2 hours ago, McQueen said:

Where from down the road?

You sound like someone from Camperdown. 

Cobden... 

What does a Camperdown accent sound like over a forum?

18 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

Cobden... 

What does a Camperdown accent sound like over a forum?

So close.... ?

I'll go further to say you played for Scott’s Creek.

21 minutes ago, McQueen said:

So close.... ?

I'll go further to say you played for Scott’s Creek.

Stevo, were you brought up in Colac? Did my initial comment hit a nerve for some reason? If so, I apologise - as I said in a few other posts- I was being flippant - I could have just as easy said Birregurra, or Portland, or Fish Creek.

I presume you're an old family friend of the Hodges by how intensely you are pursuing this!

1 hour ago, Sir Why You Little said:

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??

We're playing completely different zones to 2018. If we didn't lay tackles with our aggressive 18 man press we were [censored]. We no longer play an 18 man press.

Tackling around the contest to ensure we break up the opposition's clearance work is far more important in the style we play IMV. On that stat, Oliver is equal 5th in the league. But once again, I don't subscribe to the tackle metric being necessarily the best way to view our work rate.

I'd almost prefer the opposition's score as the best indicator of work rate over tackle count anyway. If we're restricting opposition scores without a high tackle count that tells you that there is something else going on that is preventing that scoring (ie work rate to implement the zone).

15 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

Stevo, were you brought up in Colac? Did my initial comment hit a nerve for some reason? If so, I apologise - as I said in a few other posts- I was being flippant - I could have just as easy said Birregurra, or Portland, or Fish Creek.

I presume you're an old family friend of the Hodges by how intensely you are pursuing this!

I probably would’ve preferred Carlisle river or Simpson but let’s just move on. 

4 minutes ago, McQueen said:

I probably would’ve preferred Carlisle river or Simpson but let’s just move on. 

and thank [censored] for that...

1 minute ago, Engorged Onion said:

and thank [censored] for that...

Did you play with the Darcy boys?

3 minutes ago, A F said:

We're playing completely different zones to 2018. If we didn't lay tackles with our aggressive 18 man press we were [censored]. We no longer play an 18 man press.

Tackling around the contest to ensure we break up the opposition's clearance work is far more important in the style we play IMV. On that stat, Oliver is equal 5th in the league. But once again, I don't subscribe to the tackle metric being necessarily the best way to view our work rate.

I'd almost prefer the opposition's score as the best indicator of work rate over tackle count anyway. If we're restricting opposition scores without a high tackle count that tells you that there is something else going on that is preventing that scoring (ie work rate to implement the zone).

It’s hard to see all that watching on an iPhone  tackling to me is a basic rule, along with kicking, marking and handballs

i wish we would do more of it. Your opponent is more wary of you.
i agree that opposition score is a good indicator of work rate. 
tomorrow night we will know in the first 5 minutes whether we are in it 

 

18 hours ago, Deemented Are Go! said:

Meh.
Dermie is a punch drunk alpha who absolutely and openly loathes the MFC and will take every opportunity to sink the boots in, rain or shine. 

King is a statistics sycophant who flip flops with his convictions depending on the tide of public opinion like a chameleon. 

And Robbo, with his penchant for RTDs, can hardly string a sentence together, let alone form a coherent argument. He’s lucky to get his pants on each day. 
 

Whilst there is likely truth in their observations, I’m not placing too much weight on what these muppets opine. 
 

@Demonland I think we found a new podcast special guest. Might have to bump @binman

Edited September 6, 20204 yr by praha

This is just spin by media commentators. Our success of failure as a club will not be determined by our 'DNA'. It will be determined by making good decisions in terms of selecting coaches, recruiting players and allocating contracts. And then we will need a healthy dose of luck to win premierships.

Our losses, apart from the Port game, have been almost solely due to a lack of skill. Not softness.

If we continue to confuse the reasons why we are where we are and think it is 'culture', we could end up with Mark Neeld 2.0.

43 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

It’s hard to see all that watching on an iPhone  tackling to me is a basic rule, along with kicking, marking and handballs

i wish we would do more of it. Your opponent is more wary of you.
i agree that opposition score is a good indicator of work rate. 
tomorrow night we will know in the first 5 minutes whether we are in it 

 

Completely agree. We always do know whether we're on or not in the first few minutes.

6 hours ago, My name is legion said:

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

Completely agree. My comment was about Salem. 

5 hours ago, 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.

But our wins are only against poorer sides. To beat the better sides we do need to bring high pressure including tackles and 1%ers 

6 hours ago, A F said:

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.

Don't you think though that if our team is mentally fragile, and it has been a feature of our sides for generations, that is exactly what is meant by culture? There must be a reason for the consistency in that, the environment of the club seems to foster that mentality. Why and how do we arrest it and change it is the difficult thing. I think it would be folly to disregard the commentary of some people who have been part of successful environments and cultures when they repeatedly say there is something wrong with ours. Part of the reason Roos was brought here was to embed a strong culture so it has clearly been identified as an issue previously.

