Coaches Box

[Cheap Seats 3,300]

25 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

Everybody has an opinion, some think theirs is the only correct one, not me, I just post my opinion, don't demand anything, unlike some

The issue lies with the inexperience still within the playing group

I've listened to the coaches, the idea is to slow the game down to kill opposition momentum, not rocket science, it's whether the older heads can rein in the younger ones     a rush of goals adds to the panuc, making it harder for the coaches and leaders

4th qtr we managed it

The coach is in the box, not on the field

Doesn't help if a leader gives away a stupid free kick to allow the opposition to draw level

Its interesting you say that saty.

Because i noticed in the 3rd and 4th that we tended to rush and bomb the ball rathe then trying to keep possession. 

I assume it was because the boys were tired and the ball like a cake of soap? But it seemed opposite of slowing the game down?

Was it poor execution or just not following instructions?

 

 

[rpfc 27,391]

I think his demeanour is fine, my main issue is with our loyalty to this overloading behind the contest AND then we panic kick to the forward line where our players are not. It is fuel to the fire when teams get a run on. We just give it to them on their HB line.

I think we need to read the game better and make it a one-on-one contest when teams have the momentum against us. I honestly think we can win against most teams in an arm wrestle.

[Wiseblood 24,636]

34 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

Everybody has an opinion

Classic Saty.  Gets stuck into people for having an opinion, and when he's challenged on it he raises his hands in the air and claims it's just 'his opinion.'  

[Dr. Gonzo 22,399]

12 hours ago, A F said:

I think this is a great post, mate, but I'd say we do implement a Plan B, which is moving the press deeper and playing an 8 man defence. What happens is, our pressure completely drops off, we fail to lay tackles and fumble the ball and/or bomb long to 2 on 1s. 

Lewis has been responsible for two momentum swings, two weeks in a row.

Vince killed Zorko in the first half, but when Zorko got off the chain, Brisbane got off the chain.

Jones generally fumbled most of the night and can often make poor decisions under pressure.

These are our three more experienced players. They are our leaders. They deserve to be questioned. They don't stand up when we need them. 

At one stage last night, Jones tried to play tempo footy, but kicked it to a contest that we lost and Brisbane got a goal from it. So clearly, we try to slow the tempo at times, but our coaches either need to put something else in place too or we need to get better at playing tempo footy.

We should be able to do it with the experience of Lewis and Vince kicking behind the ball, but these two often turn it over back there. It's a hard one. I suspect the coaches shift to an 8 man defence and push the zone back and expect that our leaders should be able to do the rest with a bit of tempo footy and calm ball use. 

Having written this post, I'm wondering whether it's not a Plan B that we need, but a Plan C and D!

That Jones kick up the line to a contest was stupid. That was the exact time we needed to chip the ball around and maintain possession for a minute or two to take some wind out of the Lions sails. We seem unprepared to do that, not sure if it's down to having no confidence in our skills to do it or what. 

It's one thing to be frenetic in your attack and pressure but when the opposition gains momentum your frenetic energy works in their favour. That's when you need to hold on to the footy, chip it back and forth across half back for a few minutes to frustrate the opposition and slow the game down. I don't really understand why we don't do this, we keep pushing ahead trying to wrestle back momentum through pure will but it's like the opposition uses our own momentum against us.

[Mach5 4,482]

I think (hope) it is simply a case of a coaching dept with a young team still with plenty to learn, and the end game is to have our players learn to work through slumps themselves by making their own adjustments.

The coaching dept give guidance during, before and after, but really you want the players on-field to eventually make those moves and make it work before the coaches need to intervene.

[Dr. Gonzo 22,399]

12 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Good post AF although I have only selected one section to comment on.

The deep press is good but you need some really good break away players to pressure the opposition on the rebound. Not sure if we have that (those players).

I know a lot of people deride his skills and he is slowing down but the likes of Heath Shaw are fantastic at providing that brief run and deep kick out of defence that sets up the quick attack.

I'd say we use Hibberd in this role and Hunt for the run and carry. Neither have been as good as they have previously (and conditions weren't ideal for Hunt on the weekend) but Hibberd wasn't bad against the Lions.

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

9 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

Everybody has an opinion, some think theirs is the only correct one, not me, I just post my opinion, don't demand anything, unlike some

The issue lies with the inexperience still within the playing group

I've listened to the coaches, the idea is to slow the game down to kill opposition momentum, not rocket science, it's whether the older heads can rein in the younger ones     a rush of goals adds to the panuc, making it harder for the coaches and leaders

4th qtr we managed it

The coach is in the box, not on the field

Doesn't help if a leader gives away a stupid free kick to allow the opposition to draw level

Astonishingly, I’m in total agreement with this post and your last.

