On 01/05/2011 at 00:14, agent_orange said:

Haven't seen any game plans - nobody else can see it. We are a joke to most clubs. And if there is a game plan somewhere to be seeen, I highly doubt that it will get anywhere near a premiership.

Time for a changes, time for a hard progressive coach. Surely the board should meet and request Dean Bailey to attend and explain what he is trying to achieve. It is purely economical. If we keep going along this track, we will end up losing more financially then paying of a sacked coach and employing a new one.

I don't even think that's necessary. No further explanations required thank you.

Just an immediate job advert:

AFL club seeks ruthless, battle hardened coach with premiership experience ...

back to basics ?

what the hell do they do all week ?

they are full time employes of the MFC which work all week l,m sure none of them have to go back to basic surfing lessons again.

get a grip l dont pay my hard earned money on the club to show nothing !!!!!!!

  On 01/05/2011 at 00:14, agent_orange said:

Haven't seen any game plans - nobody else can see it. We are a joke to most clubs. And if there is a game plan somewhere to be seeen, I highly doubt that it will get anywhere near a premiership.

Time for a changes, time for a hard progressive coach. Surely the board should meet and request Dean Bailey to attend and explain what he is trying to achieve. It is purely economical. If we keep going along this track, we will end up losing more financially then paying of a sacked coach and employing a new one.

You didn't watch the Sydney game last year? Or the Brisbane game? Or any of our other wins?

We push numbers up the ground and behind the ball, we wait for the turnover, then we move the ball with run and carry and handpass, with our players running towards goal to catch flat footed zoning members of the opposition off guard.

Does it work? Well, we have won games doing it. But as Garry Lyon, amongst others, has said, it's a high risk/high reward style. When it works, it looks good (e.g. Sydney, Brisbane from last year). We carve teams up on the rebound with pressure in our defensive half, and with footspeed and skill we stream forward and break the game open. When it doesn't work, we get destroyed. If we don't apply pressure our structure falls apart because too many players end up in the same area, we don't run or chase hard enough, we don't create the turnovers required to get the ball, we don't go inside 50 enough, we don't have a forward line, and we generally have no sound method for moving the ball out of the 50.

I'm not convinced that this style of play will win us a premiership, as I think we have been left behind with the evolution of the forward press. We defend from too far back, we need our players further up the ground, and we need to be far, far more aggressive at the contest. I'd like to see us keep more numbers forward of the ball, keep taller players closer to goal and leading towards, not away from, the ball carrier.

  On 01/05/2011 at 02:05, titan_uranus said:

You didn't watch the Sydney game last year? Or the Brisbane game? Or any of our other wins?

We push numbers up the ground and behind the ball, we wait for the turnover, then we move the ball with run and carry and handpass, with our players running towards goal to catch flat footed zoning members of the opposition off guard.

Does it work? Well, we have won games doing it. But as Garry Lyon, amongst others, has said, it's a high risk/high reward style. When it works, it looks good (e.g. Sydney, Brisbane from last year). We carve teams up on the rebound with pressure in our defensive half, and with footspeed and skill we stream forward and break the game open. When it doesn't work, we get destroyed. If we don't apply pressure our structure falls apart because too many players end up in the same area, we don't run or chase hard enough, we don't create the turnovers required to get the ball, we don't go inside 50 enough, we don't have a forward line, and we generally have no sound method for moving the ball out of the 50.

I'm not convinced that this style of play will win us a premiership, as I think we have been left behind with the evolution of the forward press. We defend from too far back, we need our players further up the ground, and we need to be far, far more aggressive at the contest. I'd like to see us keep more numbers forward of the ball, keep taller players closer to goal and leading towards, not away from, the ball carrier.

Defending from so far back will never work in september, takes up too much energy..Think of the good old Tug of war...you are giving your opponents a free 25-30% before you attack, meaning you have to exert 50 % rjust to get back to the central point..

Yes if you catch your opponent off guard it can be devastating, but that won't happen often in september.

  On 30/04/2011 at 06:37, titan_uranus said:

Nope, seems like you're the one missing the point.

The idea is to pick a game plan that will win you a premiership, then stick to it until you get there. It means short term pain for long term gain. We've seen it happening since DB came to the club. Otherwise you play one way for a year or two, then need a fundamental re-structuring of your players to win a flag.

Ill expalin it simply shall I. You cant build a brick wall without bricks. You might have some but if not enough then the design must change to accomodate the materials to hand. We simply dont have the cattle ( or cattle far enough along any 'development' ) tocary out the Bailey game. He wil always find his team out manouvred and shot down. Only when against even more inferior combinations will any semblance of hope for his style exist.

You need to play a game with what you have. You need to work within your means whilst expanding your means. Once your cattle are bettle developed then you can also alter your methods.

At present hes putting the cart before the horse....or in our case....ponies !!!

  On 01/05/2011 at 02:05, titan_uranus said:

We push numbers up the ground and behind the ball, we wait for the turnover, then we move the ball with run and carry and handpass, with our players running towards goal to catch flat footed zoning members of the opposition off guard.

Does it work? Well, we have won games doing it. But as Garry Lyon, amongst others, has said, it's a high risk/high reward style. When it works, it looks good (e.g. Sydney, Brisbane from last year). We carve teams up on the rebound with pressure in our defensive half, and with footspeed and skill we stream forward and break the game open. When it doesn't work, we get destroyed.

Ah , that explains everything .

We wait for the opposition to get the ball and attack .

Pray to god they make a mistake and turn it over .

Then pray we don't make a mistake while trying to get them on the rebound .

Talk about reactive , how 'bout some proactive for a change .

