1 hour ago, Swooper1987 said:

. ex Swooper

"We had a bit of footy chit chat and he asked me about my thoughts on the Demons.  Then I asked his. He said Gawn is the best ruckman in the comp, and quite possibly the best player, but he plays with "peanuts". He said if Gawn went to a side like Geelong they'd be unbeatable.  In his view our midfield fall into one or more of the following categories: double grabbers (fumblers); poor skills; poor decision makers.  He said every one of them had at least one of those issues and some had more.  He said Gawn gives his midfield first look way more than any other ruck in the competition but the midfield either fumble it, butcher it or pass it on to somebody in a worse position almost all of the time."

I asked him about Petracca and he pointed out a very small sample size to go on to quantify his improvement, but that he appeared to have made himself a better player by working harder on both fitness and decision making i.e clearing the immediate area with possession distance. He said the way to beat Melbourne is basically concede the tap, understand where Gawn is dropping it and wait for the midfield to either fumble or turn it over.  Down the line, add numbers to any contest with Gawn to neutralize his aerial impact and know that when the ball hits the deck the opposition is much better than 50-50 to scoot away with it.  He said neither Gold Coast or Hawthorn covered Gawn properly when he dropped back and that's why we looked so good. Brisbane did and while Gawn had solid numbers, his actual game influence was nullified. He reckons every team playing Melbourne spends at least half their prep time on Gawn.

I watched last night with this conversation in mind and it played out pretty much as above.  Even Hinkley and Wines post match saying how much time they put into Gawn. He didn't offer any solutions, just pointed out the issues, which unfortunately seem to compound.

I would have to agree wholeheartedly.

As I mention elsewhere the Effective disposal efficiency from our top ballgetters was around 50 % (Oliver & Viney. Petracca was 58" but he at least makes things happen.

OLiver & Viney either go round in circles or "bomb "NS (Not Specifically). I often wonder as to what the criteria is for Effective Disposal because if it includes dinky hanballs that go 1 Metree to someone with 2 opponents hovering then I do not class it as effective.

13 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Tom McDonald - Signs a 4 year deal in the middle of 2018. Since then, has turned into one of the worst footballers on our list. Can barely turn and is ridiculously slow.

Angus Brayshaw - Same as Tmac, Signs a big 4 year deal in the middle of 2018 and yet again hs done nothing since. A step closer to getting dropped to park footy.

James Harmes - Signs a 5 year deal last year and now thinks he's Dustin Martin. I'm staggered how far backwards he's gone.

 

We also gave 4 or 5 year contracts to May, Lever, Langdon and Tomlinson. 

For them and the players you mention I can see the logic was to keep or get a wanted player. 

Tomlinson can't get a game.  TMc is rapidly not best 22.  We have too many inside mids and some fans want to trade TMc, Brayshaw and possibly Harmes.  Lever has yet to deliver on his promise.  The bad news is they are all in contract until 2022, 2023 or 2024.  

4/5 year contracts should be for bona fide stars otherwise it is too easy for the lesser lights to rest on their laurels and go along for the ride.

Terrible contract term management by Mahoney and co.

Edited July 31, 20204 yr by Lucifer's Hero

there is universal criticism of our game plan .But can someone please explain our game plan .? Ports was easy enough to fathom but we were completely static and our forwards just stood around like Browns cows ,Can somebody just explain to me what the blueprint of our game plan is .

15 minutes ago, kallangurdemon said:

there is universal criticism of our game plan .But can someone please explain our game plan .? Ports was easy enough to fathom but we were completely static and our forwards just stood around like Browns cows ,Can somebody just explain to me what the blueprint of our game plan is .

We play "our brand", meaning manic attack on the footy. That's it. Regardless of the opposition. When it works it's overwhelming. But it's been worked out and is easily thwarted.

When it's not working Goodwin doubles down on playing "our brand" with even more intensity.

It's like a snooker player saying "if I clear the table every time, the other bloke can't get a look-in". It's like a tennis player saying "if I just serve aces every time my opponent won't be able to score." Not serving aces? Try even harder to serve aces every time. Still not serving aces? Try even harder! Rinse and repeat while plummeting down the world rankings chart.

We don't have the funds to get rid of Goodwin right now. However, we can definitely afford to offload Alan Richardson. Poor to terrible coach at StKilda and, as is a our way, we decide to pick him up as an assistant. Huge error.

