FFS!  What logic is there in taking Pickett off immediately after each goal?  Why Goodwin, why? 

No logic other than the logic of the derp.

He did bugger all when he was on the ground so no harm done really

59 minutes ago, Hellofatime said:

FFS!  What logic is there in taking Pickett off immediately after each goal?  Why Goodwin, why? 

No.

No logic.

I thought he worked really bloody hard tonight. Some really tough gut running and tackles.

He played a pretty solid game compared to others such as Spargo and ANB

I don’t get involved in interchange after goal debates. They’re a waste of time these days.

12 hours ago, Hellofatime said:

FFS!  What logic is there in taking Pickett off immediately after each goal?  Why Goodwin, why? 

You obviously don't watch many games of football if you think Pickett is the only player that comes off after kicking a goal.

No, it's football groupthink. Let's take the player who's fired up, who's got a rush of adrenalin, who's jumping out of his skin to do it again, who might actually do it if the ball goes near him .... let's take him off the ground. The same kind of genius that doesn't believe in practicing goal kicking.

There must be some logic to it. I'd love to know what it is. Serious question. Does anyone know?

I was told by someone in the industry that it was related to hyper-extension. Players kick through it a little more when taking a shot on goal. So benching is a protective measure. Please don't shoot the messenger - sounded like nonsense to me too. 

Pickett kicks a goal. We win the following centre clearance and drive the ball deep to one on one marking contest. Marking contest brings the ball to ground and Pickett is not there to crumb. Makes perfect sense. .

Edited July 25, 20213 yr by John Crow Batty

6 minutes ago, John Crow Batty said:

Pickett kicks a goal. We win the following centre clearance and drive the ball deep to one on one marking contests. Marking contest brings the ball to ground and Pickett is not there to crumb. Makes perfect sense. .

Sounds good on paper, but they have to concentrate on the things that win matches

Picketts goals came after dry spells, so it was probably over time for a rest for him and others anyway 

13 hours ago, Brownie said:

No logic.

I thought he worked really bloody hard tonight. Some really tough gut running and tackles.

He played a pretty solid game compared to others such as Spargo and ANB

With regret, Spargo and ANB were smothered physically and by foot. 

1 hour ago, Skuit said:

I was told by someone in the industry that it was related to hyper-extension. Players kick through it a little more when taking a shot on goal. So benching is a protective measure. Please don't shoot the messenger - sounded like nonsense to me too. 

Some coaches like to be seen as 'decision-makers' and with such a small arsenal of ideas, Goodwin is one of them.

It is one of the things that turns me into a cranky old man. Let forwards be forwards.

Much, much better to have even just a couple of forwards stay on the ground all day patrolling and lurking and making the space their own.

Any 'total volume of running' contribute from forwards bursting all over the ground is a trade off for the extra bench time they take up when they could be getting routine 30 second or one minute 'rests' of low-intensity when the ball is in our defence. The extra bench time opened up would mean midfielders get more, and more frequent, rest.

Meanwhile, having forwards rest in place forces the opposition to keep defenders back in defence, giving us the initiative while still retaining one-on-one targets.

As the great Maurice de Saxe said, "If your argument is that my opponents shall simply adopt the same stratagem, have you not merely proven that my method is best?"

3 minutes ago, Deemania since 56 said:

Some coaches like to be seen as 'decision-makers' and with such a small arsenal of ideas, Goodwin is one of them.

Sure. I agree wholeheartedly about this thing you said. 

There must be a so called physical/rest reason, but personally would much rather try build some momentum and maybe they get two in a row. Then after five mins give a break!

Remembering the Jeff Farmer 9 in a half against the Pies, wouldn’t happen today as would be taken off the ground 8 times!

The long answer is that players have set rotations and are always aware when they need to leave the field. In some cases, a player will know that they are expected to go off the ground during the next break-in-play and that happens to coincide with the break that occurs immediately after they kick a goal. There is a myth that players leave the field quite often after they kick a goal, but this is just a cognitive bias. The cameras will always stay with the player who just kicked a goal. Most of the time they line up back in their normal positions and we don't notice, but occasionally they will go the bench and because this seems weird our brains light up and think "that's strange" and remember the occurence.

With that said, coaches (especially coaches on the bench) should have the awareness that when a player is hot, then they're hot, and they shouldn't mess with momentum. With a player like Kozzie especially, I think it makes a lot of sense to keep them on for at least another inside 50 entry after they've scored. Just look at Cody Weightman's goal shortly after he took that screamer - he clearly had a lot of adrenaline running through him and managed to follow up his superb mark with an important goal. I saw Port Adelaide sense this a few weeks ago with Connor Rozee, when he kicked 4 goals in the first quarter. After the third, we ran to the bench as part of a normal rotation but the coaches sent him back immediately. They recognised that he was running hot and sure enough, he kicked another goal minutes later.