2 hours ago, bing181 said:

If we can't follow plan A, what hope in hell is there that we can follow plan B?

I'd also just make the point that changing Game Plan, isn't like changing your jocks. It takes years, or at least, a season. Getting the players to play to a plan that they haven't put serious time into is a recipe for disaster.

Going man on man shouldn't be too confusing.

2 hours ago, CityDee said:

How can carlton get a defensive structure right so quickly? Although they score less we are out of whack completely. 

Have you already forgotten what we were like in 2014? We went ultra-defensive in Roos' first year, it's unsurprising that it's the first thing Bolton has taken to. 

44 minutes ago, Chris said:

I think the biggest issue with the zone is it seems to get sucked up the ground too far. Roos said pre season he wants the ball back closer to our goal,this makes sense and would be why they push so far up, it also means if one or two players slip through then it is all over. The plan needs to be more reactive and if the forwards arent applying pressure, for what ever reason, then the zone roles back 30 meters to reduce our vulnerability. If the forwards are on top then the zone can role forward. It seems they have the same set up no matter the situation.

Agreed. I think these are the sort of tweaks that will be applied with time. Not sure about 30 metres, but merely 10 metres might be enough to prevent the breaking of the zone.

31 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Agreed - the other problem yesterday was missing too many shots. In the first quarter we had close to double the inside 50s but only led by three points.  We missed quite a few set shots as well. Kick a few of those and go in 4-5 goals up at quarter time and it starts to put the pressure on them and the game turns out differently. Even in the 3rd when we were pushing we missed chances that would've seen some scoreboard pressure.  All in all I think it was our forwards who cost us yesterday both defensively and offensively.

Spot on, mate. I watched the game with my family yesterday, as I always do and when Hogan had that shot on goal in the last, I said if he misses this, we'll lose by 7 or 8 goals. Sure enough, he missed it and that was pretty much the turning point in the final term, when we were within reach.

It's an oldie, but still applies - scoreboard pressure is essential in footy and poor kicking is poor footy. I know it sounds harsh, but I believe Hogan's kicking cost us the game yesterday. He kicked 3.4 and missed some vital shots that would have put us right in the game. His kicking also let us down in the Bulldogs game. In a season or so's time, Hogan will kick those and pretty much win us the game off his own boot. 

But equally, when the team works hard to create a scoring chance on a lean day and then the forward keeps missing, it just saps our confidence and adds to the opposition's.

26 minutes ago, AdamFarr said:

Agreed. I think these are the sort of tweaks that will be applied with time. Not sure about 30 metres, but merely 10 metres might be enough to prevent the breaking of the zone.

Spot on, mate. I watched the game with my family yesterday, as I always do and when Hogan had that shot on goal in the last, I said if he misses this, we'll lose by 7 or 8 goals. Sure enough, he missed it and that was pretty much the turning point in the final term, when we were within reach.

It's an oldie, but still applies - scoreboard pressure is essential in footy and poor kicking is poor footy. I know it sounds harsh, but I believe Hogan's kicking cost us the game yesterday. He kicked 3.4 and missed some vital shots that would have put us right in the game. His kicking also let us down in the Bulldogs game. In a season or so's time, Hogan will kick those and pretty much win us the game off his own boot. 

But equally, when the team works hard to create a scoring chance on a lean day and then the forward keeps missing, it just saps our confidence and adds to the opposition's.

Not sure on the distance needed but it needs to be variable depending on circumstance. 

2 hours ago, AdamFarr said:

It takes time to find the balance between attack and defence. We lead the competition for a number of stats. We score more goals and have a greater spread of goalkickers than practically anyone else. 

So could it be that we add a security measure not pressing up as high or pulling 1 forward out to run back or station a loose man type situation against  certain teams - gws left Patton loose at the top of the defensive  goal square against doggies 

8 minutes ago, CityDee said:

So could it be that we add a security measure not pressing up as high or pulling 1 forward out to run back or station a loose man type situation against  certain teams - gws left Patton loose at the top of the defensive  goal square against doggies 

That could be a solution, but I think it'd be better if we just stuck stringently to our roles and learn to play disciplined, consistent football. If we do this, we'll win most weeks.

1 hour ago, titan_uranus said:

Have you already forgotten what we were like in 2014? We went ultra-defensive in Roos' first year, it's unsurprising that it's the first thing Bolton has taken to. 

Absolutely remember  2014 and it was the right thing to do . 

3 hours ago, AdamFarr said:

Agreed. I think these are the sort of tweaks that will be applied with time. Not sure about 30 metres, but merely 10 metres might be enough to prevent the breaking of the zone.

Spot on, mate. I watched the game with my family yesterday, as I always do and when Hogan had that shot on goal in the last, I said if he misses this, we'll lose by 7 or 8 goals. Sure enough, he missed it and that was pretty much the turning point in the final term, when we were within reach.

