deanox

Yeah absolutely agree. Ive been banging that drum for years too. At the moment the congestion around the ball is caused by players deliberately standing close enough to "tackle" their own team mate so that it becomes a ball up, rather than a free kick against. Coaches use this tactic to try and avoid ongoing contested ball situations, because they are uncontrolled and parts get drawn out of position. This will force the players wider because they'll need to knock it out quicker in contested situations.

These three are perfect and three best way to get rid of congestion. Use the whistle and stop congestion. Pay holding the ball as soon as someone is tackled with the ball. Don't grand stand the signal for the crowd. Quick whistle, run in and throw straight up within 1-2 seconds instead of waiting for teams to set up or for nominated ruckmen to arrive. The ruck becomes a "follower" again. The 8-15 seconds between calling for a ball up and actually doing it is what allows the congestion to continue. This will also shorten the quarter's, by reducing time on (what the tv wants) and have similar effect to reducing rotations by removing the players rest time. Also watch old games and they do this. If they want to retain nominated ruckmen for center bounces and throw ins, that could be ok, because they take time to set up.

They cost money, but if the AFL wants to capitalise Sydney, now is the time to keep them. Union is dead (they might not survive this) and league is so greatly reliant on pokies that they will hurt from this for years. If there was ever need for two Sydney teams, now is it.

They should scale back the "base" contracts and increase the match payments, so that they are 75% of the salary cap. A) why should big name players be able to get payments for sitting on the sidelines, whether due to form or injury? B) They claim their salaries are because "they are the product", and this will tie their pay directly to their product. C) Players will be rewarded on form and performance, not based on how well they negotiated a contract. D) The league will have flexibility in the case that games are ever cancelled.

I think we've built a lot of the game plan around the idea that TMac will be at least useful, not he really hasn't been.

There is no way the game plan is bomb it long to 3 on 1s. So what's going wrong?

Broken foot, 3 months. Announced this morning.

It'll be like watching VFL on TV. With the small crowd there seems less focus on bad decisions and mistakes. I'm looking forward to it.

I think the original plans were to try and squeeze 2-3 games in before everything hit hard, suspending the season. That way they had the option of pushing back a few weeks (removing the byes and pushing back the GF could gain a month) or even resuming the season with a new fixture (ie reduced rounds,- everyone plays everyone once - or compressed - 6 day breaks and mid week games). But if they bail now it could be disastrous.

This is in line with my thoughts. We've had a perfect storm: -AFL directive to "let the game go" because no one likes stop start football and they want it to flow, this umpires don't make quick calls on free kicks or even ball ups - Coaches realising some really basic stuff: They want to be in control of the game, so they prefer a stoppage where they can set up, to a truly loose ball entire the outcome is left to chance. They want to prevent opposition taking possession - because that sounds them scoring - and therefore prefer to keep the ball contested, even if that means they don't win possession themselves. These two situations have meant the AFL has let the coaches turn AFL from fast flowing attack into bogged up scrums. Instead of introducing new rules (which the coaches will just exploit) they should simply make it less valuable for coaches to have players around the ball. The switching of % to points for might be a good catalyst. But I do think that clubs play to win first with percentage a long way second, so it will have limited effect on most games, except perhaps to open up in the last quarter.

This focus on interpretation change was suggested by Clarko in the article though! I think this will help both congestion and scoring though, with players starting further outside of a contest (3rd man in is now less valuable), and Moore scotty to knock the ball clear.

Bumping this, in case anyone wants to comment: I think it's a really different take that just reducing numbers and worth discussing.

Absolutely. But he was recognized as one of the best in the league, plus these two werent available at the time. It may be that we had been having conversations with both and thought we were a chance of landing both, thus focused our recruitment on May instead (who we thought would go to Collingwood at the end of 2019). I was only commenting on why many of us wanted us to look closely at him.

The way we've seen Langdon and Tomlinson play is exactly the reason some of us were so keen on Gaff. He fills the same role, and after 2018 it was very clear we needed someone in that role. We don't need him anymore.

He is on the money in that article, but not for the reasons quoted in the headline. “We probably need to look at the way the games officiated and say to ourselves: ‘How can we reduce the congestion? Do we reward holding the ball more regularly, so that we don’t have three, four or five stoppages in a row where as many as 20 players, 25 players get to that area of the ground and it gets really congested?’” Clarkson asked. Nothing needs to change, just play the rules as written: -Pay holding the ball when players are caught. -Pay holding the man against the 3rd player in who locks a contest up by "tackling a tackler". -Pay shepparding in the mark, every time someone prevents an opponent marking by bodying them out of the way, instead of trying to contest the ball in the air. Terrible interpretations are the problem, not numbers of players.

