FlashInThePan

I am keen to see van rooyen in action at AFL level. I have mentioned in another thread that I think having a contested marking beast in the forward 50 might net us another couple of goals per game. I just don’t think this is our real problem right now.

 If we can’t win contest and at least break even on clearance it really doesn’t matter how awesome our forward line is. This is why defence and contest first wins finals. Our method broke down at the cattery and that is why we lost.

i absolutely want to get a good look at van rooyen, but he is not going to fix our current problem

@WalkingCivilWardo we need to pass the hat tonight to try and top up your cookie jar?

@WalkingCivilWar you only need to scrounge up $28,431 if they will give you the $13 membership. Can’t you get that out of the cookie jar? 😝

2 minutes ago, BDA said:

Toby Bedford deserves a run of games. I'm delighted he has retained his spot

I agree, he looks lively and always a threat. He has a pretty good turn of pace and is not afraid to use it. I’d like to see what he can bring once he feels settled and is used to the speed of AFL. He is already managing a couple of goals a game and some decent pressure.

My one word answer to this thread is ‘no’.

We don’t need to kick massive scores. To state the obvious, we need to kick 1 more point than our opposition and that is all. Despite that, people may not have noticed it but our percentage is 139.6% We have managed this without any 100 point drubbings against easy beats. We have just racked up decent victories against most teams we have played. Part of why our forward line looks disfunctional sometimes is due to our territory game. This is actually code for take ground however you can, one way of taking territory is to kick long to a contest and ensure we either mark or bring it to ground. This can look ugly but as long as we don’t concede an intercept mark it is a very effective way of moving the contest up into our forward half.

We have struggled more to get space in our forward line this year as oppositions have regularly flooded in order to try and choke off our ability to score. This plays into our hands though as although it makes it hard for us to get a clean entry, it leaves our defensive press in a terrific position to intercept anything exiting our forward 50. This gives us repeat entries and gives our back 6 a decent rest.

I do think we would look a goal or two better if we had a monster forward to break packs and take big pack marks but the down side is that leaves us with one less person to get to work applying pressure when the ball hits the deck. If we could add some contested marking power from a person who could also tackle and chase that would be the holy grail for us.

6 minutes ago, Billy said:

Oh so he’s instructed to try and mark with hard hands, I’ve heard it all now 

Also run out under the ball & put up one hard hand???

No, he is favouring bringing the ball to ground unless he is super confident of taking the mark. Given he is constantly impeded from getting a run at it and contesting against multiple defenders that means he is often preferring to insure that the ball comes to ground.

Honestly I feel like some demonlanders are watching a different team to the one I’m watching. Our forward line instructions are clearly to prioritise bringing the ball to ground. You will see BB competing with 2,3 or 4 defenders regularly and halving the contest. If he goes up in a pack mark situation with soft hands he will only ever mark or be out marked, that is not our strategy. We play percentages and the number of individual goal kickers over the past couple of weeks tells me that our strategy works.

 He virtually never gets a block and without another genuine tall target he will rarely get space to run and jump. I’m not sure what key metric is telling people he is not doing his job, all I can think of is that his conversation on set shot, which is usually elite, is a little bit off lately. He does a power of work to get up the ground and provide an outlet.

 I’m honestly unsure what people are seeing that they could attribute to BB not playing his role.

22 minutes ago, tiers said:

Even when he is playing, Maxie is not the great tap exponent and our three warriors mostly win their own ball in congested and contested battles. They will prevail even without a winning ruckman.

Maxie's great contribution is contesting the ball ups and throw ins but not necessarily tapping down their "throats' whilst denying the oppos ruck. It is because of his contested marking, his mobility, goal scoring and ground play that he dominates.

Maxie and the boys are not the same combination as Jeff White and Todd Viney were before they changes the rules on White.

This is factually incorrect. Max is possibly the best tap ruckman of all time. Both his hit outs and hits to advantage are elite

55 minutes ago, In Harmes Way said:

You're all class, Claz.

