Daniel Hoyne was on First Crack Preview saying Melbourne's ball movement vs Carlton was the fastest Champion Data has seen in their 8 years, i.e they play on almost at all costs. I'm sure there'll be a follow-up story or clip online eventually but this is interesting to hear.

5 minutes ago, Go Ds said:

Daniel Hoyne was on First Crack Preview saying Melbourne's ball movement vs Carlton was the fastest Champion Data has seen in their 8 years, i.e they play on almost at all costs. I'm sure there'll be a follow-up story or clip online eventually but this is interesting to hear.

Sounds like an evolution of 2025, only now the shackles are off with a different mindset framing from King.

It was a bold move to sack Goody, but it was definitely the right one.

The appointment of King looks good at this stage, but a week is a long time in football, and I expect us to yo-yo a bit this year.

Edited yesterday at 12:081 day by Adam The God

I am happy to yo-yo when you see performances like last week's second half and from the second quarter on against Freo. It will take time to click and for the dfence to position better behind the ball in a fast-moving gameplan. Tell me when youv'e been more exited to watch the Dees: the last three weeks or the last three years? I'll take A thanks Eddie.

It certainly seems a lot quicker. I thought it might have just been a perception given the stodge we’ve been accustomed to so good to see it backed up in the data.

I saw in another thread that at least one poster wanted Salemi dropped. Whilst I don't agree with that move, you do wonder if King has asked him to speed up his play. Salem tendency to kill the momentum appears at odds with our new game plan.

10 hours ago, Go Ds said:

Daniel Hoyne was on First Crack Preview saying Melbourne's ball movement vs Carlton was the fastest Champion Data has seen in their 8 years, i.e they play on almost at all costs. I'm sure there'll be a follow-up story or clip online eventually but this is interesting to hear.

Just seeking a point of clarification: The definition of "ball speed" here is percentage of time the team played on after a mark or free kick? Is that right? It's not, for example, measuring literally how quickly the ball moves by having it in the hands of the fastest runners? Or, perhaps, dividing the metres gained by the time taken to gain those metres (which I think would be a fascinating measure)?

10 hours ago, Adam The God said:

Sounds like an evolution of 2025, only now the shackles are off with a different mindset framing from King.

It was a bold move to sack Goody, but it was definitely the right one.

The appointment of King looks good at this stage, but a week is a long time in football, and I expect us to yo-yo a bit this year.

We were second last year

Fox Sports

AFL’s newest and most important stat: Speed of Ball expla...

Truth in Pies shock as AFL’s fastest... and slowest teams revealed: Every club ranked 1-18

3 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

We were second last year

Fox Sports

AFL’s newest and most important stat: Speed of Ball expla...

Truth in Pies shock as AFL’s fastest... and slowest teams revealed: Every club ranked 1-18

Is that where we finished though? Because that article was written mid year.

13 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

We were second last year

Fox Sports

AFL’s newest and most important stat: Speed of Ball expla...

Truth in Pies shock as AFL’s fastest... and slowest teams revealed: Every club ranked 1-18

Answers my question (above). Thanks.

It's a very interesting analysis. I look forward to hearing how the media manage to either interpret or mis-interpret it.

29 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Just seeking a point of clarification: The definition of "ball speed" here is percentage of time the team played on after a mark or free kick? Is that right? It's not, for example, measuring literally how quickly the ball moves by having it in the hands of the fastest runners? Or, perhaps, dividing the metres gained by the time taken to gain those metres (which I think would be a fascinating measure)?

Watching the segment, they seem to define it as how quickly the team played on after a mark/free kick. Hoyne was praising how much we play on with instinct, to a contest, with optimism. It worked against Carlton, but I dunno - it feels a bit too much like the old bomb-n-hope ball movement. I must admit I was surprised to hear we've broken records - I mean, we look fast moving the ball, but not the fastest ever. I'll take the record though!

9 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Just seeking a point of clarification: The definition of "ball speed" here is percentage of time the team played on after a mark or free kick? Is that right? It's not, for example, measuring literally how quickly the ball moves by having it in the hands of the fastest runners? Or, perhaps, dividing the metres gained by the time taken to gain those metres (which I think would be a fascinating measure)?

