Leg speed is only a part of the problem but it stands out because overall we don't run & spread well enough. We have too many guys who simply don't cover enough ground & so our lack of pace gets exposed when we can't make up for the workrate with pace. Also pace at the centre bounces is lacking. We don't really have the guys who can hit the pack at pace, get the ball & execute a clean clearance. We so often turn our 1st possession into another stoppage because we run into or handball into a pack. We don't have a reliable outside runner who we go to. Look at the way Steven today ran away from stoppages. Our guys get caught too often so panic disposal.
I get your point, but seriously, how many players are there in the competition that can do that?
It doesnât have to be Colyer level pace but just that ability to run through packs & break open the play. Zaka at his best can do it & Cooney used to be able to do it but most of our midfield have below average pace or in the case of Stanton & Howlett, not much lateral movement. We donât have many players who can take the game on run past an opponent through pace or âselling candyâ so this often sees our players forced backwards or corralled onto their wrong side. Watch Portâs mids for an example of guys who can regularly get past opponents by taking them on. Eberts not quick but he can move through traffic & he runs all day. Iâd love to see GPS data on our players as I just donât believe we as a group run as hard as the top sides. Today for example Stkilda just seem to have outside runners more often & they seemed to have more players prepared to run hard to create options. Their skills were still poor (underdeveloped) which allowed us to negate their outside dominance to some extent. Stanton is by far our best runner in terms of Km covered, we need more of that level of running power & it would allows us to move the ball quicker.
Spot on. We got a lesson in work rate by a young bottom 4 side. If we matched St.Kildaâs energy weâd have easily won by 30-40 points.
It's ball movement and efficency, not just leg speed.
Ball travels faster by foot not by hand.
Refer Hawthorn, not overly quick but their ball movement and kicking skills make them appear quick.
Oh they kick more than handball aswell.
And yet nobody can lay a glove on Rioli, Burgoyne waltzes through traffic like heâs walking around witches hats, Hill turns players inside out, Puopolo is putting in blistering 100 metre sprints just to lay a tackle etc etc.
Youâve got to be able to move the ball well, no doubt about that.
But itâs not an either/or scenario. You need both
Yep add to that list Smith, Breust and Duryea and you realise they are not slow at all.
They made a conscious decision after 2009 IMHO.
That flag side really had Rioli (quick), Bateman (reasonably quick), Crawford (only reasonably quick, by that point). Since then theyâve added Hill, Smith, Duryea, Breust, Puopolo, Anderson and Burgoyne. Before that they were a lot stodgier, and kicked the ball comparatively more to targets, rather than into space.
Geelong is the interesting one for me. They were never that quick across the side, but they won contests. Every contest. Which allowed guys to peel off those contests secure in the knowledge their team mate would win it. That extra half second of âpre-emptionâ ( is that a word, lol?) opened the game up and opponents were entirely reactionary. Now they dont win those contests with impunity, they are exposed on the spread.
Which brings up a memory of David Kings stupidity. Remember he wrote that theory that Geelong were happy to lose the stoppage and instead hurt on the rebound? Absolute bollocks. It was a symptom of a side losing the well oiled machine factor a little bit and being forced to adapt, not a selected tactical ploy. Which is not a criticism, geelong have been incredible.
You need high running power, and some outright pace. The pace bit is the cream. But more important than both is winning the footy. However you have to do it. And team mates having confidence that you will.
Thereâs no black and white âpace is no useâ vs âpace is everythingâ debate here.
Geelong also had a couple of guys who were not much use in the contest, but darn quick - Varcoe, Wojinski, Shannon Byrnes, early days Stokes (he developed into much more). They were arguably cream on top sorts, but they still got picked in flag side/s primarily for their leg speed.
Of course every side has their plan A which they excel at, and Geelongâs was big, well-rounded, hard-running mids, but they also have plan B and C and D to cope with different match situations and different defensive setups.
Even Geelongâs plan A got worked out, in the end by Collingwood, brained in that prelim, while Bomber was trying his best to change it.
Right now our plan A is below itâs best, which puts the spotlight on whether our existing balance is right, to make best use of the ball we do win, or whether we need a bit of tinkering.
There's no black and white "pace is no use" vs "pace is everything" debate here.
Geelong also had a couple of guys who were not much use in the contest, but darn quick - Varcoe, Wojinski, Shannon Byrnes, early days Stokes (he developed into much more). They were arguably cream on top sorts, but they still got picked in flag side/s primarily for their leg speed.
Of course every side has their plan A which they excel at, and Geelong's was big, well-rounded, hard-running mids, but they also have plan B and C and D to cope with different match situations and different defensive setups.