Meanwhile, smart clubs are looking for young, bright assistants with the mental acumen to genuinely analyse the systems of the opposition and, at the same time, develop systems that work to our strengths.I.e. a Blake Caracella who has shown what an effective assistant can do.

I genuinely believe that this lack of off-field smarts has cost us two matches, Geelong and Brisbane. We take an eternity on game day to solve problems being thrown at us. Even taking into account last nights putridness, a good assistant would have us 5 - 3 going into winnable matches.

In summary, [censored] off Richardson. You're akin to a double agent. 

 

Edited July 31, 20204 yr by Return to Glory

5 minutes ago, Return to Glory said:

Meanwhile, smart clubs are looking for young, bright assistants with the mental acumen to genuinely analyse the systems of the opposition and, at the same time, develop systems that work to our strengths.I.e. a Blake Caracella who has shown what an effective assistant can do.

Give us credit for thinking outside the square. We hire assistants who barrack for other clubs and have never played in the position they're coaching.

We have somehow got so many inside mids that we are completely deficient in outside skilled runners.  

Inside mids - Viney, Trac, Oliver, Harmes, Brayshaw, Jones, Sparrow. These blokes need to play on the ball and cannot move to a flank outside role (except Trac and he’s brilliant in the midfield). 

Outside mids - Langdon (a good runner but not skilled)  then ... 

We lack skilled runners. Memo to Mahoney and Jason Taylor for three (minimum) in the 2020 draft or trade.  Refer to my 2020 draft posts. 

We recruited Tomlinson for a “wing” - who was thinking that a slow 6”4’ endurance runner was being transformed to the wing.  Mahoney was joking. He’s too slow and not agile for such a role. 4 year deal !! FFS.  We need to salvage this. Move him to CHF for 6 weeks.  He’d be better than Tmcd  !! 

We have too many mid sized half forwards- Anb, Hunt, Bennell, Melksham, Vdberg, Hannan, Fritsch. Add Baker and Dunkley and our recruiting becomes unstructured and haphazard. Only 2-3 such players should be in the team any week so a need to cull here.  
 

For a wing role starting this week

Option 1  

I’d like to see Jayden Hunt back in as a midfielder.  We don’t need him as a midsized forward. Put on the wing for 3-4 weeks and say “Go your hardest”. Run run run. He’d confuse the commentators with Hunt and Langdon.    If it doesn’t work, Hunts put up as a trade option. 
 

Option 2 

James Jordon. He’s only 19 but ready to play. I’d back the kid for a few games this year on the wing.  He’s got skills and composure.  
 

Option 3 

Trent Rivers.  He showed us he can run and deliver.  Get him in and see if the wingman role suits.  Give him 3-4 weeks in this role.  

5 hours ago, Swooper1987 said:

Earlier in the  week I spoke with someone in an incidental work conversation who had been working for an AFL club coaching panel pre covid.  He has subsequently been stood down.  I don't really know him at all but he noticed that I'm a Demon fan from a top I was wearing in our online meet. He was trying to sell me stuff so he was obviously looking for an "in". We had a bit of footy chit chat and he asked me about my thoughts on the Demons.  Then I asked his. He said Gawn is the best ruckman in the comp, and quite possibly the best player, but he plays with "peanuts". He said if Gawn went to a side like Geelong they'd be unbeatable.  In his view our midfield fall into one or more of the following categories: double grabbers (fumblers); poor skills; poor decision makers.  He said every one of them had at least one of those issues and some had more.  He said Gawn gives his midfield first look way more than any other ruck in the competition but the midfield either fumble it, butcher it or pass it on to somebody in a worse position almost all of the time.

I asked him about Petracca and he pointed out a very small sample size to go on to quantify his improvement, but that he appeared to have made himself a better player by working harder on both fitness and decision making i.e clearing the immediate area with possession distance. He said the way to beat Melbourne is basically concede the tap, understand where Gawn is dropping it and wait for the midfield to either fumble or turn it over.  Down the line, add numbers to any contest with Gawn to neutralize his aerial impact and know that when the ball hits the deck the opposition is much better than 50-50 to scoot away with it.  He said neither Gold Coast or Hawthorn covered Gawn properly when he dropped back and that's why we looked so good. Brisbane did and while Gawn had solid numbers, his actual game influence was nullified. He reckons every team playing Melbourne spends at least half their prep time on Gawn.

