3 hours ago, 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).

See below, plus it was a wet and miserable day so clearly that impacted their one wood throughout the day. Yet their winning goal came from an end to end passage. Something they do incredibly well and whilst Whitfield's first kick was iffy, it's their ability to be clean, slick and execute their kicks that separated them from us in the end. Regardless of that period of dominance at contest in the last. 

24 minutes ago, Watson11 said:

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.

 

Exactly right. 

4 hours ago, 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.

You're listing two brand new recruits, so I'd say you're reaching with those names given one has just been dropped and the other is yet to play their second game. 

I'm not doubting we're trying to get better in that area/add players who can kick. I'm simply saying we don't have the cattle to compete in slingshot games against the top 5-6 sides. And I don't think that can be disputed. I mean, we're renowned for an inability to convert inside 50's and to convert shots at goal. And have been since 21. That's a list issue, not anything game-plan related. 

And the modern game doesn't start at the back with slingshot. Do you mean that in the modern game, teams are scoring more often from back half chains? Cause that is true. We have rarely had issue getting our hands on the ball, anywhere on the ground such has been our strength in contested situations. But we've continued to have huge issues at moving from outside that contest. If we were more efficient in that area, we wouldn't be having this conversation at all. 

I think people complicate football a lot more than needed. It's quite simple. Our list was built with certain attribute types in mind from the Roos days. Contest, compete and defend. We won a flag from it. Which is huge. Times have changed, teams figured out how to play us and footy is moving on from that time. We're playing catch up due to a number of reasons whilst still trying to remain strong in our strength areas. 

I still think we need much more variety through our list to get back to the top couple of teams. Lets see how we go against the Roos first hey.. Big banana peel game if we don't bring our pressure and contest given what we lack in other areas. 

 

Edited March 22Mar 22 by Redleg_Knowledge

It’s going to get ugly if we lose tomorrow 

4 minutes ago, Roost it far said:

It’s going to get ugly if we lose tomorrow 

Don't worry we will win by a small margin. But that was what I thought last week. 

Edited March 22Mar 22 by old dee

45 minutes ago, old dee said:

Don't worry we will win by a small margin. But that was what I thought last week. 

I think we’ll win easily but I do have a small, deep hole in my soul where I store the thousands of expected wins that turned south. I also store the last round of 87 in there to keep the overall vibe positive. 

4 hours ago, Redleg_Knowledge said:

See below, plus it was a wet and miserable day so clearly that impacted their one wood throughout the day. Yet their winning goal came from an end to end passage. Something they do incredibly well and whilst Whitfield's first kick was iffy, it's their ability to be clean, slick and execute their kicks that separated them from us in the end. Regardless of that period of dominance at contest in the last. 

 

Exactly right. 

I didn't say they didn't transition ok in the last.

And I know they aare a brilliant transition team.

I said they dominated clearamces and therefore territory in the last q - which remains important, just not as important as it was.

As our coach noted  ot was a key reason why they won.

By the by our only goal for the quarter came from a terrific transition from our back half.

And I'm pretty sure AJ's late point was from a back half transition.

He kicks that goal we win, with 2 transition goals.

Edited March 22Mar 22 by binman

Just kick it off the blo#dy carpet was one used as nausem by my father. 

That first goal of ours by Jeffo in a few nano seconds was dare I say it..... champagne football.

7 hours ago, Redleg_Knowledge said:

You're listing two brand new recruits, so I'd say you're reaching with those names given one has just been dropped and the other is yet to play their second game. 

Not sure I agree, clearly. One has played a season, the other had an Oliver R1 2016-like impact on debut last week.

But when they were drafted is irrelevant to the point I was making. We have the cattle, it's a matter or.building synergy and refining other parts of our game (ie stoppage) to maximise our strengths, whilst developing our weaknesses (transition).

7 hours ago, Redleg_Knowledge said:

I'm not doubting we're trying to get better in that area/add players who can kick. I'm simply saying we don't have the cattle to compete in slingshot games against the top 5-6 sides. And I don't think that can be disputed. I mean, we're renowned for an inability to convert inside 50's and to convert shots at goal. And have been since 21. That's a list issue, not anything game-plan related. 

Answered above, but again, I dispute this strongly. Last year we had McVee and Salem at half back. This year we'll have McVee, Salem and two elite runners and kickers alongside them. How many players do you need before you "have the cattle"?

