1 hour ago, The Chazz said:

What I found interesting about that footage was just how important Jake Lever will be to us.

When you see vision like this, it just confirms why I hate reading/contributing to the changes threads each week.  We don't have any idea what the instructions are, or what the role is for a certain player, we don't have the behind-the-scences vision, we don't have the GPS data. You can clearly see how Lever's performance (and the rest of the backline's for that matter), will hinge on the rest of the team adhering to structures.

Agree. Those first two clips show how incredibly well he reads the play and he managed to tear away from the closest man and impact the contest of the ball that was kicked in to ensure Oscar/Frost had support. He didn’t mark it, which he may have when last when when in better form, but he read the play better than anyone else in that half of the ground. Pretty exciting to see if from that angle, it’s clear as day his footy brain is a level above anyone else out there. Once his confidence returns and there’s some form of pressure on the ball coming in, he is going to flourish and be f*cking unbelievable.

Edited April 19, 20186 yr by Lord Travis

Clarkson did what most coaches do when something isn’t working. He changed a few things (nothing innovative) but MORE importantly their players where committed.

The biggest difference after the 1st quarter was more about our lack of two way running, and the differential in the tackling and clearance counts. 

Our players just can’t commit to 4 quarters re game plans or intensity and coaches can’t get a response from them often enough

14 minutes ago, Demons1858 said:

Clarkson did what most coaches do when something isn’t working. He changed a few things (nothing innovative) but MORE importantly their players where committed.

The biggest difference after the 1st quarter was more about our lack of two way running, and the differential in the tackling and clearance counts. 

Our players just can’t commit to 4 quarters re game plans or intensity and coaches can’t get a response from them often enough

Why didn't we?

4 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Why didn't we?

We did, we started with no wings for no reason at all 

1 minute ago, jnrmac said:

Why didn't we?

We didn't need to until sometime during the third term.

We lost the second term to poor kicking - we had ample chances to hit the scoreboard and only kicked points.  The Hawks had just 4 scoring shots for the term, all of which were goals.  Goody could be forgiven for going in at half time and telling them to kick straight and we're in the game - outside of tackles, we were either level or ahead in most statistical areas, so it wasn't as if we were being belted going in at half time.  We turn those gettable shots into goals and we're ahead by 3 of them going in to half time.

The game began to run away from us half way through the third term and, by then, it was running away quickly.  I know that Goodwin moved Frost up forward and re-jigged a few other things, but he certainly wasn't able to work any sort of magic that Clarkson did.  I don't think he has the experience to do that just yet.

Again, I'm not making excuses - Goodwin needs to learn to see things changing in a game earlier than he does some weeks.  But at the same time we didn't really start struggling until half way through the third term and then the flood gates opened.  We had no idea how to stop them and that's the issues we need to address.

 

33 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

We didn't need to until sometime during the third term.

We lost the second term to poor kicking - we had ample chances to hit the scoreboard and only kicked points.  The Hawks had just 4 scoring shots for the term, all of which were goals.  Goody could be forgiven for going in at half time and telling them to kick straight and we're in the game - outside of tackles, we were either level or ahead in most statistical areas, so it wasn't as if we were being belted going in at half time.  We turn those gettable shots into goals and we're ahead by 3 of them going in to half time.

The game began to run away from us half way through the third term and, by then, it was running away quickly.  I know that Goodwin moved Frost up forward and re-jigged a few other things, but he certainly wasn't able to work any sort of magic that Clarkson did.  I don't think he has the experience to do that just yet.

Again, I'm not making excuses - Goodwin needs to learn to see things changing in a game earlier than he does some weeks.  But at the same time we didn't really start struggling until half way through the third term and then the flood gates opened.  We had no idea how to stop them and that's the issues we need to address.

 

Good point, and one easily forgotten among the debacle of the second half.  At one point in the second quarter, we had 10 inside 50s for 3 behinds, while they had 5 inside 50s for 4 goals.  Improved forward efficiency would have had us well up at half time and who knows what could have happened.

As for the second half, I am at a loss to explain it.

44 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

We didn't need to until sometime during the third term.

We lost the second term to poor kicking - we had ample chances to hit the scoreboard and only kicked points.  The Hawks had just 4 scoring shots for the term, all of which were goals.  Goody could be forgiven for going in at half time and telling them to kick straight and we're in the game - outside of tackles, we were either level or ahead in most statistical areas, so it wasn't as if we were being belted going in at half time.  We turn those gettable shots into goals and we're ahead by 3 of them going in to half time.

