Matthew Lloyd said this morning on the sunday footy show you'd go crazy being a forward at Melbourne.

But yeah Jackson was leading into the pocket & I don't know why. 

Don't even get me started when gawn or Jackson & Brown all fly up for the same mark

The Age wrap up specifically highlights the continued bombing to the pocket

36 minutes ago, dees189227 said:

Matthew Lloyd said this morning on the sunday footy show you'd go crazy being a forward at Melbourne.

But yeah Jackson was leading into the pocket & I don't know why. 

Don't even get me started when gawn or Jackson & Brown all fly up for the same mark

 

21 minutes ago, Superunknown said:

The Age wrap up specifically highlights the continued bombing to the pocket

So everyone in the media especially a past champion of the game that knows forward craft better then anyone (Lloyd), knows this is a flawed system and have voiced this concer all year.

Yet we've done nothing at all in rectifying this.

Cool.

Edited September 4, 20222 yr by dazzledavey36

7 hours ago, Demon Disciple said:

We don’t play the G all that well. Its deep wings and flanks allow for teams to switch with ease and then run and gun or just pick through our defence. Why not go with a 1:1 setup.

I don't buy this. Optus Stadium has similar dimensions and we play it very well. The problem is we play a congested game on the MCG and target the flanks which limits our drive and effectively neutralises Langdon, Hunt and Brayshaw. We seem to organically without thinking target the MCC wing which is historically "our wing" but we always seem more dangerous in the AFL reserve wing (ie. Langdon's wing). When we play through the corridor we look super dangerous otherwise it's a hope that we'll get drive from the stoppage. 

We weren't terrible on Friday but there has to be something about losing to these same teams on the SAME ground.

2 minutes ago, praha said:

I don't buy this. Optus Stadium has similar dimensions and we play it very well. The problem is we play a congested game on the MCG and target the flanks which limits our drive and effectively neutralises Langdon, Hunt and Brayshaw. We seem to organically without thinking target the MCC wing which is historically "our wing" but we always seem more dangerous in the AFL reserve wing (ie. Langdon's wing). When we play through the corridor we look super dangerous otherwise it's a hope that we'll get drive from the stoppage. 

We weren't terrible on Friday but there has to be something about losing to these same teams on the SAME ground.

I wonder though, is it the ground or the quality of opposition? Teams we’ve lost to:

5th, 3rd x2, 4th x2

All good teams around our mark.

It's great locking the ball in the 50. Helps a lot, but we need to be able to score as well. 

The dumb kick to the pocket is a result of moving the ball to slowly round the boundary, the only time we won’t do this is if there is options to hit up which typically won’t be the case if we go slowly round the boundary. If you compare the lions game to the swans in one we had free players on the lead to kick to the other we had no space so the kick to the pocket is the only option.

Some are posters defending the long-bomb deep to the left-hand pocket tactic because 'it won us the premiership". So I went back and looked at where the GF goals were kicked from.

 

Food for thought.

It’s not the strategy that’s issue it was simply our execution. Basic skill error u der more perceived pressure than actual pressure. This meant none of the easier faster transition goals came off ie that diabolical run in final Qtr where Spargo Melksham nuffed it. Salem was incredibly quiet and Melksham missed several getable chances whereby swabs took theirs. Simples 

14 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

 

So everyone in the media especially a past champion of the game that knows forward craft better then anyone (Lloyd), knows this is a flawed system and have voiced this concer all year.

Yet we've done nothing at all in rectifying this.

Cool.

I think the current problem, with playing certain sides has emanated from winning a flag with a certain method.

IMO this has allowed the FD to become sort of arrogant/stubborn, in that they refuse to change the method/game plan/selection in any way to suit the current circumstances, which are different to last year.