The talk of Goody and co needing a plan B, C, D etc is ridiculous.

Look at any strong opposition side who have played consistently well over a period of time and you’ll see that they have one game plan and their players execute it to a consistently high level often. Hawthorn, Geelong and Sydney over the years, Richmond last year, Doggies in 16 etc.

Our single quarter meltdowns are nothing to do with the way we’re coaching. Go over any of the footage from our second quarter against Geelong or the last 10 mins of the third and first half of the fourth against the Lions and it’s obvious to see that there is a distinct drop off from far too many individual players.

Skill errors, decision making errors, fumbles, disciplinary issues, positional etc. 

They’re the first things that notably drop-off which give the opposition a chance to hit the scoreboard. Momentum comes later when an opposition can sense a swing in the game.

Until we get a dozen or so guys playing at a consistently high level for four quarters, nothing will change, no matter who is sitting in the coaches box.

Gawn has been playing half games, Lewis is not playing to a high enough level, Jones is not using the ball as well as he usually does, Melksham and ANB have been wildly inconsistent, the contrast of Garlett’s game this round compared to last. The list is endless for so many.

It’s player driven. Our game plan is fine. We need more individuals playing high level footy for 4 quarters. Oliver is one.

 

* Would like to make an apology to @Wiseblood for my last few posts directed to him. Supporting this team is infuriating at times.

 

 

Edited April 1, 2018 by stevethemanjordan

[titan_uranus 22,220]

As usual, Demonland treats many things in absolutes, as if it is either the coaches or the players, but not both.

I agree with STMJ and others above that we have leadership issues and drop offs from too mamy players within games (Oliver stands out to many of us because he plays four quarters). 

But we are too frequently outnumbered in our forward line and too often allow our opponent’s loose man to dictate play and those are coaching issues, not just player issues. 

[Binmans PA 25,897]

9 hours ago, rpfc said:

I think his demeanour is fine, my main issue is with our loyalty to this overloading behind the contest AND then we panic kick to the forward line where our players are not. It is fuel to the fire when teams get a run on. We just give it to them on their HB line.

I think we need to read the game better and make it a one-on-one contest when teams have the momentum against us. I honestly think we can win against most teams in an arm wrestle.

Yeah, going one on one is probably the other way to go, once we've tried the 8 man defence, deeper press and tempo footy. We seem determined not to go one on one though. 

54 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Astonishingly, I’m in total agreement with this post and your last.

The talk of Goody and co needing a plan B, C, D etc is ridiculous.

Look at any strong opposition side who have played consistently well over a period of time and you’ll see that they have one game plan and their players execute it to a consistently high level often. Hawthorn, Geelong and Sydney over the years, Richmond last year, Doggies in 16 etc.

Our single quarter meltdowns are nothing to do with the way we’re coaching. Go over any of the footage from our second quarter against Geelong or the last 10 mins of the third and first half of the fourth against the Lions and it’s obvious to see that there is a distinct drop off from far too many individual players.

Skill errors, decision making errors, fumbles, disciplinary issues, positional etc. 

They’re the first things that notably drop-off which give the opposition a chance to hit the scoreboard. Momentum comes later when an opposition can sense a swing in the game.

Until we get a dozen or so guys playing at a consistently high level for four quarters, nothing will change, no matter who is sitting in the coaches box.

Gawn has been playing half games, Lewis is not playing to a high enough level, Jones is not using the ball as well as he usually does, Melksham and ANB have been wildly inconsistent, the contrast of Garlett’s game this round compared to last. The list is endless for so many.

It’s player driven. Our game plan is fine. We need more individuals playing high level footy for 4 quarters. Oliver is one.

 

* Would like to make an apology to @Wiseblood for my last few posts directed to him. Supporting this team is infuriating at times.

 

 

Tempo footy is certainly a Plan B and the teams you've mentioned above have certainly employed this when the tide has turned against them. Equally, one on one has been employed too. These are strategies and back up plans that provide contingency to the main attacking game plan.

But I also concur that when these momentum swings occur, it is off the back of our players' own inconsistencies within game. 

It's frustrating because I'm not really sure why it's happening. Why are experienced players in Lewis, Jones, Vince (on Zorko), Melksham, Jetta and even Hibberd all struggling to maintain consistency?

