No Title

Well. To go out like that was, to put it nicely, distasteful. And in the aftermath of such a comprehensive defeat, it is natural to want an immediate and definitive reason as to why.

The temptation is to hold this one game, the last game of the year, up to the microscope and then present it as emblematic of larger issues: It appeared Geelong hadn't learnt anything from the round 16 loss to Sydney – or indeed from any of the 5 losses all year – as the same problems kept presenting themselves: A catastrophic slow start, the selected 22 being too tall/slow, blindly bombing the ball forward, and giving up easy, spirit-sapping goals via turnovers.

That the Cats won 17 games, and finished 2nd on the ladder, is quickly forgotten in the wake of such an ugly exit. Indeed, only questions remain: Was it a good season? Did Geelong over or underachieve? Was a prime opportunity lost in a pretty wide-open year? Is the playing list overrated or is there a player development issue? Are they selecting the right team, playing them in the right positions? Why the large gap between their best and worst? Are all the new players taking time to settle in with their teammates? Is there a problem with the game plan? With the coaching?

A lot of fingers will, and have already begun to, point at Chris Scott. But I strongly suspect that being an AFL head coach is immeasurably more complex and all-encompassing than knowing when to swing Harry Taylor forward and providing channel 7 with histrionic reaction shots. And I suspect the AFL media, and the fans, have a pretty limited knowledge of what exactly goes on, something we as Geelong fans should be uniquely positioned to know (please refer to, “Review 2006” and “Premiership 2007”).

I also don’t think coaches really have a heap of input into the outcome on match day, other than perhaps reinforcing the team rules/KPIs/whatever at half-time; I genuinely don’t think any of them have a Plan B, they just aim to execute their Plan A better than the opposition; I think Geelong’s plan A was designed to beat Hawthorn; And I think that by quirk of the finals system The Cats came up against the wrong team, much like Collingwood did in 2011. Let’s also give Sydney their due; they beat Geelong.

Is Geelong’s entire football philosophy wrong, then? Scott’s finals record is bordering on poor, and for a club that has experienced recent premiership success, just making it to the big dance is no longer good enough. However, it is worth noting that the season only ever ends well for one team; and the more finals you play the more finals you are likely to lose (let’s call it the Ivan Lendl corollary). The Cats finished 10th last year. This year they won 17 games – including comprehensively beating the Western Bulldogs twice – and made a preliminary final. This is appears to be progress.

There improvements to be made, but the Cats don’t seem miles off the pace; it will be interesting to see the recruiting strategy this off-season. As I noted last week, I always thought that with this much player turnover, 2017 would be a truer representation of this Geelong incarnation, a truer test of the competence of this coaching group.

(Interestingly, the two grand finalists offer glimpses into differing paths to coaching success. The dogs pulled the plug early on the promising Brendan McCarthy era, while John Longmire was anointed to his position 12 months before he actually took it, largely inheriting an incumbent system. There are, it would seem, many ways to skin a cat.)

Whatever happens looking forward, looking back reminds us of two things; that bad preliminary finals are more easily forgotten than bad grand finals, and that it’s easier to sack one coach than 18 players.

Zen and the Art of Contested Possession

With about 4 and half minutes left to play, and Geelong trailing, a strange calm came over me. It may have been my body reacting to the stress and tension of another close final against Hawthorn – some sort of defensive mechanism akin to a dying man’s euphoria – but it all suddenly became clear.

“Geelong will win this,” I announced to my drunk, skeptical friends. And with that I sat back and watched the final minutes of the qualifying final– including Isaac Smith’s after the siren shot on goal – in perfect equanimity.

Prior to this epiphany, or possibly minor stroke, I was anything but calm. I was confident pregame that the Cats had Hawthorn covered, but as the game progressed it became apparent that it would be an arm wrestle. As a spectacle it was as gripping as AFL gets. As a player it must have been as tense as AFL gets. Tellingly, the Geelong players, and its game plan, stood up.

The two styles of play were almost diametrically opposed but equally matched; each built to counter the strength of the other – Geelong’s built on contested possession and repeat forward entries, Hawthorn’s on luring the opposition forward and then attacking on the rebound into the open space behind. Hawthorn’s personnel matches their game style perfectly; Geelong’s is starting to catch up.

Sydney offer a different challenge – they pride themselves on contested possession and often bring an extra number to the contest, hoping to outweigh opposition teams from the stoppage. This can leave them exposed to quick ball movement and spread from the contest, and again it will be vital that Geelong get their share of clearances and the outside players get on their bikes to wide expanses of the MCG.

