Blue Vain wrote:
I wrote this piece following our previous game at Subi against the dockers.
The midfield smashed us. Stevens and Kouta were missing and Bell and Haselby were burning.
The statistics may give us a guide to whats required.
"Should we be happy with Saturdays result?
Where did we lose the game and were we tactically sound?
Statistics dont always paint the picture but they do for our round 1 result.
Did the forwards do their job?
Contrary to the view of some, the forward line won on the day.
The Pagan game plan requires a forward line to better a 50% inside 50/scoring shot ratio.
In other words, the forwards must win 50%+ of the forward thrusts and score from them.
20+ shots at goal from 33 inside 50s indicate an efficient forward structure.
Did the backline do their job?
No doubt the tall defenders were effective.
Waterhouse, Longmuir and Simmonds were largely inneffective with a combined 26 possessions and zero goals..
Fremantle had 32 scoring shots from 52 entries.
Not a result considering the input from the Freo on ballers.
Where did it go wrong?
The inability to shut down Haselby and Bell was the reason we couldnt win.
Pagan went into the game with a tactic based on segregating our prime movers from Freo's.
Clarke was to negate Bell, Bannister was to negate Pavlich and Johnson was assigned Haselby. Sporn was also assigned Headland.
Pagan was happy with the peripheral match ups of Camporeale/Carr, Scotland/McManus and Lappin/Walker.
Haselby/Bell v Carlton statistically.
In the first quarter Haselby and Bell had a combined 20 possessions to Clarke and Johnsons 8.
Darren Hulme was assigned Bell and fared no better.
In the second term Bell and Haselby had 16 possessions.
To show the damage inflicted by these 2 players, in the second quarter Freo had 10 scoring shots.
Haselby and Bell either kicked those scores or gave the ball to the scorers 8 out of the 10 times!
In other words they scored or directly assisted 80% of Freos second quarter score!
Was the tactic sound?
With Kouta and Stevens unavailable I believe the tactic was worthwhile. It didnt prove successful due the the inability of Carlton to shut down 2 players. Bannister was very good and Scotland, Campo and Lappin were creative.
The fact remains Carlton were unable to get the ball inside 50. We won the clearances but lost the centre bounce clearances.
Our game plan requires an average of 50 inside 50s to give us a good chance at victory. we had 33.
Freo had 67 more possessions on the day. 55 of those were in the midfield.
As we know Bell and Haselby had over 70 possession between them.
outcomes of the match.
As I stated earlier, statistically our forward line was efficient.
Our backmen toiled hard and our tall backs were very good which is a huge bonus for Denis.
Our inability to apply defensive pressure to the opposition midfielders is where the game was lost.
Those who believe we kick long too often in the midfield will be interested to know Fremantle actually kicked 57% of their midfield possessions long compared to Carltons 51%.
I suspect Denis will be not unhappy after looking at the numbers.
To compete against Freo, the 5 most important players to our set up would include Kouta, Stevens and Angwin.
To be missing those players plus Waite, put us at a great disadvantage.
If we can tread water until they return, we will improve markedly.
I suspect Denis hoped for a win but budgeted for damage minimalisation on Saturday.
For a good percentage of our players to beat or break even with their opponents will give him great heart."
As you can see, Carlton managed a poor 33 inside 50s.
Our midfield is up and running and Kouta and Stevo are huge inclusions.
Johnson had a poor game and his spot in the side concerns me at Subiaco.
Carlton can win this game. The form of Barney is a huge bonus.
We just need to take our opportunities and convert well.
Totally agreed, smashed in the midfield. The bulk of the blame should be placed on those players responsiblle for that part of the ground. Given that our average losing score has been 8+ goals in the last 5+ games at subi it is a 'good' result. But, anyway!
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
