Talking Carlton Index Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington CFC Home CFC Membership CFC Shop CFC Fixture Blueseum
It is currently Tue Jan 26, 2021 7:42 pm

All times are UTC + 10 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 124 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Oct 05, 2020 6:42 pm 
Offline
Ken Hunter

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:35 am
Posts: 14802
CC1961 wrote:
Instead of all the effort in structuring 'set ups' around the boundary that require half a dozen successful passes to make any progress why wouldn't it be more profitable and efficient to get the damn ball successfully into the 2,500 square metres of real estate called the centre square from which one decent kick is a goal-bound attack???

All Premiership teams manage to make this a feature of their dominance.

Why can't we?


Maybe it's because we play against an opposition team who don't make it practical. What's the point of going into the centre square if we're outnumbered? The opposing teams zone the corridor and make it a impractical unless you can get them on the turnover.
It's bemusing that the same posters who often criticise us for not playing a back half game are the same ones who demand we keep our forwards inside the front 50. :lol:
Unless you can play with 30 players, both game styles are not simultaneously possible.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 05, 2020 7:25 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2020 11:50 am
Posts: 1896
Location: Brisbane
Blue Vain wrote:
CC1961 wrote:
Instead of all the effort in structuring 'set ups' around the boundary that require half a dozen successful passes to make any progress why wouldn't it be more profitable and efficient to get the damn ball successfully into the 2,500 square metres of real estate called the centre square from which one decent kick is a goal-bound attack???

All Premiership teams manage to make this a feature of their dominance.

Why can't we?


Maybe it's because we play against an opposition team who don't make it practical. What's the point of going into the centre square if we're outnumbered? The opposing teams zone the corridor and make it a impractical unless you can get them on the turnover.
It's bemusing that the same posters who often criticise us for not playing a back half game are the same ones who demand we keep our forwards inside the front 50. :lol:
Unless you can play with 30 players, both game styles are not simultaneously possible.

Firstly, this is a discussion BV, not an attack, so please take the responses in the right spirit.
Blue Sombrero and I both remarked about the corridor and how it IS used successfully by the leading teams.

So, to respond to your points...

"Maybe it's because we play against an opposition team who don't make it practical."
- and in which universe is the opposition ever trying to make anything you do "practical"?

"What's the point of going into the centre square if we're outnumbered?"
- well naturally if your plan is to use the corridor then you would make sure you weren't 'outnumbered' wouldn't you?

"The opposing teams zone the corridor and make it a impractical unless you can get them on the turnover."
- they 'zone' everything don't they?

"It's bemusing that the same posters who often criticise us for not playing a back half game are the same ones who demand we keep our forwards inside the front 50."
- not particularly relevant to the discussion at hand about using the corridor efficiently.


Again, instead of constantly 'setting up' around the boundary, I fail to see why it isn't worth 'setting up' in the centre square as well: visualise a tall target like a Levi or SDK with a crumbing couple of mids and practice drills to move their 'foci' around different parts of the square for different plays.
One kick from anywhere in the ground to this 'set up' and then one kick for a forward entry.

Anything is better than kick -> contest = scrimmage = ball up or throw in REPEATED 6 times to get the ball from back to front.
That's 6 chances for the opposition to regain the ball.
Plus the opposition defenders are set up in advance with this predictable play being so easy to read.

_________________
Que Sera, Sera


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 05, 2020 8:45 pm 
Offline
Ken Hunter

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:35 am
Posts: 14802
As you said, this is a discussion, not an attack, so please take the responses in the right spirit.

CC1961 wrote:
well naturally if your plan is to use the corridor then you would make sure you weren't 'outnumbered' wouldn't you?


This comment indicates a lack of understanding IMHO. Success relies on retaining possessions and breaking the opposition chains of retention.
The key is to create a match up or outnumber in your favour and to take advantage of it. All teams defend the corridor because they know scores are more likely when the opposition have possession through the corridor.
That's why they'll defend the corridor with excess numbers which in turn allows the opposition an opportunity to get a match up in their favour out wide.
And rightly so. About 60 per cent of scores come from turnovers and twelve of the past 13 premiers have ranked in the top three for points differential from turnovers. We would be lucky to win a game if we stacked the corridor and kicked the ball to one on one contests all day.

To highlight the value of forcing turnovers and how costly they are, the best 4 sides at points differential from turnovers this year are Port, Brisbane, Richmond, Geelong. The fact that they were the top 4 sides isn't a lucky coincidence.

