Bathwater = Bust?

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,467]

1 minute ago, Sir Why You Little said:

This is the bit i truly do not understand, after what happened in Round 23 ‘17. 

It is why i worry about Goodwin as a senior coach, i am not crucifying him, but i worry that basic traits like desperation are not instilled in the team as a non negotiable. 

Yesterday’s loss was bad, but we have seen it all before. 3.12 at halftime is so Melbourne against a serious opponent 

I think the concern about the coach is valid, but it might be rectified with experience. With one exception (St Kilda), all our losses have been against teams with very experienced coaches. I accept that we've also won games against teams with experienced coaches (Freo and North), but I think most of our losses have been due to what the other team brought to the table, and our inability to counter it.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,467]

2 minutes ago, H_T said:

Seven unanswered goals speaks volumes. I’m not going to pick out examples, but there is plenty to be shown the players what Sydney did, and what the players didn’t do and what they could have done - and have done this season at times -  to be sitting on 13+ wins  

Do you mean effort or execution? I thought the former was there but not the latter.

[Superunknown 3,353]

1 minute ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I think the concern about the coach is valid, but it might be rectified with experience. With one exception (St Kilda), all our losses have been against teams with very experienced coaches. I accept that we've also won games against teams with experienced coaches (Freo and North), but I think most of our losses have been due to what the other team brought to the table, and our inability to counter it.

Against Sydney, we brought it, in spades.

However, the team went full Ian Baker-Finch and basically lost the game off the boot in the first half. It's really that simple. Bad kicking (and lack of composure) is bad footy.

 

[H_T 2,941]

7 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Do you mean effort or execution? I thought the former was there but not the latter.

I mean mindset, knowing your role at every stoppage, every play. They were roving off Gawn,. Giving opponents too much room to be dangerous. (Ref: Papleys goal). 

Being alert and mindful, being the hunter, proactive and not reactive.

obviously execution of skills is everything, decision making - not kicking to Garlett above his head whilst on two defenders ready to pounce. (Ref: Jones)

Kicking for goal (obvious), but i50s kicking to advantage, lowering the eyes instead of bombing to packs for interception (Ref, Aliir, Heeney etc). 

They all add up. And the side tightens as a result.

Edited August 13, 2018 by H_T

[Sir Why You Little 34,614]

12 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I think the concern about the coach is valid, but it might be rectified with experience. With one exception (St Kilda), all our losses have been against teams with very experienced coaches. I accept that we've also won games against teams with experienced coaches (Freo and North), but I think most of our losses have been due to what the other team brought to the table, and our inability to counter it.

It must be rectified, not hope it might be. 

Goodwin has to be ready to face a good coach with a Plan A, B & C depending how a game evolves. 

Why is our kicking into the forward line at the ‘G always poor, these fixables seem to just continue...

is that not stuff that should be sorted early days?

[Frustrated Demon 233]

Might pay to send them to a boot camp in the offseason ?

[drdrake 3,043]

4 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

It must be rectified, not hope it might be. 

Goodwin has to be ready to face a good coach with a Plan A, B & C depending how a game evolves. 

Why is our kicking into the forward line at the ‘G always poor, these fixables seem to just continue...

is that not stuff that should be sorted early days?

Sorry, I'm tired of us blaming coaches, the team was mentally soft with Paul Roos at the helm, how many games we went in as favorites to be beaten.  The coach is the easy target, our club is a coach killer.

[Sir Why You Little 34,614]

1 minute ago, drdrake said:

Sorry, I'm tired of us blaming coaches, the team was mentally soft with Paul Roos at the helm, how many games we went in as favorites to be beaten.  The coach is the easy target, our club is a coach killer.

I agree. But when the same mistakes are repeated then the Head Coach must be accountable, players are not drilled hard enough to be desperate at every contest (just jogging around....)

we have all seen it dr. 

[SFebes 4,692]

6 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

I agree. But when the same mistakes are repeated then the Head Coach must be accountable, players are not drilled hard enough to be desperate at every contest (just jogging around....)

we have all seen it dr. 

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2018/06/20/goodwin-allowing-melbourne-to-play-with-freedom-melksham/

[Sir Why You Little 34,614]

2 minutes ago, MSFebey said:

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2018/06/20/goodwin-allowing-melbourne-to-play-with-freedom-melksham/

Players can still play with freedom. Balme had a similar philosophy, but they must have desperation to the contest embedded like a template. 

That is exactly what Hardwick has learnt. It took him an eternity to work it out, but look at the results

[drdrake 3,043]

14 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

I agree. But when the same mistakes are repeated then the Head Coach must be accountable, players are not drilled hard enough to be desperate at every contest (just jogging around....)

we have all seen it dr. 

We have seen it for the past 18 years, when we play on our terms we look a million dollars when the pressure comes on we go to water.  I don't understand why or how but this is in the fabric of our club, we can keep blaming coaches as they are easy to blame.  It is a culture thing we just aren't a ruthless club with high expectations, not the bull, fluff that we here from our players, coaches  that we will hear it this week.

I have posted this before, our club goes to play footy hoping to win, good clubs expect to win.

Goodwin should however look into the recent past, his coaching style his similar to Dean Bailey, attacking mindset, buddy buddy with the players, Dean Bailey was a good coach until the players started taking easy options.

Edited August 13, 2018 by drdrake

[Sir Why You Little 34,614]

1 minute ago, drdrake said:

We have seen it for the past 18 years, when we play on our terms we look a million dollars when the pressure comes on we go to water.  I don't understand why or how but this is in the fabric of our club, we can keep blaming coaches as they are easy to blame.  It is a culture thing we just aren't a ruthless club with high expectations, not the bull, fluff that we here from our players, coaches  that we will hear it this week.

