On 21/03/2025 at 04:29, DubDee said:

Hawthorn's tall forward line consisted of Chol last night so I don't think talent is everything

System and team work beats talent most times

So our system and team didn’t work either last week DD.

  On 21/03/2025 at 05:20, old dee said:

So our system and team didn’t work either last week DD.

It actually worked pretty well. We lost by 3 points against a top 4 side. 

  On 21/03/2025 at 05:25, DistrACTION Jackson said:

It actually worked pretty well. We lost by 3 points against a top 4 side. 

The magic word. “Lost”. Didn’t work well enough. 

  On 21/03/2025 at 01:39, old dee said:

It is usually difficult to compensate  for a lack of talent by changing the game plan.

We simply don't have the forward talent to kick a winning score against the good teams no matter how we deliver the ball.

Really, if you cant hit that last kick inside 50m no forward will be effective.

The GWS tsunami requires players getting behind the footy, get the turnover and then run forward in waves.  Teams now score from stoppage or from turnovers usually in there defensive half.

I love seeing this change, means you have to get elite ball users in your team.  The change is happening, clubs now will look at elite kicks and back their conditioning staff to get their fitness up.

 

Edited March 21Mar 21 by drdrake

  On 21/03/2025 at 05:28, old dee said:

The magic word. “Lost”. Didn’t work well enough. 

Poor Essendon. Must be a shock for them to realise even in 2000 there system didn't quite work.

We're talking about a game where you're considered highly efficient if you get the ball to a teammate 3/4 of the time.

I can't help picturing the total meltdown you'd have if you ever had to go through IVF.

  On 21/03/2025 at 04:29, DubDee said:

Hawthorn's tall forward line consisted of Chol last night so I don't think talent is everything

System and team work beats talent most times

He’s now going by Chol’s Royce, from the Hawks fans 

  On 21/03/2025 at 08:11, Little Goffy said:

Poor Essendon. Must be a shock for them to realise even in 2000 there system didn't quite work.

We're talking about a game where you're considered highly efficient if you get the ball to a teammate 3/4 of the time.

I can't help picturing the total meltdown you'd have if you ever had to go through IVF.

Comparing me to someone suffering the frustrations of IVF is poor. One is game the other is traumatic beyond believe. Get a grip it's a game.

Edited March 21Mar 21 by old dee

  On 21/03/2025 at 05:20, old dee said:

So our system and team didn’t work either last week DD.

We HAVE a system ?? 

Asking for a friend...  he mentioned  he's  never noticed one 🤷‍♂️

  On 21/03/2025 at 05:25, DistrACTION Jackson said:

It actually worked pretty well. We lost by 3 points against a top 4 side. 

We're  back to the good ol' " honourable loss" I see ......

 

  On 20/03/2025 at 22:55, binman said:

Again, that's not what hoyne is saying. He's saying the opposite. The best teams ARE NOT just kicking it, territory is no longer king.

Which is why we have been changing our method over the last season and a bit. 

The gag is lampooning the Pearl clutching nuffies screaming to 'just kick it' as teams chip it around and/or chain up with handballs.

I beg to differ. I even think the Coodabeens did a song about it. And if l can't find the song l will write one myself and DM it off to a posse of Demonland fact-checkers and pedants.

  On 21/03/2025 at 08:34, old dee said:

Comparing me to someone suffering the frustrations of IVF is poor. One is game the other is traumatic beyond believe. Get a grip it's a game.

Yeah, see, the precise point I'm making is that you need to get a grip on the constant obnoxious stream of 'We'll all be ruined and let me tell you who to blame' because there are actual frustrations and obstacles in the world. It is spectacular that your lack of self awareness reached this point. Take a good hard look at yourself.

Having recently experienced the frustrations of IVF, and being acutely aware of how much worse it could have gone, and being in awe of my wife's magnificent resilience and lack of sulking throughout, I feel like I've gained a refreshed lack of patience with people who act like their constant dreary sulking gives them some kind of moral authority.

We did the 'get it in there' thing. Everyone hates it now.

Transition footy and catching teams on the counter is where the game is heading.

  On 21/03/2025 at 04:27, DubDee said:

Lots of people complaining on the Game Day thread about the chip kicking we were doing

I wonder if they are same people complaining about us bombing it long last year

Thankfully we are trying something different this year!

You know they were Dubdee. It's the same people who yell to kick the bloody thing and when they do and it gets intercepted they berate them for not kicking it to a Melb player. Or if they kick sideways it should have been forward and "the goals are that way" all that kind of jargon.

Plain and simple, we do not posses enough creative and great kicks in our side to be able to execute this game plan as well as other sides. 

So we will still be relying on winning territory, contest and trying maximise goals from our entries much more than those sides who excel at a transition and backhalf game. 

Do we, or other teams, change tactics during matches? Obviously with 30 seconds left before full time a half-goal ahead or behind they will? But other times too? Wet or windy conditions? But how about when Gawn (or even him and Tracc/Clarrie) are rested  do we just try damage control and just make sure the oppo don't score? And when there's a minute till a quarter finishes? While teams would have general tactics surely many factors complicate things and simply just  kicking it long or playing keepings off will sometimes be wrong (despite mainly being right.)

  On 21/03/2025 at 08:40, beelzebub said:

We're  back to the good ol' " honourable loss" I see ......

 

If a tactic has a team usually losing by small margins I'd agree with you. But if a tactic is 5 from 7 against the top sides who cares about the 2 losses, especially if previously the main tactic had them 4-6 or worse  against the best ?

  On 21/03/2025 at 08:40, beelzebub said:

We're  back to the good ol' " honourable loss" I see ......