48 minutes ago, Undeeterred said:

Completely agree. My comment was about Salem. 

fritsch is not also skinny but he is gutless too; deliberately avoids contact

2 hours ago, Fat Tony said:

This is just spin by media commentators. Our success of failure as a club will not be determined by our 'DNA'. It will be determined by making good decisions in terms of selecting coaches, recruiting players and allocating contracts. And then we will need a healthy dose of luck to win premierships.

Our losses, apart from the Port game, have been almost solely due to a lack of skill. Not softness.

If we continue to confuse the reasons why we are where we are and think it is 'culture', we could end up with Mark Neeld 2.0.

Disagree. Our losses often come down to lack of workrate, not skill. I think this is true across the competition and had been for at least 4 or 5 seasons.

57 minutes ago, Undeeterred said:

Completely agree. My comment was about Salem. 

It was a bit of an offhand comment by Dermie which he was called out on and asked to name names. When pushed on it he mentioned Fritsch only because King had said the same thing a couple of weeks earlier. When pushed further he mentioned Salem and Harmes who he didnt know by name initially. It was a bit if typical Derm bravado that he was called on and then just chucked out a couple of names that wouldn't cause too much controversy.

13 hours ago, Engorged Onion said:

Maybe I am a bit ragey this morning, but here is Port Adelaides Ladder position since 2013 under Ken.

Now if winning games is indicative of good culture (which is isn't, that is just mythologised  and a conceptual way for us to make sense of what drives performance)

I highly doubt there must have been some 'magical' cutural changes between October 2019 and March 2020... 

So if it is not culture, what is it that's propelled the change??

 

55% winning rate.

2013  7th

2014  6th

2015  10th

2016 10th

2017 10th

2018 5th

2019 10th

2020 1st (currently)

 

 

its a lot easier for  coach to change himself than a team of 44 players

 

Thats what Hinkley did

2 hours ago, Fat Tony said:

This is just spin by media commentators. Our success of failure as a club will not be determined by our 'DNA'. It will be determined by making good decisions in terms of selecting coaches, recruiting players and allocating contracts. And then we will need a healthy dose of luck to win premierships.

Our losses, apart from the Port game, have been almost solely due to a lack of skill. Not softness.

If we continue to confuse the reasons why we are where we are and think it is 'culture', we could end up with Mark Neeld 2.0.

The Sydney loss wasn't just a lack of skill, there were workrate issues on display.

The main reason I'm furious at the Sydney loss is that from the start our intensity/workrate were off. Just like the Port game.

23 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

But our wins are only against poorer sides. To beat the better sides we do need to bring high pressure including tackles and 1%ers 

Except we've got two wins over the current top 8, with an opportunity to win a third before the season's done. 

Two wins over the current top 8 is the same number that the Dogs, St Kilda, Collingwood and even Richmond have.

Indeed, no one has more than three wins over the current top 8 except Brisbane (five).

21 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

The Sydney loss wasn't just a lack of skill, there were workrate issues on display.

The main reason I'm furious at the Sydney loss is that from the start our intensity/workrate were off. Just like the Port game.

Except we've got two wins over the current top 8, with an opportunity to win a third before the season's done. 

Two wins over the current top 8 is the same number that the Dogs, St Kilda, Collingwood and even Richmond have.

Indeed, no one has more than three wins over the current top 8 except Brisbane (five).

I rate an undermanned Collingwood as a "poorer" team. Saints was a good win but even so they will struggle to make finals.

6 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I rate an undermanned Collingwood as a "poorer" team. Saints was a good win but even so they will struggle to make finals.

That's fine.

Some might argue West Coast today was undermanned, but I'm sure the Dogs will get credit for the win.

Point is, most sides aren't winning a heap of games against the current top 8, so we're not that far off the mark in that respect.

Where we are far off the mark, IMO, is the ongoing pattern of dropping games where our workrate/intensity is below acceptable levels. Doesn't happen to other sides with the same sort of regularity as it does to us.

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

But our wins are only against poorer sides. To beat the better sides we do need to bring high pressure including tackles and 1%ers 

Disagree mate. Although one-dimensional, St Kilda are a good side and we were half a kick from beating Geelong and Brisbane, two top 4 sides.

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Don't you think though that if our team is mentally fragile, and it has been a feature of our sides for generations, that is exactly what is meant by culture? 

No, I don't. I think our mental fragility is based around a lack of experience. The players haven't got it to click regularly, not because the game plan is too hard to sustain (as I had previously thought), but because they haven't worked out yet how to bring consistent performance and what that feels like. The automation of that and the mental preparation that it takes to bring consistent elite performance in system based sport hasn't been discovered yet.

18 hours ago, Hogan2014 said:

Would be great to hear from Jordan Lewis who come from winning 4 flags plus 3 in a row as to what he saw/felt were the differences in culture between the clubs.. 

We got to get him back into the club ASAP. 

10 hours ago, DeeZee said:

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.

Sorry DZ any little tips points or advice from a legend like Hodge who has a CV our players and Coaches would all be envious of.

I happen to believe Hodge for Off field and Gary Lyon for onfield matters plus a hard taskmaster like Ross Lyon would be about as good as it gets to cover culture football tactics and discipline plus  a much needed game plan that is simple and positive in today's shortened version of AFL 2020.

On 9/5/2020 at 10:57 PM, pitmaster said:

Northey had the solution. It's called a red hot go.

Why i started following the MFC - this man alone