I thought it might be worth a thread which focuses on Roo's general approach and gameplan. Mods, please axe if it already exists or is more appropriate elsewhere or just plain stupid.

I think this article from Roos explains why he didn't move Watts forward on Saturday. Looks like he'd rather get everyone playing their planned role than toss the team about to secure a win. Painful for us supporters and lets hope he knows how to lessen the pain for the players.

Take down the scoreboards: Paul Roos

As Roosy has said this week, the scoreboard, wins and Losses don't matter so much, it's about nailing down the plan, structure and rules of the team, building confidence and re-learning what's required to be an AFL footballer

for the best part of 8 years losing has been accepted and honourable losses were almost treated as wins, there is a fair bit of mental scarring that needs to be fixed before we're ever going to move forward, especially blokes like Watts and Trenners who had the weight of the world put on their shoulders far too young.

Well said Master Demon....

It's not about now, it's about how will want to be playing in late 2014, 15 & 16...

Painfully as it's been a wreck since 07 but you can't fix it in 4-6 months & we shouldn't forget a complete new structure of on & off the field has occurred

Rome wasn't built in a day. Just enjoy the ride.

Was interesting hearing Roos speak about it last night and Bomber saying that they got Essendon to play they wanted for 1/2 a game or so then if things went wrong they would revert to the bad habits.

Also said the hardest part is convincing the players to believe in themselves and to get out of the mentality of being scared to make a mistake.

As disappointing as it was to lose on Saturday, it is a seven year relief to see the WAY they played, and hear Roos justifications for it. It's a relief to have a coach who sees the big picture, i.e. that change is a month by month rather than week by week project. For me, the future of our playing style is for once grounded in logic. Possession control, and hunting possession when it's lost. The stats also bore it out against the Saints. Lack of forwards and uncertainty cruelled us, but the practice is rock solid......and it's been a long time coming.

We played with more intent, was good to see.

The game plan was good, but we simply have no forwards.

Could get messy this week. A full strength West Coast are a 15 goal better side than a depleted Saints outfit.

Whilst we may groan with tossing the ball about "aimlessly", it is pretty hard to build confidence in players if they can't get the ball in their hands. The gameplan is there for all to see and I think that Roos might have already had a little success by the team winning the ball and sharing it around. We need to go more direct sometimes, take first options and not turn it over so much but you can't do any of those things if you don't have the pill in your hands in the first place. ( I also think it will help when we get some semblance of a forward line in place)

The plan is ok when the other team's defence is set. It is still a work in progress going inside 50 however.

But we need to be more bold and attacking when we first retain the ball and more willing to kick forward to a contest from a stoppage rather than always handballing backwards.

I agree with positive sentiments expressed. We definitely have a better set up than previous seasons. The midfield has much more potential. Added quality, Tyson is playing well and is a future gun, Vince is a proven excellent player, Watts may well turn out to be a mid field star. Also there is a chance Mitchie and or Riley will be good. Throw in Viney who should be a gun. There is plenty to work with.

Just have to get those talls fit.

I still think we will finish bottom 3 or 4 with a good chance of getting another gun tall in the draft. After Saturdays game I now know why they say you cannot have enough quality talls!!

I remember when the hawks were putting their list together they were getting regular floggings until the penny dropped. So hang in there.

Stick to the game plan despite not having the cattle?

Hmmmm....didn't Malthouse say that he needed to 'find a way' and shift things around?

Weren't posters screaming at Neeld for sticking to a game plan when we 'didn't have the cattle?'

But I suppose it's Roos and everything will be okay.

Neeld never came this close, kept the game this competitive, managed to maintain as much possession, or managed to display such a clear gameplan.

Unfortunately, when Neeld was in charge, things weren't working, but the difference was they were never going to.

  On 24/03/2014 at 22:00, KingDingAling said:

We played with more intent, was good to see.

The game plan was good, but we simply have no forwards.

Could get messy this week. A full strength West Coast are a 15 goal better side than a depleted Saints outfit.

Howe must pull his finger out and the rest of the team must learn to use him as an option more effectively. Breust at the Hawks nailed 5 of 21 goals on the weekend from 53 Forward 50 entries - we could only manage 6 goals (in accuracy I know) from a total of 48 entries. If we can get a little bit of consistency this area we'll look a lot better.

  On 24/03/2014 at 23:35, jumbo returns said:

Stick to the game plan despite not having the cattle?

Hmmmm....didn't Malthouse say that he needed to 'find a way' and shift things around?

Weren't posters screaming at Neeld for sticking to a game plan when we 'didn't have the cattle?'

But I suppose it's Roos and everything will be okay.

How do you know that this is the completed game plan and how do you know it won't be adjusted and evolve depending on the cattle - I'll wager that whilst the overall plan is more defensively minded and a generous helping of keepings off this will still evolve as our cattle matures or even gets on the paddock ( pardon the pun). For example - you will see more bail out kicks to the forward line when we actually get some personnel with height and strength playing there.

  On 24/03/2014 at 23:35, jumbo returns said:

Stick to the game plan despite not having the cattle?

Hmmmm....didn't Malthouse say that he needed to 'find a way' and shift things around?

Weren't posters screaming at Neeld for sticking to a game plan when we 'didn't have the cattle?'

But I suppose it's Roos and everything will be okay.

I suppose the difference is the cattle is already much better than last year, and the game plan isn't terrible, we have structure for the first time in 8 years.

