There is all this talk about changing the team tactics depending on the ground.

For example, using "runs and curry" at AAMI and Subiaco.

My question is, do teams like Sydney and West Coast change their tactics depending on what ground they are playing and who they are playing?

I haven't seen enough of these two teams recently, so if there is anyone out there who has, is there a notable shift in their game plans?

There is all this talk about changing the team tactics depending on the ground.

For example, using "runs and curry" at AAMI and Subiaco.

My question is, do teams like Sydney and West Coast change their tactics depending on what ground they are playing and who they are playing?

I haven't seen enough of these two teams recently, so if there is anyone out there who has, is there a notable shift in their game plans?

The thing about this is that i dont mind melb playing run and carry on large ovals. I believe, and u may think im being negitive but my thought is that if we play our normal style (like we have at the G for years) at AAMI or Subi, then we will loose. If we play a run and carry i believe we can either win or loose. Therefor playing our normal game at larger ovals will have no positive effect. Youy can say that im being negitive but thats reality and y we have lost at AAMI and Subi in recent years.Watchin g hawks v melb in the preseason i was appaled to see the run and carry however after reading the age and realising ND was practising for larger grounds i didnt mind. It does matter tho when 4 points are up for grabs.

At the end of the day i think we should play our normal style at the G. Thats the kick from defence to a leading backman. Switch the ball to the centre square. Run and carry to the 50 and kick long either to leading forward or a pack mark (where there is not 1 melb player to 3 oposition ie Saints game). At larger grounds, run and carry and have a chance at winning. We play our G like game there, well were 4 points worse off.

The thing about this is that...

All I want to know is, do Sydney and West Coast change their tactics so dramatically depending on where they play?

I dont think any particular plan works..or doesnt.. elements of plans may be handy etc but there are 2 teams on the filed; and it depends on who's in the accendancy onthe day as to how you play the game. Its interactive. One team cant play a particular style in isolation. It has to modify it on the run ( literally ) to adjust to it seffectiveness at the time.

This THIS is what we dont do... we keep on going blindly when its obviousl a particular style is failing. And it comes back to teh bloke at the helm...he's not adjusting anywhere near quick enough. He is oft to say he has faith in his charges, quite applaudable; but pointless if they arent going n the right direction or method, thats what he's paid the big bucks for...to orchestrate and coach..EFFECTIVELY

All I want to know is, do Sydney and West Coast change their tactics so dramatically depending on where they play?

Im not sure that it varies much on where they play, but more who they play. But then again it doesnt vary much, I think that thier success over the past years has been because they dont change, the team playing them does to combat thier style. I guess this allows them to perfect thier styles.

I'm not sure if this will help this debate much, but I have seen a lot of Sydney over the years (being up here) and honestly they don't particularly change their "style" much from one match to the next on whatever field they play, because they know what works for them, but what they can do, or at least try to do, with obvious recent success, is adapt within the course of a game, and last night was another example.

They do have a "style" (for want of a better word) that suits the talents that they have (and have worn the criticism for that), but what they do do is they tend to make teams play their way, and not allow them to push their own individual plan, and this is especially evident on a small ground like the SCG.

But after watching yet another nail biter last night (on a far bigger ground than the SCG) it was fairly clear that they changed, if only a little, after half time. They were being beaten out of the middle and their normal plan was quite obviously not working, or not being executed properly, and something had to give. Don't get me wrong the Swans were not the better team on the night and were generally awful in front of goal, but they did manage to push a contest in a game that was running away from them. And to do this they altered their perspective, and executed it better, if only a little.

So I guess to me, after boring you all with my ramble, the ability of being able to adapt, no matter how little, within the course of a game is an extremely important quality in a football team. And that is something that Sydney can do and something we need to learn how to do.

Of course all of this is just my opinion, and I hope it made sense :D !!!

Of course all of this is just my opinion, and I hope it made sense :D !!!

That's exactly what I was trying to find out.

Thanks QueenC.

That's exactly what I was trying to find out.

Thanks QueenC.

You're welcome CB.....

I'm glad I could be of some assistance to you !!!

All I want to know is, do Sydney and West Coast change their tactics so dramatically depending on where they play?

I haven't read the thread yet so I apologize if the query has been answered

The answer though is yes.

Look at last years GF and last nights game, the Eagles employed a flooding tactic more against the Swans that they have against any other team.

I haven't read the thread yet so I apologize if the query has been answered

The answer though is yes.

Look at last years GF and last nights game, the Eagles employed a flooding tactic more against the Swans that they have against any other team.

I missed their game the other night and my memory of the Grand Final is a little sketchy.

Also, when you don't follow a team so close, it's hard to notice any changes they may make.

All I want to know is, do Sydney and West Coast change their tactics so dramatically depending on where they play?

im sick of hearing of sydney there is no team in the AFL I hate more overrated peice of crap.... if we played like syndey i would have to turn to folling melbourens storm (rugby).... im sick of u comparing us too sydney coz we are not like them and i hope we never will be.... apart from the fact they won a premiership recently. but still u get my point.

i belive the fact syndey are soo good is based pureley on confidence and consistancy.... any team can beat sydney on their day.