3 hours ago, Demon77 said:

The centre bounce drill would involve the rucks tapping the ball down to the mids and then a pass on to the forwards. A lot of the forwards ran under the ball, not sure if they misjudged the flight or there was too much on the kick. It happened a lot actually in the short time. Hogan was the only one able to read the flight and take a few marks. Hogan moved really well, had a bandage of some sort on but was not hindered at all. 

Is it remotely possible this was an intentional part of the drill?

46 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

Goodwin does this all the time at training, doesn't necessarily mean he is omitted...

No-one said it did.  We're not that stupid.

But it's reasonable to suggest it's a possibility old chap.

51 minutes ago, Skuit said:

Is it remotely possible this was an intentional part of the drill?

The forwards were running under the incoming ball all game on Sunday so the drill is working a treat! 

55 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

Goodwin does this all the time at training, doesn't necessarily mean he is omitted, might have a different role in mind

The team lost by a kick, why would Goodwin be considering changes?

It was the 1st half defending which disappointed him

Listen to his presser, he is already flagging there may be no change

I actually came away with the impression that Tyson and Brayshaw are right in the mix.

1 hour ago, Redleg said:

Yeah,  it was an easy shot for Pedders, only 60 out on the boundary and the wrong side for a right footer. 

It was more a comment toward the particular player that joked with Max, not the actual shot but the sarcasm was appreciated. 

1 hour ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

I'm guessing Hannan's omitted??

 

Edit - just saw Pro Dee post the exact same thing.

Sorry what @ProDee  somebody misquoting you, never happens to me

On Weid, they sometimes have Keilty, Peddo and Tommy Mc doing work with Stafford and other rucks,  including agility drills, so assume is a part of the plan, if Weid gets a game, he can chop out in the ruck

Edited March 28, 20187 yr by Satyriconhome

4 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

Sorry what @ProDee  somebody misquoting you, never happens to me

You are familiar with the word "guessing" and you noticed his 3 question marks ?

3 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

@Demon77

Thanks for great report.

I'm curious about Weideman working out with the rucks.  Reports were he has done a bit of that in Casey games. 

I would have thought we would let him settle into his natural position as a forward and once he has that nailed then develop his ruck skills.  Trying to do both at AFL level is fraught and runs the risk that he won't reach his potential in either role.   And I'm not sure he has the height or the build (at least not yet) to ruck.

Wondering if you have seen him do 'enough' forward work in the preseason - we could certainly do with a forward who is ready to step in if needed. 

Cheers

If he did participate during the ruck drills today i missed it LH. He did some work forward today but the regulars are better placed to comment. 

He was asked after training by a fan if he’s playing this week and his answer was yes. On Friday!

3 minutes ago, watchtheeyes said:

I actually came away with the impression that Tyson and Brayshaw are right in the mix.

Hopefully we have 30 players in the mix again

We had a few down including Melksham, ANB, Hannan, Garlett and one of Goody's main concerns was how the ball rebounded from the forward 50, so a couple midfielders might not be the answer

3 hours ago, Redleg said:

Yeah,  it was an easy shot for Pedders, only 60 out on the boundary and the wrong side for a right footer. 

He would’ve nailed it

Goodwin better be making some changes this week. We may have only lost by a few points but the reality is we need to focus on how the team functions and not just the result. There are a number of areas we can improve in from the Geelong game and some of them can be instantly improved by bringing in the right players.

7 hours ago, Demon77 said:

Hi all.

Training started around 10am and lasted about 60 minutes. It was a light session and not one of the most intense we have seen. The 6 day break and upcoming warm conditions could be the reason. 

Notable absentees from Sunday were Trac, Hunt and Vince. McKenna ran laps most session. 

There were 33-34 players in the main warm-up excluding Weid, King and Filipovic. They were in a drill together with Stafford, it lasted about 15 minutes and eventually joined the main group.

In the first half an hour or so there were a lot of short drills set out concentrating on stoppages and rapid ball movement. Players were constantly changing groups. 

It was blustery out there at times and the wind favoured the end the forwards were stationed at.

The centre bounce drill would involve the rucks tapping the ball down to the mids and then a pass on to the forwards. A lot of the forwards ran under the ball, not sure if they misjudged the flight or there was too much on the kick. It happened a lot actually in the short time. Hogan was the only one able to read the flight and take a few marks. Hogan moved really well, had a bandage of some sort on but was not hindered at all. 

Salem was another of the injury concerns that moved freely.

There was no match sim drill with the short session. At the end players were given a 15 minute period of “ playtime” where they would try and kick snaps and torps through the goals. 

When most were leaving I noticed Maynard hunched over talking to one of the coaches. Also Hannan and Goodwin had a 5 minute one on one in the centre of the ground. 

Right in front of me Max kicked a 60 metre torp through the goals and Pedders yelled out “ Why couldn’t you do that on Sunday?”

Not much else to report unfortunately as the session was over quickly.

Hope this helps.

I would be happy enough to receive this first hand information anytime.  Well done.

5 hours ago, rjay said:

 

 

My thought is that we may only go with the 2 tall forwards as part of the game plan this year and one will have to ruck part time...

That means that Weid will have to ruck to get a game because Hogan won't be.

If he comes on this year then it will be interesting to see where Tommy plays.

Tight structures break, they're rigid and when under too much pressure they fracture.  Whether in footy terms or skyscrapers.

Better to be flexible, and have many players capable of playing a lot of differing roles.

This also helps when playing top teams, because if plan 'A' isn't working well for us, we have a multi to choose between, to try to topple the leaders.

It also helps us to keep structured defences off balance, because we can rotate too quickly for them to adjust.  Creating a mismatch if at all possible.

 

Harry Taylor has been a success at both ends for the Catters.

