tiers

Gawn tagging anyone is a fundamental acknowledgement by the coach that we are inferior to the opposition. Max is a match winner and drives our performance when he is on song and the team plays to his game. Coaching error showing lack of creativity and match awareness. No wonder we remain nearly, but not quite, there. As for AA, Max should be absolute certainty. When the number of kicks and possessions, not ruckcraft, are criteria for selecting a ruckmen, then the game and the stats are losing credibility.

I posted this a couple of weeks ago. Nothing has changed on field but it is clear that we need a captain who acts as a leader on the field by voice and by actions. The job can be shared but there must be only one captain on the team sheet. It's funny how in the history of the game that in many cases the best captain is the best leader with the coolest head, not the gun player. Think Harley and Ling at cats, Davis at GWS, Easton at dogs, Hurn at toasters and many others. Who is our born leader with a cool head who can lift the side? Not Max because he is too busy being the best ruckman in the game and definitely not Viney who seems to believe that there is never too much stupid effort. My preferred options include TMac (who is always seen directing the team in close games), a versatile Tracca who has become the papa bear in the forward line (he is the one patting heads when team mates come to him after doing well) and has a football brain. Any other choices that fit the bill?

It's funny how in the history of the game that in many cases the best captain is the best leader with the coolest head, not the gun player. Think Harley and Ling at cats, Davis at GWS, Easton at dogs, Hurn at toasters and many others. Who is our born leader with a cool head who can lift the side? Not Max because he is too busy being the best ruckman in the game and definitely not Viney who seems to believe that there is never too much stupid effort. My preferred options include TMac (who is always seen directing the team in close games), a versatile Tracca who has become the papa bear in the forward line (he is the one patting heads when team mates come to him after doing well) and has a football brain. Any other choices that fit the bill?

The stats from the game reveal that we had fewer forward entries than the sainters but kicked more accurately. Thank goodness we didn't have more elastic band style forward entries (bounce right back) that would have created more scoring opportunities for them. Nevertheless, if we could retain our new found accuracy and regain our higher forward entry numbers from earlier this year, we might have the beginnings of a workable game plan so long as we can keep the ball in our forward line. I am still haunted by our game against the cats this year when we had 50% more entries and still lost by 80 points.

i posted this in December 2018. Nice to receive recognition at last. Frosty can be a weapon. The classic 80-100m players who can run away from any opposition and drive the ball long into the forward line. It doesn't have to be "lace out" just so long as the opposition are put under pressure and forced to defend in our forward line. Can't kick goals from anywhere else. If used tactically and strategically at the right times will make a huge difference to the game plan.

A 133 free differential between most and least favored is seriously disturbing. It equates to an average of 7 free kicks a game, any one of which could be game changing (ask Scott Thompson). For the credibility of the competition and the umpiring, these stats should even out over 18 rounds. All conspiracy theories should at least be aired but not necessarily believed. However, this should be no.1 priority for 'shocking' Hocking.

I couldn't watch much of the game against the toasters but I did notice that Preuss's tap work was very precise and nearly always to a dee and we either retained the ball or got a clearance. Gawn wins a lot of taps but we lose the clearances, especially in the centre. By the way his goal kicking will improve dramatically when he adopts the reverse Buddy run up ie. a curved run up that swings the ball to the goals by using his natural hook. Something to watch.

He was recruited to be a key player in the middle with his experience and ability to organise. He was not recruited to play a negative defensive game in our F50. Too slow, clumsy and unreliable to help us rise up the ladder. His time has passed and we need new younger leaders and role models. Made a contribution when we needed a cool head and a lift in reputation. He should be thanked and offered a coaching role.

The dorks got Crimmins, Mathews, Scott, Tuck, Langford, Mew, Ayres, Brereton, Wallace and many other 20+0 gamerswithout having to work. In those days the Mornington Peninsular and the Berwick area were growing rapidly whereas most other zones were relatively static. On the basis of this success the dorks were able to import Platter, Dunstall, Buckenara, Judge to add to their bounty. The lolly blues also had a good zone in Bendigo and were able to recruit many 200+ gamers and premiership players with no effort. Then they were able to recruit Kernahan, Dorotich, Bosustow, Bradley and Motley to add to the bounty. Doggies had the Latrobe Valley but squandered Quinlan and Round who won Brownlows at other teams. All other teams has a mixed bag.

This was before zoning (the most distorting concept ever) and the draft/salary caps. Success was a direct function of recruitment based on foresight, leadership and initiative and we had them in abundance. Jim Cardwell was the most effective club secretary of all time when he could approach a recruit with an offer to play at the MCG with the likes of Barassi and Beckwith. Zoning made these advantages worthless as clubs had exclusive rights over their zones. If you got a good, growing zone such as the dorks and the lolly blues did, it led to success. If you got a lousy zone like we did, clubs struggled to survive and advance. Until 1964 we had exclusive use of the MCG for training and matches (we trained at the MCG until the 1980s before the move to the Junction Oval). In 1965 toiges joined and deprived us of our inbuilt advantage and progressively other clubs have made it worse. We was robbed.

The most uniquely gifted and instinctive forward I have seen in 60 years of watching footy. All teams. He made it without "silver service" lace out delivery from upfield by relying on his rare natural ability alone. Jacca, Garry, Duke, Darren B all in the same team. There has never been a more talented Demon forward line but injury to Jacca and Garry brought them down. Agree with Spud - if only. Alas.

