Kicks-to-handball ratio

[ugg]

199 kicks, 76 handballs. That's a 2.6 KTH ratio. I think it illustrates the brilliant game plan Roos came up with. Clear the space in the forward 50 and let Hall and O'Loughlin work their magic against their respective opponents. At the same time, this allowed us to drop numbers back against the malfunctioning WC forward line and rebound quickly when the ball hit the deck.

Most satisfying of all was that we weren't afraid to play on and hit targets directly rather than farting about with handballs. That stretch of play that led to the winning goal was amazing. It started right in the back pocket with Ablett and Buchanan performing great evasive manouevres and ending with a big Malceski kick towards the forwards.

[graystar]

Good analysis. With ceski and dempster with big kicks this tactic will work pretty well against WC firing in bombs

[Leo_for_fullfwd]

One more reason it was such an awesome game! No farting about tonight! The two-man forward line was sheer brilliance! I've never been more amazed by a Sydney game plan.

[Mike_B]

Re: Kicks-to-handball ratio

Originally posted by ugg
Most satisfying of all was that we weren't afraid to play on and hit targets directly rather than farting about with handballs. That stretch of play that led to the winning goal was amazing. It started right in the back pocket with Ablett and Buchanan performing great evasive manouevres and ending with a big Malceski kick towards the forwards.

Except in that passage of play, there were three kicks - one from Kennelly, one from Malceski and one from MOL - it was one of the few times we actually ran and carried the ball and linked up with handballs, the difference was the handballs were to players in motion and better position.

[garethb83]

Not to mention ROK's delivery. I liked the fact that when he took a mark just outside 50, happened a few times from memory and he didn't stuff around, just bombed it in long, looked to play on at all times, we should play footy like this more often!

[NMWBloods]

Yes, it was a much better quality of game and game plan than we often see. Good economical use of the ball.

Freeing up the forward line was a masterstroke. Poor coaching by Worsfold not to drop someone back.

[smartplay]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Yes, it was a much better quality of game and game plan than we often see. Good economical use of the ball.

Freeing up the forward line was a masterstroke. Poor coaching by Worsfold not to drop someone back.

All it takes one mistake from us in kicking goals Vs Eagles or opponents having more acurate goal kicking, then we wouldn't be singing the many current praises for this only "freeing forward" move.

Freeing up forward line was one great plan yesterday but there should be a mix avenues of getting goals from
1) strong forward - hall success in Vs Eagles
2) mobile forward - MOL success in Vs Eagles
2) tall ones - a failure from Vs Eagles game
3) smaller crumbers - a failure fom Vs Eagles game
4) running or/and stationary kicking from 50 from a conjested forward - failure. it was not done from Vs Eagles game
5) from defence to forward as the defenders could be relatively fresher than tiring opponents defenders eg use of Hunter -
strategy was not used.
6) set plays from boundary throw-ins at our forward area - failure in Vs Eagle game
6) plus smart techniques that clever players can use.

In other words, we are stronger if there is good goal contribution from a couple of key players instead of 2 players only.

If the "free forward" strategy was used mainly due to opponent coach continuing not dropping somone back, the decision may have its own merit but it could have been risky.

All the cyclinders need to be firing at this time of the year, not just 1 or 2 cyclinders to gain maximum confidence to goal kickers.