7 hours ago, Deemented Are Go! said:

Well, Pedders could've had the shot himself. Just sayin' !

I know you are having a laugh DAG, I just wanted to point out Pedo's centring kick to Max was textbook perfect. I'm sure they work on those plays at training, but it couldn't have worked out any better (except the score, of course).

Pedo may not be quick or the most skilled footballer, and he's getting a bit old in the tooth, but he plays his role for the side pretty damn well

6 minutes ago, DV8 said:

 

Harry Taylor has been a success at both ends for the Catters.

Not really, he had the odd good game as a forward but nothing to really write home about.

Harry is an AA defender moved forward because they had no one else.

Just because he moved there it doesn't make him a success at both ends.

8 hours ago, Neitz the Great said:

Anyone go today??

I'm not sure that's a great choice of name anymore.  Not after his performance on Tuesday night.  Disgraceful work upholding a ban for a bump to the ribs. 

13 minutes ago, DV8 said:

Tight structures break, they're rigid and when under too much pressure they fracture.  Whether in footy terms or skyscrapers.

Better to be flexible, and have many players capable of playing a lot of differing roles.

This also helps when playing top teams, because if plan 'A' isn't working well for us, we have a multi to choose between, to try to topple the leaders.

It also helps us to keep structured defences off balance, because we can rotate too quickly for them to adjust.  Creating a mismatch if at all possible.

 

Harry Taylor has been a success at both ends for the Catters.

I take your overall point...but Harry a success as a forward? Not even Harry would concur.

7 hours ago, Devil is in the Detail said:

The old ladys would like that

you devil

3 hours ago, Earl Hood said:

The forwards were running under the incoming ball all game on Sunday so the drill is working a treat! 

I don't mind that, if they are all 35 to 45 out when the ball whistles over-

top, and we have the speedy players to sprint at the footy for a foot race.

I like the idea that we play lead-up high, with space in behind us for our quicker forwards to work-over.  Pushing all our forwards up high, congesting the mid zone and half-backlines, I think might be a good thing ?

 

26 minutes ago, rjay said:

Not really, he had the odd good game as a forward but nothing to really write home about.

Harry is an AA defender moved forward because they had no one else.

Just because he moved there it doesn't make him a success at both ends.

 

22 minutes ago, Danelska said:

I take your overall point...but Harry a success as a forward? Not even Harry would concur.

I think it does, or they wouldn't have continued with it.

Its not so much about Harry's personal stats, Re bags of goals, but rather how the team functions overall, within that structure. 

They had the players to balance their defence, and Harry was the best option forward to help out.

I was always impressed with his efforts up forward.

 

But I'm really not a Live stats man, preferring to check in hindsight, checking my own impressions of the play.

I thought he was as good as I've seen, playing his role for them, away from his customary backline duties.

 

But then I was also a fan of Brad Ottens following work, and Clark Keatings ruck work in the big games.

I don't care for flashy sleek players, much preferring the crash bang pragmatic players who just get it done.

 

Keating, Brown, Voss, Archer, Grinter, Lockett, Williams, Brereton, Ayers, O'Dwyer,  et al.

Edited March 28, 20187 yr by DV8

5 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

 

The team lost by a kick, why would Goodwin be considering changes?

 

 

We lost to a team down a man since the first quarter and half our team didn't show up.

1 hour ago, Petraccattack said:

 

We lost to a team down a man since the first quarter and half our team didn't show up.

I agree, but all our team (on & off field) at least seemed to be, off their games ?

 

Or were we experimenting? trying something out, testing?

2 hours ago, Petraccattack said:

 

We lost to a team down a man since the first quarter and half our team didn't show up.

Don’t expect analysis.

Just opinion.

Lost by one kick to one of the weakest sides Geelong will field all year, plus they lost a key player early. I am filthy at the thought of those who state this was a gallant/brave loss. 

This was a matter of not being good enough to beat a weakened team on our home ground after an off-season of talking tough and saying how we’ll rebound after a pathetic end to last season. 

If you lose a game you should’ve won, that is a bad loss. 

7 hours ago, DV8 said:

I don't mind that, if they are all 35 to 45 out when the ball whistles over-

top, and we have the speedy players to sprint at the footy for a foot race.

I like the idea that we play lead-up high, with space in behind us for our quicker forwards to work-over.  Pushing all our forwards up high, congesting the mid zone and half-backlines, I think might be a good thing ?

 

 

I think it does, or they wouldn't have continued with it.

Its not so much about Harry's personal stats, Re bags of goals, but rather how the team functions overall, within that structure. 

They had the players to balance their defence, and Harry was the best option forward to help out.

I was always impressed with his efforts up forward.

 

But I'm really not a Live stats man, preferring to check in hindsight, checking my own impressions of the play.

I thought he was as good as I've seen, playing his role for them, away from his customary backline duties.

 

But then I was also a fan of Brad Ottens following work, and Clark Keatings ruck work in the big games.

I don't care for flashy sleek players, much preferring the crash bang pragmatic players who just get it done.

 

Keating, Brown, Voss, Archer, Grinter, Lockett, Williams, Brereton, Ayers, O'Dwyer,  et al.

 Nice follow up, I was always a Darren Pritchard, Spiro Malekalis kinda guy...

8 hours ago, goodwindees said:

Lost by one kick to one of the weakest sides Geelong will field all year, plus they lost a key player early. I am filthy at the thought of those who state this was a gallant/brave loss. 

This was a matter of not being good enough to beat a weakened team on our home ground after an off-season of talking tough and saying how we’ll rebound after a pathetic end to last season. 

If you lose a game you should’ve won, that is a bad loss. 

Perhaps a little harsh but the sentiment is correct. That was a game we should have won ... at the MCG.. Dangerfield out and an early injury to a key Geelong player.