42 minutes ago, Gawn's Beard said:

Without trying to oversimplify things, there's effectively two competing game styles...

That's a good summary.

The issue with this run and carry game plan is that it can quickly come undone under even the slightest pressure.

The good thing with having a more kicking focused game plan is that the structure is usually more solid and can withstand pressure better.

With game plans, I always have the firm belief that the game plan should suit the strength of the team (Clarkson has said as much) as there is no one perfect game plan.  There non-negotiable aspects that all teams should have (good skills, pressure, teamwork and so on) but there is no point trying to get Clayton Oliver to play like Josh Kelly.

Having said that, the best game plans are generally just based on the best option, the worst thing is when players become programmed to always play a certain way no matter the situation.

A lot of sense in what you say oh bearded one, yes when you kick it forward in a hurry you take your chances, if you have more of your players around the ball then chances are the opposition will have more players ahead so the greater the chance of turn overs. I think people accept that is part of our game plan. I think what burns most supporters is the pitiful handpasses that dont hit a target 2 meters away. Or the dumb kicks and poorly executed foot passes that we see far too often, Hunt for instance running and bouncing, running and bouncing and then shanking the kick direct to an opposition player standing by himself, which results in a rebound goal. or the regular 'bernie' kick in the backline that inevitably results in facepalms from coaches and supporters everywhere.  

We need players with a real competitive spirit like Viney and Oliver, guys who battle all day long. we have too many players who will sit back and not run the extra 10-20meters to put pressure on a player, because they have already given up and figured it is not worth the effort.  So if the opposition player fumbles or drops the mark we have no one there to pressure them.

The sides I think play the best brand of football make you earn every kick, mark, goal or point, if you make a mistake, drop a mark, bobble the ball then they buried you. A lot of our players try to corral the opposition instead of attacking them, yes it probably is better percentage football but putting pressure on all the time may mean next time they opposition player may fumble because he knows he will get pressured by any nearby melbourne player.

 

We are not that competitive as yet, i hope that some day we will be.

 

2 hours ago, Gawn's Beard said:

Without trying to oversimplify things, there's effectively two competing game styles:

You have to build your list to execute one of the 2 game plans. Tnte Hawks had the list for option 1, but then replaced their 2 best kickers with handballers so they struggled and their game style now is a work in progress.

The Hawks clearly changed their game plan earlier this year. They suffered losses and chnaged their playing positions of several personnel. 

In the process the put to the sword the claims that it "takes several years for a team to change its game plan"- an idea that was pretty common on these boards during 2007-2014..........

4 hours ago, Gawn's Beard said:

Without trying to oversimplify things, there's effectively two competing game styles:

Option 1: Your slower, keep possession style of play where you focus less on winning contested ball and more on keeping it once you have it back (i.e. Hawks of the previous years). This requires a high level of skill to kick through zones, strong defensive structures to absorb forward 50 entries and high level pressure when in certain areas to win the ball back. 

Option 2: A run and carry game where you attempt to run in waves through zones, limiting the amount of kicks (Melbourne / GWS / Adelaide). This relies on you winning the contested ball and getting it on the outside where you run and spread hard. 

You have to build your list to execute one of the 2 game plans. Tnte Hawks had the list for option 1, but then replaced their 2 best kickers with handballers so they struggled and their game style now is a work in progress.

Melbourne have gone for contested beasts and (usually) win the clearances. We have identified the stoppages as a competitive advantage and structured the team accordingly, the idea being to handball to someone outside of the immediate vicinity of the stoppage, who can then do likewise, until such time as it is in the hands of someone on the outside running at full pace to break the lines, or who can hit up a target moving away from the stoppage. When we're on, our run and carry is evident and we rip teams to shreds. When it's not, we look slow, "handball happy" and our backline get caught between streaming forward for the outside run and staying back in their defensive setup  

Ironically, some of melbournes best passages of play this year have been a chain of handpasses, where we've broken through the oppositions line, force the defender to leave their man and commit and we handball over the top. 

Where this breaks down is when we don't have the outside run. The inside mids flick it around looking for it, but if it's not there they then get caught with the ball. 

As for those who scream "just kick it", and then bemoan the player for kicking it to a 1v3 up forward, it's down to the way we are trying to play and why players just don't throw it on the boot. We want to effectively run it into our 50, not launch it high and long from stoppages. Hence the "over handballing". 

I don't criticize the inside mids. They're doing what they're told to do. If you're going to criticize anyone point the finger at the lack of outside run during stretches of some games forcing the inside mids to keep it within the immediate vicinity of a stoppage. 

SNAP. Somebody else gets it. Well done GB.

This should be printed out and handed to every support who yells out "kick it".