I watched last night with this conversation in mind and it played out pretty much as above.  Even Hinkley and Wines post match saying how much time they put into Gawn. He didn't offer any solutions, just pointed out the issues, which unfortunately seem to compound.

This.

And it is blindingly obvious to everyone except our brainless coaching staff.

I think this is why we need to get Salem into the midfield. He is no use to us off half back.He doesn't run and carry and deliver to a forward. He constantly dinks the ball 10m (which he does quite well but provides no real value).

He is quite a smart decision maker so could well be a revelation in the guts

Oliver is now next to useless in the middle. Turns it over too much, puts team mates under pressure and his happy handballing provides no impetus.

Viney we can afford to have in the middle but he isn't creative nor can he burst away to deliver to a forward. My thinking is we cant play oliver and Viney in the middle together.  Or maybe brayshaw goes in there as it is his natural position and can't seem to play anywhere else. 

Edited July 31, 20204 yr by jnrmac

No one is playing positional football.

They are all doing a "role".

Chasing nothing to get to a zoning area.

Skilled teams kill them as they can pierce through the holes.

Hard at it teams beat us with chaos.

We beat ourselves because players aren't where we expect them to be when we push forward.

We need to create normal leads, space to play in and one on one pressure.  Manic, up and back exhaust us.

It is difficult to dispose of the ball without turnover as we have no plan for when we are under pressure to find any advantaged one on ones. The player could be a small or 2 on one when we clear the pressure. We also seem to be on the outside. We can't seem to hold the corridors. Very few pressured kicks to advantage. 

To many running to a field position, exhausting themselves. Our handball/running offensive game can't get going as we are tired from pushing to get to our zones. 

Do they know, who is in what position. A quick ball seems to always go to the opposition. We kick to mismatched or outnumbered. We can't hold the corridor and are always pushed wide.

 I think we need to go back to playing in position. Getting one on ones across the field.

Let our midfield chase in packs and the rest play normal suburban set-ups. We are too complicated and the players don't know where the talls are positioned for a get out of pressure disposal. We have no patterns or instinctuals, so development as the season progresses is lacking.

 

I want one on one play and for us to hold the forward and back lines in the 6 and 6 positions.

 

8 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

@dazzledavey36 - it's not a long bow to draw when you look at the long term contracts they received and how they have played since then.  While there are bigger issues than this, it's worth looking at.

When you consider our centre square set up, and the players who run through there, we have low skilled players.  That's not news to anyone here.  Petracca can be good at times, but he, Viney, Oliver, Gus, Harmes etc are all average users of the footy at best.

So what do we do?  The three we generally go with are Viney, Oliver and Trac.  Does that need to change?  Chucking Gus or Harmes in there isn't going to make much of a difference, so do we look to offload one of them to help us get a different type of mid that we can run through there.  

We could look to experiment, but guys most of our mids can't really play in other possies.  I'd love to see us try and centre square set up of, say, Trac, Melksham and Salem to see how it goes, but I don't know if we will really get the opportunity to do so.

Either way, those contracts aren't looking flash at present.

That’s a good summary, we have been screaming out for outside run and all we’ve done is bring in KK (bad decision), Langdon ✅, Tomlinson ?

Sparrow, Jones, Brayshaw, Harmes, Oliver, Viney, Trac all to similar...

4 minutes ago, Vineytime said:

That’s a good summary, we have been screaming out for outside run and all we’ve done is bring in KK (bad decision), Langdon ✅, Tomlinson ?

Sparrow, Jones, Brayshaw, Harmes, Oliver, Viney, Trac all to similar...

I'm a bit confused with Tomlinson.  Okay, he wasn't setting the world alight, but they were pretty quick to drop him, even though there were probably others ahead of him who deserved to be.  Now, he can't get back into the side.

Hopefully they see a bit of sense and get him back this week against the Crows.  I think he has something more to offer, and he can get dropped off the form he had, then there would be 10 others who could get dropped this week.

19 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

I'm a bit confused with Tomlinson.  Okay, he wasn't setting the world alight, but they were pretty quick to drop him, even though there were probably others ahead of him who deserved to be.  Now, he can't get back into the side.