 

A damn sight better than a dishonourable thrashing IMO.  If people can't take some comfort from a close result against a supposed top 4 team, however frustrating,  then I'm not sure they should be following footy.

  On 21/03/2025 at 08:40, beelzebub said:

We're  back to the good ol' " honourable loss" I see ......

 

Definitely not happy with an honourable loss…. But you can be unhappy but also acknowledge the things that went well

  On 21/03/2025 at 05:28, old dee said:

The magic word. “Lost”. Didn’t work well enough. 

So if we won by 3 points instead would you then be happy with how we played?

When talking about such small margins against good sides you can simultaneously play well, but also lose.

  On 21/03/2025 at 11:44, layzie said:

We did the 'get it in there' thing. Everyone hates it now.

Transition footy and catching teams on the counter is where the game is heading.

I think you have contradicted yourself in both of those sentences. Hoyne is saying get it in there quickly, but for exactly the reason you state in your second sentence.  If you move the ball quickly then the forward line is more open and you’re more likely to score.

We absolutely did not do that.  Our method was get it in there to a pocket taking as long as you like, create a stoppage, setup a wall, intercept, take as long as you like again, repeat.

And it’s not all about transition from defence. Brisbane are not one of the fastest defensive transition teams.  They control the ball well in the back half and minimise turnovers.  They move it on a lot more quickly in their forward half including from forward half turnovers and the front 6 are a lot more dynamic than us.

And Brisbane have won a flag.  GWS and Hawks are unproven in finals.

 

  On 21/03/2025 at 15:18, Redleg_Knowledge said:

Plain and simple, we do not posses enough creative and great kicks in our side to be able to execute this game plan as well as other sides. 

So we will still be relying on winning territory, contest and trying maximise goals from our entries much more than those sides who excel at a transition and backhalf game. 

Disagree, we've got enough players to play the transition game to a high enough standard, where our scores from stoppages game will give us a huge advantage over most teams. 

Salem, McVee, Windsor, Bowey, Lindsay at the back are all beautiful kicks that can be relied upon to maintain possession and keep chains going.

Spargo, Melksham and Langford at the other end are elite kicks, we want them connecting between wing and half forward.

But the modern game starts at the back with slingshot, so load up there with beautiful kicks and guys that can break lines with poise.

From there it's about our players becoming confident and knowledgeable in our transition that there is no second guessing because there's synergy. 

This might take time to build, but the more continuity we get with these above guys at the back, the more it'll become instinctive.

  On 21/03/2025 at 23:07, Adam The God said:

Disagree, we've got enough players to play the transition game to a high enough standard, where our scores from stoppages game will give us a huge advantage over most teams. 

Salem, McVee, Windsor, Bowey, Lindsay at the back are all beautiful kicks that can be relied upon to maintain possession and keep chains going.

Spargo, Melksham and Langford at the other end are elite kicks, we want them connecting between wing and half forward.

But the modern game starts at the back with slingshot, so load up there with beautiful kicks and guys that can break lines with poise.

From there it's about our players becoming confident and knowledgeable in our transition that there is no second guessing because there's synergy. 

This might take time to build, but the more continuity we get with these above guys at the back, the more it'll become instinctive.

Ironically, for all the talk of the Giants ability to transition from the back half and play fast footy, what won them the game was, as goody noted, their ability to win stoppages and territory in the last quarter (was the only quarter in which they did do, and the only quarter they scored more than us).

On the subject of kicking....... Christian Salem. I love Salem. He's tough, clever, competitive, great one on one, reads the play well, a bit slow but when in form is very important to our side. He is NOT an elite kick though. Maybe when he was younger but he hasn't been for a long time. His kicking efficiency record is ok (high 60s to low 70s) but his best kicking is between 20 and 35 metres ie. those dinky kicks to the next down the line. When he goes for distance to an outlet player he stabs at it and the ball floats in the last half of its trajectory. These kicks are very vulnerable to turnover and I get sick of commentary about his "elite kicking". T Mac has reshaped his kicking and only goes for low hard stabs with a maximum distance of about 40 m. This has been a revelation for his disposal efficiency. I no longer have my heart in my mouth every time he gets it on the backline. He doesn't float them across goal like he used to but stabs hard and fast towards a free player. Salem could learn from this. The Daicos, Houston, long raking kicks to a free running player are very different from Salo's floating stabs. I still love him though

Edited March 21Mar 21 by btdemon

  On 21/03/2025 at 01:39, old dee said:

It is usually difficult to compensate  for a lack of talent by changing the game plan.

We simply don't have the forward talent to kick a winning score against the good teams no matter how we deliver the ball.

  On 21/03/2025 at 01:45, binman said:

Absolute rubbish.

  On 21/03/2025 at 02:35, GS_1905 said:

Bullocks. I’d kick a tonne with a bung back if I was leading into paddocks. But would be useless in a contested marking situation, which is what our KPFs are put in. 

The canary in the coal mine for Melbourne is the collective statistical decline of the core group that delivered the 2021 premiership and still plays in 2024. This drop in output—particularly among key midfielders and defenders—has not been offset by the emergence of new talent. While a few players have shown modest improvement, no incoming player has matched the impact or consistency of the premiership players still on the list creating a widening performance gap that has contributed to the club’s overall stagnation and regression across key indicators.

  On 21/03/2025 at 23:34, binman said:

Ironically, for all the talk of the Giants ability to transition from the back half and play fast footy, what won them the game was, as goody noted, their ability to win stoppages and territory in the last quarter (was the only quarter in which they did do, and the only quarter they scored more than us).

Although they kicked 3 goals in the last and the last 2 goals came from defensive 50 transitions. Those 2 goals won them the game. We should have defended both of them better.