21 hours ago, Engorged Onion said:

Brown, TMAC, Fritsch, Petty, Melksham - all forwards and all have been injured for significant parts of the year or currently incapacitated.

Perhaps there is a link between the players you have on the ground (and their caliber) and your chances of winning...

Matter of fact - if you Google AFL Injury Ladder and AFL Ladder - there is a remarkable resemblance.. year after year after year...

 

Injuries impacted but the bottom line is the bombing we do is suited for power fwds which  can contest & either mark or bring to ground which we don’t have, we have hybrids trying to compete on 2vs1  and need to lower their eyes. The amount of times leads were ignored and free players is frustrating yet both Goody/coaches can’t get them to change this BS. 

About a month ago when we lost (forget against who) Goodwin was questioned on our forward setup and transition and stated it was the least of his issues.

The man is in complete denial about both our forward issues along with the 'efficiency' of his game plan.

We will significantly regress over the next few years if this doesn't change.

18 hours ago, Brownie said:

Yeah you wonder about the toll on their bodies having to slam into pack marks continuosly versus leading into space to mark bullet passes where middies have lowered their eyes.

How about even just a few players  leading wide …. a defender has to go with them making these packs less dense. Even for self preservation this makes sense, and even a bomb wide of the mob surely can help.  How many pack marks up forward have we taken this year?  Very few. 

17 hours ago, Roy Boy said:

So we apparently have some of the best coaches in the land.

Goodwin (multiple premiership player, premiership coach)

Choco (premiership coach)

Yze (assistant in Clarko years, played a lot of forward in career)

How can they not see how terrible our forward 50 entries are, it totally baffles me. And it keeps happening week upon week.

How about lower the eyes, lead different directions, instead of bombing then praying for a pack mark.

Crumbers need to stay down and do their job, crumb. Looking at you Kozzie especially.

Coaches need a kick up the bum in my opinion. Fix it, cause straight sets are fast approaching.

And FFS come out breathing fire from the first bounce.

Touché 

13 hours ago, McQueen said:

Unfortunately our forwards are always under so much pressure to execute cleanly because of how the ball comes in. 

Wouldn’t they be under less pressure if they spread?

5 hours ago, At the break of Gawn said:

Expected score is a fallacy and I really hope Goodwin doesn’t just think our forward efficiency is just a simple fix. I hope the FD pauses the tape at every inside 50 and shows where the better option was. Also the lack of leading is extremely concerning. It’s either they’ve been directed not to because the FD just wants deep entries or the forwards are lacking some sort of confidence.

 

Looking forward to the podcast - they put a lot of emphasis on  this. 

5 hours ago, leave it to deever said:

The Pies did do well flooding our backline although our slow entries did help them. It was pretty crowded in there most of the time.

see above.  Spread.  Dummy leads. Drag opponents away from the contest. 

11 minutes ago, monoccular said:

How about even just a few players  leading wide …. a defender has to go with them making these packs less dense. Even for self preservation this makes sense, and even a bomb wide of the mob surely can help.  How many pack marks up forward have we taken this year?  Very few. 

Touché 

Wouldn’t they be under less pressure if they spread?

Looking forward to the podcast - they put a lot of emphasis on  this. 

see above.  Spread.  Dummy leads. Drag opponents away from the contest. 

Nearly all you suggest is Footy Nouse 101

Seems the Dees have never read it.

 

We confident that even if our midfield saw these leading targets (which I agree doesn't happen enough) they would be able to hit them consistently? 

ANB yes, Spargo yes and.... yup the list stops there.

Every single one of them are below average kicks.  Hopefully they all have above average days for the next 3 weeks.

  

6 hours ago, Demonsone said:

Haven’t won a final since our premiership & likely to go out in straight sets & possibly 4 final loses in a row! Continue to bomb the ball into fw50 in the same dumb way! Who would want to be a forward at our club with that rubbish coming in! Goody saying how proud he was of his players really, it’s the same old BS yet we keep hearing the learnings they get?  Will the next 3 yrs see us just hanging around finals and hearing the same old & then watching us fall of the cliff? Hearing Max say it felt like a typical Melbourne loss, I thought we had gone past this!

Take it easy, you'd be saying how awesome everything is had we kicked straight 3-4 more times. The forward line is a busted up Comodore atm. The fact we were even in it is a small miracle.

4 hours ago, 1858 said:

About a month ago when we lost (forget against who) Goodwin was questioned on our forward setup and transition and stated it was the least of his issues.

