We’ve actually done this in all 3 games. Tippa, and at times Fantasia, have started behind the ball in the last half, and we have used them to run the ball through the middle and get fast direct entries, and it has worked well. Presumably, it has also meant that the opposition has had a spare defender each time.
It obviously didn’t work this week, and that is probably due to the conditions preventing us from getting the run and fast ball movement. Maybe we needed to abandon ship on the tactic when it wasn’t working, but you can’t really blame the coaching for using the tactic that has worked in the first two rounds. In those 2 games, the run through the middle has been a big factor in our good last quarters.
Plan B
Just when we thought the old kicking in danger rule was gone its dragged out from nowhere to be paid against us in front of goal.
10 Likes
Everything thats come from the club website indicates Carlton did not play a +1 in defence.
This is a random one but I would target Adam Saad and offer him about 400-500k a season over 3-4 years to come back home to Melbourne.
I reckon we lack the sufficient drive and bounce off the half back line. Too many predictable plodders back there at the moment. McGrath still young and learning and obviously weighting his game heavily around negating his man which is fine.
It’s a very important position in today’s game and we really lack back there atm. It’s a deficiency we need to address as we try to progress up the ladder in the coming years.
A lot of the time I don’t think they specifically did play an extra +1 in defence in the sense of having 7 defenders continually inside 50. Instead they just always had an extra number about 30m from the contest expecting a quick kick from the pack to fall short & also maintained a free defender about 35m from goal. Simpson for example did have an opponent at the start of quarters & at centre bounces but that was the only times we saw 6 of our forwards down there. I’m not sure what the coaches plans were but we continually had situations where we had nobody inside 50 or we had 1-2 forwards against 3-4 defenders. I didn’t notice that we were trying to isolate a matchup, or drag any of their rebounders closer to goal it just looked like we were hoping for the “fast break” type goals where we got our smalls over the back but Carlton had a defined plan of letting us have the extra numbers up the ground while they maintained a defensive structure. Its something I have wanted to see us try to work on as we seem to have a lot of goals kicked against us where our backline get caught out.
2 Likes
From what I know, we were after him big time last year but he signed a new contract since
Meh. We lost. Next.
I actually thought there was a good chance we’d be 1-2 after 3 rounds. I was surprised we beat Hawthorn, and before we beat the Hawks, I honestly thought the Lions game was touch and go up there at this time of the year. I also thought we’d beat up on Carlton, but they’re proving to be a little more competitive than I thought. I still think they’re going to struggle to find key forwards to kick goals, but that’s not an issue when it’s ■■■■■■■ rain from a great height. Also, if you’ve ever played in a ■■■■ team in ■■■■ weather, you know how much of a leveller that conditions like that can be.
The loss on the weekend doesn’t erase the win in round 1, or the tough win on the road in round 2. Nor does it mean we should start pressing the imaginary panic button. Are there issues/deficiencies in our team? Absolutely there are - but I’ve seen enough to know that our best footy is ■■■■■■ exciting, and we are absolutely capable of giving the top 8 a nudge. I’m not sure we’ll do much when we get there - but who knows? If a week is a long time in footy - then 4 months is a ■■■■■■ eon.
8 Likes
Well it’s at least good to know that we are serious about trying to address this need. It’s a bugger he re-signed though. Go after another option who will give us similar attributes I suppose.
Or just pray that McKenna or Morgan come through
1 Like
Funniest post so far. LOL
This is something I have been on about for a long time. When teams press up, in the hope of locking the ball in their forward line, they are vulnerable to the fast break goal. And it is becoming more and more frequent that goals are scored this way. The obvious defence against it is to leave one defender about 30m behind the last line. The price you pay is that the opposition have one extra man up the ground. It seems that this is what Carlton may have done (you can’t tell from TV). It’s not so much playing 7 back, as not pressing up with every player.
Yeah gee wouldn’t that be nice!!
Yes our +1 was there, clogging up the stoppages and receiving 1m handballs
Johannisen?
1 Like
We could have played another 3 quarters and still not scored another goal
6 Likes
This is what I think:
- We are disappointed in losing to Fark Carlton - NO MATTER WHAT WEATHER CONDITIONS - especially when we were expecting a win after a promising start to the season. There was no plan B.
- Excuses will not make the loss more bearable - and they are all excuses - we should have won if we are the team we think we are.
- We have a right to criticize and complain about this game and not just accept and move on. Players should not let games like this slip away especially against weaker teams - it’s been happening for too long now and too many blitzers excusing the players.
- Any team of the 50’s and 60’s would have killed us (and Fark Carlton) under these conditions. Modern football has forgotten how to play a tough wet weather slog type game.
- Ask yourselves this: How many EFC players would slot in or be part of our 2000 team? That should give you a reasonable idea as to how far we need to go list wise and how far we are able to go with this list. That team had a winning culture or more importantly a “never say die” culture.
- EFC culture needs to change back to the mentally and physically tough culture we were famous for. ANY player that does not fit the criteria should not play for us and should be replaced with players that do. Only then will we win when we go in as favourites and and not be pushed around because of a bit of H2O.
- I now feel a tadge better
7 Likes
I wonder if they thought of putting Hooker down the back at some stage. Thought he was all at sea up fwd in the wet. They clearly believe Hooker can be a ff.
Francis probably needs to play much of the season in the reserves. Stewart can obviously play, but is he a talented player who hasn’t got what it takes to succeed at the highest level?
In reality we can discount yesterday as far as normal matches are concerned. But if they have to play in the wet again, they’ll need to get their tactics right. Carlton was way ahead of them in the way they set up
There was never any reason to move Hooker into defence - You don’t take intercept marks in wet conditions and the Carlton forwards were hardly lighting it up.
The bigger issue in the first three games is Zach has spent too much time in the back half of the ground - We aren’t using Zac effectively.
1 Like
Yes. Both of those guys could contribute much more.