3 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

As with everything, we need to do it week on week, but what I saw yesterday was promising enough structurally.

The Sparrow and Sharp set shot misses really hurt though. We just will not make the required progress if we keep missing easier set shots.

.. and the Max and Johnson even more. 

It's interesting, because to my eye our kicking efficiency was really pleasing against GWS, but the higher efficiency was also padded out by those short uncontested kicks across half back to control the game.

The kicks that we miss were those 15-20m short angled kicks coming back through the corridor or along the wings. Make those kicks and as @binman often says, you have a chance to chain for a score. 

Rivers is super unreliable and turned it over in these sort of spots, and has for 2-3 years now. He gives great bounce and has great penetration with his kicking, but isn't who we want trying those shorter kicks IMO.

As often as possible, we need to involve Windsor, Lindsay, Salem and McVee from the back. Despite Salem lacking pentration, and even the ability to hit those angled kicks, what Salo does do is nails those 15-20m passes, which maintains possession and continues the chain.

IMV, another guy that could really help with our forward entries and ensuring the chain doesn't breakdown is Melksham.

I just wonder whether Fritta is playing the Melksham role at the moment, and that when Melksham is fit, it'll be between those two for the leading high half forward that turns and enters A50 as that final link in the chain.

Edited March 19Mar 19 by Adam The God

2 minutes ago, Adam The God said:

It's interesting, because to my eye our kicking efficiency was really pleasing ahainst GWS, but the higher efficiency was also padded out by those short uncontested kicks across half back to control the game.

The kicks that we miss were those 15-20m short angled kicks coming back through the corridor or along the wings. Make those kicks and as @binman often says, you have a chance to chain for a score. 

Rivers is super unreliable and turned it over in these sort of spots, and has for 2-3 years now. He gives great bounce and has great penetration with his kicking, but isn't who we want trying those shorter kicks IMO.

As often as possible, we need to involve Windsor, Lindsay, Salem and McVee from the back. Despite Salem lacking pentration, and even the ability to hit those angled kicks, what Salo does do is nails those 15-20m passes, which maintains possession and continues the chain.

IMV, another guy that could really help with our forward eentriesand ensuring the chain doesn't breakdown is Melksham.

I just wonder whether Fritta is playing the Melksham role at the moment, and that when Melksham is fit, it'll be between those two for the leading high half forward that turns and enters A50 as that final link in the chain.

Bowey as well. Those 5 are crucial for us moving forward. Rivers is good because he can burst 10m and kick close to 60m, so perfect to gain field position. Agree that his short kicks are very hit and miss.

7 minutes ago, DistrACTION Jackson said:

Bowey as well. Those 5 are crucial for us moving forward. Rivers is good because he can burst 10m and kick close to 60m, so perfect to gain field position. Agree that his short kicks are very hit and miss.

I really hope spargo can force his way back into the team.

Rarely misses those short hit up targets, has good vision and low centre of gravity makes him ideal as a small forward/half forward.

I can see spargo, Henderson and Chandler all playing together- with koz rounding our our small forward brigade when not on ball.

All can hit targets.

24 minutes ago, DistrACTION Jackson said:

Bowey as well. Those 5 are crucial for us moving forward. Rivers is good because he can burst 10m and kick close to 60m, so perfect to gain field position. Agree that his short kicks are very hit and miss.

Good call on Bowser. Managed to miss him.

I know he's small in stature, but I wouldn't mind Bowser taking some wing minutes when McVee and Windsor are fit again. Basically rotating Bowey and Lindsay between wing and half back.

Structure up something like this:

McVee May Petty

Windsor Lever Salem / Bowey / Lindsay

Lindsay / Bowey Oliver Langdon

I'd also try and play Langdon majority wing, because his ball use has improved out of sight and he's reliable being a link in the chain.

I'd keep Rivers in the midfield and injuries permitting, I'd hope we wouldn't need him backward of centre.

That would leave our midfield with Oliver, Viney, Petracca, Langford, Rivers, Kozzy and Sparrow.

I'd play Viney 60% forward, 40% mid. Trac 65% mid, 35% forward. Kozzy 40% forward 60% mid. Running the rest of the guys through midfield too. 

Down the other end, as I wrote the other day, I'd be open to TMac playing alongside JVR. If we want to play three talls, then it's between Turner and Jefferson for that other spot. But I'd prefer to play two talls and a mid sized Fritta or Melksham.

I think our best team is probably something like this:

McVee May Petty

Windsor Lever Salem

Lindsay Oliver Langdon

Sparrow JVR Trac

Spargo TMac Viney

Max Rivers Kozzy

Bowey Langford Fritta Henderson/Kolt

Sub. Melksham

If there is an injury to a tall, Petty can swing if necessary, otherwise you structure up around Fritta/Melksham/Trac and push Kozzy permanent forward too.