Who does he think he is? It's our game, not his. Time to invoke the "up yours" campaign again. In any event, just paying more free kicks for extended possession when tackled eg. 360 or even 720 degrees, and eliminating the stupid rule that allows umpires to avoid ball ups so long as the ball is still moving that causes ugly rolling scrums to form will reduce the number of tackles and the punishment to the players and clean up the spectacle. Watch replays from the 70s and 80s to see how the game should be played. Quick whistles and even quicker ball ups (umpires then took less time to prepare for a bounce than today umpires for a throw) kept the game open and moving.

To monoccular's comments. To suggest that players are scared to shoot for goal for fear of opposition kick in strategy is to deny the fundamentals of footy - that is, to score at every opportunity. Letting fear make the decision is contrary to all that we love about our great game. Is it any worse to squander the chance and concede an easy exit from our forward line and allow a "slingshot" thrust to score easy goals against us? Kick for goal because that is the basis of footy. Kick for goal and let the opposition worry about us scoring goals. Once we get our range we will be right. We get enough opportunities so only a small simple adjustment should bring benefits. 2020 Go dees.

I have written in another thread that there should be a team rule that anyone within 40m of goal and running free (or for Tracca and Clarrie 50m) must have a shot. No more dinky passes or stupid hand offs to players in worse positions with their backs to the goals. If a player must hand off (being tackled) then only to a team mate running free and facing to goals. Better to shoot and miss than not to have a shot at all because of some stupid concern about being called greedy or goal hungry. These should be encouraged attributes. Just shoot. When it becomes normalised we will win more games than we lose because we will be conditioned to scoring with every opportunity. Simple change.

Let's remember that when we had May, Lever, Salem, Jetta and Hibbert out at the same, Fritsch and Frost were forced to play in defence. Both would be better suited to play up the ground but we had to cut the cloth to fit. Both are still learning good skills but this year is now gone so leave them alone. And who would they supplant in the mid/forward line?

Tracca has been excelling in his ability to win the ball and deliver to advantage when in crowded situations. Seems to me he needs to learn the same for when he is free. He knows how to get to where the ball is so let him focus and this and worry less about goal kicking. He can play outside 50m arc and still be effective.

It would make a difference if we won some clearances from centre bounces. The best ruckman in the game working with a combination of Viney, Oliver, Brayshaw, Harmes, Petracca, Jones and we get smacked in the clearances. How can this happen? When is this going to stop? Where are the changes to personnel or tactics going to be revealed? Why is there no response? What is being done? Just like forward entries on elastic bands (that bound straight back) this should have been fixed long ago. Help. Maccas last two paragraphs are spot on.

I normally defer to Saty's opinions because he is mostly correct and well reasoned. However while he reports that the players were fitter than ever in terms of their 2k run, and while aerobic fitness is good, were they "match fit" as a playing group able to implement their game plan? I am not convinced.

There is cause for hope. Start with Dr.G's last paragraph and add that if only a small adjustment results in a workable and effective game plan then we are on our way and off to the finals. My reservation is that, unless there is a "dees" specific game plan that builds on our strength,s then we might never reach the ultimate prize. We have the cattle and with an earlier start to a more productive pre-season with more players available there is only the game plan to go. 2020 Go dees.

Since last century. 1964.

It seems that most are treating this season's malaise as a consequence of one off 2019 problem such as a poor pre-season, injuries and an inexperienced list. Most of the deficiencies issues were also evident in 2018 but we somehow maked them due to good fortune, surprise factor and a stable list. Teams like toiges and doggies had similar issues but still managed to win premierships by adapting and adopting a better game plan based on their respective strengths and personnel. So should we.

All correct about the pre-season and injuries. There is no doubt that they have significantly affected our chances of success this year. But my concern is not that we will miss finals and finish low. My concern is that when, in games, we have the chance to perform to a high level that we still fail. Fatique, lack of match fitness and restricted preparation should not impact on basic choices and skills when we are free to make an impact. It's the stuff ups when we are not under pressure that hurt us most. All 42 (44?) players on our list should be able to execute to advantage. That they can't be relied upon to do this is damning. 2020 Go dees. BBO posted while I was writing. Agree with BBO's post.

We miss too many gettable set shots in front of goal and running shots when not under pressure. The opposition's game plan does not affect these simple mistakes. It's all our own fault. If we score in proportion to the number of inside 50s we achieve then we will win. If we stop wasteful fancy shots (Jeffy's dribbles, Tracca's hurried play ons) our ratios will improve and we will win by even more. It's time for the coaching panel to step in and coach.

Our greatest weakness is the inability to offer good options for the kicker. Partly due to "play on" mentality, partly due to lack of confidence in the kicker delivering the ball to the advantage of the receiver, partly due to the absence of a cohesive, effective and predictable (to us) game plan. Time for the coaches to step up and instill these qualities into the team. Injuries should not affect these parts of the game plan - the plan should apply to all players on the list.

The secret to the success of play on football is for the receivers to present to the best position. Unfortunately our technique has been to play on regardless and deliver to contests. Over time, oppositions work us out and learn to read our game (does anyone doubt what Clarrie or Viney is going to do when they play on?). Its too easy to defend. Until our team and our game plan is settled (injuries don't help) I believe that we should limit play on to those situations where we have created an advantage. Otherwise hold the ball until a receiver makes a play. Agree with Clint.