Fox Footy Analysis Dermot, King, Robbo MfC DNA

[My name is legion 158]

5 minutes ago, Undeeterred said:

Fair enough. My comment still holds on that measure too

Fritsch needs to beef up a bit and learn to tackle hard with two arms.

[Binmans PA 26,049]

48 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

It is certainly Cultural and has been that way for decades. 
Mental Fragility and timidity were the first discussions i had on here in 2005. 
We are still discussing it now. 
 

That is Culture 100%
We are 18th for tackles in the League 

We do not work hard enough 

That is Culture when it happens year after year

I think that's more a reflection on you and your posts, which to your credit have remained consistent, but you have no idea about the internal culture. You're basing culture in this post on tackle count, which tells me you're still stuck in 2005 with your analysis of the game. 

If we use evidence here rather than a nebulous guess on your behalf of our "culture", you'd see that even when we work extremely hard, our zone and corralling does the work of defence and our tackle counts are still much less than the opposition. 

So if we'd brought the required work rate every game this season, we'd still likely be near the bottom for a metric like tackling. Some of our players are in the top echelon for 1%ers though.

Once again, I am not saying our team isn't mentally fragile, I'm just refusing to put it down to something like culture. That's far too easy.

[Binmans PA 26,049]

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Did you see Fagan's halftime spray a few weeks ago when Lions were playing North?

To be fair, Goodwin gave a massive spray at half time against Sydney and we were better in the second half.

Langdon kicks that goal from 15m out directly in front and it's less than two goals with plenty of time left.

Edited September 6, 2020 by A F

[McQueen 17,863]

3 hours ago, Engorged Onion said:

Ok ok! You’re the second person to call it.

Im originally from down the road.

It was a flippant comment - you’re 100% it has no baring!

*Must remember the literalism of people who read posts. 

Where from down the road?

You sound like someone from Camperdown. 

[Sir Why You Little 34,438]

8 minutes ago, A F said:

 

If we use evidence here rather than a nebulous guess on your behalf of our "culture", you'd see that even when we work extremely hard, our zone and corralling does the work of defence and our tackle counts are still much less than the opposition. 

So if we'd brought the required work rate every game this season, we'd still likely be near the bottom for a metric like tackling. Some of our players are in the top echelon for 1%ers though.

 

Sorry but Tackle’s beat 1%’s everytime, everytime and we are the worst at it. Finals are all about hard tackles that stick. 
A F i am guessing you have been watching this Club since the 90’s/2000’s

I already know that you have little regard for the past, that is fine, but i shall continue to tell you that the same problems have been repeating themselves for decades

Look up AFLstats.com and go to 1971 and follow the Scores/Ladder Round by Round. That will give you a reasnoable idea of what i am talking about 

[Binmans PA 26,049]

19 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Sorry but Tackle’s beat 1%’s everytime, everytime and we are the worst at it. Finals are all about hard tackles that stick. 
A F i am guessing you have been watching this Club since the 90’s/2000’s

I already know that you have little regard for the past, that is fine, but i shall continue to tell you that the same problems have been repeating themselves for decades

Look up AFLstats.com and go to 1971 and follow the Scores/Ladder Round by Round. That will give you a reasnoable idea of what i am talking about 

I don't think tackles or 1%ers are necessarily relevant, because they're not constant attributes of our wins, when we clearly bring work rate.

[Sir Why You Little 34,438]

Just now, A F said:

I don't think tackles or 1%ers are necessarily relevant, because they're not constant attributes of our wins, when we clearly bring work rate.

If we don’t stick tackles the workrate is not up. Pressure is all about good tackles

We are 18th out of 18 added to that we are not super quick on the outside 

No chance of doing anything in a finals series with numbers like that

[Half forward flank 1,022]

Most AFL coaches dont have any guts. Number 1 is to protect their job and the best way to do that is follow the crowd. So the AFs of the AFL stick like glue to the current trend until somone with guts changes things and then they stick like glue to the next trend.  In the end they are some caught up in it all that they have completely  forgotten fundamentals like hard tackles help win big finals.

[Binmans PA 26,049]

14 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

If we don’t stick tackles the workrate is not up. Pressure is all about good tackles

We are 18th out of 18 added to that we are not super quick on the outside 

No chance of doing anything in a finals series with numbers like that

Yeah, you're missing my point. You keep linking tackle stats with work rate and I'm saying our zone does the work of making the opposition give the ball up (on the most part). We don't have to tackle to regain possession. The stats in our most dominant wins bear this fact out.

