Jump to content

Featured Replies

Posted

Now that the Eagles have won the 2018 flag we know all other 17 clubs will be analysing their list, their game plan and just how they won on the day. The AFL is full of copycats as we know. It now seems to me that chaos footy and small defensive forwards, small running halfbacks with intercept marking backs may not be so much in vogue next year. Today’s win for the Eagles was also a victory for 2 legitimate ruckman, two key marking forwards and at least two big marking/spoiling key position backman. It’s like 1990’s footy reborn. Yes there are still running halfbacks, inside mids and small, crumbing forwards but there always were I think. 

The ramifications are I think that the value of secondary ruckman (Pruest), key position backman who can handle the gorillas  (May) has now gone up but so has Hogan’s value as a key forward to offset that for us. The WC structure wants the ball played predominately in the air and this would also help alleviate some of the AFL’s worries about congestion. 

Interesting to see how the recruiters react to the WC blueprint. 

 

Spot on Mr Hood

‘Chaos’ is an oversimplifiction of course, but skilled players down the spine are critical whatever you call you game plan..

We are not far off. Maturity, some improved strength, height and marking in the back half and we will be there. 

Anything can happen, but I reckon we are 2 key players and 1 to 2 years maturity away from being in a position to winning this.

Good game today, well done Eagles. But the King is dead. Long live the King. Ie us,.

 

Two ruckmen worked for West Coast because of the specifics of their personnel. Specifically:

- Vardy is a competent forward in his own right

- They’ve got two AFL elite forwards, so their ruckman in the forward line is third tall

- Neither of their rucks are that good as actual rucks, nor are they huge runners, so the load needs to be shared.

It will be interesting to see how West Coast look when NicNat returns next year. I’d expect him to be an 80% ruckman, with Vardy to have a role akin to the one Weideman played with us during those few games he played with both Hogan and TMac in. 

If we get Preuss, he would want to offer something as a forward if he wants to play seniors.

 

I dont see why teams would copy West Coasts strategies. Richmond would have done them (pre prelim form), Our better games this year would have stacked up well today. West Coast just get to sit out west accumulate wins, get a good finals draw and make it to the big day in ease. You cant draft home ground/crowd advantages.

Edited by david_neitz_is_my_dad

Would West Coast have used a dual ruck combo if Nic Nat was fit? We will never know.

WC winning was a good old fashioned best team on the day scenario. There is nothing about that list or game plan that screams "blueprint". Congratulations to them, they were just very fortunate to play us out West a week before and not today. I think we would have beaten them at the MCG today.

 


46 minutes ago, david_neitz_is_my_dad said:

I dont see why teams would copy West Coasts strategies. Richmond would have done them (pre prelim form), Our better games this year would have stacked up well today. West Coast just get to sit out west accumulate wins, get a good finals draw and make it to the big day in ease. You cant draft home ground/crowd advantages.

We havent played close to as good as both clubs today. With all due respect, that is delusional. We would have gone to water under the pressure of the eagles tall marking forwards or pies 5 goal start. We look amazing when everything is going our way, and took some big steps towards curbing the infuence of a team when it's not. But we're a year off staning up under pressure of a big game.

 

A free ride into the grand final? What a massive disservice to a club that has overcome a stacked compo towards mcg teams. Richmond pre prelim were neck and neck with pies at 3/4 time, and overran a team 2 rotations down -they also were smashed interstate all year . Had nowhere near as much unity and confidence in their system as both gf finalists with backs against wall. Level at 3/4 time, showed massive effort for both clubs to go goal for goal and to end in a small margin. But monumental to come down from 5 goals, backing the system to grind away methodically.

 

Edited by johndemonic

I reckon it's the Two Team Theory. One Team for the first rounds before the Bye and then if you got the players a different and better team for the rest and Finals if you are smart, good and fit enough........

Both sides held one grab marks for the most part of the game. 

Was great to watch

 

An interesting discussion to be carried on over the off season.

WCE played the possession game a la the Hawks but with better forwards.

Collingwood midfield was not up to the level it was in the first three finals.

Love to hear some considered views.

Honestly, I'm not sure too much imitation will be inspired by this one.