Even Geelong's plan A got worked out, in the end by Collingwood, brained in that prelim, while Bomber was trying his best to change it.
Right now our plan A is below itâs best, which puts the spotlight on whether our existing balance is right, to make best use of the ball we do win, or whether we need a bit of tinkering.
Well said. Sums it up perfectly.
I can see the coaches desperately wanted to get Dempsey back in which, despite criticism on here by some, is the right decision. We need Demps in the side for now. If we have Cooney too then we have papered over the issue somewhat for a bit. Iâd hope though, that there is a grand design to have Dags come through into the best 22. To the extent of even putting up with errors, ala Melkshamâs dream run, in order to build up his capability at AFL level.
Most of the top line sides have persevered with the outside pacey runners while they found their feet, eg Brad Hill, because they have identified the need for it at AFL level to give flexibility to your gameplan(s).
The coaches need to release Zaha and Hibberd someone to give more run too.
Geelong is the interesting one for me. They were never that quick across the side, but they won contests. Every contest. Which allowed guys to peel off those contests secure in the knowledge their team mate would win it. That extra half second of âpre-emptionâ ( is that a word, lol?) opened the game up and opponents were entirely reactionary. Now they dont win those contests with impunity, they are exposed on the spread.
Which brings up a memory of David Kings stupidity. Remember he wrote that theory that Geelong were happy to lose the stoppage and instead hurt on the rebound? Absolute bollocks. It was a symptom of a side losing the well oiled machine factor a little bit and being forced to adapt, not a selected tactical ploy. Which is not a criticism, geelong have been incredible.
You need high running power, and some outright pace. The pace bit is the cream. But more important than both is winning the footy. However you have to do it. And team mates having confidence that you will.
Garry was quick, they also had Wojcinski, Stokes, and Varcoe, later Christensen, then Motlop.
I think our forward line has lacked a lot of bite since we delisted Davey tbh, both scoreboard and especially defensive pressure. Davey in the vacinity of an opposition player made them brick and rush their disposal.
ESSENDON hero Travis Colyer says the explosive burst of speed that led to his match-winning goal against St Kilda was only possible after years of building his fitness.
With the Bombers trailing by five points late in the fourth quarter at Etihad Stadium on Sunday, the Dons speedster received a handball backwards of centre, evaded a tackler and switched on the afterburners as he streaked through the middle of the ground.
Colyer took two bounces running towards goal and drilled a low shot from 50m to wrest back the lead for the Bombers, who then clung on desperately in the final five minutes to win by two points.
The victory improved their win-loss record to 3-2 and Essendon had Colyerâs daring run to thank for avoiding a major upset.
âSomething Iâve worked on over pre-season is being able to run out games and using my speed at the end of it,â Colyer told SEN on Monday.
âIn terms of fitness, it takes a couple of years to get there ⌠but after that I ran straight to the bench and didnât came back onto the ground.â
Colyer said the Dons were disappointed with their start to the match, which gave the young Saints âa bit of a sniffâ.
I think our forward line has lacked a lot of bite since we delisted Davey tbh, both scoreboard and especially defensive pressure. Davey in the vacinity of an opposition player made them brick and rush their disposal.
Yep was thinking the same thing on the weekend. Davey would have been nice. Just to get you a few easy goals out the back when the opposition makes an error or turnover.
I think our forward line has lacked a lot of bite since we delisted Davey tbh, both scoreboard and especially defensive pressure. Davey in the vacinity of an opposition player made them brick and rush their disposal.
His last couple of years were not that great IMHO.
We havenât replaced him though, either 07-10 model or 11-13, thatâs the issue.
I think our forward line has lacked a lot of bite since we delisted Davey tbh, both scoreboard and especially defensive pressure. Davey in the vacinity of an opposition player made them brick and rush their disposal.
His last couple of years were not that great IMHO.
We havenât replaced him though, either 07-10 model or 11-13, thatâs the issue.
Yep, agree with that. Davey wasnât giving us much in his last few years, but he was still a quick, crumbing, opportunist who could chase guys down.
Weâve tried to spread his role over a few out-of-position midfielders and Chappy. It would have been much easier to just get another friggin small forward.
I actually think he would be more of a weapon in todays game than then, sit Lovey on the back of the press, get it out to him on the break and no one, no one, could beat him to the line ever. He is like a wide receiver
I think our forward line has lacked a lot of bite since we delisted Davey tbh, both scoreboard and especially defensive pressure. Davey in the vacinity of an opposition player made them brick and rush their disposal.
His last couple of years were not that great IMHO.
We havenât replaced him though, either 07-10 model or 11-13, thatâs the issue.
yep in the last few seasons the idea of Davey was better than the actual thing.