It’s easy now to forget how different Geelong was last year, how outmatched they were. The big off-season recruits weren’t just flashy spends, they were necessary pieces to let the team domino into position. And domino they have.

This is a very different Geelong team, not only from last year, but from 5 or 6 weeks ago. Post-match Tom Hawkins said it didn’t matter that they got 17 points down to the Hawks – that it could have been more – they felt like they could win from anywhere: This is a team of believers.

The unnatural calm I felt in the dying minutes against Hawthorn has stayed with me, like I’ve reached some type of Zen posture with The Cats and their fortunes. Perhaps it’s because I always thought Geelong would be better in 2017 than 2016, that it would take this season for the group to gel as a team, and for new teammates to learn to trust the game plan, and to trust each other.

But what was and what will be are not what is. Geelong is close enough now. And Geelong is good enough now.

Playing the Spaces

Here we are. September. The sun is shining in Melbourne and I am so excited/nervous about this game that I can’t think about it anymore without turning into Eminem about to bring up mum’s spag bol. So let’s take an emotional cold shower and run through some key statistical indicators that worked against Hawthorn and how that bodes for The Cats.

Hawthorn’s last four games looked like this: lost to Melbourne, beat North Melbourne, lost to West Coast, and juuuuuust beat Collingwood. It is hardly inspiring stuff. And it also appears to lay out a pretty effective blueprint for beating Hawthorn.

1. Win contested possessions: It’s been well documented that Hawthorn struggles in contested possession; they want clean, uncontested ball, where their skill players can carve you up in space, and it’s almost as if they allow the opposition to get the messy stuff on the inside, hoping they’ll cough it up. Geelong need to win this category and win it handsomely. Melbourne won the contested possession count +25, North Melbourne were +17, West Coast a staggering +45, and Collingwood +19. During the season Geelong averaged a +12.7 differential in contested possession (3^rd in the AFL), something they can hopefully increase on Friday night to more like the +19 they recorded in the round one victory.

2. Win clearances: Contested possession is often correlated with clearances but Hawthorn seem to bet the other way; they pressure the opposition so their contested possession does not lead to a clearance, but rather to a turnover, which allows them to play in space. Good contested ball players not only win the ball but also clear it to advantage, something that is crucial against the Hawks. Melbourne won the clearances +11, North Melbourne were -4, West Coast +12 and Collingwood +4. Geelong averaged a +2.7 differential during the season (4^th in the AFL) and were +12 in round one. 

3. Take marks inside 50: So you’ve won the ball, you’ve cleared the ball, and without getting too Gary Ayres on you, what do you wanna do next with the ball? That’s right, hopefully mark the ball inside your attacking 50 metre arc. Geelong averaged a league leading 15.2 marks inside 50 per game this year, a figure that they’d hope to get to again after taking 16 in round one. Against the Hawks Melbourne took 13 marks inside 50, North managed 9, West Coast 13 and Collingwood 17. Wet weather or not, this is something the Cats need to exploit. 

4. Convert all of the above to the scoreboard: The Cats have too often this year dominated possession and inside 50s and yet failed at the pointy end of the ground. Against Hawthorn they’ll need scoreboard pressure because, as Collingwood found out, the Hawks are capable of quick and devastating scoring bursts. They’ll also need a pretty big score; leading 58 to 41 after three quarters is not going to get it done. Something closer to round one, when Geelong kicked an impressive 18.8 (116) to win by 30, is required. Melbourne hung 110 on them, the Roos managed only 57, the Eagles kicked an inaccurate (13.14) 92 and Collingwood got to 111 before realising they didn’t know how to win. This point also reflects the need to kick accurately, something that has been a bit of an issue most of the season.

The Cats need to do all of these things exceptionally well, not just because of the occasion and the opponent, but also because of the venue. Geelong was able to beat other contenders like Adelaide, West Coast, and the Bulldogs largely because they closed them down defensively; and this is in part because they played them on more traditionally “oval” venues.

Unlike Kardinia Park, Adelaide Oval, Subiaco, or even The Dome, the MCG is a uniquely wide venue. At 160 metres long and a 141m wide it is almost a circle, and is a full 26m wider than KP. Hawthorn’s game is reliant on this space. And having to defend them, to cover all that ground zoning off and filling space defensively, is not only taxing but also often just simply not possible with all the extra real estate.

By attacking the above four areas Geelong can expose some of Hawthorn’s weaknesses and limit their exposure to some of Hawthorn’s strengths. It's a simple game, right?

God speed, Big Leaguers.