if the games continue to be played at a faster pace with more of an emphasis on kicking,  we're in big trouble 

4 minutes ago, one_demon said:

if the games continue to be played at a faster pace with more of an emphasis on kicking,  we're in big trouble 

So usually people go to the effort of providing a bit of context to claims - even seemingly over the top ones. 

Probably best to wait until we have played a game or 7 i think. We have a few weapons of our own pace-wise. 

You might be right about the kicking part though.

Like Seinfeld, here is a fantastic example of a thread about nothing. 

People starting to treat DL like Facebook more and more by the day.  

33 minutes ago, Smokey said:

Like Seinfeld, here is a fantastic example of a thread about nothing. 

The thread is about how the game has changed and how it may not suit our list or the way we play

Edited March 19, 20214 yr by one_demon

Let me add some meat to these bones. I believe the combined effect of the reduced rotations, the extended kick-in space provided to the man kicking in following the scoring of a behind, and the man-on-the-mark rule will see the end of the zone defence. Players instead will be expected to play man-on-man. If I'm right, I think that will be good for the game. Whether it will be good for us, I have no idea.

Discuss. 

I too watched Carlton and thought 'damn, maybe another team thats gone past us' 

But let's wait and see.

 

 

20 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Let me add some meat to these bones. I believe the combined effect of the reduced rotations, the extended kick-in space provided to the man kicking in following the scoring of a behind, and the man-on-the-mark rule will see the end of the zone defence. Players instead will be expected to play man-on-man. If I'm right, I think that will be good for the game. Whether it will be good for us, I have no idea.

Discuss. 

Thank you for a kind  and considered response

Fatigue will pay a big part on skills for all teams the last quarter last night showed that the skills were terrible for both sides, It will come down to how well you can win the ball back, Richmond being the best 

If the opposition kick more goals than us, we’re in trouble.

Fitness mattered a lot in the Thursday night game. 

Taking only the first half of each quarter;  Carlton 7 goals,  Richmond 4 Goals.

Taking only the second half of each quarter;  Carlton 2 goals, Richmond 11 goals.

(Carlton also had a goal so close to the middle of a quarter I didn't want to split it)

 

That's pretty decisive.  I'll choose to take a little optimism out of it because as a team even if our overall skill level isn't so grand, it doesn't seem to get much worse with fatigue!

2 hours ago, one_demon said:

if the games continue to be played at a faster pace with more of an emphasis on kicking,  we're in big trouble 

 

46 minutes ago, one_demon said:

The thread is about how the game has changed and how it may not suit our list or the way we play

Thanks for clarifying that.  At first it seemed like you just started a whole new thread to vent some pessimism.

Less rotations is bound to have a significant impact. I’m hoping our superior fitness gives us an edge here.

Of course there’ll be unintended consequences and coaches will adjust. I think it’s going to be a really interesting season in terms of how the game changes and evolves.

This is why we drafted in quality ball users in Bowey and Laurie. 

we have May, Lever, Rivers, Bowey, Salem down back. All good kicks 

Trac, Fristch, Melksham are critical to our connection from def - mid - fwd and we are a bit light on in this area. 

guys like Jones, Spargo, and Kozzi need to get their hands on the ball and provide good inside 50’s

so overall we don’t excel in this area but we are ok and building. 

Does appears to be a faster moving game, it could benefit us.

We have been "red mist" for a while and have worked on turning it down. We should be able to control the tempo.

Ball moving quickly into our defence will be best served by a combination of zone (sweepers on the flanks) and man on man. A bit of both ways I reckon.

Zone, for the bomb, get out of trouble or no time to lift the eyes kicks, and to fill the lead into space. 

Man on man against the dangerous and running "hot" players

Good interceptors, zone position players, require eye on the ball, as well as their man and communicating well with their team mates.

A stable back-line will have the cohesion necessary to implement a bit of both. I think we are in that category, so long as the midfield run both ways to pick up their opposites.  

Our forward-line will benefit from the quick entry as we seem to struggle with finding separation.

Hoping we don't just bomb it in and our general skills particularly when under pressure have improved. 

I think in 2019 we kicked goals in the time-on period. So fatigue factors will benefit us. We are more an endurance then a speedster team.

 

Edited March 19, 20214 yr by kev martin

i agree, no around the ground ball ups last night... we're f*ed

3 hours ago, one_demon said:

if the games continue to be played at a faster pace with more of an emphasis on kicking,  we're in big trouble 

Do yourself a favour and dont look at the selected team

4 hours ago, one_demon said:

if the games continue to be played at a faster pace with more of an emphasis on kicking,  we're in big trouble 

Ironically its called "football", the new man on the mark rule does change movement, how will we adjust. 

1 hour ago, DubDee said:

This is why we drafted in quality ball users in Bowey and Laurie. 

we have May, Lever, Rivers, Bowey, Salem down back. All good kicks 

Trac, Fristch, Melksham are critical to our connection from def - mid - fwd and we are a bit light on in this area. 

guys like Jones, Spargo, and Kozzi need to get their hands on the ball and provide good inside 50’s

so overall we don’t excel in this area but we are ok and building. 

Errrr Bowey and Laurie are not playing

2 minutes ago, Kent said:

Errrr Bowey and Laurie are not playing

No [censored]. Just mentioning that we are trying to address the issue. They are no ready to play just yet. Hopefully we’ll see one or both in a few weeks

4 minutes ago, DubDee said:

No [censored]. Just mentioning that we are trying to address the issue. They are no ready to play just yet. Hopefully we’ll see one or both in a few weeks

You reckon that will before or after the demise of Goodwin. Issue should have been addressed long before this in my view

8 minutes ago, Kent said:

You reckon that will before or after the demise of Goodwin. Issue should have been addressed long before this in my view

Hard to say. Buckley and Hardwick survived years of no finals and poor performance and tuned it around. We have been a contested team for years, hard to turn around quickly. Guys like May and Kozzi also help

3 hours ago, ProperDee said:

If the opposition kick more goals than us, we’re in trouble.

Not if it is only one more goal and we kick 7 points more than them.

i hate concerns, people who use the word "concerns/ed and/or appropriate/inapprpriate".

Edited March 19, 20214 yr by Biffen

Pace in a game is mainly about skill. All teams have quick and slow players it’s skills that make the difference here. The dogs play 14 midfielders, dominated tonight but still had Collingwood been a little more level headed on 3 or 4 occasions they could of easily got up. I’m not convinced by the dogs as yet and they’re the latest team seen as “fast” We have a very skilled back half and our mids are far from shabby. It’s run and spread we’ve struggled with and forward connections. I’m hoping we can split the ledger in the first 10 rounds and then get Brown, Weideman, Hibberd and a pre 2020 Melksham. That’s when I think we’ll be able to take it up to the best. Yes I want to beat Freo but it’s not season defining by any means. If the players have learnt a bit over summer from and if Yze and Choco are helping we’ll be right in this year. Go Demons unleash hell

Edited March 19, 20214 yr by Roost it far