Hopefully they see a bit of sense and get him back this week against the Crows.  I think he has something more to offer, and he can get dropped off the form he had, then there would be 10 others who could get dropped this week.

Sorry Tomlinson lost me when he had that last deliberate set shot for goal against Geelong I think and he missed because he rushed the kick. He had the distance no problem. It looked like he wanted to have the set shot quickly and obviously missed.

9 hours ago, praha said:

combination of overpaying average footballers (and coaches), and coaching/developing them poorly. 

Can add Oliver to this list as well. They've all been Melbourne'd.

Should have just let Goodwin resign like he wanted to after the camp fiasco.

Is this a fact? Was he talked out of it?

8 minutes ago, cantstandyasam said:

Sorry Tomlinson lost me when he had that last deliberate set shot for goal against Geelong I think and he missed because he rushed the kick. He had the distance no problem. It looked like he wanted to have the set shot quickly and obviously missed.

So after a couple of games you've written him off due to a rushed kick?

I would assume then that you've written off practically the whole list as most are guilty of doing this a few times a game?

1 hour ago, cantstandyasam said:

Sorry Tomlinson lost me when he had that last deliberate set shot for goal against Geelong I think and he missed because he rushed the kick. He had the distance no problem. It looked like he wanted to have the set shot quickly and obviously missed.

You're easily triggered if it really was over that..

The haircut of first year player Jackson.

It shows some people in the hub have no idea.

3 hours ago, kev martin said:

No one is playing positional football.

They are all doing a "role".

Chasing nothing to get to a zoning area.

Skilled teams kill them as they can pierce through the holes.

Hard at it teams beat us with chaos.

We beat ourselves because players aren't where we expect them to be when we push forward.

We need to create normal leads, space to play in and one on one pressure.  Manic, up and back exhaust us.

It is difficult to dispose of the ball without turnover as we have no plan for when we are under pressure to find any advantaged one on ones. The player could be a small or 2 on one when we clear the pressure. We also seem to be on the outside. We can't seem to hold the corridors. Very few pressured kicks to advantage. 

To many running to a field position, exhausting themselves. Our handball/running offensive game can't get going as we are tired from pushing to get to our zones. 

Do they know, who is in what position. A quick ball seems to always go to the opposition. We kick to mismatched or outnumbered. We can't hold the corridor and are always pushed wide.

 I think we need to go back to playing in position. Getting one on ones across the field.

Let our midfield chase in packs and the rest play normal suburban set-ups. We are too complicated and the players don't know where the talls are positioned for a get out of pressure disposal. We have no patterns or instinctuals, so development as the season progresses is lacking.

 

I want one on one play and for us to hold the forward and back lines in the 6 and 6 positions.

 

Our defensive zone is actually one of the things we've been getting right the last month.

There's no defensive setup that can contain a top of the ladder side when you turn it over like we do.

Longing for old-fashioned one-on-one footy isn't the answer.

Concerted effort for our mids and forwards to improve their skills and work rate is.

6 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

Our defensive zone is actually one of the things we've been getting right the last month.

There's no defensive setup that can contain a top of the ladder side when you turn it over like we do.

Longing for old-fashioned one-on-one footy isn't the answer.

Concerted effort for our mids and forwards to improve their skills and work rate is.

Our defensive set up was i thought quite organised last night. It was the lack of pressure from the mids that was glaring.

May, Lockhart, Lever and Hibberd can all hold their head up high.

10 hours ago, Swooper1987 said:

Earlier in the  week I spoke with someone in an incidental work conversation who had been working for an AFL club coaching panel pre covid.  He has subsequently been stood down.  I don't really know him at all but he noticed that I'm a Demon fan from a top I was wearing in our online meet. He was trying to sell me stuff so he was obviously looking for an "in". We had a bit of footy chit chat and he asked me about my thoughts on the Demons.  Then I asked his. He said Gawn is the best ruckman in the comp, and quite possibly the best player, but he plays with "peanuts". He said if Gawn went to a side like Geelong they'd be unbeatable.  In his view our midfield fall into one or more of the following categories: double grabbers (fumblers); poor skills; poor decision makers.  He said every one of them had at least one of those issues and some had more.  He said Gawn gives his midfield first look way more than any other ruck in the competition but the midfield either fumble it, butcher it or pass it on to somebody in a worse position almost all of the time.

