Gawn is in the top 15 in the AFLCA award (only 8 votes behind Grundy and having played 1 game less.  He's also just outside the top 10 in the Age player of the year, again only 7 votes behind Grundy.  So he is a chance to actually finish ahead of him by seasons end.  Given he sits comfortably inside the top 10 of the league (and Luke Darcy has often referred to him as the best big man in the comp - and he's an AA selector), he'll make it on the bench.  The precedent was set last year.

I wonder if the reason Gawn wrote about it in the Herald Sun with the title "Goody made me do it" was that Gawn didn't actually agree with the move. In the article he talked about the sound reasoning, but it made me suspicious that Gawn stated that Goodwin said it had a positive influence in the second half of the match on QB and he should adopt it for all of Saturday's game. From my recollection, we got flogged after half time on QBD. Anyway. It just seems strange to bring attention to it and almost as an explanation/excuse as to why he played that way on Saturday

I think Goody's experimenting with different tactics is admirable, but I feel it's just a scatter gun approach hoping that something hits. It's almost as if he's having a stab in the dark while all the other coaches have night vision goggles on. 

Edited August 12, 20196 yr by At the break of Gawn

King has very little inability to think. He's the kind of idiot who gets caught drink driving in this day and age where you can get an uber in less than 3 minutes. 

If you are critical of a coaching move you have to lay out the pro's and cons and what did and didn't work. To simply say these 2 things didn't work because the team lost is about as stupid as it gets.

Let's look at the Gawn/Grundy match up:
Grundy's not only been the best ruck this year but quite possibly the best player in the comp. Asking Gawn to stick tight to him rather than drop a kick behind play or drag Grundy forward makes perfect sense. We had the long kicks covered with May, Frost and Lever, we didn't need Gawn behind the play. Could Gawn have run off Grundy more when we had the ball - yes. He did once to get a goal. But Gawn's not the best forward - he's a bad shot for goal - and we also needed Max playing the 103 minutes of game time that he did play given our lack of back up. As far as I'm concerned the 'tagging' was about keeping Gawn and Grundy together on the park and then giving Max an ability to win the contests. Max still was involved in plenty of contests, we won the clearances, all but levelled the inside 50's - 43 v 44 - and when our run and pressure was up to AFL standard we were right in the contest. When it wasn't for patches in the 2nd and 3rd we were miles off. I'd rather our coaches make moves based on us playing the footy that will win games rather than planning to be rubbish. And when we played well in patches the Gawn move made perfect sense.

The Sidebottom factor:
Sidebottom played most of the game as a wing and parts of it as a half forward. At both times he was left alone at stoppages, let's look at why:

Wing: Melbourne made the coaching move to drop a wingman to the edge of the square to cover a half back and to then run a half back in at centre bounces. Why? Because the Pies centre square midfield is faster than ours and really dangerous from the middle. Adam Treloar - who broke the game open a couple of times in the middle quarters in transition play - was minded at stoppages by Harmes and stopped from those centre square bursting runs. Grundy: who plays like an extra midfielder was held up. Brayshaw, Viney, Petracca etc weren't punished for lack of pace or defensive effort and we won the centre clearances 8 to 5. The Eagles don't have to tag Treloar because their inside midfield set up features Yeo and Shuey who are both super quick (and Gaff, Redden etc). For them it makes more sense to sit on Sidebottom, it doesn't mean it's the case for us. Until the last 2 weeks Sidebottom has had a mediocre season for his talents, whilst Treloar has been the most prolific midfielder in the comp and is using the ball better. If Harmes plays on Sidebottom and/or if we left the front of the centre square open we've got Treloar running straight in to the Pies forward line without pressure. Could JKH, Dunkley or Corey Wagner been sent directly to Sidebottom - maybe, would they have really done the job of stopping him - almost certainly not.

Half forward: Sidebottom played as the high half forward coming right up to stoppages, often leaving Jones and/or Salem back from the contest as the sweeping defenders. Something that nearly every team in the comp does. Teams rely on their wings and mids to man the half forwards and use their own half forwards to get involved at the other side. Shock horror that Sidebottom got involved more around the packs and was more dangerous than JKH, Baker, Corey Wagner etc and found room because the likes of Brayshaw, Oliver and Viney don't defend the outer ring of a clearance. Does that really mean it was a coaching mistake? Again, in the first and last quarter when our pressure and running was with the Pies it wasn't an issue. 

