apply pressure on the opposition players who are quick to pounce.
It's potentially a 2 goal turn around every time the ball comes straight out.

So we need tenacious, quick, hard tackling players to put the pressure on in our forward 50 - Connellan, Wright, Paton ... play 2 in the F50?
Connellan is surely a better option than the slow smalls we are playing, who have no chance of marking the ball, anyway.

The best one we have for that and one of the top in the AFL is unfortunately injured all the time. Minchington.

Yeah but the three you mention should at least be given a go and Wright has improved out of sight.

[Mr Magic]

I'm pretty sure that's what Ben Long was doing with some success before his injury?

Unfortunately his replacement Jack Lonie doesn't seem capable of 'sticking' a tackle and the opposition seem to know it.

[rodgerfox]

I don't usually start threads - but, I had to express my thoughts ...

When the ball hits the ground in our F50 from a spillage - we are hardly ever there to pick it up or to apply pressure on the opposition players who are quick to pounce.
It's potentially a 2 goal turn around every time the ball comes straight out.

So we need tenacious, quick, hard tackling players to put the pressure on in our forward 50 - Connellan, Wright, Paton ... play 2 in the F50?
Connellan is surely a better option than the slow smalls we are playing, who have no chance of marking the ball, anyway.

I think the terrible 'bomb it in' entries are what make it so easy for the opposition to stroll out of defence.

They know exactly where it is going, and set up accordingly.

[samoht]

I think the terrible 'bomb it in' entries are what make it so easy for the opposition to stroll out of defence.

They know exactly where it is going, and set up accordingly.

That's part of the problem, too, of course - but I'm referring more to the spillages, after a spoiled marking attempt where we let opposition defenders pick up the loose ball and stroll out too easily under little to no pressure.
In the absence of Long, I think Connellan should come straight in this week for some much-needed F50 pressure - we need to try something different. And the added bonus is that Connellan doesn't bomb it - he kicks it low and hits targets - he's a beautiful kick (as is Joyce).

[cwrcyn]

The problem with us trying to keep the ball inside 50 is that all our players cluster around the ball. The opposition always have two or three players sitting off this cluster, lined up in such a way so that player A releases to player B who releases to player C. We got burnt with this so badly against the Swans. Three times in the first 7 minutes we had the ball in our left forward 50. They had a player set up 15 metres adjacent to the giant cluster of players, another about twenty metres across, and another 10m inside the centre square. Our players scrambled to keep the ball in, but as soon as the Swans player got it he shot out a 15m handball to the spare and and they were off. We had no players set up to counter their obvious set up, and of course they just cruised up the ground to score easy goals. Our defenders didn't stand a chance. Similar situations occurred across the duration of the game.

Of course, the other dumb thing we do is not look for short kicks inside 50 for players to have shots from 40m out. The Swans did, and because of this cluster approach of ours, all our players rushed to the goal square when the opposition were running with the ball just forward of the centre. They looked at our cluster and though "F*ck that" and kicked short to a team mate about 40m out from goal. How many times did they score like this?

Those two glaringly obvious structural problems cost us most of the scores against us. Unfortunately, this comes down to coaching. It's just such an obvious failing in how our players are instructed to set up.

[saintkev]

I don't usually start threads - but, I had to express my thoughts ...

When the ball hits the ground in our F50 from a spillage - we are hardly ever there to pick it up or to apply pressure on the opposition players who are quick to pounce.
It's potentially a 2 goal turn around every time the ball comes straight out.

So we need tenacious, quick, hard tackling players to put the pressure on in our forward 50 - Connellan, Wright, Paton ... play 2 in the F50?
Connellan is surely a better option than the slow smalls we are playing, who have no chance of marking the ball, anyway.

I think the terrible 'bomb it in' entries are what make it so easy for the opposition to stroll out of defence.

They know exactly where it is going, and set up accordingly.

If the opposition know exactly where the pill’s going, how come we don’t set up accordingly with crumbing forwards ready to pounce on the loose ball, or opposition backmen and cause a turnover?

