Game plans, tactics and all that jazz

[Axis of Bob 10,156]

17 hours ago, A F said:

Successful tackling pressure isn't necessarily the best measurement, clearly. How do these stack up against pressure acts? 

Whatever the result, it's clear that we're not getting the most out of all of our forwards. 

Another thing that has been noticeable over the last few weeks is our want to keep our forward structure and always keep one or two forwards deep.

Firstly, I think pressure acts are a better indicator. You can see these on the AFL site but they're much more difficult to track because the AFL site is awful. Usually they show that Weid and Fritsch are the worst, Kozzie easily the best and everyone else in between (although closer to the bottom).

I think that keeping our forward deeper is important to use our mediums properly. Mediums need space to beat their opponents, generally, whilst talls and smalls are less disadvantaged by congestion. However it does mean that we are in less of a position to defend when the ball is turned over.  It requires that the midfield push up to our forward line to seal off the exits and compress the field, and I think the midfield failure to do this was probably the main cause of our poor 3rd quarter last week.

[Skuit 9,109]

I stumbled across this article yesterday. It's a review of Time and Space by James Coventry, which Dee Man mentioned early in this thread - written by Russel Jackson (who I've been told has moved on from the Guardian due to a dispute). 

The review alone covers some interesting tactical developments and their surprise originators, which I was probably too young at the time to care about or have picked up on - though I think most wouldn't be aware of these aspects of AFL history. 

I'll be looking to pick up a copy now. https://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2015/jul/15/understanding-afl-tactics-russell-jackson. 

 

 

[Axis of Bob 10,156]

3 hours ago, pitmaster said:

I'm going to need to think about this highly praised analysis some more because AoB there is a fundamental flaw in your introduction. Simply, the fastest way to move the ball forward is by kicking it. Run and carry does not move the ball at anything like the speed of a kick, unless it's a mistimed "up and under".

For speed of movement a kick is the best way to go; "relatively slowly" ain't right, with respect.

"Relatively slowly" means that the ball hangs in the air for a period of time, which allows defenders to cover that space. It means that just because you're in space it doesn't automatically mean that the ball has enough time to get to that open player before a defender can cover them. Unlike a short handball, which can get to a team mate before the defender has time to react. The time the ball hangs in the air is the reason why a zone defence works, because you don't need a defender playing on every forward, you just need a defender close enough that they can cover the kick by the time it reaches them.

Just because it's the fastest way to move the ball forwards doesn't mean that it's fast. 

[binman 37,724]

7 minutes ago, Axis of Bob said:

"Relatively slowly" means that the ball hangs in the air for a period of time, which allows defenders to cover that space. It means that just because you're in space it doesn't automatically mean that the ball has enough time to get to that open player before a defender can cover them. Unlike a short handball, which can get to a team mate before the defender has time to react. The time the ball hangs in the air is the reason why a zone defence works, because you don't need a defender playing on every forward, you just need a defender close enough that they can cover the kick by the time it reaches them.

Just because it's the fastest way to move the ball forwards doesn't mean that it's fast. 

I am hating watching every game on TV. You just miss so, so much. 

And one thing is the work rate of players who don't have the ball. 

Teams switch to the 'fat side all the time. It is usually the most reliable and relatively risk free way to break a zone. 

Sometimes team give their opposition that option, but deep. And cover and force rhe bsll to be switched back.

But more often than not the dees try to not even give the switch option and force a kick down the line

But it is not tbe first switch kick that is the problem, it is the next disposal, be that a kick or handball.

If that disposal can be immediate and under little or no pressure you get what happens to us in the third. Easy transition from the back half to their inside 50.

So even though it looks routine it is just so critical that a player gets accross hard when the ball is switched to man rhe mark and hold up the next disposal.

And if your team is working hard enough and prepared to gut run and sprint the time the ball is in the air on a 40-50 metre kick gives them time to cover.

This is where langdon has been so important for us. 

Live you can see who is working hard and who has decided not to sprint and cover. On tv you are guessing. 

But if we were collectively working hard enough in that third quarter there us no way tbey transition rhe ball so ridiculously easily.

And it has to be said the most likely culprits not covering off in thst game are the forwards as rhey are the first line of defence stopping easy transition.