Indeed, which goes to my point the stat is of little use if it's not clear how it is defined and measured.

Last season, according to Champion data, we were the second quickest in the AFL at playing on after a mark or free kick. I don't know if that's the same stat Hoyne referenced on the First Crack preview when he said we 205 from after a mark or free kick (but i'm guessing it probably is) because he didn't define it.

But it's relevant because despite the myth that dees were a treacle slow down the line team that constantly held the ball up under Goody, whilst true for much of his tenure it decidedly wasn't in 2025. In the 2025 season we were in fact the second quickest at moving the ball on after a mark or free kick (something Hoyne highlighted all season in his 30 min Tuesday spot on SEN - my only not miss footy media).

Does that misconception matter? I think so because already you can see the footy media, and many fans if DL is any guide, suggest King has introduced a radical new game plan, one that is chalk and cheese to what the players are used to - and are assessing his perfo4mance accordingly.

Whilst King's game is different in lots of ways to the one Goody tried to implement in 2025 (and the first half of 2024 too for that matter) - for example, the concept of all team defence AND all team offence - the speed at which we move the ball on after a mark of free kick is not one of them (though its clearly even quicker this season).

That's relevant because the team have had a full season of practising moving the ball on quickly after a mark or free kick, which can only be a positive in terms of making doing so instinctive, as seems to be the case this season (helped by the fact that we moved on players who clearly struggled to implement that method last season).

17 minutes ago, Adina88 said:

Watching the segment, they seem to define it as how quickly the team played on after a mark/free kick. Hoyne was praising how much we play on with instinct, to a contest, with optimism. It worked against Carlton, but I dunno - it feels a bit too much like the old bomb-n-hope ball movement.

I think this will be the thing that gets us back to the top quickly, and also explains the use of some of the younger guys. Early days, while implementing a new game plan, if you back it in you take the good (speed) with the bad (bomb-n-hope), but the finessing or finishing will be a major improvement with the end of the chain or the movement into FWD50, so limited bomb-n-hope. I think in our best quaters this year, it has stood out that they've actually looked to chanhe angles and find the open player with the last kick.

I take it that it explains why Langford is playing more wing, and X still half backish with Kolt being given a run with role. They have to get their running right before being unleashed in the middle full time, Kossie now has the running right and seemed to spend as much time near the ball in the backline as the forward line now, but that running skill, mindset and continual application can take a few years for younger players to get right.

I could see that as the game plan evolves we see more of Steele and Viney being used as the battering rams early in games, so we don't get blown out early, and Kolt as a tagger, then that reverse later in quaters or games, to get our run at these high intensities.

If your players are switched on they know how their teammates will play on quickly and position themselves accordingly then it looks great. The flip side is turnovers where you get cut up as everyone is out of position.

It does seem we have got some fit 2 way runners in the team now which is different to our midfield last year. Vital if the new plan is to work. And lets see how long they can keep it up for.

The players have a licence to take the game on under King

3 hours ago, Adam The God said:

Is that where we finished though? Because that article was written mid year.

But this year's one is only based on 3 games 😜

4 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Just seeking a point of clarification: The definition of "ball speed" here is percentage of time the team played on after a mark or free kick? Is that right? It's not, for example, measuring literally how quickly the ball moves by having it in the hands of the fastest runners? Or, perhaps, dividing the metres gained by the time taken to gain those metres (which I think would be a fascinating measure)?

I wish I knew. The guy used figures he didn't explain.

4 hours ago, M_9 said:

I saw in another thread that at least one poster wanted Salemi dropped. Whilst I don't agree with that move, you do wonder if King has asked him to speed up his play. Salem tendency to kill the momentum appears at odds with our new game plan.

And that poster is totally clueless & should be banned from posting his views.

Same as turning the sound up to 11

Hrmm, you can take a mark then kick long to a contest near the boundary, or you can take a mark, play on to a runner who takes a bounce before firing it to a target in the risky chf zone.

Very hard to track that statistically unless you've got access to the premium packages.

Side thought - Bowey is going to be gold when he comes into this side and system.

57 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

If your players are switched on they know how their teammates will play on quickly and position themselves accordingly then it looks great. The flip side is turnovers where you get cut up as everyone is out of position.

