TalkingCarlton :: View topic - Poor starts. Why?

Here's one for the tacticians amongst us. Why the hell are we going through the season 4 goals down during the 1st quarter?

Is it:

(a) coaching staff getting our matchups wrong at the start of the game.

(b) a too-passive warmup, meaning we're not ready to go at the first bounce.

(c) a lack of self-belief, which leads us to be reactive and allows other teams to get the jump on us.

(d) an overly-cautious coaching box, starting each game with the intent of neutralising the opposition. Then, when they get the jump on us, we have to throw caution to the wind, start attacking, and then actually take control and start scoring.

(e) the team is betting heavily on itself at quarter-time to win.

(f) other

The importance of a good start is not lost on Lance Whitnall and with the Blues slow to get out of the blocks in the last fortnight, the Carlton big man is keen to ensure that it doesn't become a theme this season.

"We've been trying to get our heads around it over the weekend, but we can't really put our finger on what it is. We're just being reactive and probably following other sides in for the first 10 minutes, then finding our feet and going from there, but it's certainly something we have to rectify before next weekend."

Got smashed out of the midfield in the first qtr, just like last week. Jolly appeared to be leaping right over the top of French

When Betts and Murphy were moved into the middle we won a lot of ball. Eddie was terrific getting plenty of clearences along with Murph.

Suggesting that the Saddington on O'Loughlin match up cost us, hence our slow start, is too simplified.

Sydney had the ball. That's the first big advantage.

Sydney have goal scoring stars in their forwardline with Hall, O'Loughlin, Nicks, O'Keefe and Goodes along with a crumber. We did really well shutting most out in the match, as well as in the first quarter. I thought it was smart of their players to open a corridor for O'Loughlin to run into an open space and mark. His goals were not anything but a mark and kick from a set position. No defender could have stopped that; and as for their short passing skills, we all saw that. One of their guys is always bound to step up.

They had the ball, and they controlled the first quarter.

They went in harder, and bullocked the lines, until we hardened up.

We lacked poise in the HB line. When we did have it, there wasn't much around the centre to kick it to.

We didn't get into the tempo of the game until midway of 2Q. That's just inexperience.

Author:	JohnM [ Mon Apr 17, 2006 12:26 pm ]
Post subject:	Poor starts. Why?
Here's one for the tacticians amongst us. Why the hell are we going through the season 4 goals down during the 1st quarter? Is it: (a) coaching staff getting our matchups wrong at the start of the game. (b) a too-passive warmup, meaning we're not ready to go at the first bounce. (c) a lack of self-belief, which leads us to be reactive and allows other teams to get the jump on us. (d) an overly-cautious coaching box, starting each game with the intent of neutralising the opposition. Then, when they get the jump on us, we have to throw caution to the wind, start attacking, and then actually take control and start scoring. (e) the team is betting heavily on itself at quarter-time to win. (f) other

Author:	Andain [ Mon Apr 17, 2006 12:29 pm ]
Post subject:
This week I would say it was a combination of a revved up Sydney coming out of the blocks, the loss of Lappin so early and a overreaction to that loss by our coaching staff where they tried to shut the game down so they could get their bearings again and figure out where the hell they were going to pull another forward from.

Author:	Ads [ Mon Apr 17, 2006 12:40 pm ]
Post subject:
Good news is we are one of only two teams to have won all our second halfs. The Bulldogs are the other team

Author:	dannyboy [ Mon Apr 17, 2006 12:44 pm ]
Post subject:
Lappin didn't help often we get the ball forward early but we never seem to get that first easy goal that fires everyone up. on saturday I did not like that forward line setup. I wanted a real hard chaser in there with Eddie and Fev. Think we do lack self-belief still. It'll come but it is not ther eyet. On saturday you got the feeling the side didn't really believe it could win - totally sibjective I know but that's how it felt. Being young we are a side that plays on passion. Watch that third quarter, a goal or two, the passion rises and suddenly its a whole new ball game. As the lads gets older/experienced, they'll learn to play with that intensity without needed the really big exurberance (if that makes any sense). Do not think French has had a good start to the game the last two weeks and we've started slow at the clearances because of it. Sides do not want the indignity of losing to us after they come off a loss or two and really do get fired up. Perhaps Denis is happy to weather the storm and then hit them and as we gain self-belief I think we'll begin to be seen like the Roos sides he coached - never say die and all that.

