On 16/08/2020 at 15:53, Grr-owl said:

In the wake of the victory against the Filth, I have a few questions for the tacticians. Are we winning because:

1. The players are implementing Goody’s tactics better?

or

2. The tactics have changed?

or

3. The opposition has been poor and we are getting away with tactics that better opposition will easily counter?

On 16/08/2020 at 16:50, Adam The God said:

I reckon it's a tough one to gauge because we're not on the inner sanctum. 

To me, the way we moved the ball earlier in the season was a carbon copy of 2019. Get the ball and go long into the dangerous area 20 metres out from goal, but we didn't have the contest there, so it would break down. It was actually illogical to go there because we weren't playing two talls.

Therefore, I think it's a combination of all three. I think the coaching across 2019 and early 2020 was poor, because instead of looking for lateral options, we'd just go bang and go long inside 50, usually to an outnumber or to the disadvantage of our forward in a 1v1.

I think the players are able to set up defensively a whole lot better and because our fitness is much better, we're starting to trust that team mates are in a lateral position to receive the ball or will create a contest and then crumb when the ball hits the ground.

I think the persist bombing long was down to the coaches trusting the system. I think Goodwin has shown a Hardwick-like stubbornness to change in game tactics and instead trust that the system will right itself. Maybe it's a case of short term pain for long term gain. If you don't play to the system I've devised, this is what happens, guys.

This is where I think selection was the major blunder for Goodwin earlier in the year. Not playing two talls is inconceivable given the system is clearly, we want contests from our talls and pressure from our smalls. Well, if everyone's small, how are they go to compete in the air? It's almost as if Goodwin wasn't entirely sure what make his system work. 

Now we're getting contests in those important areas offensively and we're getting great defensive transition and setting up really well behind the ball.

I think we were setting up well behind the ball earlier in the year, but the transition from attack to defence was still being learnt. 

I reckon we're close to a break out. Problem is, this season, due to the short turnarounds, is throwing up some really strange results, so I wouldn't put it past us to throw in one or two more pathetic results. I'm hoping we can maintain focus though and back our own fitness.

This exchange from 2020 is very interesting to read again. Particularly, the selection issues and the lack of defensive transition. This part of the thread also discusses how we would move the ball long to the central hot spot to get contests from our talls in the air and our smalls at ground level.

Hitting up the central hot spot is also what Richmond did so well during 2017-2020 (get a contest from Riewoldt or Riewoldt and Lynch, and their smalls would go to work). And like us across 2021-2023, they turned defensive intercept into attack.

Reading back over the early part of this thread is fascinating. It seems our problems and Demonlanders' critiques are cyclical.

57 minutes ago, Adam The God said:

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.😆

The conflicting views in the media are becoming unwatchable for me. You get a lot of great insight and I actually really like Horse's take here, but you also get a bunch of blanket filler opinion pieces that don't often make much sense to the die hard fan that watches us every minute of the game.

One thing I'm getting a bit sick of hearing is that the game has passed us by. Saw a Youtube snippet on the Sunday Footy Show of Nathan Brown saying this and that we're not moving it direct and and going sideways too often and that this is down to coaching. I've seen first hand that we are trying to change this but for the most part it's not working for whatever reason (confidence, habit, disdain for the coach etc).

We then hear this stuff about kicking to the square again I think it's a good take but how many long bombs have we had into 50 these last two weeks only to be cut off? Argh

2 minutes ago, layzie said:

The conflicting views in the media are becoming unwatchable for me. You get a lot of great insight and I actually really like Horse's take here, but you also get a bunch of blanket filler opinion pieces that don't often make much sense to the die hard fan that watches us every minute of the game.

One thing I'm getting a bit sick of hearing is that the game has passed us by. Saw a Youtube snippet on the Sunday Footy Show of Nathan Brown saying this and that we're not moving it direct and and going sideways too often and that this is down to coaching. I've seen first hand that we are trying to change this but for the most part it's not working for whatever reason (confidence, habit, disdain for the coach etc).

We then hear this stuff about kicking to the square again I think it's a good take but how many long bombs have we had into 50 these last two weeks only to be cut off? Argh

Then you also hear from Champion Data that we're top 5 for ball movement this year and top 3 for fastest ball movement, which then contradicts someone like David King who doesn't have us anywhere near the top because he takes out variables to suit his own argument (that better ball movement equals ladder position).

