Bring back the Bailey(?) double huddle for kick in from points. A huddle just before centre and another around CHF. Fast spread to wings / flanks, confuse self and opposition simultaneously..  I always thought it was our most entertaining method of turning the ball over from kick in.

7 hours ago, rjay said:

I've always thought the best form of forward pressure is to kick goals...goes to show how out of touch I must be.

Sometimes you have to go backwards to go forwards. 

Our aggressive zone defending backline won't work against the best teams unless the forwards do their job and pressure more. If I were the coach I'd rather the short term pain now than getting the chop in a few years when the team can't rise above mid table mediocrity. I wouldn't do it early in the season but I'd be giving the guys I named 5 or so weeks to lift their defensive intensity and lay some tackles. Hopefully they've worked on it over the summer and it isn't even necessary. 

3 hours ago, don't make me angry said:

I asked what piece of play u would like to see, and be part of the coaching panel and came up with a game plan,  I did not ask for a sheep statement 

Ok a non sheep comment, make sure that everybody works and drop, no matter the name,  any player that doesn't

And as Bossdog says score more goals than the opposition,

No passengers coz we have the soldiers now ready and willing to step up

Be hard at it and don't accept anything less than that from anyone on the field. If a team mate is going soft give the a spray out of public view, if the opposition is (i.e. ducking into tackles) then get massively stuck into them and let you know you have no interest in playing against soft cheating bastards such as them. We kind of did this against that Mathieson scum kid from Brisbane. I say ramp it up another notch.

Other than that I would just them to hit their bloody targets!

Forwards in the forward line.

22 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Forwards in the forward line.

Radical CB!!

10 hours ago, rjay said:

I've always thought the best form of forward pressure is to kick goals...goes to show how out of touch I must be.

Oh..no! That would mean the ball goes all the way back to the "neutral zone" aka the middle.....a lot closer to the opposition goal than were we to just hold it in deep forward and run it round in circles ?

From my observations and (failing) memory that must have been part of the Neeld plan ?

Have a "Plan B", and even a "Plan C", for when "Plan A" isn't working or we're getting unravelled.

And anticipate the predictable tactics that half-decent coaches will use against us - especially "nullify Gawn (a la Hickey)" - and know how we'll counter it before it happens.

And own the corridor.

The Hawking Field -

The ball is assigned a theoretical gravity well value of 100, while each square meter of the field without a Demon already in it is given a 'well' value of 1, each square meter containing an opposition player is assigned a value of 10, and each square meter already containing a Demon is given a value of -10.

At all times each player moves in the direction with the highest 'well value' as perceived from their current position, after adjustment for proximity by dividing each square meter's value by the distance in meters to it.

For example, other things being equal, if ball 'A' (value 100) is 10 meters away and opponent 'b' is also 10 meters away but slightly to one side, then Demon 'c' will run in a direction mostly towards the ball but slightly towards the opponent player, putting their body between the opponent and the ball prior to directly reaching the ball.

 

Of course, this is all ridiculous. Thankfully the original theory was abandoned in favour of the much improved:

The Probablistic Hawking Field -

It is only based on current position. Whereas to truly make a decision you need to know both the current position AND the momentum of all the objects. Since this can't be simultaneously done through classical measurement due to the uncertainly principle, it is necessary to apply probabilistic methods to obtain a set of possible next positions based on previous observed movement of objects such as the ball 'a' and opponent 'b' mentioned above and then apply our original formula based on the distribution of those possibilities.

 

 

And if anyone has a problem with this game plan, just remember that until it has been observed it should be considered both better and worse than any other game plan you might suggest.

6 hours ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Forwards in the forward line.

And Full-backs in the goal square (bring back Danny Hughes)!

No more unworthy balls bouncing through unattended goal squares.

1 hour ago, Little Goffy said:

The Hawking Field -

The ball is assigned a theoretical gravity well value of 100, while each square meter of the field without a Demon already in it is given a 'well' value of 1, each square meter containing an opposition player is assigned a value of 10, and each square meter already containing a Demon is given a value of -10.

At all times each player moves in the direction with the highest 'well value' as perceived from their current position, after adjustment for proximity by dividing each square meter's value by the distance in meters to it.

For example, other things being equal, if ball 'A' (value 100) is 10 meters away and opponent 'b' is also 10 meters away but slightly to one side, then Demon 'c' will run in a direction mostly towards the ball but slightly towards the opponent player, putting their body between the opponent and the ball prior to directly reaching the ball.

 

Of course, this is all ridiculous. Thankfully the original theory was abandoned in favour of the much improved:

The Probablistic Hawking Field -

It is only based on current position. Whereas to truly make a decision you need to know both the current position AND the momentum of all the objects. Since this can't be simultaneously done through classical measurement due to the uncertainly principle, it is necessary to apply probabilistic methods to obtain a set of possible next positions based on previous observed movement of objects such as the ball 'a' and opponent 'b' mentioned above and then apply our original formula based on the distribution of those possibilities.

 

 

And if anyone has a problem with this game plan, just remember that until it has been observed it should be considered both better and worse than any other game plan you might suggest.

