National Forum

Playing Devil's Advocate here

(Oldest Posts First) - Go To The Latest Post


I can't imagine this will be a popular post but from a completely tactical viewpoint, contrary to people suggesting our lateral hand passing / risk averse attitude was the reason we lost, I have a theory that we actually took too many risks and played right into Tyrone's hands.

For a spell in the second half, when we were 3 or 4 points up (and this happened at many other times), we probed from side to side just outside the 45, sometimes beating a man or two and then facing a cup-de-sac, being forced to turn back and undo the work of beating those players. This was very risky and eventually resulted in us losing the ball on a number of occasions. Indeed, for 4 of Tyrone's first 7 second half points, we coughed up the ball just inside Tyrone's 45 and they countered us.

What we should have done, and this would not have been at all popular with the crowd, was to take the ball back inside our own half and soloed and bounced the ball, passed it amongst ourselves and waited, and waited, and waited for as long as it took for Tyrone to start to release 5 or 6 bodies from their own 45 in order to get the ball off us. Then, we could have got our running game going with a bit of space in behind.

With a 4 point lead the onus was on Tyrone to start moving their defence forward but we came to them and played right into their hands. That lead should have forced Tyrone to play on our terms, but the exact opposite happened.

The mental discipline required to do this considering the (misplaced) crowd abuse would be tough. But if its going to be a boring approach anyway, why not use it to your advantage?

I will caveat all this by saying, as I have previously, that we should have varied our game more by kicking long into the square a few times. It was way too predictable what we were doing and we gave the Tyrone defence nothing to think about in behind their defensive banks because they knew the ball wouldn't be delivered. But what I say above still stands for the situation we found ourselves in.

benjyyy (Donegal) - Posts: 1422 - 19/07/2016 22:09:20    1886702

Link

Or Ye could've tried a few long shots ....or long ball in to Murphy and mc brearty.....or instead of retreating try and break the tackle and get a shot off.

seanie_boy (Tyrone) - Posts: 4235 - 19/07/2016 22:39:24    1886729

Link

I agree and have wondered why this hasn't happened already. Work the ball up the field and at the first sign of resistance send it all the way back to the keeper. The crowd are generally bored anyway, there is nothing to lose on that front. Players are so rigid to the system I wonder how long it would take for the opposition to send more than two men forward to try and retrieve possession?

Soma (UK) - Posts: 2630 - 19/07/2016 22:53:57    1886741

Link

Replying To Soma:  "I agree and have wondered why this hasn't happened already. Work the ball up the field and at the first sign of resistance send it all the way back to the keeper. The crowd are generally bored anyway, there is nothing to lose on that front. Players are so rigid to the system I wonder how long it would take for the opposition to send more than two men forward to try and retrieve possession?"
I wonder the same. Hypothetically, if Donegal had done just that, I imagine that initially both sets of supporters would boo and start to shout the usual "get the ball up" etc. But after a while, Tyrone fans and players would start to think "jeez these lads are happy to sit there, we actually need to go and do something about this". Suddenly the tables then turn and the villains of the day become the defending team who are losing but happy to sit back.

And if it became the norm that a team in the lead would happily sit and play with the ball if the opposition didn't come near them, then eventually teams would stop trying to immediately filter everyone back knowing that this would happen.

And before you know it...voila...the end of the mass 14 man defense.

benjyyy (Donegal) - Posts: 1422 - 19/07/2016 23:14:51    1886752

Link

Replying To seanie_boy:  "Or Ye could've tried a few long shots ....or long ball in to Murphy and mc brearty.....or instead of retreating try and break the tackle and get a shot off."
That was covered in the initial post. I think that we should have tried long range points and long ball into murphy and mcbrearty in the 2nd half. The only time we did it was in the first half and your keeper looked like he would not have enjoyed himself had this been the trend. But this is all in the past now.

I think that playing the ball back to the half way line or beyond would indeed have resulted in the tyrone team being forced out of the trenches. But there are consequences to doing this. Firstly, the ref would give a team absolutely nothing if they did this in terms of frees. Secondly, it would mean that we would probably have nicked a couple of scores, and then..... retreated back to put our 15 behind the ball for the rest of the game.

There is no moral high ground here. I think that we have just got to add long ball and long range shots into our running game. Simple as that.

Donegalman (None) - Posts: 3830 - 19/07/2016 23:35:59    1886758

Link

Replying To Donegalman:  "That was covered in the initial post. I think that we should have tried long range points and long ball into murphy and mcbrearty in the 2nd half. The only time we did it was in the first half and your keeper looked like he would not have enjoyed himself had this been the trend. But this is all in the past now.

