Game plans, tactics and all that jazz

[WheeloRatings 1,163]

1 hour ago, Binmans PA said:

If this is something you can access easily, @WheeloRatings, are our scores from stoppages up this year?

It certainly seems like we're still scoring a lot from stoppage despite the evolution of the game shifting to more points from turnover. 

Here are our scores from stoppage per season:

Season	For	Against	Diff
2021	33.7	23.8	+10.0
2022	35.9	27.0	+8.9
2023	34.5	28.4	+6.1
2024	33.4	26.2	+7.2

 

You can access scores from stoppage by team here:

https://www.wheeloratings.com/afl_stats_team.html?year=2024

And each match for Melbourne here:

https://www.wheeloratings.com/afl_match_stats_team.html?ID=melb

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

7 hours ago, Binmans PA said:

If this is something you can access easily, @WheeloRatings, are our scores from stoppages up this year?

It certainly seems like we're still scoring a lot from stoppage despite the evolution of the game shifting to more points from turnover. 

Hoyne is always harping on about the turnover game.

He claims that of the last 20 premierships, 17 of them were from teams that were ranked in the top 3 on scores from turnovers during the H&A seaaon.

According to him (champion data) the other three winners were outliers.  I can't recall who the three were.

[titan_uranus 24,963]

6 hours ago, Demon Dynasty said:

Hoyne is always harping on about the turnover game.

He claims that of the last 20 premierships, 17 of them were from teams that were ranked in the top 3 on scores from turnovers during the H&A seaaon.

According to him (champion data) the other three winners were outliers.  I can't recall who the three were.

I believe it’s 17 of the last 18. And the outlier was the Dogs in 2016.

[Adam The God 30,021]

I think @binman may have touched on this overall point and I certainly have as well, but there was a run down of our stats since R13 in the HUN this morning. We're 1st for groundball differential since this time.

It's pretty clear that we changed the way we set up in the first half of the year, which meant we could generate scores and wins without winning groundball, in fact usually losing it easily.

This goes to that point Binners has often made previously about Chris Scott's mantra of managing players and potentially missing finals, but being cherry ripe by the pointy end. Our philosophy early in 2024 also had the positive side effect of developing our slingshot transition game.

So instead of winning groundball at contest and trying to play a forward half territory game, we were happy to set our zone deeper, win the clean clearance if possible, but otherwise try and intercept when the ball goes inside 50 against or simply reset with a stoppage.

This also meant there was less bang, crash, physicality to each stoppage, and enabled us to win without Clarry dominating.

Since the Brisbane game, we have certainly set up more aggressively at stoppages and tried to play a more forward half territory game. Get the ball forward at all costs, knocks, long kicks to contests etc. The HUN article also noted since R13 that we are 1st for long down the line kicks and 1st for contested possession differential. This contested possession turn around feeds into us being 1st for scores per inside 50 against, so our defenders are doing their jobs as well as mids and forwards.

One other thing I'd note over the last fortnight against West Coast and then Essendon, is our ability to transition the ball quickly from that long kick down the line situation to a goal out the back. Melksham is a key part to this, but so are Petty, Turner and JVR in being able to bring the ball to ground and not have it intercepted. We then follow it up with a ground ball possession and it basically leads to a goal out the back. 

When we broke down in the third quarter last week, McKay took multiple marks on Petty, 2 or 3 at least. And our game broke down for this period. It's really vital that we at least halve most of those contests, because if we do, at worst we get territory, and at best, we get a scoring chance.

Our three talls have a big role to play again today against Freo. If they can stop their intercept game, make it more chaotic, and prevent Freo from being able to control the ball with uncontested marks at half back, and we complement this with aggressive, powerful pressure and cleanness at the stoppages, it will go a long way to getting enough chances to win the game. Then it's about taking our opportunities in front of goal.