 

[dpositive 1,547]

17 hours ago, A F said:

I think this is tongue in cheek here, mate, but Len Thompson played a long time ago. In the early part of this thread, a few posters talked about the autocratic coach being from a bygone era. It's close to irrelevant in the modern game IMV. 

I'm not convinced we'll see another autocratic coach again. I get what you're saying though. I'd argue the coach's job is partly to motivate and inspire, but with the systems in place these days, it's just as much about teaching and reassuring players of their roles and efforts within the systems.

Well yes it's the old world example but the intention doesn't change. The need to inspire and motivate is still significant.We obviously don't spit n em and the authoritarian coach model redundant. teaches  Teaching and reassuring must still motivate and inspire best performance and maximum effort. This is the most significant responsibility of the coach.

[58er 5,568]

7 hours ago, BW511 said:

I think Fritta is a little too comfortable. He doesn't really have any challengers for his position and the other bloke playing a similar role is in a horrible form slump (Melksham). 

He's also a fairly easy match up for opposition defenders, you just sit goal side of him and let him lead away from contact for his low percentage shots. He is having 4-6 shots a week, but if he's only making 1-2 of them, it isn't going to be the difference between a win or loss.

The issue I have with Harmes, Viney or Jones as permanent forwards is that none of them have any tricks. With zones, there is always plenty of players around the contest and those three can't regularly manufacture goals on their own in the way a Papley, Butler, Rioli, Henry, Cameron, Miers or Bolton could. Not one of them has an elite side step, pace or leap.

Wallis on the weekend was a good example, he had plenty of space to operate due to the speed the dogs transitioned and he was absolutely sensational in the way he used his brain to beat opponents - Through strength, body position and timing

 

 

BW why you are saying is true but what ai an saying that Fritta must start being smarter Surely every time he misses a relatively easy set shot it must sap his confidence.

He is a great mark but we should be getting 2/3/4 even a 5 goal haul on his marks etc. Sharpening  up his running for snap shots like the one vs Pies should be easy Ashe is highly skilled. A Dees supporter said yo

me last week he thinks Fritta is a bit "soft" and I agree really that he is not assertive grouch in general play snd tjis is because he is nit strong or powerful enough.

Our coaches will suddenly lose patience if they don't get to him.

Your comment that 1-2 shots don't make a difference I believe that in Sst it was 3/4 snd that goes make a difference.

I honestly believe Bayley could be a 40 plus goal kicker white easily dirt of half Gunstan snd other half Bruest.

Tnis is his third season and if we are to get to the challenging fir a flag Bayley is one who has the ability to lift his standards by a big margin.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,381]

10 hours ago, 58er said:

 

( BTW What a shocker shot from Melky fir a point also coach killing error not befitting him ) in the second quarter.!!) 

 

 

 

I wondered at the time, and still do, whether Melksham's poor kick was actually a well thought through strategy to keep the ball low because of the wind but one he poorly executed. The converse was Fritsch's floater which looked terrific until it swung sideways.

[Canary M Burns 50]

Really interesting topic, spurred me to start an account to add to the discussion. The earlier talk about pressure acts prompted me to have a bit of a deep dive into the stat during our games this year. You'll be surprised to know we won pressure acts overall against the Dogs 271-231, so its certainly something to take with a grain of salt.  

Not sure how it goes posting big tables, so I've gone with a summary for now but what stuck out to me was that pressure acts wasn't a particularly good indicator in our wins and losses. Sure we often win when we put on good pressure, but looking at this stat alone changes in pressure acts are often small in percentage terms, and the average number of pressure acts from each of our forwards doesn't seem to change markedly at all. On first glance I'd say that game style of the opposition, time in possession, and weather conditions are playing a big part in the number of pressure acts in a game rather than effort alone.   

	PA (for)	PA Diff	FWD PA (avg)	UP diff	Marks diff
Season avg	253.5	3.5	10.48	-12.83	-7.66
Win avg	257.5	6.66	10.44	2.33	9
Loss avg	249.5	0.33	10.52	-28	-24.33

Given this unexpected outcome I added a few columns to see if anything else stood out across our wins and losses.  Uncontested possession differential and marks differential really stood out to me. We've been soundly beaten for uncontested possessions in all our losses this year. It seems to agree with what we see on TV. The physical pressure is ok at the contest, but as other have mentioned we're off in our spread and ability to guard the space. So where to from here? I think we've seen this season the effects of changing the number of talls, mediums and smalls in our forward mix, but there is an element of continuity missing too. When looking at forward pressure acts I first had to look at who I thought was playing forward in each game....by my count we've run 15 through there this year, excluding resting mids like Petracca. That's surely not conducive to executing our zone in the forward half. 