[Yokozuna 1,004]

Many good points on this discussion. 

Out of interest, how many people on here have coached a high level AFL side before?

not saying people can't have an opinion unless they have coached, but it may help understand some things better.

One of people's arguments about him being a poor coach is his demeanour when the camera is in him. That is a load of crap, it means nothing. Just cos Clarkson is demonstrative, does that make him a better coach???

others point out the poor play by players and some of our tactics like bombing it forward to nobody. Do you honestly think the coaches tell players to get the ball and bomb it to nobody??? 

The tactic of starting with extra defenders running through is great, but the players need to be smarter with who they kick it too or be more patient.

overall, I like what the coaches have done in the past two years, the development is going really well, for those who think the last 2 rounds are showing players haven't developed, you really jump to conclusions too quickly!

Wait until mid season and see where we are and how we are playing and then people can probably justify there positions.

[DEE fence 4,415]

I am amazed at how much people read into Goodwin's expression, it is like people watched a season of 'Lie to Me' and are now emotinal experts, will have to watch it again myself, a handy skill to have...

[BAMF 3,783]

10 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

Everybody has an opinion, some think theirs is the only correct one, not me, I just post my opinion, don't demand anything, unlike some

The issue lies with the inexperience still within the playing group

I've listened to the coaches, the idea is to slow the game down to kill opposition momentum, not rocket science, it's whether the older heads can rein in the younger ones     a rush of goals adds to the panuc, making it harder for the coaches and leaders

4th qtr we managed it

The coach is in the box, not on the field

Doesn't help if a leader gives away a stupid free kick to allow the opposition to draw level

For what its worth i agree with you on most things. The negativity on here does my head in sometimes.

I hate it when you shoot down anyone with a negative opinion because they have never played/coached at the top level. An opinion can be positive or negative. We all have the right to voice our opinion no matter which way it leans. Many come here to vent.

I see that you have edited your original post, so kudos to you.

I will have to rewatch the game to see how we attempt to slow the game down though. It looks to me that we just continue to try to move it forward no matter the cost.

Was the free kick the Lewis one on Christensen? I think thats a hard one to judge, Lewis lost sight of him for a moment and made a mistake. Christensen was playing for frees all game which make it hard.

 

[Lil_red_fire_engine 10,132]

I don't think there is anything wrong in the coaches box. As others have mentioned you need consistent application of the game plan from majority of the 22 over 4 quarters. It is clear that when its applied we control the game. The problem is we still get wild variations. To manage the wild variations and sensing the game change in quarter you need smart and strong on field leadership. All we seem to be getting at present is the jitters from Lewis and to a lesser extent Jones when the pressure ups. 

For those that want a plan B how do we think Collingwood players cope when after training all summer as a back men Darcy Moore is swung forward after 3 quarters in round 1 or Howe goes from their key attacking springboard to a stopping role on Jeremy Cameron in one week. The best teams drill in a belief in plan A that means all play their role without falter. 

 

[rjay 23,867]

11 hours ago, Win4theAges said:

The major Problem with Goodwin is he is too proud to vear away from his attacking principals/philosophy and nulify attack surges against us. He is very stubborn our coach of ours. 

The major problem with Goodwin is he's a 2nd year coach.

He's still very young in coaching terms, all coaches go through this.

No one comes in fully formed...

[Diamond_Jim 11,679]

A good coach gets the best out of the players. For the first time in around ten years we have a decent list with a sprinkling of "potential" A graders.

Have a look at Collingwood teams under Malthouse and North teams of the last several years. Their lists were okay without being outstanding but you could rely upon them to give you a good game.

So far Goodwin's efforts have not clicked with the players. If anything the bulk of them have underperformed (including the last six or so rounds of 2017).

The next five-eight weeks are the key. All the games are very winnable. I don't expect to win them all but I expect to win 5 at least of the next 8 as a minimum.

North is a good test of coaching skills. We are a better team. Weather predictions are perfect (24 and light winds). No excuses.

Edited April 2, 2018 by Diamond_Jim

[rjay 23,867]

2 hours ago, stevethemanjordan said:

The talk of Goody and co needing a plan B, C, D etc is ridiculous.

Look at any strong opposition side who have played consistently well over a period of time and you’ll see that they have one game plan and their players execute it to a consistently high level often. Hawthorn, Geelong and Sydney over the years, Richmond last year, Doggies in 16 etc.