The Coaches also made an adjustment and sent Lewis to man the back of the stoppages as a half forward himself, taking the space that Sidebottom was operating in. So they did make a change during play. However that meant we were one short up forward and hindered our ability to score - that was already not great - and our ability to lock the ball in forward (which was already pretty much non existent).

Salem: As above I don't really think he was the problem with Sidebottom. I think teams have put a lot of time in to him and with Jones at half back playing the sweeper role it's meant Salem has to do more defensively. It's the same problem as last year when Lewis was the main uncontested cheater at half back. Apart from that he's pretty much had about enough playing half back for a crap side after a huge first half of the year. I'm disappointed he's dropped of a little but King's pretty much called him out on something that isn't his fault and after a couple of down games. I'd certainly give him a go in the midfield just for a fresh look for the last 2 rounds but in the scheme of things it's all bit meh.

I'm sorry Mr King but your peanut gallery level analysis doesn't hold up. Melbourne's coaches made a choice and an adjustment to that as well. Someone was always going to get off the chain when the pressure and running dropped away. The coaches could've made different match up choices and he could've written about Grundy and Treloar as the best Pies players. 

Seriously, what did we actually lose by having Gawn tag Grundy?

Gawn is a good tap ruckman, and good in the air - he’s not a bloke that likes to run free and gather a lot of loose possessions, delivering the ball to others with skill. 

We lost very little with this move. Get past the concept of a player being wasted by tagging and look at the actual net effect of the strategy.

5 minutes ago, Mach5 said:

Seriously, what did we actually lose by having Gawn tag Grundy?

Gawn is a good tap ruckman, and good in the air - he’s not a bloke that likes to run free and gather a lot of loose possessions, delivering the ball to others with skill. 

We lost very little with this move. Get past the concept of a player being wasted by tagging and look at the actual net effect of the strategy.

He’s one of the best contested marks in the game (6th in the comp this year). He only took a single mark on the weekend, and I have no idea if that was even contested. So there’s that for a start.

Grain of salt time but Campbell Brown had Grundy in the Team of the Week.

7 minutes ago, Demonland said:

Grain of salt time but Campbell Brown had Grundy in the Team of the Week.

Campbell Brown is Joffa in disguise!! He sets a low bar does this fella. 38% disposal efficiency - that's 6 out of 16 possies getting where they were meant to!! Love your work Joffa!!

Lol Brown, team of the week for Grundy. Didn’t get a vote from either coach.

2 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

King has very little inability to think. He's the kind of idiot who gets caught drink driving in this day and age where you can get an uber in less than 3 minutes. 

If you are critical of a coaching move you have to lay out the pro's and cons and what did and didn't work. To simply say these 2 things didn't work because the team lost is about as stupid as it gets.

Let's look at the Gawn/Grundy match up:
Grundy's not only been the best ruck this year but quite possibly the best player in the comp. Asking Gawn to stick tight to him rather than drop a kick behind play or drag Grundy forward makes perfect sense. We had the long kicks covered with May, Frost and Lever, we didn't need Gawn behind the play. Could Gawn have run off Grundy more when we had the ball - yes. He did once to get a goal. But Gawn's not the best forward - he's a bad shot for goal - and we also needed Max playing the 103 minutes of game time that he did play given our lack of back up. As far as I'm concerned the 'tagging' was about keeping Gawn and Grundy together on the park and then giving Max an ability to win the contests. Max still was involved in plenty of contests, we won the clearances, all but levelled the inside 50's - 43 v 44 - and when our run and pressure was up to AFL standard we were right in the contest. When it wasn't for patches in the 2nd and 3rd we were miles off. I'd rather our coaches make moves based on us playing the footy that will win games rather than planning to be rubbish. And when we played well in patches the Gawn move made perfect sense.