I think that playing the ball back to the half way line or beyond would indeed have resulted in the tyrone team being forced out of the trenches. But there are consequences to doing this. Firstly, the ref would give a team absolutely nothing if they did this in terms of frees. Secondly, it would mean that we would probably have nicked a couple of scores, and then..... retreated back to put our 15 behind the ball for the rest of the game.

There is no moral high ground here. I think that we have just got to add long ball and long range shots into our running game. Simple as that."
A couple of good points there. The one about the ref is a funny one - yet absolutely true. You would think that a teams tactics would have no bearing on how the referee implements the rules of the game but we all know that isn't the case.

However, the long range point thing I don't agree with for a few reasons. Firstly, it has a low probability of success. What Tyrone did well in the second half was to really limit their turnovers when they had lots of bodies ahead of the ball - they almost always kicked the ball dead so they had time to reset their defense. The second reason is that in that heat in the 2nd half there would have been tired bodies and tired minds. The tired body is an easy one to comprehend - it requires serious power and effort to kick from long range and when the reserves go down the effort becomes even harder. And anyone who plays any sport will know that fatigue leads to sloppy technique to make it even harder again. The third and main reason though is that we were kicking into a breeze in the second half. It wasn't a strong breeze but it definitely affected the flight of the ball. Really, the only player we have who can kick long range points in these circumstances is McNiallais (who kicked a monster) and possibly McBrearty, but he struggles to get accurate shots away under pressure. When Cavanagh struck his shot skywards it looked initially like it would drop around the 13 yard line until the breeze caught it, which shows the difference it was making.

benjyyy (Donegal) - Posts: 1422 - 19/07/2016 23:56:04    1886762

Link

Did something like this not happen in 2011 with Dublin v Donegal when Dublin quite rightly stayed back as well.
If Donegal had ran hard at Tyrone in the second half they would probably have got enough scores to win (couple of frees would have done it). They didn't, and deserved to lose because they stopped pushing for scores thus handing the initiative to Tyrone.

mhunicean_abu (Monaghan) - Posts: 1044 - 19/07/2016 23:59:18    1886763

Link

Totally agree with this post.I am amazed teams dont apply this tactic when facing a blanket defense and have a small lead

CaogaCuig (Dublin) - Posts: 63 - 20/07/2016 01:35:53    1886777

Link

Replying To benjyyy:  "I can't imagine this will be a popular post but from a completely tactical viewpoint, contrary to people suggesting our lateral hand passing / risk averse attitude was the reason we lost, I have a theory that we actually took too many risks and played right into Tyrone's hands.

For a spell in the second half, when we were 3 or 4 points up (and this happened at many other times), we probed from side to side just outside the 45, sometimes beating a man or two and then facing a cup-de-sac, being forced to turn back and undo the work of beating those players. This was very risky and eventually resulted in us losing the ball on a number of occasions. Indeed, for 4 of Tyrone's first 7 second half points, we coughed up the ball just inside Tyrone's 45 and they countered us.

What we should have done, and this would not have been at all popular with the crowd, was to take the ball back inside our own half and soloed and bounced the ball, passed it amongst ourselves and waited, and waited, and waited for as long as it took for Tyrone to start to release 5 or 6 bodies from their own 45 in order to get the ball off us. Then, we could have got our running game going with a bit of space in behind.

With a 4 point lead the onus was on Tyrone to start moving their defence forward but we came to them and played right into their hands. That lead should have forced Tyrone to play on our terms, but the exact opposite happened.

The mental discipline required to do this considering the (misplaced) crowd abuse would be tough. But if its going to be a boring approach anyway, why not use it to your advantage?

I will caveat all this by saying, as I have previously, that we should have varied our game more by kicking long into the square a few times. It was way too predictable what we were doing and we gave the Tyrone defence nothing to think about in behind their defensive banks because they knew the ball wouldn't be delivered. But what I say above still stands for the situation we found ourselves in."
Isn't that what kerry dome to ye n the 13 final

rossy15 (Roscommon) - Posts: 617 - 20/07/2016 06:07:29    1886779

Link

Replying To benjyyy:  "I can't imagine this will be a popular post but from a completely tactical viewpoint, contrary to people suggesting our lateral hand passing / risk averse attitude was the reason we lost, I have a theory that we actually took too many risks and played right into Tyrone's hands.

For a spell in the second half, when we were 3 or 4 points up (and this happened at many other times), we probed from side to side just outside the 45, sometimes beating a man or two and then facing a cup-de-sac, being forced to turn back and undo the work of beating those players. This was very risky and eventually resulted in us losing the ball on a number of occasions. Indeed, for 4 of Tyrone's first 7 second half points, we coughed up the ball just inside Tyrone's 45 and they countered us.