[Grr-owl 1,075]

How about broken tackles. I’m having A recurring nightmare in which a demon meekly reaches after a bulldog as it breaks into space.

[binman 37,724]

52 minutes ago, Grr-owl said:

How about broken tackles. I’m having A recurring nightmare in which a demon meekly reaches after a bulldog as it breaks into space.

Without a word of a lie i read that as a recruiting nightmare!

[binman 37,724]

1 hour ago, Canary M Burns said:

Really interesting topic, spurred me to start an account to add to the discussion. The earlier talk about pressure acts prompted me to have a bit of a deep dive into the stat during our games this year. You'll be surprised to know we won pressure acts overall against the Dogs 271-231, so its certainly something to take with a grain of salt.  

Not sure how it goes posting big tables, so I've gone with a summary for now but what stuck out to me was that pressure acts wasn't a particularly good indicator in our wins and losses. Sure we often win when we put on good pressure, but looking at this stat alone changes in pressure acts are often small in percentage terms, and the average number of pressure acts from each of our forwards doesn't seem to change markedly at all. On first glance I'd say that game style of the opposition, time in possession, and weather conditions are playing a big part in the number of pressure acts in a game rather than effort alone.   

	PA (for)	PA Diff	FWD PA (avg)	UP diff	Marks diff
Season avg	253.5	3.5	10.48	-12.83	-7.66
Win avg	257.5	6.66	10.44	2.33	9
Loss avg	249.5	0.33	10.52	-28	-24.33

Given this unexpected outcome I added a few columns to see if anything else stood out across our wins and losses.  Uncontested possession differential and marks differential really stood out to me. We've been soundly beaten for uncontested possessions in all our losses this year. It seems to agree with what we see on TV. The physical pressure is ok at the contest, but as other have mentioned we're off in our spread and ability to guard the space. So where to from here? I think we've seen this season the effects of changing the number of talls, mediums and smalls in our forward mix, but there is an element of continuity missing too. When looking at forward pressure acts I first had to look at who I thought was playing forward in each game....by my count we've run 15 through there this year, excluding resting mids like Petracca. That's surely not conducive to executing our zone in the forward half. 

Top work CMB. 

Great point about the revolving door in the forward line.

It is has long been accepted that a consistent back six is critical in terms of developing synergy. It is even more important these days with zones.

It stands to reason then when start talking about all team defence and tbe critical role forwards play in terms of pressure and spread, that consistency in selection would be very helpful.

[Half forward flank 1,022]

8 minutes ago, binman said:

Top work CMB. 

Great point about the revolving door in the forward line.

It is has long been accepted that a consistent back six is critical in terms of developing synergy. It is even more important these days with zones.

It stands to reason then when start talking about all team defence and tbe critical role forwards play in terms of pressure and spread, that consistency in selection would be very helpful.

I would add with a consistent forward six or so forwards gain confidence in each other and know where to run to and spread. I think the whole forward pressure thing is overdone. If the forwards are working on getting the ball it is out of the oppositions hands. I wonder if our forwards are out of synch with when to attack, create and defend.

[BW511 2,227]

22 minutes ago, Half forward flank said:

I think the whole forward pressure thing is overdone. If the forwards are working on getting the ball it is out of the oppositions hands. 

I agree with this generally, if you’ve got control of the ball, you’ve got control of the game. In this instance tackling or pressure acts mean very little.

Where it hurts us is even when on song, we don’t really have control of a game long enough to rely on it. We win a game in a quarter at present, we are just not skilled enough, disciplined enough or determined enough to control a game from start to finish

@58er There is little doubt Fritta picks and chooses when to contest, but you can cop that if he’s nailing his goals. The examples of Gunston and Breust were good ones, neither of those two are hard at it. They rely on finding space and previously had some beautiful field kicks who could find them. No surprise they have both dropped of significantly without being spoon fed by Burgoyne, Mitchell, Lewis etc

 

 

Edited August 25, 2020 by BW511

[deanox 8,503]

2 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I wondered at the time, and still do, whether Melksham's poor kick was actually a well thought through strategy to keep the ball low because of the wind but one he poorly executed. The converse was Fritsch's floater which looked terrific until it swung sideways.