It's typical from King, but it's really, really dishonest journalism. And it's why I stopped watching them all. They have a thesis, which they then go and support with data. If the data fit, they remove the variables or use a narrow set of stats to prove a point.

Edited April 17Apr 17 by Adam The God

So watching the build up to Liverpool v Spurs and they're tlaking about Liverpool's manager Arne Slot.

He's about to win the Premier League in his first season.

They said the sporting director chose Arne Slot to succeed Jurgen Klopp because they played a similar style, but Slot's injury record at his previous club was incredible and they said "that's why he's here [at Liverpool]".

Just as it is in the AFL, being able to roll put your best players more often than not is a huge determinant of success.

@binman and others have spoken about this for years, but the idea that a manager could have an amazing injury management record got me thinking about AFL and Goody.

They talked about how Slot had Salah doing less defending (ie pressing) and being fresher when in attack. They also discussed the less ballistic style that Slot's team plays in comparison to Klopp's Liverpool, who were basically on all the time.

Back to AFL and thinking of our brutal, contested stoppage and territory game that would grind sides down, this would have been a very taxing on the body, mentally and physically. With our shift to more uncontested possessions, less contact, we are protecting our bodies from that rigorous, combative football.

I wonder if with this new game style, we'll eventually start to see less injuries and our team last longer than others, but also be more powerful when the time comes.

They also mention the continuity in the team that Slot has played. There havenever been wholesale changes. So the players can build together.

Interestingly though, they made the point that certain players would be allowed to play in a certain way that would protect them (Salah, Alexander-Arnold) because they offer something so good that their team mates would have to cover them/offset what Salah and Trent weren't offering the team. This has implications for me on players like Fritta, Kozzy and even Trac.

Finally, they also said that Slot brought with him his sports scientist that would manage minutes, I really think this is where the AFL game is heading too, and probably already is with Burgo and now Selwyn. But science is now a huge factor in decision making.

Liverpool have built this team based on player data points across all the top leagues in world football. They identify the right talent for them based on data and analytics. It's an incredible frontier for professional sports, and I hope we can start to tap into some of this stuff to get a competitive edge.

Edited April 27Apr 27 by Adam The God

9 hours ago, Adam The God said:

So watching the build up to Liverpool v Spurs and they're tlaking about Liverpool's manager Arne Slot.

He's about to win the Premier League in his first season.

They said the sporting director chose Arne Slot to succeed Jurgen Klopp because they played a similar style, but Slot's injury record at his previous club was incredible and they said "that's why he's here [at Liverpool]".

Just as it is in the AFL, being able to roll put your best players more often than not is a huge determinant of success.

@binman and others have spoken about this for years, but the idea that a manager could have an amazing injury management record got me thinking about AFL and Goody.

They talked about how Slot had Salah doing less defending (ie pressing) and being fresher when in attack. They also discussed the less ballistic style that Slot's team plays in comparison to Klopp's Liverpool, who were basically on all the time.

Back to AFL and thinking of our brutal, contested stoppage and territory game that would grind sides down, this would have been a very taxing on the body, mentally and physically. With our shift to more uncontested possessions, less contact, we are protecting our bodies from that rigorous, combative football.

I wonder if with this new game style, we'll eventually start to see less injuries and our team last longer than others, but also be more powerful when the time comes.

They also mention the continuity in the team that Slot has played. There havenever been wholesale changes. So the players can build together.

Interestingly though, they made the point that certain players would be allowed to play in a certain way that would protect them (Salah, Alexander-Arnold) because they offer something so good that their team mates would have to cover them/offset what Salah and Trent weren't offering the team. This has implications for me on players like Fritta, Kozzy and even Trac.

Finally, they also said that Slot brought with him his sports scientist that would manage minutes, I really think this is where the AFL game is heading too, and probably already is with Burgo and now Selwyn. But science is now a huge factor in decision making.

Liverpool have built this team based on player data points across all the top leagues in world football. They identify the right talent for them based on data and analytics. It's an incredible frontier for professional sports, and I hope we can start to tap into some of this stuff to get a competitive edge.