What we should have done, and this would not have been at all popular with the crowd, was to take the ball back inside our own half and soloed and bounced the ball, passed it amongst ourselves and waited, and waited, and waited for as long as it took for Tyrone to start to release 5 or 6 bodies from their own 45 in order to get the ball off us. Then, we could have got our running game going with a bit of space in behind.

With a 4 point lead the onus was on Tyrone to start moving their defence forward but we came to them and played right into their hands. That lead should have forced Tyrone to play on our terms, but the exact opposite happened.

The mental discipline required to do this considering the (misplaced) crowd abuse would be tough. But if its going to be a boring approach anyway, why not use it to your advantage?

I will caveat all this by saying, as I have previously, that we should have varied our game more by kicking long into the square a few times. It was way too predictable what we were doing and we gave the Tyrone defence nothing to think about in behind their defensive banks because they knew the ball wouldn't be delivered. But what I say above still stands for the situation we found ourselves in."
The 2014 final rather

rossy15 (Roscommon) - Posts: 617 - 20/07/2016 06:17:49    1886780

Link

Replying To benjyyy:  "I can't imagine this will be a popular post but from a completely tactical viewpoint, contrary to people suggesting our lateral hand passing / risk averse attitude was the reason we lost, I have a theory that we actually took too many risks and played right into Tyrone's hands.

For a spell in the second half, when we were 3 or 4 points up (and this happened at many other times), we probed from side to side just outside the 45, sometimes beating a man or two and then facing a cup-de-sac, being forced to turn back and undo the work of beating those players. This was very risky and eventually resulted in us losing the ball on a number of occasions. Indeed, for 4 of Tyrone's first 7 second half points, we coughed up the ball just inside Tyrone's 45 and they countered us.

What we should have done, and this would not have been at all popular with the crowd, was to take the ball back inside our own half and soloed and bounced the ball, passed it amongst ourselves and waited, and waited, and waited for as long as it took for Tyrone to start to release 5 or 6 bodies from their own 45 in order to get the ball off us. Then, we could have got our running game going with a bit of space in behind.

With a 4 point lead the onus was on Tyrone to start moving their defence forward but we came to them and played right into their hands. That lead should have forced Tyrone to play on our terms, but the exact opposite happened.

The mental discipline required to do this considering the (misplaced) crowd abuse would be tough. But if its going to be a boring approach anyway, why not use it to your advantage?

I will caveat all this by saying, as I have previously, that we should have varied our game more by kicking long into the square a few times. It was way too predictable what we were doing and we gave the Tyrone defence nothing to think about in behind their defensive banks because they knew the ball wouldn't be delivered. But what I say above still stands for the situation we found ourselves in."
I don't understand the title of the thread. you make some very valid points. why do you think you are playing the devil's advocate. Do you not actually believe in what you are saying.

s goldrick (Cavan) - Posts: 5518 - 20/07/2016 07:32:43    1886783

Link

Replying To s goldrick:  "I don't understand the title of the thread. you make some very valid points. why do you think you are playing the devil's advocate. Do you not actually believe in what you are saying."
Because it goes against what many people are suggesting was our problem - that we didn't 'go for it'. And that it would be a very unpopular tactic given the abuse we got for actually trying to attack.

The phrase 'go for it' perplexes me though; it's a bit vague. What does it actually mean? Does it mean just kick it in long or do what we did except more effectively. Going long might yield some success but 90% of the time Tyrone would have gobbled Murphy and McBrearty. That's even assuming we kicked good quality ball in, which we have never been capable of doing consistently.

And we tried hard to run the ball but even when we had 2 or 3 men on the shoulder they got gobbled up by the white wall. If we had another man or 2 in more advanced positions who could have received it and immediately laid it off to runners it would have been an improvement. Easier said than done though and Tyrone feed off turnovers in these areas.

benjyyy (Donegal) - Posts: 1422 - 20/07/2016 08:23:04    1886791

Link

I agree entirely with the first post here and was saying it to anyone that would listen on the hill on Sunday.

We're 4 points up, they have 15 behind the ball, we should start playing it back to our keeper and passing it around inside our own 45. Don't even have to pass it around, start doing kickups, or just have the keeper put his foot on the ball. That would rile them up and force them to come out. Obviously some risk involved, but surprised it hasn't happened before. Look at Soccer, happens all the time. They even brought in the back-pass rule to negate it.

And the point about the crowd not liking it, I think that would pass very quickly. It would only need to be done for a couple of minutes until the team behind on the scoreboard would be forced to come out and hey... an actual open game would start to break out.

himachechy (Donegal) - Posts: 293 - 20/07/2016 12:18:20    1886918

Link

Referring to the opening post....Dublin have done it in a few league games this year. It stinks the place out, but why run into the trap the other team are trying to set.