[samoht]

The problem with us trying to keep the ball inside 50 is that all our players cluster around the ball. The opposition always have two or three players sitting off this cluster, lined up in such a way so that player A releases to player B who releases to player C. We got burnt with this so badly against the Swans. Three times in the first 7 minutes we had the ball in our left forward 50. They had a player set up 15 metres adjacent to the giant cluster of players, another about twenty metres across, and another 10m inside the centre square. Our players scrambled to keep the ball in, but as soon as the Swans player got it he shot out a 15m handball to the spare and and they were off. We had no players set up to counter their obvious set up, and of course they just cruised up the ground to score easy goals. Our defenders didn't stand a chance. Similar situations occurred across the duration of the game.

Of course, the other dumb thing we do is not look for short kicks inside 50 for players to have shots from 40m out. The Swans did, and because of this cluster approach of ours, all our players rushed to the goal square when the opposition were running with the ball just forward of the centre. They looked at our cluster and though "F*ck that" and kicked short to a team mate about 40m out from goal. How many times did they score like this?

Those two glaringly obvious structural problems cost us most of the scores against us. Unfortunately, this comes down to coaching. It's just such an obvious failing in how our players are instructed to set up.

It could be partly the coach, as you say - but I think it's more than that.
I think our ground level players, apart from being slow and poor tacklers, don't know where to position themselves - Long was not coached any differently, but positioned himself better - he's got the right instincts.
It's a fluid situation, when the ball comes in, it comes in a number of different ways and from different directions - you can't set up for that - you need players that are switched on and with the right instincts and chemistry - that gel and click as a unit - that work well together and cover for each other.
If AR continues to play the same players with the wrong instincts/chemistry, hoping for different results - then I would start to question the coach.
I think Connellan needs to be tried at least - as well as Wright. I'd play both.

[8bloggs]

The problem with us trying to keep the ball inside 50 is that all our players cluster around the ball. The opposition always have two or three players sitting off this cluster, lined up in such a way so that player A releases to player B who releases to player C. We got burnt with this so badly against the Swans. Three times in the first 7 minutes we had the ball in our left forward 50. They had a player set up 15 metres adjacent to the giant cluster of players, another about twenty metres across, and another 10m inside the centre square. Our players scrambled to keep the ball in, but as soon as the Swans player got it he shot out a 15m handball to the spare and and they were off. We had no players set up to counter their obvious set up, and of course they just cruised up the ground to score easy goals. Our defenders didn't stand a chance. Similar situations occurred across the duration of the game.

Of course, the other dumb thing we do is not look for short kicks inside 50 for players to have shots from 40m out. The Swans did, and because of this cluster approach of ours, all our players rushed to the goal square when the opposition were running with the ball just forward of the centre. They looked at our cluster and though "F*ck that" and kicked short to a team mate about 40m out from goal. How many times did they score like this?

Those two glaringly obvious structural problems cost us most , etc.????of the scores against us. Unfortunately, this comes down to coaching. It's just such an obvious failing in how our players are instructed to set up.

So what were our 'cluster' of players doing then??? We clearly didn't have possession when the Swans player passed the handball out, and so the problem started.... So why weren't we able to execute a tackle, gain possession, take advantage, etc. ????
I agree it is a problem that we seem undermanned in forward line contests and there rarely seems to be someone down to pick up the loose ball or tackle the opposition player....

[spert]

Probably 2 season ago, Richo was bemoaning the ease at which the ball came out of our 50 and that they were going to focus on structures to stop this leaking ball- it worked for a while then fell off the radar. The coach is a dead man walking, so let's hope the new coach fixes it. The players are all skilled and play like they are instructed.

[cwrcyn]

Connellan would be an interesting experiment. God knows we need the pace. It'd be nice to see at least on of our Irish recruits make it. We seem to be just about the only club who can't manage to develop these players.

[cwrcyn]

Seriously, you don't leave the opposition have there outlyers standing exactly where they want. And..... No point us having 10 players all within 5m of the ball if they've got no-one outside to give it to. The other BIG problem we have is our inability to get players into space all around the ground. So many times our players look upfield and there's not a single team mate with space between he and his opponent. Firstly, there is no obvious strategy from those players, like blocking, drawing opponents away to create a hole for team mates to run in to, running criss cross patterns, etc, and secondly, not one seems to want to work hard enough to make it happen.

[rodgerfox]

I don't usually start threads - but, I had to express my thoughts ...

