Something I noticed today.

[Jezza]

I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed how easy it was for the Hawthorn players to move the ball quickly out of their defence towards their forward line before we could prevent them from scoring day goals.

Our inability to man up really hurt us on Saturday and it's been a repetitive theme against them in our past six encounters.

[the pie guy]

While we are talking about the things we do badly, I noticed, both from kickouts and going into our 50, that we tend take up space rather than create it. Next time you watch the kickout from behind notice that some are in space with their man and rather than making a fast lead, taking their man with them, thereby creating space behind him for another to lead into it, they are content to stand there.

Same thing when we are going inside 50, we see players in space, but not free enough to get the ball just standing there. Under MM it was a given that we would lead to the pockets and players still do, we should always look at other options but they don't just appear, we need to create them.

Players should be prepared to sacrifice their chance to get the ball in order to create space for others.

[SuperStar Beams]

[Member 7167]

At times this year we went from playing zonal to man on man football. At the time I thought that it was a good change as it is the only way to beat Hawthorn. If you do not pressure on the Hawthorn ball carrier he will pass the ball successfully to another Hawthorn player by way of an uncontested possession.

We did not play man on man and we paid the price.

We have another chance at the end of the season. Lets hope we get it right next time.

(P.S. When referring to zonal defence I am referring to when one of our players stands between 2 opposition players. The trouble with Hawthorn is they pass the ball so efficiently and quickly by way of small passes, by the time our player reacts they are already taking possession.

[woftam]

A lot of our players let their Hawk opponents out run them on the lead without busting a gut to make a contest. Time & time again we conceded & took the easy option. It may be somewhat related to experience out there but our experienced guys were conceding ground far too easily as well. Our strategy at kick outs against this mob is near comical. Both when we are in defence & when we are in attack. They look so much more organised. Again that can be put down to some inexperience I guess. However the priority next time we play them must be to make them kick to a contest at all times. Especially when they are kicking out from a behind scored.

Some things I noticed about the way the hawks play & if anybody else has watched them closely I'd be interested in their thoughts. Whenever a stoppage happens they get numbers (at least 2 or 3 ) defensive side of the stoppage. This strategy is very good & works in 2 ways.

1 - When their inside mids win the ball in close, he almost without fail does a 180 degree about face & handballs backwards to their defensive side. He does this knowing he has outriders ready to spread in this position always. The beauty of it is that if they lose the stoppage they are already goal side of their opponents & can get back to help their defenders quicker than their opponents or to make a tackle on an attacking player.

[Robbie]

These moves might well appear self defeating although in these days of Offensive and Defensive Overloads, it is important to reduce the time an opposition player has to make a decision is imperative.

If, as you say, this occurs along a wing from half forward to half back or more, then we have opportunity to have additional players running down the centre to fill places taken by our player running at a loose man. Imagine if the loose man was allowed to run forward without pressure. When the player is near the man on man combination you prefer, does our defender let the Hawks player pass unhindered rather than leave his man, and just hope he tires before he runs to the forward 50 to kick a goal.

Leaving your man to either help a teammate or stop a loose player has been a critical part of defensive pressure for as long as I can remember. The mark of a good defence is its ability to move up as part of the one defensive unit so as to allow your teammates running through the centre to fill those vacant spots in the 50 meter area. In other words if you as the winger is forced to leave your man to attack a player coming out of our forward line, there is immediate movement of the other defenders to fill your vacant wing, and the back pocket moving forward to half back while players from the centre and other wing press and your on ball players run to fill the last line of defence.

[jackcass]

[jackcass]

This loose man transition from defense to attack has been going on for years, we do it ourselves. All teams love to get a man free to draw an opponent from down field. If the offensive move is moving clockwise then the defense tries to close down anticlockwise. Probelem is that the player who moves to close down the loose player either has to impede his progress to allow other players to get back, or impact his disposal to allow a contest further downfield. Ultimately though if your midfielders and forwards aren't prepared to do the hard running to get back in support then the defensive efforts eventually fall in a heap.

You do need players who can kick over zones accurately, Suckling in Hawthorns case or Young and Seedsman in our case, or you need to be assured of winning the ball at contests like ball ups which is why clearances are so important.

[woftam]

[Bob Sugar]

[Bob Sugar]

Also, as I said earlier, we need to make those HBs kick on the run, kicking on the run isn't easy, trust me, simply allowing them to pick a target off 3 steps is not acceptable.

Side track, Bruce says player A would've kicked that on the run, why didn't he just go back and pretend he was on the run?

Well Bruce, the trajectory changes massively if no one's on the mark, DER!!!

Fact is players don't kick further on the burst, anyone who's played the game knows that, are you listening Robbo?

[mudlark]