16 hours ago, Lord Travis said:

He's not alone. Whenever any of our players get the ball 40 out they still look to pass it. None of them will stand up and take responsibility for the shot. It's either team direction from above to always look for a better option, or they're all sh*t scared. I'd say it's the later. 

 

4 hours ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Yes Goodwins instructional play is handball or short pass until it’s 20 metres out. We are unlikely to kick running goals from 40-50 out even with open goals 

@Lord TravisThis is 100% game plan. The @spirit of norm smith has nailed it. 

There are really good statistics for shot accuracy showing the zones which are high percentage. We know Goodwin is fascinated by this because he started the "diamind defense" last year, which was a structure that conceded low percentage shots (45m+ from goal and shots from the flanks), in order to defend the "high accuracy zone" immediately in front of opposition goal.

In addition, we have identified that if we score a goal it resets to neutral contest in our strongest formation (centre bounce) but if we miss the shot, we hand them the ball in our weakest formation (defending opposition transition from defense to attack).

Although we've abandoned the diamond defense this year, our new implementation of this strategy has focused on our attack instead. We have looked to gain possession of the ball in the "high accuracy" zone in our forward line.

This worked very successfully in the first half of the season, where we're had very high goal conversion ratios. It came to a screaching halt against Port, who countered this tactic by ignoring the bank carrier at our HF, and stacked the "high accuracy" zone in their D50 and picked off all our forward entries when we're tried to pass it. We didnt adapt that night and take better options. 

We have improved/adapted in this area since, by taking more lower percentage shots, but this has resulted in a decrease in our goal kicking accuracy. The other flow on from this is we are exposing ourselves to more counter attacks from our defense, which were don't defend well. 

 

This is a balance our players need to find: when to follow team rules, and when to have a shot. They will find that balance better with experience; we are still relatively young. 

We saw against Sydney we got the worst of both worlds.  Our attempts to kick to the high accuracy zone were cut off by Alir and our low percentage shots went out of bounds on the full or didn't make the distance. Hopefully we can execute better this week.

Edited August 18, 20186 yr by deanox
Clarity

5 hours ago, Ante_Up said:

A sport with Such variation in ground dimensions .... are soccer rugby tennis NFL MLB NBA NHL the same?

Cricket. 

2 minutes ago, deanox said:

 

This is 100% game plan. 

There are really good statistics for shot accuracy showing the zones which are high percentage. We knowis fascinated by this because he started the "diamind defense" last year, which was a structure that conceded low percentage shots (45+m from goal and shots from the flanks), in order to defend the "high accuracy zone" immediately in front of opposition goal.

In addition, if we have identified that if we score a goal it resets to neutral back in our strongest formation (centre bounce) but if we miss we hand them the ball in our weakest formation (defending opposition transition from defense to attack).

Although we've abandoned the diamond defense, this year our implementation of this strategy has focused on our attack instead.  We have looked to gain possession of the ball in the "high accuracy" zone in our forward line.

This worked very successfully in the first half of the season,  where we're had very high goal conversion ratios. It came to a screaching halt against Port, who countered this tactic by ignoring the bank carrier at HF, stacking the "high accuracy" zone in their D50 and picking off all our forward entries when we're tried to pass it.  We didnt adapt that night and take better options. 

We have improved in this area since by taking more lower percentage shots, but this has been reflected in a decrease in our goal kicking accuracy. The flow on from this is we are exposing ourselves to more counter attacks from defense,  which were don't defend well. 

 

This is a balance our players need to find: when to follow team rules,  and when to have a shot. They will find that balance better with experience. 

We saw against Sydney we got the worst of both worlds.  Our attempts to kick to the high accuracy zone were cut off by Alir and our low percentage shots went out of bounds on the full or didn't make the distance.

Completely understand this and agree with it all in theory. We showed in the first half of the season that we were the number one team for scoring goals within 15 meters of goal, thus meaning our accuracy was highest. This only came against poor teams however. Against any opposition of substance it hasn’t worked and it’s been an embarrassing shambles. If a player takes a mark 40 meters out from goal, they should take the responsibility of having a set shot and not looking to pass amongst a clogged up area in slow play.

I want to see guys like Petracca step up and actually take some responsibility to try to and win games.  

3 minutes ago, deanox said:

Cricket. 

Yes and no. In cricket the immediate area of competition is exactly the same.

