Changes for Round 4 | PUNT ROAD END | Richmond Tigers Forum
  • IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.

Changes for Round 4

Very true. Though in our two losses you can strongly argue we've been overrun due to having too many talls and not enough runners.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Leysy Days said:
Very true. Though in our two losses you can strongly argue we've been overrun due to having too many talls and not enough runners.
Click to expand...
You could also mount an argument that the umpires gave our opponents a run on when they needed it most
 
  • Like
  • Angry
Reactions: 4 users
123cups said:
While replying to your post, I realised something that I hadn't realised before.

There's a linear series of situations to limit the oppo's ability to score:

A -> B -> C -> D

A is clearance
B is midfield pressure
C is defensive structure
D is marking contest in D50

If you solve A, then you don't need to worry as much about B, C, or D.

In general, I think most clubs tend to gravitate towards solving A first. It feels right.

But what fascinates me is at our dominant best, we've been poor in A but still dominant in B, C, and D.

And the more I think about it...

It's much better to be dominant at B, C, and D instead of A.

If you accept you can't be perfect in all areas, then you have to embrace 1 least desirable strength.

In B, C, and D conditions the opposition's defence is not setup. That means when you succeed at winning back the ball in B, C, and D conditions, you'll be attacking with more space and time, so you'll find it easier to score.

Condition A is the only condition with an opposition defence that's fully setup and mentally switched on. You'll be attacking with less time and space, so you'll find it more difficult to score.

Therefore, condition A is the least desirable strength to invest in... while also being the most common strength that other clubs invest in.

You still invest in all areas, but sacrifices are required because you can't be perfect, so you need to prioritise your imperfections. In this case, I've reasoned a case for clearances being the lowest priority in a chain of situations that lead to an opposition goal, because it's the only condition in which the opposition's defence is ready.

Should more attention go towards addressing conditions B, C, and D?

By extension, are we trying too hard to solve A by taking a calculated risk with Prestia?

Just putting some late night thoughts out there, I hope it makes sense in the morning lol
Click to expand...
When we were in our premiership years we had 7 defenders. The 6 - 6 - 6 rule stuffs that. Plus we played with relentless pressure on all opposition disposals, the Statue on the Mark stuffed that.

With these recently added rules, all games are won by the team that wins the midfield clearances. In all our games this year we have been in front because we were winning the contested ball out of the guts. Then we suffered an injury to a major player (Prestis against Carlton, Grimes against St Kilda) and had to shuffle the magnets which resulted in a sudden loss of congested ball - 25 in a row against The Saints for example.

IMO your A in your series of A-B-C-D extolled in your post has become the only measurement that points to success on the scoreboard.
 
The commentators last night did talk about Melbourne always having an extra player back. You can do this at any time except the centre bounce after a goal so maybe we have changed our set ups too much. Mind you, have to stop opposition centre clearances for this to work.

Leysy Days said:
Very true. Though in our two losses you can strongly argue we've been overrun due to having too many talls and not enough runners.
Click to expand...

Yep, it is all a balance. Not being able to win centre clearances means any height advantage forward is nullified, then again, more height back might help if the ball is coming in quickly and cleanly for the opposition. At the end of the day, it is the way we have allowed pressure-free clearances by the opposition which is really killing us.

DS
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Rfc4Ever said:
If Sonsie plays as sub, nailed it
Click to expand...
when Hardwick says a player just needs a bit more fitness before they play AFL, I doubt we will risk him sitting on the sub bench for an entire game.
All the kids need to play at this time of the year, not wear the sub vest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Brodders17 said:
when Hardwick says a player just needs a bit more fitness before they play AFL, I doubt we will risk him sitting on the sub bench for an entire game.
All the kids need to play at this time of the year, not wear the sub vest.
Click to expand...
He was clearly fit in the wet last week
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
DavidSSS said:
The commentators last night did talk about Melbourne always having an extra player back. You can do this at any time except the centre bounce after a goal so maybe we have changed our set ups too much. Mind you, have to stop opposition centre clearances for this to work.



Yep, it is all a balance. Not being able to win centre clearances means any height advantage forward is nullified, then again, more height back might help if the ball is coming in quickly and cleanly for the opposition. At the end of the day, it is the way we have allowed pressure-free clearances by the opposition which is really killing us.

DS
Click to expand...

Our centre clearance work has actually been OK this year. In our two losses it was 12-14 and 16-17.

It's our around the ground stoppage work that needs addressing. Been murdered 10-26 and 17-29 in those games. Reckon our lack of size is showing up more there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Leysy Days said:
Our centre clearance work has actually been OK this year. In our two losses it was 12-14 and 16-17.

It's our around the ground stoppage work that needs addressing. Been murdered 10-26 and 17-29 in those games. Reckon our lack of size is showing up more there.
Click to expand...
Thats why Prestia is so crucial to us. A four quarter Meatball will help address that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
tigerdell said:
Shedda back would be a smart move.
Get experience where we need it and give him the ball to regain form
Click to expand...
while Shedda may have Zorro hands his kicking can be iffy at times. Not sure i'd want him coming out of the backline. I'd prefer the Cotch down back.
 
dimmauchamp said:
while Shedda may have Zorro hands his kicking can be iffy at times. Not sure i'd want him coming out of the backline. I'd prefer the Cotch down back.
Click to expand...
Did a great job a couple of seasons ago when every man and his dog was injured
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
dimmauchamp said:
while Shedda may have Zorro hands his kicking can be iffy at times. Not sure i'd want him coming out of the backline. I'd prefer the Cotch down back.
Click to expand...
Shedda was handy down back in 2019 when we were missing half the best 22, but would prefer him middle/forward if he can still keep up
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
AngryAnt said:
maybe, a good team puts a bad decision down to bad luck and moves on, we did this well in the glory years before we fell off the cliff after round 12 last year.
Click to expand...
Hardly won a game since.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Leysy Days said:
Our centre clearance work has actually been OK this year. In our two losses it was 12-14 and 16-17.

It's our around the ground stoppage work that needs addressing. Been murdered 10-26 and 17-29 in those games. Reckon our lack of size is showing up more there.
Click to expand...

I'm not entirely sure of this. Didn't notice it so much last week (might have had my head in my hands!) but we were getting killed in centre clearances in the last quarter against Carlton.

The other aspect would be the quality of the centre clearances, Carlton's were clean and unpressured, are ours also clean and unpressured? Delivery into the forward line suggests they aren't.

I agree around the ground clearances are an issue, we are losing the contested possessions (374 to 403) and we seem completely unable to spread and get clean delivery to the forward line.

The defence has no chance if the ball is coming in quickly and without any pressure.

DS
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
You must log in or register to reply here.
< Joel Bowden | Rnd 7 WC >
Official PRE merch now on Redbubble!
Top Bottom