JayP (Dublin) - Posts: 1772 - 20/07/2016 12:43:07    1886933

Link

Replying To benjyyy:  "I can't imagine this will be a popular post but from a completely tactical viewpoint, contrary to people suggesting our lateral hand passing / risk averse attitude was the reason we lost, I have a theory that we actually took too many risks and played right into Tyrone's hands.

For a spell in the second half, when we were 3 or 4 points up (and this happened at many other times), we probed from side to side just outside the 45, sometimes beating a man or two and then facing a cup-de-sac, being forced to turn back and undo the work of beating those players. This was very risky and eventually resulted in us losing the ball on a number of occasions. Indeed, for 4 of Tyrone's first 7 second half points, we coughed up the ball just inside Tyrone's 45 and they countered us.

What we should have done, and this would not have been at all popular with the crowd, was to take the ball back inside our own half and soloed and bounced the ball, passed it amongst ourselves and waited, and waited, and waited for as long as it took for Tyrone to start to release 5 or 6 bodies from their own 45 in order to get the ball off us. Then, we could have got our running game going with a bit of space in behind.

With a 4 point lead the onus was on Tyrone to start moving their defence forward but we came to them and played right into their hands. That lead should have forced Tyrone to play on our terms, but the exact opposite happened.

The mental discipline required to do this considering the (misplaced) crowd abuse would be tough. But if its going to be a boring approach anyway, why not use it to your advantage?

I will caveat all this by saying, as I have previously, that we should have varied our game more by kicking long into the square a few times. It was way too predictable what we were doing and we gave the Tyrone defence nothing to think about in behind their defensive banks because they knew the ball wouldn't be delivered. But what I say above still stands for the situation we found ourselves in."
I'm sorry Benj - this is a whole load of wudda, shudda, chudda - fact is both teams set up ultra defensive until Tyrone decided to take the game by the scruff of the neck in last 10 and went on to win it. Tyrone had the same issue whereby they hit the wall on your 45 and went side by side and spilled the ball - the difference before the last 10 mins is Donegal scored some great long range points and Tyrone made really bad shot selections. However in last 10 with the wind they got their shots on target. I would also suggest that Tyrone played within themselves to counteract the Donegal set up and don't believe they will do that again even if they meet Donegal in HQ. Plus they also played very nervously because of their recent history with Donegal - now having beaten them and have another trophy under their belt their shackles will come off.

IrishGael3 (USA) - Posts: 1092 - 20/07/2016 12:47:00    1886936

Link

An interesting theory and one that would have taken a lot of nerve to implement. Joe Brolly would have had a conniption!

Lockjaw (Donegal) - Posts: 9135 - 20/07/2016 13:34:28    1886970

Link

Yeah that's exactly what should be done .

It's not really what Kerry done . Well they did it but in the final 10 minutes .

Donegal should have done it from minute 35. Then again it might continually promote it .

I hate the way football has gone .

Im not a dreamer either .

I've watched matches from the 80s and 90s and thought it was poor enough too.

TheRightStuff (Donegal) - Posts: 1688 - 20/07/2016 13:39:24    1886977

Link

Jesus, lads, if that's what football is gonna be reduced to next...!

keeper7 (Longford) - Posts: 4088 - 20/07/2016 13:47:20    1886982

Link

This theory is doing the rounds since Sunday and I don't agree that it is an improvement tactically on what Donegal did. If you play as deep as possible in the opponents half then if you get a free its score-able or if a defending player slips/pulls up injured an attacking player has a good chance right away of a scoring chance.

If Donegal played keep ball in their own half it would mean if they got fouled they would have no option of a kick at goal. If they got turned over by Tyrone then Tyrone would have scoring chance right away or at least be one pass away from a scoring chance.

Its a nice theory but when you think about it, it doesn't really hold through.

Donegal came within a Murphy converted free or Mcfadden holding onto a ball of getting the win. I don't they they slipped up tactically, although they could look at working on screening defending players better as a method to get attacking players open inside.

realman2 (Kildare) - Posts: 464 - 20/07/2016 14:05:12    1886997

Link

The major risk is that while inviting tyrone players into the Donegal half if Tyrone got a turn over they would be right on top of goal. So either a point or goal would be the out come. Imagine trying this then getting dispossessed and a conceding a goal. The fans would have wrecked it.

At the very least it would be Donegal having to take the ball from their back line right up to tyrone half without giving the ball away or being dispossessed. It wouldn't work against well organised teams

kevin03 (Tyrone) - Posts: 276 - 20/07/2016 15:00:31    1887062

Link