It's also irrelevant RE scores for inside 50 as we played probably 12 games last year with an early version of this transition game in mind where territory was less important than slingshot. As I've said previously, see the Geelong win in round 6 last year. We killed them on transition. That's the blueprint. They were unbeaten to that point in time.

Add Windsor, Lindsay, more dare with ball movement, different forward structures,  and what we did between 2017-2023 + part 2 of 2024 is irrelevant.

7 hours ago, Redleg_Knowledge said:

And the modern game doesn't start at the back with slingshot. Do you mean that in the modern game, teams are scoring more often from back half chains? Cause that is true. We have rarely had issue getting our hands on the ball, anywhere on the ground such has been our strength in contested situations. But we've continued to have huge issues at moving from outside that contest. If we were more efficient in that area, we wouldn't be having this conversation at all. 

Well, actually, the modern game is points scored from defensive 50 transition. 

But you're posting as if we want to play a territory game and bombard the opposition with repeat inside 50s.

I've said our MO is to go for aggressive "perfect" centre and forward half clearances that lead to scores or rescind territory to the opposition, and thus allow us to slingshot back in.

Every game is different as every opposition is different, but against the faster transition sides, this will be our go to 

7 hours ago, Redleg_Knowledge said:

I think people complicate football a lot more than needed. It's quite simple. Our list was built with certain attribute types in mind from the Roos days. Contest, compete and defend. We won a flag from it. Which is huge. Times have changed, teams figured out how to play us and footy is moving on from that time. We're playing catch up due to a number of reasons whilst still trying to remain strong in our strength areas. 

Nah. Contest is always king. But modern footy requires speed on the ball from contest. Winning clearance, zones and repeat entries are no longer enough. That's important nuisance I think you aren't acknowledging. 

7 hours ago, Redleg_Knowledge said:

I still think we need much more variety through our list to get back to the top couple of teams. Lets see how we go against the Roos first hey.. Big banana peel game if we don't bring our pressure and contest given what we lack in other areas. 

No list is every finished. Our approach has been to continue replenishing our list while our stars are still in the sweetspot.

In 4 years we've added JVR, Jefferson, Windsor, Kolt, McVee, Lindsay and Langford. It's a significant injection of talent, and I expect us to continue. Have a good season and can really hit the FA/ pre FA market.

On 21/03/2025 at 09:57, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

We really have reached peak Elon Musk problems when Demonland is being affected.

Pls tell me Dick Dastardly (masterful toe cutter) hasn't cut funding to our beloved Demonland!?? (among so many other magnificent achievements).

By the way, shouldn't he be wearing a suit?  What is the world coming to.

2 hours ago, leave it to deever said:

Just kick it off the blo#dy carpet was one used as nausem by my father. 

That first goal of ours by Jeffo in a few nano seconds was dare I say it..... champagne football.

I used to play carpet bowls at my Nan's and can't recall ever kicking the balls off the carpet

On 21/03/2025 at 16:25, DistrACTION Jackson said:

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

We are consistently losing close games.

Our method / management / application of red time both at the end of many quarters and matches is poor at best.

14 minutes ago, Demon Dynasty said:

We are consistently losing close games.

Our method / management / application of red time both at the end of many quarters and matches is poor at best.

Agree with that. I was referring to our ball movement was better than it was last year, not about our ability to close out close games.

On 21/03/2025 at 12:39, 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 12:45, binman said:

Absolute rubbish.

On 21/03/2025 at 16:13, old dee said:

Hmm so where have these mystery forwards been the last three years binman we often have more inside the forward 50 but manage the lose the games. Last week same problem 56 vs 52. 

Amazing.

On 22/03/2025 at 18:22, Roost it far said:

I think we’ll win easily but I do have a small, deep hole in my soul where I store the thousands of expected wins that turned south. I also store the last round of 87 in there to keep the overall vibe positive. 

Just asking for a friend.....

How deep is that hole ?? 

On 22/03/2025 at 07:23, Adam The God said:

Not sure I agree, clearly. One has played a season, the other had an Oliver R1 2016-like impact on debut last week.

But when they were drafted is irrelevant to the point I was making. We have the cattle, it's a matter or.building synergy and refining other parts of our game (ie stoppage) to maximise our strengths, whilst developing our weaknesses (transition).

