The MYTHunderstood factors in TRUE forward line pressure.

[droversdog65]

It's a byword of top four planning and a sacred cow amongst some Collingwood supporters. Forward 50 tackling, or the swarm - however you want to portray it - it's a much quoted and little understood raft of factors and personel that requires strong commitment and a total belief in self and team mates.

Since we won our last premiership with our version of the swarm a sizeable percentage - especially of the silver fox loving variety - posters proclaim tackling and pressure acts to be absolute necessities for everyone forward of the centre.

I disagree - to a degree - and with provisos.

Ask any under 12's little leaguer the true meaning of pressure and if they have absorbed their coaching properly they will proudly proclaim 'scoreboard pressure'!!

You can't hit the scoreboard if you are busy trying to tackle the opposition who has the ball. Make him try to tackle you and you have a different proposition entirely. Some of our finest football games in recent years were a few years ago when Cloke was out through injury and we had to rely on midfielders and 'medium forwards' to fill the gap - they sure did with 10+ goalkickers a week a common fare for us lucky supporters.

Of late our forward line has consisted of Cloke and Elliott with the ball bombed in long at their heads with hope and little purpose, hoping the likes of Goldsack and Blair can hold it in long enough to score. It's a bankrupt strategy that is entirely predictable with the opposition double teaming the marking contest and streaming crumbers to the foot of the pack and careening away with speed, leaving our defensive forwards floundering in their wake and putting our backline under unendurable pressure.

For my part entering the forward line with purpose and destructive intent to players able to convert consistently - regardless of their defensive forward capabilities - is another type of pressure.

Not as blatant as the swarm but lightning attacks focussed on proper leading patterns with forwards capable of good rates of conversion, rinse and repeat time and time again is a recipe for opposition disarray and the disollution of opposition backline structures.

IMHO it's time to stop the calls for defense first forwards and start looking to have versatile forwards capable of defending if need be but with their first and foremost interest being scoring intent rather than defensive intent - that for me is unmythtakeable forward pressure.

[Woods]

With a forum name of droversdog65 I'd guess your real name is Hayden (you're not Bill are you?)

Good post. Its sometimes easy to forget the most basic thing that games are won on the scoreboard not on the field.

And you have an excellent writing style (you a journo?). Keep it up.

[droversdog65]

Thx Woodsey just an old bushie here - hence the drovers dog- originally hailing from 'Kelly country' and the home of 'the long paddock'.

Agreed on the basics.

Dad was a mad one eyed Carringbush lad and he used to love to tell a tale about Ron Todd in a game he was playing at Vic park. Dad was watching a certain Richmond backman give him heaps - both physically in the marking contest and verbally after.

Toddy just gave him a smirk and calmly slammed it through the exact centre of the goals.

Dad always said 'It doesn't matter what they do or say, just kick the bloody goal and the rest is postscript'.

As for writing style - again thx - but no not a journo, just brought up by strict English parents who insisted on strong written communication lol.

[Member 7167]

Some good observations. At the same time i think our poor delivery into the forward line has a lot more to do with our skills and forward line set up than the adverse effects of putting too much effort into applying defensive pressure. Also our accuracy in front of goals has been extremely poor at times and we have let other team off the hook too many times.

[droversdog65]

Greetings Member and your scorn for our forward line delivery is certainly a good point too - although in part I would ascribe to the pressure of constantly having to rebuff attacks caused by the rebound of our own failed attacks - the skills as you quite rightly note are not up to standard.

Part of this I would ascribe to recruitment policies under the previous coaching regime which seemed to lean heavily towards recruiting 'soldiers' rather than footballers. By this I mean players with the personality and skillset to be accomodated into Mick's unique coaching method.

The rest of the blame I am inclined to lay at the feet of the then board and yes - sadly - Eddie.

Mick was given far, far, far too much free reign and instead of building a strong and resiliant player group built up a corps of yes men and indebted 'soldiers'.

You might be forgiven for thinking I have a hate on for Mick - far from it - he coached us to our first flag in 20 years and deserves respect for that.

But . . .

He did it in a way that has crippled the playing list.

OOPS got off the point.

I beleive we have been recruiting in the last few years expressly to address the very shortcomings you mention - and I agree with.

Hopefully the footy gods will give us a break and we get a decent run with injuries to see those 'unopened christmas presents' strut their stuff out on the park where they belong.

[thompsoc]

We only have two forwards who can regularly
kick goals.
In the second half of the season we were
kicking 10 goals or less.
I wonder why?
Blair, Goldsack, White .......
It is simple really - get players who can attack
the goals not defend constantly.

