jabberwocky

Agreed, it hasnt changed, thats why the thread was titled "Game Plan Execution". I think what we are seeing is the early stage of the playing group coming to terms with it and thier failure to sustain it for various reasons.

The voice of reason. There are no quick fixes.

MO seriously. Sydney Adam Goodes, Brett Kirk, Barry Hall, Darren Jolly, Michael O Loughlin, Leo barry. Reasons for thier modern success and for what will be a wane as they grow older and retire. They may be competive, but they will not win another flag until they turnover thier list and start again. Take these guys from a couple of years ago and stick them into th dees side and I am sure we would be more than competive today. We would get smashed, annihalated and reamed if we played the game that you advocate.

PF I don't think its a matter of playing contested and uncontested footy. Its a matter of keeping the footy in your possession to get the ball into the 50 and kick goals. There are 3 different games played in footy. -The one you play when possession is in dispute. -The one you play when the opposition has possession -The one you play when you have possession. The little revelation I had with our gameplan was that we were able to control our possession and in a creative manner for a portion of the game. You contest the footy to get possession, once you gain possession of course you need to keep possession. I agree with one part of your post ie that we need to respond in the coaching box when we begin to be cramped or zoned. I am sure that the coaching and playing group see exactly what we see and will respond. Tackling and defensive pressure are still crucial to any gameplan. Your last sentence is a little bit unusual.

He's a flth man, ignore it.

Run and carry gameplan is preferred to a bomb and turnover gameplan which we often revert to when we are playing at our worst. Usually it results in an opposition score. Those people looking for us to turn to a long kick to a contest are advocating a gameplan that will lead to constant thrashings. Far better to own the corridor with run and skill as we did for a short period yesterday. And yes we do need to win more stoppages. I will try and watch a rerun of the game this week, and will post times and results of Davey's possessions.

"Difficult to see, always in motion is the future." "No, no different, only different in your mind. You must unlearn what you have learned. No try, do or do not. There is no try." (Master Yoda)

Davey is possibly the only player capable of playing the role he played yesterday. Had he not played the result would have been much worse. He did hurt the pies with his possessions and many of our forward thrusts were as a result of a spot up through the guts or switch which he originate. Davey can't be made responisible for the skill errors by his team-mates up the ground. It was good to see Davey work as hard as he did and get his hands on the footy as often as he did. Hope we see it every week.

After returning home last night and recovered from my disappointment of our second half capitulation I decided that not all was lost I came to the following conclusions. 1. Our first quarter and a half was a revelation. We moved the ball with fluency, found space and hit targets consistently. Our backline was well on top. We owned the corridor, looked confident in possession and our obvious strategy of centring the ball in the forward 50 was paying didvidends. We also had a clear plan of getting the ball to Aaron Davey, our best decision maker and executor. We were winning most of the clearances. We made a few silly mistakes that gave goals to the opposition and we failed to make the most of our opportunities. I went to the game with a collingwood supporter and he was genuinely concerned that we were outplaying them. My point being that winning clearances, finding space and spotting up difficult kicks is not something I have been accustomed to seeing as a Melbourne supporter. The game plan was working, we were on top of a strong opposition but for all too short a time. 2. Our Inability to sustain the gameplan needs to be looked at and can be attributed to the following. - a coaching response by the opposition to counter our game plan and a counter coaching response from us. We failed to respond yesterday. - a lack of confidence and the dropping of heads when things start to get hard. We went within our shell and stopped attacking the game yesterday very quickly after Collingwood wrestled control back. Good sides find a way to get the ascendancy back again because they believe in thier ability. - the absolute capitulation of our rucks and midfield after half time. The midfield were winning most clearances prior to half time, after half time we won about 2. I feel the fitness of Paul Johnson and Brock are a worry. Neither look capable of running out a half let alone a game at the moment. We also need more than one go-to man in the game besides Davey. I believe that Aussie was being groomed for this type of role. We desperately need more class in this area. -the concerning developing trend of the dominance of the oppositions ruckman. 3. In conclusion yesterday I feel I saw for the first time a succesful execution of a plan. Now the coaching staff and our players need to find a way to sustain it for more than a half and develop the ability to counter-punch. We will see this side win a few games this year, and we will win a couple well. This is not something I would have said last year.

