PODCAST: Rd 01 vs Western Bulldogs

[binman 28,557]

1 hour ago, Demonland said:

Whilst pressure is very important and absolutely has to be applied when you don't have the footy but I would prefer to be the ones with footy in hand.

Mmm, interesting. 

I see what you're saying, but whilst of course it's good to have control of the ball (which this year we seemed to have really empahsied short kicks to lead up players to control possession and tempo) philosophically our game plan does not emphasis having the ball in hand. 

By that i mean we priortise territory over possession.

So, for example, if the ball is in motion in the back half, we have possession but there is no free player up the line to kick to, but there is a free player behind the ball (which there almost is) for the bail out kick or handball. more often than not we will risk losing possession by prioritsing territory and booting it 50 metres towards our goal. 

For the same reason we don't do many cross-ground switches because even though it would ensure we maintain possession we gain no territory (and it gives the oppo defence time to set up) - so if we can't maintain possession by lead up mark down the line, again we kick long down the line to a contest even though that risks losing possession. 

Which is where pressure is so critical. Pressure helps us to ideally win that contest and if we can't do so, force a stoppage, But if THEY win pressure (as defined by that metric) is critical to our game plan because we ensure (when we are fully up and about) that the oppo kcik is under pressure. We either force a turnover (as happened many times on sat) or they are forced to dump kick and we intercept (as Lever did any number of times) and rebound of half back to create a scoring train.

West coast's game plan under Simpson has a huge focus maintaining possession. The dogs game plan under Bevo also had this focus (but has shifted this season - hence much fewer switches against us) and Freo's, if their game against the saints is anything to go by, also does (what was weird against the saints is they didn't run the ball down the ground the way they like to get territory - Lyon might have tried to take this away from them).  

But the problem with the model of maintaining possession is twofold.

One, maintaining possession invites pressure and therefore there an increased risk of turnover (which is often in the back half because that is where the ball is kicked side to side to free players - kicks we allow the oppp to have).

And two, it makes scoring much more difficult when playing a team like the dees with an elite zone and all team defence because it allows that defense to get set and our defensive forwards and mids to flood back and create an outnumber. And to state the obvious you can't kick a goal from the back pocket. 

Bevo has realized their possession style aint gonna cut and have shifted to the territory model. Which is one reason why i'm bullish about their prospects this year.

Edited March 21 by binman

[Demonland 49,100]

1 minute ago, binman said:

Mmm, interesting. 

I see what you're saying, but whilst of course it's good to have control of the ball (which this year we seemed to have really empahsied short kicks to lead up players to control possession and tempo) philosophically our game plan does not emphasis having the ball in hand. 

By that i mean we priortise territory over possession.

So, for example, if the ball is in motion in the back half, we have possession but there is no free player up the line to kick to, but there is a free player behind the ball (which there almost is) out kick for bail out kick or handball. more often than not we will risk losing possession by prioritsing territory and booting it 50 metres towards our goal. 

For the same reason we don't do many cross-ground switches because even though it would ensure we maintain possession we gain no territory (and it gives the oppo defence time to set up) - so if we can't maintain possession by lead up mark down the line, again we kick long down the line to a contest even though that risks losing possession. 

Which is where pressure is so critical. Pressure helps us to ideally win that contest and if we can't do so, force a stoppage, But if THEY win pressure (as defined by that metric) is critical to our game plan because we ensure (when we are fully up and about) that the oppo kcik is under pressure. We either force a turnover (as happened many times on sat) or they are forced to dump kick and we intercept (as Lever did any number of times) and rebound of half back to create a scoring train.

West coast's game plan under Simpson has a huge focus maintaining possession. The dogs game plan under Bevo also had this focus (but has shifted this season - hence much fewer switches against us) and Freo's, if their game against the saints is anything to go by, also does (what was weird against the saints is they didn't run the ball down the ground the way they like to get territory - Lyon might have tried to take this away from them).  

But the problem with the model of maintaining possession is twofold.

One, maintaining possession invites pressure and therefore there an increased risk of turnover (which is often in the back half because that is where the ball is kicked side to side to free players - kicks we allow the oppp to have).

And two, it makes scoring much more difficult when playing a team like the dees with an elite zone and all team defence because it allows that defense to get set and our defensive forwards and mids to flood back and create an outnumber. And to state the obvious you can't kick a goal from the back pocket. 

