46 minutes ago, Neil Crompton said:

I guarantee there would be a market for this. The problem is, there is no one in the media with the intelligence of being able to deliver it.

Indeed

And there no driver fir 7 or fox to introduce any meaningful innovations given their duopoly.

Why spend any money on innovation above and beyond paying the bone headed ex footballers who clag up the coverage of the game.

22 minutes ago, binman said:


Indeed
And there no driver fir 7 or fox to introduce any meaningful innovations given their duopoly.
Why spend any money on innovation above and beyond paying the bone headed ex footballers who clag up the coverage of the game.

There is but that's not what the media want, people want to hear controversial side of football.

1 hour ago, demon3165 said:

Great analysis and it was good to see him mention about not getting sucked into the contest and hold, this is what the pies are doing, you watch Nick Daicos will lead his opponent into the contest and then peel away same with Josh it's smart play just hope we can continue to do those little things.

In primary school the technical term was "stacks on the mill".

I watched his analysis and it was very good but soccer goalkeepers do this using the angles automatically to create the impression they have covered the whole goals, it is called depth perception.

It is no different in AFL but the players have to be switched on 100% mentally to do this throughout the match.

Watching that analysis puts Goody’s statements around “I love what we did without the ball” into a whole lot more context

Jeff knows his onions

8 hours ago, Oxdee said:

Has anyone been watching Jeff Whites match analysis? His insight of the game is on another level

This is very good!

Very very good.

I hope that Kalani has been a keen student of his father's knowledge and analysis.

...and I hope he comes to us.

Fascinating analysis.

Am I right in saying that Jeff lives in QLD?

How valuable would he be as an assistant coach were he willing and able?

OR, to those who have a far greater understanding of tactics and structure than I, is this all just basics??

26 minutes ago, monoccular said:

How valuable would he be as an assistant coach were he willing and able?

Yes, but he's only analysing what we're already doing. IOW, we already have the coaches and strategists who know all this and are implementing it.

Also, there's more to being an assistant than being good at analysis and systems - not saying he mightn't have those additional skills as well.

17 hours ago, Demonstone said:

Fans often deride their players for "guarding grass". Jeff's analysis demonstrates why they do this and how a zone defence operates.

Yes, it was interesting how he described the defence zone that had been popular up until recently versus the newest iteration of zone defence we're doing which involves being in line with the defender's kick (and looks like guarding grass). Very enlightening to see how we're changing things and why it works!

Very good analysis.

Learnt some things .

This guy needs to come home 😉

( bring the lad too 😆 )

22 hours ago, Roost it far said:

Why oh why don’t we get this during breaks and post match during AFL broadcasts. Maybe someone should set up a YouTube channel that does this during the breaks in play. Do they seriously think no one is interested in actual analysis?

It would get in the road of ads and bloke [censored] by the presenters. Anyway who needs someone who knows what he is talking about!

I don't want to sound critical of Jeff's excellent analysis but there were 4 shocking and uncharacteristic mistakes in there by Brisbane - Fort's dump miskick out of D50, Payne's fumble on the wing, Ashcroft's absolute clanger kick across goal and Payne's terrible 10m fluffed kick in their D50. Fagan will be livid with that last quarter.

But I guess all of those mistakes were in part due to our pressure and set up behind the ball so we'll take it. Great last quarter Dees!

18 hours ago, Neil Crompton said:

I guarantee there would be a market for this. The problem is, there is no one in the media with the intelligence of being able to deliver it.

Hang on there is BT!!!!!

11 hours ago, monoccular said:

Fascinating analysis.

Am I right in saying that Jeff lives in QLD?

How valuable would he be as an assistant coach were he willing and able?

OR, to those who have a far greater understanding of tactics and structure than I, is this all just basics??

It would be pretty basic stuff for anyone currently playing footy, or involved in coaching or talent spotting, at a reasonable level.

But not basic for the rest of us, particularly people like me who last played footy in the under 14s.

I'd like to think I've got a reasonable handle on tactics and structures, but whatever I do know is a function of:

• Having always been really interested in the tactical side of the game

• Being fascinated by the evolution of tactics in footy

• My own observations

• Like a bower bird, getting scraps of information from the media to add to my knowledge

All of which means my knowledge about tactics, method, game plans, structures etc etc is really just a hodge podge of cobbled together info with heaps of knowledge gaps and guess work.