Blue Vain wrote:
It's bemusing that the same posters who often criticise us for not playing a back half game are the same ones who demand we keep our forwards inside the front 50."]


Your response-
Quote:
not particularly relevant to the discussion at hand about using the corridor efficiently.


It's absolutely relevant because if you want to play a corridor game, you have to win the ball in defence and have the numbers to run it out. The opportunity its to use the corridor comes from fast ball movement, overlap run from defence and preventing the opposition the time to set up their defensive mechanism or relying on the opposition to have a mental lapse. I wouldn't want to be relying on the last option as a tactic to win games of footy. Our game style is based around stretching the opposition structures by keeping our forwards inside 50 and using the space to chip the ball out. Unfortunately that doesn't afford us the chance to push sufficient players back to create the required run and give options.
So game style not only lends relevance to our corridor efficiency, it actually controls it.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Oct 05, 2020 9:21 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2020 11:50 am
Posts: 1896
Location: Brisbane
We'll have to agree to disagree to some extent.

However, Your reasoning is well thought through and balanced with appropriate stats.

I for one, am sick and tired of the boundary side play with no success in getting the wins we need.
Yes, I agree the ideal is run through the corridor from fast ball movement but the overlap run hasn't happened as evidenced by the worst-in-comp uncontested possession count.

What I countered with is 'left-field thinking'. The game never stays the same and is constantly evolving with the Sheedys etc. changing game-plan strategy.
My centre-setup strategy is a possible evolution in the game and if other things aren't working, worth trying.
IMHO.

I respect your deep and profound insights and perhaps we can discuss what progress they've made (or not) in any of these areas after a few games next year.

In the meantime, we can consider same with the remaining finals games and discuss the winning patterns that reveal themselves.

Cheers.

-CC

_________________
Que Sera, Sera


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 1:12 am 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 10:56 am
Posts: 19501
Location: Progreso, Yucatan, MEXICO
Blue Vain wrote:
As you said, this is a discussion, not an attack, so please take the responses in the right spirit.

CC1961 wrote:
well naturally if your plan is to use the corridor then you would make sure you weren't 'outnumbered' wouldn't you?


This comment indicates a lack of understanding IMHO. Success relies on retaining possessions and breaking the opposition chains of retention.
The key is to create a match up or outnumber in your favour and to take advantage of it. All teams defend the corridor because they know scores are more likely when the opposition have possession through the corridor.
That's why they'll defend the corridor with excess numbers which in turn allows the opposition an opportunity to get a match up in their favour out wide.
And rightly so. About 60 per cent of scores come from turnovers and twelve of the past 13 premiers have ranked in the top three for points differential from turnovers. We would be lucky to win a game if we stacked the corridor and kicked the ball to one on one contests all day.

To highlight the value of forcing turnovers and how costly they are, the best 4 sides at points differential from turnovers this year are Port, Brisbane, Richmond, Geelong. The fact that they were the top 4 sides isn't a lucky coincidence.

Blue Vain wrote:
It's bemusing that the same posters who often criticise us for not playing a back half game are the same ones who demand we keep our forwards inside the front 50."]


Your response-
Quote:
not particularly relevant to the discussion at hand about using the corridor efficiently.


It's absolutely relevant because if you want to play a corridor game, you have to win the ball in defence and have the numbers to run it out. The opportunity its to use the corridor comes from fast ball movement, overlap run from defence and preventing the opposition the time to set up their defensive mechanism or relying on the opposition to have a mental lapse. I wouldn't want to be relying on the last option as a tactic to win games of footy. Our game style is based around stretching the opposition structures by keeping our forwards inside 50 and using the space to chip the ball out. Unfortunately that doesn't afford us the chance to push sufficient players back to create the required run and give options.
So game style not only lends relevance to our corridor efficiency, it actually controls it.

I commented on this elsewhere, BV.
On TV it looks for all the world like our forwards are playing well outside fifty when we don't have the footy.
I have commented on maybe a dozen occasions in the game threads how there is a line of three defenders on or about our F50 and our FF is meanwhile marking the footy on the HBF from the kickout or the release.
Often those comments co-incide with the commentators saying something like:
"Cunningham takes the mark on the wing but there is nobody forward of the ball."

And I disagree we defend the corridor well. We are one of the teams most vulnerable to attacks down the corridor and once again, I have been saying t for years. A few years ago we just let teams run and gun us week after week, not that that has any bearing on the Teague game plan, I admit. Also, as I have commented before, I only get the TV view of the ground so it is hard for me to see the whole setup, but when teams get their famous five-goal runs against us, you can bet your life they are often on the back of an overlap running through a poorly zoned-off square with nobody paying attention to the trends. Meanwhile, the defenders have pushed up and their forwards go out the back for a goal.