Brilliant. 

7 hours ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Forwards in the forward line.

 

28 minutes ago, CBDees said:

And Full-backs in the goal square (bring back Danny Hughes)!

No more unworthy balls bouncing through unattended goal squares.

And of course Norm Smith would go ballistic way back in 1964 if his back pocket player, say a certain someone wearing a number 5, were to venture forward and have a ping at goal!  

Rumour had it that despite Neil Crompton's indiscretion snatching back the GF Norm was (almost) apoplectic that he had broken team rules. ?

8 hours ago, monoccular said:

Brilliant. 

 

And of course Norm Smith would go ballistic way back in 1964 if his back pocket player, say a certain someone wearing a number 5, were to venture forward and have a ping at goal!  

Rumour had it that despite Neil Crompton's indiscretion snatching back the GF Norm was (almost) apoplectic that he had broken team rules. ?

Maybe Norm Smith was right! Since that team rule was broken we've been a disaster.

19 hours ago, Biffen said:

1. Go to bottle shop

2.Purchase plastic hip-flask of Vodka.

3.Meet Uncle Biiter and or Moon.

4.Purchase coke or OJ.

5.Mix drinks

6.Abuse opposition vociferously

7.Go to pub.

8.Catch train home while sloshed.

What d'ya reckon Dave Misson would have to say about this game plan?

 

20 minutes ago, Ron Burgundy said:

What d'ya reckon Dave Misson would have to say about this game plan?

 

Don't store vodka in plastic?

On 2/16/2017 at 9:01 AM, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Don't store vodka in plastic?

Possibly. I think he'd be more concerned about vodka and coke though.

Biffen aside, who drinks that?!

 

On 15/02/2017 at 0:24 PM, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

That tactic should be banned. If a player from the team which does not have the ball is banned from the protected zone, so should players from the team with the ball. And if the player on the mark isn't in the protected zone, he should be. In other words, the player on the mark should be protected as much as the player with the ball.

I agree.   Also it's a very ugly look for the game.  But as I understand it currently, as long as the player is behind the man on the mark, he is not in the protected zone.  Simple to have a man-on-the-mark zone and no need for a 50m penalty or other silly penalty if entered - simply stopping play till he clears out will be penalty enough.

Vince on a forward flank, kicking goals. 

1 hour ago, Ron Burgundy said:

Possibly. I think he'd be more concerned about vodka and coke though.

Biffen aside, who drinks that?!

 

1.Slash from G'n'R.

2.Me

 

On 2/15/2017 at 7:23 AM, Ron Burgundy said:

Middle section of the ground - Jones, Oliver, Viney and Tyson around the ball. Gawn to use any of those players to win the clearance. Spread quickly. Deliver the ball immediately to Lewis or Stretch on a wing. Those players then to deliver it precisely and quickly to a forward on the lead, or any number of high half forwards finding space in the forward 50. Simple. And, from the training reports I've read, it seems that's the style they're intending to play.

If it's a stoppage near the forward 50 - same set up but with one of Hunt, Salem, Hibberd or Vince sneakily lurking behind the stoppage. Win the clearance and quick disposal out the back to one of them, they then run to the forward 50 line and have a shot on goal. Vince and Hunt specialise in this, and Hibberd used to do this in his Essendon days. Salem would eat this play for breakfast.

Main thing is consistently winning the clearances though - and the good news is that seems to have been a huge focus this preseason.

 

Agree with this, simple enough but need to do consistently as stated. If you don't win the clearances your dead. 

The fake.

After a free kick, four players converge, then split in various directions, hunched over as if carrying the ball. A moment of chaos for the opposition, but our designated kicker has free space to pinpoint a pass to our upfield players who are in the know.

Genius.

1 hour ago, Demonised said:

The fake.

After a free kick, four players converge, then split in various directions, hunched over as if carrying the ball. A moment of chaos for the opposition, but our designated kicker has free space to pinpoint a pass to our upfield players who are in the know.

Genius.

I'm sure I have seen that in multiple American football movies.

American college football is famous for inventive fake plays... probably all on youtube these days

The play we used a lot last year with the forward running off the back of the square at the centre bounce was next to useless.  I only saw him get involved in the play once and I watched it a lot.  At least half the time Max palmed the ball onto the OPPOSITE side to where he ran through.  Mind boggling.

1 hour ago, Fifty-5 said:

The play we used a lot last year with the forward running off the back of the square at the centre bounce was next to useless.  I only saw him get involved in the play once and I watched it a lot.  At least half the time Max palmed the ball onto the OPPOSITE side to where he ran through.  Mind boggling.

The Petracca open goal (with Duryea fumble) against Hawthorn?

Pressure pressure and more pressure! Cause turnovers, make them rush!

talk to each other, let the player with the ball know if they have time or not.

when there's a contested play start thinking about the second play and not every player worry about the ball. Some need to be ready to either stop the opposition running away from a received handball or be ready to receive a handball .

i love attacking football. They say defence wins games but I'm all for attacking. From the back line you just keep on going until you score

Too many guns plan.

Where we simply have too many match winners to be able to be covered.

Been a while since we used that one.