Which is why i find the coverage of the game so frustrating. I want to learn about the tactical side of the game, the basics and the more complex aspects and i don't think it is unreasonable to expect i get some that in the wall to coverage of the game in the same way you do in other sports.

But there seems to be no interest in helping people learn about what I'd argue, given the size if the field, the number of participants, being 360 degrees, opaqueness of the rules and the speed of evolution is the most complex elite sport in the world.

Which is why I loved this vid so much - smart, easy to understand when combined with visuals, doesn't talk in the stupid code and jargon ex footballers seem to love so much (eg the infuriating habit of recently retired ex footballers saying stuff like 'the fat side' or 'kicking off line' assuming people know what they are talking about when they have never bother explaining it) and above all informative and interesting.

I mean, really, fox and 7 is that bloody hard?

Edited Thursday at 02:323 days by binman

I got a chance to watch it last night. learned a few things.
This is the kind of analysis footy fans want. Wake up, TV!

1 hour ago, binman said:

It would be pretty basic stuff for anyone currently playing footy, or involved in coaching or talent spotting, at a reasonable level.

But not basic for the rest of us, particularly people like me who last played footy in the under 14s.

I'd like to think I've got a reasonable handle on tactics and structures, but whatever I do know is a function of:

• Having always been really interested in the tactical side of the game

• Being fascinated by the evolution of tactics in footy

• My own observations

• Like a bower bird, getting scraps of information from the media to add to my knowledge

All of which means my knowledge about tactics, method, game plans, structures etc etc is really just a hodge podge of cobbled together info with heaps of knowledge gaps.

Which is why i find the coverage of the game so frustrating. I want to learn about the tactical side of the game, the basics and the more complex aspects and i don't think it is unreasonable to expect i get some that in the wall to coverage of the game in the same way you do in other sports.

But there seems to be no interest in helping people learn about what I'd argue, given the size if the field, the number of participants and being 360 degrees, opaqueness of the rules and speed of evolution is the most complex elite sport in the world.

Which is why I loved this vid so much - smart, easy to understand when combined with visuals, doesn't talk in the stupid code and jargon ex footballers seem to love so much (eg the infuriating habit of recently retired ex footballers saying stuff like 'the fat side' or 'kicking off line' assuming people know what they are talking about when they have never bother explaining it) and above all informative and interesting.

I mean, really, fox and 7 is that bloody hard?

Haha, he does actually use the phrase "kick off the line". But I agree with what you're saying.

2 hours ago, dice said:

I don't want to sound critical of Jeff's excellent analysis but there were 4 shocking and uncharacteristic mistakes in there by Brisbane - Fort's dump miskick out of D50, Payne's fumble on the wing, Ashcroft's absolute clanger kick across goal and Payne's terrible 10m fluffed kick in their D50. Fagan will be livid with that last quarter.

But I guess all of those mistakes were in part due to our pressure and set up behind the ball so we'll take it. Great last quarter Dees!

not very generous. I'd say in large part to our pressure. Thats the whole point of the zones we set up- removing the easy short kicks and putting the kicker and receiver under pressure.

You could see from the first half where we didnt get that balance right and Brisbane waltzed the ball throug the middle

It's fine lines and looks terrible when it doesn't go right...

1 hour ago, Adam The God said:

Haha, he does actually use the phrase "kick off the line". But I agree with what you're saying.

Yes he does - but he explains exactly what it means clearly and with the visual aid of drawing a line down the ground to illustrate what he means (ditto 'fat side')

20 hours ago, demon3165 said:

22 minutes ago, binman said:


Indeed
And there no driver fir 7 or fox to introduce any meaningful innovations given their duopoly.
Why spend any money on innovation above and beyond paying the bone headed ex footballers who clag up the coverage of the game.

There is but that's not what the media want, people want to hear controversial side of football.