I have Spargo ahead of Chandler as well...

Edited March 19Mar 19 by Adam The God

On 17/03/2025 at 13:16, layzie said:

The concern is how much we're still relying on score from stoppage and Max monstering in the ruck. The proof of the pudding with the evolving ganeplan will be if the scores from transition increase.

I think yesterday with the weather and personel out is a tough one to be critical on the gameplan and really needs a few weeks  Guys like Xavier Lindsay are very much going to help this area and I'm going to be watching how this area develops closely.

We were mostly very slow in transition 

 

Still.   Stop and prop was plentiful

10 hours ago, binman said:

I really hope spargo can force his way back into the team.

Rarely misses those short hit up targets, has good vision and low centre of gravity makes him ideal as a small forward/half forward.

I can see spargo, Henderson and Chandler all playing together- with koz rounding our our small forward brigade when not on ball.

All can hit targets.

One quality of Spargo’s that we’ve missed is his ability to hit kicks off the inside and outside of his boot. It allows him to disguise which forward he’s kicking it to, not allowing the opposition defenders from peeling off their man to where the ball is going. 

@binman, I’m sure you’ve heard this but there is plenty of good insight into the way the game is shifting, tactically.

We have enough good kicks in the team to up the transition game. Defensively we looked really good against GWS most of the day! It’s a work in progress and transition against the best teams is never as easy. The thing is there’s now 12-14 teams who are in the race. The wins will come from being that bit cleaner than the opposition. Our starting midfield is as strong as anyone’s and if we can get it out to the likes of Lindsay, Windsor, Langdon, Bowey, Spargo, Melksham and even Fritsch the delivery inside 50 should improve. It’s going to be a hell of a season if our best 15 can stay fit.

11 hours ago, Adam The God said:

It's interesting, because to my eye our kicking efficiency was really pleasing against GWS, but the higher efficiency was also padded out by those short uncontested kicks across half back to control the game.

The kicks that we miss were those 15-20m short angled kicks coming back through the corridor or along the wings. Make those kicks and as @binman often says, you have a chance to chain for a score. 

Rivers is super unreliable and turned it over in these sort of spots, and has for 2-3 years now. He gives great bounce and has great penetration with his kicking, but isn't who we want trying those shorter kicks IMO.

As often as possible, we need to involve Windsor, Lindsay, Salem and McVee from the back. Despite Salem lacking pentration, and even the ability to hit those angled kicks, what Salo does do is nails those 15-20m passes, which maintains possession and continues the chain.

IMV, another guy that could really help with our forward entries and ensuring the chain doesn't breakdown is Melksham.

I just wonder whether Fritta is playing the Melksham role at the moment, and that when Melksham is fit, it'll be between those two for the leading high half forward that turns and enters A50 as that final link in the chain.

McVee out is probably a bit more critical than we realise. 

Especially on the forward 45 kicks and coming inside 50 hitting the odd target.

Also McVee's defensive work is first class alot of the time.

I like Howes' endeavour but is the FD hoping he will fill that role?  

If so, unfortunately he has fallen short of late and may not be coming on as much as the FD may have hoped?

McVee is a big loss for mine and can't come back soon enough.

Edited March 19Mar 19 by Demon Dynasty

5 minutes ago, Demon Dynasty said:

McVee out is probably a bit more critical than we realise.

I like Howes' endeavour but is the FD hoping he will fill that role?  

If so, unfortunately he has fallen short of late and may not be coming on as much as the FD may have hoped?

McVee is a big loss for mine and can't come back soon enough.

Massive out. A key player for us.

1 hour ago, jnrmac said:

We were mostly very slow in transition 

 

Still.   Stop and prop was plentiful

I think that's how we'll play against sides like the giants, swans, hawks and dockers who are quick and excellent transition teams. 

Lots of chipping it around laterally in the back half and propping if there is not an obvious target forward of the ball - and not just after a mark but also when run and carrying.

We saw a few examples of the latter against the giants - Lindsay and bowey both did it a couple of times (ie running forward with ball in hand, no obvious option, stop and then dink kick sideways to a stationary target).

There's no point us getting into a transition or speed battle against teams better than us at it. That's a recipe for a smashing. 

There's a similar dynamic in the NBA, at least there was (it's becoming a boring fast break, 3 point fest).

Some teams are set up to play fast ball and really good at it. The tactical response by teams that ain't so good at it look to slow the play down, pass it around and use all the time on the shot clock. Playing fast just plays into their opponents hand.