Edited July 21 by Binmans PA

[binman 42,468]

46 minutes ago, Binmans PA said:

I think @binman may have touched on this overall point and I certainly have as well, but there was a run down of our stats since R13 in the HUN this morning. We're 1st for groundball differential since this time.

It's pretty clear that we changed the way we set up in the first half of the year, which meant we could generate scores and wins without winning groundball, in fact usually losing it easily.

This goes to that point Binners has often made previously about Chris Scott's mantra of managing players and potentially missing finals, but being cherry ripe by the pointy end. Our philosophy early in 2024 also had the positive side effect of developing our slingshot transition game.

So instead of winning groundball at contest and trying to play a forward half territory game, we were happy to set our zone deeper, win the clean clearance if possible, but otherwise try and intercept when the ball goes inside 50 against or simply reset with a stoppage.

This also meant there was less bang, crash, physicality to each stoppage, and enabled us to win without Clarry dominating.

Since the Brisbane game, we have certainly set up more aggressively at stoppages and tried to play a more forward half territory game. Get the ball forward at all costs, knocks, long kicks to contests etc. The HUN article also noted since R13 that we are 1st for long down the line kicks and 1st for contested possession differential. This contested possession turn around feeds into us being 1st for scores per inside 50 against, so our defenders are doing their jobs as well as mids and forwards.

One other thing I'd note over the last fortnight against West Coast and then Essendon, is our ability to transition the ball quickly from that long kick down the line situation to a goal out the back. Melksham is a key part to this, but so are Petty, Turner and JVR in being able to bring the ball to ground and not have it intercepted. We then follow it up with a ground ball possession and it basically leads to a goal out the back. 

When we broke down in the third quarter last week, McKay took multiple marks on Petty 2 or 3 at least. And our game broke down for this period. It's really vital that we at least halve most of those contests, because if we do, at worst we get territory and at beat, we get a scoring chance.

Our three talls have a big role to play again today against Freo. If they can stop their intercept game, make it more chaotic, and prevent Freo from being able to control the ball with uncontested marks at half back, and we complement this with aggressive, powerful pressure and cleanness at the stoppages, it will go a long way to getting enough chances to win the game. Then it's about taking our opportunities in front of goal.

That increased focus on territory and contest is what I meant by moving to a hybrid method combining the old method and the transition model.

A big watch for mine is scores from defensive half, which with scores from turnover, is a key metric for the transition game and has become a key indicator for success.

On the espn footy pod (which is good, but frustrating because one of the hosts is dead set anti dees and it colours his analysis of us), Christian from champion data noted we are bottom four for points for from our defensive half, and of more concern also points against from defensive half.

That's concerning in terms of our transition game. 

The key questions for mine are:

- are we able to improve those numbers (we have improved points for in the last few weeks, but not really points against the back half)

- our 2021 flag win was an outlier in terms of the dees being one of only two teams in,  iirc, 19 years to win the flag and not be top 6 in scores from turnover.

My question is whether the hybrid model goody is implementing is less reliant on defending scores from turnover and from the defensive half. 

[Adam The God 30,021]

5 minutes ago, binman said:

On the espn footy pod (which is good, but frustrating because one of the hosts is dead set anti dees and it colours his analysis of us), Christian from champion data noted we are bottom four for points for from our defensive half, and of more concern also points against from defensive half.

That's concerning in terms of our transition game. 

Did you see the little piece in the HUN this morning?

Since R13, we're:

* 3rd for chain to score against.

* 1st for score per inside 50 against.

So I suspect those stats are skewed by Rounds 0-12.

5 minutes ago, binman said:

- our 2021 flag win was an outlier in terms of the dees being one of only two teams in,  iirc, 19 years to win the flag and not be top 6 in scores from turnover.

Such was our defence and the inability of teams to move the ball quickly against us.

Makes sense.

5 minutes ago, binman said:

My question is whether the hybrid model goody is implementing is less reliant on defending scores from turnover and from the defensive half. 

And is more reliant on scores from stoppage?