Author:	ballistic blues [ Mon Apr 17, 2006 12:50 pm ]
Post subject:
we are to defensive thats why........ to worried about getting back instead of attacking thats why. We become to deffensive other teams pick that up and that gives them confidence cause we already trying not to lose

TalkingCarlton http://talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/

Poor starts. Why? http://talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=9453	Page 1 of 1

Author:	nightcrawler [ Mon Apr 17, 2006 1:18 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Poor starts. Why?
JohnM wrote: Here's one for the tacticians amongst us. Why the hell are we going through the season 4 goals down during the 1st quarter? Is it: (a) coaching staff getting our matchups wrong at the start of the game. (b) a too-passive warmup, meaning we're not ready to go at the first bounce. (c) a lack of self-belief, which leads us to be reactive and allows other teams to get the jump on us. (d) an overly-cautious coaching box, starting each game with the intent of neutralising the opposition. Then, when they get the jump on us, we have to throw caution to the wind, start attacking, and then actually take control and start scoring. (e) the team is betting heavily on itself at quarter-time to win. (f) other I think its as combination of A and C. The Saddington O'loughlan match-up cost us pretty big I thought. That made the coaches go defensive and flood through a lot of the second quarter. But mostly it hasn't really looked like the self-belief is there in the first halves. Seems to take us half a game to remember that we're actually a pretty competative outfit this season.

Author:	Ponkstar [ Mon Apr 17, 2006 1:40 pm ]
Post subject:
In recent years it has been the opposite: we have bolted out of the blocks, got the first 2-3 goals of the match, the opposition coach has made some moves & shutdown our game plan, and we are rooted for the rest of the game. This is quite the opposite, and at least we are playing 3 quarters instead of one. That said if we are not switched on from the bounce, it needs to change.

Author:	BlueWorld [ Mon Apr 17, 2006 1:46 pm ]
Post subject:
Sluggish starts hurt Quote: The importance of a good start is not lost on Lance Whitnall and with the Blues slow to get out of the blocks in the last fortnight, the Carlton big man is keen to ensure that it doesn't become a theme this season. "We've been trying to get our heads around it over the weekend, but we can't really put our finger on what it is. We're just being reactive and probably following other sides in for the first 10 minutes, then finding our feet and going from there, but it's certainly something we have to rectify before next weekend."

Author:	bondiblue [ Mon Apr 17, 2006 2:37 pm ]
Post subject:
Suggesting that the Saddington on O'Loughlin match up cost us, hence our slow start, is too simplified. Sydney had the ball. That's the first big advantage. Sydney have goal scoring stars in their forwardline with Hall, O'Loughlin, Nicks, O'Keefe and Goodes along with a crumber. We did really well shutting most out in the match, as well as in the first quarter. I thought it was smart of their players to open a corridor for O'Loughlin to run into an open space and mark. His goals were not anything but a mark and kick from a set position. No defender could have stopped that; and as for their short passing skills, we all saw that. One of their guys is always bound to step up. They had the ball, and they controlled the first quarter. They went in harder, and bullocked the lines, until we hardened up. We lacked poise in the HB line. When we did have it, there wasn't much around the centre to kick it to. We didn't get into the tempo of the game until midway of 2Q. That's just inexperience.

Author:	bjaffe [ Mon Apr 17, 2006 2:43 pm ]
Post subject:
I think we started slowly for a number of reasons. 1: They got the ball out of the middle and were winning most of the stoppages and 50/50 contests. 2: The matchups to start the game were favourably the Swans, O'Loughlin was killing Saddington and disappointingly for mine, Ted Richards was all over T-Bird. 3: For whatever reason our intensity was poor and didnt really pick up till 1/2 way through the 3rd quarter which is a real issue for us. 4: Sydney came out knowing a loss would have had the football world breathing down their necks and the pressure reaching boiling point - they had to come out fired out - players positions were on the line for Sydney, no doubts had they lost to us some players (fringe and experienced) would have been dropped.