The man is in complete denial about both our forward issues along with the 'efficiency' of his game plan.

We will significantly regress over the next few years if this doesn't change.

We are still not out of it yet but you could mount an argument to say that we have regressed. We finished 2nd on the ladder last year 4th on the ladder this year. Either that or teams are going past us or a combination of both. Hopefully there are learnings and no stone has been left unturned. Time will tell but hopefully our team can play to its true potential. 

Watching Greater Western Sydney play St Kilda.   The Giants move the ball really quickly and subsequently their forward fifty has lots of space for their forwards to work in.  Our forward fifty has thirty players in it.

On the couch analysis was spot on, the predictability of going long and ignoring shorter to players with space just allowed the defenders to line up, they continue to ignore the corridor and bang to a 1 vs 2, or 3 defenders. This  surely isn’t Goody’s game plan, yet it’s been a nemesis of our team each season and yet they can’t fix it. Good observation about Gawn should look to handball to an on baller rather than kick which always goes to an opposition, a clip was shown an Oliver standing free waiting for the ball and Gawn kicked it & Oliver dropped his head probably saying Max I’m herd mate . 

I think this thread pops up a couple of times a year. I know, you know it, the whole footy world knows it.

Problem is 1) game plan, 2) average kickers, 3) no playmakers forward of the middle.

All three midfielders are class but cannot lower their eyes or hit a target under pressure. 
 

They have to have drilled into their head, look for the chip kick in and around the 40m mark. 

28 minutes ago, Gawndy the Great said:

I think this thread pops up a couple of times a year. I know, you know it, the whole footy world knows it.

Problem is 1) game plan, 2) average kickers, 3) no playmakers forward of the middle.

All three midfielders are class but cannot lower their eyes or hit a target under pressure. 
 

They have to have drilled into their head, look for the chip kick in and around the 40m mark. 

This will/ has cost them winning another flag 

Yet you'll hear the 'real experts' on here try and make any excuse possible to play down what has been fundemental flaw and weakness in our game for so long. 

And the number one reason we lose games we should win. 

39 minutes ago, JimmyGadson said:

Yet you'll hear the 'real experts' on here try and make any excuse possible to play down what has been fundemental flaw and weakness in our game for so long. 

And the number one reason we lose games we should win. 

It also makes us have to work so much harder to score a goal, than opponents, this really should have been fixed in the last off season... 

4 hours ago, Gawndy the Great said:

I think this thread pops up a couple of times a year. I know, you know it, the whole footy world knows it.

Problem is 1) game plan, 2) average kickers, 3) no playmakers forward of the middle.

All three midfielders are class but cannot lower their eyes or hit a target under pressure. 
 

They have to have drilled into their head, look for the chip kick in and around the 40m mark. 

Absolutely.  Two years of learnings.  Two years of connection forward of Centre. 
 

Goodwin takes the premiership glory. 
 

2022 and wherever 2023 ends are on his shoulders.  He’s the coach. Blind Freddy can see the issue.  Stop bombing the ball into a pack with a Hail Mary luck.  Why can’t the 100% fulltime professional coaches see it and change it  ?!?!? Two years!!! 

If the strategy is to lead, create space, lower your eyes to hit targets… then the players are either ignoring Goodwin completely or incapable of execution of a standard skill of the game.  

You know it’s a game plan. 
I don’t care about better kickers etc, this has gone on for two long for it not to be a game plan, or if it isn’t then Goodwin and the coaches can’t get through to the players.

Tbh we would prob better served kicking it into 50 along the ground, at least it’s something different and easier to re set after a ball up which is what we “use to want”

Edited September 11, 20231 yr by Gorgoroth

The fact we played so poorly at times with a good player down and almost won really hurts. Pies were average and we kinda of let them into a prelim. 

It's frustrating and is very occasionally the reason we lose, however, we win much more often than we lose hence finishing in the top 4 the last 3 years. 

We kick to a predictable spot and stick to the side we are kicking from rather than opening it up and giving the opposition a chance to slingshot or turn their defence into offence.

When we have the ball locked into our forward they can't score but we can and by nature we spend alot of time there.

Having Melksham out hurts us because he kicks alot of goals from the spots in the pockets we kick it too.

I'm not saying it is the right thing to do, perhaps, we should back our midfield with Gawn, Oliver, Viney etc.. but on percentages we win alot more often than not. If we had the luxury of playing Petracca in the forward line last week the percentages probably would have worked in our favour like they normally do.