We don't have a fit Tom Mac. We don't seem to win last quarters. We don't seem to be applying as much pressure and for as long. We are susceptible to pressure being applied to us. Our disposal efficiency is down. Our fitness may not be at the same level as last year. Many players have suffered injuries, or are out of form. We haven't blooded any new players to improve depth experience. Rival Coaches know our game plan and have worked out tactics to deal with our game plan. Rival Coaches have said we are very predictable and their players are coached as to what we will do. We appear to be slower than last year.

The arrogance/stubbornness, comes from apparently not accepting that our game plan may not be what it was last year, as a result of the above factors and probably more I haven't mentioned and just sticking to the mantra of "our game plan will win the day if we do it better. "

Well maybe it can't anymore, because it has been worked out, or we simply can't do it any better because of the factors above and others.

Then again, we could be in a PF after friday night and that is a pretty good result.

2 minutes ago, TRIGON said:

Some are posters defending the long-bomb deep to the left-hand pocket tactic because 'it won us the premiership". So I went back and looked at where the GF goals were kicked from.

 

Food for thought.

Dropping eyes and faster transition where player runs from middle after vacuum created by fwds leading — exactly what we weren’t getting again Friday night due to perceived pressure and reluctance to take the risk and lower eyes Plus none of our better kicks getting enough ball through middle for final kick (Spargo, Brayshaw, Trac, Salem) instead it was left to others who’s predication is to kick longer (hunt, clarry, Viney, Sparrow, Ed) all this can be eradicated quickly and few straight kicks would’ve allowed perceived pressure to drop and the flow-on effect would’ve been dramatic!!! Scoreboard pressure was our final insurmountable enemy.

If we don’t replace our Forward coach this season we are more than likely to keep on with the same crud. 
An ex ruckman that devised a game plan that involves kicking it long to a resting ruckman…

We weren't just kicking to the pocket from just outside 50, we were literally trying to bang it in there from the wing which almost rendered our half forward play non-existent. I get getting it in there and figuring the rest out later but you know when I want that attitude? I want that attitude when we are about to exit the centre square and go for one too many handballs on cough it up when the clearance should have been ours. 

I just want to see us vary our ball movement and forward 50 entries. I don't remember too many games we've won this year when the majority of kicks into the 50 were the same predictable bombs every time. If I had time I would go through every forward 50 kick on Fri night that was 40 metres + and see how many a)goals came out of it and b) how many stoppages were created. I’m not going to call it a stupid gameplan because it clearly isn’t and if these levels are reasonable then it is more a case of or our forward structure and pressure but is that enough? Will it kick us a winning score? 

If we are going to persist with it I’d love to see a lot more low and hard kicks in there, keep it low and unpredictable. If it goes out of bounds then brilliant. We need to do more to catch opposition backs off guard. 

Whatever we have been doing, we have won 16 games doing it.

19 minutes ago, Jontee said:

Whatever we have been doing, we have won 16 games doing it.

But 0-5 vs other top 4 sides. All good and well if you happy just making up numbers come finals 

24 minutes ago, Jontee said:

Whatever we have been doing, we have won 16 games doing it.

We've won 16 games from our defence. 

We've struggled with our offensive connection and efficiency for years and if we'd nailed that we could be anything to be honest. 

The pocket kick whilst a percentage play many times is used by us far too often, so often that players now miss open leading players elsewhere because of their tunnel vision. 

I would say it's barely a percentage play anymore. Opposition teams load up numbers to where we kick to and use skills and smarts to exit our forward 50 due to our poor forward pressure. 

Not only is it frustrating to watch. It's incredibly boring and supporters become sick of it very quickly. 

I just want some life breathed into this side this week. Give us some new looks at players, we've got nothing to lose now. We're not favourites and we are incredibly inconsistent with our form. 

May as well throw the oppo a curve ball. Especially Geelong if we get through this week. 

Be bold and show some courage Goody. Clearly what we've dished up against fellow top 4 teams hasn't worked. For once I want to see some genuine match-day strategy from Goody instead of this boring template that the best oppo teams now know how to handle. 

Give us something Goodwin. 