[binman 42,468]

22 minutes ago, Binmans PA said:

Did you see the little piece in the HUN this morning?

Since R13, we're:

* 3rd for chain to score against.

* 1st for score per inside 50 against.

So I suspect those stats are skewed by Rounds 0-12.

Such was our defence and the inability of teams to move the ball quickly against us.

Makes sense.

And is more reliant on scores from stoppage?

Agree on all points.

Yes, I think more reliant on stoppages.

I wonder if we'll continue to even up at stoppages in every game now.

[Engorged Onion 10,199]

18 minutes ago, binman said:

Agree on all points.

Yes, I think more reliant on stoppages.

I wonder if we'll continue to even up at stoppages in every game now.

Do we think this a direct reaction to not having petracca and at times brayshaw (when he would roll through the midfield), so the evidence being that without the holy trinity operating (Oliver, Viney, Petracca, and Barayshaw) anymore, or at least at reduced capacity (Oliver) there is less likelihood that we a) win the clearance and b) disrupt the opponents first clearance, thus we need the extra (no longer -1) at stoppages.

So not changing due to a change in just game plan, but personnel  to execute the preferred game plan in the first place…

Is that Goodwin being flexible 😏

Edited July 21 by Engorged Onion

[Adam The God 30,021]

1 hour ago, Engorged Onion said:

Do we think this a direct reaction to not having petracca and at times brayshaw (when he would roll through the midfield), so the evidence being that without the holy trinity operating (Oliver, Viney, Petracca, and Barayshaw) anymore, or at least at reduced capacity (Oliver) there is less likelihood that we a) win the clearance and b) disrupt the opponents first clearance, thus we need the extra (no longer -1) at stoppages.

So not changing due to a change in just game plan, but personnel  to execute the preferred game plan in the first place…

Is that Goodwin being flexible 😏

I think it was a product of who we were playing against. The first time I noticed this was last week. But I think it helps us with Trac out, and we may not have tried it had he been in the team still.

Our defenders are really great at reading when and where to drop off their opponents, and I think this enables us to generate 2v1s behind the ball. 

[Nairobi_Demon 335]

I’m increasingly of the view that this season has gone pear shaped because of some fundamental mistakes in our season strategy. It’s starts with the game plan:

1.  Gameplan - I suspect about one third or half way through the season we began to realise that we went too far in tweaking our game plan. I can’t remember when it started but from about round 9 or 10 onwards we started to see players regularly confused about whether they were playing for territory, pressing high, holding the ball, etc. This has to be on the Senior Coach as he would be the one setting the overarching strategy at this level but the over-reaction to last year’s performance and failure to execute relates to various second-order areas of coaching that are not directly Goodwin’s responsibility but flow from the overarching strategy (note I’m not calling for Goodwin to be sacked and personally I’m not really interested in that debate here - there are other threads for that).

 2. High-performance program - We are simply not running over the ground like we should be at this time of year and have not been able to run out games for weeks. That’s partly because of our youth (see below) but even many of our senior players are struggling.   I have two hypotheses here: either we misunderstand what fitness levels would be required to execute the new game plan and got the high-performance program wrong, or about mid-way through the season, when we realized we’d over corrected and we lost Trac, we realized we were unlikely to challenge this year and have adjusted our performance program to build for 2025 rather than taper off and peak in Aug-Sept 2024. 

3. Skills - related to why it become clear we had over-reached on the new game plan, our skills development program has not delivered the desired and perhaps anticipated improvement in skills across the playing group and certainly not at the level required for the new game plan. 

4. Midfield - our coaches still don’t seem to know who to move into the midfield. They therefore don’t know the strengths and weaknesses of our core midfield group and thus how to develop their midfield method. They clearly now seem to be experimenting with players in the middle (see last night’s game) and that can only be for next year (not this year). They have no cohesion - something Goodwin values.