Our absolute best footy is played from the back half when the mindset is to use the corridor. When we do that and the forwards are deeper, it is as good as anybody's. Is that because when we do it, it takes the opposition by surprise because we do it so infrequently? I put it to you we outgunned Geelong and the Bullies because neither coach was ready for us to run the footy and we 'went at them from the jump' to quote the Banjo. Geelong almost ran us down because we reverted in the last to the chippy chippy stuff instead of putting our foot on their necks and the Dogs weren't up to it.

_________________
Let slip the Blues of war (with apologies to William Shakespeare) (and Sir Francis Bacon, just in case)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 7:08 am 
Offline
Ken Hunter

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:35 am
Posts: 14802
Blue Sombrero wrote:
Blue Vain wrote:
Our game style is based around stretching the opposition structures by keeping our forwards inside 50



I commented on this elsewhere, BV.
On TV it looks for all the world like our forwards are playing well outside fifty when we don't have the footy.


You're being too literal. The terminology is relative to the other teams. Carlton are a front half team. We dont keep 6 forwards in our front half every minute of the game but compared to the other 17 teams, our game style is based around creating space and moving the ball out of defence utilising that space and having options ahead of the ball. Teague and the players have clearly stated that is their mindset to stretch the ground and the stats back it up. How many goals have we got out the back this year compared to some other sides? (Look at St Kilda, Dan Butler alone has kicked 28 goals this year. I'd suggest most out the back with no one between him and the goals)

Blue Sombrero wrote:
And I disagree we defend the corridor well.


That's great but I didn't say we did.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 1:29 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence

Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2015 5:55 pm
Posts: 1573
What an easy game plan. Harry, just stay there. Done.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 2:04 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2020 11:50 am
Posts: 1896
Location: Brisbane
Blue Sombrero wrote:
On TV it looks for all the world like our forwards are playing well outside fifty when we don't have the footy.
I have commented on maybe a dozen occasions in the game threads how there is a line of three defenders on or about our F50 and our FF is meanwhile marking the footy on the HBF from the kickout or the release.
Often those comments co-incide with the commentators saying something like:
"Cunningham takes the mark on the wing but there is nobody forward of the ball."

Yep. I'll buy back in here.
Saw several games live this year and you're absolutely correct - we had a last line of defenders between centre circle and forward 50 arc.
It worked enough for a consistent series of rebound entries that accounts for us being 4th for the year in i50s BUT when it didn't work, as we've all seen even on TV, there was no-one further back when the opposition broke our lines and racked up those 5 goal runs.
Then the opposite was true "Cunningham takes the mark on the wing but there is nobody forward of the ball" when coming out of defence.

Call me old fashioned but why the 'F' can't we have at least One guy deep and back and One guy deep and forward (how many times do you see Justin Martin slip unattended into the goalsquare?!!) at ALL times!

Sure they may be manned up but WTF.
More chance then to deal with the haemorrhaging defensive line AND a fast incoming forward ball.

It's nonsensical to think that All 18 players have to be around the ball all the time or a kick away.
Our players get pushed around the park like some kind of obsequious Rolling Maul with no clear or apparent end-to-end strategy.
Oh, except that BS around the boundary one.

For any doubters just mentally count up even a fraction of the goals possibly gained and saved this year with that one simple 'strategy' tweak and reconsider our Win/Loss result.

P.S.
Paddycripps wrote:
What an easy game plan. Harry, just stay there. Done.


Yep, "Harry! - effing Goal Square & don't move until you see the ball coming in."

_________________
Que Sera, Sera


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 3:03 pm 
Offline
Ken Hunter

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:35 am
Posts: 14802
CC1961 wrote:
Blue Sombrero wrote:
On TV it looks for all the world like our forwards are playing well outside fifty when we don't have the footy.
I have commented on maybe a dozen occasions in the game threads how there is a line of three defenders on or about our F50 and our FF is meanwhile marking the footy on the HBF from the kickout or the release.
Often those comments co-incide with the commentators saying something like:
"Cunningham takes the mark on the wing but there is nobody forward of the ball."

Yep. I'll buy back in here.
Saw several games live this year and you're absolutely correct - we had a last line of defenders between centre circle and forward 50 arc.
It worked enough for a consistent series of rebound entries that accounts for us being 4th for the year in i50s BUT when it didn't work, as we've all seen even on TV, there was no-one further back when the opposition broke our lines and racked up those 5 goal runs.
Then the opposite was true "Cunningham takes the mark on the wing but there is nobody forward of the ball" when coming out of defence.