Any of the four preliminary finalists could've snagged the premiership this year, and there's a lot of variety in those lists.

Still no denying the value of having confident, reliable players in key positions. West Coast's contested marking at both ends was quite something. Seven players with 2 or more contested marks, yeesh.


2 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

An interesting discussion to be carried on over the off season.

WCE played the possession game a la the Hawks but with better forwards.

Collingwood midfield was not up to the level it was in the first three finals.

Love to hear some considered views.

I still can't believe Hardwick didn't send someone to Sidebottom last week. Ridiculous coaching.

3 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

An interesting discussion to be carried on over the off season.

WCE played the possession game a la the Hawks but with better forwards.

Collingwood midfield was not up to the level it was in the first three finals.

Love to hear some considered views.

hahahaha. Dream on DJ. 

2 hours ago, A F said:

I still can't believe Hardwick didn't send someone to Sidebottom last week. Ridiculous coaching.

Dickwick was completely out coached. Caught napping when Big Cox went bezerk . Simpson saw to it that didn't happen again. simmo coached brilliantly I thought. 

Edited by Queanbeyan Demon
typo

2 hours ago, Queanbeyan Demon said:

Dickwick was completely out coached. Caught napping when Big Cox went bezerk . Simpson saw to it that didn't happen again. simmo coached brilliantly I thought. 

Simpson did coach well across the season, shoring up his KPD/KPF as an arsenal and used the season to create play familiarity and responsibility; he also maximised his team strengths - as we found out in the Prelim. The GF was nearly always going to be a proving ground for them, and the widespread mantra was '...how to beat Collingwood or Richmond...' on the day with talls, contested marking and a sustained finishing intent after the first flush - which obviously was Collingwood's attempted 'best play'. The relentless 'hard ball get' was another asset that supported their mid to final game rally. Well done, Simpson and his determined team of players. 

8 hours ago, johndemonic said:

We havent played close to as good as both clubs today. With all due respect, that is delusional. We would have gone to water under the pressure of the eagles tall marking forwards or pies 5 goal start. We look amazing when everything is going our way, and took some big steps towards curbing the infuence of a team when it's not. But we're a year off staning up under pressure of a big game.

 

A free ride into the grand final? What a massive disservice to a club that has overcome a stacked compo towards mcg teams. Richmond pre prelim were neck and neck with pies at 3/4 time, and overran a team 2 rotations down -they also were smashed interstate all year . Had nowhere near as much unity and confidence in their system as both gf finalists with backs against wall. Level at 3/4 time, showed massive effort for both clubs to go goal for goal and to end in a small margin. But monumental to come down from 5 goals, backing the system to grind away methodically.

 

Couldnt agree more jd.

If that was us yesterday & Collingwood kicked the 1st x 5 goals it would have been all over.We would have gone to water like we did in the West last week & ended up losing by over 10 goals.Pies trounced us during the year just as WC did a few weeks ago & to me i think we are still a fair tick off the pace.Not saying we couldn't win it next year but we would need to be at our best while say the WC were off by that 10% to be a chance.


Interesting to note that 2015 onwards no grand finalist has reappeared the following year:

2015: Hawthorn - West Coast

2016: Bulldogs-Sydney,

2017: Richmond-Adelaide,

2018: West Coast-Woods.

Agree we would not have stood up under the Pies' early onslaught yesterday but we grew through this year and there's no reason to think we can't advance next year to the big one. Genuine pace through the middle with quality disposal is the missing element.

Imitation of the premiers happens but it's smarter to devise a strategy that works for your list. That's what the Dogs and Tigers did. And the Eagles.

The Eagles dont play fumbly defensive forward dribblers  who cant kick and refuse to take a straight line at the ball or the body.

Edited by goodoil

If Simpson had a different team with different strengths he would have coached differently.

Good coaches do this.

It’s like when Melbourne brought in “run and carry” in 2007 because it was all the rage despite the fact our team was not suited to play that way.

There is an interesting 'tension' between two game styles:  'possession' vs 'pressure' football. 

