Game plan is the problem. 70% of possessions in the back half

[smasha]

The trouble is to fix all our problems,we don't have the players to back it up atm.


:'( :-[ ???

 

[Bill James]

Cracker post. I have long believed our disposal is made to look worse because the ball carrier has poor structure/presentation to kick to.

The Richo of past years was a major cause of his own poor delievery. By the time the ball carrier was ready to kick, richo would be 70m out from goal travelling so fast his screams for the for the ball were scrambled by the doppler effect. No wonder he got poor delivery the ball carrier was probably worried Richo was going to take him out.

 

[TigerPort]

In my opinion there is an easy answer to this question and the answer is Terry Wallace. I have been to a number of training sessions this year including closed sessions as well as all games and most preseason games. During the early scratch matches we actually practiced this zoning sideways rubbish. Wallace is obviously trying to copy Hawthorn in reaction to the way that many other clubs are now playing. unfortunately he doesn't have the mechanics of this game plan down pat and we are failing to break the zones horribly. Our players are clearly struggling to work with this structure and are crumbling under pressure. Switching play from one side of the ground to the other is meant to create space and open corridors into the forward line. Yes we do switch from side to side however we are failing to create or find space in the corridors. The reason we can't find space is because we don't have the mechanics right up the ground in terms of player movements. To put it simply our players don't move, they don't lead, they don't even try and at times some have turned their backs on the player with the ball. The player with the ball is then pressured into a panic kick or handball which often results in a turnover.

It took Clarkson three seasons to get his players to play the zone correctly. But our players are expected to do it perfectly after only 6 months?????????

 

[Massai]

I must confess to somewhat cynical about "zoning". Given that you can no longer rush a behind, when the behind is scored, the player with the ball IMHO should boot the absolute bejesus out of the ball straight up the middle, it should land somewhere in the centre square. If you've got your tall's there, plus a couple of smalls, the other players should be moving forward (Wingmen plus any stray forwards), whilst the defenders hang back on their own opponents in case of the rebound.

If you had a defender that could kick the ball out 60 metres, plus 10 metres he's got in the goal square, that's 70 plus metre's. Instead of drop punting it, kick it torpedo punt or torpedo you'll achieve the 70 plus metre mark easily.

If your boys in the centre grab the ball, then they can dish it off with a quick handball, to a running player coming up through the middle, that opens up the entire forward line, your FF should be coming straight up the middle, whilst your other tall's split, giving the kicker a choice and he should be able to deliver the ball within mere seconds some 10 metres inside our 50 metre arc, for a scoring shot, at the very least a ball up and go from there.

The game's got faster, but the essentials remain the same, move the ball as quickly as possible thru the middle of the ground, kicking it to your tall's, with a couple of small's underneath, the rest of the team man's up or present's leads as the case may be.

Have I got it wrong somewhere, christ I used to play FF, I always made the effort to lead and to be honest it didn't bother me whether it was up the middle or on one particular side of the ground, because I could kick goals with both left or right footers just as well (you practice that and you keep on practicing until you've got it right), which is a skill that a lot of current AFL players do not seem to have.

Ah for the good ole days when Rainsey would kick the ball over the centre circle from FB, now that would destroy zoning in 2 seconds, so maybe the Tigers need to get their absolutely longest kicker to do all the kick in work from herein in an effort to bust up the idea of zoning and for that matter flooding.

 

[Hungry]

The game's got faster, but the essentials remain the same, move the ball as quickly as possible thru the middle of the ground, kicking it to your tall's, with a couple of small's underneath, the rest of the team man's up or present's leads as the case may be.

Good post, and nice point.

While overall skills are better the rule changes of the last few years have brought back old fashioned footy - fast movement, less stoppages, big forwards and little crumbers.

When Carlton were towelling us up in round one it was obvious that they were playing classic FOOTBALL; prepared to kick long but always with little blokes ready to hoover the spillages. Not sure what we were playing that night.

 

[Baloo]

Not sure what we were playing that night.

Charades

 

[Massai]

Good post, and nice point.

While overall skills are better the rule changes of the last few years have brought back old fashioned footy - fast movement, less stoppages, big forwards and little crumbers.

When Carlton were towelling us up in round one it was obvious that they were playing classic FOOTBALL; prepared to kick long but always with little blokes ready to hoover the spillages. Not sure what we were playing that night.

So on Saturday night, Joel Bowden kicks out from FB to a hard running Richardson in the middle of the ground (70 metres plus out), who marks, then dishs off the handball to Newman (10 metres away, 80 plus metres from FB, who runs another 10 metres or so before kicking it straight down the throat of Riewoldt, Hughes, *smile*, Morton (some bloody one), with the mark taken virtually directly in front around 30 metres out. Alternatively, if the ball is with a player that can kick it long and has pace, that player can close to just outside the 50 metre arc and bang it thru the sticks for a goal, or a marking contest in the goal square with the small forwards prowling.

Now if they can't score from that sort of play, then they need to be all sent to Siberia permanently.

