12 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

This is my problem with Goodwin.

He like many here identified the issues we have bit he was unable to fix them. Aside from putting Gawn and the Petracca forward what else did he do?

he had ample opportunity to experiment against the WCE and North. He wanted to bank the wins though and backed his players to fix it onfield which they didn't /couldnt do.

We blooded 1 new player Turner for 1 game and Dunstan for a couple.

Many players went backwards including Lever, Rivers, Salem, Spargo, ANB, Jackson, 

I am struggling to see who improved? Maybe Brayshaw and Viney.

Stubborn Simon wears this and needs to fox it.

 

Simon is not a good match day coach . Never has been. He needs to hand over more game day power to assistants who can identify issues and make adjustments. 
 

5 minutes ago, 1964_2 said:

Simon is not a good match day coach . Never has been. He needs to hand over more game day power to assistants who can identify issues and make adjustments. 
 

Given he is on the ground, he probably already does.

6 hours ago, binman said:

In simple terms, the approach seemed to be get a big enough lead by half time and then hang on for dear life.

I reckon the biggest change was that we  stopped using tempo control. 

 

Do you think it’s safe to assume this was because we were too banged up/lacking in fitness to play 4 quarters? It was so consistent (and honestly infuriating to watch) that it had to be a plan. I’m just trying to work out why it became our game style. 

9 hours ago, SW5 Demon said:

Smoke screen. Absolute distraction from selection and coaching failure.

Deliberately non-specific, again. Coaching failure and selection across the season may well be the reasons why. These matters needed to be specified, addressed, confronted, implemented and evaluated with reasoned tweaks back in May, through June, July, August for readiness in September. 

25 minutes ago, The heart beats true said:

Do you think it’s safe to assume this was because we were too banged up/lacking in fitness to play 4 quarters? It was so consistent (and honestly infuriating to watch) that it had to be a plan. I’m just trying to work out why it became our game style. 

Yep, very much so. 

I've been pondering the reason for the significant change to the way we normally play since the dogs game.

My theories revolved around Goody looking to add another layer to our method because:

• we were looking to take advantage of our predictability (by being unpredictable)
• goody has said a number of times that tactics evolve in season 
• the quick ball movement method of the pies and the swans was proving effective
• other teams had found ways to mitigate our strengths and expose our weakness 
• the changes would increase our chances of winning the flag

But to be honest I didn't apply Occam's razor to the conundrum, perhaps because my confidence in winning the flag was predicated on the training program having us in optimal shape to attack the finals

If i had applied Occam's razor, whilst the above dot points all might have some validity, i would have arrived at the more logical conclusion as to why we went out so hard to get a match winning lead and then look to hang on - goody, who of course has access to all the injury and fitness related data and metrics, knew we were too banged up/lacking in fitness to play 4 quarters.

Most effective forward for the year = Harrison Petty.

time in forward line: 5 mins

goals:  1 

24 minutes ago, 1964_2 said:

Most effective forward for the year = Harrison Petty.

time in forward line: 5 mins

goals:  1 

And one goal assist. 
Gave one off with a handball.

29 minutes ago, 1964_2 said:

Most effective forward for the year = Harrison Petty.

time in forward line: 5 mins

goals:  1 

It beggars belief that the brains trust waited until the season was over to try this move. What were they waiting for?

Goodwin is famous for saying nothing at press conferences. 

As much as supporters want insights/reasons/excuses etc. press conferences after the game are not the time and place.

The secret of these is to wax lyrical about nothing for seven minutes so you don't become the news story for the next week. 

I have no doubt many factors that have been discussed here will be investigated in the next month or so. Fitness, injury management, selection, list management, game plan, etc.

We have some very astute football people led by Pert as CEO and Richardson as GM.

Let's revisit in November and see what they come up with.

1 hour ago, Deemania since 56 said:

Deliberately non-specific, again. Coaching failure and selection across the season may well be the reasons why. These matters needed to be specified, addressed, confronted, implemented and evaluated with reasoned tweaks back in May, through June, July, August for readiness in September. 

I am sure all this will be addressed but equally sure that much if it will never be made public - for good reason namely don’t signal to the adversary your battle plans. 

1 hour ago, binman said:

Yep, very much so. 

I've been pondering the reason for the significant change to the way we normally play since the dogs game.