5. Regeneration - I have two hypotheses here. Once we realized mid-season we were unlikely to challenge, we shifted to prioritising junior players rather than playing experienced players - a mini rebuild on the fly. This year we have consistently played Windsor, Howes, Tholstrup, Woewodin, Turner, AMW plus given a taste of AFL to Brown. This is too many for a side to carry, particularly when the game plan is changing. I also think this clear prioritisation of juniors players would have demotivated some of our more experienced but second tier players. Second, I think we’re also playing catch up on re-generation.  We seemed to have a strategy in 2022 and arguably 2023 of always playing our best 22 rather than selecting our best 19 or 20 plus 2-3 of our best future prospects. In short, we prioritised challenging over re-generation and have sought to catch up this year, particularly from mid way through the season. 
 

6. Motivation - the players don’t seem motivated and willing to put their bodies on the line (see last night’s missed tackles) because they know that the coaches know that we can’t challenge this year and they’re already looking to protect themselves for 2025. 
 

In short, and given the age of some of our star players like Gawn and May, I think we need to play the long game and focus on getting this team and our strategy right to re-bound and challenge in 2025 and build for 2026+.  

[Adam The God 30,021]

1 hour ago, Nairobi_Demon said:

I’m increasingly of the view that this season has gone pear shaped because of some fundamental mistakes in our season strategy. It’s starts with the game plan:

1.  Gameplan - I suspect about one third or half way through the season we began to realise that we went too far in tweaking our game plan. I can’t remember when it started but from about round 9 or 10 onwards we started to see players regularly confused about whether they were playing for territory, pressing high, holding the ball, etc. This has to be on the Senior Coach as he would be the one setting the overarching strategy at this level but the over-reaction to last year’s performance and failure to execute relates to various second-order areas of coaching that are not directly Goodwin’s responsibility but flow from the overarching strategy (note I’m not calling for Goodwin to be sacked and personally I’m not really interested in that debate here - there are other threads for that).

 2. High-performance program - We are simply not running over the ground like we should be at this time of year and have not been able to run out games for weeks. That’s partly because of our youth (see below) but even many of our senior players are struggling.   I have two hypotheses here: either we misunderstand what fitness levels would be required to execute the new game plan and got the high-performance program wrong, or about mid-way through the season, when we realized we’d over corrected and we lost Trac, we realized we were unlikely to challenge this year and have adjusted our performance program to build for 2025 rather than taper off and peak in Aug-Sept 2024. 

3. Skills - related to why it become clear we had over-reached on the new game plan, our skills development program has not delivered the desired and perhaps anticipated improvement in skills across the playing group and certainly not at the level required for the new game plan. 

4. Midfield - our coaches still don’t seem to know who to move into the midfield. They therefore don’t know the strengths and weaknesses of our core midfield group and thus how to develop their midfield method. They clearly now seem to be experimenting with players in the middle (see last night’s game) and that can only be for next year (not this year). They have no cohesion - something Goodwin values.

5. Regeneration - I have two hypotheses here. Once we realized mid-season we were unlikely to challenge, we shifted to prioritising junior players rather than playing experienced players - a mini rebuild on the fly. This year we have consistently played Windsor, Howes, Tholstrup, Woewodin, Turner, AMW plus given a taste of AFL to Brown. This is too many for a side to carry, particularly when the game plan is changing. I also think this clear prioritisation of juniors players would have demotivated some of our more experienced but second tier players. Second, I think we’re also playing catch up on re-generation.  We seemed to have a strategy in 2022 and arguably 2023 of always playing our best 22 rather than selecting our best 19 or 20 plus 2-3 of our best future prospects. In short, we prioritised challenging over re-generation and have sought to catch up this year, particularly from mid way through the season. 
 

6. Motivation - the players don’t seem motivated and willing to put their bodies on the line (see last night’s missed tackles) because they know that the coaches know that we can’t challenge this year and they’re already looking to protect themselves for 2025. 
 

