Watson11

There are only just over 20 coaches who got stuck on a single premiership in 125 years (and lots who won zilch including Northey and Daniher). That’s no disrespect to them, as premierships are really hard to win. But the great coaches consistently get the best out of their list and therefore the other 80% of premierships are won by multiple premiership coaches. Of the 20 coaches to win a single premiership, some are probably mediocre coaches who were a bit lucky. Worsfold did incredibly well in his first 6 years with a great list (a lot better w-l than Goody). But he could probably be judged as a mediocre coach as when that list went he got really average results for his last 9 years. So it’s over to Goody really. Win another flag and end the debate. If the second youngest premiership team ever never win another flag, then the debate as to whether Goody was a good coach or not will go on forever.

But we also made a tactical change after Oliver’s last game against Port. Despite wet conditions Port had +1 at most clearances between the arcs. Since then we have evened it up. Maybe because the coaches felt we had no chance without Oliver. I suspect this alone had more to do with our better clearance performance than anything else. I hope we don’t revert when Oliver returns.

To be fair there was one sensible comment. Miller and Jack to sacrifice themselves on May and Lever while we run, gun and lower our eyes entering 50. Only way to beat Melbourne without Lynch They did that in the first qtr on Anzac eve and tore us to shreds. But when we closed down space of their defenders and mids they were useless.

Premiers by ladder position (2000-22) 1st: 8 2nd: 7 3rd: 7 4th: 0 5th: 0 6th: 0 7th: 1 8th: 0

Agree totally re Rankine. He is an absolute gun and a good example of how tough the half forward role. For such a skilful player he has a Clanger every 4.5 disposals. For all the flak that ANB cops, he has a Clanger every 5.4 disposals.

Hopefully one of the learnings for Goody is that the zone doesn’t work when you don’t put pressure on the kickers (ie in our forward 50). We really need to stop falling back and relying on a zone to defend leads. If we do it in a prelim or gf against the pies then it will be gifting them a flag.

I agree. The other games against top 4 teams they are 2W -0L.

Statistics say the premiers win an average of 80% of their last 11 H&A games. So usually, if you are not winning consistently, for whatever reason, you will be unlikely to win 3 finals in a row. It’s interest to think that you would expect to perform on the day (finals), if you haven’t practiced (H&A). It’s like goalkicking. Why practice as you will be able to perform when you need it (Not!).

I thought we completely changed it up. In qtrs 1 to 3 we were content to zone back and left easy kicks for them coming out of our forward 50, especially on the switch. They had it pretty easy coming out and that style was different to what we did against the Pies and others recently. We let them play on their terms. But in the last, we didn’t let them have any easy kicks out of d50 and they had few options other than kicking long usually to Max. It was totally on our terms.

I thought that Spargo play was more about everything wrong with our forward line coaching. The tv view showed that entire end of the ground. Spargo is our best inside 50 kick but can’t kick reliably over more than 35m. He has it 75m out, plays on quickly, and no Melbourne player is leading and everyone seems to be running toward a long kick to a pack 20m out. Maybe he should have done that but it’s pretty ridiculous his only option beside dumping it long is a 45m pass over a brisbane players head to Langdon 50m out in the pocket.

But it’s not some unique Melbourne problem that will suddenly come good for us and not anyone else. It’s every team and relative and we are a relatively poor team when conditions don’t suit. https://www.afl.com.au/news/963488/data-reveals-startling-goalkicking-trend-as-winter-takes-hold

Maybe you would change ball movement based on the weather at this time of year. A lot of talk about Goodys game style going inside 50 is to minimise risk, create stoppages, then setup to score on turnover. Ie a high stoppage game plan. Its interesting that if we consider high stoppage games (>75 stoppages) to low stoppage games (<=75), we almost always lose high stoppage games (1w 5L) and almost always win low stoppage games (8w 1L). The outlier win was against the suns and the outlier loss was Port. I don’t really know what it all means other than I’m hoping there are less stoppages this week.

How about he instruct at least one to lead at the ball carrier and not all run to the same spot. Even better, how about he instruct them never to kick long to a pack, and always kick to advantage. If you want to see how it works when you have a mediocre bunch of roles players in your forward 50 go and watch Collingwood.

Forward coach at Richmond from 2017-2020 was Justin Leppitsch. Collingwood are luck to have him as forward coach now. Wish we had someone like him.