Honestly, that's what I thought he was trying. 

[deanox 8,503]

A few years back someome was plotting winning/losing margin vs uncontested possession differential. The correlation was amazing, and the outliers had very obvious explanations i.e. a losing team with more UP actually had lots of them in their d50 while they chipped it around unable to make ground instead of bombing long and losing possession.

I wonder how hard it would be to pull this data this year?

[Binmans PA 25,886]

3 hours ago, deanox said:

A few years back someome was plotting winning/losing margin vs uncontested possession differential. The correlation was amazing, and the outliers had very obvious explanations i.e. a losing team with more UP actually had lots of them in their d50 while they chipped it around unable to make ground instead of bombing long and losing possession.

I wonder how hard it would be to pull this data this year?

There's also difficulty comparing the difference between how the game changes in finals football, versus the home & away season too. 

Do you need to win more UPs during the regular season, and win more CPs to win finals?

I wonder if this points to how, say, a Geelong seems to capitulate in finals, but always makes them?

I think it was @titan_uranus that mentioned St Kilda's game style the other day and questioned whether it would hold up in the pressure cooker of finals. It may well be their focus on UPs that could be the defining factor....?

Whilst I do think we get done on the outside in our loses, this has certainly been a trend longer than just this season and my feeling is (without any data to back it up) that we've closed the gap a bit on the UP differential this year, even in our losses. 

When we play well, we can shut down the exits to the quicker teams and prevent them from spreading from the contest and getting it on the outside.

So I don't think it necessarily translates that teams just need to get it to the outside and they'll beat us. I think that has certainly been the problem for us in the past, but now with the defensive system we're beginning to see it gives our backs a bit more cover and we leak less goals. Bulldogs got it on the outside a lot, but we still managed to stay in the game for the vast majority of it. 

@Canary M Burns's post was great and I wonder how the club measures its strengths and weaknesses with regards to the stats on hand.

Would love to see whether our UP differential this season is better than the last 3 or 4. That might point to a sign of improvement and strength in the system that we're trying to play. Alternative measures other than tackles and pressure acts would be fascinating to analyse. 

Is it simply a case of the midfielders not two-way-running to stop teams spreading? Or is it that the sliders and additional mids aren't blocking off the exits from the contest? Or is it both? Or some other factor?

I'm sure there is something in the forward imbalance too. Not only did it take us a long time to work out a reasonable mix, until finally settling on something through that Hawthorn/Gold Coast/Brisbane stretch, I'm still not sure they know what the correct balance should be.

I'm inclined to agree with the idea that we should be playing a similar style in our forward 50 that fits with the combative style of the midfield and half back line.

It'll be interesting to see how they set up the forwardline this week with Jones fit to take his place. UPs will be the go for St Kilda if they're on song, so it'll come down to can our half forwards and mids bring enough pressure off half back and at the contest, to prevent them generating scores, and can we use the ball well from stoppage and convert Max's work?

Edited August 25, 2020 by A F

[Stein9193 129]

On 8/24/2020 at 10:34 AM, A F said:

I think this is tongue in cheek here, mate, but Len Thompson played a long time ago. In the early part of this thread, a few posters talked about the autocratic coach being from a bygone era. It's close to irrelevant in the modern game IMV. 

I'm not convinced we'll see another autocratic coach again. I get what you're saying though. I'd argue the coach's job is partly to motivate and inspire, but with the systems in place these days, it's just as much about teaching and reassuring players of their roles and efforts within the systems.

Plus he's dead.

I agree the fire and brimstone thing is such a dated method. Coaches need to be rocket scientists now.

[layzie 28,473]

17 hours ago, Canary M Burns said:

Really interesting topic, spurred me to start an account to add to the discussion. The earlier talk about pressure acts prompted me to have a bit of a deep dive into the stat during our games this year. You'll be surprised to know we won pressure acts overall against the Dogs 271-231, so its certainly something to take with a grain of salt.  

Not sure how it goes posting big tables, so I've gone with a summary for now but what stuck out to me was that pressure acts wasn't a particularly good indicator in our wins and losses. Sure we often win when we put on good pressure, but looking at this stat alone changes in pressure acts are often small in percentage terms, and the average number of pressure acts from each of our forwards doesn't seem to change markedly at all. On first glance I'd say that game style of the opposition, time in possession, and weather conditions are playing a big part in the number of pressure acts in a game rather than effort alone.   

