Possession Kings but when will we see the benefit?

[swoop42]

Last night we had the dominant midfield and won in important areas like contested ball, clearances and inside 50's.

And yet we've come away defeated.

Again.

This is something I've identified and raised in the past and it's become rather common place these past few seasons under Buckley.

We seem to have no problem getting our hands on the ball but doing something constructive with it time and again and getting the reward on the scoreboard is the problem.

Last night we had the 4 leading possession winners on the ground and 7 of the top 10.

Sidebottom, Pendlebury, Treloar and Adams staggeringly had more than 30 touches each.

You'd think for most sides that would equate to an almost certain victory but for us it seems at best a 50/50 proposition we'll get the 4 points.

So what's going wrong?

To me it would indicate 3 probable scenarios.

a)A fundamental flaw in the game plan.
b)Real inadequacy in one area of the field.
c)Below average skill of the playing group.

I guess the answer could be d) all of the above but I feel we're doing quite a bit right and it's frustrating that we continue to let games slip we could and should be winning.

For me the glaring difference between the two sides last night and the reason we lost was our costly mistakes by foot especially on the break which stopped golden scoring opportunities as well as some poor decision making deep inside our forward 50 arc.

But there were others areas that are a continuation of problems we've seen over the last few seasons:

1.Is it just me or do we seem to have to work bloody hard just to create scoring opportunities and goals?

In comparison to many of our opponents it seems an easy goal is hard to come by for us and we seem to often rely upon weight off inside 50 numbers and creating contests to score.

While hard work and pressure should be applauded it's a very taxing way of playing the game and maintaining it for 4 quarters or across a 22 game season is unrealistic.

For me this is the number one thing I've questioned Buckley on these last few seasons. While no doubt we have many set plays and positioning that make up our game plan I often feel we rely on pressure first and foremost to make the other aspects of our game function, to hide some flaws if you will, whereas top sides can be off a little in the area of pressure but there style of play is robust enough in other areas to still find ways to win enough games across the season to make finals.

2.Seeing the dogs break our wall across high half forward and coast to a number of easy goals last night is something we've all become accustomed to in recent years and it does our head in.

Now it's easy to lay blame and wonder why it continues to occur but the reasons for it are quite likely linked to our ability to often gain more forward 50 entries than our opponents like we starkly saw last night.

The question is is it the best option for us?

It's obvious that the opposition know what we want to do and there response is to simply flood our forward zone to make it near impossible for us to find space to find a free target and as stated above we often then have to scrap and fight for the ball on the ground to achieve a scoring opportunity and to often resort to kicking the ball long and high to our forwards giving them little chance.

As we saw last night though if we make a mistake by foot and the ball is intercepted by our opposition or they win an easy clearance at ground level then all to quickly they can break our line and waltz down the other end for an easy shot on goal.

The dogs had what 20 odd less inside 50's last night yet only 1 less scoring shot?

While the number of forward entries might look good on the coaches stat sheet if a high percentage of them are of low quality and not to any real advantage of our forward targets is it the best approach?

I don't pretend to have the answers but what I do know (or think I know) is that our style of play appears taxing and not overly efficient inside f50 and if like last night we have wave after wave of forward thrusts for no scoreboard benefit you've expelled a hell of a lot of physical and emotional energy only to see the opposition eventually break your line and add 6 points with relative ease.

I'm interested in peoples thoughts on the areas we need to improve in or rethink in order to take the next step and return to finals.

[RudeBoy]

It's simple imo. We don't yet have a reliable full forward or centre half forward. This problem is made worse as midfielders don't have confidence in our key forwards when moving the ball forward. Darcy is still a kid who needs to beef up and Cox is on a steep, steep learning curve. White is ok, but will never get much better than what he is.

[What'sinaname]

We win games through sheer effort and in spite of our coach and gameplan. If we fixed our coaching the players would have a gameplan that would support them in winning more games.

[MatthewBoydFanClub]

No flaw in the game plan. When we find genuine crumbers in front of goal who can convert their opportunities, then we'll win games of footy against the top teams. We need to fast track the Daicos and Kirby type of players.

