If we play 4 more talls than other teams, they’re playing 4 more runners. That’s a lot of extra run and spread we need out of the runners that we do have.
Our talls have to control the air to make up for that.
2 Likes
There are opportunities to try this during the game with most of the players we currently have. Throw Hurley forward for a quarter, bench Goddard, Stewart and TBell for 15 minutes, put Heppell in the back pocket for a quarter - who knows? Worsfold needs to shuffle his deck Sheedy style and try and make something happen. We just seem to stagnate in our set positions and wait for our style of game to work.
2 Likes
Which they never do…
1 Like
I guess part of the point the article makes is that drafting a bunch of flankers isn’t the worst idea IF they’re replacing the big guys.
Guys like Langford/Lav/Guelfi can rotate through the middle and provide marking targets when up forward.
Most goals are scored on the counter these days- usually giving the forward space to work in so that any half decent lead with solid hands should be able to convert the opportunity.
2 Likes
Further thoughts: Our worst performances this year have come against small ball teams.
Round 1 - Win Vs the Crows.
They play as tall as we do. Even without Walker they ran an extremely tall forward line, with Jenkins, McGovern, and Fogarty all ~195cmish. They also play an old fashioned lumbering ruck man in Jacobs. The result was a very even match of football and our ginormous forward line dominated taking a huge number of marks I50.
Round 2: Loss Vs the Dockers.
Ross Lyon was arguably the original small baller, and while criticized for not building lists he’s brought in pressure based players at every opportunity at both the Saints (Schneider, Peake, Lovett) and Freo (Pearce, Matera, Bennell). The Fremantle side only contained one genuine tall up forward in Tabener, while McCarthy, Mundy and Fyfe all spent time up there they are only 190ish and all capable of good pressure. We, on the other hand, ran with the dinosaur 4 tall set up and got burnt in both contested and uncontested ball.
Round 3: Loss vs the Bulldogs.
As mentioned in the article in the op, Beveridge took Lyon’s idea to the next level (by necessity or design?) and basically runs the forwardline as a depth midfield. Redpath the only tall up forward. Interesting point in this game about ruckmen; Bellchambers dominated the hit outs this match (33 to 19) but most here felt he was well beaten by English (who gathered 17 touches to Bellchambers 10). Hit outs are not a key stat anymore (clearances in general are overrated). Ruckmen who can cover ground are key to the small ball philosophy.
Round 4: Win vs the Power.
Hinkley did not get the small ball memo. The power ran with Westhoff, Dixon, Watts and Marshall with Howard in the ruck. They plan to add Ryder to this mix (an excellent small ball ruck) but will probably maintain the three tall structure. Thankfully, Woosha throws Hooker back for this one making us a little bit top heavy. Power aren’t able to bring the midfield pressure that the dockers and dogs were and our ‘run and carry’ game actually gets going allowing for a convincing win.
Round 5: Defeat Vs the Pies
Injury to Moore was the best thing to happen to Buckley as it removed the pressure of playing an out of form lumbering favourite son. The Pies have been heading in the small ball direction for the past couple of seasons but couldn’t get the forward line system right. Now they have a wonderful balance of mid and small sized players with Reid playing as a defensive tall to help trap it in there. Their press absolutely crushed us and we were all very sad on BBlitz. They also have the best small ball ruck in the game with Brodie Grundy.
Round 6: Loss vs the Demons
The Dees are the hardest one to fit in here. At times this season they have looked like a small ball side (and have one of the best I50 differentials in the league as a result) but have also been sucked into going too top heavy. They played a more conventional set up, and for the most part our ball movement looked better than it did vs the Pies. We were well on top for a large part of this game and should have gone it at half time with a healthy lead. I’d note that the Dees mid/small forwards brigade did a lot of damage to us (Hannan, Fritsch, Melksham, Spargo).
So what next? If my theory holds we’ll actually do a lot better vs Hawthorn and Carlton than the form guide may indicate. That’s not to say we’ll win, but I doubt we’ll look like the train wreck that we did vs Collingwood and the Bulldogs.
2 Likes
Like the thinking, although it feels like you just ignored Mason Cox, who would be the antithesis of a small ball specialist.
I think the question is how do you beat the small ball teams regularly, and “structure up” to be flexible both between and within games.
On this point I feel that the Hooker back, Joe/Stewart/Stringer strategy isn’t gong to be successful. It makes both Joe and Stewart less effective talls, but doesn’t bring the small ball benefits. Go all in, like Adelaide do but strengthen the midfield, and intercepting at HB, might be our best option for success this year.
But Fanta and Tippa in form will be crucial.
2 Likes
My main counterpoint would currently be that while richmond is on top of the table, the next five teams on the ladder all run tall forward line, then sydney, then two more teams who go tall. The tigers are the only genuinely small forward line team tracking better than 50/50.
