1 hour ago, mo64 said:

If we've got the ball in our forward half and there's a turnover, there's more space for the opposition to work with. We actually out scored the Saints from turnovers predominantly because of Garlett and Watts. Saints used a high press, and Garlett and Watts were able to get out the back and score. But when I watched the replay, I only care about how our backmen went with the high press.

Garland was guilty of mistakes with all three points above. Three led to goals and the other was a point. The obvious one was his kick across goal in the 1st. But also in the 1st, he was caught out of position by getting sucked into an area he shouldn't have been, resulting in 2 Saints players on their own. They missed the goal, but Garland was the chief culprit for poor zoning. And twice he had the opportunity to neutralise a on-on-one contest with his opponent and failed, which resulted in goals.

Against top teams that move the ball well, we could get caught out unless our backline improves.

 

 

 

He also did a number of good things that you did not highlight that lead to scoring chances. it is about minimising the bad and enhancing the good to make sure we have more chance of winning.

50 minutes ago, Cards13 said:

He also did a number of good things that you did not highlight that lead to scoring chances. it is about minimising the bad and enhancing the good to make sure we have more chance of winning.

And he attributes team mistakes to Garland. With every opposition goal kicked there will be an MFC player at fault.  Garland must be easy to spell.

Goodwin took the preseason training sessions.

Goodwin is in charge of game-plan and ball movement.

Roos oversees all aspects of football in a managerial role.

My take is that Goodwin will continue to take training throughout the season.  He will continue to educate the players on the game-plan and will be vocal during all match day breaks.  And Roos will continue to oversee football in a managerial role.

In essence it's the plan and it's happening now.

1 minute ago, ProDee said:

Goodwin took the preseason training sessions.

Goodwin is in charge of game-plan and ball movement.

Roos oversees all aspects of football in a managerial role.

My take is that Goodwin will continue to take training throughout the season.  He will continue to educate the players on the game-plan and will be vocal during all match day breaks.  And Roos will continue to oversee football in a managerial role.

In essence it's the plan and it's happening now.

Who will make call on team selection and game plan?

Who is effectively our senior coach based on your answers?

1 hour ago, Baghdad Bob said:

Who will make call on team selection and game plan?

Who is effectively our senior coach based on your answers?

I suspect Roos takes the (old) "chairman of selectors" role, but Goodwin gets the team he wants.

I think Goodwin is effectively the senior coach and Roos more a director of football, but both will be careful to avoid using labels.

I reckon it's a very collaborative approach and Jackson and Roos have been the architects.

All just "gut feel" of course.

7 minutes ago, ProDee said:

I suspect Roos takes the (old) "chairman of selectors" role, but Goodwin gets the team he wants.

I think Goodwin is effectively the senior coach and Roos more a director of football, but both will be careful to avoid using labels.

I reckon it's a very collaborative approach and Jackson and Roos have been the architects.

All just "gut feel" of course.

I agree and hope you're right.  It's the best possible structure I can see.

Of course we'll probably never really know.

45 minutes ago, Baghdad Bob said:

I agree and hope you're right.  It's the best possible structure I can see.

Of course we'll probably never really know.

And to be fair who gives a flying as long as we are winning, right?!

16 minutes ago, Cards13 said:

And to be fair who gives a flying as long as we are winning, right?!

The point is it might be why we're winning.

3 hours ago, Cards13 said:

He also did a number of good things that you did not highlight that lead to scoring chances. it is about minimising the bad and enhancing the good to make sure we have more chance of winning.

Name them, because after watching the game twice, Garland probably did 3-4 things that I'd consider decent, but none of them led to goals. I also didn't mention the time when he kicked out on the full with no pressure and when he missed Grimes with that pass under no pressure, so I thought I was being generous.

He along with O Mac and Wagner were poor, but I'm not going to stick the boots into developing kids. Garland isn't a smart footballer as some like to assert, and the high press will find him out.

 

Sometimes a player will make a few mistakes early and an observer will be blinded to good work produced later in the game. Wagner had the jitters in the first quarter, maybe even beyond, but he was a really strong contributor by the final stanza. Oscar settled as well, and had a much better NAB round 3 than his previous game. Garland has played 135 games against all comers, so I doubt he will suddenly be found out by the high press (anymore than any key defender). He has been a bit rusty at various stages this time out, but he is flexible and quite reliable. If we have a group that go beyond his skill set, he will be replaced, just like the other 21 in our best! Not likely to happen in the near future!

For me the biggest difference i see as an overall judgement on our side. Is the fact we hunt the ball and have hunger for it. 

Kennedy, Bugg, Oliver, AVB, Gus all have drive for it. Gawn giving us majority of the first use. It's a great call of character on our recruitment side of things. Plus an obvious sign now that the 'bruise free' and lack of commitment for the ball is a thing of the past. 

Looking forward to the season now. I'm predicting a surprise season. We've paid our dues. 

Well... in the absence of JoeBoy  I offer this  3 word summation:  Dees playing Footy

 

Just had the chance to watch a replay.  if again 3 words....they are  bitter-sweet -sweet

We are far from '"there" but we are on the way.   There were many times I had to think..."is this Melbourne ? "

There's some seriously good footy happening in this game. Yes, some bloody obvious howlers and we are still really short of a really really good defender. Tmac cant do it all. Jetta neither.  Garlo..worries me to tell the truth. Grimes isnt really up to it at present...but we;re still doing ...ok.  Id rather do better than OK...over to you  FD !!

