So I have a theory about the drop off in standards for goal kicking (from set shots) over the last 20 years. Players have become too skinny. When you look at a list of the great goal kickers the only real athletes were Buddy, the erratic Richardson and Riewoldt (who is on my merde list at the moment). Lockett, Dunstall, Ablett, Wade, Hudson and Coventry all had large backsides used to great effect. Even our own Neitz and Jackovich had some weight to throw around. Across a century of great goal kickers, by far and away the best are the heavy set blokes.

I would be curious if we allowed a JVR to be 5-10 kg heavier as the main KPF, and reduce slightly his defensive obligations whether this could see a more composed set shot. Instead of looking like Marvel action heros with 3% body fat, I think there is some merit in heavier, more explosive, players good for bursts.

The difference is I think, that they are doing too much defensive running to properly get the HR down for a good shot and they feel the rough and tumble more being thin. Again this is for set shots not in play shots on goal.

I find it hard to see any other factor across the time period that could cause what is basically a regression in set shot ability when training has become so elite and so professional.

I’m not sure how much traction it’ll get, but this is the kind of post I pay my yearly subscription for.

2 minutes ago, Mel Bourne said:

I’m not sure how much traction it’ll get, but this is the kind of post I pay my yearly subscription for.

It’s certainly true of the champions . Hudson, Plugger, Wade and Cowboy Neale and our own Biffo when he forward would scare the daylights out of modern players one out.

The one thing why the past forwards kicked so well was they all kicked straight over the man on the mark not the hard really, the only reason they kick in an arc is to try and get extra distance with the ball.

Taking 30 seconds to set up for a shot at goal is ruining goal kicking.

Watch the old replays - guys like Wade, Hudson, Lockett, Ablett, Jesaulenko who all kicked 100 goals in a season did not need a long lead time.

Get on with the game and stop looking at the screen for seconds remaining.

Practice quicker set up time and forget about the clock. Kicking for goal will improve, just you see.

33 minutes ago, DEE fence said:

So I have a theory about the drop off in standards for goal kicking (from set shots) over the last 20 years. Players have become too skinny. When you look at a list of the great goal kickers the only real athletes were Buddy, the erratic Richardson and Riewoldt (who is on my merde list at the moment). Lockett, Dunstall, Ablett, Wade, Hudson and Coventry all had large backsides used to great effect. Even our own Neitz and Jackovich had some weight to throw around. Across a century of great goal kickers, by far and away the best are the heavy set blokes.

I would be curious if we allowed a JVR to be 5-10 kg heavier as the main KPF, and reduce slightly his defensive obligations whether this could see a more composed set shot. Instead of looking like Marvel action heros with 3% body fat, I think there is some merit in heavier, more explosive, players good for bursts.

The difference is I think, that they are doing too much defensive running to properly get the HR down for a good shot and they feel the rough and tumble more being thin. Again this is for set shots not in play shots on goal.

I find it hard to see any other factor across the time period that could cause what is basically a regression in set shot ability when training has become so elite and so professional.

I think Cowboy Neale would "fit" into this illustrious group, although he was a bit of a swing man.

Just now, bush demon said:

I think Cowboy Neale would "fit" into this illustrious group, although he was a bit of a swing man.

Ray Biffen as well.

1 hour ago, DEE fence said:

that they are doing too much defensive running to properly get the HR down for a good shot

I think you just answered the question.

39 minutes ago, rjay said:

I think you just answered the question.

Imagine A.Jackovich following his opponent out of the 50 😂

Those fat arsed full forwards never ventured far from the goal square, never chased and suffered from claustrophobia. It would be an affront to them to actually have a teammate within 10 metres of the goal square where they lurked.

On the good ship 'let forwards be forwards', through all misfortunes we sing a merry song because destiny shall prove us right.

3 hours ago, tiers said:

Taking 30 seconds to set up for a shot at goal is ruining goal kicking.

Watch the old replays - guys like Wade, Hudson, Lockett, Ablett, Jesaulenko who all kicked 100 goals in a season did not need a long lead time.

Get on with the game and stop looking at the screen for seconds remaining.

Practice quicker set up time and forget about the clock. Kicking for goal will improve, just you see.

Matthew Lloyd may beg to differ.