This!!!
I didn’t really get to finish this, but have a minute now.
(and understanding that we have to be flexible depending on dealing with the opposition)
Go all in on talls. Hooker, Joe, Stewart, Stringer. We trained all summer with Hooker forward, but then give up on it after 3 rounds. Have we decided that we wasted an entire summer on a structure that is unsustainable? I reckon we need to reset and go back to the plan. 3 big talls. Stringer rotating through the middle, and smalls buzzing at the feet of the talls. We need Fantasia and Tippa up and about though, and probably Green or Colyer or someone else as well.
In defence go one less. Ambrose and Hurley, and then the 3rd who has to be able to play tall or small. Hurley has to be able to take a key. What Rance does so well recently is beat his man as well as provide something the other way. Hurley’s plenty good offensively (ignoring the issues with hitting targets this year), but when teams are choosing to go through his man, and it’s hurting us, then we’ve got the balance wrong. Hurley and Ambrose and a 3rd tall. Gleeson was the obvious, but maybe it’s Francis or Ridley, or Dea. Then our best 3 small defenders…I’m guessing McKenna, Saad, McGrath. All should be quick, good man on man, and able to contain small forwards, while having enough speed and athleticism to deal with the swarming press.
And finally favour mids over any other types for the rest of the lineup. Preferably ones that can run. So I guess what I’m saying is that I’ve locked in 12 spots, + Bellchambers, so I want 9 pure mids beyond that. No “flankers” or "utilities. If that means that Laverde can’t get a game, or you have to leave out Goddard for a better runner, even if that’s Clarke, or even Long, then so be it.
This is about building a tall team that can handle the small ball teams, and I think to do that you have to maximise the run out of your non-talls, so that you are not too disadvantaged in that area, while being advantaged in the air.
And you have to win the ball in the middle and deliver to your talls advantage. But that’s a given with any gameplan.
The other option is to ditch the talls entirely and go full on small ball. We don’t appear to have trained for this over summer, so I can’t see why you would try this now. But if you do, then I’d still retain Bellchambers in the ruck, but I’d be dropping Stewart, and possibly one of Hurley and Hooker. Theory being that Ambrose is our best stopper, and then you want defenders that are more mobile and flexible.
I don’t know how it works, and I don’t even know if it can with our current list, but it’s an option.
But where we are right now is not a viable option in my opinion. We’ve trained for a tall gameplan, then we’ve second guessed, and gone away from our ideals partly due to injuries (Ambrose and Fantasia amongst others), and partly due to panic. We’re not the marking threat we planned for with Stewart getting the #2 tall defender, and we’re also not fully there on the pressure game either. We’re slow in defence, and out of it, with Hurley and Hooker and invariably a utility or 2 floating through there, and we’re short on running depth.
Either reset and back in our planning and training over summer, or throw it all out and start again. And if you’re doing that you have to accept that we’re going to be horrible this year, and also that some favourites can’t get a game, because they just aren’t designed for the “new” style.
Personally, I’m playing Hooker at FF this week.
1 Like
Clone 22 Smiths
Emergencies: Laverde
Didn’t see that coming did ya
Currently:
Goddard hooker Saad
Heppell Hurley McGrath
Zaka Myers McKenna
Smith Stewart zerrett
Walla stringer Fantasia
TBC Langford Parish
Laverde Mutch Guelfi Clarke
2019
Gleeson Hooker Saad
Heppell Hurley McGrath
Zaka Langford McKenna
Smith Daniher Zerrett
Walla Stewart Fantasia
TBC Stringer Parish
Laverde Guelfi Clarke Mutch
1 Like
Yeah there’s an interesting mix of game styles and structures this season. Off the top of my head:
- Richmond- Small ball
- West Coast - probably the closest in setup to us (or the 2017 version of us that had a clear style). Relying a lot on intercept marking and the counter attack.
3- Giants - A tall setup but getting smaller (they used Patton in the ruck on the weekend, leaving the talented Rory Lobb out)
4-Hawthorn - on the tall side, playing the Clarkson brand
5- Adelaide- Tall
6- Port - Tall
7 - Sydney - Tall
8 - North - Very tall
Small ball has yet to conquer the top 4 but I’d note the strong midfield possessed by a lot of those taller sides, allowing them to actually take advantage of their tall forward lines. We don’t look like matching anytime soon.
I’m certainly not going to disagree that our midfield is our major paint point.
Brilliant article on the the new West Coast gamepan.
Reading this I kind of feel like this is what our coaches are trying to achieve, but then we throw in a bunch of overlap handball for no reason.
TL:dr - West Coast are switching the ball like crazy, not handballing very often, and generally doing their best to avoid the small ball scrum.