33 minutes ago, Altona-demon said:

There's an overriding assumption in this thread that "copying" the modern template will be the answer to the woes we are currently experiencing as a team.

With this assumption comes the rationalisation of draft picks potential / alignment to that assumption.

The first order question is whether we should copy (i don't think so), or whether we should pick the gameplan that will in 2-3 years be the new dominant style. I believe it was Sam Mitchell that noted that his challenge when coming to the Hawks was not to copy the then current dominant style, contested defence zone that Melbourne had mastered, but to define what would be copied next.

I think we can all agree he's been sucessful in this. My question, does Goody have that sort of innovation in his kit bag?

You have to understand that Goody's coaching philosophy is largely a defensive one, so his response to anything will be from a place where defence is king.

I have a funny feeling that the evolution of the modern game will be one that looks to restrict the free flowing nature of it and look to lock down ball movement and transition. Maybe its a higher press, making the ground skinnier or flood the corridor etc who knows, but its a ying and yang...the game has - IMO - become too open / offensive, which will be corrected in the coming years by and over-the-top defensive style plan and the cycle will continue.

1 minute ago, GS_1905 said:

You have to understand that Goody's coaching philosophy is largely a defensive one, so his response to anything will be from a place where defence is king.

I have a funny feeling that the evolution of the modern game will be one that looks to restrict the free flowing nature of it and look to lock down ball movement and transition. Maybe its a higher press, making the ground skinnier or flood the corridor etc who knows, but its a ying and yang...the game has - IMO - become too open / offensive, which will be corrected in the coming years by and over-the-top defensive style plan and the cycle will continue.

Agreed - an astute observation. The question for the club is what side of the ledger (Yin or Yang) do we want to be?

My gut feel is that you are right, and that if we can find the way to address this I think we win in the medium to long-term.

Some observations along the lines of what you are suggesting with the higher press (is that similar to Richmond 2018-2020 btw?):

1. The umpiring of HTB is allowing players to ride tackles longer, which means forward half pressure and tackling as a tactic has become less effective.

2. Players are getting better at spreading at the right time, decision making, meaning defending the open expanses of a football ground is becoming much harder. This is equally hard for the zone to adjust as "triggers" for spreading are becoming harder for defenders to follow, this is becoming apparent with Melbourne as teams "run through" our zone.

3. Would be interested to analyse the scoring patterns of the good teams, when they match up against good defending teams.

3 minutes ago, GS_1905 said:

You have to understand that Goody's coaching philosophy is largely a defensive one, so his response to anything will be from a place where defence is king.

I have a funny feeling that the evolution of the modern game will be one that looks to restrict the free flowing nature of it and look to lock down ball movement and transition. Maybe its a higher press, making the ground skinnier or flood the corridor etc who knows, but its a ying and yang...the game has - IMO - become too open / offensive, which will be corrected in the coming years by and over-the-top defensive style plan and the cycle will continue.

Undoubtedly, the next evolution will be a defence based game but this current style of game was created to open up our gamelan - very effectively, I might add. It’s all cyclical.

No matter what we try and do, we need better skills across the park to be able to execute the very thing that wins games, kicking the ball through the big sticks more than the opposition.

2 minutes ago, BW511 said:

Undoubtedly, the next evolution will be a defence based game but this current style of game was created to open up our gamelan - very effectively, I might add. It’s all cyclical.

No matter what we try and do, we need better skills across the park to be able to execute the very thing that wins games, kicking the ball through the big sticks more than the opposition.

What does remain constant through most games styles is an ability to score from turnover. Which we bucked the trend in '21 (although our centre clerance dominance in Q3, probably fudged the stats on that night).

Scoring largely comes from turnover.

If you turn the ball over teams try to go as quickly as they can because it is harder for the defence to organise.

It relies on running and trust in your teammates to support the defensive matrix you are trying to implement. If there's a breakdown in that, either because communication is bad or one in the chain fails you get punished.

Its why players like Fritsch kill teams. They dont provide pressure or tackles. And it looks like the way we look look now, hopeless. Like players haven't a clue what they are supposed to be doing. Its why heads get dropped because the 'system' keeps breaking down.

Geelong are well drilled and are patient. They have a lot of trust in their team mates and are content to kick it all day sideways until an overlap or gap appears. When it does they all know what to do - spread and run. The kicker often kicks to space for their team mate to run onto - a much easier kick than the hail Mary's we try to pull off under pressure.

Its all a failure of coaching to drill the players on what and where they are supposed to be. And failing to drop players that refuse to adhere to the new style.