I asked him about Petracca and he pointed out a very small sample size to go on to quantify his improvement, but that he appeared to have made himself a better player by working harder on both fitness and decision making i.e clearing the immediate area with possession distance. He said the way to beat Melbourne is basically concede the tap, understand where Gawn is dropping it and wait for the midfield to either fumble or turn it over.  Down the line, add numbers to any contest with Gawn to neutralize his aerial impact and know that when the ball hits the deck the opposition is much better than 50-50 to scoot away with it.  He said neither Gold Coast or Hawthorn covered Gawn properly when he dropped back and that's why we looked so good. Brisbane did and while Gawn had solid numbers, his actual game influence was nullified. He reckons every team playing Melbourne spends at least half their prep time on Gawn.

I watched last night with this conversation in mind and it played out pretty much as above.  Even Hinkley and Wines post match saying how much time they put into Gawn. He didn't offer any solutions, just pointed out the issues, which unfortunately seem to compound.

I posted this earlier in the thread.

"Posted 11 hours ago

 

We know we are the worst skilled side in the AFL and one of the slowest, if not the slowest.
The game plan has been shown to not work with this list.  
I think we have another problem with Gawn, in that players believe he can dominate and win the clearances and then the game for them. Opposition are roving to him and winning clearances, then with outside spread are killing us. We need to adjust in this area now. I have advocated Gawn smashing it forward, thereby creating a different contest and changing the game.
However all that being said,  when all you have to do all year is practice and then execute reasonable disposal and you can’t, you have no chance of success. 
When your star mid, every game wins the first few contests and then gives the ball straight to the opposition for goals and before you know it you are 3-4 goals down, you generally don’t win. 

 

13 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

Our defensive zone is actually one of the things we've been getting right the last month.

There's no defensive setup that can contain a top of the ladder side when you turn it over like we do.

Longing for old-fashioned one-on-one footy isn't the answer.

Concerted effort for our mids and forwards to improve their skills and work rate is.

You are right. Our backline is doing the job.

I notice that every player is sometimes found in that part of the ground, which makes it a bit easier to defend in a crowded area.

I think we lose energy and intensity because of the effort to fill the back zones.

My point is more about how we are playing out of traditional positions and our forward structure suffers. Players cannot blindly kick knowing a tall will be close to the ball drop.

Edited July 31, 20204 yr by kev martin

5 hours ago, jnrmac said:

 

Oliver is now next to useless in the middle. Turns it over too much, puts team mates under pressure and his happy handballing provides no impetus.

Viney we can afford to have in the middle but he isn't creative nor can he burst away to deliver to a forward. My thinking is we cant play oliver and Viney in the middle together.  Or maybe brayshaw goes in there as it is his natural position and can't seem to play anywhere else. 

Why is Oliver now such a poor disposer of the footy? He wasn't like that his first couple of years, other than the odd clanger. Now it is the odd correct disposal. What has caused this disintegration of his disposal?

Agree on the Viney point.

6 minutes ago, kev martin said:

You are right. Our backline is doing the job.

I notice that every player is sometimes found in that part of the ground, which makes it a bit easier to defend in a crowded area.

I think we lose energy and intensity because of the effort to fill the back zones.

My point is more about how we are playing out of traditional positions and our forward structure suffers. Players cannot blindly kick knowing a tall will be close to the ball drop.

But they're not though.

More than ever under Goodwin's reign, we're keeping forwards higher up the ground as outlets for when we get the ball back.

Our mids are defensively running now, which is essential. No team leaves defence up to the back six alone.

If we're losing energy defending, which we are, it's because we keep turning it over forcing us to have to manically re-set our zone and sprint back into defence. Too much running between the 50s and not enough keeping of the ball inside our forward half (which is what Goodwin has always wanted).

11 hours ago, Swooper1987 said:

Earlier in the  week I spoke with someone in an incidental work conversation who had been working for an AFL club coaching panel pre covid.  He has subsequently been stood down.  I don't really know him at all but he noticed that I'm a Demon fan from a top I was wearing in our online meet. He was trying to sell me stuff so he was obviously looking for an "in". We had a bit of footy chit chat and he asked me about my thoughts on the Demons.  Then I asked his. He said Gawn is the best ruckman in the comp, and quite possibly the best player, but he plays with "peanuts". He said if Gawn went to a side like Geelong they'd be unbeatable.  In his view our midfield fall into one or more of the following categories: double grabbers (fumblers); poor skills; poor decision makers.  He said every one of them had at least one of those issues and some had more.  He said Gawn gives his midfield first look way more than any other ruck in the competition but the midfield either fumble it, butcher it or pass it on to somebody in a worse position almost all of the time.