In short, and given the age of some of our star players like Gawn and May, I think we need to play the long game and focus on getting this team and our strategy right to re-bound and challenge in 2025 and build for 2026+.  

Bloody great post, please post more often.

Just on 2 and 4.

On high performance, I think this is arguably the trickiest season of AFL to plan a high performance program for in the history of the game. Two byes, multiple five day breaks, just weird fixturing and scheduling all round. Look at Sydney tonight. They lose by over 100 points. It's unprecedented for a premier or even a minor premier to lose a game by 100+ points. Yet this year, anything could happen, because this ridiculous fixture throws up these bizarre results.

So high performance is a really difficult one to gauge this year. I really like your final point about potentially using the rest of the season as a build into the 2025 pre season. That definitely leads into point 6 of yours. If the players know this or get a sense of it, the mind could easily go into self preservation mode.

On the midfield, I think losing Trac has given us an opportunity to experiment, and I think you're right, they don't know what our best midfield mix is. I would suggest (or hope) they're also experimenting with set ups and structures, because we have been nowhere near it for weeks now.

Despite everything you've written here, had we got a bit of luck in those three games we lost by under kick, we'd have managed to be sitting inside the top 8 *and* be tinkering with things. The fact that we're not and we've fallen in a hole, suggests motivation *might* be lower, but there is more room for experimentation without hampering a potential finals run.

[Engorged Onion 10,199]

So, is Contest and Defence dead? Is the MFC now behind the curve of where the game is at? It was once comfortably ahead by a year, or perhaps only 6 months.

Fast, free flowing football, as evidenced by last year and this year, seem to be the paradigm of choice.

So what will be the tactics and system that rebut it? And does Goodwin and co, have the innovative nous to attempt to combat this.

I'm not great at articulating methodology of tactics and going into forensic detail of systems and game plans - but some my DL brethren may. Feel free to come up with some theories about where we may be headed from a tactical and system perspective.

Edited August 5 by Engorged Onion

[BW511 2,622]

On 03/08/2024 at 22:51, Binmans PA said:

Bloody great post, please post more often.

Just on 2 and 4.

On high performance, I think this is arguably the trickiest season of AFL to plan a high performance program for in the history of the game. Two byes, multiple five day breaks, just weird fixturing and scheduling all round. Look at Sydney tonight. They lose by over 100 points. It's unprecedented for a premier or even a minor premier to lose a game by 100+ points. Yet this year, anything could happen, because this ridiculous fixture throws up these bizarre results.

 

 

I’d be interested to know what the view on this is inside clubland versus fans versus AFL house.

I believe the 5 day breaks have far too much of an influence on results and the league has gone too far in its quest for equalisation.

Really hope crowd numbers and tv audience backs that up so the ship can be steadied for 2025

 

 

[Adam The God 30,021]

@Engorged Onion, I'd argue Goody started his coaching career by being extremely offensively minded, so much so that the players couldn't wait to release the Roos defensive shackles under Goody in 2017.

We then saw the Demon Diamond defence, we had attacking half backs like Hunt screaming off the back of square to receive from centre stoppage before 666 scuttled that.

In 2018, we had the third highest percentage of 131.4% in the league behind minor premier Richmond on 136.1% and 8th placed Geelong on 131.6%.

But we scored 156 more points than the next best, Richmond, and way more than any other team in the top 4. 

We conceded the 9th most points though. 

I think we have much better personnel in 2024/2025 than we did in 2018. Think May and Lever versus Oscar McDonald (sorry @Slartibartfast) and Sam Frost.

In a way, I hope we back a version of that game plan, given where the game is going. It was still a territory based game with a super high press. If we go back to that though, we need to sort out stoppage.

Edited August 5 by Binmans PA

[layzie 33,722]

15 hours ago, Binmans PA said:

@Engorged Onion, I'd argue Goody started his coaching career by being extremely offensively minded, so much so that the players couldn't wait to release the Roos defensive shackles under Goody in 2017.