 

Completely agree with this 'steve'...

The good teams have a plan, one plan not multiple and they perform it well.

Of course there are contingencies within that plan as all good plans have.

Our problem is not with the game plan it's in the execution.

We're not playing good, consistent footy at the moment.

That's ok with me, it's a long season and as long as we hang in we will be well positioned at the business end.

Things will click, you can see it in patches.

 

[DV8 2,271]

3 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

That Jones kick up the line to a contest was stupid. That was the exact time we needed to chip the ball around and maintain possession for a minute or two to take some wind out of the Lions sails. We seem unprepared to do that, not sure if it's down to having no confidence in our skills to do it or what. 

It's one thing to be frenetic in your attack and pressure but when the opposition gains momentum your frenetic energy works in their favour. That's when you need to hold on to the footy, chip it back and forth across half back for a few minutes to frustrate the opposition and slow the game down. I don't really understand why we don't do this, we keep pushing ahead trying to wrestle back momentum through pure will but it's like the opposition uses our own momentum against us.

Its also party of our development i suspect.

In that we want to be a mighty contested ball team so we are still learning to engrave that into our minds as new players continue to enter out team. a constant teaching learning curve at this time.

And so backing our teammates to win contested footy or at least halve them. (includes kicking along the line)

Also we will need to develop confidence in chipping around to control possession, both in defence (tempo) but also from wing forward, in offence mode.

 

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

1 hour ago, titan_uranus said:

As usual, Demonland treats many things in absolutes, as if it is either the coaches or the players, but not both.

I agree with STMJ and others above that we have leadership issues and drop offs from too mamy players within games (Oliver stands out to many of us because he plays four quarters). 

But we are too frequently outnumbered in our forward line and too often allow our opponent’s loose man to dictate play and those are coaching issues, not just player issues. 

Are they coaching issues though? How do you know?

At this level, navigating how to enter the forward 50 in a smart and deliberate way is up to the individual. Bombing it aimlessly forward when your entire team know that the opposition have a loose man sitting back is not the coaches fault.

Take our forward running set-play as an example: When we send a half-forward to run in off the square at a centre bounce from the half backline, it obviously means the oppo have a spare defender sitting inside our forward 50. Our players should be fully aware of that so if we happen to win a clearance at that centre bounce because of our extra runner coming through, we need to be entering our forward 50 with purpose and care, not just blazing away. 

The coach sets these plays. The individuals must carry them out.

 

1 hour ago, A F said:

Yeah, going one on one is probably the other way to go, once we've tried the 8 man defence, deeper press and tempo footy. We seem determined not to go one on one though. 

Tempo footy is certainly a Plan B and the teams you've mentioned above have certainly employed this when the tide has turned against them. Equally, one on one has been employed too. These are strategies and back up plans that provide contingency to the main attacking game plan.

But I also concur that when these momentum swings occur, it is off the back of our players' own inconsistencies within game. 

It's frustrating because I'm not really sure why it's happening. Why are experienced players in Lewis, Jones, Vince (on Zorko), Melksham, Jetta and even Hibberd all struggling to maintain consistency?

Tempo footy really isn't a plan B imo.

It's just common sense.

However, I'm more interested in the part before the "tide had turned", so to speak.

I've just revisited the Brisbane game and there are were number of warning signs halfway through the third quarter that are the reason we lost control: 

- Individuals lost their ability to be clean with the ball in the contest

- Some certain individuals lost some critical one-on-one contests at important times

- The level of our ball use dropped significantly

- We missed some opportunities to kick very easy goals during that quarter

It was a matter of Brisbane picking up their contest game and ball use and us dropping away heavily in that area. That was the difference. Had we still been clean around the ball and kept our ball use up, the quarter would have been halved imo. 

 

[Binmans PA 25,897]

1 hour ago, rjay said:

Completely agree with this 'steve'...

The good teams have a plan, one plan not multiple and they perform it well.

Of course there are contingencies within that plan as all good plans have.

Our problem is not with the game plan it's in the execution.

We're not playing good, consistent footy at the moment.

That's ok with me, it's a long season and as long as we hang in we will be well positioned at the business end.

Things will click, you can see it in patches.

 

Then we're getting down to semantics, R. As we often do on Demonland.  To me, a Plan B, C or D are these contingencies within a game style.

[rjay 23,867]

19 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Tempo footy really isn't a plan B imo.

Correct, it's part of a well thought out plan...a contingency.