Really untill Watts is fully developed and we find at least another Gorilla who can take a contested mark in the forward line , talk of success in finals is just an illusion anyhow . In high pressure finals when hail mary's are being bombed into the forward line big marking forwards are worth their weight in gold . Just gotta hope that our young developing midfeild is good enough to send it their way often enough . Preferably without having to come from the backline 1st .

  On 01/05/2011 at 03:00, belzebub59 said:

Ill expalin it simply shall I. You cant build a brick wall without bricks. You might have some but if not enough then the design must change to accomodate the materials to hand. We simply dont have the cattle ( or cattle far enough along any 'development' ) tocary out the Bailey game. He wil always find his team out manouvred and shot down. Only when against even more inferior combinations will any semblance of hope for his style exist.

You need to play a game with what you have. You need to work within your means whilst expanding your means. Once your cattle are bettle developed then you can also alter your methods.

At present hes putting the cart before the horse....or in our case....ponies !!!

OK. One more time. You can either play a game plan that suits what we are capable of now, or one that suits what we are capable of when we are more likely to challenge for a flag.

Perfecting a game plan now is all well and good but in 2-3 years when our list changes again, when our currently undersized forwards (Watts, Cook, Fitzpatrick etc.) become capable of playing AFL, when our running mids are stronger, fitter and faster, it might not be the same game plan we want to use then. So if we start with the ideal, and work towards it, we give ourselves the best chance of winning a premiership.

This is not to say that the game plan we're trying to use is actually going to win us a premiership. What I'm saying is that DB has, since he got here, tried to implement what he thinks is a game plan that we can use on Grand Final day down the track to win the flag.

  On 01/05/2011 at 05:40, titan_uranus said:

OK. One more time. You can either play a game plan that suits what we are capable of now, or one that suits what we are capable of when we are more likely to challenge for a flag.

Perfecting a game plan now is all well and good but in 2-3 years when our list changes again, when our currently undersized forwards (Watts, Cook, Fitzpatrick etc.) become capable of playing AFL, when our running mids are stronger, fitter and faster, it might not be the same game plan we want to use then. So if we start with the ideal, and work towards it, we give ourselves the best chance of winning a premiership.

This is not to say that the game plan we're trying to use is actually going to win us a premiership. What I'm saying is that DB has, since he got here, tried to implement what he thinks is a game plan that we can use on Grand Final day down the track to win the flag.

Good post.

I don't think DB's particularly worried about our W/L column this year or next year.

At the moment his priority is getting games into the players he thinks are capable of taking us to a premiership. I'll take developing players properly over cheap wins in a nothing season.

  On 01/05/2011 at 05:40, titan_uranus said:

OK. One more time. You can either play a game plan that suits what we are capable of now, or one that suits what we are capable of when we are more likely to challenge for a flag.

Perfecting a game plan now is all well and good but in 2-3 years when our list changes again, when our currently undersized forwards (Watts, Cook, Fitzpatrick etc.) become capable of playing AFL, when our running mids are stronger, fitter and faster, it might not be the same game plan we want to use then. So if we start with the ideal, and work towards it, we give ourselves the best chance of winning a premiership.

This is not to say that the game plan we're trying to use is actually going to win us a premiership. What I'm saying is that DB has, since he got here, tried to implement what he thinks is a game plan that we can use on Grand Final day down the track to win the flag.

seem to be changing your stance a little TU.

No game plan can be so rigid it cant adjust to the game day as it unfolds.

So are you seriously telling me youd persevere with a game plane /style , knowing full well you are incapable of actually executing it with the talent/development status as it is simply for its own sake in order that one day maybe they might get it or grow into it ??

A lot of unnecesary pain for irrelevent gain if so

I have thought about our friend DB a lot over the last 18 months.

It is fairly simple for me.

His game plan either does not work

or we do not have the skill level to make it work.

Plainly he will not change it.

There is no alternative

His contact is not renewed.

2012 we should have a new coach and a new game plan.

One that our players have a chance of implementing.

  On 01/05/2011 at 07:13, belzebub59 said:

seem to be changing your stance a little TU.

No game plan can be so rigid it cant adjust to the game day as it unfolds.

So are you seriously telling me youd persevere with a game plane /style , knowing full well you are incapable of actually executing it with the talent/development status as it is simply for its own sake in order that one day maybe they might get it or grow into it ??

A lot of unnecesary pain for irrelevent gain if so

I agree that a game plan can be adjusted. I've seen it happen more than once, a prime example being Geelong two weeks ago against Sydney.

DB doesn't seem to like switching things up mid-match, or even mid-season. He seems to want to persevere with the game plan he thinks will win us a premiership. As it stands, it may well turn out rosy. But I am still quite unconvinced that the style we're playing is going to get us there. And I've been saying all along that this is the process that DB has wanted to implement since he arrived, and it has its merits in that you start to instill in your players the way they are going to play 2-3 years down the track. Otherwise you're constantly chopping and changing.

No team changes it's 'gameplan' midmatch.

Tactics change but the style of play doesn't.

They're footy players FCS, any FD would be happy for them to learn one style and change tactics as needed.

  On 01/05/2011 at 11:07, rpfc said:

No team changes it's 'gameplan' midmatch.

Tactics change but the style of play doesn't.

They're footy players FCS, any FD would be happy for them to learn one style and change tactics as needed.

Semantics.

Would you say that the way a team moves the ball (i.e. whether it be predominantly by run and carry and handpass, or by foot) constitutes a game plan? I would, and thus, when Geelong changed this aspect a couple of weeks ago, that to me was a change in game plan.

A change in tactics, to continue the semantics debate, would be playing another tall in the forward line, or tagging a midfielder, or double teaming a forward.

Semantics is fun.