[droversdog65]

Agree Thommo although there is a place for the defensive forward and certainly times when defensive forward play is needed we need a rebalancing of the forward line - indeed the entire front half - around a proactive rather than reactive mindset.

Players that are fully capable of defending well but who instinctively hunt the ball to attack rather than seek to minimize prospective damage.

Once you become too defensive you place yourself in the role of the victim who has things happen to them both on the football field and in life.

Far better to be proactive and seek to make the play and let the other fellow worry about defense.

[thompsoc]

To win a flag you need to kick about 13 or
14 goals a game on a regular basis.
Kicking 8 or 9 is going to get you nowhere.
Ask Ross Lyon - best defensive coach in the AFL.
Still no flag. But he has got close.

[droversdog65]

Agree again Thommo although it must be said I'm a belligerant little %@$%@# who thinks defence is what goes around de oval.

[Member 7167]

[droversdog65]

Member I've made a bit of a study of this 'swarm' technique and it's consequences, both to playing style and to physique / injury toll.

As I've mentioned 'swarming' tends to put a team into a reactionary style of football that is constantly on the back foot - a catch up style if you like.

What most don't take into account is the fearsome toll this takes on body and mind.

We often talk about players having a 'tank', and rightly so. No matter how well trained and prepared the athlete there is a time when they are sipping the dregs and no more can be extracted. It's my belief that incessent tackling and the constant two way running required to do it effectively are horrendously draining on that tank. Added to that is the constant body 'shock' of repeated hard impacts and the immense requirement of 100 minutes of undiminished concentration.

It may have been a playing style supportable whilst the interchange cap was just a fond wish in 'Gollum's' heart so that players could be rotated through and rested up but since the cap's introduction it has become insupportable as players seem to be actually losing condition in the back half of the year trying to support the physical and mental demands of the swarm.

On a side note the AFL have much to answer for in this regard, they have lauded the swarm and seem to base their image around the hard running, hard tackling machine like play the swarm personifies yet they deliberately engineered the demise of the one playing condition that allowed players and teams to support the demands placed upon them.

[Stinger]

If you break the game down: 4 quarters, 5 efficient, 5 effective inside 50, 5 goals per quarter. That's 20 goals per game. That's hard to beat.

We need to be having set shots closer to goal. We need to stop a heavy reliance on Cloke although a return to a marking powerhouse would be nice. We have a Gunston type sharp shooter: Elliot, who I fear will spend more time in the midfield, which is robbing Peter to pay Paul. I hope Reid gets on the park because he is a great shot on goal. I hope these young guys are accurate and Broomhead continues to make inroads.

And finally, yes, get a forward coach that can sort out how to make space and get our forwards in the right spots to take these opportunities in front of goal.

[droversdog65]

Yes Stinger good numbers and imposing to try to beat. As to being 'Clokecentric' - yes we have become totally predictable in our play in that regard.

Part of the blame I place on poor forward line coaching and partly on poor tactical awareness and simple execution by upfield players attempting to penetrate the forward 50.

Times without number in recent years we have seen players of the Maxwell and H ilk come streaming out of the backline and launching their wobbly, vaugely aimed 45 meter mongrel punts in the general direction of a double or triple teamed Cloke whilst the Elliotts and Whites of the team languish as not second or third choice but 5th or 6th choice with Cloke being first, second or third choices regardless of how outnumbered he is.

Again we have recruited specifically to combat this distressing condition and with luck the first of them - Freeman - comes on line this season.

[Harrysz]

Tommy Hafey once said (and I'm paraphrasing) "I don't care if they kick 19 goals so long as we kick at least 20".
Drovers Dog65 this is an excellent post and very well written, but isn't the answer really to strike a proper balance between defence and attack?
Perhaps Mick did rely too much on defence and our balance needs to shift, but if we kick 19 goals regularly but the opposition kicks 20 goals regularly we'll be no better off.

[droversdog65]

Harry I'm not sure if you understand my reasoning or not. If you go back a few posts you will see I talk about constant well mounted and finished attacking forays destabilizing an opposiition team.

20 goals - or more - scored in a blitzkreig fashion is going to unman just about any team. It's all about posture - not posturing - and attitudinal aggression. That's what reduces an opposition to fumbling, second to the ball also rans.

Simply put I believe 20 goals scored aggressively will reduce most opposition teams to 10 - 15 goals at the most.

The few resiliant teams are what finals series are for.