[Hot as Hell 465]

The best coaches have always been those able to develop a methodical, repeatable game plan built around the list of players they have at their disposal. 

No plan on its own will guarantee a win, and neither will a team of champions without a plan. Success demands that special sort of chemistry between coaches and players matched with skills and determination. 

I don't expect Goody to be a coaching genius after a whole 25 game coaching career. Nor do l expect him to be bloody minded that his way is the only way. 

From the underlying pre-season furore, it seems self evident that there remains some doubt that the players are as unified behind the unproved Goodwin as they were behind Roos, a premiership coach. 

The future is not yet written,  so l remain hopeful that over this year and next, Goodwin can broaden his mind enough and the players buy into his game plan enough, to get the coach/player chemistry right. 

Beveridge and Hardwick managed to get their players to die for them and had some luck with few player injuries.  Goody and his game plan is a long way from that, after his just 25 games. 

Open minds are needed from both groups if we are going to be more than just a "good, ordinary football team".

Every other side works on improving themselves just like us, so a "break out"  ahead of the pack demands ongoing fine tuning of all the ingredients of success. 

 

[John Crow Batty 8,226]

They must be doing something right despite serious lapses. For 50% of the quarters played thus far we only have conceded 1 goal in each. We had a lapse against Geelong where the wheels temporarily fell off but against Brisbane it was the warm fuzzy winning feeling when we got over 40 points up and the players backed off. Similar situations happened in the last two rounds of last season. We blow a quarter and end up playing losing catch up footy or we shut shop early when we have what the players perceive a match winning lead. These are two different problems. They are now clearly identified and the coaches need to act to bring in the killer instinct.

Edited April 2, 2018 by america de cali

[YesitwasaWin4theAges 5,789]

1 hour ago, rjay said:

The major problem with Goodwin is he's a 2nd year coach.

He's still very young in coaching terms, all coaches go through this.

No one comes in fully formed...

You think he's worked out to play another tall backman yet rjay? 

[Satyriconhome 9,982]

3 hours ago, BAMF said:

For what its worth i agree with you on most things. The negativity on here does my head in sometimes.

I hate it when you shoot down anyone with a negative opinion because they have never played/coached at the top level. An opinion can be positive or negative. We all have the right to voice our opinion no matter which way it leans. Many come here to vent.

I see that you have edited your original post, so kudos to you.

I will have to rewatch the game to see how we attempt to slow the game down though. It looks to me that we just continue to try to move it forward no matter the cost.

Was the free kick the Lewis one on Christensen? I think thats a hard one to judge, Lewis lost sight of him for a moment and made a mistake. Christensen was playing for frees all game which make it hard.

 

I only shoot down the blowhards who post 'I'm right and everbody else is wrong' and then attempt to bully other posters into submission

I have most on ignore now

This has been a really good discussion for a page or two, it does happen occasionally on here

Everybody is putting forward their opinion and nobody is deriding them for it, just stating their own, a discussion

Lewis has done that for years, oops, my opinion, it was stupid

The team are slowly learning to put the brakes on the opposition, but in the heat of the game when you have a group of attack minded young players (which we all love now), the coaches and leaders have a job akin to herding cats

 

[DeeSpencer 23,060]

Plan B got us back in to the game against the Cats. Where we lost the game was being unable to just get to half time 2 goals down as we conceded 2 in the last 5 minutes to make it a 4 goal margin. We had the loose man back then and just needed some smarter ball use and a couple of better defensive efforts to kill the clock.

I actually think against Brisbane they went to plan B too early when they really should've kept attacking in the 3rd up 4 goals and tried to get it back to 6 plus. Brisbane faded out at the end of every quarter against the Saints and did at the end of the last. We should've doubled down on attack instead of defending. We became too defensive in a game that was starting to resemble wet weather and wasn't going to be won just with numbers back and tempo footy.

The current issue with the team is that they can't defend by any means aside from attacking. They midfield transition and defensive one on one skills just don't seem up to it. Even when we drop a number or two back we have to keep winning the ball and moving it to keep the scoreboard still. Now, part of that is modern AFL footy, going hard in to your shell only invites more pressure. But we desperately need to find 4 quarters of consistent midfield spread - Roos alluded to that on Saturday night - and we need to get stronger contests from the backline.

I'm more concerned with those deficiencies than the ability to curb momentum. Play close to 120 minutes of midfield spread and pressure and be strong down back and other teams might still have momentum but it won't be as costly.