Bevo has realized their possession style aint gonna cut and have shifted to the territory model. Which is one reason why i'm bullish about their prospects this year.

As a team you're not going to have possession of the ball 100% of the time. Pressure is absolutely critical. It's a big reason I have a replica Premiership cup sitting on my desk.

[dino rover 419]

One subject not covered was kicking in

maybe the absence of May meant no predictable dump kicks to Gawn on the left of the centre square

there didn’t seem to be much thought system or ownership of the kick ins

Someone like McVee with pace and a laser is ideal but not just yet as he is only newly minted

 

 

[Webber 8,681]

27 minutes ago, dino rover said:

One subject not covered was kicking in

maybe the absence of May meant no predictable dump kicks to Gawn on the left of the centre square

there didn’t seem to be much thought system or ownership of the kick ins

Someone like McVee with pace and a laser is ideal but not just yet as he is only newly minted

 

 

Agree. I thought we might see more of Rivers kicking in this year, precisely because he’s the longest kick in the back 6 (if not the team). Might create predictability though, cos oppo will know it’s gonna be long. Maybe best employed as the quick occasional up the guts option, as he’d hit the centre circle more often than not. Is why I enjoyed Bowey’s kicking in on Saturday, given he’s expert at the short option, and can also get the longer kick comfortably beyond the 50 arc. Keeps ‘em guessing, probably the ideal. McVee could be a second graduate to this role. 

[Ethan Tremblay 26,422]

I agree with @binman (I think it was).. the Bulldogs back line was an absolute shambles. One of the worst I’ve seen in recent history. Josh Bruce back there won’t work. Hope they stick with it though. Good episode. 

Edited March 22 by Ethan Tremblay

[Dees_In_October 2,350]

On 3/20/2023 at 4:23 PM, binman said:

Man o man the coincidences are piling up. Not 5 mins ago i sent this message to andy 'a reminder andy we should highlight the fact 28 AFLW players resigned'.

Awesome news. I'm sure Geroge will be all over it

I have a question for you DIO. 

I heartily cheered and clapped the AFLW team as they walked past where i was sitting. Was about to yell out something along the lines of go girls, or some such. But i don't like the term girls for women.

But i couldn't think of an alternative. I thought about yelling "well done women" but it didn't sound right. And 'well done dees AFLW team' is even worse. 

So, my question. What is an alternative to girls when yelling support to multiple dees women players?

What about heroes?

Late to the game here, and others have it covered, but since you asked, my straight-up reflex answer also would have been "Go Dees". I believe it's the collective noun for multiple Melbourne players haha. It's nice not to always be qualified by your gender, ya know? They've heard all the "lay-dees" punny ones before and I would hope we've moved on from the novelty factor of that ever so slightly.

For what it's worth, "girls" doesn't actually bother me personally in this casual sporting context (can only speak for myself, of course). And, yeah, it really is all about context. Like, it's jarring to hear 25-year-old male players being called "boys" after some unseemly incident, as a way to emphasise their youth and deflect accountability. Much of it's in the tone too. Women know when someone is using "girls" to belittle them, and I doubt a passionate binman calling over the fence celebrating our club's second premiership in two years would give that effect.

BUT if you're not comfortable in yelling "Go girls!" but want to be respectful while saying something gender-specific for whatever reason (like, I don't know, the men's team is also walking past and you don't want to support them haha?!), a tried and true classic that will signal to the players that you "get it" would be a hearty and enthusiastic "Yeah the girls!" That's become a bit of a rallying cry for supporting women's sport generally that our players would recognise and appreciate I think.

Even better, you could always just get really specific with a "Go Paxy, Go Birchy, go Goldie" and so on. Or "Go Jules" for maximum niche nickname points.

[binman 28,557]

My three favourite players have great names to yell - westy, paxy and goldie. 

[Demonland 49,100]

 

[Go the Biff 2,713]

On 3/21/2023 at 7:44 PM, layzie said:

Half way through the ep. Reading from the same hymn book as Binman when it comes to set shots. I don't hate Chandler's technique but I knew during that run up at 3 qtr time that he was going to spray it as he never looked confident.

Couldn't agree more with Max's kicking as well. Boy did he flush that one from the pocket, ball drop was good too!

Agreed.  On his approach he looked like he took a couple of short steps to adjust. Still finished up too close for comfort to the man on the mark