In the first camp is WCE, Hawks and to some extent Geelong.  The second includes (2016 Bulldogs), Rich, Pies and Demons.  The finals have shown that on any given day either style will win. 

imv it is the new rules in 2019 that will have the biggest impact on game styles:

With the 6x6x6 at centre bounces the ball will go forward very fast.  Imagine - no players behind the square and no +1 in defence.  The ball will come out so fast that defenders will be disadvantaged as their will be no time for a +1 to drop back.  

With the longer goal square when the ball is kicked in it will reach the 'fat' part of the ground, probably at its widest point.  Much harder to defend the width of the ground.  So, I can forsee Max patrolling one side of the ground and Preuss patrolling while keeping our forward structures in place ie not dragging Tom Mc or Weideman up the ground to help defend the 'fat' part.

Defending those situations, imv is what is driving our interest in Preuss and May.  

At the other end of the ground the rule changes help our fast and furious, bomb it long to forwards as initially there is no +1 to intercept.  Imagine all those i50's that won't ricochet back out again!   Most of our medium forwards (Melksham, Petracca, Fristch) are very good marks.  These factors could be why we are willing to let Jessie go. 

It will be interesting to watch how game styles evolve in 2019.  There will be a fair bit of experimenting by coaches but I think they will stick to their underlying 'possession' vs 'pressure' game styles.

Edited by Lucifer's Hero


1 hour ago, Ugottobekidding said:

Melbournd would have smashed the eagles at yhe MCG yesterday.

Just like last week ah?

1 hour ago, goodoil said:

The Eagles dont play fumbly defensive forward dribblers  who cant kick and refuse to take a straight line at the ball or the body.

Liam Ryan on multiple occasions...

45 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

There is an interesting 'tension' between two game styles:  'possession' vs 'pressure' football. 

In the first camp is WCE, Hawks and to some extent Geelong.  The second includes (2016 Bulldogs), Rich, Pies and Demons.  The finals have shown that on any given day either style will win. 

imv it is the new rules in 2019 that will have the biggest impact on game styles:

With the 6x6x6 at centre bounces the ball will go forward very fast.  Imagine - no players behind the square and no +1 in defence.  The ball will come out so fast that defenders will be disadvantaged as their will be no time for a +1 to drop back.  

With the longer goal square when the ball is kicked in it will reach the 'fat' part of the ground, probably at its widest point.  Much harder to defend the width of the ground.  So, I can forsee Max patrolling one side of the ground and Preuss patrolling while keeping our forward structures in place ie not dragging Tom Mc or Weideman up the ground to help defend the 'fat' part.

Defending those situations, imv is what is driving our interest in Preuss and May.  

At the other end of the ground the rule changes help our fast and furious, bomb it long to forwards as initially there is no +1 to intercept.  Imagine all those i50's that won't ricochet back out again!   Most of our medium forwards (Melksham, Petracca, Fristch) are very good marks.  These factors could be why we are willing to let Jessie go. 

It will be interesting to watch how game styles evolve in 2019.  There will be a fair bit of experimenting by coaches but I think they will stick to their underlying 'possession' vs 'pressure' game styles.

Sorry LH, but those rule changes will do nothing for what they are designed to alleviate.  

666 only happens at centre bounces.  For the rest of the match the positioning will be the same.  Wingers will sit on the defensive corner and head straight back to cover before the ball has even touched the rucks hand.

The extended goal square will only encourage kicking down the line, as it guarantees the ball further away from the opposition goal.  We already know this leads to a throw in and more congestion.

The big thing to be learned about the GF, is the value of strong marking.  There were fine examples of one grabs, which were game changing from both sides.  Darling, Kennedy, Cox, McGovern, Ryan all came up with grabs in seriously contested situations, that gave their sides game changing opportunity.    How many of our players at the moment could be classified as strong contested marks?

The other thing to be learned was the return of the tagger.  Pendelbury and Yeo were shut down but at the cost to their tags.  How many can a side afford to tag, and how many can you devote to this task?  It probably shows we have a genuine advantage in this area, because teams don't have the numbers to tag Oliver, Viney, and Brayshaw.  

 
10 minutes ago, george_on_the_outer said:

Sorry LH, but those rule changes will do nothing for what they are designed to alleviate.  

