deanox

I think we are at a different stage. Last year: new up and coming, inconsistent with a game plan unfamiliar to opposition, able to beat anyone on our day ("upset" wins) but still seen as an easy scalp by the bottom teams. This year: more comfortable with our new game plan enabling us to win every game against the lower teams (and beat them well). Top teams now recognise us as a threat, have had time to study our plan and know how to counter and put pressure on us (ie we can't "upset" them). Ideally next year is: Comfortable in executing our game plan under pressure, and also aware of possible exploitations and limitations. Players have enough experience and group familiarity to shift mid game to plan b tactics.

I think this is contradictory. We are attacking from our defence, and this attacking intent is the reason we have sacrificed some of our close checking defence. Our strategy is to defend as a unit, up the whole ground, preventing the ball from reaching our D50. We do this by playing more attacking defenders, who sit up the ground, repelling attacks in the midfield and launching our attacks. This is a risky strategy, but has huge upside. If the average team concedes 5 inside 50s each week, and a conversion against of 50%, they'll concede 25 shots against. If we concede 35 inside 50s and a conversion of 60%, we'll concede only 21 shots. If we are relying on repelling goals by our defenders on they last line we are in a desperate position.

Where do we rank on the inside 50s against stat? I'd rather defend from the midfield than rely on repelling from D50.

Who says that's the dream or even the kpi required? Maybe its a certain number of repeat sprints? Maybe it's his effort and positioning in our defensive structure/ zone. Maybe its not Garlett specific but larger tactics: we are using the small forwards up the field more as flankers. Spargo, Hannan etc have all been playing up the ground, harassing, tackling and linking. This adds additional players in our midfield zone structure to supplement having the third tall forward who isn't as agile or mobile. This "up the ground small forward" then needs to get back to the forward line to crumb. Maybe the problem is Garlett doesn't have the tank to do this ie he needs to stay forward to be effective, and we can't do this with 3 talls? I'm just spitballing here but it isn't far fetched, and it would make more sense than "until he kicks a bag I refuse to play him".

I'm still not convinced that the back line is the problem. Oscar will take McCartin and J Smith will take Battle. No other talls needed. But getting the forwards in the right positions will enable us to kick to advantage instead of to packs.

If you can get an upgrade into level 2 of the southern stand it is a bit more enclosed and you can wrap up away from the breeze. Technically its premium members guest passes but they may let you buy them given your reason and the lowish expected crowd.

He wasn't in a good way. But Ireckon the high contact was caused by the Port player ducking and trying to evade the tackle.

Despite losing, out opponents only kicked 75 points. We also won the contested midfield battle. Where we struggled was not defending, it was delivery into forward and converting possession into goals. So changes are either about improving our delivery or about changing the forward mix/structure to be more efficient and/or offer better targets. "Delivery" is often as much about the positioning of forwards as it is the kicking skills of the midfield. Create space and delivery looks amazing; stand still and delivery looks crap. Adding Weid may straighten us up. His strengths are his leading patterns (which make space for others) and his ability to not loose marking contests (he either marks well or halves the contest). This may improve both our forward efficiency and our delivery (by adding a target and creating space). Garlett, despite form, may increase efficiency by creating opportunities. He won't help delivery by changing structures or creating space. I'm not sure we have any "highly skilled" mids waiting in the seconds. Stretch and JKH are it. Are they major upgrades on current skills? In Weid, out Smith for mine. Garlett the other option if wet think he can generate more opportunities than another small forward.

Because they are scared of long term liability associated with brain damage from concussion. Their legal strategy is to suspend every player involved in a concussion where there is even a of breaking the rules. That way when they are eventually sued by former players they will argue that it isn't their fault, they've done all they could to protect the players. They don't have the same risks from broken ribs or punctured lung.

The 6 clangers includes the 3 frees against and may include the 2 50s.

exactly what we saw last night. Too many soft frees that didn't need to be paid.

One of our "secrets" this year has been our focus on shots from within 30m which has resulted in high accuracy. As supporters we often get nervous when we "give off" to someone in a better position due to the risk of fumble but the increase conversion % has been worthwhile. I think Port targeted this. They knew that from any possession from 45-70 m out we would look to pass off instead of take a shot, so they defended deeper instead of pressuring the ball carrier. We didn't adjust: with a crowded deep forward line we needed to look for long range scoring opportunities. That isn't a strength of ours from set shots but on the run Trac, Hannan, Oliver, Jones, Melksham are all more than capable to hit from 50. This is a really good lesson. When we talk about having a plan B, we can't have a complete different structure, but we can have tactic variations. Shots from longer when they defend deep, or sharking the opposition ruck when Gawn is nullified, are two tactic shifts we could have used in the last two weeks. Hopefully we've recognised this and add to our repetoir.

Both players expected the ball to come in higher. It dropped short, the port player (Westoff?) stumbled forward to mark it. Oscar had jumped to spoil but got caught and pulled up but still bumped into him. Not hard. Not particularly late. Clearly an accident.

So you want him to be a petulant sook and get himself fined just so you can feel good that he complained about the umpiring publicly? I am not happy with the umpiring standard but public winging doesn't help and I don't like the Scott brothers.

@dees189227 What do you mean backwards? At one stage in the last they had paid 9 or 10 straight against us. @At the break of Gawn 2 weeks ago they brought Pedo in. Hogan was in form when playing with Weid and then Smith.

I don't think its cultural. I think it's a maturity and experience thing. Last year we won about half. This year our game has clicked some of the time and we've learnt to belt teams. We are still learning how to play our game under top pressure, but getting better. We'll get there.

Agreed @Jaded. I'm disappointed but not throwing the baby out with the bath water. We are judging ourselves against round 11 expectations not against preseason expectations. At the start of the year "8-5 with 127% and just pushed Port to 10 points against shitty umpiring" we'd be stoked. We need to play finals, and we should given the games left and the way we played in 7 of the last 8 matches. We might not finish top 4 but st haven't played finals in 11 years; I don't think we need to be disappointed for not skipping the expected step (finals) and jumping to top 4 straight away.

I'm not unhappy with our effort away from home. I thought we deserved to win but for the umpiring.. early it was the momentum stopping free. Late it was 10 consecutive free kicks in the last quarter. What else can we do?

This is nerve racking. I hate the umpires. Although Ithink we'll hold on.I'm desperately worried we won't win. It isn't an enjoyable feeling. But damn its better than the last 10 years.

[censored] i love TMac.

He ducked his head, so technically isn't a free.

Handball away after being taken to ground.

The more I reflect the more I think this game depends on the ruck and clearance battle. Collingwood worked us out there last week and that cost us the game. Can we reinstate our dominance in that area? Did we learn a plan B for when Gawn is getting beaten?

Weid/Smith for Pedo was always going to happen. Pedo just doesn't gel with Hogan and it messed with our structure. Tyson has been playing well with the main issue being how to get him in the mix without upsetting balance. This may allow us to play Viney as a stopper instead of Brayshaw and get our inside mid mix right again. I'm ready disapointed with Garlett. He is a better player than Casey but he just hasn't clicked this year. I don't think others have gone past him, more that he hasn't brought it. Can he find it again? Other than Lever, this is our best 22 right now. Form might push Garlett or Spargo in, but we must be pretty happy with what we've got on the park.

Emergencies: Spargo (reportedly traveling with team), Stretch, Weid, Petty.