When the final siren sounded Monday at 5:40, there was a sigh of relief from Collingwood supporters – the Pies hadn’t played their best but still got the all-important four points.
Melbourne supporters sighed with relief that they hadn’t been blown out of the water like in their past three Queens’ Birthday encounters.
Yet the scoreboard read 61-28.
It wasn’t pretty if you were from the generation of high-scoring, free-flowing football, and consider defence a word left to basketball crowds. However season 2014 has seen defence rule. To be a consistent side, let alone a premiership contender, you need to know how to play defence.
Richmond were tipped to make the top four based on last year’s improvement, however now sit 3-8 and another rebuild may be on the cards. Last year they were very good defensively, this year they are languishing at the bottom of the table for defensive indicators.
Sunday night was the perfect example of what happens when you play defence well and when you don’t. In the first half Richmond were desperate, defensively accountable, structured, organised and were able to maximise their scoring opportunities.
Come the third quarter and it was as though they had forgotten what to do. In the space of 20 minutes, North Melbourne scored 51 unanswered points.
As much as we lauded North for their performance, Richmond coach Damian Hardwick would surely have paid any money to have 30 minutes of defensive and ugly football.
Teams must know how to play defence to keep themselves in games and stem the flow of momentum.
The Round 1 clash between Collingwood and Fremantle was a classic case of defence winning out.
Collingwood dominated all offensive statistics in the first quarter, however Fremantle’s defensive structures were able to keep Collingwood to a minimal lead. Fremantle was then able to swing the offensive statistics to their favour, yet Collingwood were unable to show the same defensive structures and attitude, resulting in a 70-point loss.
What has also contributed to the defensive attitude and tendencies of teams is that many are coming from a low base, with Melbourne the pin-up boys for this.
When Paul Roos took over as coach, everyone knew what to expect, so complaining is like being mad if the Socceroos fail to score in Brazil. From last year to this year, Melbourne are nearly seven goals better defensively. Melbourne supporters are nearly as happy with this as Brendan Bolton is in a post-match press conference.
If you told any Melbourne supporter heading to the game Monday they were to keep Collingwood to 61 points, they would have been thinking a win was a real possibility.
One person who has condemned Paul Roos is Sam Kekovich.
“I ended up abusing Paul Roos. I understand what he is trying to do but if he wants to oversee that crap, why not buy a chess board where he and Ross Lyon can bore each other to death?”
It is ironic that both Roos and Lyon are two of the best and most in-demand coaches of recent years.
Before Ross Lyon took over Fremantle, they had only made finals on two occasions. In the three years he has been at the helm, they have made a semi-final, a grand final and are well on their way to making a mark in this year’s series.
At St Kilda, he was a bounce of the ball away on two occasions from winning their second flag, and first since 1966.
On Sunday, Adelaide was no match for Fremantle’s manic defensive pressure. When the heat was on, Adelaide melted. It was symbolic of where the game is at.
Coaches are paid to win matches and grand finals. They don’t draw pictures or symbols of how it is done; just etch the name on the premiership cup.
As for Sam Kekovich, his beloved Kangaroos are every chance to make top four with a good draw to come. However if they are not defensively sound, he may finally see why defence is just as important as attack and wish that Paul Roos or Ross Lyon were coach of North Melbourne.
Aransan
Guest
I wouldn't want to watch a "dull" game where my side had no chance of winning. Melbourne kicked 3 goals for the game, sure they appeared to be in the game for a good part of it but when you are so committed to defence you give your forwards little chance and you can't suddenly change your style of game. I would prefer to have a chance of winning rather than be satisfied with an honourable defeat. I will concede though that perhaps Melbourne need to go through this stage and gain confidence before being more ambitious. Before Roos they were a rabble and that is no longer the case.
BigAl
Guest
Another thing that could cause this would be blowouts ! - games that are well and truly over well before half time. At least with this style of game it would not be 'impossible' for Melbourne (say) to come back with a great last quarter.
John Wilkins
Guest
That would ring true for most Bryan, but if no neutrals tune in on TV what then? Fiscal collapse! On the upside it would certainly mean smaller salaries for the commissioners and that might attract a different type of administrator, one that actually cares about the game. :-)
bryan
Guest
I'd rather watch a "dull" game where my team wins,than an exciting one where they lose!
Axle an the guru
Guest
Thats just it me too,how many people will walk away from these games saying,I'm not paying again to watch that sh:t,where as the game that pope mentioned,you would pay to watch anyday of the week.
me too
Guest
That sigh of relief was simply, "thank god that game's over and we're playing someone more entertaining next week, bugger me if' I'm going next time we play these dullards."
dave
Guest
If you keep the opposition to zero pts for the game you still have to score at least 1 point to win it. Likewise If you score 200Pts for the game you still have to be able to stop the opposition from scoring 201pts to win the game. Or is this a suggestion that the high scoring teams dont instruct their players to stop the other team from scoring? Or the teams that do well defensively instruct their team to avoid kicking goals?
c
Guest
I have a problem with the current terminology being used by the afl namely deee fence and off fence perhaps that is part of the problem
Pope Paul VII
Guest
Fair enough Balthazar, thanks for the update, we'll see where he's headed come september.
