Round 2

[hawk_88]

There is one stat that sums up the night perfectly.

Hawthorn 42 - Melbourne 17.

That is the number of scoring shots.... I'll let that soak in.

However, as bad as our kicking for goal was, and it was REALLY bad, our biggest issues were our structure around stoppages and contested situations. Our smalls aren't setting up well around packs, marking contests and stoppages. Too often the ball gets out and our talls are left to crumb their own ball or even worst, there were a number of opposition players ready to take the ball, with space, and kick it forward and run it over our press, forcing one on ones, or even worst, uncontested situations.

Our backs aren't great one on one defenders so this is problematic. Nor do we have the speed to follow the ball when it is moved on so quickly and easily so we can't create pressure on the kicker or get back to help out the defenders. Most Melbourne scoring shots came from quick rebounding counter-attack. Sides with pace are going to be able to do this time and time again if we don't set up properly.

Our talls aren't working well to create leads at the moment. Too often they are going two or three on one or leading into congestion. We need to be blocking and creating more space for them to lead into and they need to work together as well.

However, as frustrating as tonight was, there were positives as well. Suckling had his best match (still a little suspect in his decision making) but Shiels had a blinder! Hale was pretty good in the second half and Birchall finally found the form he has been lacking for 2 years in the second half. Bruce looked like he is starting to find his feet and Rioli looks great in the center.

Most of all though our press was stronger than last week. We were less concrete and adjusted to opposition movement. It wasn't as tight which made it very difficult to get through.


Overall a win... but much improvement to be made.

[MajorLazer]

Hale was great in the ruck. May not have got many hitouts, but was changing where Jamar was tapping it and getting some of the loose balls.

Don't like our press at all. Our defence isn't strong enough to leave their attacking 50 open. We need one or two stay at home defenders or at least guys who stay at the 50, not halfway up the ground.

Very happy with the way we fought back and got a lot of momentum. Really wish we could kick straight. ::)

[hawk_88]

Don't like our press at all. Our defence isn't strong enough to leave their attacking 50 open. We need one or two stay at home defenders or at least guys who stay at the 50, not halfway up the ground.

I think proper structure around stoppages and contested situations will stop this. Very few inside 50s for Melbourne were caused by them moving the ball through our press, but rather from turn overs and 50/50s.

If you remember back to 2008 we had the least inside 50s against of any side in the league, but the highest scoring concession rate once it was there. I think the trick is to prevent an inside 50 in the first place istead of accounting for it once it is there.

[MajorLazer]

Don't like our press at all. Our defence isn't strong enough to leave their attacking 50 open. We need one or two stay at home defenders or at least guys who stay at the 50, not halfway up the ground.

I think proper structure around stoppages and contested situations will stop this. Very few inside 50s for Melbourne were caused by them moving the ball through our press, but rather from turn overs and 50/50s.

If you remember back to 2008 we had the least inside 50s against of any side in the league, but the highest scoring concession rate once it was there. I think the trick is to prevent an inside 50 in the first place instead of accounting for it once it is there.

I agree, but still think Gilham/Stratton and one of our smaller defenders should be further back than their furthest forward player. That's how both Adelaide and Melbourne scored against us.

[hawk_88]

I think if we had really solid key defenders who would win one on one contests more than they lost them I could see this working. I think reducing the press down to 15 reduces its effectiveness far more than the 17% of players taken from it.

I think if you look at the players we are suited to a team defence. I think if you move 3 players back you will see many more inside 50s with only a slight decrease in the scoring rate per inside 50 which will lead to higher scores scored against us.

[pothead]

Rioli is out for a week tho fromm elbowing nathan jones  :(

[Fletch74]

The Hawks didn't challenge the ban either

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/110880/default.aspx

[hawk_88]

I don't think there is any argument the Hawks could have made since precedence isn't a valid argument at the tribunal. He clearly did it, I don't think there was much in it and that sort of thing happens quite often with little notice taken by the AFL however if that is the rule then as long as everyone else who does it gets picked up, I have little issue with it.

I think all the fans want is consistency yet the system is set up such that a player/team can't explicitly argue for it. It essentially allows the tribunal/match review committee to rule on an indidivdual issue however they want.

I can understand in the past where if an umpire missed an incident or there wasn't enough footage of an incident then decisions made might compromise future decisions. However with the amount of coverage of games and the degree of detail games are reviewed it would be good to hold those in power accountable by re-introducing precedence.

For example last week Jarrad Waite recieved no punishment for what all men know is a very low act. He recieved no punishment because the force he made was deemed to low to cause injury.

To mirror that, Cyril Rioli was given two weeks last year for "attempted striking".

So according to the AFL ruling both players intended to strike, the difference being that one player didn't make contact and one player did but it wasn't hard enough to cause injury; and it is the player who didn't make contact that was punished....