Re: 2018 Rd 11: Post Game Pragmatism: Carlton vs Sydney
Reply #115 –
For whatever reason, most coaches seem to be either ex defenders or ex mids. There are, as always, exceptions, but it's generally the case. I think the emphasis on defence starts from there. I also think that as you imply, it's easier to defend than to attack. I would say attacking is a more creative act than defending. Coaches talk a lot about defensive structures and defensive mechanisms, but rarely about attacking structures and attacking mechanisms. I think coaches also feel a little uneasy about high scoring, shoot out footy, because they don't have as much control over the players - it tends to be more instinctive when you play that way.
Many coaches preach the mantra of a strong defence, and regard building from the back as important to a successful attacking game - Malthouse, Leigh Matthews, even Ratten started out trying to shore up our defence in late 07 and 08.
That all depends on what you are talking about.
Defending requires much more discipline. Attacking is all about being an opportunist.
Id argue its hard to remain discipline in your tasks, and much easier to throw caution to the wind.
It's why the focus on defense exists, because if players aren't worried about defensive duties they often sell out their teammates, which builds mistrust, which also makes them play conservatively rather than rolling the dice, which breeds bad morale, and which also leads to players being labelled cowards, and downhill skiers.
Even applying defensive pressure in the forward line is easy. You can make an attempt at 5 tackles and succeed once in holding the ball, and your defensive pressure is lauded, but if you spoil 4 marks out of 5 and then concede 3 goals from 15 entries you lost that battle against your opponent and your forward had a decent day out and the defender had a dirty day.
Modern sports is best summed up by simple statements. Risk vs Reward. If the reward is great, but the risk is great, then you need to have a good handle on what point of the game you are in. Teams that are down by a couple of goals with very small amount of time left in the game can afford to take the high risk high reward route. Teams that are dead in the water, can also play high risk footy. Teams that are infront by a minute margin or have trouble converting their chances, or don't get many chances are better off playing low risk footy.
Sometimes, its all about momentum too. If the momentum is with you, take more risks. They will pay off more frequently and hurt you less. If momentum isn't with you, sometimes you need to hold your ground.
People often get too caught up in the arguments above to realize that every team takes risks, but the major difference is how the game is going when they do. We often threw caution to the wind under Ratten as an example. Made for exciting games, but we often got beaten by teams who had a better appreciation for when to take the game on, and when not to. The great grand final comeback is the best example of this. We were dead and buried, and then played on for the rest of the game. Its all about getting the balance right.
Topic: 2018 Rd 11: Post Game Pragmatism: Carlton vs Sydney (Read 19387 times)
previous topic - next topic