My theories revolved around Goody looking to add another layer to our method because:

• we were looking to take advantage of our predictability (by being unpredictable)
• goody has said a number of times that tactics evolve in season 
• the quick ball movement method of the pies and the swans was proving effective
• other teams had found ways to mitigate our strengths and expose our weakness 
• the changes would increase our chances of winning the flag

But to be honest I didn't apply Occam's razor to the conundrum, perhaps because my confidence in winning the flag was predicated on the training program having us in optimal shape to attack the finals

If i had applied Occam's razor, whilst the above dot points all might have some validity, i would have arrived at the more logical conclusion as to why we went out so hard to get a match winning lead and then look to hang on - goody, who of course has access to all the injury and fitness related data and metrics, knew we were too banged up/lacking in fitness to play 4 quarters.

thanks binman - the last few lines sums it up, but still begs the question as to why?  IMO it is mainly cumulative low to medium level injuries, not enough to miss a game but enough to impair significantly especially late in a game, rather that an overall failure to prepare type of issue. 
Now, could / would “resting” these injuries have made the difference?  We can never know. 
And of course there was definitely a “failure of renewal” with only one debutant who only played half a game (and played it well) and very few changes around the fringe players.   How many of the list had games, and how many had more than two?  Not enough, probably.  
Looking forward to the podcast as I always do. 
GO DEES. ❤️💙❤️💙❤️💙

Sparrow----7 goals in 23 games,78 tackles or 3.4 per game

ANB---------9 Goals in 23 games,105 tackles or 4.5 per game

Spargo----10 goals in 24 games,57 tackles or 2.3 per game

 

Goodwin will never drop out of form/not up to AFL level at any cost.

 

Enough said!!!

4 hours ago, 1964_2 said:

Simon is not a good match day coach . Never has been. He needs to hand over more game day power to assistants who can identify issues and make adjustments. 
 

One potential problem when you are leading at half time as we did for most games this year, is that the other coaches make changes, fire up their team and change pressure etc.

As the team that leads you probably don't make too many changes because things are working.

Then as the game unfolds the oppo changes might be having some effect and we back our guys in to stay the course and finish the job. We almost NEVER make a change in this circumstance.

Yet in the Saints game we were around 9 goals up at half time and lost the second half.

In the Brisbane game a couple of weeks back we lost the second half after being around 10 goals up.

Whilst we all like to bask in a big win its actually really poor that we don't use these opportunities to experiment a little or try something to snuff out an oppo comeback.

And of course as the year went on we became known as a poor last quarter and second half team. Any coach worth his salt would be saying keep the pressure up they will break.

The Sydney second half pressure was immense (over 200) as was the Brisbane second half pressure (over 190)

Even in the Geelong game it was blindingly obvious in the first half that we were trying to break tackles and failing, turning the ball over under pressure and oblivious to the Geelong tactic of smashing May's kick ins fwd about 10-15m away from our crumbers. No changes were made

We sowed the seeds of our own doom and more to the point suggests that Goodwin cant coach on match day.

 

 

Edited September 11, 20222 yr by jnrmac

6 minutes ago, Jack7 said:

Sparrow----7 goals in 23 games,78 tackles or 3.4 per game

ANB---------9 Goals in 23 games,105 tackles or 4.5 per game

Spargo----10 goals in 24 games,57 tackles or 2.3 per game

 

Goodwin will never drop out of form/not up to AFL level at any cost.

 

Enough said!!!

You could extend that and add Gawn, Jackson, Sparrow to the list

No wonder the forwardline is a mess

Fritsch & Kozzie carry it

3 hours ago, binman said:

Yep, very much so. 

I've been pondering the reason for the significant change to the way we normally play since the dogs game.

My theories revolved around Goody looking to add another layer to our method because:

• we were looking to take advantage of our predictability (by being unpredictable)
• goody has said a number of times that tactics evolve in season 
• the quick ball movement method of the pies and the swans was proving effective
• other teams had found ways to mitigate our strengths and expose our weakness 
• the changes would increase our chances of winning the flag

But to be honest I didn't apply Occam's razor to the conundrum, perhaps because my confidence in winning the flag was predicated on the training program having us in optimal shape to attack the finals

If i had applied Occam's razor, whilst the above dot points all might have some validity, i would have arrived at the more logical conclusion as to why we went out so hard to get a match winning lead and then look to hang on - goody, who of course has access to all the injury and fitness related data and metrics, knew we were too banged up/lacking in fitness to play 4 quarters.

An alternative might have been to bring in a few Casey players who were in form and rest and rehab a few banged up players and a few other players who were totally out of form. Instead we hung on with the same battle weary crew playing an ever more defensive, static game plan that was asking to be over run by any side willing and able to take a risk and run with the ball.

Goody talked about the challenges of being the hunted vs the Hunter this season but in my mind the first people to blink was the coaching group with their game plan that resembled a hybrid of Mick Malthouse’s 2010 and Paul Roos in 2005 - defensive, contested, boundary line hugging, ignore the corridor, stoppage footy at every opportunity. The Dogs in 2016, then the Tigers blew slow, contested, stoppage footy away in 2019 and 2020. Then in 2021 when we demolished Geelong in the Prelim that marked the end of measured, possession footy I thought. The Cats & Pies have gone ultra offensive, running and moving the ball forward at all costs along with Freo and the Swans and just about everyone else with varying degrees of success against us. In short in my mind the coaching group bears much of the responsibility for where we ended up through game plan, and team selection. 

3 hours ago, Redleg said:

And one goal assist. 
Gave one off with a handball.