The stat that might be more relevant, which I don't have access to is failed tackles.

[Hogan2014 390]

2 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

It is certainly Cultural and has been that way for decades. 
Mental Fragility and timidity were the first discussions i had on here in 2005. 
We are still discussing it now. 
 

That is Culture 100%
We are 18th for tackles in the League 

We do not work hard enough 

That is Culture when it happens year after year

Eagles are 17th for tackles & tigers 8th not always a barometer for success. 

[P-man 13,168]

5 hours ago, NeveroddoreveN said:

Getting someone who actually was a leader throughout his career and did wonders for Brisbane in short stint is not practical? We seem pretty devoid of this thing called leadership ....I think we need tangibles but Luke Hodge would be a great get for leadership/tactics/smarts...probably good enough to be our kicking coach on the side too.  Is there a downside to trying someone like this??

Yes. Wasted effort

Honestly I would love it if getting Luke Hodge was some kind of panacea. Robbo himself conceded that a number of great football people from successful cultures have come through the club. What tangibles is Hodge going to bring that others haven’t? I understand we are at desperate ends but I’d rather focus attention on more practical means of achieving consistency.

[deespicable me 1,427]

Stick fatt!

Part of a strong culture is backing in your coach and playing group when you're backs are to the wall.

Part of a strong culture is never admitting you got it wrong, even when it is blatantly obvious you got it wrong.

How often did Sheedy suffer a bad loss and come out in the press conference and mis-direct the press corp and talk about anything but the truth.

Keep telling the f#ckers to f#ck off even when they have a point.

So Dermie et al can go and GET well and truly F#CKED.

Even if they are right.

I'm well and truly looking forward to tomorrow night. Does anyone really know if we're going to win or lose?

Go Dees, stick it up "em! 

[Sir Why You Little 34,438]

15 minutes ago, Hogan2014 said:

Eagles are 17th for tackles & tigers 8th not always a barometer for success. 

I wonder how high the Eagles are on that list when playing in Perth?

Tackling is not the only Barometer, but it certainly ramps up in the finals, and against Top Sides

We will get nowhere being 18th, unless our kicking skills are 100% spot on

[Sir Why You Little 34,438]

58 minutes ago, A F said:

Yeah, you're missing my point. You keep linking tackle stats with work rate and I'm saying our zone does the work of making the opposition give the ball up (on the most part). We don't have to tackle to regain possession. The stats in our most dominant wins bear this fact out.

The stat that might be more relevant, which I don't have access to is failed tackles.

I understand what your saying, but our zones have been breaking down regularly since 2018 and if we are also 18th in the tackle count, that is lamentable. These things should be fixed during a game, but they are not obviously. 
Yes Failed Tackles would be an interesting read, once again that is something that should be easily addressed. Top level Footballers should excel At tackling opponents. 
Are we frightened of the Sling??

[Bitter but optimistic 21,238]

1 hour ago, A F said:

Yeah, you're missing my point. You keep linking tackle stats with work rate and I'm saying our zone does the work of making the opposition give the ball up (on the most part). We don't have to tackle to regain possession. The stats in our most dominant wins bear this fact out.

The stat that might be more relevant, which I don't have access to is failed tackles.

Yeah I'd like to see that stat too AF - and half arsed or one arm tackles. We might be winning those numbers

[old dee 22,850]

6 minutes ago, Bitter but optimistic said:

Yeah I'd like to see that stat too AF - and half arsed or one arm tackles. We might be winning those numbers

Might!

[titan_uranus 22,344]

1 hour ago, Sir Why You Little said:

If we don’t stick tackles the workrate is not up. Pressure is all about good tackles

We are 18th out of 18 added to that we are not super quick on the outside 

No chance of doing anything in a finals series with numbers like that

The bolded bit is completely, utterly, wrong. There is so much more to pressure than tackles.

Having said that, we're 17th for average tackle differential at -4.5 (only Carlton, North and Adelaide are worse than -1.7).

That, couple that with the fact that we're only 11th for average disposal differential at -3.6, concerns me. It's one thing to be 18th for average tackles, but if we consistently played in high-possession/low-tackle games, our average differential would be closer to 0. That it's so far away from 0 to have us 17th shows that we're getting outworked too frequently in that metric.

Interestingly though, we're 6th for average 1%'ers differential, at 1.8. I don't have a definition of 1%'ers so I don't know what they include, but they likely include spoils, smothers, blocks, shepherds, those sorts of things. So we're doing some of those pressure-related things well.