666 only happens at centre bounces.  For the rest of the match the positioning will be the same.  Wingers will sit on the defensive corner and head straight back to cover before the ball has even touched the rucks hand.

The extended goal square will only encourage kicking down the line, as it guarantees the ball further away from the opposition goal.  We already know this leads to a throw in and more congestion.

The big thing to be learned about the GF, is the value of strong marking.  There were fine examples of one grabs, which were game changing from both sides.  Darling, Kennedy, Cox, McGovern, Ryan all came up with grabs in seriously contested situations, that gave their sides game changing opportunity.    How many of our players at the moment could be classified as strong contested marks?

The other thing to be learned was the return of the tagger.  Pendelbury and Yeo were shut down but at the cost to their tags.  How many can a side afford to tag, and how many can you devote to this task?  It probably shows we have a genuine advantage in this area, because teams don't have the numbers to tag Oliver, Viney, and Brayshaw.  

Fair points. 

Given their are at least 15 centre bounces there will be a lot of 6x6x6 set ups.  I can't help but think our mooted list changes (May, Preuss, Hogan) in part relate to the impact of the new rules.

It will be interesting to watch coaching reactions to the changes.

Edited by Lucifer's Hero


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

Featured Content

  • NON-MFC: Round 15

    As the Demons head into their Bye Round, it's time to turn our attention to the other matches being played. Which teams are you tipping this week? And which results would be most favourable for the Demons if we can manage to turn our season around? Follow all the non-Melbourne games here and join the conversation as the ladder continues to take shape.

      • Like
    • 275 replies
  • REPORT: Port Adelaide

    Of course, it’s not the backline, you might argue and you would probably be right. It’s the boot studder (do they still have them?), the midfield, the recruiting staff, the forward line, the kicking coach, the Board, the interchange bench, the supporters, the folk at Casey, the head coach and the club psychologist  It’s all of them and all of us for having expectations that were sufficiently high to have believed three weeks ago that a restoration of the Melbourne team to a position where we might still be in contention for a finals berth when the time for the midseason bye arrived. Now let’s look at what happened over the period of time since Melbourne overwhelmed the Sydney Swans at the MCG in late May when it kicked 8.2 to 5.3 in the final quarter (and that was after scoring 3.8 to two straight goals in the second term). 

    • 3 replies
  • CASEY: Essendon

    Casey’s unbeaten run was extended for at least another fortnight after the Demons overran a persistent Essendon line up by 29 points at ETU Stadium in Port Melbourne last night. After conceding the first goal of the evening, Casey went on a scoring spree from about ten minutes in, with five unanswered majors with its fleet of midsized runners headed by the much improved Paddy Cross who kicked two in quick succession and livewire Ricky Mentha who also kicked an early goal. Leading the charge was recruit of the year, Riley Bonner while Bailey Laurie continued his impressive vein of form. With Tom Campbell missing from the lineup, Will Verrall stepped up to the plate demonstrating his improvement under the veteran ruckman’s tutelage. The Demons were looking comfortable for much of the second quarter and held a 25-point lead until the Bombers struck back with two goals in the shadows of half time. On the other side of the main break their revival continued with first three goals of the half. Harry Sharp, who had been quiet scrambled in the Demons’ first score of the third term to bring the margin back to a single point at the 17 minute mark and the game became an arm-wrestle for the remainder of the quarter and into the final moments of the last.

    • 0 replies
  • PREGAME: Gold Coast

    The Demons have the Bye next week but then are on the road once again when they come up against the Gold Coast Suns on the Gold Coast in what could be a last ditch effort to salvage their season. Who comes in and who comes out?

      • Sad
      • Like
    • 115 replies
  • PODCAST: Port Adelaide

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 16th June @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we dissect the Dees disappointing loss to the Power.
    Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show.
    Listen LIVE: https://demonland.com/

      • Sad
    • 33 replies
  • POSTGAME: Port Adelaide

    The Demons simply did not take their opportunities when they presented themselves and ultimately when down by 25 points effectively ending their finals chances. Goal kicking practice during the Bye?

      • Clap
      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 252 replies