Author:	Effes [ Mon Apr 17, 2006 2:45 pm ]
Post subject:
Got smashed out of the midfield in the first qtr, just like last week. Jolly appeared to be leaping right over the top of French When Betts and Murphy were moved into the middle we won a lot of ball. Eddie was terrific getting plenty of clearences along with Murph.

Author:	BlueWorld [ Mon Apr 17, 2006 3:05 pm ]
Post subject:
Effes wrote: Got smashed out of the midfield in the first qtr, just like last week. Jolly appeared to be leaping right over the top of French When Betts and Murphy were moved into the middle we won a lot of ball. Eddie was terrific getting plenty of clearences along with Murph. Starting midfield was Kouta, Stevens & Bentick. Seems like the younger guys are doing better, which is a good sign for the future.

Author:	Effes [ Mon Apr 17, 2006 3:20 pm ]
Post subject:
Bentick got better as the game went on, unlike Kouta who we had to push forward Also moving Stevens to the wing/half back took Kirk away from the centre bounce until Kirk went to Murphy

Author:	camel [ Mon Apr 17, 2006 5:11 pm ]
Post subject:
bondiblue wrote: Suggesting that the Saddington on O'Loughlin match up cost us, hence our slow start, is too simplified. Sydney had the ball. That's the first big advantage. Sydney have goal scoring stars in their forwardline with Hall, O'Loughlin, Nicks, O'Keefe and Goodes along with a crumber. We did really well shutting most out in the match, as well as in the first quarter. I thought it was smart of their players to open a corridor for O'Loughlin to run into an open space and mark. His goals were not anything but a mark and kick from a set position. No defender could have stopped that; and as for their short passing skills, we all saw that. One of their guys is always bound to step up. They had the ball, and they controlled the first quarter. They went in harder, and bullocked the lines, until we hardened up. We lacked poise in the HB line. When we did have it, there wasn't much around the centre to kick it to. We didn't get into the tempo of the game until midway of 2Q. That's just inexperience. That's a pretty good precis IMO. We just let them control the game and failed to attack the ball. Once we started having a crack we did much much better. Seeing Saddington and Stevens leave the ball for each other allowing the Swans to take it away uncontested almost made me as cranky as the shit umpiring!

Page 1 of 1	All times are UTC + 10 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	TheGame [ Mon Apr 17, 2006 5:20 pm ]
Post subject:
I think our young side struggles with the tempo early. Freo came out very hard and made us look like kids early which we are really. I think starting Carrazzo on the bench is a mistake as he is one player I think likes the hard stuff. Against Freo he had an immediate impact when he came on.

Author:	jim [ Mon Apr 17, 2006 6:47 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Poor starts. Why?
JohnM wrote: Here's one for the tacticians amongst us. Why the hell are we going through the season 4 goals down during the 1st quarter? Is it: (a) coaching staff getting our matchups wrong at the start of the game. (b) a too-passive warmup, meaning we're not ready to go at the first bounce. (c) a lack of self-belief, which leads us to be reactive and allows other teams to get the jump on us. (d) an overly-cautious coaching box, starting each game with the intent of neutralising the opposition. Then, when they get the jump on us, we have to throw caution to the wind, start attacking, and then actually take control and start scoring. (e) the team is betting heavily on itself at quarter-time to win. (f) other "d" Bloody flooding!!! Allows good midfields to run free without pressure, especially free running sides like Freo, and Sydney, who are the most precise chippers of the ball into tight, flooded spaces. Pagan has to show more faith in the players as it's been shown when they do attack they're not doing a bad job, scoring goals and closing gaps on the scoreboard. If we weren't so defensive early we'd be 3-0 by now. Too many times Pagan shows no faith.