Rodger, Rodger

1 hour ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Somewhere, Scott says it (loading) is what they do in the middle of the year ie during the bye.  Based on that, one would expect any form drop off to be after their bye.  He also said he thought the impact of loading on form is overstated. 

While every club is different his comments make me wonder about all the DL posts that were adamant losses to Freo (rnds 9 and 10), Lions (rnds 10 and 12) and Demons (rnds 11 - 13) were 'mainly' due to loading.  All had their byes after those loses, in round 14.

Given our fixture, to me it makes more sense that our loading is between rounds 12 and 16 where we have 8, 9, 8 days break between games.  After that we have a 5 day break and another 9 day break.  Plenty of time to load up and recover over that 6 weeks with minimal affect on results. 

Intuitively, with this fixture it makes more sense to me that we have several 'smaller' load peaks over rounds 12 -18 tapering towards the end, rather than one huge peak over 2/3 weeks before the bye.  Also it doesn't make much sense to me that we would load up players when so many had been ill or injured over rounds 8 to 12.  Get them healthy, give them a rest then, load up...

Note: number of days break does not include the day of the subsequent game. 

According to the periodisation charts earlier in this thread (if that is what the club are doing), you don’t get to pick a convenient window to get your loading done, you work the schedule.

 Separately, the effect of loading on the performance of the team will have a heck of a lot to do with game style. For a chip kick/possess plan like the cats had last year, the effects would be minimised. You might hardly be able to tell that they are loading at all. Fortunately or unfortunately our game plan is massively aerobically based. Our zone and press rely on lots of unrewarded running and repeat efforts. So on the unfortunate side, when we increase training loads and players fatigue quicker in games it has a very noticeable effect on performance. On the fortunate side, when we taper and see the benefits…Bang, bang, bang, bang!

To be clear, I don’t know if we are loading or not. But if I were a betting man, I’d be putting the family home on it. 

Just for those in the PJ thread commenting on his lack of HO to advantage...turns out hit outs don't highly correlate to clearances

15 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

 

Yes, he is clearly not a recognised tap ruckman. That may come as he fills out over the years and is able to hold his ground better. What he adds is his follow up and presence at stoppage as an extra midfielder.

 The aim of the game is to win stoppage not to win hit outs to advantage.

I really love this thread because, to me it typifies Demonland and brings the different approaches we all bring to supporting our club (and probably life) into stark clarity.

In the blue corner we have (in this case) those who believe in training loads. Putting all the science aside and making no statement about whether loading is happening or not, the blue corner are the optimists. Believing that the club has essentially got things under control and if it hasn't us getting angsty about it is not going to help anyway. The blue corner doesn't think that anything we say on a fan forum is going to effect next weeks result one way or the other. Since that is the case and us feeling [censored] about things or good about things really only effects our own mental well being (not the dees performance), why not look for reasons and data that make us feel good.

In the red corner we have (in this case) those who believe we are just making excuses for our club and that training loads are just the latest in a long line of excuses. Again putting all science aside on whether we are loading or not, the red corner are the pessimists. At heart they believe that  winning and success is an anomaly and look for signs that we are regressing back to the mean (the mean for them is the Dees losing and letting us down as we are well used to). At heart the supporter pessimist suspects that when they accept excuses or less than perfect performances it has an effect on the players and the club. They feel that their criticism and lack of acceptance of soft excuses will have an effect on the players and/or those managing them, being soft on the players or the club is actually negatively effecting the club in their minds.

To me this is quintessential Demonland, the blue corner vs the red corner fighting it out along ideological grounds to the death.

We've been seeing teams flood our forward line since very early in the season. On Saturday night, and the same last week, we were comprehensively out marked. I think part was due to the flood, part due to the lack of effective leading patterns and part due to the delivery. Midfielders seem to have a pre-planned location in mind for their kick and consistently use it even if it is filled with tall defenders. Pearce last week and the Mcartin bros this week were doing what Lever and May have been doing to other teams for quite some time, intercepting and starting rebound chains.

We know that to beat our defence requires one of 3 things.