We then saw the Demon Diamond defence, we had attacking half backs like Hunt screaming off the back of square to receive from centre stoppage before 666 scuttled that.

In 2018, we had the third highest percentage of 131.4% in the league behind minor premier Richmond on 136.1% and 8th placed Geelong on 131.6%.

But we scored 156 more points than the next best, Richmond, and way more than any other team in the top 4. 

We conceded the 9th most points though. 

I think we have much better personnel in 2024/2025 than we did in 2018. Think May and Lever versus Oscar McDonald (sorry @Slartibartfast) and Sam Frost.

In a way, I hope we back a version of that game plan, given where the game is going. It was still a territory based game with a super high press. If we go back to that though, we need to sort out stoppage.

As Binman often says, our default gameplan is built for finals footy. Come finals time you will see a lot of teams play the forward half territory game.

But during the home and away season if we were to go back to that I agree we would need to fix up the way we setup at stoppage and we absolutely need to get the high performance program spot on. The style we were playing is extremely taxing over the course of a season.

Tweaking a gameplan is a much harder balancing act than people think and I can see just how easy it is to 'overcorrect'. I would like to still be doing this to try and find the right balance but it's important to not trek too far away from our DNA in my opinion. 

[Adam The God 30,021]

I think we actually need to go back to +1 at the contest.

We've had a system that is determined to manufacture a +1 behind the ball and enabled our interceptors to take charge and our mids to play an extremely taxing game that still allows us territory with Max's dominance.

But I want to share this clip from round 23, 2018. Not only is there a huge Melbourne crowd at the MCG against GWS (wouldn't that be nice again), look at the dare of ball movement. Not only do we try and use the corridor at all costs, we add numbers to stoppage to swarm (doesn't have to be bees to honey pot when we get it right) and we kick it to a predictable spot 30m out directly in front, where TMac or Weideman bring the ball to ground. We then have the likes of Spargo, Trac and our mids getting to the foot of that contest.

Highlights: Melbourne v GWS
https://www.afl.com.au/video/82285

I'm not saying we should play a forward half too stringently, but it does play to a similar Goody philosophy of playing the percentages.

The overriding point is I think we need to back in our defensive 7 to win or halve their contests regularly enough, if we outnumber at stoppage and force enough post clearance pressure on op mids.

So I'd be adding numbers to stoppage, and using McVee, Rivers and even Windsor and AMW like this.

It's effectively what Collingwood did last year too, by adding numbers to the contest, which is vulnerable the other way, but if you play this game with our bulls like Clarry, Viney and Trac, it means their disposals are often handballs or short kicks to get it to the outside. With big pre seasons, Clarry and Viney can absolutely be those contested bulls with swarming support around them.

The ball movement is then forced to be fast and chaotic, because you're committing numbers to the stoppage and leaving less behind the ball.

But trust our defenders to deal with the slingshot if it tries to hurt us the other way.

You can see the excitement this ball movement generates for the crowd in the above clip.

[biggestred 4,975]

didnt know where to post this but seems interesting...

[dazzledavey36 54,086]

9 minutes ago, biggestred said:

didnt know where to post this but seems interesting...

It's to join Burgess team.

[Adam The God 30,021]

2 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

It's to join Burgess team.

It's basically the Selwyn role under Burgo.

[Gawndy the Great 9,011]

23 hours ago, Binmans PA said:

@Engorged Onion, I'd argue Goody started his coaching career by being extremely offensively minded, so much so that the players couldn't wait to release the Roos defensive shackles under Goody in 2017.

We then saw the Demon Diamond defence, we had attacking half backs like Hunt screaming off the back of square to receive from centre stoppage before 666 scuttled that.

In 2018, we had the third highest percentage of 131.4% in the league behind minor premier Richmond on 136.1% and 8th placed Geelong on 131.6%.

But we scored 156 more points than the next best, Richmond, and way more than any other team in the top 4. 

We conceded the 9th most points though. 