Interesting analogy. Thanks

I made this post in another thread, but it fits better in this thread.

Note: the context is our improvement in what could be considered goody's core fundamentals- contested possessions, pressure etc:

Agree those stats reflect goody's focus on his fundamentals - pressure, contest and inside 50 tackling and pressure.

Bur we are definitely making some fundamental changes to our method, a process we began in thefirst two thirds of last season

For example we are third in the AFL for uncontested possessions, a reflection of the way we are chipping it around to stretch opposition zones and maintain possession until we can find a path to attack and then press the button.

I reckon another factor in using the chip it around strategy, which freo also use, is it helps to minimise turnovers and intercepts because there's less emphasis on getting it forward at all costs

We're still turning it over too much (4th - Swans are number 1) but we're way better in terms of clangers. We are 14th for clangers, two spots better than the pies and just above Suns, Dockers, Dogs and Hawks - all teams that arw considered excellent kicking sides.

By the by the Swans are number one for most clangers, which bodes well for us if we bring the heat, which I fully expect us to do

I don't put much stock in the kicking efficiency stat, but for what it's worth we are above the Swans this season, 68% to 64.9%. In fact we are 2nd in the afl (behind freo), though that's probably a function of our chip it around strategy, which freo also use.

The Swans' clangers and key stats really show the impact if losing so many quality plsyers, Gulden being the big one).

Another change is how quick we are moving the ball when we take a mark or win a free. I'm not sure whete we're are at now but 3 weeks ago we were top 3 for how quickly we played on after a free or mark.

We've still got a long way to go to get the transition game right - we're 18th for scores from defensive half for example.

Bur we're getting there.

Take that last stat. Yes we're not scoring enough from our back half. BUT we are actually 5th for transitioning the ball from our D50 inside our 50.

We are one posiion above a hawks team many consider to be thev best transition team and below other excellent transition team in the Dogs, Suns, (surprisingly) Blues and Cats

That suggests that we are actually transitioning effectively but breaking down once we get inside our 50 (no shock to dees fans).

If we can improve our last kick inside 50, and our forward line effectiveness more generally we can really improve our scoring from the back half very quickly, which makes us a big threat if we can maintain our contest and pressure levels.

5 hours ago, binman said:

I made this post in another thread, but it fits better in this thread.

Note: the context is our improvement in what could be considered goody's core fundamentals- contested possessions, pressure etc:

Agree those stats reflect goody's focus on his fundamentals - pressure, contest and inside 50 tackling and pressure.

Bur we are definitely making some fundamental changes to our method, a process we began in thefirst two thirds of last season

For example we are third in the AFL for uncontested possessions, a reflection of the way we are chipping it around to stretch opposition zones and maintain possession until we can find a path to attack and then press the button.

I reckon another factor in using the chip it around strategy, which freo also use, is it helps to minimise turnovers and intercepts because there's less emphasis on getting it forward at all costs

We're still turning it over too much (4th - Swans are number 1) but we're way better in terms of clangers. We are 14th for clangers, two spots better than the pies and just above Suns, Dockers, Dogs and Hawks - all teams that arw considered excellent kicking sides.

By the by the Swans are number one for most clangers, which bodes well for us if we bring the heat, which I fully expect us to do

I don't put much stock in the kicking efficiency stat, but for what it's worth we are above the Swans this season, 68% to 64.9%. In fact we are 2nd in the afl (behind freo), though that's probably a function of our chip it around strategy, which freo also use.

The Swans' clangers and key stats really show the impact if losing so many quality plsyers, Gulden being the big one).

Another change is how quick we are moving the ball when we take a mark or win a free. I'm not sure whete we're are at now but 3 weeks ago we were top 3 for how quickly we played on after a free or mark.

We've still got a long way to go to get the transition game right - we're 18th for scores from defensive half for example.

Bur we're getting there.

Take that last stat. Yes we're not scoring enough from our back half. BUT we are actually 5th for transitioning the ball from our D50 inside our 50.

We are one posiion above a hawks team many consider to be thev best transition team and below other excellent transition team in the Dogs, Suns, (surprisingly) Blues and Cats

That suggests that we are actually transitioning effectively but breaking down once we get inside our 50 (no shock to dees fans).

