On 7/18/2021 at 7:40 PM, bing181 said:

One of Demonland's meaningless platitudes, trotted out every time we lose.

That’s not entirely a knock on Goody, Clarko is a damn good coach and his players executed the game plan they came up with. Even with Clarko putting the game on his terms the cattle we had out there should have been able to get the job done. 

All teams are predictable and everyone knows how everyone plays.

These coaching groups are all fairly smart and will have an understanding of how to beat sides.

Sides back their structures to beat the opposition. This is a tough competition and if you’re slightly off it impacts your structures. But kick straight in those performances against those lower sides and we win.
 

However wins sometimes paper over cracks, which (despite what posters think) footy departments will identify and work to evolve.  When sides expose a weakness it allows you to make some tweaks.

The Dogs will have a plan to counter us sitting on Libba this week

 

9 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

 

 

Ranked 1st out of players classed as ruckmen for hitout win %.

Ranked 16th out of players classed as ruckmen for hitout to advantage %

 

2 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

 

Ranked 1st out of players classed as ruckmen for hitout win %.

Ranked 16th out of players classed as ruckmen for hitout to advantage %

 

Ugly stat unfortunately. 

18 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

 

Ranked 1st out of players classed as ruckmen for hitout win %.

Ranked 16th out of players classed as ruckmen for hitout to advantage %

 

Watch some here try to spin that.

All the stats on "On the couch" and First Crack are damning about our pressure dropping, off, our transitioning from defence, our poor clearance work, no advantage from our ruck dominance (in fact the opposite) etc But I love how some come here and say 'gee we're still on top'

Its blindingly obvious we haven't been playing well for 6 to 8 weeks bar some good form against Port.

 

4 hours ago, Lord Nev said:

 

Ranked 1st out of players classed as ruckmen for hitout win %.

Ranked 16th out of players classed as ruckmen for hitout to advantage %

 

Unfortunately that's a really poor stat and big room for improvement. It's been that way for a long time with opposition sides winning clearances despite Max's dominance in the hit outs

5 hours ago, Lord Nev said:

 

Ranked 1st out of players classed as ruckmen for hitout win %.

Ranked 16th out of players classed as ruckmen for hitout to advantage %

 

But many say clearances aren’t a problem.

It’s why we can’t seem to get a run-on against teams, we always keep them in the game by allowing them first-use of the ball at ball-ups.

https://www.theage.com.au/podcast/the-age-real-footy-podcast/not-a-team-that-i-feel-you-can-trust-20210719-p58b1e.html

2 hours ago, Clint Bizkit said:

But many say clearances aren’t a problem.

It’s why we can’t seem to get a run-on against teams, we always keep them in the game by allowing them first-use of the ball at ball-ups.

It's a good point @Clint Bizkit

So if we're working off the hypothesis, that as a FD and team, we are prepared to risk losing first use, due to pressuring the opposition and getting a dump kick, and feeling that particular option works more consistently (when it occurs, getting ball in d50 and working back for a cleaner delivery into the F50 (rather than first use and pressured kick), then the inverse for our opponents is also true, hence our back 6 performing very well throughout the season (with added bonus pressure from the mids on the kicks entering the D50).

Whilst I'd rather us blow teams out of the water - and to be fair - I'm not sure what happened after 1/4 time in the game (but as noted Hawthorns pressure gauge was well up), I'm not worried about it.

So what does this mean for Gawn and the midfield brigade for being 16th to hitouts for advantage?

Well, I'd imagine it's a reaction to 2017-2020 opposition trying to shark (and consistently doing well at it) all taps to advantage from Gawn - as the assumption was made - Gawn is ultimately going to win 80-90% of taps, so lets set up that way as the opposition.

That then nullified our midfielders propensity to win the ball... 

As a reaction to that (as well as other factors, being beaten on the outside)  - Goodwin and co have set up the midfielders in a way whereby if they DO get the ball from a tap - great, but also if they don't win the clearance - damage isn't huge.

I'd argue the evidence is there, we're on top of the ladder, no team has blown US out of the water, up to the bye we were on 'record' to becoming a team that had the best (least) ever % of D50 entries to conversions.

We've lost (and drawn) 4 games by a total of 29 points - that'd be 7.25 points a game.

And whilst the evidence is teams are always kept in it, which always feels uncomfortable - I believe this style will hold us in good stead for the finals over the next 3-4 years (should we make it, injuries would be my only concern).