	PA (for)	PA Diff	FWD PA (avg)	UP diff	Marks diff
Season avg	253.5	3.5	10.48	-12.83	-7.66
Win avg	257.5	6.66	10.44	2.33	9
Loss avg	249.5	0.33	10.52	-28	-24.33

Given this unexpected outcome I added a few columns to see if anything else stood out across our wins and losses.  Uncontested possession differential and marks differential really stood out to me. We've been soundly beaten for uncontested possessions in all our losses this year. It seems to agree with what we see on TV. The physical pressure is ok at the contest, but as other have mentioned we're off in our spread and ability to guard the space. So where to from here? I think we've seen this season the effects of changing the number of talls, mediums and smalls in our forward mix, but there is an element of continuity missing too. When looking at forward pressure acts I first had to look at who I thought was playing forward in each game....by my count we've run 15 through there this year, excluding resting mids like Petracca. That's surely not conducive to executing our zone in the forward half. 

Great first post and love the name mate! That UP differential while shocking sort of makes sense but the mark differential is astounding. 

I'd love there to be a better explanation for this but could it purely just be a case of a team that can bring that relentless spread and running one week and not be willing to back it up the next and just assuming it will happen? I guess that's what we're here for, to discuss

Edited August 26, 2020 by layzie

[Grr-owl 1,075]

19 hours ago, binman said:

Without a word of a lie i read that as a recruiting nightmare!

Freudian....

[Grr-owl 1,075]

14 hours ago, A F said:

Is it simply a case of the midfielders not two-way-running to stop teams spreading?

One thing I keep noticing is that in our best games, I see our midfield running two ways with urgency. When we're down, I don't notice it. It could be me..... 

[Engorged Onion 9,215]

2 minutes ago, Grr-owl said:

One thing I keep noticing is that in our best games, I see our midfield running two ways with urgency. When we're down, I don't notice it. It could be me..... 

I feel it's a couple of things within the systems - as you have already said @Grr-owl  - that seperate our 'best games' vs weaker performances.

Midfielders not running both ways with urgency/filling up space/haranguing - so what shifts the willingness to do it weekly?

Forwards essentially not doing the same thing

Smaller handballs to stationary players - so do all the players around the ball 'feel' pressured and don't want to be he one with the pill caught holding it - essentially playing emotionally safe

I think also the oft quoted scoreboard pressure really helps validate that we are doing ok, which feeds in to confidence to continue to be expansive and take risks - rather than dishing it off short (and the 'pressure' goes back on to the other team) - so what if Kossie had got his 2, Melksham etc etc... 

On that note - that is what needs to be worked on - as it is evidenced that they can do it well - its how do they work through the pressure on them when they have the ball to create better opportunities for each other...

On another side note - I dislike the language of 'we only do it on our terms' - essentially all teams do that. You could rule a line through 9 teams each weeks that didnt have it on their terms... that's not the issue at hand.

[Grr-owl 1,075]

Agreed. Regarding confidence, what I saw last week was the team reverting to poor practice under stress. That is, for three weeks they tried the system, found that it worked and so were encouraged to continue. It even worked against the Filth, happily, though diminished as they were. But then, against a determined, energetic, committed and physical opposition, we lost faith.

There was a moment in the 4th when we were coming... Trac dashed from the middle, thought again, Hollywooded a handball instead of kicking it, which resulted in a turnover that led to the final Dog goal. My gut turned. Hope drained from me like an Englishman's bathwater... 

So, IMHO, we have the right system. We just need one or two more players to fit the necessary roles, a season or two for others to develop... and to trust ourselves under pressure on the big stage.

Edited August 26, 2020 by Grr-owl

[Canary M Burns 50]

A F's right, stats are a bit meaningless without context. Here is how both those elements look across the last 4 years, which I cant say matches my perception but its important to challenge the feel with numbers. 2019 has an asterix given we only won 5 games (small sample size) and one of those was against the Sun's where we lost uncontested possessions by 51 but fell over the line by a point. The trend is away from uncontested possessions in both wins and losses, which could be both our evolving gamestyle/zone but also the tendency of opposition teams in 2019-2020 to defend with the ball in hand. The stat is one element in a larger puzzle, but throws a bit of a light on trade offs happening as the team evolves and the difference between the 2018 Dees and the 2020 model.
 