I suspect we will be much more aggressive, and stop and prop far less, against sides who aren't as good at transition as the aforementioned teams - starting this week against the roos who are poor on transition.

2 hours ago, jnrmac said:

We were mostly very slow in transition 

 

Still.   Stop and prop was plentiful

It definitely would have been nice to see a bit more speed on the ball. They often looked caught in two minds. 

I do think there's a place for the patient approach but I do agree we're going to need to move it quicker overall. 

59 minutes ago, binman said:

I think that's how we'll play against sides like the giants, swans, hawks and dockers who are quick and excellent transition teams. 

Lots of chipping it around laterally in the back half and propping if there is not an obvious target forward of the ball - and not just after a mark but also when run and carrying.

We saw a few examples of the latter against the giants - Lindsay and bowey both did it a couple of times (ie running forward with ball in hand, no obvious option, stop and then dink kick sideways to a stationary target).

There's no point us getting into a transition or speed battle against teams better than us at it. That's a recipe for a smashing. 

There's a similar dynamic in the NBA, at least there was (it's becoming a boring fast break, 3 point fest).

Some teams are set up to play fast ball and really good at it. The tactical response by teams that ain't so good at it look to slow the play down, pass it around and use all the time on the shot clock. Playing fast just plays into their opponents hand.

I suspect we will be much more aggressive, and stop and prop far less, against sides who aren't as good at transition as the aforementioned teams - starting this week against the roos who are poor on transition.

That's right and it just gives you a chance to hold possession for a tad longer and let the opposition do some running without the ball, the option should eventually present.

It doesn't necessarily mean going full 'tempo' footy like the Swans back in the day but I think it can be useful and less taxing in the long run. 

Fast ball movement with greater use of the corridor using precision skills hitting up forward 50 targets is probably beyond us right now

But if we are endeavouring to implement that new style we have to keep at it

Practice makes perfect

The positive is that it looks like we've drafted players that can help us play a new style (Windsor, Tholstrup, Lindsay & Langford)

But I can't help but think that the old style is going to be difficult to shake off

After all, the game style that we had (or have) often involves slow ball movement ending up with the mids booting the ball deep into our forward and then working to win the stoppage (if a stoppage eventuates) ... and then locking the ball into our forward line) 

Plan B is a long way removed from plan A.  There's no subtle difference, the difference is stark

I also reckon that our depth of players that are highly skilled by foot and by hand is not great

But again, we have to keep at it as our old plan A just isn't going to work anyway

Slow ball movement via the Cape is now playing into the oppositions hands.  They constantly flood back which gives our forwards little chance

So go to plan B and stick with it.  Pain along the way is a probability but that's the price you pay for change

On 20/03/2025 at 09:59, layzie said:

It definitely would have been nice to see a bit more speed on the ball. They often looked caught in two minds. 

I do think there's a place for the patient approach but I do agree we're going to need to move it quicker overall. 

Memo Salem and Bowey

Am I correct,   two games in and two very bad last quarters, one we were run down and run over, and the other was a steam train that we could not stop.

Fitness ??   surely not,   I despair  sometimes when we prop and stay and just look to give to someone.  Too afraid to take the opposition on and make a mistake.

I always say you can't trust the first 3 rounds.  We've lost 2 from 2, the first was impressive, the second unimpressive. So where are we and where are we in relation to others?  Too early to say but the signs aren't great.

Need to start making some big improvements soon.

Interesting segment from Hoyne in SEN on atm. Short storey is that the style that won us the premiership in 21 is pretty much dead in the water and probably has been for 12+ months.

Ball movement is king. Better kickers and decision makers is what will matter in the modern game. No surprises there.

All pundits acknowledged we are trying to change and have some good young talent that should develop. Piled on Carlton as they are in no man’s land. Having said that the Bkies and the Dees were bottom 2 on offence profile so there’s that. 

I think what we do with Clarry, Trac, Sparrow and Viney will define the success of MFCs next era. They are excess to requirements   in the modern game. Clearly you can’t get rid of all of them - nor should we try too but we do need to explore trades  to free up salary cap space and get into the draft or trade space.

 

 

On 20/03/2025 at 09:01, binman said:

I think that's how we'll play against sides like the giants, swans, hawks and dockers who are quick and excellent transition teams. 

Lots of chipping it around laterally in the back half and propping if there is not an obvious target forward of the ball - and not just after a mark but also when run and carrying.

We saw a few examples of the latter against the giants - Lindsay and bowey both did it a couple of times (ie running forward with ball in hand, no obvious option, stop and then dink kick sideways to a stationary target).