You probably shouldn't have bought back in. He's talking about the opposition defenders. You're talking about ours. Totally different situation.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 4:14 pm 
Offline
Stephen Silvagni
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 12:06 pm
Posts: 26795
Location: Half back flank
:lol:

Sell! Sell....!

_________________
#DonTheStash


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2020 4:45 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2020 11:50 am
Posts: 1896
Location: Brisbane
Fine.
I'll take my 'analytical' skills back to the covid thread where they belong.
:grin:

P.S.
Blue Sombrero: when you wake up my Mexican amigo -Help!

I don't think he's quoting you correctly!
:donk:

_________________
Que Sera, Sera


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 07, 2020 11:12 am 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 10:56 am
Posts: 19501
Location: Progreso, Yucatan, MEXICO
CC1961 wrote:
Fine.
I'll take my 'analytical' skills back to the covid thread where they belong.
:grin:

P.S.
Blue Sombrero: when you wake up my Mexican amigo -Help!

I don't think he's quoting you correctly!
:donk:

Sorry mate. You're on your own this time. I was indeed talking about opposition defenders.

_________________
Let slip the Blues of war (with apologies to William Shakespeare) (and Sir Francis Bacon, just in case)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 07, 2020 11:17 am 
Offline
Ken Hunter

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:35 am
Posts: 14802
Blue Sombrero wrote:
CC1961 wrote:
Fine.
I'll take my 'analytical' skills back to the covid thread where they belong.
:grin:

P.S.
Blue Sombrero: when you wake up my Mexican amigo -Help!

I don't think he's quoting you correctly!
:donk:

Sorry mate. You're on your own this time. I was indeed talking about opposition defenders.


:lol: :thumbsup:

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 07, 2020 3:24 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2020 11:50 am
Posts: 1896
Location: Brisbane
Great.
Just great.
Watch out for those agave worms - they can be a choking hazard.
:donk:


Regardless, my direct observation on where OUR defenders were lining up still stands and fits the rest of my 'argument' accordingly.

_________________
Que Sera, Sera


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 07, 2020 7:46 pm 
Offline
Wayne Johnston
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:32 am
Posts: 8607
:lol:

Thanks guys I needed the laugh today.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 07, 2020 8:27 pm 
Offline
Ken Hunter

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:35 am
Posts: 14802
CC1961 wrote:
Great.
Just great.
Watch out for those agave worms - they can be a choking hazard.
:donk:


Regardless, my direct observation on where OUR defenders were lining up still stands and fits the rest of my 'argument' accordingly.


:lol:
"Analytical" skills hey?

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 07, 2020 9:06 pm 
Offline
Ken Hunter
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 11:17 am
Posts: 13313
Location: threeohfivethree
Blue Vain wrote:
CC1961 wrote:
Great.
Just great.
Watch out for those agave worms - they can be a choking hazard.
:donk:


Regardless, my direct observation on where OUR defenders were lining up still stands and fits the rest of my 'argument' accordingly.


:lol:
"Analytical" skills hey?


You should see the other threads... :lol:

_________________
“As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.”

H.L.Mencken (1920)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 08, 2020 12:16 am 
Offline
Harry Vallence
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2020 11:50 am
Posts: 1896
Location: Brisbane
If you can't contribute to the sandcastle get out of the sandbox you tools.

_________________
Que Sera, Sera


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 08, 2020 2:18 am 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 10:56 am
Posts: 19501
Location: Progreso, Yucatan, MEXICO
CC1961 wrote:
If you can't contribute to the sandcastle get out of the sandbox you tools.

Attachment:
sandcastle.jpg
sandcastle.jpg [ 13.73 KiB | Viewed 257 times ]

_________________
Let slip the Blues of war (with apologies to William Shakespeare) (and Sir Francis Bacon, just in case)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 08, 2020 6:43 am 
Offline
Harry Vallence
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2020 11:50 am
Posts: 1896
Location: Brisbane
Geez mate!
What kind of substance abuse issues are going on in Mexico these days???

Never in my worst nightmares could I conjure an interpretation of 'sandcastle' like THAT!

Sandcastle - you know, little kids, sunny days, buckets, spades, icecream...

Has LSD made a sick comeback over there or what?

:screwy: :eek: :roll:

_________________
Que Sera, Sera


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 124 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

All times are UTC + 10 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 34 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group