The game always tightens up in finals, it's more attritional, systems win, not individual players, but individual players can influence - and we've got (May and Lever, Petracca and Oliver, and probably Pickett, and perhaps Brown and Tmac, as those forwards who could light it up). 

As bizarre as it sounds, I'm not worried about the hit outs to advantage stat, because teams have been counteracting Max for years, and we've had to find a way to counteract their positioning, rather than trying to get first use at all costs, and been blown out of the water on the outside as we've been done for  4-5 years.

It's not sexy, but it's smart coaching. 

Edited July 19, 20214 yr by Engorged Onion

8 hours ago, jnrmac said:

Watch some here try to spin that.

All the stats on "On the couch" and First Crack are damning about our pressure dropping, off, our transitioning from defence, our poor clearance work, no advantage from our ruck dominance (in fact the opposite) etc But I love how some come here and say 'gee we're still on top'

Its blindingly obvious we haven't been playing well for 6 to 8 weeks bar some good form against Port.

 

I watched on the Couch last night and I too thought those stats were damning. 

At a time where it's so crucial to get wins now and stay top 4, it's probably the worst time also in not being in good form.

Some of the good premiership teams are usually now on a good run or timing their winning streak, yet we are struggling to beat a severely undermanned 17th team in the comp.

I have some genuine concerns.

20 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

I watched on the Couch last night and I too thought those stats were damning. 

At a time where it's so crucial to get wins now and stay top 4, it's probably the worst time also in not being in good form.

Some of the good premiership teams are usually now on a good run or timing their winning streak, yet we are struggling to beat a severely undermanned 17th team in the comp.

I have some genuine concerns.

It's all going to depend how we perform this week. Roll the Dogs and we will be flying again. If they get their ball movement going and cruise to an easy win its panic stations. A close fought game that we lose? Frustrating but not the end of the world.

The King article gives the perfect example of what a few have been banging on about for weeks. We are playing a negative brand of footy, sitting back of centre and letting the opposition come at us. It's designed to allow Lever and May to control the ball and tempo of the game, however when we are a little off or teams really come at us, it falls apart. It's utilizing a strength but an incredibly risky strategy.

I'm very confident that our mids (Gawn, Trac and Oliver) pay absolutely no attention to what the opposition are doing or are instructed that way, because we were zigging when Max was zagging at an extremely high percentage of the centre bounces on the weekend.

Hawthorn gave it everything and exposed us, they just were not good enough across the board to actually win the game. Collingwood and Adelaide did the same, but got over the line.

I don't care if our record is good against the top teams and we 'get up' for those games, it's only a matter of time before we don't and it would be heartbreaking if that were week 1 or week 1 and 2 of finals.

 

 

9 hours ago, Lord Nev said:

Ranked 1st out of players classed as ruckmen for hitout win %.

Ranked 16th out of players classed as ruckmen for hitout to advantage %

It appears in a lot of matches, and not just our ones, that the ruckmen don't seem to hit the ball anywhere in particular, it just drops to their feet or within a metre of them, then a pile-on ensues. There appear to be very few "set plays" where a ruckman can put the ball down the throat of one of his mids, which is something I would have assumed would be gold standard for a midfield coach.

15 hours ago, bingers said:

The result was described as a massive upset.

Was anyone here really surprised? I wasn't. 

Yawn  Me either! Hawks fan i know wouldnt believe me that it was a danger game

Dees supporters just know Right?

7 minutes ago, BW511 said:

The King article gives the perfect example of what a few have been banging on about for weeks. We are playing a negative brand of footy, sitting back of centre and letting the opposition come at us. It's designed to allow Lever and May to control the ball and tempo of the game, however when we are a little off or teams really come at us, it falls apart. It's utilizing a strength but an incredibly risky strategy.

I'm very confident that our mids (Gawn, Trac and Oliver) pay absolutely no attention to what the opposition are doing or are instructed that way, because we were zigging when Max was zagging at an extremely high percentage of the centre bounces on the weekend.

Hawthorn gave it everything and exposed us, they just were not good enough across the board to actually win the game. Collingwood and Adelaide did the same, but got over the line.

I don't care if our record is good against the top teams and we 'get up' for those games, it's only a matter of time before we don't and it would be heartbreaking if that were week 1 or week 1 and 2 of finals.

 

 

Yes the more defensive our setups the more we lose.

Goodwin must attack from the first bounce and trust the midfield

He is still a long way from a good coach in my opinion and this is a major weakness

1 minute ago, Kent said:

Yes the more defensive our setups the more we lose.