If we can improve our last kick inside 50, and our forward line effectiveness more generally we can really improve our scoring from the back half very quickly, which makes us a big threat if we can maintain our contest and pressure levels.

The big one for me this year is injuries. We’re as close to full fitness as I’ve seen us for a few seasons now. If we can improve the areas you point out and keep our best on the park who knows what could happen.

I haven't gone through this thread in a while but wanted to ask what people thought of yesterday's setup. It seemed like we played a very 2021 style of footy, pressing up high with repeated forward 50 entries and lots of pressure/tackles inside 50.

Was this just a feature of how the Swans play? Was it just that we were efficient with forward half turnovers meaning we didn't need to slingshot off half back as much?

Unfortunately I had to watch from the couch as caught a virus from my son so perhaps I missed the overall view you get being at the ground.

I guess the main difference is we are "lowering our eyes" more and not going long down the line to the pockets to create a higher probability of getting a stoppage inside 50 or forcing teams to hack it out down the line if they do clear it. Is that what we are seeing, a 2021 high press/defensive setup but with more forward handball chains instead of long down the line (particularly once we get to the wing) and a 2018 focus of kicking to the hotspot instead of to the pockets to create better quality scoring opportunities?

One thing that stood out yesterday against the swanettes was the return of Eddie Langdon's running game.

He seemed to be everywhere on both sides of the ground.

I have always thought that his running game was a big part of our 2021 success.

Go Eddie go.

GO DEES.

2 minutes ago, tiers said:

One thing that stood out yesterday against the swanettes was the return of Eddie Langdon's running game.

He seemed to be everywhere on both sides of the ground.

I have always thought that his running game was a big part of our 2021 success.

Go Eddie go.

GO DEES.

I said something similar to mate at the game - langdon's running was incredible.

Ditto for Chandler, who worked his guts out.

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I haven't gone through this thread in a while but wanted to ask what people thought of yesterday's setup. It seemed like we played a very 2021 style of footy, pressing up high with repeated forward 50 entries and lots of pressure/tackles inside 50.

Was this just a feature of how the Swans play? Was it just that we were efficient with forward half turnovers meaning we didn't need to slingshot off half back as much?

Unfortunately I had to watch from the couch as caught a virus from my son so perhaps I missed the overall view you get being at the ground.

I guess the main difference is we are "lowering our eyes" more and not going long down the line to the pockets to create a higher probability of getting a stoppage inside 50 or forcing teams to hack it out down the line if they do clear it. Is that what we are seeing, a 2021 high press/defensive setup but with more forward handball chains instead of long down the line (particularly once we get to the wing) and a 2018 focus of kicking to the hotspot instead of to the pockets to create better quality scoring opportunities?

Unfortunately I couldn't make it to this one in person either Gonzo it was Gran's birthday so I won't be much help on field setups and positioning but from the TV it did look like we went back to more full press and suffocate higher up the ground, but it could have also been that our pressure was really good.

We scored 6.4.40 from stoppage and 2.3.15 from centre bounce. I think our gameplan and looking to rebound from defensive 50 is taking shape but I can't help but feel that score from stoppage was the secret sauce in this game, especially during the key stages in the 2nd and 3rd where we would instantly respond with an I50 entry from the bounce.

The delivery of the footy was on display today and very few unnecessary Dr Stangelove entries. And our forwards moved! 12.10.82 from turnover and 11.10.76 originating from the forward half would support your thoughts as well.

We played with more confidence and dare today, it's amazing the difference confidence makes. 6 weeks ago we were completely bereft of it, now it looks effortless at times. You can't turn it on and off like a tap but when you have it, strap yourself in!

Oh and obviously thanks to @WheeloRatings for all those stats.

@Dr. Gonzo I think you are 100% right. We have been predictable going inside 50 forever under Goody and then from rd 1 2022 we stopped pressuring teams once they controlled the ball in there (we dropped our zone back). But it’s changed since round 6.

