I suspect the Match Committee want to give B Brown a few games in a row when he's finally ready to see how he goes, just like they did with Weideman. They wouldn't want the first one of those games to be when he's not fully fit.

I get it that it seems counter-intuitive to have him as an emergency if he's not fully fit, but I suspect what that means is that if one of Gawn, Jackson or T McDonald isn't able to play, the Match Committee would rather Brown come in rather than Weideman or M Brown as once they're in, how many games in a row should they then be given? That would then keep B Brown out too long.

50 minutes ago, rjay said:

They had the same huge game last week and didn't bring the heat...would have been in the 8 if they beat the Hawks.

True.

But i hope they do bring the heat as I want to watch a good game now that i finally get the chance to watch a game of footy live again. 

One thing i love about where we are at ATM is that the game plan is built for the g and the a clear focus of 'making the g small' as max said after last weeks game. 

It seems a bit counterintuitive, but i reckon our game works well with the extra space at the g becuase if teams try to switch to get around our zone the width means it takes two shoter kicks or one long one to go to the fat side. Both options give us time to get across and cover that opposite wing.

And  each extra kick required to switch or pick their way though us is an opportunity to force a turnover. 

1 hour ago, grazman said:

My biggest concern for the match is that Mumford injures Max with another intentional 'clumsy' act - there I said it so that should nix it!

me too.  Giants know they have to physically hurt us to win.

Any chance of a late change - Brown in for Gawn?

I'm not surprised there is no change this week

Viney coming back allows Trac to spend more minutes inside F50 where he becomes our Dusty 

 

42 minutes ago, DubDee said:

 

Any chance of a late change - Brown in for Gawn?

I have been thinking the same thing.

2 hours ago, Lord Nev said:

We went with an extremely defensive game plan last week. Flooded back in big numbers. Watch the replay and note where players like TMac, Spargo, Kozzy even Fritsch appear a lot of the time. The reason our forwards didn't contribute as many goals is that they were all high up the ground and we scored surging forward together.

It's not particularly great footy to watch, but it won us the game coming off the bye when our form hasn't been great and against an in-form high scoring team.

Essendon were the 2nd highest scoring team so the game plan was to nullify that strength.

One thing that seems to becoming more apparent is that the coaching panel are analysing teams strengths and playing to stop their strengths. 

Our fwd 'connection' is almost secondary.

Gus in his podcast pointed to the fact we held Ess to 57pts and what an achievement that was. Similarly we dismantled the Bulldogs game plan, Richmonds game plan and Geelongs game plan.

GWS have good skills, don't turn the ball over very often but can be lazy on team defence. They have a solid midfield Group including Taranto, Kelly, Hopper, Whitfield etc.

Whitfield gains lots of metres for them and if we can stop him and Greene we go a long way to beating them.

Goodwin clearly think our speedy forward line is the right way to go....

 

7 minutes ago, Left Foot Snap said:

I have been thinking the same thing.

I still wear L plates when it comes to strategy etc. so would you be so kind as to explain why. ?

1 minute ago, WalkingCivilWar said:

I still wear L plates when it comes to strategy etc. so would you be so kind as to explain why. ?

No science to it at all, just a gut feel. B Brown named as emergency, rumours from some that Brown was going to play this week, and Max might need a rest. Would be great if GWS brought the lumbering Mumford thug in to combat Max and he missed last minute on wet day and we got a mobility over match with Jackson and Tmac in the ruck and around the ground.

3 hours ago, poita said:

Our 6 specialist forwards contributed a grand total of 3 goals between them last week, and Goodwin thinks that all is well - the mind boggles.

How many uncontested marks will Haynes & Davis take this week because we are looking for the marking option that doesn't exist?

Forecast is for 60% chance of any rain, with possible rain of 0 - 1mm. Hardly a torrential downpour and certainly no reason to keep Brown out.

Understanding team defence isn’t really your thing is it.

If you wish to look at stats, have a look at our marks and shots inside 50 last week.

The issue was conversion not structure 

Was quietly hoping to see BBB this week, but the selectors get it right most times this year so I’ve learned to question them less 

3 hours ago, Baghdad Bob said:

Charlie’s had a haircut. 

Bob with the big news!

Hope this is not a Samson scenario. 

42 minutes ago, Pennant St Dee said:

Understanding team defence isn’t really your thing is it.

If you wish to look at stats, have a look at our marks and shots inside 50 last week.

The issue was conversion not structure 

Indeed.

