On 10/05/2018 at 10:59, Roost It said:

All grounds should be exactly the same size, its ridiculous in this day and age there isn't a standard pitch size 

One of the things that differentiates Australian rules footy from other sports is that no two grounds are exactly the same. It is one aspect that helps make our game unique. It is something that should be embraced.

  On 10/05/2018 at 20:48, FarNorthernD said:

One of the things that differentiates Australian rules footy from other sports is that no two grounds are exactly the same. It is one aspect that helps make our game unique. It is something that should be embraced.

Like the bounce, subjective application of the rules, and pie temperature.

  On 09/05/2018 at 14:15, praha said:

So I just finished reading of Sydney's troubles at the SCG this year where they're 1-3 and it got me thinking of our own troubles on our home turf.

Granted that the travel factor makes this a non factor comparison, but it's relevant as an isolated issue for us, because we haven't quite played out best footy on the MCG in the past 14 or so months.

Since Round 1 2017:

MCG record: 7 wins 9 losses

Away from the MCG: 9 wins 4 losses

I'd have never thought given the past 10 years that we'd ever be a more reliable team away from the MCG, but here we are: I'm more confident of beating Adelaide in Adelaide or West Coast in Perth than I am beating either on the MCG.

I watched the broadcast of the St Kilda game this evening, and before the game Goodwin said something along the lines of Etihad suiting our style of play.

At Etihad, we look faster, cleaner, and more efficient. On the MCG we look to be in a slow slog. 

The most obvious reason being the width and dimension of the MCG: we sometimes seem to struggle to get back to contests or cover space. 

I think the Richmond game was a good insight, because we playing a similarly styled game as them, yet they seem to have more run and space, and play the MCG superbly. Ironically, they aren't anywhere near as efficient away from the MCG.

IMO, I think our biggest challenge as a team at the moment is mastering the MCG. If we can't perform reliably and consistently on the ground, then we will struggle to ever do more than make up the numbers.

I also feel it is the only thing atm standing in the way of us being a top 4 side.

I am not sure if it's a personnel issue or a game plan issue, and I wonder if a Martin-style line break would make the difference as he does for Richmond.

Thoughts?

 

 

Our marking and our kicking is I think, the key to the 'G'.

We need more class & run, all in good time.

  On 10/05/2018 at 10:59, Roost It said:

All grounds should be exactly the same size, its ridiculous in this day and age there isn't a standard pitch size 

That’s crap 

  On 11/05/2018 at 15:35, Wolfturdo said:

That’s crap 

No it'd fact. What other game gives such an unfair advantage to the home team. It makes no sense in this day and age

  On 12/05/2018 at 12:05, Roost It said:

No it'd fact. What other game gives such an unfair advantage to the home team. It makes no sense in this day and age

Test Cricket

  On 12/05/2018 at 12:17, deesrule said:

Test Cricket

Yeh and thats going from strength to strength isnt it

Some opp coaches thoughts on playing the G:  http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-05-13/cats-new-defensive-style-does-the-trick-again

C Scott - "It does take an adjustment (to play at the MCG).  The game is played slightly differently... "It's a combination of tweaking our defensive style for this ground and also being aware of what the opposition were trying to do."

Buckley on Geelong -  "They have the slowest ball movement in the comp by design, so they don’t lose shape when they turn the ball over."

So, slow play and sticking to structures (or in my words above defend 'in formation') is the go.  We play fast and a press high so structures break down on the G. 

Will be fascinating to see what we have learnt from the recent Hawthorn and Richmond games next week vs Carlton.  It will be a perfect time to experiment with something different, more suitable to the G.