 

If one word sums up our game now it's "Purpose "  There's a cohesive instinct now. It;s far from perfected but by golly it;s there

We play like we can actually play...and play to win.  Still i have to think...am I watching the Dees  ?

 

I like it

Me too

Took me a while to put my finger on what was different from Sunday evening onwards.

Than I realised - it felt strange to walk away from a game NOT feeling disappointed. 

10 minutes ago, bjDee said:

Took me a while to put my finger on what was different from Sunday evening onwards.

Than I realised - it felt strange to walk away from a game NOT feeling disappointed. 

Sometimes I think the forum should be called 'DemonTherapy', we qualify by any objective measure.

I went along for a look on Sunday with my Daughter and her boyfriend and despite the errors from both sides thought that it was a fast and entertaining game with lots of pressure and we did not cave in at any time, we looked faster, harder and more dangerous than we have for a very long time. when ever they got a sniff the boys were able to shut them down and kick a couple of quick goals to keep them at bay. I had the Saints on a level par with the Dee's but not any more our up side with CP5, Vanders, Gus & JT to name but a few now puts us well ahead. Our team is kind of reminiscent of our 1998 side with Whitey, Powell and a very young Travis Johnstone coming in at No1 in the draft to join a young group of budding stars. I don't want to Mozz them but I am getting very excited about our prospects going forward, as I was in 1998.

1 hour ago, bjDee said:

Took me a while to put my finger on what was different from Sunday evening onwards.

Than I realised - it felt strange to walk away from a game NOT feeling disappointed. 

I didn't quite know what to do with myself as I was walking away from the ground. We've become so accustomed to dissecting loses and the expectation is they'll always be negatives, but there were very few on Sunday.

3 hours ago, beelzebub said:

There's some seriously good footy happening in this game. Yes, some bloody obvious howlers and we are still really short of a really really good defender. Tmac cant do it all. Jetta neither.  Garlo..worries me to tell the truth. Grimes isnt really up to it at present...but we;re still doing ...ok.  Id rather do better than OK...over to you  FD !!

With Dunn and Lumumba due to come back in, that is 379 games worth of experience to replace O'Mac and Wagner with 2 games

Whilst they may not be 'really really good defenders', they are definitely quality players that with the combination of T'Mac, Jetta, Salem and Garland should be able to cover most forward lines to keep us in the game

Edited March 15, 20169 yr by trenners_09

Back in the dark days of just a few years ago someone (can't remember who) mentioned Melbourne players didn't play with "trust". That is, they didn't trust each other to be able to do what was necessary which lead to them sticking to their own man to protect themselves should the opposition get the ball. I haven't seen any of the pre-season games, but would those who have say that the players now "trust" each other?

What has stood out for me in the NAB challenge is the tackling. It is smarter, harder and relentless. Very few dumb frees. Waiting a split second before committing, coralling the opposition.

This pressure will hold us in good stead. Its been missing for a long time and shows great signs of selfless team play.

8 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

What has stood out for me in the NAB challenge is the tackling. It is smarter, harder and relentless. Very few dumb frees. Waiting a split second before committing, coralling the opposition.

This pressure will hold us in good stead. Its been missing for a long time and shows great signs of selfless team play.

and the area it's happening, if they get out the back we are stuffd, but we are going to turn over a lot of balls up forward

16 minutes ago, Peter Griffen said:

and the area it's happening, if they get out the back we are stuffd, but we are going to turn over a lot of balls up forward

Sounds like us historically

On 3/15/2016 at 2:36 PM, mo64 said:

If we've got the ball in our forward half and there's a turnover, there's more space for the opposition to work with. We actually out scored the Saints from turnovers predominantly because of Garlett and Watts. Saints used a high press, and Garlett and Watts were able to get out the back and score. But when I watched the replay, I only care about how our backmen went with the high press.

Garland was guilty of mistakes with all three points above. Three led to goals and the other was a point. The obvious one was his kick across goal in the 1st. But also in the 1st, he was caught out of position by getting sucked into an area he shouldn't have been, resulting in 2 Saints players on their own. They missed the goal, but Garland was the chief culprit for poor zoning. And twice he had the opportunity to neutralise a on-on-one contest with his opponent and failed, which resulted in goals.

Against top teams that move the ball well, we could get caught out unless our backline improves.

 

 

 

Yes high press relies on zoning - because that's what it's about.  But it doesn't specifically highlight one-on-ones and skills more than any other structure.  Man-on-man highlights one-on-ones moreso.  And your "skills" example - Garland's miskick was nothing to do with High press.

5 hours ago, Peter Griffen said:

and the area it's happening, if they get out the back we are stuffd, but we are going to turn over a lot of balls up forward

The one who's often pretty good at cutting off the opposition's attempts to clear the zone & "get out the back" is Dunn.

I am not sure if anyone as posted this observation from the ST Kilda game.

After 1/4 time the MFC had 2 less on the bench and for the 4th quarter ST Kilda had twice the number of interchanges and our boys still out ran them.

Looks like fitness won't hold us back this year.