It's an oldie, but still applies - scoreboard pressure is essential in footy and poor kicking is poor footy. I know it sounds harsh, but I believe Hogan's kicking cost us the game yesterday. He kicked 3.4 and missed some vital shots that would have put us right in the game. His kicking also let us down in the Bulldogs game. In a season or so's time, Hogan will kick those and pretty much win us the game off his own boot. 

But equally, when the team works hard to create a scoring chance on a lean day and then the forward keeps missing, it just saps our confidence and adds to the opposition's.

Yep - I had very similar thoughts. I even made a similar comment to my brother re: the Hogan shot - "if he misses this it's all over".

I truly think if we'd put a few of those earlier misses through, we'd have been looking at a totally different energy in the side. You could just feel the energy go limp with each miss. Roos even said in the post match presser that players naturally get energised through scoring.

2 hours ago, CityDee said:

Absolutely remember  2014 and it was the right thing to do . 

So why are you complaining about Carlton getting their defence right "so quickly" if you admit you know we did the same thing in 2014?

Just now, Nasher said:

Yep - I had very similar thoughts. I even made a similar comment to my brother re: the Hogan shot - "if he misses this it's all over".

I truly think if we'd put a few of those earlier misses through, we'd have been looking at a totally different energy in the side. You could just feel the energy go limp with each miss. Roos even said in the post match presser that players naturally get energised through scoring.

Add to that the pressure we feel in games where we are favourites, or thereabouts, or coming off a win etc., and I think with every missed shot we get less and less confident in ourselves.

12 hours ago, bing181 said:

If we can't follow plan A, what hope in hell is there that we can follow plan B?

I'd also just make the point that changing Game Plan, isn't like changing your jocks. It takes years, or at least, a season. Getting the players to play to a plan that they haven't put serious time into is a recipe for disaster.

Brendan Bolton says he disagrees. Yes he has more experienced players, but they were there the last 3 years.  

I understand what implementing a game plan means, but blind faith in it  being guaranteed to work in years to come is naive. It won't work on some days and that is guaranteed, therefore you don't need a whole new game plan, you need to make some simple changes such as man on man, or loose defender etc. This will help us win or stop thrashings when we are off. Where is the evidence of that? 

Also wins are invaluable to young sides. 

I know it is not all about winning if there is a bigger picture but for God sake, footballers are not all total idiots and can adapt to slight modifications in games. Nothing is new, they will have done it before.  

Better selection won't hurt either. 

15 hours ago, AdamFarr said:

Astayetreed. I think tmnese are the sicoachingtweaks thint will outne appliedinwith Idnime. Not sure about 30 metres, but merely 10 metres might be enough to prevent the breaking of the zone.

Spot on, mate. I watched the game with my family yesterday, as I always do and when Hogan had that shot on goal in the last, I said if he misses this, we'll lose by 7 or 8 goals. Sure enough, he missed it and that was pretty much the turning point in the final term, when we were within reach.

It's an oldie, but still applies - scoreboard pressure is essential in footy and poor kicking is poor footy. I know it sounds harsh, but I believe Hogan's kicking cost us the game yesterday. He kicked 3.4 and missed some vital shots that would have put us right in the game. His kicking also let us down in the Bulldogs game. In a season or so's time, Hogan will kick those and pretty much win us the game off his own boot. 

But equally, when the team works hard to create a scoring chance on a lean day and then the forward keeps missing, it just saps our confidence and adds to the opposition's.

Hogan needs a new kicking leg agreed. But he alone did not cost us the game yesterday.

Still much to learn, played from behind (not alone) too often but worked hard and even pushed up the ground at times.

His contested marks I50 were some of the few times the ball remained In our 50 for more than 20 or 30 sec.

Thought he was one of our (few) best players on the day

I don't have a problem per se with zone defense - what I find strange is signing Dunn to a long-term deal (not meaning to knock the player) when he is not suited to being a zone defender and they arent using him and losing Howe who is essentially everything you want in a zone defender

If Plan A is fluid, flexible and adaptable, you don't need a Plan B.

Plan A is Plan B.

9 minutes ago, mauriesy said:

If Plan A is fluid, flexible and adaptable, you don't need a Plan B.

Plan A is Plan B.

Our Plan A clearly isn't.  

I know that a young inexperienced side needs time and won't do everything correctly, however I think it is demoralising for the team, if they have to keep doing something that is not working on a particular day, instead of implementing a small change that gives them the chance of winning. 

BTW what happens if we discover in a year that our plan is the wrong one, what then, another year or two trying another one?

We are pressing too high and our kick in zone is like swiss cheese at the moment. Even against Collingwood and Richmond we gave up too many end to end scoring opportunities.

It took a single preseason for carlton to get a solid defence up and running and three for us to get it wrong . 