It does seem we have got some fit 2 way runners in the team now which is different to our midfield last year. Vital if the new plan is to work. And lets see how long they can keep it up for.

The players have a licence to take the game on under King

Spot on jnr

Three of our biggest issues last season were we weren't fit enough, the athletic profile of the team was not a good fit for the amount of high-speed running and spread the go fast, transition and turnover game demands and how woefull our kicking was.

As ive noted elsewhere, leaving aside any of the fugazi and cultural stuff, Tracc, Claz and May are all dead slow, not great runners and poor by foot. They are not a great fit for King's game plan (or Goddy's last year).

They've been replaced by better athletes and better kicks - for example Sharp, who if selected last year was inevitably the sub, but under King is thriving and has been one of our best players, in large part because he is perfectly suited to King's game plan.

It was actually fascinating watching the blues as Voss is actually trying to implement the transition game plan, but despite trading in a bunch of players with decent athleticism, he faces the same barriers Goody did - too many bulls and clearance players and way too many ball butchers.

Edited 13 hours ago13 hr by binman

13 minutes ago, binman said:

Spot on jnr

Two of our biggest issues last season was we weren't fit enough, the athletic profile of the team was not a good fit for the amount of high-speed running and spread the go fast, transition and turnover game demands and above all ho woeful our kicking was.

As ive noted elsewhere, leaving aside any of the fugazi and cultural stuff, Tracc, Claz and May are both dead slow, not great runners and poor by foot. They are not a great fit for King's game plan (or Goddy's last year).

They been replaced in the side by better athletes and better kicks - for example Sharp, who if selected last year was sub but under King he is thriving and has been one of our best players, in large part because he is perfectly suited to King's game plan.

It was actually fascinating watching the blues Voss is actually trying to implement the transition game plan but despite trading in a bunch of players with decent athleticism, he faces the same barriers Goody did - too many bulls and clearance players and way too many ball butchers

As an aside I was told last year that the lack of injuries/soreness associated with feet and legs probably meant we wernt trainning hard enough. Got plenty now.

This is just a continuation on from what we did under Goodwin last year. Problem with Goodwin's team last year was:

• We had #1 and #2 for clangers in the side every week (Trac and Clarry).

• We didn't play through Kozzy like we are this year.

• Our setup at stoppages was laughable.

• No instinct to lower the eyes for a short hit up, instead long over the top was our method to score.

King's gameplan isn't all that different from what Goodwin tried last year, it's just different personnel (very much needed) and different messaging has vastly improved our ability to score. All things Goodwin could've done, but didn't, thus was rightly sacked.

I would also like to say, while we should maintain optimism and patience, comments like "That was the Goodwin part of the team" when we have bad quarters/patches are extremely petty and ignorant.

23 minutes ago, MurDoc516 said:

I would also like to say, while we should maintain optimism and patience, comments like "That was the Goodwin part of the team" when we have bad quarters/patches are extremely petty and ignorant.

On that, aside from the Premiership - one of Simon's great skills after inheriting the team from Roos, Neeld, Bailey, was to reduce the bad quarters/patches, from bad 3 months and 6 month periods as per Reverend Daniher during '98-07 🫠

Edited 14 hours ago14 hr by Engorged Onion

2 hours ago, Fritta and Turner said:

As an aside I was told last year that the lack of injuries/soreness associated with feet and legs probably meant we wernt trainning hard enough. Got plenty now.

"lack of injuries"?

Also saw the clip last night and the mysterious 200 figure lol. But from the clips shown, we're playing on by taking a step or two forward immediately after marking it and kicking or handballing it to wherever has been 'instinctively' decided is the best option.

It's flow state footy that cuts out the lag time of holding the ball up to make a decision and giving the opposition time to defend. Petty went back on the mark but once he turned around it was go time, to whoever was leading up, be it a contest or a player free in space. There was no time to stop and assess.

It requires total trust in the rest of your teammates to be presenting up. And if they're not clear, or if they're contesting with an opponent, then so be it. The ball being in continual motion as the principle of our gameplan, is more important than holding it up out of fear of turning it over, which is a distrust in your teammates.

Exciting times.

Edited 12 hours ago12 hr by John Demonic