  On 24/03/2014 at 23:55, nutbean said:

How do you know that this is the completed game plan and how do you know it won't be adjusted and evolve depending on the cattle - I'll wager that whilst the overall plan is more defensively minded and a generous helping of keepings off this will still evolve as our cattle matures or even gets on the paddock ( pardon the pun). For example - you will see more bail out kicks to the forward line when we actually get some personnel with height and strength playing there.

  On 25/03/2014 at 00:00, Sassy said:

I suppose the difference is the cattle is already much better than last year, and the game plan isn't terrible, we have structure for the first time in 8 years.

Settle, boys....

It's Roosy.

Roos has stated the game plan changed about 15% due to no forwards.

Think people are being a bit tough on Howe. He played well pre-season and it would not be easy for someone his size and build being a key position forward. Hes a natural 3rd forward and will struggle until Dawes et al return.

The team we saw on the weekend is completely different to what we've seen over the last three years and even though I'm not happy that we didn't win I'm actually pretty satisfied with what I saw.

  On 25/03/2014 at 00:07, jumbo returns said:

Settle, boys....

It's Roosy.

The whole gameplan thing - I seriously don't get it.

Be defensively minded ? well that's not a gameplan thats common sense

Keep the ball in hand and don't kick to a contest - at the risk of not kicking a score at all you can't be outscored if you don't let your opponents have the ball.

Clarkson is a perfect example of a coach who demands the above as part of the gameplan but then mixes his attacking vs defending mindset on any given day depending on how the hawks and the opposition are going. When buddy was on fire he would open the forward line and give him free rein or he was equally as comfortable shutting the game down.

Do you believe that if we had a fit and firing Clark, Dawes and Hogan ( and Howe standing on all their heads) in the forward half that Roos would not change it up ? keep possession yes but get it into those three one on one as quick as possible?

  On 25/03/2014 at 00:14, Jarka said:

The team we saw on the weekend is completely different to what we've seen over the last three years and even though I'm not happy that we didn't win I'm actually pretty satisfied with what I saw.

I'm not that satisfied.

Still too many nqrs, poor kicking skills, lack of on field leadership and costly turnovers.

  On 25/03/2014 at 00:19, nutbean said:

The whole gameplan thing - I seriously don't get it.

Be defensively minded ? well that's not a gameplan thats common sense

Keep the ball in hand and don't kick to a contest - at the risk of not kicking a score at all you can't be outscored if you don't let your opponents have the ball.

Clarkson is a perfect example of a coach who demands the above as part of the gameplan but then mixes his attacking vs defending mindset on any given day depending on how the hawks and the opposition are going. When buddy was on fire he would open the forward line and give him free rein or he was equally as comfortable shutting the game down.

Do you believe that if we had a fit and firing Clark, Dawes and Hogan ( and Howe standing on all their heads) in the forward half that Roos would not change it up ? keep possession yes but get it into those three one on one as quick as possible?

I don't know.

Haven't seen it yet.

I found it a little strange as smart as Roos is, that he couldnt find an avenue to goal.

I found it quiet obvious what the game plan is but simply couldn't pull it off due to bad skills and lack of numbers.

Hold onto the ball no matter what. go backwards, sideways, forwards as long as we hold onto the ball. Wait for something to open up then GO. In the Richmond game I think that showed best only because the Richmond players were going half arsed. One we get better at that movement we will be able to execute it in the season proper.

We were getting the ball to about 75meters out easy enough and then would look up and think 'gee I haven't got anyone to go to. we didn't really have a player the boys could kick to and think atleast if he doesn't mark it he will bring it to the ground. This week we will bring in Gawn and play him close to goal. dump it long and hope for the odd clunck, if not hope of small forwards can swoop.

  On 24/03/2014 at 22:55, Fat Tony said:

The plan is ok when the other team's defence is set. It is still a work in progress going inside 50 however.

But we need to be more bold and attacking when we first retain the ball and more willing to kick forward to a contest from a stoppage rather than always handballing backwards.

Good point. The game plan is based on soccer. It's not only about keeping possession, but also about creating an opening and then attacking quickly in a co-ordinated way. The "keeping possession" part is just the foundation.

Bombing to tall forwards should be just one option to attack. But other much more effective options include hitting someone on a lead, or running it through the corridor, or switching and then moving it quickly, or creating a stoppage deep in attack. We have an ideal opportunity over the next few weeks to develop other attacking options that don't rely on tall forwards.

But this relies on co-ordination. We have very few players who can reliably pinpoint someone on a fast lead - Watts can do it; Toumpas is great at it; Strauss can do it but needs to get the ball in the right position; and now we have Vince and possibly Tyson, and in future Salem. So when we move it around, we aim to get the ball in the hands of one of these in a dangerous position. And the most important part is that the forwards need to anticipate and to run to the right spaces even before the ball gets to them. If we have 2 or 3 forwards running to different spaces (not to the same space as they tend to do at the moment), it's even better.

Co-ordination is also important when the play is switched quickly. Dunn is great at this, as is Strauss. But at the moment, it seems that the forwards get caught flat-footed when this happens, so there is nobody upfield making space for the 2nd, 3rd & 4th possession (the last being the kick on goal) so the switch is wasted and it goes sideways again. So when Dunn gets the ball and looks to the "fat side", those downfield know who runs and to where, and who blocks the runner's opponent, and get the timing right.

At the moment, they're having to make everything up on the spot. That's not such a bad thing, because set plays can get unpredictable, and are harder to carry out once the other team susses them out. But the ideal is a combination. Getting back to soccer again, this has been the basic game plan for 30 or 40 years, and everyone knows what the other team is trying to do and strives to stop them, but defences can still get caught out of position and sometimes even the most obvious moves just can't be stopped. Which is why it's a damn good game plan.