2 hours ago, jnrmac said:

Scoring largely comes from turnover.

If you turn the ball over teams try to go as quickly as they can because it is harder for the defence to organise.

It relies on running and trust in your teammates to support the defensive matrix you are trying to implement. If there's a breakdown in that, either because communication is bad or one in the chain fails you get punished.

Its why players like Fritsch kill teams. They dont provide pressure or tackles. And it looks like the way we look look now, hopeless. Like players haven't a clue what they are supposed to be doing. Its why heads get dropped because the 'system' keeps breaking down.

Geelong are well drilled and are patient. They have a lot of trust in their team mates and are content to kick it all day sideways until an overlap or gap appears. When it does they all know what to do - spread and run. The kicker often kicks to space for their team mate to run onto - a much easier kick than the hail Mary's we try to pull off under pressure.

Its all a failure of coaching to drill the players on what and where they are supposed to be. And failing to drop players that refuse to adhere to the new style.

The scary thing is thru the first month we are actually top 3 in the comp for turnover difference and created more turnovers than the opposition for our first three games. And bottom three from scores from turnovers. Aye caramba.

49 minutes ago, Jjrogan said:

The scary thing is thru the first month we are actually top 3 in the comp for turnover difference and created more turnovers than the opposition for our first three games. And bottom three from scores from turnovers. Aye caramba.

Maybe that's why SG is optimistic we are doing numerous things right but execution is very poor

When it doesn't work it looks a mess

1 hour ago, Jjrogan said:

The scary thing is thru the first month we are actually top 3 in the comp for turnover difference and created more turnovers than the opposition for our first three games. And bottom three from scores from turnovers. Aye caramba.

Has there ever been a better argument to therefore ignore most stats as every movement etc deserves a qualification.

Football really isn't that complicated.... unless you're us .

46 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

47 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Maybe that's why SG is optimistic we are doing numerous things right but execution is very poor

When it doesn't work it looks a mess

Even if we correct that substantially though Jnr we still have....

1. Poor decision making coming inside 50. Eg; bombing wide or deep into a pocket instead of looking inside more often for the free player on 45s, fat side over the top to advantage or kicking to someone on a lead.

2. A forward line that struggles to take many marks inside 50 and who are very often poor at converting. How often have we kicked ourselves out of the game early in the last few seasons?

3. Pressure that is often below the AFL average. Since 2024, we have been one of the worst pressure teams going both in our forward 50 and in a general sense.

I personally can't see us fixing some or all of these in the near term when we've had 2.5 seasons (or thereabouts) to fix No.2 and failed miserably (so far).

Edited April 9Apr 9 by Demon Dynasty

On 08/04/2025 at 14:52, KozzyCan said:

2023 we were first for inside 50s with an average of 58.4. 6th for marks inside 50 with 12.8, 4th for shots on goal with 26.7 but 6th for goals again with 12.8. I believe this is the year you were talking about where we successfully locked it into our forward half but couldn't really improve our scoring off the back of it.

Thanks for doing the research that I should have done. 2023 was really one that got away. Frustrating as hell.

7 hours ago, Jjrogan said:

The scary thing is thru the first month we are actually top 3 in the comp for turnover difference and created more turnovers than the opposition for our first three games. And bottom three from scores from turnovers. Aye caramba.

I didn't know this. That's actually huge and something we can hang our hat on. Where did you read this?

Edited April 9Apr 9 by Adam The God

21 hours ago, Altona-demon said:

There's an overriding assumption in this thread that "copying" the modern template will be the answer to the woes we are currently experiencing as a team.

With this assumption comes the rationalisation of draft picks potential / alignment to that assumption.

The first order question is whether we should copy (i don't think so), or whether we should pick the gameplan that will in 2-3 years be the new dominant style. I believe it was Sam Mitchell that noted that his challenge when coming to the Hawks was not to copy the then current dominant style, contested defence zone that Melbourne had mastered, but to define what would be copied next.

I think we can all agree he's been sucessful in this. My question, does Goody have that sort of innovation in his kit bag?

100 x this post.

10 hours ago, Adam The God said:

I didn't know this. That's actually huge and something we can hang our hat on. Where did you read this?

Calculated and confirmed off Wheelo. We've been +5, +5 +8 and -4 so far. Pies and Cats ahead of us. Hawks and Saints just below. Port, NM and Rich make bottom three.

5 hours ago, Jjrogan said:

Calculated and confirmed off Wheelo. We've been +5, +5 +8 and -4 so far. Pies and Cats ahead of us. Hawks and Saints just below. Port, NM and Rich make bottom three.