The game began to run away from us half way through the third term and, by then, it was running away quickly.  I know that Goodwin moved Frost up forward and re-jigged a few other things, but he certainly wasn't able to work any sort of magic that Clarkson did.  I don't think he has the experience to do that just yet.

Again, I'm not making excuses - Goodwin needs to learn to see things changing in a game earlier than he does some weeks.  But at the same time we didn't really start struggling until half way through the third term and then the flood gates opened.  We had no idea how to stop them and that's the issues we need to address.

 

Or the talent that he could do it with.

We need to remember that our key players, the so called "top end talent", are still inexperienced.  It's not far away that we will have the luxury of say, shifting Trac to full forward mid game and expecting him to kick 3 or 4, while Hogan and co clear out the forward 50.

The time has come to adopt from the NFL the position of "eagle eye" - an experienced and knowledgeable assistant to the coaching team who sits at the very highest point of the G to look down over the whole ground to spot team structures and movements and who trusted by the coach to make SWOT type recommendations for structural changes to the team set ups.

We have been out-coached as we were on Saturday so many times in recent years that its time to try something new.

30 minutes ago, tiers said:

The time has come to adopt from the NFL the position of "eagle eye" - an experienced and knowledgeable assistant to the coaching team who sits at the very highest point of the G to look down over the whole ground to spot team structures and movements and who trusted by the coach to make SWOT type recommendations for structural changes to the team set ups.

We have been out-coached as we were on Saturday so many times in recent years that its time to try something new.

I imagine that the vision is available to the coaches in the box...

2 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

We didn't need to until sometime during the third term.

We lost the second term to poor kicking - we had ample chances to hit the scoreboard and only kicked points.  The Hawks had just 4 scoring shots for the term, all of which were goals.  Goody could be forgiven for going in at half time and telling them to kick straight and we're in the game - outside of tackles, we were either level or ahead in most statistical areas, so it wasn't as if we were being belted going in at half time.  We turn those gettable shots into goals and we're ahead by 3 of them going in to half time.

The game began to run away from us half way through the third term and, by then, it was running away quickly.  I know that Goodwin moved Frost up forward and re-jigged a few other things, but he certainly wasn't able to work any sort of magic that Clarkson did.  I don't think he has the experience to do that just yet.

Again, I'm not making excuses - Goodwin needs to learn to see things changing in a game earlier than he does some weeks.  But at the same time we didn't really start struggling until half way through the third term and then the flood gates opened.  We had no idea how to stop them and that's the issues we need to address.

 

The 7 goal last qtr is a real problem. That says they were out of ideas or that the players threw the towel in.

1 hour ago, jnrmac said:

The 7 goal last qtr is a real problem. That says they were out of ideas or that the players threw the towel in.

No doubt about that.  It was an aberration the likes of which we haven't seen in some time.  It happens to all sides at some stage.  How we respond in the coming weeks is the key.

5 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

No doubt about that.  It was an aberration the likes of which we haven't seen in some time.  It happens to all sides at some stage.  How we respond in the coming weeks is the key.

The jury is still out whether it was an aberration.

1 minute ago, america de cali said:

The jury is still out whether it was an aberration.

The jury is out on lots of things for most teams at the moment.  It's Round 4.

 

8 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

The jury is out on lots of things for most teams at the moment.  It's Round 4.

 

I got that gist from Gawns and PJ’s comments. At least we are keeping our aberration average to about one every four rounds. 

Edited April 19, 20186 yr by america de cali

23 hours ago, Gorgoroth said:

They said on the telecast that Hawks are the best 2nd quarter team as Clarko sees what they throw at him and he adjusts.

Like Belichick. Doesn't start with any particular plans but adapts to the opposition.

19 minutes ago, Clintosaurus said:

Like Belichick. Doesn't start with any particular plans but adapts to the opposition.

Yeah, perfect comparison. 

23 hours ago, jackaub said:

LOW IQ  FOR ME

Most unimpressive coach in the game

Repeat history and expect a different outcome?

= definition of insanity.

Lets hope he's flexible.

The football world's microscope will be well and truly switched on next Tuesday night.

To jnrmac.