UP diff	2020	2019	2018	2017
Season avg	-12.83	-19.9	8.2	25.7
Win avg	2.33	-16.2	25.125	31.9
Loss avg	-28	-21	-21.88888889	18.2
Marks diff	2020	2019	2018	2017
Season avg	-7.66	-5.2	3.16	0.1
Win avg	9	5	16.75	1.9
Loss avg	-24.33	-8.3	-9	-2

[Binmans PA 25,886]

1 hour ago, Canary M Burns said:

A F's right, stats are a bit meaningless without context. Here is how both those elements look across the last 4 years, which I cant say matches my perception but its important to challenge the feel with numbers. 2019 has an asterix given we only won 5 games (small sample size) and one of those was against the Sun's where we lost uncontested possessions by 51 but fell over the line by a point. The trend is away from uncontested possessions in both wins and losses, which could be both our evolving gamestyle/zone but also the tendency of opposition teams in 2019-2020 to defend with the ball in hand. The stat is one element in a larger puzzle, but throws a bit of a light on trade offs happening as the team evolves and the difference between the 2018 Dees and the 2020 model.
 

UP diff	2020	2019	2018	2017
Season avg	-12.83	-19.9	8.2	25.7
Win avg	2.33	-16.2	25.125	31.9
Loss avg	-28	-21	-21.88888889	18.2
Marks diff	2020	2019	2018	2017
Season avg	-7.66	-5.2	3.16	0.1
Win avg	9	5	16.75	1.9
Loss avg	-24.33	-8.3	-9	-2

Fascinating stats there, mate. Appreciate them. Great post.

I'm not even going to bother with 2019, but I'm astounded to read that 2017 was a season where we generally smashed it in UPs. That's very surprising. I had always felt over Goodwin's tenure that we slowly built our ability to create UPs, but that CPs were mostly our go. 'We're building from the contest out' mantra. It shows the stats and the eye can be misleading.

What the 2018 stats could also tell us is that we increased our uncontested marks and these probably resulted in higher potency / scoring chains. I'm not really sure what to make of that, other than we were certainly a far more potent offensive team in 2018, so I suppose the stats bear that out.

In 2018, it seemed to the eye that we played a more aggressive / all or nothing defensive game style than it 2017. In 2018 we had that chaotic and aggressive 18 man press, and given the much higher marks differential and our really great CP game that year, it seems like we balanced the UPs pretty well (although slightly down on the previous year's UPs, we dramatically increased our CPs by 629).

If we measure the 2020 stats against those from 2017 and 2018 (again I'm discounting 2019 because I think it confuses things), we essentially see that we haven't really got going in the same way offensively, but when we win, our UPs are up and our Marks differential are up, but when we lose we get smashed on both. That was at least a trend or characteristic of 2018. But I think in 2018 that was about our all or nothing system. In 2020, it's about work rate and willingness to implement the system.

What I don't think the stats bear out that I'm coming to believe is that we are actually a stronger defensive side in 2020 than we were in 2018 and if we can get our scoring side to click a bit more in 2020 (ie higher UPs and Marks differential), and develop a consistency to our defence and offence in this way, then come (hopefully) finals time, we'll be far better placed to launch an attack on the flag than we were in 2018. 

I also think our defence this year is focused on defending without the ball (a bit like Geelong), as opposed to say Hawthorn or Collingwood who have traditionally defended by playing keepings off and spreading the opposition zone with the ball.

In 2018, despite our scoring power, our aggressive press was always susceptible to counter attacks and leaking goals out the back. Our defensive systems are much better this year. We just haven't found the balance between this newer defensive system with its increased accountability, and our offensive game.

It's also fair to suggest that the shorter games have hampered our ability to really put the foot on certain opponents throat's (increasing the UPs and Marks differential), but I think it's only a matter of time before we find this balance and when it does click, we will beat a lot of teams. I'm hoping it's this season.

Edited August 26, 2020 by A F

[Kent 2,574]

22 hours ago, Stein9193 said:

Plus he's dead.

I agree the fire and brimstone thing is such a dated method. Coaches need to be rocket scientists now.

if that is so, then we are definitely in trouble with Goodwin