The Sidebottom factor:
Sidebottom played most of the game as a wing and parts of it as a half forward. At both times he was left alone at stoppages, let's look at why:

Wing: Melbourne made the coaching move to drop a wingman to the edge of the square to cover a half back and to then run a half back in at centre bounces. Why? Because the Pies centre square midfield is faster than ours and really dangerous from the middle. Adam Treloar - who broke the game open a couple of times in the middle quarters in transition play - was minded at stoppages by Harmes and stopped from those centre square bursting runs. Grundy: who plays like an extra midfielder was held up. Brayshaw, Viney, Petracca etc weren't punished for lack of pace or defensive effort and we won the centre clearances 8 to 5. The Eagles don't have to tag Treloar because their inside midfield set up features Yeo and Shuey who are both super quick (and Gaff, Redden etc). For them it makes more sense to sit on Sidebottom, it doesn't mean it's the case for us. Until the last 2 weeks Sidebottom has had a mediocre season for his talents, whilst Treloar has been the most prolific midfielder in the comp and is using the ball better. If Harmes plays on Sidebottom and/or if we left the front of the centre square open we've got Treloar running straight in to the Pies forward line without pressure. Could JKH, Dunkley or Corey Wagner been sent directly to Sidebottom - maybe, would they have really done the job of stopping him - almost certainly not.

Half forward: Sidebottom played as the high half forward coming right up to stoppages, often leaving Jones and/or Salem back from the contest as the sweeping defenders. Something that nearly every team in the comp does. Teams rely on their wings and mids to man the half forwards and use their own half forwards to get involved at the other side. Shock horror that Sidebottom got involved more around the packs and was more dangerous than JKH, Baker, Corey Wagner etc and found room because the likes of Brayshaw, Oliver and Viney don't defend the outer ring of a clearance. Does that really mean it was a coaching mistake? Again, in the first and last quarter when our pressure and running was with the Pies it wasn't an issue. 

The Coaches also made an adjustment and sent Lewis to man the back of the stoppages as a half forward himself, taking the space that Sidebottom was operating in. So they did make a change during play. However that meant we were one short up forward and hindered our ability to score - that was already not great - and our ability to lock the ball in forward (which was already pretty much non existent).

Salem: As above I don't really think he was the problem with Sidebottom. I think teams have put a lot of time in to him and with Jones at half back playing the sweeper role it's meant Salem has to do more defensively. It's the same problem as last year when Lewis was the main uncontested cheater at half back. Apart from that he's pretty much had about enough playing half back for a crap side after a huge first half of the year. I'm disappointed he's dropped of a little but King's pretty much called him out on something that isn't his fault and after a couple of down games. I'd certainly give him a go in the midfield just for a fresh look for the last 2 rounds but in the scheme of things it's all bit meh.

I'm sorry Mr King but your peanut gallery level analysis doesn't hold up. Melbourne's coaches made a choice and an adjustment to that as well. Someone was always going to get off the chain when the pressure and running dropped away. The coaches could've made different match up choices and he could've written about Grundy and Treloar as the best Pies players. 

Great post.

I don't necessarily agree with all of it (the runner off half-back was clearly not working by HT but we persisted), but at least here is a post from someone who has taken some time to think about the tactics, to consider them in context, and to discuss the pros and cons of them.

The Sidebottom thing is a complete non-issue. He's been nowhere near as good as he could be and I have no problem with us focusing on Treloar and Adam (much more damaging in 2019) instead. The "look" of him being alone on the wing was just that, an appearance. Commenting on it without the context of why we had Jones/Salem dropping back indicates superficial analysis (which is too often what we get from David King).

Gawn wasn't making AA anyway

 

2 minutes ago, praha said:

Gawn wasn't making AA anyway

 

How could he not? The precedent was set last year. Gawn is in front on the head to head ledger and according to the coaches votes they have had similar seasons. Both will make the team but in reverse order this year.

1 minute ago, Swooper1987 said:

How could he not? The precedent was set last year. Gawn is in front on the head to head ledger and according to the coaches votes they have had similar seasons. Both will make the team but in reverse order this year.