Reinforces my view that we are OK with the defence, contest and forcing turnovers but are clueless with ball in hand.

20 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Reinforces my view that we are OK with the defence, contest and forcing turnovers but are clueless with ball in hand.

And my understanding is we don't have a ball movement coach amongst our ranks. A bad oversight that.

3 minutes ago, Adam The God said:

And my understanding is we don't have a ball movement coach amongst our ranks. A bad oversight that.

I believe we just play soccer at training these days 😊

10 minutes ago, Adam The God said:

And my understanding is we don't have a ball movement coach amongst our ranks. A bad oversight that.

I think that’s Chaplin’s role and maybe a bit of Sam Radford.

The issue is the caps put on coach spending, which probably limits where we can spend our money.

Not sure if you can easily see this marked up photo.

This was a boundary throw in, with Essendon putting a spare in defence. Melbourne had 2v1 with their extra in the centre of the ground.

Anyone able to explain the intent here. Is it to try and bring the ball through the corridor by hand or foot or either?

If anyone hasn't seen this, it's well worth the watch.

Incredibly fascinating by Horse on this.

1 hour ago, dazzledavey36 said:

If anyone hasn't seen this, it's well worth the watch.

Incredibly fascinating by Horse on this.

That’s half the problem though isn’t it Dazzle, you are taught this from a young age and it’s not earth breaking tactics, however we get it so wrong so much, years of it.

1 hour ago, dazzledavey36 said:

If anyone hasn't seen this, it's well worth the watch.

Incredibly fascinating by Horse on this.

The pair of them offer great, in-depth but measured insights, whatever the subject. Whole sequence is worth watching, including the first segment about changing game plans and what that entails. Simpson is candid in admitting that the kind of style WCE tried to bring in in 2021 didn't work with the players they had. Lots of talk about how the game plan and the players/list have to mesh, that it's as much as anything about personnel.

Simple but effective is the way it should be.

This is the % plays I've been banging on about. Get the best marks and readers of flight down down there (Gawn, May, Lever) and with Kossie ready to crumb this should a strength rather than a weakness.

On 09/04/2025 at 13:39, Jjrogan said:

The scary thing is thru the first month we are actually top 3 in the comp for turnover difference and created more turnovers than the opposition for our first three games. And bottom three from scores from turnovers. Aye caramba.

On 09/04/2025 at 11:31, jnrmac said:

Scoring largely comes from turnover.

If you turn the ball over teams try to go as quickly as they can because it is harder for the defence to organise.

It relies on running and trust in your teammates to support the defensive matrix you are trying to implement. If there's a breakdown in that, either because communication is bad or one in the chain fails you get punished.

Its why players like Fritsch kill teams. They dont provide pressure or tackles. And it looks like the way we look look now, hopeless. Like players haven't a clue what they are supposed to be doing. Its why heads get dropped because the 'system' keeps breaking down.

Geelong are well drilled and are patient. They have a lot of trust in their team mates and are content to kick it all day sideways until an overlap or gap appears. When it does they all know what to do - spread and run. The kicker often kicks to space for their team mate to run onto - a much easier kick than the hail Mary's we try to pull off under pressure.

Its all a failure of coaching to drill the players on what and where they are supposed to be. And failing to drop players that refuse to adhere to the new style.

Re Jjrogan's post (too scared to try and plonk my response up there after the new update)...

I can't be sure without checking but it would be interesting to know....

1. What part of the ground the majority of our turnovers are coming from

2. Our transition efficiency in terms of say a turnover off HB being chained successfully to an inside 50. Same with turnovers from defensive mid, from the center & wings

3. Our scoring % and goal % from each of those turnover sectors

Why are we bottom three in terms of scores from turnover? Doesn't take Einstein to realise we are terrible in pretty much all aspects of the game in a forward sense. Both in terms of skills / spread in transition, forward connection, forward craft, actual shots at goal from our forwards and mids / rucks pushing up and lastly conversion.

I will say it again and again, had we fixed this aspect of our play and replaced the likes of BB & T-Mac then i doubt we'd be having these discussions and nashing of teeth about our present conundrum. There would have been no conundrum / slump and we'd be kicking healthy / competitive scores most weeks that would see us in the winning mix a bit more often.