I think we have much better personnel in 2024/2025 than we did in 2018. Think May and Lever versus Oscar McDonald (sorry @Slartibartfast) and Sam Frost.

In a way, I hope we back a version of that game plan, given where the game is going. It was still a territory based game with a super high press. If we go back to that though, we need to sort out stoppage.

It’s fascinating how we have swung from one extreme to the other in 6 years. We have a fair chunk of the players still playing from that era. Player for player we are so much better than the 2018 side and yet we are half the team offensively. 
 

What ever Goody does it shouldnt be about negating the current method. We have to be more positive, more offensive without being vulnerable like Carlton. The team has built foundations in defence, they know what good looks like. They just need to be given more freedom offensively. It’ll unfortunately take time to develop the method.

[Adam The God 30,021]

1 minute ago, Gawndy the Great said:

It’s fascinating how we have swung from one extreme to the other in 6 years. We have a fair chunk of the players still playing from that era. Player for player we are so much better than the 2018 side and yet we are half the team offensively. 
 

What ever Goody does it shouldnt be about negating the current method. We have to be more positive, more offensive without being vulnerable like Carlton. The team has built foundations in defence, they know what good looks like. They just need to be given more freedom offensively. It’ll unfortunately take time to develop the method.

Yep, somehow retain the shape of 2021-2023 and the ball use of 2018.

I think actually it's doable.

Crudely, it just means we change the way we are prepared to move the ball, which may lead to more scores against, but the better shape behind the ball should prevent huge leakages.

I do wonder if this is ultimately what we've been trying this year, it just didn't work.

[binman 42,468]

On 05/08/2024 at 18:46, Engorged Onion said:

So, is Contest and Defence dead? Is the MFC now behind the curve of where the game is at? It was once comfortably ahead by a year, or perhaps only 6 months.

Fast, free flowing football, as evidenced by last year and this year, seem to be the paradigm of choice.

So what will be the tactics and system that rebut it? And does Goodwin and co, have the innovative nous to attempt to combat this.

I'm not great at articulating methodology of tactics and going into forensic detail of systems and game plans - but some my DL brethren may. Feel free to come up with some theories about where we may be headed from a tactical and system perspective.

No, is the short answer.

Contest and defence are still fundamental 

Particularly if contest includes pressure.

Teams that can't apply elite pressure are not going to win a flag. 

Sure fast ball movement from the back half is now more important, but pressure is what creates turnovers.

And it's really all about turnover now.

The pies are a great example. Last year they combined pressure, contest and speed (though they often lost the pressure count in the first two thirds of the season- that changed come finals).

It's this combination of needing quick players with decent foot skills and applying crazy heat in the contest that makes the game so taxing now.

My feeling is this is a big factor in why performance had been so variable this season acrrosd the competition.

I can never remember a season so volatile and unpredictable in terms of results and margins.

Take Sydney's loss on the weekend gone. Ten years ago they would have been written off as a flag chance. But does anyone seriously think they're not still a red hot chance of winning the flag?

That said our high performance program no doubt reflected our playing style and personele in the last few years- anaerobic power athletes like Jack, trac and clarry crashing into packs.

Perhaps the greater emphasis, and need for aerobic athletes like nibbler, langers and Windsor has created a challenge for our program. And found us out as perhaps we don't have enough  such players.

As layzie notes, come finals contest, defence and pressure becomes king again.

[binman 42,468]

15 minutes ago, Binmans PA said:

Yep, somehow retain the shape of 2021-2023 and the ball use of 2018.

I think actually it's doable.

Crudely, it just means we change the way we are prepared to move the ball, which may lead to more scores against, but the better shape behind the ball should prevent huge leakages.

I do wonder if this is ultimately what we've been trying this year, it just didn't work.

I think the last para is spot on. 

No doubt conditioning is a big issue, so it's hard to judge our method.