1. Fast, direct ball movement and winning a one on one marking contest. 

2. Bringing the ball to the ground with superior numbers at the fall

3. Changing the angles unpredictably and entering where the zone is weak.

I need to watch the replay, as you often see different things to what you see live at the game in the heat of it all. But it looked to me like we just kept targeting the same spots even when there were 4 or 5 Swans defenders in that spot and just one of the Browns. Hopefully we are learning from these last couple of weeks and working on more effective structures and tactics to counter.

I think the best 3 rucks right now would be Gawn, Witts, Ryder. All three are amazing tap ruckmen and marks. Jackson is something different and certainly an up and coming talent, not in the top 3 ruckman right now though IMHO.

13 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Dunstan can find the pill but his disposal is actually quite poor. Handballs to feet etc.

I can see why the Saints weren't sold on him. 

 

That said he is a more than useful fill in for an inside mid.

I was grinding my teeth watching his early disposals but he started to settle as the game went on. Just remember he has come in cold to a team that has been very settled. Clarry, Trac, Viney and Gawn know exactly where the other one is going to be. Dunstan will take a while to get used to the pace and make that connection with his team mates.

 On a separate note, I would really like to see Bedford get some game time. His chase down of LDU was really something to watch. He has got great pace and endeavour and he can finish around goals okay as well. I’m not sure what his tank is like but I’d prefer to see him in that high half forward role than Melksham.

15 minutes ago, WalkingCivilWar said:

Love your work, RL23! 🤩
Please excuse my ignorance but what does OTTNO stand for? You finished last week’s scribble with this, as well as today’s. 

My money is on ‘On To The Next One’

52 minutes ago, Deedubs said:

Watching the GWS vs WC game today shows me just how off we are. Gws up by 54 at half time. Instead, we get outplayed by a half. But it's apparently ok because its 'not our style'. It's no surprised Kangaroos outplayed us for a large chunk of the game too. 

Next week is a big test because we are miles off at the moment. Like how about our defensive zone after a behind? we just get sliced through with ease every time. Need to short that s*** out asap. 

I think you need to put your keyboard away or find a non-football forum to post on. You clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

 It looks like GWS will win by 70-80 points, roughly the same margin we beat WCE by, and coincidentally not much more than we beat GWS by a few weeks before that.

 We are not about to lose 7 of the next 8 games, we may lose 1 or 2, or we might just keep winning. You are actually getting tiresome.

You play the team in front of you on its merits with what you have. Too many people on this forum seem to think there is a fantasy land where perfect teams play perfect football against oppositions who roll over.

 In the real world, great football looks like this. Not everything goes to script but you are good enough to overcome whatever is thrown at you. This is absolutely the best team in the league right now. Sure, some weeks our kicking is a little off, other weeks our clearances work is not dominant. Regardless, we find a way to overcome our opposition.

 These teams lower on the ladder are free to try some really interesting things to penetrate our defensive zone. We will be learning a lot by having to deal with it. It’s not shameful to encounter something new and struggle to counter it, that’s us learning and adapting. I actually think we could have been in trouble if north could have executed the basics a bit better, there strategy for moving the ball was pretty good.

Sooner or later we are going to drop one because no team can be this dominant all the time. I for one am enjoying this immensely. I don’t need to pick at the little imperfections each week, I’m just enjoying watching us find different ways to win.

17 hours ago, Wells 11 said:

It’s no wonder teams can’t score against us is it. Wondering where a player of Salem’s ilk fits back in is a ridiculous luxury. Brayshaw, May, Lever, Petty, Bowey, Rivers and Hunt  is just an awesome array of back talent. 

Given Cameron’s role fr the lions  and what he did to us in the final last year  Hunt imo has to stay. It’s super super tough on either of them but it’s between JJ and Rivers.

This is what it’s like when you’re the premiership team and 9-0 the following year! Gotta drink this in while the era lasts. You never know the length of time it will be. 