I think it is becoming clearer what Goody is trying to do and in my opinion it’s a recipe for premiership success, and it’s not copying the defensive half scoring game but countering it. Yes we are trying to move it quickly from defence and hit targets inside 50, but not at any cost. Our chipping around at times is trying to minimise score from forward half turnover for the opposition. When we do get it forward and don’t mark inside 50, we are applying a lot more pressure and seem to be making the opposition earn the defensive 50 exit, even when they have control. I don’t think we have seen f50 intercepts like recent games since 2021. We no longer completely drop the zone back (although we did versus hawks which was strange). It’s risky, as when sides breach our setup they are a good chance to score, but if we apply forward half pressure I think Goody is betting we score more and it’s working.

The result is our score from turnovers and score from forward half have gone through the roof, and we have minimised the opposition score from forward half. If you look at what it means from a stats perspective, it’s best shown by score source differential, with our forward half score and turnover score differentials going through the roof since round 6 (see chart thanks to @WheeloRatings ) Our score from defensive half should improve but we won’t dominate it and it doesn’t matter. It will do Daniel Hoynes head in!

And it’s all built on pressure. We got it 100% right against Sydney. I think our pressure rating was 192 for the entire game. If we do that against the best teams we win, and then we are playing finals and doing lots of damage. Just by way of comparison, our score from turnover differential is 14.5pts a game since Rd 6, and forward half differential is 22.7pts. That is elite and both stats are better than seasons best every year since 2020 (except Geelong in 2022 who had a higher turnover differential but lower forward differential). And the premiers have led both these stats every year since 2021 except in 2023 (when Brisbane led both but fell 5pts short in the GF). Great signs.

The challenge will be that the team needs everyone switched on to apply that type of pressure and we can’t afford too many slips.

Agree with the above.

Seems like we are incorporating the best of 2021-23 (i.e. contest and defence) with a more dynamic midfield (e.g. Kozzie and Rivers) and faster / more precise ball movement (e.g. Bowey, Langford, Lindsay)

Yeah I wasn't sure because it seemed like against Brisbane we were slingshotting more off half back but that could have just been a result of Brisbane using precision kicking to get through our forward press more. We definitely pressed up in the last quarter against the Lions which could be seen on some of the repeated vision forcing turnovers in our forward 50/front half.

I wasn't sure if yesterday was a return to the 2021 style press or it just happened that way due to Sydney's set up (on tv it looked like more players brought up to the contest as it was an extremely congested game, especially in the 1st half). Will be interesting to see how we play the Saints, Lyon is under the pump and you would presume he will be trying to to turn the game into a scrap like they did against Freo.

Edited May 25May 25 by Dr. Gonzo

5 minutes ago, speed demon said:

faster / more precise ball movement (e.g. Bowey, Langford, Lindsay)

And Salem. Goodwin mentioned him in the press conference, which was good to hear. Right back to his very best form.

In another thread @DEE fence noted Chandler's use of low flat passes. I responded with this post, which i reckon fits in this thread given it's about tactics:

Its interesting you should note that.

It's clearly something they have been working on, ie low, flat passes inside 50 -often from near the boundary and kicked into the corridor on the 45.

Langdon does several each game, ditto melk.

And its more than just kicking back into the corridor - the kicks are being kept deliberately low, are often scrappy (particularly langdons) and often bounce before getting to the target.

I'm guessing the idea is four fold:

• Get it to the hotspot quickly, ie not floaters to reduce the time for the oppo to get numbers to the target and by doing

• Ideally hit a target dead in front of the goal, 20-25 metres out.

• But if not marked, either because it's spoiled or because it bounces, it becomes a predictable ground ball which we fight to win or tackle the oppo if they win it.

• Reducing intercept marks

In regard to the last point, all teams look to reduce oppo intercept marks inside D50, but we look hyper focused on doing so.

Watching petty on Sunday from ground level in the pocket you could see his sole focus was blunting mcartin. Barely left his side or looked to get separation.

AJ was similarly defensive. Even Friiter was pretty defensive- am I right in thinking he waxed with melksham to defend Blakley?

Ironically, of our medium and tall forwards, Melksham who has been playing the defensive forward role, was probably our most offensive forward (McCartin too big for melk I reckon).

Edited May 26May 26 by binman

On 26/05/2025 at 09:03, Watson11 said:

@Dr. Gonzo I think you are 100% right. We have been predictable going inside 50 forever under Goody and then from rd 1 2022 we stopped pressuring teams once they controlled the ball in there (we dropped our zone back). But it’s changed since round 6.