But there is no doubt that out relative lack of foot skill (and handball skills?) hurts us big time with the turnover game. We give it back too often and players like salo and bowey have dropped off in terms of their ability to hit high risk kicks coming out of our back half.

In our back 7, or mid for that matter, who would you trust to hit a high risk kick to the corridor?

For me, probably only mcvee and tmac now.

That ain't gonna cut it.

Which is why i think our greatest need is flankers who are elite kicks and elite runners not mids.

[Adam The God 30,021]

16 minutes ago, binman said:

I think the last para is spot on. 

No doubt conditioning is a big issue, so it's hard to judge our method.

But there is no doubt that out relative lack of foot skill (and handball skills?) hurts us big time with the turnover game. We give it back too often and players like salo and bowey have dropped off in terms of their ability to hit high risk kicks coming out of our back half.

I don't think Salo was ever a good aggressive kick. He was a highly reliable short kick under pressure.

Bowser's kicking has gone off a bit this season. I wouldn't mind him being one of our aggressive kickers.

16 minutes ago, binman said:

In our back 7, or mid for that matter, who would you trust to hit a high risk kick to the corridor?

For me, probably only mcvee and tmac now.

That ain't gonna cut it.

Which is why i think our greatest need is flankers who are elite kicks and elite runners not mids.

I think the FD may agree with you given who we're supposedly targeting in Cumming and Houston.

As I note above, I think we can use faster, more aggressive players as +1s at contest with licence to attack. Rivers, Windsor, Bowey, McVee and AMW.

That's the difference between this year and 2018. We haven't gone +1, we've finally evened up numbers at the contest.

I want us to be more aggressive at stoppage.

FWIW, if we get those half back flankers in Cumming and/or Houston, we'd probably be even more damaging with +1 at stoppage.

I think we need at least one, if not two young mids to join a slowing Viney, a stuttering and defensive Sparrow, and hopefully a rejuvenated Clarry.

Be interesting to see which way we go.

Edited August 6 by Binmans PA

[Adam The God 30,021]

I never like to let this thread go too cold.

Okay, figured I'd go the early crow and do a best 22+1 pre draft and trade period, which is a bit dangerous.

The task here for no particular reason is to build a side that I think could contend, by only utilising those on the list currently, so no new players. (obviously, we will bring in talent and this side will change and get even stronger)

With a fresh pre season, I think this team could go places, and score more, but probably concede a little more too.

Here goes...

AMW May Lever

McVee TMac Salem

Langdon Oliver Windsor

Fritta Turner Melksham

Koz JVR Trac

Max Viney Rivers

Bowey Spargo Kolt Petty

Sub. between Billings, Sparrow and Howes.

Playing Fritta and Melksham as high half forwards would certainly lessen our defensive set up, but I think have an astronomical effect on the efficiency of our inside 50 entries. I'd be playing Spargo as the more defensive high half forward in that group, but his ball use by foot is also elite. Trac would rotate between high half forward and deep forward too.

Midfield rotations are: Oliver (as the anchor with most CBAs), Viney (also spending time as a pressure forward), Rivers (also playing half back attacking role), McVee (also playing half back attacking role with Rivers - occasionally will be out of rotation to play lockdown defensive role), Trac (40% mid, 60% forward, rotating forward high and deep), Koz (25-30% mid burst play, keep building on his 2024 output in midfield), Kolt (mostly forward, but some around the ground stoppages to use his explosiveness and bash and crash physicality) and if necessary, Salem (mostly half back anchor though). If Sparrow plays as sub, he plays his usual defensive role, which frees someone else up.

Petty plays forward for 2025, but is to be utilised as a swingman if injuries occur down the other end.

JVR plays second ruck again, not ideal, but it is what it is.

I'd be playing +1 or even +2 at contest next year, be really aggressive at stoppages, back our defenders to win 1v1s behind the ball, and get it to the likes of Trac, Melky, Fritta, Koz, Spargo across half forward, and Salem, McVee and Windsor across half back.