Firstly, in the words of Malthouse, it can take 3-5 years for a game plan to be perfected and adopted by players.

Having said that, it is my belief (at least I would hope)that this long bombing is the "get out choice" of the game plan and we are just not seeing the balance of the plan being executed.

Collingwood for the last three years have gone boundary but only use the bomb when all other options have dried up. We saw the last two years that the options rarely dried up. Collingwood players worked hard on the lead up.

When we do not work hard at leading up or we do not honor or pull the trigger on a good lead up then it only leaves two options. Chipping backwards or long bombing forwards.

Long bombs used frequently to stagnant contests are too easy to defend and the only time they should be used is when you are moving the ball really quickly and you can kick it long to advantage like we did with Stef Martin in the 2nd quarter.

Neeld strikes me as an intelligent man and I dont believe for a second that long bombing to a stagnant contest is the master game plan.

I'd be very surprised if the full game plan was on display at the moment. He's only had a few games with this team, so he will have drilled in thee most important aspects of it. Once we have mastered these parts I'm sure he will add extra layers of complexity, one at a time.

Think of it like school. There's no point telling someone to write an essay on Romeo and Juliet if they can't read or write. So you teach them basic literacy first. You then teach them important skills that they need to form a strong argument. Then you give them a structure to use to construct an essay. Finally, once they have every tool they need, you give them an essay to write. They you keep practicing.

I'd suggest that the defensive gameplan is being heavily focussed on for the moment. While this is happening the offensive plan is being made deliberately simple (although probably a basis for the ultimate plan). Kicking the ball long to marking targets and minimising the pain from turnovers. Once the players have mastered the inital aspects of the plan Neeld may give themextra options to move the ball forward.

Ross Lyon took a while, with a talented team, to get his side playing to his structure. He was canned after he took over from Thomas. He won 4 of the first 7 games with a team that had Riewoldt, Dal Santo, Goddard, Hayes, Rob Harvey, Ball and Leigh Montagna.

Neeld is also a very structured coach. I'm not expecting fireworks early.

Firstly, in the words of Malthouse, it can take 3-5 years for a game plan to be perfected and adopted by players.

Having said that, it is my belief (at least I would hope)that this long bombing is the "get out choice" of the game plan and we are just not seeing the balance of the plan being executed.

Collingwood for the last three years have gone boundary but only use the bomb when all other options have dried up. We saw the last two years that the options rarely dried up. Collingwood players worked hard on the lead up.

When we do not work hard at leading up or we do not honor or pull the trigger on a good lead up then it only leaves two options. Chipping backwards or long bombing forwards.

Long bombs used frequently to stagnant contests are too easy to defend and the only time they should be used is when you are moving the ball really quickly and you can kick it long to advantage like we did with Stef Martin in the 2nd quarter.

Neeld strikes me as an intelligent man and I dont believe for a second that long bombing to a stagnant contest is the master game plan.

I am serious when I say this Nutbean

When you work out the plan can you let me know please

What i saw on saturday made me long for DB,s plan at least once a month it was good to look at.

I have seen nothing in the past month that was worth the effort.

The game plan, when done properly, was what you saw in the second half of the first quarter.

It is a defensive game plan. It involves territorial dominance by reducing the opposition's ability to counterattack. We locked the ball in for long periods of time and had many repeat entries and turned over their kicks when they tried to leave their defensive 50.

If we bring the ball back into the middle then a turnover is very costly. Keepping the ball wide means that we can defend the oppostion much more easily.

Unfortunately we lost the clearances so badly that we couldn't get the ball forward enough to keep it there.

Bailey counterattacked far more than Neeld and it was attractive, but turnovers would be very costly. Contested ball will be far more important for us now as we try to drive the ball forward to gain territory rather than run the ball like we used to.

Some people are concerned about our new game plan. I'm not. I have absolute confidence in Neeld and his new coaching team.

I mean, it's not as though we have this unbelievably good list that's getting cruelled by our new game plan. With a very different game plan last year, virtually the same list got belted by 186 points.

Just read the HS over my coffee and was interested to see that 52.8% of our possessions were contested. Last year the cats went at 39% and the kings of contested foot, the Swans went at 44%.

This tells us that we are taking the message to heart of getting our hands dirty (The contested footy must have been everywhere except at the clearances).