Answered above, but again, I dispute this strongly. Last year we had McVee and Salem at half back. This year we'll have McVee, Salem and two elite runners and kickers alongside them. How many players do you need before you "have the cattle"?

It's also irrelevant RE scores for inside 50 as we played probably 12 games last year with an early version of this transition game in mind where territory was less important than slingshot. As I've said previously, see the Geelong win in round 6 last year. We killed them on transition. That's the blueprint. They were unbeaten to that point in time.

Add Windsor, Lindsay, more dare with ball movement, different forward structures,  and what we did between 2017-2023 + part 2 of 2024 is irrelevant.

Well, actually, the modern game is points scored from defensive 50 transition. 

But you're posting as if we want to play a territory game and bombard the opposition with repeat inside 50s.

I've said our MO is to go for aggressive "perfect" centre and forward half clearances that lead to scores or rescind territory to the opposition, and thus allow us to slingshot back in.

Every game is different as every opposition is different, but against the faster transition sides, this will be our go to 

Nah. Contest is always king. But modern footy requires speed on the ball from contest. Winning clearance, zones and repeat entries are no longer enough. That's important nuisance I think you aren't acknowledging. 

No list is every finished. Our approach has been to continue replenishing our list while our stars are still in the sweetspot.

In 4 years we've added JVR, Jefferson, Windsor, Kolt, McVee, Lindsay and Langford. It's a significant injection of talent, and I expect us to continue. Have a good season and can really hit the FA/ pre FA market.

It's seems you've misunderstood me on many fronts and I can be bothered replying to every one of your paragraphs. There are a whole lot of words there and I still think you're complicating what is very simple. 

Basically, my view is that we don't have a balanced enough list across the entire ground to make the most of our ball winning ability. We haven't done enough to address a vanilla forward line and our midfield is still very one-dimensional given the similar attributes they all share. 

I think you and others completely over-analyze our game plan. 

When half your best 22 are average kicks of the footy, you're going to have a hard time converting inside 50 dominance into scores, regardless of whether the ball is coming from a back-half chain or a repeat entry. You're going to have a hard time moving the ball from all areas of the ground. And when your midfield is comprehensively beaten up around the ball as well, you get what we saw yesterday. A smacking by a bunch of kids. 

Pointing out that we've picked up talent in the last few years is no different to most other sides around us so I'm not sure why that's a talking point. 

The fact remains, Goodwin hasn't done enough with our list since 21' to be able to stay ahead of the curve. 

 

On 21/03/2025 at 23:19, Redleg_Knowledge said:

I still think we need much more variety through our list to get back to the top couple of teams. Lets see how we go against the Roos first hey.. Big banana peel game if we don't bring our pressure and contest given what we lack in other areas. 

 

Precisely what happened. Didn't take our chances when we had them due to our lack of foot skills and decision making across the board as well as a lack of class forward of the ball to create. And when we dropped off with our pressure and contest, we have no way of staying in a game due to our poor skill level across the board. 

1 hour ago, Redleg_Knowledge said:

Precisely what happened. Didn't take our chances when we had them due to our lack of foot skills and decision making across the board as well as a lack of class forward of the ball to create. And when we dropped off with our pressure and contest, we have no way of staying in a game due to our poor skill level across the board. 

This is literally every team. If you don't have pressure or win contest you're not going to stay in the modern game...

1 hour ago, Adam The God said:

This is literally every team. If you don't have pressure or win contest you're not going to stay in the modern game...

No it's not. 

How many times have opposition teams beaten us when we've still managed to win contested poss count and clearance? Countless. 

You keep talking about the modern game like it's some template that everyone plays. It's not. Teams have variations and individual lists differ from team to team. A team like us simply cannot afford to lose contest and clearance as often as other teams because we struggle to score from the back half compared to other sides. Yes we're trying to change that with slight game-style variations but it's been to no avail due to the current list we have. 

16 minutes ago, Redleg_Knowledge said:

No it's not. 

How many times have opposition teams beaten us when we've still managed to win contested poss count and clearance? Countless. 

You keep talking about the modern game like it's some template that everyone plays. It's not. Teams have variations and individual lists differ from team to team. A team like us simply cannot afford to lose contest and clearance as often as other teams because we struggle to score from the back half compared to other sides. Yes we're trying to change that with slight game-style variations but it's been to no avail due to the current list we have. 