When the ball hits the ground in our F50 from a spillage - we are hardly ever there to pick it up or to apply pressure on the opposition players who are quick to pounce.
It's potentially a 2 goal turn around every time the ball comes straight out.

So we need tenacious, quick, hard tackling players to put the pressure on in our forward 50 - Connellan, Wright, Paton ... play 2 in the F50?
Connellan is surely a better option than the slow smalls we are playing, who have no chance of marking the ball, anyway.

I think the terrible 'bomb it in' entries are what make it so easy for the opposition to stroll out of defence.

They know exactly where it is going, and set up accordingly.

If the opposition know exactly where the pill’s going, how come we don’t set up accordingly with crumbing forwards ready to pounce on the loose ball, or opposition backmen and cause a turnover?

Good question.

[chico2001]

Lot of good points. I believe Minchington was tried a few times but didnt set the world on fire. Gresham will get better but is inconsistent and tries too many flashy moves.Billings will come back in and give us a chance to show his wares . After that you have'nt got too much because Paddy and Bruce are not quick. Membrey is generally a leading type. You cant pinpoint small forwards when you come into the fifty, it dont work-they are to small so the ball has to be delivered high and they have to crumb it. Saints dont tackle in the forward line as good as other clubs which means they lack desperation and therefore cant keep it in. Add to that the woeful kicking for goal. That all means you kick 9 goals a game and win about 3 per year until you can get 2 "top forwards". ...and some midfielders with good kicking skills.

[degruch]

Seriously, you don't leave the opposition have there outlyers standing exactly where they want. And..... No point us having 10 players all within 5m of the ball if they've got no-one outside to give it to. The other BIG problem we have is our inability to get players into space all around the ground. So many times our players look upfield and there's not a single team mate with space between he and his opponent. Firstly, there is no obvious strategy from those players, like blocking, drawing opponents away to create a hole for team mates to run in to, running criss cross patterns, etc, and secondly, not one seems to want to work hard enough to make it happen.

I missed this week's game...intentionally...because that's exactly what I saw last time we played Sydney. I knew we'd cough up an insipid performance again...we wilt against any team that works hard, because our players lack work rate. I got shut down here sinking the boot into an Acres 29 possession game, where I witnessed him joggings as he watched opposition players sprint past him to intercept his team mates...won't lay block or put contact on anyone to save himself. And he's not an orphan there. I find it hard to fathom this is coached into them, or not coached out of them, as much as I find it hard to fathom they don't care...I really can't say where the blame lays, but we're not even doing the basics.

[freely]

Richo's on a hiding to nothing really - the only way players can get the right 'chemistry' is by playing together. When it's not working, you've got to make changes. When you make changes, you lose whatever chemistry you had.

[saintspremiers]

Richo's on a hiding to nothing really - the only way players can get the right 'chemistry' is by playing together. When it's not working, you've got to make changes. When you make changes, you lose whatever chemistry you had.

The only chemistry I saw on Saturday night was the Chernobyl type. Toxic.

[IluvHarvey]

It has done my head in all year, that a team made up of 80% small forwards can let the ball rebound so easily.

[To the top]

And here was me led to believe it was all down to Hickey - and dropping Hickey for Longer would change our fortunes

This contribution hits the nail on the head except it also goes to our plodding midfield and that, in the game we did manage to just win, Brisbane's small forwards ran amuck nearly winning that game for them

Hence my contribution to changes this week

This problem has been long in the making

The focus needs to not only include our deficient 100 game contingent but also our 50 plus game contingent and those not showing ability to feature in a side that goes deep into September

We are where we are currentjy for a reason - and that reason was long in the making

[To the top]

And just to add I include the likes of Ross, Webster and Sinclair in that list

The outcry that Webster and Ross are among our best is out into context of St Kilda challenging for the Wooden Spoon

Replicates Geary - and being Captain to boot!

And the promotion of Longer

[To the top]

One of my mates, leaving to join us now, has ranted at looking at "Murdoch's s***" and the headline that Kennett will consider the Golf Coast's cry for help

Put Murdoch and Kennett together and you get what you get

But is Kennett now the dictator of the AFL?

As my mate lamented "No wonder the AFL is stuffed"

We will have to settle him down in a few hours time!