What we arent doing is working hard enough off the ball. Run and spread, give and go, presenting options, hard leading. And we saw the end result of that with lots of long bombing.

Aaron Davey, who I was less than impressed with went at 73% contested possession ( with the limited possessions he had). Whilst I admit I am one to scream at him to go harder at the ball, if he gets another crack I will yell something different - work harder to make space. We do not want Aaron Davey getting 73% of his possessions contested - thats not his game and nor do we want it to be.

Jeremy Howe (who I do love) goes hard at a contest also needs to be constantly pushing up hard to make a lead. He needs to take more chest marks out in front. He is not providing his option enough.

To anyone who says " I've been watching 4 weeks and I dont know what the game plan is" I will counter by saying, its 4 weeks old - what do you expect.****

***for the record -I don't accept the crud we played on Saturday and whilst I expect the adherence to a cohesive game plan to take a little time, I expect a better effort to take no time at all.

I am serious when I say this Nutbean

When you work out the plan can you let me know please

What i saw on saturday made me long for DB,s plan at least once a month it was good to look at.

I have seen nothing in the past month that was worth the effort.

I am serious in saying "why would you be expecting a perfectly formed, instilled, implemented and executed game plan after 4 weeks ?" Unrealistic expectations of the highest order

I am disappointed in the effort not in the very dodgy execution of any semblemce of the game plan.

Just read the HS over my coffee and was interested to see that 52.8% of our possessions were contested. Last year the cats went at 39% and the kings of contested foot, the Swans went at 44%.

This tells us that we are taking the message to heart of getting our hands dirty (The contested footy must have been everywhere except at the clearances).

What we arent doing is working hard enough off the ball. Run and spread, give and go, presenting options, hard leading. And we saw the end result of that with lots of long bombing.

Aaron Davey, who I was less than impressed with went at 73% contested possession ( with the limited possessions he had). Whilst I admit I am one to scream at him to go harder at the ball, if he gets another crack I will yell something different - work harder to make space. We do not want Aaron Davey getting 73% of his possessions contested - thats not his game and nor do we want it to be.

Jeremy Howe (who I do love) goes hard at a contest also needs to be constantly pushing up hard to make a lead. He needs to take more chest marks out in front. He is not providing his option enough.

To anyone who says " I've been watching 4 weeks and I dont know what the game plan is" I will counter by saying, its 4 weeks old - what do you expect.****

***for the record -I don't accept the crud we played on Saturday and whilst I expect the adherence to a cohesive game plan to take a little time, I expect a better effort to take no time at all.

Lots of interesting comments on this and other threads.

I for one dont want to wait 5 years for another new group of players to get the Neeld plan

I would like Neeld to work with the talents that he has place them against opponents that they suit and play game plans (note plural) to win games.

Its called coaching and I am sure he has the skill and ability to do this(and the support team)

I do agree that it will take some time for it all to come together and despite my desolation at the result and particularly the radio commentry I am pleased that demonlanders are still seeing some positives (even if it was only for the first half)

While not looking forward with confidence against west coast I hope the squad has also seen a few of the other games to see that the intensity must begin and be maintained. I hope the coach can release players at appropriate times when they are fatigued or game plans require I hope to see improvement.

Lots of interesting comments on this and other threads.

I for one dont want to wait 5 years for another new group of players to get the Neeld plan

I would like Neeld to work with the talents that he has place them against opponents that they suit and play game plans (note plural) to win games.

Its called coaching and I am sure he has the skill and ability to do this(and the support team)

I do agree that it will take some time for it all to come together and despite my desolation at the result and particularly the radio commentry I am pleased that demonlanders are still seeing some positives (even if it was only for the first half)

While not looking forward with confidence against west coast I hope the squad has also seen a few of the other games to see that the intensity must begin and be maintained. I hope the coach can release players at appropriate times when they are fatigued or game plans require I hope to see improvement.

I also dont want to wait five years - what we have seen in the past from Daniher was a year of finals and promise followed by a year of going backwards and this repeated itself. Under Bailey we saw building of youth but basically going nowhere. What I want to see under Neeld is our core group improving month by month, this season to next, so I can see we are building to something. I dont need to see brilliant sunshine tomorrow but also I do not want to be taken in by false dawns.

Run and spread will be the Training routine this week $100 on it.

Thanks for that contested possy stat nut, i feel better, the fog is lifting.