The biggest problem the way I see it is we revert to type as soon as the pressure goes up. I’m a believer in getting Viney out of the middle and have him play forward as a small. I think he’s a smart reader of the pay. Rotate Pickett, Lindsay and Windsor in the middle with Petracca and Oliver to get some outside class in there. It didn’t help that Xerri absolutely monstered Max.

I just don’t think Langdon should play anywhere except the wing or maybe HHF. Sharp isn’t an ANB replacement but could work towards that perhaps. I think we have to play Laurie or Billing’s, after watching VFL I’m leaning towards Laurie. Such a pity he isn’t a better player. Losing Jefferson and Lever didn’t help our ability to change things up. 
I think we’ve been recruiting well but I’m leaning towards trading Petracca out for draft picks. Yes he’s good but hard decisions need to be made if this is actually were we are at, which I don’t think we are. I think once we get May, Pickett, McVee back in the side we’ll look a lot better.

Edited March 23Mar 23 by Roost it far

21 minutes ago, Redleg_Knowledge said:

No it's not. 

How many times have opposition teams beaten us when we've still managed to win contested poss count and clearance? Countless. 

You keep talking about the modern game like it's some template that everyone plays. It's not. Teams have variations and individual lists differ from team to team. A team like us simply cannot afford to lose contest and clearance as often as other teams because we struggle to score from the back half compared to other sides. Yes we're trying to change that with slight game-style variations but it's been to no avail due to the current list we have. 

What? Read my post again.

I said "if you don't have pressure or win contest you're not going to stay in the modern game".

The reason we've not won those games where we win CP and clearance is because the other team has out pressured us.

You're not old mate Steve are you? 🤦

Edited March 23Mar 23 by Adam The God

6 minutes ago, Roost it far said:

The biggest problem the way I see it is we revert to type as soon as the pressure goes up. I’m a believer in getting Viney out of the middle and have him play forward as a small. I think he’s a smart reader of the pay. Rotate Pickett, Lindsay and Windsor in the middle with Petracca and Oliver to get some outside class in there. It didn’t help that Xerri absolutely monstered Max.

💯 spot on here. Although, I also think 2017-2023 it was a directive to get it forward and lock it in, and play territory.

As for the Viney bit, I and others have been writing it for 5 years.

Edited March 23Mar 23 by Adam The God

27 minutes ago, Adam The God said:

💯 spot on here. Although, I also think 2017-2023 it was a directive to get it forward and lock it in, and play territory.

As for the Viney bit, I and others have been writing it for 5 years.

The Viney bit has definitely been circulating around here. I think it’s worth a shot. After watching on Sunday I’m no longer convinced you can have 3 inside mids in the middle unless Max is dominating hit outs. Witts is no slouch so we need a plan if Max is getting beat. We got Campbell for a reason?? Is AJ good enough to take on their second ruck? Our mids are used to Max dominating and that’s now changing. 

1 hour ago, Adam The God said:

What? Read my post again.

I said "if you don't have pressure or win contest you're not going to stay in the modern game".

The reason we've not won those games where we win CP and clearance is because the other team has out pressured us.

You're not old mate Steve are you? 🤦

Yep, I reckon you've nailed it - i knew their style seemed familiar - Steve the man jordon (aka whatevs) back. 

Thanks for the heads up. 

On 21/03/2025 at 16:51, drdrake said:

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.

 

what do you mean now. From either stoppage or turnover are the only ways you can score. The only other option is from kick out which is less than a goal a game on ave.

3 hours ago, Adam The God said:

What? Read my post again.

I said "if you don't have pressure or win contest you're not going to stay in the modern game".

The reason we've not won those games where we win CP and clearance is because the other team has out pressured us.

You're not old mate Steve are you? 🤦

Well your memory doesn't serve you correctly. We've lost countless games even if our pressure has matched or bettered the oppo and if our contested numbers and clearance numbers were better over the course of a game. 

When we're pressured, we crumble even further due to our poor skills across the board. Some teams can withstand that pressure and still execute. 

Jrmac has made a great post in regards to the problems we face in another thread, I suggest you read it. 

And I don't know who Steve is. 

Edited March 24Mar 24 by Redleg_Knowledge