I think it is becoming clearer what Goody is trying to do and in my opinion it’s a recipe for premiership success, and it’s not copying the defensive half scoring game but countering it. Yes we are trying to move it quickly from defence and hit targets inside 50, but not at any cost. Our chipping around at times is trying to minimise score from forward half turnover for the opposition. When we do get it forward and don’t mark inside 50, we are applying a lot more pressure and seem to be making the opposition earn the defensive 50 exit, even when they have control. I don’t think we have seen f50 intercepts like recent games since 2021. We no longer completely drop the zone back (although we did versus hawks which was strange). It’s risky, as when sides breach our setup they are a good chance to score, but if we apply forward half pressure I think Goody is betting we score more and it’s working.

The result is our score from turnovers and score from forward half have gone through the roof, and we have minimised the opposition score from forward half. If you look at what it means from a stats perspective, it’s best shown by score source differential, with our forward half score and turnover score differentials going through the roof since round 6 (see chart thanks to @WheeloRatings ) Our score from defensive half should improve but we won’t dominate it and it doesn’t matter. It will do Daniel Hoynes head in!

And it’s all built on pressure. We got it 100% right against Sydney. I think our pressure rating was 192 for the entire game. If we do that against the best teams we win, and then we are playing finals and doing lots of damage. Just by way of comparison, our score from turnover differential is 14.5pts a game since Rd 6, and forward half differential is 22.7pts. That is elite and both stats are better than seasons best every year since 2020 (except Geelong in 2022 who had a higher turnover differential but lower forward differential). And the premiers have led both these stats every year since 2021 except in 2023 (when Brisbane led both but fell 5pts short in the GF). Great signs.

The challenge will be that the team needs everyone switched on to apply that type of pressure and we can’t afford too many slips.

Superb post mate, but just wanted to add something further.

As the game wore on, we definitely let Sydney have two and sometimes even three kicks from the kick out. We wouldn't allow them to get over centre wing, but we allowed them to chip to here. We then set up down the line and in the corridor and dared them to hit the kick into the corridor. They mostly went long down the line and we'd often win ground ball or neutralise their ground ball win.

This is a vaguely similar tactic that we used against Collingwood in 2023 in the KB game and again, a similar move to the one we employed against Hawthorn recently. As @binman has said of the Hawthorn game, we allowed the first handball, but sweated the second, and meant that often the press would start across half forward. Against Collingwood, we allowed the first kick and then allowed them to run into our press, and strangled them from there, exploiting their overly aggressive press and commitment of numbers forward of the ball.

Both strategies hope to turn the ball over by the centre of the ground, sometimes boundary side of the wings, and then slingshot back inside a relatively empty forward line, as the opposition commits numbers to half way. And that press or gamble that Collingwood (and Hawthorn) do has always left them more vulnerable, and they rely on 1v1 wins or break evens from Moore, Maynard, Quaynor and co to neutralise fast turnovers against. So the key is either lots of forward movement from our forwards when we cause the turnover or lowering the eyes and hitting up shorts, or even better kicking it over the last defender towards the square.

I think in the recent past we would have been happy to take the shot from anywhere inside 50, but now we tend to get it deeper and within (to my eye), 30-35m of goal. This entry doesn't have to be central, best if it is, but you can see we have a lot of shots tucked into the boundary line. Melksham often leads here, for example. He's generally an excellent finisher from either pocket, so IMV, he'd be our go to forward. And the beauty of him often taking the best interceptor, is it drags that defender out of the central leading channel and brings other forwards into play with the space it creates.

On 26/05/2025 at 09:22, speed demon said:

Agree with the above.

Seems like we are incorporating the best of 2021-23 (i.e. contest and defence) with a more dynamic midfield (e.g. Kozzie and Rivers) and faster / more precise ball movement (e.g. Bowey, Langford, Lindsay)

Definitely less long down the line (although we seem happy to revert to this against certain opposition- see Brisbane last week), and morenuse of angles, and aiming to have more shots closer to goal from marks inside 50, rather than repeated chaotic snap shots. But the latter also happens as the game of AFL is imperfect and rhe best teams can turn chaotic entries or turnovers into scores too. Collingwood are excellent at turning dirty entries into goals.

Edited May 27May 27 by Adam The God