Goodwin must attack from the first bounce and trust the midfield

He is still a long way from a good coach in my opinion and this is a major weakness

There has been very little recent talk of our game being a 'front-half game' either.

We definitely have a soccer style game plan and a very physically taxing one to employ for a whole year, to the level required.

 

24 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

It's all going to depend how we perform this week. Roll the Dogs and we will be flying again. If they get their ball movement going and cruise to an easy win its panic stations. A close fought game that we lose? Frustrating but not the end of the world.

All good and well to say we're flying if we win. We beat Port Adelaide and yet we dished up an extremely poor performance the week after?

On recent form we could easily roll the Dogs and lose to GC and the Crows the week after.

1 hour ago, BW511 said:

There has been very little recent talk of our game being a 'front-half game' either.

We definitely have a soccer style game plan and a very physically taxing one to employ for a whole year, to the level required.

 

You make a good point. Our game is soccer style but more like the defensive style Italians used to play. The Catenaccio style they played translates to chaining the opposition. It worked very well against top ranked teams but often struggled against lower ranked teams. It did have success though. Italy won the 1982 and 2006 World Cups despite struggling against weaker sides in those tournaments as well as other deep finishes. It wasn’t a perfect game as it let the opposition freedom to make the play and move forward more often and left a lot to chance and luck that they didn’t score if the system broke down. At this stage our game plan is still working or else we wouldn’t be on top but the true test is in its resilience as we get towards the finals. That will be the definitive  test. As with us the style always kept the supporters in a state of perpetual anxiety.

Edited July 19, 20214 yr by John Crow Batty

16 hours ago, bingers said:

The result was described as a massive upset.

Was anyone here really surprised? I wasn't. 

No I wasn't surprised because we've been pathetic against bottom 4 sides this year. We even conceded a half time lead to a side that would not have been able to beat the Nar Nar Goon ressies at the time (although they have since improved dramatically)

Yes, I was surprised we couldn't even slump over the victory line when I looked at Hawthorn's injury list. If the players haven't already yet, they deserve an absolute roasting from the coaching staff and a few home truths need to be dished out. We are playing like a 9th-12 side since the Brisbane triumph, and we will be lucky to win a final at this rate. 

 

26 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

All good and well to say we're flying if we win. We beat Port Adelaide and yet we dished up an extremely poor performance the week after?

On recent form we could easily roll the Dogs and lose to GC and the Crows the week after.

I'd prefer to be consistently applying ourselves rather than bipolar Dees.

13 minutes ago, Superunknown said:

I'd prefer to be consistently applying ourselves rather than bipolar Dees.

100%

3 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

100%

I'm ok with losing games so long as the umpiring is reasonable (mistakes happen, but...Adelaide) and we turn up. ie if we play honest footy and are beaten by a better team, that's ok. But the losses so far have been pretty bad.

9 hours ago, jnrmac said:

Watch some here try to spin that.

All the stats on "On the couch" and First Crack are damning about our pressure dropping, off, our transitioning from defence, our poor clearance work, no advantage from our ruck dominance (in fact the opposite) etc But I love how some come here and say 'gee we're still on top'

Its blindingly obvious we haven't been playing well for 6 to 8 weeks bar some good form against Port.

 

But most of these stats were the same when we were 11-1.

We've been mid-table for hit outs to advantage and clearances all season, it's not like we were dominant and have fallen away.

So the two areas that are of real concern IMO are pressure and transition, and for mine pressure takes the cake - it's elite when we're the hunters, against a strong side, etc., but it's nowhere near as good when we're the hunted and our lesser opponent throws caution to the wind. I don't consider our ball movement to be a big concern - we're generating plenty of inside 50s, marks inside 50 and shots on goal, and if we were nailing our easier set shots we'd probably have beaten GWS and Hawthorn.

By leaving 10 out of 12 premiership points on the table vs Adelaide, Collingwood and Hawthorn, we're forcing ourselves to bring elite pressure every time we play a top 8 side, including again this week. I have faith we can do it, but one slip up vs the Dogs, West Coast or Geelong and we could well lose our top 4 spot.

2 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

By leaving 10 out of 12 premiership points on the table vs Adelaide, Collingwood and Hawthorn, we're forcing ourselves to bring elite pressure every time we play a top 8 side, including again this week. I have faith we can do it, but one slip up vs the Dogs, West Coast or Geelong and we could well lose our top 4 spot.

This x 1000.

We *should* have banked Adelaide, Pies and let's say Hawks. That's top 2 locked up. Complacency/hubris.