I asked him about Petracca and he pointed out a very small sample size to go on to quantify his improvement, but that he appeared to have made himself a better player by working harder on both fitness and decision making i.e clearing the immediate area with possession distance. He said the way to beat Melbourne is basically concede the tap, understand where Gawn is dropping it and wait for the midfield to either fumble or turn it over.  Down the line, add numbers to any contest with Gawn to neutralize his aerial impact and know that when the ball hits the deck the opposition is much better than 50-50 to scoot away with it.  He said neither Gold Coast or Hawthorn covered Gawn properly when he dropped back and that's why we looked so good. Brisbane did and while Gawn had solid numbers, his actual game influence was nullified. He reckons every team playing Melbourne spends at least half their prep time on Gawn.

I watched last night with this conversation in mind and it played out pretty much as above.  Even Hinkley and Wines post match saying how much time they put into Gawn. He didn't offer any solutions, just pointed out the issues, which unfortunately seem to compound.

Appreciate what you're passing on mate, that said I pretty much the exact same thing on how to beat us in the post match thread, of which I am not the first to do so. To use a bit of a footy cliche, Blind Freddie could tell us this.

The point I disagree on is that our mids fall into double grabbers, poor kills or poor decision makers, at least anymore than most other inside mids in the competition. Notwithstanding last night, Oliver is a one grab player whose decision making is usually pretty sound (he's being made to kick more to take him to the next level - talks of trading him are the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard), Petracca has clearly improved his skill execution and therefore his decision making is looking better. Viney? Maybe, but on his night he is elite and has done it in big finals games, so I reckon the criticism of our midfield is rubbish.

So I will be one of the voices of dissidence here, because I still believe in this midfield. What they turned in last night was pathetic, but the forwards weren't much better either. But what has become increasingly clear over time is that the system Goodwin wants us to play is unsustainable and the team has never been able to master any level of consistency of it over 3 years and almost half a season.

33 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

But they're not though.

More than ever under Goodwin's reign, we're keeping forwards higher up the ground as outlets for when we get the ball back.

Our mids are defensively running now, which is essential. No team leaves defence up to the back six alone.

If we're losing energy defending, which we are, it's because we keep turning it over forcing us to have to manically re-set our zone and sprint back into defence. Too much running between the 50s and not enough keeping of the ball inside our forward half (which is what Goodwin has always wanted).

I don't mean they are found all at the same time in that area.

It is difficult to know with tv viewing.

Though what drew my attention was seeing Fritsch in the backline. 

It is also the high forward line that gives me ths impression of everyone zoning the defensive. 

I want to work out why our 50 entry conversion is atrocious and the opposition (Port in particular) sling off our forward line to score.

I feel it is about transitions, disposals to advantage and intensity. 

The players don't seem to know where each other are as they continually change roles.

So my idea is that we run around the field too much.

Our main 6 backline players are our stability, the rest could  be anywhere.

Edited July 31, 20204 yr by kev martin

5 minutes ago, kev martin said:

I don't mean they are found all at the same time in that area.

It is difficult to know with tv viewing.

Though what drew my attention was seeing Fritsch in the backline. 

It is also the high forward line that gives me ths impression of everyone zoning the defensive. 

I want to work out why our 50 entry conversion is atrocious and the opposition (Port in particular) sling off our forward line to score.

I feel it is about transitions, disposals to advantage and intensity. 

The players don't seem to know where each other are as they continually change roles.

So my idea is that we run around the feild too much.

Our main 6 backline players are our stability, the rest could  be anywhere.

Goodwin moved Fritsch into the backline in the second half, as part of his (useless) flipping of magnets.

Yes, we run around the field a lot, but it stems from turnovers.

We looked composed and well structured over the past three weeks. We weren't turning it over as much. The two are, IMO, inextricably linked.

When we turn it over, we find ourselves caught out of position and then we look all over the shop, forcing everyone to sprint around to try to plug gaps.