 

You can't stop Cameron when he is on, it doesn't matter who you put on him. It is like trying to stop Kozzie when he is on, you just can't do it. You can sweat on him in stoppages but someone will get put in a block and he is gone. The only way to limit players of Cameron's skill is to limit the number of ground balls (ie. intercept incredibly well) and have more than one person keeping an eye on him (and a body) in forward half stoppage. Hunt has really lifted his game since earlier in the year but I wouldn't describe him as a gun lockdown defender. He has solid defensive skills, speed and a willingness to run and carry.

13 hours ago, Grouse said:

My one and only small criticism of Salem is that he avoids physical contact. He will often pull out of a contest if if looks like he will be knocked. One small observation of a brilliant player. This is the attribute that Gus has in spades. He will commit and win. He goes back and takes marks knowing he will cop some attention. I love Salem and want him in the team but I have loved seeing brayshaw lock down that flank with courage . A difficult decision indeed for selectors. 

You might want to go back and watch the GF again. Salem not committing to a contested mark is not something you will see on there.

10 hours ago, Deedubs said:

Why are you including Betts and Breust in your averages? They aren't key forwards. I was saying the avg height for a good key forward as of 2022 is 199cm.This is from a sample of 20 key forwards in the leading goal kickers of this year. So I'm not sure why you would include a 174cm forward pocket lol.  

That second set of data was just trying to show that over the life of a forward, height seems to be only one factor. Honestly, I was a bit bored yesterday and your statement about key forward height kicked me into a frenzy of playing with data and the top ten goal kickers of the past decade just looked like really interesting data to me.Your statement about key forward height does seem to be a trend, I'd like to do some more analysis to see if it is a trend that works for or against teams.

An interesting point was raised by someone that the rise of the tall power forward is due to needing to beat the defensive zone rather than compete 1-1. Logically you would expect that a better way to beat the zone is by precision ball movement and leading patterns. I wonder if the problem is more due to full ground defensive zones and an increase in pressure on the ball carrier leading to poorer delivery into the forward zone - more dump kicks. That kind of entry can only be successful with a dominant tall forward or at least the ability to halve the contest and take it to a ground ball situation.

1 hour ago, Deedubs said:

I never said all good forwards are 199cm. I simply said that the average 'tall forward' is about 199cm. Across a sample size of about 20 of the leading key forwards. That's a large enough sample size to see the direction that the league is heading. 

I would always take a good hybrid forward like a Heeney or Fritsch over a bad forward of true key position height like Callum Coleman-Jones. But once Ben Brown is done, we will have the smallest forward line in the league height wise. I think Gawn can play full time forward in a few years if Jackson stays but I think it's really important to be dangerous in the air and make opponents put their tallest defender on our tallest forward. With a forward line of TMac and Van Rooyen, it's a very easy match up for opposition as they'll never have to worry about being out-sized. Both are not super mobile and both are not tall. Both are not quick. That doesn't mean they aren't good or in JVR won't be a great player and have other traits like footy smarts, goal sense, be a strong mark etc. but in terms of match ups these guys won't stress the opposition. If Gawn plays forward or we somehow find a genuine 200cm+ tall forward then all of a sudden TMac and JVR are getting 2nd tall defenders. 

I'm just going to play with stats here a little bit... because why not?

In the last 21 years (since 2000) the average height of the Coleman medalist has been 195.09cm. There is a slight increase in average height if you include only the last 10 years - 196.9. If, however, you look at the top goal scorers over the last 10 years, the average height is  191.8cm

47 minutes ago, Deedubs said:

I've shown you the facts. Just because we have the best defender in the league doesn't discount the fact that the best key forwards on avg are 199cm and they're only going to get bigger with guys like Sam Darcy (207cm) coming into the league. We need guys of genuine height, at both ends. 

Sorry DeeDubs, you've shown some data and drawn a conclusion that there is a causal relationship. In stats there is a very famous warning about mistaking correlation for causation. Not only do we need to be careful about mistaking correlation for causation but also confirmation bias. When you start looking for tall forwards that meet your criteria you may already have missed a lot of valid contradictory data.