I think people need to relax a little and have faith that the FD we have aren't dimwits and have identified all of the problems we are seeing play out on game day. I know it is difficult considering we've been burnt in the past but we've got plenty of experience in the coaches box these days. I doubt what we're doing now is the end product, it will be more like a base to build off. Tweaking will occur naturally as the game evolves and as we become more adept we will become more flexible - a lot of it comes down to on field leadership knowing when and more importantly how to pull the trigger on structural changes. Having a team of kids where the mean number of games played is 30 (last week v Brisbane, not sure about this week) doesn't help this. It is unsurprising considering this that we are trying to focus on implementing the game plan first before trying to change things around.

Hi

now that many of the newspapers have introduced paywalls I have become an avid reader of the online Australian edition of the Guardian. No paywall and unlimited access. Moreover it allows comments which frequently make for better reading than the articles.

Anyway today is one of the first opinion pieces I have seen on the MFC. Shows we are "making waves". It talks of our game plan amongst other things including the dreaded MFCSS

Here is the link if anyone is interested:

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/may/30/fear-of-another-false-dawn-lingers-at-melbourne-after-demons-loss-in-alice

Was listening to 3AW on the weekend and they were commenting on the importance of Heath Shaw to the Giants.

In the game against the Bulldogs he had 38 possessions across the half back line. Apparently he was just sitting back mopping up the helter skelter forward moves from the Bulldogs. Another interesting stat was that of his 38 possessions he had 36 kicks and only two handballs. Even in a losing game against the Crows he had 26 odd possessions of which 24 were kicks.

I was wondering in our defensive system who if anyone is our equivalent of Heath Shaw or are the Giants playing a different zone ?

6 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Was listening to 3AW on the weekend and they were commenting on the importance of Heath Shaw to the Giants.

In the game against the Bulldogs he had 38 possessions across the half back line. Apparently he was just sitting back mopping up the helter skelter forward moves from the Bulldogs. Another interesting stat was that of his 38 possessions he had 36 kicks and only two handballs. Even in a losing game against the Crows he had 26 odd possessions of which 24 were kicks.

I was wondering in our defensive system who if anyone is our equivalent of Heath Shaw or are the Giants playing a different zone ?

I'd assume we want Salem to be that player but he's been out of sorts this year seemingly due to his thyroid issue.

34 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I'd assume we want Salem to be that player but he's been out of sorts this year seemingly due to his thyroid issue.

Melksham?

47 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Was listening to 3AW on the weekend and they were commenting on the importance of Heath Shaw to the Giants.

In the game against the Bulldogs he had 38 possessions across the half back line. Apparently he was just sitting back mopping up the helter skelter forward moves from the Bulldogs. Another interesting stat was that of his 38 possessions he had 36 kicks and only two handballs. Even in a losing game against the Crows he had 26 odd possessions of which 24 were kicks.

I was wondering in our defensive system who if anyone is our equivalent of Heath Shaw or are the Giants playing a different zone ?

I like Heath Shaw as a player, but his stats are misleading. Whenever the opposition kicks a behind, Shaw takes the kick-ins and always kicks it to himself before playing on. That counts as a possession. Also in the Dogs game, once the result was beyound doubt, Shaw played kick to kick with his fellow GWS teammates. He's a Dreamteam pin-up boy.

 

1 hour ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Hi

now that many of the newspapers have introduced paywalls I have become an avid reader of the online Australian edition of the Guardian. No paywall and unlimited access. Moreover it allows comments which frequently make for better reading than the articles.

Anyway today is one of the first opinion pieces I have seen on the MFC. Shows we are "making waves". It talks of our game plan amongst other things including the dreaded MFCSS

Here is the link if anyone is interested:

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/may/30/fear-of-another-false-dawn-lingers-at-melbourne-after-demons-loss-in-alice

I thought the Guardian was  UK newspaper, I guess not.

The strangest part about the comments section is that it seems to be respectful discussion.  Mind you I havent been to the politics section yet...

17 minutes ago, Petraccattack said:

I thought the Guardian was  UK newspaper, I guess not.

The strangest part about the comments section is that it seems to be respectful discussion.  Mind you I havent been to the politics section yet...

You are right it is a long established UK paper with a reputation for being liberal (left) ...similar perhaps to the Age.

A few years back it started publishing a US and Australian version and now have several good writers.

The political comments are indeed a bit less respectful. (It has some great articles on TV shows with ensuing commentary. The ones on Game of Thrones I consider a "must read.")

43 minutes ago, mo64 said:

I like Heath Shaw as a player, but his stats are misleading. Whenever the opposition kicks a behind, Shaw takes the kick-ins and always kicks it to himself before playing on. That counts as a possession. Also in the Dogs game, once the result was beyound doubt, Shaw played kick to kick with his fellow GWS teammates. He's a Dreamteam pin-up boy.

 

Very good point mo64. Could explain why even with that number of possessions some writers did not name him amongst the best players. (This was one of the things the 3AW commentators were complaining about.)