I really can't think of anything else where the ambiguity of the ball combined with differing dynamics of varying space applies.

 

6 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

If a player takes a mark 40 meters out from goal, they should take the responsibility of having a set shot and not looking to pass amongst a clogged up area in slow play.

I want to see guys like Petracca step up and actually take some responsibility to try to and win games.  

If it's a team rule not to then they can take all the responsibility they like but will find themselves at Casey.

Don't shoot the messenger...I don't necessarily agree with this but it's what's happening.

Just now, rjay said:

If it's a team rule not to then they can take all the responsibility they like but will find themselves at Casey.

Don't shoot the messenger...I don't necessarily agree with this but it's what's happening.

That’s true, if you don’t play by the teams rules then you’re gone. It just happens that in this case the rule appears to be a hinderence against quality opposition. Surely there has to be some logic applied to when to pull the trigger.

I guess I’m just frustrated, like many, that we seem to waste opportunities by being too cute. And I’m frustrated that talented players like Petracca are yet to impose themselves when opportunity has been presented.

Here’s hoping Weid takes his chances today and helps us over the line.

1 minute ago, Lord Travis said:

Completely understand this and agree with it all in theory. We showed in the first half of the season that we were the number one team for scoring goals within 15 meters of goal, thus meaning our accuracy was highest. This only came against poor teams however. Against any opposition of substance it hasn’t worked and it’s been an embarrassing shambles. If a player takes a mark 40 meters out from goal, they should take the responsibility of having a set shot and not looking to pass amongst a clogged up area in slow play.

I want to see guys like Petracca step up and actually take some responsibility to try to and win games.  

Yeah I agree with this too.

I think that change in mentality will be when this team clicks.  It makes sense it is taking some time though. You have to be very good,  and very well styled to follow a game plan perfectly. But you have to be particularly experienced/ elite to know when to break a game plan/team rules, and be successful. 

Our team is 2 years in into learning the plan, into trusting each other. This week we have an average of 89 games, which is median for the AFL. GWS and Collingwood are anomalies but they also have long injury lists of experienced players (Greene, Delidio, Scully, Shaw, Patton etc.) (Dunn, Elliot, Howe, Treloar) whose inclusions would comfortably bump them close to 100.

 

Geelong (122)

Port (119)

Adel (116)

North (114)

WC (108)

Sydney (107)

Hawks (107)

Richmond (104*)

Essendon (102)

Brisbane (89)

Melbourne (89)

Carlton (86)

Collingwood (87)

Freo (83)

Dogs (81)

GWS (80)

GC (76)

Saints (69)

Best of luck to him. Coming in to a crunch game and with most on here wanting his head already. Big fan but feel next year will be ideal. I think he will play his role in next two games and I hope the club give the lad a chance next year. 

Sad thing if we miss finals he could have played all year. 

12 minutes ago, rjay said:

If it's a team rule not to then they can take all the responsibility they like but will find themselves at Casey.

Don't shoot the messenger...I don't necessarily agree with this but it's what's happening.

 

8 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

That’s true, if you don’t play by the teams rules then you’re gone. It just happens that in this case the rule appears to be a hinderence against quality opposition. Surely there has to be some logic applied to when to pull the trigger.

I guess I’m just frustrated, like many, that we seem to waste opportunities by being too cute. And I’m frustrated that talented players like Petracca are yet to impose themselves when opportunity has been presented.

Here’s hoping Weid takes his chances today and helps us over the line.

I think it's a bit of learn to walk before you can run. 

We've seen it with Oliver - he is starting to make decisions to run and carry and kick, instead of taking the first option, but Ibet if he tried that last year he would have been caught out. 

The playing group will start to make these decisions better with a bit more experience.  Hopefully starting this week!

22 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Yes and no. In cricket the immediate area of competition is exactly the same.

I really can't think of anything else where the ambiguity of the ball combined with differing dynamics of varying space applies.

 

But I'd argue the same concept applies to AFL. The center square and the 50 arc is largely the same!

Glad it's not being played in Melbourne's miserable weather today. 11deg windy and rain. Sam would struggle to get near the ball.

If our midfield can lower their eyes entering 50, he's a good chance to snaffle a few. The kid has good hands, but as we've found all season, the long bombs have not worked. Keep doing that and Hurn and Gov will slaughter us. Create space, look for a lead, deliver low, get the small forwards involved and we are a chance.