[MatthewBoydFanClub]

[RudeBoy]

[MarkOSuv]

The importance of a big CHF and FF is overrated. It's a structure issue and having no dangerous small forward apart from Fasolo.

[Pies2016]

Good, balanced post Swoop.

Like you, I don't profess to know all the answers but maybe I can add some insight into what are now considered to be the more relevant stats in the AFL and TAC level ( and possibly other levels )

Inside 50s no longer mean much and at club level, this stat has now been replaced by the '' repeated entry inside 50 ''. This stat is far more relevant because it shows by numbers, the frequency in which you win the ball back again after you have had your first entry repelled by the opposition.

Most teams are happy to set up with an extra in defence, so by measuring your repeat entry wins against other clubs, you get an idea of just how well your team defence is organised ( or not ) at winning the ball back from the opposition immediately after it has left your own forward 50.
Most scores come from the opppositions defence being disorganised and the best chance of this happening is to win the ball back just outside your own forward 50 and pump it back in while the defence is out of position.

Hawthorn were always the bench mark of this stat in recent years ( I haven't looked at the 2016 numbers ) but Collingwood were generally around mid table our worse during the Buckley era.

Im not saying this to bag Buckley ( we already have enough on here to do that ) but I believe we are still at a point in Collingwoods development where we don't have enough quality ( small ) defenders who can make a difference to this stat and we also don't have enough mid fielders who work hard enough to assist when we don't have possession. It doesn't help that Ramsay, Scharenberg, Reid, langdon and Sinclair have all played very little footy to date.

In simple terms,, we just don't win the ball back often enough AFTER it has exited our own forward 50.
In modern footy, the inability to win the ball back after it has been cleared from your own forward 50, is like handing any half decent team an endless supply of coast to coast goals.
And that's just one area that needs to be addressed.

[MatthewBoydFanClub]

[Pies4shaw]

^^^ Unhappily, our most creative permanent forward (Sidebottom) still made the mistake of continually moving up the ground to get 35 or so disposals, mostly running as a mid.

[HAL]

[Skids]

Was pretty simple last night.

They were kicking them out of their arse (5.1) in the first qaurter while we couldn't buy a goal (1.5).

We were playing catch up all night after that.

[Piesnchess]

IT aint rocket science, fact is, if both Moore and Cox had held at least two marks each, close to goals, we may have won, as we should have won. Both these guys played a shocker, Cox was ok in the ruck, but all at sea up forward, Darcy just looked all at sea, period. Moore badly needs Elliott beside him up there, and de goey floating around, it all helps. We get it up there heaps, but theres no bastard to polish it off, that's the problem and must be resolved, pronto,

[Jpies]

No significant problem with the game plan IMO. People around here keep complaining about the "game plan" without, I suspect, really knowing what they're even referring to.

Fact is, we went the whole way last night with the best team in the comp (arguably), and beat them in disposals, clearances, inside 50s, contested possessions, hit outs, and scoring shots. We had them covered end to end, which is what a game plan will make or break. We were inaccurate in front of goal, and had a small handful of players who were wasteful in forward 50, turning the ball over multiple times from good scoring opportunities. Often from actual skill errors, rather than decisions or uncertainty of what to do (Blair, multiple occasions, and other examples such as Moore's falcon).

Our issue last night again was skill/personnel. Not on part of the major ball winners mentioned above, but by the fringe players brought in to cover wells, elliott, aish, greenwood, de goey... and possibly scharenberg and langdon if they're fit.

We don't quite have the depth we had a few years ago, but arguably we have a much better first 22. I think it was quite clear from last night that will a full side, we would comfortable beat the reigning premiers.

[duke750]

You cannot underestimate how important it is to have a couple of key forwards who can consistently mark the bloody thing. It makes the game so much easier.

As much as I appreciate the development in his ruck work, Cox is just not a key forward. Neither is White, but I would keep him in because he isa tough match up.

We don't have a lot of options. My guess is that we need either Keefe to step up, or move Reid forward and trust Shade and Dunn. Get some serious marking options and then get Sidey et al at the fall of ball.

Serious marking options will take the pressure off Elliot when he returns, and Faz.