There's no point us getting into a transition or speed battle against teams better than us at it. That's a recipe for a smashing. 

There's a similar dynamic in the NBA, at least there was (it's becoming a boring fast break, 3 point fest).

Some teams are set up to play fast ball and really good at it. The tactical response by teams that ain't so good at it look to slow the play down, pass it around and use all the time on the shot clock. Playing fast just plays into their opponents hand.

I suspect we will be much more aggressive, and stop and prop far less, against sides who aren't as good at transition as the aforementioned teams - starting this week against the roos who are poor on transition.

Is that not how we played against Freo and Collingwood twice last year and we got smashed just the same, also the Bulldogs late in the season. Yes Petracca was injured in the first Collingwood game.

By the time we finish our slow transition the opposition has set up ahead of the ball so we bomb it in, funnily enough we bomb it in even if we win the clearance. We no longer have a Ben Brown or player of his calibre who can stand under the high ball and either take the mark or bring it to ground in a dangerous position for our smalls, the other problem for a large part of last season was our smalls weren’t front and centre of the drop of the ball, they were no where near the contest of we had Kosi flying for unrealistic marks. 
 

The teams that come to mind that play the quick transition style of play are GWS, Collingwood, Hawthorn and the Bulldogs. Out of those 4 I would consider only GWS to have elite kicks of the footy all over the ground. The other three have some elite users of the footy by foot and like all clubs have some role players who are not as dangerous by foot but play their role and stick to the game plan. In terms of fwds Collingwood and Hawthorn have some very dangerous smalls and the Dogs have some dangerous talls. But what makes them even more dangerous is the speed at which they move the ball, they don’t give the opposition time to get back and set up. This puts defenders in one v ones against very skilful fwds. Have your better kicks kicking out of the back half setting up the quick transition, once you’re out elite kicking is slightly less important as long as players are running to space. Then delivery inside fwd 50 an open fwd line, the kick going in may not be elite but your backing your fwd in a one v one. Our three most dangerous fwds and best set shots are JVR, Fritsch and Kosi. None of them can stand under the high ball and take the mark yet that’s how we deliver it to them time after time, madness. Whilst a great kick, Salem is slow and not penetrating by foot but funnily fits in nicely with our stop and prop gameplan. Get the ball into the hands of Windsor or Rivers to break the lines and set up our transition, onto Langdon / Petracca / Lindsay then into our fwd line.

The were two passages of play from the weekend that stand out, one from the hawks which resulted in a Watson goal after he initially dropped the mark, the other from the Bulldogs (not sure of all the players names). Point is the initial kick from their defensive 50 was a low bullet the set the wheels in motion by putting a teammate in space, the other disposals in the passages of play weren’t as good but both resulted in goals. 

We’re not even trying, our coach isn’t adapting as we continue to play a gameplan that doesn’t deliver wins. 

26 minutes ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

Is that not how we played against Freo and Collingwood twice last year and we got smashed just the same, also the Bulldogs late in the season. Yes Petracca was injured in the first Collingwood game.

By the time we finish our slow transition the opposition has set up ahead of the ball so we bomb it in, funnily enough we bomb it in even if we win the clearance. We no longer have a Ben Brown or player of his calibre who can stand under the high ball and either take the mark or bring it to ground in a dangerous position for our smalls, the other problem for a large part of last season was our smalls weren’t front and centre of the drop of the ball, they were no where near the contest of we had Kosi flying for unrealistic marks. 
 

The teams that come to mind that play the quick transition style of play are GWS, Collingwood, Hawthorn and the Bulldogs. Out of those 4 I would consider only GWS to have elite kicks of the footy all over the ground. The other three have some elite users of the footy by foot and like all clubs have some role players who are not as dangerous by foot but play their role and stick to the game plan. In terms of fwds Collingwood and Hawthorn have some very dangerous smalls and the Dogs have some dangerous talls. But what makes them even more dangerous is the speed at which they move the ball, they don’t give the opposition time to get back and set up. This puts defenders in one v ones against very skilful fwds. Have your better kicks kicking out of the back half setting up the quick transition, once you’re out elite kicking is slightly less important as long as players are running to space. Then delivery inside fwd 50 an open fwd line, the kick going in may not be elite but your backing your fwd in a one v one. Our three most dangerous fwds and best set shots are JVR, Fritsch and Kosi. None of them can stand under the high ball and take the mark yet that’s how we deliver it to them time after time, madness. Whilst a great kick, Salem is slow and not penetrating by foot but funnily fits in nicely with our stop and prop gameplan. Get the ball into the hands of Windsor or Rivers to break the lines and set up our transition, onto Langdon / Petracca / Lindsay then into our fwd line.