We need clearance extractors....Moloney must be so far down the pecking order right now. He was given a chance and failed very badly.

Think of it like school. There's no point telling someone to write an essay on Romeo and Juliet if they can't read or write. So you teach them basic literacy first. You then teach them important skills that they need to form a strong argument. Then you give them a structure to use to construct an essay. Finally, once they have every tool they need, you give them an essay to write.

Well argued but i dont buy it.

These guys are listed at AFL clubs. They arent a bunch of rugby league converts learning the game for the first time. They shouldnt need to learn to suck eggs. For all of the talk about game plans and the like, i dont believe it makes that much difference. Yes it might make the difference between a premiership and a finals berth, but not winning and loosing against a less fancied opponent.

I don't buy it either.

Essendon went from all out attack with Knights in 2010 to a much more defensive game style in 2011 under Hird.

They made a brilliant start to the season and won lots of early games before tiring half way through the season.

Why does it look like taking us 2-3 years to learn while they got it in one summer?

Just read the HS over my coffee and was interested to see that 52.8% of our possessions were contested. Last year the cats went at 39% and the kings of contested foot, the Swans went at 44%.

This tells us that we are taking the message to heart of getting our hands dirty (The contested footy must have been everywhere except at the clearances).

What we arent doing is working hard enough off the ball. Run and spread, give and go, presenting options, hard leading. And we saw the end result of that with lots of long bombing.

Aaron Davey, who I was less than impressed with went at 73% contested possession ( with the limited possessions he had). Whilst I admit I am one to scream at him to go harder at the ball, if he gets another crack I will yell something different - work harder to make space. We do not want Aaron Davey getting 73% of his possessions contested - thats not his game and nor do we want it to be.

Jeremy Howe (who I do love) goes hard at a contest also needs to be constantly pushing up hard to make a lead. He needs to take more chest marks out in front. He is not providing his option enough.

To anyone who says " I've been watching 4 weeks and I dont know what the game plan is" I will counter by saying, its 4 weeks old - what do you expect.****

***for the record -I don't accept the crud we played on Saturday and whilst I expect the adherence to a cohesive game plan to take a little time, I expect a better effort to take no time at all.

No, I disagree with this one 'nutbean'.

IMO we have had problems from the past with players refusing to do the hard stuff, point blank. This has to stop. Our players Must Go when it's their turn.

IMO we have to go this path for the first few games at least, to instill the contested mantra to get it moving to a momentum. Then we can give some extra challenges to some, as the defensive structure starts to form...

I want to see & sort, those who will gladly, 'head over the pill',,, & those who won't. I'd like to know Now, which are committed to our New mantra. Sort 'em out.

Once thats done we can start to grow the produce & pull out the weeds.

I don't buy it either.

Essendon went from all out attack with Knights in 2010 to a much more defensive game style in 2011 under Hird.

They made a brilliant start to the season and won lots of early games before tiring half way through the season.

Why does it look like taking us 2-3 years to learn while they got it in one summer?

Because we do not have the required skill level?

Unfortunately "contested" passion can also be a loose ball get. Any time the ball is in dispute i.e. a loose bouncing ball on a wing, that counts as a contested poisson, any time the ball is delivered by hand or foot that is an uncontested possession. The exception being when the possession is won while under direct physical pressure (i.e. Contested mark).

Just read the HS over my coffee and was interested to see that 52.8% of our possessions were contested. Last year the cats went at 39% and the kings of contested foot, the Swans went at 44%.

This tells us that we are taking the message to heart of getting our hands dirty (The contested footy must have been everywhere except at the clearances).

What we arent doing is working hard enough off the ball. Run and spread, give and go, presenting options, hard leading. And we saw the end result of that with lots of long bombing.

In addition to our work with the ball, we have to come up with a defensive game plan that works with a contested possession game.

Why oh why do we stick so rigidly to a zone defence, and consistently allow our opponents 10-15 metres of free space? It's not too bad if we get the ball, but we have super duper problems when we lose possession.

We were watching the way players lined up when they were 60 -70 metres off the ball, and you could tell which Brisbane players were going to receive the ball.

Surely some version of man-to-man coverage is needed here.

And this is the really strange bit..... the same tactics were used under Bailey.

Unfortunately "contested" passion

Been married a long time, passion is usually contested, rarely get uncontested passion these days.

Typing on the mobile does that!