Having vision on a small screen without commentary about what is being shown is not the same as seeing the whole ground from the wing, not from behind the goals, with knowledgeable eyes and  immediate commentary.

Let's try it and see. Nothing to lose.

I saw some footage earlier on Fox on the "weekend low down" which has Nick Dal Santo, Ben Dixon among others and one thing they highlighted was the "laziness" that was displayed by some of the players in the middle of the ground. Essentially, as a collective we weren't putting enough pressure on the ball carrier or at shutting down the next "chip kick" option which allowed them to progressively move the ball forward with ease. 

Another interesting point was that since how we are such a mediocre pressure side at the moment, there's not enough pressure on the opposition ball carrier which means they don't "sky it" as much to allow players like Jake Lever to take intercept marks. In other words, if no one is pressuring, the opposition is entering attack with no pressure and can easily execute a good option which makes our defenders more vulnerable. 

47 minutes ago, At the break of Gawn said:

I saw some footage earlier on Fox on the "weekend low down" which has Nick Dal Santo, Ben Dixon among others and one thing they highlighted was the "laziness" that was displayed by some of the players in the middle of the ground. Essentially, as a collective we weren't putting enough pressure on the ball carrier or at shutting down the next "chip kick" option which allowed them to progressively move the ball forward with ease. 

Another interesting point was that since how we are such a mediocre pressure side at the moment, there's not enough pressure on the opposition ball carrier which means they don't "sky it" as much to allow players like Jake Lever to take intercept marks. In other words, if no one is pressuring, the opposition is entering attack with no pressure and can easily execute a good option which makes our defenders more vulnerable. 

Agree. Multiple reasons but all simple. 

1- don’t allow opposition teams to play 1-3 loose men to strangle our forwards. They killed us by our turnovers 

2- apply pressure through tackle and chase pressure. We don’t work hard enough without the footy 

3- simply skills to hit targets must be the main focus. Our transition is boom or bust. 

9 hours ago, jnrmac said:

Why didn't we?

According to Goodwin in his after match interview, they tried a few different things but that they didn't work  ... personally didn't notice a lot of changes other than Frost going forward in the last quarter.

5 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

The jury is out on lots of things for most teams at the moment.  It's Round 4.

 

It is round 4 but the inconsistency within games is an old problem. I think that's why we see so much frustration from supporters on this forum

10 hours ago, At the break of Gawn said:

I saw some footage earlier on Fox on the "weekend low down" which has Nick Dal Santo, Ben Dixon among others and one thing they highlighted was the "laziness" that was displayed by some of the players in the middle of the ground. Essentially, as a collective we weren't putting enough pressure on the ball carrier or at shutting down the next "chip kick" option which allowed them to progressively move the ball forward with ease. 

Another interesting point was that since how we are such a mediocre pressure side at the moment, there's not enough pressure on the opposition ball carrier which means they don't "sky it" as much to allow players like Jake Lever to take intercept marks. In other words, if no one is pressuring, the opposition is entering attack with no pressure and can easily execute a good option which makes our defenders more vulnerable. 

This is reallythe crux of it. You see it regularly - players playing 5-10m off their man or letting loose players wander around. This can happen when you play a zone and mind space rather than pick up players. It's no-one's responsiobility. This is where trust and being well drilled comes into it. Hawthorn and Geelong are good at it. It's taking us way longer than it should and our leaders need to be more active in policing it on field.

The chip kick to the fwd pocket is my personal bugbear. Drives me crazy they allow that.

Edited April 19, 20186 yr by jnrmac

9 hours ago, Demons1858 said:

It is round 4 but the inconsistency within games is an old problem. I think that's why we see so much frustration from supporters on this forum

The one thing that didn't seem to be a problem last weekend was inconsistency within the game. We were consistently bad for much more of the game than usual.

8 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

This is reallythe crux of it. You see it regularly - players playing 5-10m off their man or letting loose players wander around. This can happen when you play a zone and mind space rather than pick up players. It's no-one's responsiobility. This is where trust and being well drilled comes into it. Hawthorn and Geelong are good at it. It's taking us way longer than it should and our leaders need to be more active in policing it on field.

The chip kick to the fwd pocket is my personal bugbear. Drives me crazy they allow that.

Spot on. Some of the footage showed Jordan Lewis and he just wasn’t running hard enough. Playing zone defence shouldn’t devoid you of responsibility of chasing an opponent to eliminate that option.