Just curious. Was the only team to have that dominance and not win by 50+ points also us?

Are you talking Goody and the forward coaches or the players?

For the record, I think loading happens but everyone does it. The crows and Blight started in in 97-98. It’s not new. But if it is being used as a reason for poor form it’s too easily misinterpreted as an excuse. On Thursday we were 2 goals down after conceding 3 goals in a row. Game on line. Atkins soccered it to a vacant wing. The photo below is a few moments after and we had 3 of the 4 closest players to the ball. By the time Hunter picked it up, Geelong had 4 players on him in an instant and we had no-one near Hunter. No one bothered to shepherd. No one bothered to run hard in case he fumbled. No one ran to receive a handball just in case. Max had jogged about 5 metres. Geelong scored from the turnover and game over. Burgo is notorious for 100x100’s in heat, and is on the record as saying it’s because players learn they always have more effort to give, no matter what. If Collingwood put in abysmal efforts like above in 4th qtrs regardless of loading, I can’t imagine what their players would cop from supporters but it wouldn’t be “jolly good effort, you’ll do better when you have finished loading.”

I may have missed where you addressed the topic, but I’m pretty sure that Isaac Smith spoke about the cats loading program and they had a staggered loading program with different groups loading at different times. They didn’t lose a game after round 9 (14 May), so managed to go undefeated through the loading period. Maybe we need to copy what they did, not what we did in 2021.

We definitely struggle more going forward in the middle part of the season. I’ll let binman explain one theory why. Mine is the weather nullifies our game plan (turnovers and scores). However, the game plan is sound and forward half turnovers (plus defending opposition i50s) are what wins flags. I’m not that worried about the loss overall but I’ll be worried if it’s wet for our first final. Our strengths (turnovers and running) are taken away when it’s wet and we don’t seem to adapt to the conditions. Question for the podcast is does the panel have any other theories about our poorer form in the wet.

This is such a myth. Burgo never had that philosophy. His philosophy is always to play/train through soreness and fatigue but not through injury. There is a big difference. I’m a bit worried about our fitness/medical department to be honest. Since the Burgo/Brukner package departed our high performance management has been sub standard. Last year cost us. Oliver is the most recent red flag.

A lot of anti Filth sentiment on this thread. Two of my best mates are pies supporters and very knowledgeable about the game. I went to the game with one on Monday and was telling him that I hoped his feral mates would behave. He just smiled and said, “you know it’s not fair that all pie’s supporters are tainted. It’s 99% that give the other 1% a bad name!”

I’m not really worried about our forward line. If we get forward half turnover we can really have anyone there. But the media (and half of demonland) go on about it as nauseum. And if we kicked straight the last 3 weeks no one would raise it as an issue. But the reason it’s been raised is our low goals per inside 50 the last 3 weeks (13%, 13%, 17%). I expect us to get back to our season average later in the season (24%).

Here’s my take on all the contenders: 1. Collingwood. Brisbane and now us have clearly shown how to dismantle them. Collingwood need to develop a plan B, but I don’t think they have the list to execute a plan B. 2. Port. Port have the worst one on one defending record in the afl. Like the dogs in 2021 they are vulnerable to bang-bang-bang. Hard to win 3 finals with a weakness like that. 3. Brisbane. Brisbane are poor runners. It’s why they struggle on the G. Even their one win last year at the G (against us) was playing a team of cripples who were running on the spot after half time. They have to pray for rain. 4. Melbourne. Our defending is back. Our forward line is the knock on us. If the El Niño prediction for a warmer dryer winter starting in July is correct, then I think Port and Brisbane are toast. Geelong/Dogs/Adelaide can cause some damage and get to a prelim as they have the tools to send one of port or brisbane out in straight sets. It really is wide open for us. We just need to hit September fit. I suspect our forward line connection issue will completely disappear with dryer Sep weather.

Crisp’s was from a boundary throw in.

@binman interested as to why you think Brisbane have shown running power all season. Statistically, they are at the bottom of running power and have only outrun Essendon this year. My guess is it’s why they struggle at the G. Also, the Hawks are actually a good running team and are the only team to match us in total distance and high speed distance this year. They are inconsistent like any young team though. So it’s probably not a surprise the hawks, despite being near the bottom, have beaten the Lions, who have been pushing for top 4, each of the last 3 years at the G. You could argue it cost the Lions a top 4 spot last year. It may cost them again this year.