I'm not saying you are wrong, by the way, just that what you have posted is not proof that all good forwards are 199cm+ just data showing that there have been some really good very tall forwards recently

14 hours ago, deegirl said:

I get what you’re saying, I’ve got no sympathy for Essendon or WCE, and enjoyed Carlton being trash but for North, who are a small club with a small supporter base, I’ve got more empathy. 

I know it is wrong but I can't find any empathy in me for North. It is completely irrational but I worked with a North supporter who used to grind on me every chance he got. His main point was that the Dees were completely irrelevant and even playing them was a forgone conclusion and a waste of his team's time. It used to drive me crazy and he'd dish it out twice over after they smashed us.

Unfortunately I no longer work with him. I'd love to rub his face in the current, disastrous state of his club and suggest to him that they be disbanded so as to stop wasting my premiership team's valuable time. I promise I am not normally a vindictive b@st@rd, but I am struggling to let this one go.

4 hours ago, Deedubs said:

I call it as a I see it. The supporters that say 'Oh we played in 2nd gear and still won' or 'we just toy with the opposition and go bang when we need' are illogical views and a strange stance to take. Do you think playing in 2nd gear is by design? Of course not. Keeping in mind that we played a WCE with half their team out and 22 players out in total. A team that Casey would've beaten by 10 goals. Eventually, the 2nd gear is our only gear if it's the only thing we know how to do. 

So at quarter time, Goodwin says 'alright guys, solid first quarter now take the foot off the gas'? Laughable logic. Then at half time just after we've kicked 1 goal in 30 mins and get outplayed for the majority of the quarter Goodwin and every other full time coaching staff gets the players in together and say 'no worries guys, another 30 mins of that will be fine. They're the standards that we're trying to set at the MFC. No need to be ruthless. No need for %. Let's just continue to make Connor West look like a 3 time Brownlow medalist. Let's just continue to give them the easy 45 kick from kick-ins and to exit our defensive zone with ease. Let's not hit the top of the goal square to a 1 on 1 when going inside 50m. Let's go to the pockets to a 50/50 or even better turn it over'. 

If the full time coaching staff aren't saying these things, which they clearly wouldn't be, then it's on the players. A trend has now become a habit and it's justifiably concerning that we go a full half against a VFL reserves standard opposition and kick only 3 goals. The first and last quarter should be the minimum standard for all quarters. 

'Old school views' are the views where people just look at the margin and that's the only analysis they possess. Some junk time goals in the last doesn't help fix our inability to score or to put the foot on the throat. Most of the commentators were all saying the same thing, as well as pretty much all official match reports. You can't analyse the match without talking about a full hour of football where a vfl reserves team restricted us to 3 goals in a half. 

I'm critical because I recognise that our tough games haven't even started yet and we haven't played a team in the top 5 yet. It would be nice if people actually analysed the game instead of being like '74 points, light work. Next'. It's these supporters that are absolutely gob smacked when we get smacked by 50 points one week to a bottom 8 team. 

But if you want positive, it was good to see Pickett hit some form and get through the game with no major injuries. 

 

Our game plan is built on contest and full team defence. We never take our foot off the gas when it come to pressure acts, restricting opposition ball movement, harassing and positional structure. Over a year and a half we have built THE MOST consistent team defence that the AFL has seen in a very long time, perhaps the best ever. We have super high standards and the cattle in the reserves to enforce that no-one on our team drops their head or compromises on our 'non-negotiables'.

We are not a media driven organisation, we are a performance driven one. We don't play for a headline or for BT to wax lyrical about our scoring power. We play to win games and ultimately finals and despite your whining we are actually very damn good at it. How much we win by is not a metric that we seem to care that much about. How we play our brand is one we absolutely care about. We push hard on that because that is what wins finals: ruthless, hard nosed, brutal contest and defence. Big scoring is cream on the pie, we score more than the opposition and that is enough. We have the tools to turn it on in attack but we do it the Melbourne way. We attack into areas that minimise our exposure us on rebound. If you are expecting us to do anything different you haven't been paying attention for the last year or two.