[Rogue 585]

Lloyd: 'No other top [his word] team is losing to bottom sides'

...except if you cast your mind back three weeks, Sydney rolled the Giants by 41 points.

The day before, Essendon escaped with a draw versus Gold Coast.

Oh, and about a month back, Freo knocked over Collingwood.

Mentally weak, or have they done what average teams do and occasionally wobbled vs lowly sides?

Edited September 6, 2020 by Rogue

[Hogan2014 390]

1 hour ago, A F said:

Yeah, you're missing my point. You keep linking tackle stats with work rate and I'm saying our zone does the work of making the opposition give the ball up (on the most part). We don't have to tackle to regain possession. The stats in our most dominant wins bear this fact out.

The stat that might be more relevant, which I don't have access to is failed tackles.

Yeah we win the ball & turn it over so many times it’s a joke ... 

[Sir Why You Little 34,438]

5 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

The bolded bit is completely, utterly, wrong. There is so much more to pressure than tackles.

Having said that, we're 17th for average tackle differential at -4.5 (only Carlton, North and Adelaide are worse than -1.7).

That, couple that with the fact that we're only 11th for average disposal differential at -3.6, concerns me. It's one thing to be 18th for average tackles, but if we consistently played in high-possession/low-tackle games, our average differential would be closer to 0. That it's so far away from 0 to have us 17th shows that we're getting outworked too frequently in that metric.

Interestingly though, we're 6th for average 1%'ers differential, at 1.8. I don't have a definition of 1%'ers so I don't know what they include, but they likely include spoils, smothers, blocks, shepherds, those sorts of things. So we're doing some of those pressure-related things well.

A good hard Tackle means an opponent is stopped or impeaded from moving forward and they lose control of the ball (Holding or Dropping) so i would say it is an important part of pressure, not the only form, but a very important one

[DeeZee 6,731]

I don’t think getting a Hodge in will do that much..

This playing group need to grow a pair, and have to take destiny into their own hands.

They must build their own culture/legacy.

It really should be lead by guys like May, Lever, Gawn , Brayshaw, Viney, Melksham, Langdon, Salem and Petracca.

Edited September 6, 2020 by DeeZee

[titan_uranus 22,344]

Just now, Rogue said:

Lloyd: 'No other top [his word] team is losing to bottom sides'

...except if you cast your mind back three weeks, Sydney rolled the Giants by 41 points.

To be fair, if you look at the top 10 (i.e. the top 8, us and the Dogs), there have only been three losses by that group to the bottom 6 in any recent time: our loss to Sydney (Round 15), GWS' loss to Sydney (Round 12) and Collingwood's loss to Fremantle (Round 9).

Every single other side in the current top 10 has won every other game against the bottom 6 since, I think, Round 6.

So it is rare.

[titan_uranus 22,344]

2 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

A good hard Tackle means an opponent is stopped or impeaded from moving forward and they lose control of the ball (Holding or Dropping) so i would say it is an important part of pressure, not the only form, but a very important one

Important, sure. But in order to tackle your opponent has to have the ball.

Pressure has to stay on when we have it and when the ball is in dispute, too.

[Rogue 585]

19 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

To be fair, if you look at the top 10 (i.e. the top 8, us and the Dogs), there have only been three losses by that group to the bottom 6 in any recent time: our loss to Sydney (Round 15), GWS' loss to Sydney (Round 12) and Collingwood's loss to Fremantle (Round 9).

Every single other side in the current top 10 has won every other game against the bottom 6 since, I think, Round 6.

So it is rare.

The top five are clearly a cut above the rest, and we're 0-5 against them, so let's compare apples with apples.

Looking at the teams 6-10, what you're telling me is that 3/5 have lost to the bottom six in recent times.

As for the other two, St Kilda got knocked over by Freo two months ago and fell over the line vs the Suns last month. WB have only played two bottom six sides in the past two months - beating Suns by less than a goal - but did get absolutely belted by Carlton.

If anything, I think this bolsters my argument that we've done what average teams do - it's not rare, it's the norm.

Edited September 6, 2020 by Rogue

[Sir Why You Little 34,438]

19 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

Important, sure. But in order to tackle your opponent has to have the ball.

Pressure has to stay on when we have it and when the ball is in dispute, too.

Fair call and I agree, but you can’t expect your opponent to not have the ball during the game, particularly in a final when its Red Hot. 
It’s the arm wrestle and serious tackles can change momentum very quickly