22 hours ago, deanox said:

But I'd argue the same concept applies to AFL. The center square and the 50 arc is largely the same!

But only when a center bounce occurs . At other times and position the dynamic changes.

On 8/18/2018 at 11:12 AM, deanox said:

 

@Lord TravisThis is 100% game plan. The @spirit of norm smith has nailed it. 

There are really good statistics for shot accuracy showing the zones which are high percentage. We know Goodwin is fascinated by this because he started the "diamind defense" last year, which was a structure that conceded low percentage shots (45m+ from goal and shots from the flanks), in order to defend the "high accuracy zone" immediately in front of opposition goal.

In addition, we have identified that if we score a goal it resets to neutral contest in our strongest formation (centre bounce) but if we miss the shot, we hand them the ball in our weakest formation (defending opposition transition from defense to attack).

Although we've abandoned the diamond defense this year, our new implementation of this strategy has focused on our attack instead. We have looked to gain possession of the ball in the "high accuracy" zone in our forward line.

This worked very successfully in the first half of the season, where we're had very high goal conversion ratios. It came to a screaching halt against Port, who countered this tactic by ignoring the bank carrier at our HF, and stacked the "high accuracy" zone in their D50 and picked off all our forward entries when we're tried to pass it. We didnt adapt that night and take better options. 

We have improved/adapted in this area since, by taking more lower percentage shots, but this has resulted in a decrease in our goal kicking accuracy. The other flow on from this is we are exposing ourselves to more counter attacks from our defense, which were don't defend well. 

 

This is a balance our players need to find: when to follow team rules, and when to have a shot. They will find that balance better with experience; we are still relatively young. 

We saw against Sydney we got the worst of both worlds.  Our attempts to kick to the high accuracy zone were cut off by Alir and our low percentage shots went out of bounds on the full or didn't make the distance. Hopefully we can execute better this week.

...and putting it bluntly we lost our best rebounding defender, Lever, who can potentially kick better than anyone from defence straight over the square, and then drift down and pick up someone else. 

2 hours ago, willmoy said:

...and putting it bluntly we lost our best rebounding defender, Lever, who can potentially kick better than anyone from defence straight over the square, and then drift down and pick up someone else. 

Yep, watching the way Alir carved us up demonstrated how much we missed Lever. Add Joel Smith and Hibberd, and we have been really hurt in such a critical department. 

On 8/17/2018 at 7:33 PM, old dee said:

Just give us a reasonable game that makes the defence respect you are out there.

In the past they have had  no respect and played off you knowing you won't embarrass them.

Embarrass a few on Sunday Sam and I will be very happy.

Got what I asked for, he created a contest and while not the greatest game ever he was good enough to keep the defence honest and should play next week.

 

1 minute ago, old dee said:

Got what I asked for, he created a contest and while not the greatest game ever he was good enough to keep the defence honest and should play next week.

 

His first half gave us a real glimpse of the player he could be - good hands, very mobile and, while his kicking for goal needs work, we can see that he hit the scoreboard as well.

He could be a real handy addition for us with Hogan going down.

Some odd shots on goal for him, but gee he was good. For such a young forward, he was clunking them! 

1 minute ago, old dee said:

Got what I asked for, he created a contest and while not the greatest game ever he was good enough to keep the defence honest and should play next week.

 

He kicked for goal nervously. uncharacteristically.

shows his framework was hindered today by nerves. somewhat.

 

He will loosen up nicely, I think, for next week.   has to be in.

1 minute ago, Wiseblood said:

His first half gave us a real glimpse of the player he could be - good hands, very mobile and, while his kicking for goal needs work, we can see that he hit the scoreboard as well.

He could be a real handy addition for us with Hogan going down.

his kicking for goal is fine,  just nerves today.

He showed he's an AFL quality tall forward.

2 minutes ago, Dee-licious said:

Some odd shots on goal for him, but gee he was good. For such a young forward, he was clunking them! 

He looked bigger when going for contests today.  I think this is his self belief growing. 

 

Un-confident players appear smaller than they are.

Confidence, makes more than nostrils flare out.

.

Well done, Weid.   

This kid is going to make it.  

This is the best game I have seen Sam play. He needs to stay in the team for the rest of the season.

The pressure on him today was immense and he stood up.  Outstanding effort and a big future!

On Ya Sammy keep it up, good game today.?