Because we're 17th. They included the two best ruckman from two sides inside the top 5. Two ruckman was an aberration, not the norm. It'll be one or the other. Gawn will make the shortlist though.

16 hours ago, Jaded said:

The fact that Goodwin made Gawn, the best ruckman in the league, tag Grundy makes me feel sick. How can a coach be this dumb? Does Fyfe tag Martin? Wtf is this strategy? Let’s nullify our best player by making him nullify an equally good player. And let’s do it in the ruck. Words fail me. 

I agree. The decision to use Gawn to tag Grundy is troubling. I would like to know Goodwin's logic behind it? On face value it looks ambitious, if not completely stupid. Grundy is a glorified midfielder, and we are rather contested, we werent in any real danger of Grundy smashing us in clearances if left to his own devices. Furthermore, last time Gawn went toe to toe with Grundy - Gawn came out on top. If any of the coaching staff bothered to watch the Collingwood vs Hawthorn game a few weeks earlier they would have seen that the way to beat Grundy is to push forward and damage the scoreboard - as McEvoy did. Supercoach (a gimmick game that heavily favours popular players) stats mightnt of shown it that day but McEvoy was far more the effective player vs Grundy that day.

Edited August 12, 20196 yr by KingDingAling

15 hours ago, jumbo returns said:

Gawn has been a giant this year, but got beaten a couple of times by a taller, stronger opponent

Hickey gets under his skin, as did the big boy from Freo (name eludes me right now)

Grundy has beaten all his opponents 

Gawn thrashed him on Queens birthday. How soon we forget

17 hours ago, Jaded said:

The fact that Goodwin made Gawn, the best ruckman in the league, tag Grundy makes me feel sick. How can a coach be this dumb? Does Fyfe tag Martin? Wtf is this strategy? Let’s nullify our best player by making him nullify an equally good player. And let’s do it in the ruck. Words fail me. 

Jaded  Goody  is dumb and stubborn. We have three more years of this carp>

17 hours ago, Swooper1987 said:

Campbell Brown is Joffa in disguise!! He sets a low bar does this fella. 38% disposal efficiency - that's 6 out of 16 possies getting where they were meant to!! Love your work Joffa!!

 

16 hours ago, Dee Zephyr said:

Lol Brown, team of the week for Grundy. Didn’t get a vote from either coach.

AFL Team of the Week has Grundy as the Best Ruckman for the week: https://www.afl.com.au/news/2019-08-13/team-of-the-week-r21-who-makes-the-cut

Ruckman across the other 8 games must have been below average to woeful.

 

Our ruckman being named in a notional team that could never actually exist is truly of little concern. Wake me up when AA selection translates into winning games. 

Could Max have simply played "a bit sore" and subsequently had a quieter game than usual ?

Tipping a ten mark game friday  night .

On 8/13/2019 at 8:05 AM, demonmerv said:

Gawn thrashed him on Queens birthday. How soon we forget

Thrashed?

Wow

6 hours ago, jumbo returns said:

Thrashed?

Wow

Grundy 14 disposals, 6 marks, 30 hitouts 1 goal. Gawn 34 disposals 5 marks 33 hitouts. Max had a great game. unfortunately the rest of the midfield did not back him up.

2 hours ago, demonmerv said:

Grundy 14 disposals, 6 marks, 30 hitouts 1 goal. Gawn 34 disposals 5 marks 33 hitouts. Max had a great game. unfortunately the rest of the midfield did not back him up.

Agree

Wonder how the umps will vote on Brownlow night

On 8/12/2019 at 2:57 PM, Jaded said:

The fact that Goodwin made Gawn, the best ruckman in the league, tag Grundy makes me feel sick. How can a coach be this dumb? Does Fyfe tag Martin? Wtf is this strategy? Let’s nullify our best player by making him nullify an equally good player. And let’s do it in the ruck. Words fail me. 

IF this is correct amd we deliberately left Sidebottom to run amok (according to vision/reports) it's no wonder the rest of our game was a shamozzle!

What a rabble we are on the field right now.  Feel sorry for anyone playing under the current FD.  No wonder many look disinterested and lazy, seemingly running at half pace/effort.