"I like big butts and I cannot lie..... "

I do wonder whether some of the old stuff can get embraced again. I've mentioned before a few successful torps from 70 metres and that'd send the opposition scrambling and have an effect on the morale of both teams. Maybe a coach would consider leaving a forward no further than maybe 60 from goal. Yes, they can't provide tackling pressure watching a defender bolting into the centre square but that defender also knows that one mistake and suddenly that 'lazy' forward is an extra player in a dangerous position. Anyway I reckon coaching staff have pondered over a lot of strategies and may even be convinced now the non-chasing forward will never work as a tactic ever again. Certainly if that's so every forward needs more speed and stamina as opposed to a big [censored]. How much extra would a forward need to add to their weight anyway? Going from 80 to 82 kg is only a 2.5% increase. Would such marginal really change a player's marking ability or balance while kicking? Or are you thinking more a 6kg gain?

The fashionable, modern day around the corner kicks, often from 30 or 40 metres directly in front of goal, annoy me. The players seem so happy with themselves as they set up for those shots, yet to me it feels as though only about one in ten of those kicks ever actually go through for a goal. The rest go anywhere from out on the full to the opposite forward pocket.

The traditional direct drop punt or banana/checkside from the forward pocket boundary, seemed to be more logical, direct and appeared to me to have had a better strike rate.

When I started reading this thread I thought it works be just humour, but there are some really thought-provoking ideas in it. The part about HR being too high because of all the chasing they are expected to do makes sense - as does the discussion about taking too long to lick. And I have written previously about how the FF should stay in the forward line and if the FB runs off him, it will be only once, until the FB is forced to pay the price.

Fans won’t stand for it. Just have a look at Fritter our best goal kicker of our flag era. Not fat at all but certainly doesn’t do a lot of defensive running or get his heart rate to high and maybe that is a factor in his ( usually) quality set shots. But he’s getting some stick for not doing the hard stuff.

Billy Brownless likes this thread

14 hours ago, tiers said:

....

Get on with the game and stop looking at the screen for seconds remaining.

Practice quicker set up time and forget about the clock. Kicking for goal will improve, just you see.

I agree. I recall that years back the umps were told that if a player looks at the clock call play on. I dimly recall it was enforced. Was it? If so, when did it change?

2 hours ago, Colm said:

Fans won’t stand for it. Just have a look at Fritter our best goal kicker of our flag era. Not fat at all but certainly doesn’t do a lot of defensive running or get his heart rate to high and maybe that is a factor in his ( usually) quality set shots. But he’s getting some stick for not doing the hard stuff.

Would fans like Fritter more if he was a bit fatter?

There is definitely not enough players with nicknames such as fridge (truck, train, moving violation etc).

Love this thread! Totally agree too

The 70 metre kick could revolutionise the game.

Where's those guys who can kick over the proverbial wheat silo these days.

Don't laugh the three point shot in basketball has dramatically changed that game.

Why when players are so much stronger and fitter and records tumble in most sports have we not seen longer kicks in AFL. NFL punters and kickers probably have increased their range by 20% since the eighties. Same in rugby union.

6 hours ago, Spirit of '87 said:

The fashionable, modern day around the corner kicks, often from 30 or 40 metres directly in front of goal, annoy me. The players seem so happy with themselves as they set up for those shots, yet to me it feels as though only about one in ten of those kicks ever actually go through for a goal. The rest go anywhere from out on the full to the opposite forward pocket.

The traditional direct drop punt or banana/checkside from the forward pocket boundary, seemed to be more logical, direct and appeared to me to have had a better strike rate.

I reckon so much is micromanaged and tested these days. You see those graphics showing a player's scores through the goals and to the left and right when they take a set shot? I'm sure our team even has these kinds of stats for newbies like Henderson. If a player has fifty shots at goal after training maybe they're not tabulated. But I wouldn't be surprised if players tell the club statistician the next session that they kicked 31.14. Once a player sees the stats for what has worked for them I'm guessing then they trust the stats.

5 hours ago, Ollie fan said:

When I started reading this thread I thought it works be just humour, but there are some really thought-provoking ideas in it. The part about HR being too high because of all the chasing they are expected to do makes sense - as does the discussion about taking too long to lick. And I have written previously about how the FF should stay in the forward line and if the FB runs off him, it will be only once, until the FB is forced to pay the price.

If Jake Lever is allowed to be a roaming third man while his opponent sits 80m behind the play, I'm all for an opposition coach trying this strategy. I promise you that allowing teams to play 18 v 17, and hoping you get it out the back to the free man will not work.

That being said, I do wonder if the "deepest" forwards should look to play aggressively. Making earlier and occassionally deeper runs behind the defenders to try to drag the defense out of shape. The best forwards move like this, you can see it at the ground.