We had 14 marks inside 50. Our season average is 12.7. Tick

We had 56 inside 50s against a season average of 55.4. So then you can't discount our marks inside 50 number by arguing we had more inside 50s than we normally do. 

As you say our efficiency inside 50 was poor - 44.6% against a season average of 50.3%.

And a high percentage of our missed shots at goals (eg Tmac, Spargo, Harmes etc) were from shots with little angle, as opposed to being from the boundary, as is often the case.

And many of our missed passes were similarly in the middle lane.

If we had converted our chances and not missed so many easy passes inside 50 we would have won by 5 goals plus. 

The other stat he might want o check out is how many intercept marks the bombers' took inside our 50. Given he reckons the Giants intercepting defenders,  Haynes & Davis, will knock up taking uncontested marks because we are looking for the marking option that don't exist then perhaps, the same should be true of Ridley and Stewart .

I can't find those stats, so perhaps I'm wrong, but my guess is they had bugger all intercept marks - certainly less then they average  

Any predictions on crowd numbers for tomorrow? We should be selling out 25k, but our attendances this year have been well down - even Anzac Eve was well below expectations 

1 hour ago, jnrmac said:

Essendon were the 2nd highest scoring team so the game plan was to nullify that strength.

One thing that seems to becoming more apparent is that the coaching panel are analysing teams strengths and playing to stop their strengths. 

Our fwd 'connection' is almost secondary.

Gus in his podcast pointed to the fact we held Ess to 57pts and what an achievement that was. Similarly we dismantled the Bulldogs game plan, Richmonds game plan and Geelongs game plan.

I reckon that is really good point. And nullifying strengths is good way of describing it too i think.

its not as if we do anything radically different week to week, like say Geelong sometimes do (eg go super slow against some teams, fast against others). We still stick to our model and work to get the 'game on our turn'. But we are really good at mitigating strengths.   

Maxy mentioned straight after the game, in his on ground interview that they were a high scoring side and we did well to keep their score low, as did goody in his presser. It was clearly a key focal point coming into the match.

Like we did against the dogs, one way we achieved that goal was being super focused on blocking the corridor and at marks/frees having a player stand on corridor side at 45 degree angle (in addition to he player on the mark) making a kick inside risky.  

We have probably improved in this area from a coaching perspective, and given Yze was in charge of opposition analysis at the hawks (i think) no doubt he has brought some great knowledge.

But i reckon a big tick needs to go to the players as a benefit of them all being focused on doing their role and the team first things is that they are better able to implement instructions and strategies designed to nullify the strengths of the opposition. 

1 hour ago, Left Foot Snap said:

No science to it at all, just a gut feel. B Brown named as emergency, rumours from some that Brown was going to play this week, and Max might need a rest. Would be great if GWS brought the lumbering Mumford thug in to combat Max and he missed last minute on wet day and we got a mobility over match with Jackson and Tmac in the ruck and around the ground.

Well I don't want Mummy beating up on Jackson either.
Jackson will jump over him a few times and Mummy will try to negate that the only way he knows how.

11 minutes ago, Kick_It_To_Pickett said:

Any predictions on crowd numbers for tomorrow? We should be selling out 25k, but our attendances this year have been well down - even Anzac Eve was well below expectations 

15k tops i would think

57 minutes ago, Kick_It_To_Pickett said:

Any predictions on crowd numbers for tomorrow? We should be selling out 25k, but our attendances this year have been well down - even Anzac Eve was well below expectations 

12-14K. It's going to be a very small crowd. The fact that we're continually in and out of lockdown and constantly under crowd restrictions is really turning the non "die hards" off this year. Plus the ticketing issues and the fact that many people have gotten into a routine of watching at home since 2020.

No club will be selling out their games anytime soon. Essendon couldn't even get 20K to their game last week which is surprising given their supporters were as up and about since their glory days of 2000.

 

3 hours ago, jnrmac said:

Essendon were the 2nd highest scoring team so the game plan was to nullify that strength.

One thing that seems to becoming more apparent is that the coaching panel are analysing teams strengths and playing to stop their strengths. 

Our fwd 'connection' is almost secondary.

Gus in his podcast pointed to the fact we held Ess to 57pts and what an achievement that was. Similarly we dismantled the Bulldogs game plan, Richmonds game plan and Geelongs game plan.

GWS have good skills, don't turn the ball over very often but can be lazy on team defence. They have a solid midfield Group including Taranto, Kelly, Hopper, Whitfield etc.

Whitfield gains lots of metres for them and if we can stop him and Greene we go a long way to beating them.