And also gave off another handball to Kozzie who somehow hit the post.

3 score involvements between the 26 and 29 minute marks.

Staggering to think what could’ve been had he played more time up forward the other night.

3 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

And also gave off another handball to Kozzie who somehow hit the post.

3 score involvements between the 26 and 29 minute marks.

Staggering to think what could’ve been had he played more time up forward the other night.

Just imagine if it had been a match winning move made sometime in the third quarter.

Would have been extra nice for Petty after getting sledged all game.

7 minutes ago, Brownie said:

Just imagine if it had been a match winning move made sometime in the third quarter.

Would have been extra nice for Petty after getting sledged all game.

Very true. Petty ended the season as a player at the top of his game and in brilliant physical nick compared to BBB, Gawn and/or LJ who were labouring in our fwd line.

Could’ve made a massive difference to the scoreboard the other night.

1 hour ago, jnrmac said:

 

Then as the game unfolds the oppo changes might be having some effect and we back our guys in to stay the course and finish the job. We almost NEVER make a change in this circumstance.

 

We sowed the seeds of our own doom and more to the point suggests that Goodwin cant coach on match day.

 

 

Unless the change is to take Gus off Neale, after keeping him to 3 effective possies in the first half, replacing Gus with Sparrow and watching Neale get 18 effective possies in the second half and lead the Lions to Victory.

14 hours ago, SW5 Demon said:

Smoke screen. Absolute distraction from selection and coaching failure.

Agree

10 hours ago, old dee said:

It beggars belief that the brains trust waited until the season was over to try this move. What were they waiting for?

Someone to play on tall forwards alongside Steve May?

Just a hunch.

(BTW, all very well to look at Petty's achievements up forward. Look at what was happening up the other end once we moved him. Lions got 3 goals I believe. That whole farce of a situation with Lever and McStay in the last quarter and resulted in a gifted goal to the Lions came about because Lever was caught out in a one-on-one role he doesn't play well. McStay had been Petty's man.)

6 hours ago, Redleg said:

Unless the change is to take Gus off Neale, after keeping him to 3 effective possies in the first half, replacing Gus with Sparrow and watching Neale get 18 effective possies in the second half and lead the Lions to Victory.

Neither you nor any of us know whether or not Neale wouldn't have got 18 possessions in any case - he's not a Brownlow favourite for nothing and usually gets off the chain sooner or later.

Secondly, if Sparrow hadn't been generating much drive (which was the case?) it makes sense to give him a more defensive role and free up Brayshaw. Angus's team-lifting goal in the 4th that put us within 2 points is perhaps an example of what they were looking for more of.

Finally, the mids are Adam Yze's area, so ...

The single biggest mistake imo was not introducing some new players to the team. Especially after a premiership, you need to inject some hunger. People need to fear their spot in the team. You only need to be 5% down in intensity and you get beaten by a team like Sydney, Collingwood, etc. who play like maniacs. We were like maniacs last year. So, so hard to keep that up forever. We will be back. 

1 hour ago, homsar said:

The single biggest mistake imo was not introducing some new players to the team. Especially after a premiership, you need to inject some hunger. People need to fear their spot in the team. You only need to be 5% down in intensity and you get beaten by a team like Sydney, Collingwood, etc. who play like maniacs. We were like maniacs last year. So, so hard to keep that up forever. We will be back. 

Yes, and prepare for your game plan to be worked out…as it invariably is after a premiership. Ended the season with a whimper, alas.

3 hours ago, homsar said:

The single biggest mistake imo was not introducing some new players to the team. Especially after a premiership, you need to inject some hunger. People need to fear their spot in the team. You only need to be 5% down in intensity and you get beaten by a team like Sydney, Collingwood, etc. who play like maniacs. We were like maniacs last year. So, so hard to keep that up forever. We will be back. 

Yes. Interestingly Gary Lyon on SEN this morning said he had thought long and hard about what happened to Melbourne in the second half games after round 10 and he could only come up with the theory that players dropped their intensity, the hunger wasn’t there as it was in 2021. He is probably correct but my immediate thought was you counter that by dropping players who you identify might be not going hard enough to put pressure on the others. After setting ourselves up at 10-0 we had the luxury to reward the better players at Casey to set the required standard even if it cost us a few games and as it turned out we lost games anyway. I still think the defensive, predictable game plan set us up for failure as well. 

12 hours ago, Jack7 said:

Sparrow----7 goals in 23 games,78 tackles or 3.4 per game

ANB---------9 Goals in 23 games,105 tackles or 4.5 per game

Spargo----10 goals in 24 games,57 tackles or 2.3 per game

 

Goodwin will never drop out of form/not up to AFL level at any cost.

 

Enough said!!!

Absolutely on the money, Loyalty is a two way street and these guys and others failed to deliver. I would replace them all next year with guys from Casey who were hungry , but went unrewarded. Goody, Coaching staff, and players have a lot to think about.