The were two passages of play from the weekend that stand out, one from the hawks which resulted in a Watson goal after he initially dropped the mark, the other from the Bulldogs (not sure of all the players names). Point is the initial kick from their defensive 50 was a low bullet the set the wheels in motion by putting a teammate in space, the other disposals in the passages of play weren’t as good but both resulted in goals. 

We’re not even trying, our coach isn’t adapting as we continue to play a gameplan that doesn’t deliver wins. 

Bollocks.

4 hours ago, GS_1905 said:

I think what we do with Clarry, Trac, Sparrow and Viney will define the success of MFCs next era. They are excess to requirements   in the modern game.

Agree with the gist of your post, but not sure of this. Oliver had more possessions than anyone on Sunday, that's not something you throw out because he's missing targets. One or two classy, skilful on-ballers alongside our inside bulls would make a world of difference. We have that in the likes of Windsor and Lindsay, but they're a couple of seasons away from being able to make a real difference on-ball.

As for cap space, yes, it has clearly been an issue, but perhaps with natural attrition there'll be a bit more in the kitty come trade period. McDonald and Melksham (though on minimal coin?) are two obvious ones to leave, and hopefully there's still some Brayshaw money sloshing around. Equally, if there are any quality mids available and we want to be in the discussion we'll need serious money and not sure where that'll come from. I can't see any of our big-3 mids leaving, either because they don't want to or there won't be any takers - too expensive for starters, Oliver and Petracca are on massive contracts.

Hard to see any short-term solutions.

25 minutes ago, bing181 said:

Agree with the gist of your post, but not sure of this. Oliver had more possessions than anyone on Sunday, that's not something you throw out because he's missing targets. One or two classy, skilful on-ballers alongside our inside bulls would make a world of difference. We have that in the likes of Windsor and Lindsay, but they're a couple of seasons away from being able to make a real difference on-ball.

As for cap space, yes, it has clearly been an issue, but perhaps with natural attrition there'll be a bit more in the kitty come trade period. McDonald and Melksham (though on minimal coin?) are two obvious ones to leave, and hopefully there's still some Brayshaw money sloshing around. Equally, if there are any quality mids available and we want to be in the discussion we'll need serious money and not sure where that'll come from. I can't see any of our big-3 mids leaving, either because they don't want to or there won't be any takers - too expensive for starters, Oliver and Petracca are on massive contracts.

Hard to see any short-term solutions.

Butters is a FA in 2026. If we can somehow get Trac off our books with 1-2 first rounders maybe we could get Butters with those picks this year on a mega 7-8 year contract.

Why Trac you ask? He’s older than Oliver, has enough appeal to big clubs, and someone like the Bumbers could take him in desperation and give us 2 of their picks this year. Plus I’ll never forgive him for what he did to the club last year so will trade him without battering an eye. I think he’d be open to a move as well.

A Butters, Langford, Oliver Centre square with Windsor, Lindsay, McVee off half back / wing on paper is a lot more balanced and has speed and improved  kicking. 

I’d move Viney  to the fwd line as others have suggested. 

Sparrow, Rivers midfield depth. 

9 hours ago, bing181 said:

 

Hard to see any short-term solutions.

One solution might be to keep Tracc and Viney out of the centre bounces and replace them with Kossie (when available) and Chandler (and Langford when gets a handle on the senior game) - players who can deliver the ball properly into the forward line. Give Tracc and Viney to Chaplin to get the most out of them in our forward line - that is where they are needed and best used IMO. 

35 minutes ago, Neil Crompton said:

One solution might be to keep Tracc and Viney out of the centre bounces and replace them with Kossie (when available) and Chandler (and Langford when gets a handle on the senior game) - players who can deliver the ball properly into the forward line. Give Tracc and Viney to Chaplin to get the most out of them in our forward line - that is where they are needed and best used IMO. 

You don't think there is an element of overreacting to one game in the whole 'our midfield bulls set up has ti change' palaver?

I mean, yes we need more speed and outside run in the middle. Which is why they are using Langdon (by the by many people are arguing we should end that experiment) and koz as permanent mids.

BUT:

- maxy had his least impactful game for a long time. 

- tracc, our best midfield bull only spent 77% TOG and basically played deep forward for half a game

- Chandler played on ball in the last and we got smashed out of the middle

- in the previous match we almost beat a top 4 team in large part because of our ability to score from stoppages BECAUSE of our bulls

- the roos absolutely obliterated us at centre bounces and stoppages with a midfield full of bulls!

Edited Tuesday at 22:315 days by binman