Read back to my posts in this thread, and I described exactly that: he played on the defensive wing, forcing opposition wing to match him up because of his height, offering a long switch option when they won the ball, and dropping back quickly to prevent/inhibit the opposition switch, when they lost the contest. It will be interesting to see if we leave Tomlinson/Langdon on one side of the ground each, playing the same role mirrored, or if they switch sides depending on game position.

I think the description of ANB as "coaches favorite" shows personal bias unfortunately (this isn't just you either!). The coach likes him because he runs better than almost anyone and generates lots of chances at goal. The coach picks him because no one else has been able to offer those qualities in that position. When other players go past him, he'll get dropped.

If Hogan played, we wouldn't have had May tie down Patton. And regardless we won by 5 goals. Why would we need another forward?

I didn't realize Bedford nailed the time trial. Is he capable of covering the distance ANB does? If so that really places some pressure on him and his role. I think the reason Kossie is favored is because he seems to be that natural opportunist rather than general "hard running small forward" which the others are. He is the only true goal sneak on that list, I think.

It's early interesting because they are all so different. ANBs strength is his endurance running. Does have Langdon and Tomlinson negate the need for this? He also generates a lot of shots/ chances on goal. Doesn't always take them but it's involved a lot. Spargo doesn't necessarily have the gut nor the knack of creating chances close to goal, but he seems to create a lot of scoring chains from up the field. His touches add lots of value, but there aren't heaps of turn. Bedford seemed to have good spark and pace, and apparently had good endurance. If he keeps developing it will be interesting to see where he goes. Kossie has power, explosion and opportunism. In limited exposure he seems to find the goals, and hunt opposition. He is more of a goal sneak at this stage. What roles do we want them to play? Creator? Finisher / goal sneak / opportunist? Chance generator? Edit: I probably fence sat so he are my thoughts: I'd probably start the year with ANB and Kossie based on exposed form. I think primarily, ANB is under pressure from Spargo, and Kossie from Bedford, and it wouldn't surprise me to see three of them in the side at times this year. It's a great problem to have given we've struggled in this role.

Oscar is playing round 1 because that's how our back line structure works. May takes the biggest and strongest, and will tend to stay at home. Lever is floating, reading the play, intercepting. He'll roam around but if his opponent is trying to drag him out of the backline, he'll switch opponents so he can be closer to goal. Omac is the inbetween, with the ability to play either role but not excel at either. He can step up if we need a second large defender but also isn't limited to only playing on the big guys. But his main skills are excellent zoning, and playing to team rules/structure. He allows Lever the flexibility to come and go where and when he needs. He provides the close to home support that May need to execute his role. I know most will call Lever the 3rd tall, because he will float and intercept, but I think that Oscar is the real third tall because his role requires the flexibility.

I'm glad someone else is noticing Spargos creativeness. I've always felt he "adds value" meaning the person he gives the ball to is usually in a much better position to use it than he was. He doesn't get heaps of it, but his touches are often high value. It's something really good to work with.

Let's say that's our best available right now. Salem gets back in, with Brayshaw and Vanders on the bench, there is only one spot for: -Hannan -Smith -Kosi -Jackson -Spargo -Hore -Lockhart -Brown -Bedford -Jordan -Sparrow -Hunt -Wagner -Rivers -Dunkley -Petty -Baker There is a lot of pressure on the ANBs and Weids, Hibbards and OMacs to play well to keep their spots. We have at least one depth in every position except ruck (waiting on Preuss to return) and probably the wings, and we perhaps dont have the spread of "star" quality or "match winners" across the 22. As long as a large number of key/top players don't get injured, we seem to have decent depth.

Weid got 20+ touches playing in the ruck and is smashed on here. Frost is spotted in Hawthorn colors and Omac gets whipped on here. It's not great.

Langdon was a name recruit. Langdon has finished top 5 in freos bnf the last two years. Tomlison was 7th inthe GWS bnf in 2018 before falling out of favor this year. I don't think he is as big a name as Tomlinson but he was a regular player in a finalist for a number of years.