You see this is where im a bit surprised at all the discussion regarding the more in-depth analysis. Firstly, i want to point out that im for it, i love the analytical, statistical nature of footy. However the most recent example is where Ch 7 decided to invest in the Korn and his side-kicks. Why? because its all about creating headlines and clicks. The strategy is clearly to get one of the most controversial AFL pundits of the modern era to generate utter garbage and then take a back seat to then see how the footy world erupts into a frenzy of hot-blooded debate. And they are not alone, Ch 9 and the class of clowns led by McClure and Bozo Barret.

The broadcasters are just not interested into the meaningful stuff, because large parts of the consumer base isnt either. They would prefer the controversy, Jerry Springer style rage-bates that come up from time to time. And if they don't, well we know how they can bend the truth. Unfortunately this in-depth analysis will continue to exist in the outskirts of the AFL reporting and journalism machine.

20 minutes ago, GS_1905 said:

You see this is where im a bit surprised at all the discussion regarding the more in-depth analysis. Firstly, i want to point out that im for it, i love the analytical, statistical nature of footy. However the most recent example is where Ch 7 decided to invest in the Korn and his side-kicks. Why? because its all about creating headlines and clicks. The strategy is clearly to get one of the most controversial AFL pundits of the modern era to generate utter garbage and then take a back seat to then see how the footy world erupts into a frenzy of hot-blooded debate. And they are not alone, Ch 9 and the class of clowns led by McClure and Bozo Barret.

The broadcasters are just not interested into the meaningful stuff, because large parts of the consumer base isnt either. They would prefer the controversy, Jerry Springer style rage-bates that come up from time to time. And if they don't, well we know how they can bend the truth. Unfortunately this in-depth analysis will continue to exist in the outskirts of the AFL reporting and journalism machine.

Its chicken and egg.

Again, id argue that people who watch footy, or at least a significant bl8ck of us arec very interested in meaningful analysis.

That's certainly the case in America, as reflected in the coverage of MBL, NBA and NFL.

I really can't imagine American sports fans are any more sophisticated than Australian sports fans.

Edited Thursday at 06:233 days by binman

12 minutes ago, binman said:

Its chicken and egg.

Again, id argue that the people who watch footy, or at least a significant part of it is very interested in meaningful analysis.

That's certainly the case in America, as reflected in the coverage of MBL, NBA and NFL. I really can't magazine American sports fans are any more sophisticated than Australian sports fans.

The interest is absolutely there. They don’t have the personnel to implement it. The Fox footy shows flirt with analysis but there’s no depth. Guys like Hoyne are perfect for it. For mine you don’t need tv performers, you need a person in the back at broadcasts, an ex assistant coach at any reasonable level of footy could do it. They then feed key plays to the guys out front. It ain’t that hard, most of the commentators are reasonably good at articulating facts fed to them.

Edited Thursday at 03:323 days by Roost it far

4 minutes ago, Roost it far said:

The interest is absolutely there. They don’t have the personnel to implement it. The Fox footy shows flirt with analysis but there’s no depth. Guys like Hoyne are perfect for it. For mine you don’t need tv performers, you need a person in the back at broadcasts, an ex assistant coach at any reasonable level of footy could do it. They then feed key plays to the guys out front. It ain’t that hard, most of the commentators are reasonable good at articulating facts fed to them.

What about Hoyne or even employing Hoarse or Simpson? There is absolutely a plethora of footy experts with a level of media competence that would be able to contribute to a 30 minute weekly segment. Id continue to argue that broadcaster executives just don't see the commercial appeal of it. Perhaps there is an opportunity to have some type of investment into a podcast style weekly show that can be bankrolled (albeit at a much lower cost) and produced for social media... Does anybody have anybody have contacts at Fox or Ch7/9? 😀

1 minute ago, GS_1905 said:

What about Hoyne or even employing Hoarse or Simpson? There is absolutely a plethora of footy experts with a level of media competence that would be able to contribute to a 30 minute weekly segment. Id continue to argue that broadcaster executives just don't see the commercial appeal of it. Perhaps there is an opportunity to have some type of investment into a podcast style weekly show that can be bankrolled (albeit at a much lower cost) and produced for social media... Does anybody have anybody have contacts at Fox or Ch7/9? 😀

I’m not after a weekly half hour watching 3 stooges analysing 3 set plays and a host of gambling ads. I want analysis during the breaks in games. FFS Kayo often just play a still saying we’ll be back soon.