45 minutes ago, Jontee said:

Whatever we have been doing, we have won 16 games doing it.

But who haven't we managed to beat with this game plan Jontee?

The team that came first, the team that came third, the team that came 4th (twice), the team that came 5th (won one lost one) and the team that came 8th (won one and lost won). 

This plan would seem to now be obsolete and a hinderance against the better sides. Hopefully a better method next season.

Edited September 5, 20222 yr by Neil Crompton

5 minutes ago, Neil Crompton said:

But who haven't we managed to beat with this game plan Ding?

The team that came first, the team that came third, the team that came 4th (twice), the team that came 5th (won one lost one) and the team that came 8th (won one and lost won). 

This plan would seem to now be obsolete and a hinderance against the better sides. Hopefully a better method next season.

We even duplicate the plan at VFL level week in week out. You'd think they might experiment occasionally

18 hours ago, Redleg said:

Ever noticed why we don’t come back from being behind late in games?

Because normally we are … in front? 

15 hours ago, At the break of Gawn said:

I wonder though, is it the ground or the quality of opposition? Teams we’ve lost to:

5th, 3rd x2, 4th x2

All good teams around our mark.

Losing to SAME TEAMS SAME GAME PLAN SAME TACTICS SAME PLAYERS 

AND 

SAME COACH And SAME ASSISTANT COACHES

No change or new ideas from Coaches and MatCh Cttee or changes in personnel in the team despite poor or underwhelming last half of seasons by ANB Spargo Harmes Bowey BBB Jacko and Weed. 
And we have a 17- 1 RESERVES team and won't try good performers.

We are too timid in all our decisions Selection Game Plan. 

Freo tried AMiss in the ELim Final and won we haven't given JVR a go and others have been ignored even Dunstan and we will lose Bedford Laurie and Chandler if opportunities are not provided go them. 

Goody has decided we can repeat last year with the same players and has been too loyal with the results stating all and sundry in the face. 

it's no too late for youth ( limited amount at this time ) but let's take a chance !!!

please Goody and MC and FD. 
 

How many times this year have we heard players and coaches after a loss say something along the lines of 

“We won the contest, time in forward half and a lot of the key stats we care about, but just needed to be more efficient going forward”

or 

“We had things on our terms for much of the game, but they just executed their game plan for longer than we did” 

 

It appears our “learnings” are always “need to be more efficient connecting with forwards” and/or “need to execute our game plan for longer” 

rather than “learning how to combat opposition tactics”, and/or “improve the method with which we play the game” 

 

 

1 hour ago, Jontee said:

Whatever we have been doing, we have won 16 games doing it.

We did, but also lost 7 of 13 games since round 10. It would be nice to have another club in the bag other than your one wood that’s all. Either change personnel if they aren’t adhering to method or change the method to suit the personnel. We haven’t and we could have. 

1 hour ago, Smokey said:

Because normally we are … in front? 

To be fair, we haven't had one game this year where the opposition has had all the momentum and we've been able to turn it around in the second half and run away with it. This happened a number of times last year and I don't know what it is about this year. It almost seems like when a team gets in front of us from the 3rd qtr onwards, we just pack up and lose. If we had somehow been able to respond to the Swans 3 goals in the 3rd qtr and regain the lead and win from there it would have been very off script for us.

1 hour ago, Neil Crompton said:

 This plan would seem to now be obsolete and a hinderance against the better sides. Hopefully a better method next season.

I wouldn't hold your breath.
The forward line entries have been woeful for years.

21 hours ago, cantstandyasam said:

No to Mitch Brown, he isn't KPF at AFL level. He plays HFF as a tall forward but little to no contact or pack marks so is ineffectual.

He's a lead / mark forward.  With a few classy ball users coming inside i reckon he would do quite well at AFL level offensively.  Not sure about his defensive work though.  Ground level he appears 'ok' as well.  The best of the KFs at Casey of late.  JVR not far behind.