 

[tigerbyte]

I must confess to somewhat cynical about "zoning". Given that you can no longer rush a behind, when the behind is scored, the player with the ball IMHO should boot the absolute bejesus out of the ball straight up the middle, it should land somewhere in the centre square. If you've got your tall's there, plus a couple of smalls, the other players should be moving forward (Wingmen plus any stray forwards), whilst the defenders hang back on their own opponents in case of the rebound.

If you had a defender that could kick the ball out 60 metres, plus 10 metres he's got in the goal square, that's 70 plus metre's. Instead of drop punting it, kick it torpedo punt or torpedo you'll achieve the 70 plus metre mark easily.

If your boys in the centre grab the ball, then they can dish it off with a quick handball, to a running player coming up through the middle, that opens up the entire forward line, your FF should be coming straight up the middle, whilst your other tall's split, giving the kicker a choice and he should be able to deliver the ball within mere seconds some 10 metres inside our 50 metre arc, for a scoring shot, at the very least a ball up and go from there.

The game's got faster, but the essentials remain the same, move the ball as quickly as possible thru the middle of the ground, kicking it to your tall's, with a couple of small's underneath, the rest of the team man's up or present's leads as the case may be.

Have I got it wrong somewhere, christ I used to play FF, I always made the effort to lead and to be honest it didn't bother me whether it was up the middle or on one particular side of the ground, because I could kick goals with both left or right footers just as well (you practice that and you keep on practicing until you've got it right), which is a skill that a lot of current AFL players do not seem to have.

Ah for the good ole days when Rainsey would kick the ball over the centre circle from FB, now that would destroy zoning in 2 seconds, so maybe the Tigers need to get their absolutely longest kicker to do all the kick in work from herein in an effort to bust up the idea of zoning and for that matter flooding.

With numbers in the middle - any rebound off a mistake will go to the wings most likely - another advantage of this system.

I used to think that to attack the zone you had to approach it like basketball - move players from the blind side into space, receive the ball and create holes and overlaps in the zone this way. It works in basketball because once you've done this you normally end up 3 feet from the basket for an open shot. Not so in footy where to work the ball up the ground this way you need to do it three or four times - that's two or three times too many for players of our skill.

Kick long - preferably up the guts, get numbers to the drop and create your run from there when the zone has lost its structural integrity. Good plan.

One other comment about the game plan - I think we play a style not conducive to 1%'ers and helping out team mates deliberately - as if all our players will win all 1 on 1 (2, 3, 4...) contests. A plan for 18 Rolls Royce players. But we don't have'em - we've got a couple of Rollers and the rest are pretty much Hyundai's. Get real Wallace - most of our squad need all the help they can get.

 

[1eyedtiger]

So on Saturday night, Joel Bowden kicks out from FB to a hard running Richardson in the middle of the ground (70 metres plus out), who marks, then dishs off the handball to Newman (10 metres away, 80 plus metres from FB, who runs another 10 metres or so before kicking it straight down the throat of Riewoldt, Hughes, schulz, Morton (some bloody one), with the mark taken virtually directly in front around 30 metres out. Alternatively, if the ball is with a player that can kick it long and has pace, that player can close to just outside the 50 metre arc and bang it thru the sticks for a goal, or a marking contest in the goal square with the small forwards prowling.

Now if they can't score from that sort of play, then they need to be all sent to Siberia permanently.

We all know that's not going to happen.

Here's how it goes:

Bowden takes forever to kick it out from full back. Meanwhile, then opposition have wandered all over the ground to man up. So, Bowden (or whoever it happens to be) kicks it to an unmanned team mate in the back pocket about 20 metres out. Then, seeing nothing but contests ahead, kicks back to Bowden. In the stands, anyone with half a brain is just shaking their head with disbelief. Ok. We still have possession (hey, that's 9/10 of the law, isn't it!). Then we switch play to the other half of the ground. Eventually we get it to our midfield where our players try to play on no matter how much pressure they are under. Usually, this involves either a hand pass to someone who is seconds from being tackled by hard working opposition or a high floating kick which takes forever to reach it's target and is punched out by opposition. But, never, never, ever is kicked long into our forward line. Ball is turned over and opposition score.

Repeat for rest of game while Wallace holds phone near his face in coaches box with mouth ever so slightly open.

I seriously don't know how I managed to watch the last 2 games to the end. It's got me. Maybe I'm just a mental case or a sad *smile*!

 

[CarnTheTiges]

Is it simply a matter of safety first at all times ? Don't kick it to a contest. Stop, prop, run in circles waiting for the elusive sure thing to appear and then miskick it to them ?

How often have we seen out boys back their natural instinct and go for the first option ?

In the last 10 years, Baloo? I think I could count that on the fingers of one hand. The game plan seems to be get the ball and then run around until you've exhuasted all possible options and the only thing left to do is dispose of it quickly, usually to a member of the opposition or to the Richmond player who is in the worst possible position to accept it.

 

[Massai]

On AFL teams tonight, the panel Tony Shaw, David Parkinson, Liam Pickering and Brian Taylor all said the same thing about Richmond.