I have posted this before, our club goes to play footy hoping to win, good clubs expect to win.

Welcome Gary Pert. 

[deebug 1,754]

19 minutes ago, Frustrated Demon said:

Might pay to send them to a boot camp in the offseason ?

Send them to goal kicking camp.

[drdrake 3,043]

3 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Welcome Gary Pert. 

If our current CEO couldn't change this underlying culture not sure if Pert can.  As much as I like Josh Mahoney is he the right man?

Edited August 13, 2018 by drdrake

[Sir Why You Little 34,614]

2 minutes ago, drdrake said:

If our current CEO couldn't change this underlying culture not sure if Pert can.  As much as I like Josh Mahoney is he the right man?

We are a lot better than we were, but now we have arrived at the serious 1%’s

Good clubs eat up the challenge, we seem to run and hide so far....

[drdrake 3,043]

7 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

We are a lot better than we were, but now we have arrived at the serious 1%’s

Good clubs eat up the challenge, we seem to run and hide so far....

Off field agree we seem to have that sorted, the on field is an on going concern and if we cant get this right the off field can turn just as quick membership/attendances fall, corporate dollars drop out, we have such a small window to capitalize on the great off field work done by Peter Jackson and his team.  They have built us into a sound business, but when the core of you business is under performing the whole business will suffer

[Sir Why You Little 34,614]

1 minute ago, drdrake said:

Off field agree we seem to have that sorted, the on field is an on going concern and if we cant get this right the off field can turn just as quick membership/attendances fall, corporate dollars drop out, we have such a small window to capitalize on the great off field work done by Peter Jackson and his team.  They have built us into a sound business, but when the core of you business is under performing the whole business will suffer

We have improved onfield, but we have reached the point, where the next increment is the big one. Beating better opponents 

Until the side is drilled properly, we won’t. 

Close enough is not good enough or acceptable

[drdrake 3,043]

16 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

We have improved onfield, but we have reached the point, where the next increment is the big one. Beating better opponents 

Until the side is drilled properly, we won’t. 

Close enough is not good enough or acceptable

No we haven't at this stage we will finish in the exact same position on the ladder as last year unless we can get a win over the next 2 weeks, which I reckon our only chance is this week as GWS will smash us.

[Sir Why You Little 34,614]

3 minutes ago, drdrake said:

No we haven't at this stage we will finish in the exact same position on the ladder as last year unless we can get a win over the next 2 weeks, which I reckon our only chance is this week as GWS will smash us.

No. We have improved. Our % of 131 shows me that. But we have reached a big hurdle, and until we master it, we shall progress no further. 

[DV8 2,271]

1 hour ago, H_T said:

Bathwater. 

Falling for the media’s perception that they’ve made it. 

Not being accountable on the field - picking and choosing when to be accountable and not - doesn’t cut a top 8 spot unfortunately.

You have to be the hunter at every preparation, every contest. 

Complacency is the evil of consistency. And inconsistency is not Premiership quality material.

very good 'HT', I think... this is my interpretation of bathwater as well... 

 

# note; it seems different to Maxy's version of bathwater drinking. I think Maxy must think of 'bathwater drinking', as being like tossers with heads bigger than hot air balloons.

* not so Maxy.

.

Edited August 13, 2018 by DV8

[Superunknown 3,353]

13 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

No. We have improved. Our % of 131 shows me that. But we have reached a big hurdle, and until we master it, we shall progress no further. 

Erm, to be fair, we played GC twice, SKFC twice, Adelaide x 2 (admittedly for one booster), Dogs x 2 and have luckily only met Richmond, Hawthorn and Pies once and will only meet WCE and GWS once, or else our % might be a lot worse.

Don't forget to make up for the rather large losses to Hawks, Tiges and Pies (3 losses), we had to [censored] Carlton, Suns, Adelaide by a factor of x2-3, plus win a heap of games in the range 30-60 odd points.

Had we really beaten Geelong or Sydney (with straight kicking) this line might have more validity.

(I agree with your broader point though: % is less important than actually winning big games.)

[Sir Why You Little 34,614]

Just now, -Ⓥ- said:

Erm, to be fair, we played GC twice, SKFC twice, Adelaide x 2 (admittedly for one booster), Dogs x 2 and have luckily only met Richmond, Hawthorn and Pies once and will only meet WCE and GWS once, or else our % might be a lot worse.

Don't forget to make up for the rather large losses to Hawks, Tiges and Pies (3 losses), we had to [censored] Carlton, Suns, Adelaide by a factor of x2-3, plus win a heap of games in the range 30-60 odd points.

Had we really beaten Geelong or Sydney (with straight kicking) this line might have more validity.

(I agree with your broader point though: % is less important than actually winning big games.)

Of course it is. But we have learnt to put the average sides away (barring The Aints) last year we won those games by 10 points. 

The next challenge is The Big One. 

The one Jeelong worked out mid 2007

[SFebes 4,692]

46 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

We have improved onfield, but we have reached the point, where the next increment is the big one. Beating better opponents 

Until the side is drilled properly, we won’t. 

Close enough is not good enough or acceptable

Weren't we beating better opponents last year? 

[Sir Why You Little 34,614]

Just now, MSFebey said:

Weren't we beating better opponents last year? 

Not by the margins we have this year, which is why losing to the Saints at home was such a dark day

[drdrake 3,043]

26 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

No. We have improved. Our % of 131 shows me that. But we have reached a big hurdle, and until we master it, we shall progress no further. 

Next two weeks will determine whether we have had an improved year or not, to improve you need to better your position on the ladder, I don't care who you beat to do this, at this stage we are looking at 9th and out by a game.  last year 9th out by percentage.  

Our ability to score has improve, but our ability to defend has gone backwards