Balthazar
Guest
I don't think Ross is so focused on defence that he's neglected goal kicking. I think he's missing the 46 goals Walters scored last year. Mayne is sorely out of goal kicking form and currently Keplar Bradley, Gumbleton and Sylvia are in the 2s as they return from injury/build fitness. I suspect that with the Peel players finally presisng their case to play for the Dockers, and Walters only a few weeks away, goal kicking will improve.
Pope Paul VII
Guest
You can see where Roosy is coming from. His team need to toughen up and he's a long way back and lacks a bit of top notch quality. Not so sure about Rossy. Is he over achieving again or so focussed on defence he's neglected goal kicking? Both are stubborn I'll give 'em that. It's not a crime to kick goals though. Get it in quick and see what happens. In the Melb/Collies match, even the Collies waited and waited for runners to get forward, even though they had evenly matched blokes already forward with a clear run at the ball. There is awful lot of time wasted going backwards and across as well. The reason ultra defence is even possible is that they are insanely fit and have the extremely generous interchange. The shortening of the quarter to 20 mins is also a deterrent to attacking football. A 19 point l lead is pretty much a winner if you clog up the first 10 mins. Should the leading team snag an early they tend to clog it more, if possible. 25 mins plus time on would gladden my heart. For my own amusement I was looking at some old scores. This from about 1994. Syd 9 3 19 6 21 8 21 8 134 NM 5 7 13 12 19 18 27 26 188 The differences between eras aside, no one was complaining about the defensive tactics in this time. The best attackers won. The idea is to score more goals than the other mob. Defend all you like but you have to have a plan A - Z to get on the scoreboard.
footyfact
Guest
Last Mondays game went exactly according to Roos script. The only thing that would've hurt Melbourne, was a thrashing, so he played for an honourable 5 goal loss. Collingwood seemed to accept this, by allowing Melbourne to constantly chip the ball around half back, as long as it didn't move into a dangerous position. Maybe the Pies were happy to play a game of bruise free footy, considering they have a couple of back to back 6 day breaks. While it was boring to watch, Roos has every right to tell his players to play that way if he wants, but don't go and then blame the umpires for it. As usual, the media have jumped on side with their new pin up boy, and all I've heard this week is about the umpires. Roos is a very good deflector. It's pretty hard to get a free kick if you don't go near a contest.
Joel Clarke
Roar Pro
I would more say they were trying to limit any damage Collingwood could muster and keep it as low scoring as possible to be in the game for as long as possible and then be able to make the most of the opportunities they had in a short period. Unfortunately, they made poor decisions and turned the ball over. In the end, Collingwood's last quarter was what Melbourne hoped they could do at some stage. I will say, would rather see 61-28 than a blowout like in previous years and it be 140-60. That isn't a contest.
Aransan
Guest
I had the feeling from late in the second quarter that Collingwood controlled the game, there seemed to be no way that Melbourne were going to kick goals with their defensive mindset. It was almost as though Melbourne were playing for an honourable loss.
Joel Clarke
Roar Pro
I agree with you. All I am saying is that if it was another team, they may have only conceeded 2 goals. 2 of his goals came about due to mistakes, so if they were not made, he wouldn't have got those opportunties. The competition is so tight that everything counts after 120 minutes
Axle an the guru
Guest
Sometimes a champion carnt be stopped Joel, and thats what makes him a champion, and i hope the day never comes where champions can be stopped by defence,because if that ever happens we will never have a champion of the game.
Joel Clarke
Roar Pro
I regards to Monday's clash, I don't think either coach wanted it to play out like it did. However when both teams make skill errors, it makes the defence look better than it really was. If you make a skill error prior to getting it inside 50, it limites a scoring opportunity and gives the opposition a chance to go inside 50. Friday nights match was a perfect blend between attack and defence, however if Carlton was able to limit Hawkins in the second quarter, they probably win. It is those periods where good teams can limit the damage done
Rellum
Roar Guru
As a non AFL person who lives in Melbourne I have aways thought that all the AFL coaches, players and Fans talk about nothing but defence, to the point where it is some how weak to talk about attack. That seems to be the reason to me why everyone puts such store in the contest possession stat even though it seems to have no correlation to wins or losses.
Axle an the guru
Guest
Thats because there a much more attacking side now MH,which makes them better to watch. At full strenth i would back your current side against Lyon and his Fockers anyday. Its ok to be defensive,a side has to be to a certain extent,but you have to also be able to kick goals,after all that what wins games of football. It no good holding a side to 61 points a game and only kicking 3 goals like Melbourne did at the wknd.
Joel Clarke
Roar Pro
A majority of teams want to score. However you need to be able to defend and if the other team is on top of you, then you nned to make it a scrap and be hard to score against to keep yourself in the game. Eventually it will turn, but the result will not matter unless for that short period, you were able to hold up defensively.