Jnr that is a great summary. But unfortunately it would seem one team values skills and precision by foot and hand while the other just seems happy to fluff it's way through with bash / crash at the coal face (i think that's what we are still doing, one can no longer be certain about anything we are trialing anymore) and dump kick / bomb the ball forward most of the time in the hope to lock it inside 50 or the forward half and hope that the weight of entries will overwhelm the oppo in a shot at goal / scoring sense.

Unfortunately we are also presently devoid of smaller or medium forwards who can take advantage of the (still) significant number of inside 50s we appear to be garnering. With Kozzy back one would hope this will start to improve.

The other aspect is the actual locking of the ball inside 50, repeat entries and scoring off turnover inside 50 or the forward half. Are we up there with our turnovers inside 50 / forward half or are we bog ordinary i wonder. I assume we are either not so good at it or.... if we are pretty decent at forcing turnover in forward half, we still suck at converting from it. My gut feel is, with the likes of Fritta, Rooh & Melk's form in the first three weeks, our pressure / turnover game inside our own 50 or forward half has been relatively shizen vs the AFL average up until Rnd 4. We may have seen a bit of an uptick since Rnd 4 with the return of Kozzy and a bit of extra pressure coming from the likes of Chandler and to a lessor extent marginal improvements from Fritta and Melk.

If we are trying to transition to something more akin to the Geelong style, and i have no idea as to whether we are or not, you require players with a skill set to do that. And you also require a forward line that runs like a well oiled machine with a number of dangerous targets who know where the goals are.

We do have a few good users of the ball a la Windsor (still trying to get match fit after his return) and Salo. With Windsor no longer (till now?) playing on his usual wing, that side of his game is stifled somewhat. I'd move him back to his wing pronto (assuming foot is ok).

Salo is another matter. Vs 2021 his uncontested possessions (-18%) score involvements (-31%), Rebound 50s (-31%) inside 50s (-16%) and meters gained (-11%) were all substantially ahead of where they are now for whatever reason/s.

He isn't alone of course in terms of a number of our top liners being well below their recent (2023 - 2024) levels.

Two key players in particular have fallen away badly.

Viney down approx 31% on his 2024 Player Rating (to date)

& Tracc down 28%

You can't cover those last two with newbies.

Add to that no Lever & McVee (so far).

What a shizen fest.

In the next 3 to 4 weeks we just might see a resurgence IF....

Tracc can fix his tank / fitness (=form?) issue

McVee returns and finds some form

We bring in a replacement for Vines ....Kolt?

We bring in a replacement for Rooh ... Fullo (if he continues his form and somehow gets noticed) or AJ (if his form warrants)

We bring in a replacement for Spargo ... Brown dog

Melk gets to somehwere near full fitness / form and starts hitting the scoreboard / pressuring better

Ditto Fritta re scoreboard AND tackling / pressure.

Kozzy ...in a scoring / pressure / accountability sense

All of the above AND the rest of the team bring manic pressure without the ball, stop guarding grass so much, we start spreading alot more, using the ball more effectively and the forwards start to run better patterns, use forward craft that one would expect from a reasonable or just good average AFL team!

& Get the basics right including skills of course.

Edited Wednesday at 13:092 days by Demon Dynasty

If horse is auditioning for the job - he’s got my vote!

14 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

If anyone hasn't seen this, it's well worth the watch.

Incredibly fascinating by Horse on this.

To be fair, we did this all last year. They're cherrypicking plays as usual. There's plenty of plays to the hot spot that result in nothing every game in every round.

We either didn't have the guys to bring the ball to ground or we didn't have the crumbers. We would set up a five man anchor behind the ball just as this video intimates.

Again, it is my view that we've overcorrected and should be reverting to what works for us. Even an aggressive press that is anchored by a five man defence. Playing Windsor and Lindsay behind the ball, with Langdon on a defensive wing, we could defend breakaways.

The play Longmire describes in itself is a tweak on the kicking it long to the pockets that we did for two years, but as with most things on the footy field, the most dangerous position to hit is the corridor, or in this case, that central hot spot.

Back in 2023, Collingwood would often hit that central hot spot, while we were still hitting the pockets. It meant their shots were easier than ours, and I remember at the time hoping we'd be more aggressive with that kick to a central hot spot, rather than a pocket, but we obviously felt we could defend the pocket better and then get a reset for a stoppage that we'd win 50% of the time resulting in a scoring chance. At the start of 2024, as I say, we made the change and looked more central.

There is nothing particularly enlightening about this exposition when you think about it, but I'm glad there is some stuff in the press about tactics, although unless it's posted on here I wouldn't watch it anyway.😆

Edited yesterday at 00:451 day by Adam The God