 

 

37 minutes ago, Gorgoroth said:

You know it’s a game plan. 
I don’t care about better kickers etc, this has gone on for two long for it not to be a game plan, or if it isn’t then Goodwin and the coaches can’t get through to the players.

Tbh we would prob better served kicking it into 50 along the ground, at least it’s something different and easier to re set after a ball up which is what we “use to want”

Chaos ball, as the [censored], BT refers to it.

In case you missed it...

In my opinion, It’s Fugazi. 

It’s a piece masquerading as insightful, and fails to highlight the times we hit people on the chest, (see all games).

We have a greater number of I50’s typically due to our setup. Thus the scoring rate goes down due to density.

Melbournes approach, staves off quick scoring out the back for our opponents 

By the very nature of a tactic, there are always ways to counter it, and Goodwin aims for risk minimisation - it’s why we have been in the top 4 for 3 years, and with the exception of Essendon this year all games have been lost by less than 2 kicks and we typically comfortably have more scoring shots. This is the risk vs the reward.

5 years ago none of us in our lifetime could have dreamed of our consistency… and we have it, yet some are not quite nuanced enough to see why there is the approach taken 

FWIW - The media highlights these things as a simple remedy… and it ain’t that simple because they don’t delve into the costs of changing strategy. 

*there needs to be 2 acknowledgements, one the quality (of all) opposition, which of course being the national league, is really very good, thus their structures are great.

secondly, our forward line has had to be restructured numerous numerous times throughout the year and thus leading patterns are not as refined. 
so it’s both structure/strategy and personnel as to why it’s adopted. 
 

and I know we all know about the injuries to forward personnel, I’m confused why people fail to see it as a significant contributing factor… YET we still lose by under 2 kicks. 

Edited September 11, 20231 yr by Engorged Onion

I don’t disagree with this but not having players forward of the ball capable of taking a contested mark contriubtes a lot this.

20 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

In my opinion, It’s Fugazi. 

It’s a piece masquerading as insightful, and fails to highlight the times we hit people on the chest, (see all games).

We have a greater number of I50’s typically due to our setup. Thus the scoring rate goes down due to density.

Melbournes approach, staves off quick scoring out the back for our opponents 

By the very nature of a tactic, there are always ways to counter it, and Goodwin aims for risk minimisation - it’s why we have been in the top 4 for 3 years, and with the exception of Essendon this year all games have been lost by less than 2 kicks. 

5 years ago none of us in our lifetime could have dreamed of our consistency… and we have it, yet some are not quite nuanced enough to see why there is the approach taken 

FWIW - The media highlights these things as a simple remedy… and it ain’t that simple because they don’t delve into the costs of changing strategy. 

EXACTLY. Didn't mean to type in all-caps, but that was the way it came out and I'm accepting the Freudian Typo...

The alternative would be spearing it hard and fast to leading players who are surrounded by defenders in the zone (that's what a zone is for) who would spoil it for a quick rebound with multiple options out. To be fair, that's not much different from the situation now, though that difference must be significant in some way, otherwise we wouldn't be doing it. If I was to speculate, I'd say the stats for either marking it or crumbing by blokes running toward goal from the fifty or out the back are better than those for cleaning up after a spoiled lead, offensively and defensively. 

Dunno. What're the stats on our returns from different types of entries in games we win vs games we lose? Not sure it actually matters; missed shots on goal is the most important stat in footy.

You could easily argue that we lower our eyes 2 more times and we win the game. I think there's a bit of panic that crept in and we don't have that one beautiful user who could lower the eyes and lace out a forward. Salem's drop off has cost us. Would have loved to have seen him running forward with the ball in hand in the last quarter. I really hope kickers are on our shopping list this Spring.

 

Edited September 11, 20231 yr by Roost it far

48 minutes ago, Boots and all said:

Chaos ball, as the [censored], BT refers to it.

And then how would the defence set up? Chaos for them; chaos for us, too. In other words, we'd have to win by luck.

The way we attack has a defensive function. It locks the oppo in to a spot they can't get out of. Hence the huge number of re-entries. It keeps the balls in our hand and not the oppo's - with the welcome consequence of them not being able to score - and tires them out. We wear them down with superior fitness and kick goals (most of the time) and win. 

Given our lack of tall feds who can take a mark in a pack, our bombing it in was just a complete waste.