Goodwin clearly think our speedy forward line is the right way to go....

I agree with this. We're working on how to defend against any side we play against and how to score from transition. That's sustainable football if it can be adjusted to our opponents' game style, and mostly this year that's worked.

To the list of teams we've dismantled I'd add Brisbane, but obviously only after half time. But in the last two months they've been able to get on top of everyone they've played, the started doing it to us in the first half too, but when we reset we clearly had learned a few things and the way we hit them in the second half completely destroyed their ball movement, took their forwards out of the game, and generated 97 points of our own.

1 hour ago, binman said:

Indeed.

We had 14 marks inside 50. Our season average is 12.7. Tick

We had 56 inside 50s against a season average of 55.4. So then you can't discount our marks inside 50 number by arguing we had more inside 50s than we normally do. 

As you say our efficiency inside 50 was poor - 44.6% against a season average of 50.3%.

And a high percentage of our missed shots at goals (eg Tmac, Spargo, Harmes etc) were from shots with little angle, as opposed to being from the boundary, as is often the case.

And many of our missed passes were similarly in the middle lane.

If we had converted our chances and not missed so many easy passes inside 50 we would have won by 5 goals plus. 

The other stat he might want o check out is how many intercept marks the bombers' took inside our 50. Given he reckons the Giants intercepting defenders,  Haynes & Davis, will knock up taking uncontested marks because we are looking for the marking option that don't exist then perhaps, the same should be true of Ridley and Stewart .

I can't find those stats, so perhaps I'm wrong, but my guess is they had bugger all intercept marks - certainly less then they average  

Stewart had 3 intercept marks and Ridley 2.

For comparison, Lever had 5 and May 4.

Also Fritsch, Harmes, Jackson, Petracca and Spargo had 2 marks inside 50 each. 

30 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

Stewart had 3 intercept marks and Ridley 2.

For comparison, Lever had 5 and May 4.

Also Fritsch, Harmes, Jackson, Petracca and Spargo had 2 marks inside 50 each. 

Thanks TU

So not many intercepts marks then and really good spread of dees players marking inside our 50.

Out of interest where di you find the stats.

59 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

12-14K. It's going to be a very small crowd.

only around 9k at Richmond's game last night

Shame that the weather is starting to turn nasty.

If you are a member and you are free tomorrow afternoon, turn up! Home crowd is a big advantage and every week we can go watch a game live, is one week closer to another lockdown. Make the most of it while it lasts.

Even if its going to be wet, there will be that many vacant seats, you can just move under cover. 

2 hours ago, whatwhat say what said:

15k tops i would think

Suspect you are right. I don’t feel the club had been particularly proactive in enticing fans to come along. I understand the reasons why there are very few ppl going, particularly when you have a large group you wish to go with, the system is a nightmare . I just reckon they could be a bit more public with urging fans to attend. We are top of the friggin ladder! It sucks that we can’t have a normal crowd at the moment 

24 minutes ago, Kick_It_To_Pickett said:

Suspect you are right. I don’t feel the club had been particularly proactive in enticing fans to come along. I understand the reasons why there are very few ppl going, particularly when you have a large group you wish to go with, the system is a nightmare . I just reckon they could be a bit more public with urging fans to attend. We are top of the friggin ladder! It sucks that we can’t have a normal crowd at the moment 

Is marketing expenditure part of the soft cap? Even if it's not, the necessary budget cuts might have reduced our PR team and with it the ability to promote games and other activities.

13 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Is marketing expenditure part of the soft cap? Even if it's not, the necessary budget cuts might have reduced our PR team and with it the ability to promote games and other activities.

Not happy to suggest it, but, for games like this - it'd be great if they could be played at more intimate grounds that we could fill and get to easily; Princess Park / Port Melbourne Oval - other?

2 hours ago, binman said:

Thanks TU

So not many intercepts marks then and really good spread of dees players marking inside our 50.

Out of interest where di you find the stats.

The AFL's website has this information now. Go to the game's page (for this one it's here: https://www.afl.com.au/matches/3108) and then go to Player Stats, and use the advanced stats to find intercept marks and possession (as well as pressure acts and plenty of other info).

4 minutes ago, D Rev said:

Not happy to suggest it, but, for games like this - it'd be great if they could be played at more intimate grounds that we could fill and get to easily; Princess Park / Port Melbourne Oval - other?

Nah [censored] that.

The MCG is our home ground. We deserve to play where we want to play.

At any rate, there's not a huge difference between the crowd we'll get tomorrow and what we'd get under "normal" conditions.