Ditch this short passing and handball game, kick the ball long and hard to a contest and make sure you've got smalls to grab the ball if it hits the deck. Parkinson said put Pattison at CHF, get the backline to kick the ball directly up the middle and give the forwards a chance.

Not one of the panel think Richmond will win, because of the way they are playing, none of them would even guess at how much they will lose by either.

No doubt, TW will have the boys play his prop stop and plop game, which should see the Kanga's kick around 20 goals against us, we'll be lucky to get 10, given the current way the team is playing on the field.

The sooner the season finishes the happier I'll be when the clean out begins, meanwhile all Richmond supporters according to Chris Newman should just "RELAX".

 

[crackertiger]

Funny enough the reason I think we played so well against Geelong is because they didn't play the zone against us. It was one on one football all day and we took it up to them.

Funny that hey!

 

[crackertiger]

This article prove my theory! The only way we will win tonight is if our midfield group steps up and creates the play. We will know by quarter time.




What's ailing the Tigers?
24/04/2009 9:03 AM
Paul Gough
Sportal

It's the question long-suffering Richmond fans keep asking - why has the club's promising form from last season turned pear-shaped so suddenly in 2009?

After nearly three decades of mostly mediocrity, Richmond appeared to be on the verge of returning as an AFL power last season when the club won eight of its last 11 home-and-away matches and was the last team to beat eventual premier Hawthorn in Round 20.

The Tigers, who had finished last in 2007, would eventually finish in ninth place in 2008 and with boom recruit Ben Cousins coming on board in 2009 and with coach Terry Wallace needing a first finals appearance as Richmond coach in order to get his five-year tenure at Punt Road extended - the Tigers were tipped as the team most likely to break into the top eight this season.

Instead, after four rounds Richmond is one of just two clubs yet to win a game and Wallace has only been given until mid-season to revive the club's fortunes or face the sack.

So where has it all gone wrong for Richmond in the first month of the season?

Well, according to Champion Data, the AFL's official stats supplier, the answer is simple - Richmond is not winning enough of the ball and as a result is not creating enough opportunities to score.

A look at some of Richmond's key statistic numbers this year, supplied to Sportal by Champion Data, reveal just how far the Tigers have fallen away in the first month of 2009 compared to the second half of last season.

In the vital area of contested possessions or winning the ball when it is in dispute, the Tigers averaged eight more contested possessions than their opponents through the second half of last year - the second best record of any team in the AFL.

In contrast this year they are averaging eight less contested possessions than their opposition - ranked 12th in the AFL.

As a result Richmond is simply not getting the ball into its forward line.

In the second half of last season the Tigers averaged two more inside 50s per game than their rivals - ranked sixth in the AFL - but this year they are averaging 10 less per game, ranked 15th.

And even when Richmond does get the ball it is not using it properly - currently ranked ninth for effective kicks compared to the opposition per match while it was second from Rounds 12-22 last year.

And as Champion Data analyst Glenn Luff revealed to Sportal, the Tigers are being made to pay big time for their lack of effective kicks or turnovers.

"While other teams are turning the ball over just as much as Richmond, it is where they (the turnovers) are happening which is hurting the Tigers and their inability to defend the turnover," Luff said.

"Richmond's opposition score 33 percent of the time when the Tigers turn the ball over - the highest strike rate conceded in the competition."

"And overall they have conceded 45 goals from turnovers - the equal second most in the competition with Melbourne - while Fremantle has conceded 48."

Luff said Richmond's inexperienced defence just can't cope with the amount of pressure it has been put under due to the Tigers' inability to win the contested ball and get it into their forward 50 more than the opposition.

"The alarming statistic here is the inside 50 differential," Luff said.

"Given that Richmond has a young defence a differential like this will always hurt and Richmond's opposition has scored once inside 50, 57 percent of the time which is the third highest percentage (of goals once inside 50) conceded by any team."

No wonder Richmond coach Terry Wallace admitted after last week's disastrous loss to wooden spooner Melbourne that all of the Tigers' problems were occurring with their failure to win the loose ball.

"If we get our contested possessions right then we will get back into some area of form," he said.

"Until we get that right, everything else goes out the door."

"We have to look at why we aren't winning the contested possession and that is something internal we need to deal with."

At least Wallace recognises what the problem is but unless he finds a solution in the coming weeks, it might soon be someone else's problem to deal with.

http://sportal.com.au/AFL-news-display/whats-ailing-richmond-69127

 

[Hungry4footy]

that`s because terry cleared the forward line and employed the old predictable "kick it to richo" plan that`s failed time and time again since 1993.

if he put a couple of forwards deep in the forward line,say jack and cleve( for example) with nahas and brown snapping at their feet there wouldn`t be a 4-5 on 2 situation.

Agree - this needs a change to the old 'kick it to Richo one out' plan and have multiple crumbing forwards ready to pounce on the predictable spoil. If Richo marks the contested ball, all the better but if we apparently have plenty of leg speed, then use it to our advantage in the forward line.

We are not the worst team for contested possession in a one-on-one contest and sometimes wonder why we don't employ the man-on-man plan for some of the game.