I believe if my memory serves me correctly that DT is in a very good position to know what is going on with Colin Garland. Unfortunately I think the information will be confirmed soon.

6 Moloney 5 Petterd 4 Jones 3 Cheney 2 Warnock 1 Frawley

Loving this Watching tha game on foxtel. Already there is a different feeling. Rivers is BACK. Cheney is a smart player. Spencer and Jones are the reason we are winning the clearances, even though thier kicking has been average. Frawley is a different player. I know thats a lot to take from a quarter of footy still I'm excited.

Hit the nail on the head I reckon. Makes more sense.

Just recording my thoughts. Obviously I am going of be off the mark with a few come the end of the year. BAIL Expected to play senior footy in 2009. Bailey has certainly endorsed him as one who will "surprise a few". I think he will get opportunities possibly with some tagging or defensive roles. He is said to have the engine for the these jobs. Will be competing with Dunn, Bartram and possibly Bell for this role. BARTRAM Has the pace, engine and intensity. Struggles with decision making and skills. If our list improves as I believe it should will be on the fringe of selection come the middle of the year. BATE Has shown the ability to mark strongly and kick goals from 50. Will get a lot of opportunity purely because we do not have a lot of players with this abilty. Doesn't get off the ground by a long way. Some have noted his poor turning circle and his difficulties below his knees. He has a lot of upside but needs to improve his consistency. Hopefully this will come with confidence and perhaps a better structure and more influential midfield. BELL Like Bartram but with more of an upside physically. His decision making and excecution really worry me. Like Bartram I expect that he may struggle to hold down a senior position, especially with the emergence of several promising defenders. BENNELL Another player endorsed by the coach. Said to have all the attributes of a classy half back/wingman. We definitely need this type of player moving into the future. BLEASE From the clips I have seen and the descriptions given he sounds like a Dale Thomas type. Don't expect to see him this year. BRUCE Gets the pill, moves well in traffic. Disposal is not elite but not nearly as bad as some here would believe. Like many of our players I feel gets tarred with the "can't" kick brush because of a lack of system and limited options up the ground due to an inexperienced and fearful footy team. BUCKLEY One of the few players in our team with the strength and pace to really break the lines and beat opposition zones. In a footy team with more system, confidence and upfield winners could be a very dangerous player. Really exciting prospect. I would like to see him continuing to lay tackles, spoils, apply pressure. Probably our most athletically rounded midfielder. CHENEY Surprised me with his marking strength and skills in the NAB cup game. Looks composed and courageous. Possibly has some physical deficiencies (pace) that may prevent him from taking the next step, but may end up a reliable cover for injuries and will put pressure on Bartram and Bell purely because he is a beter "footballer". DAVEY We want the ball in his hands. Has great skills and makes good decisions. With Buckley the only other player capable of putting a hole in the oppositions' zones with his pace and elusion. I believe that either a lack of endurance or fear of injury (hamstrings) prevent him from wreaking the havoc on opposition teams that he could. If he averages 25 touches for the year we will have a greatly improved result, if he can stay on the park. DUNN Despite the calls for him to be played as a tall forward I don't believe he has the tools. Looks all at sea in marking contests. Was a good tagger last season but needs to do more. Has the physical attributes but there is something missing. Seems like a determined individual but perhaps lacks intensity in a tough contest. May find himself on the fringe midyear if other players put thier hands' up. FRAWLEY So far has failed to put his hand up and own a position. Has been touted a a KPP by some and also as a running flanker but has so far not been able to own either role. Hopefully with increased strength and confidence he will improve, and i think he will. Has shown pre-season that he is more equipped mentally and physically to push into the side to become part of a very competitive defensive unit, perhaps from the pine. GARLAND Has surprised everybody with his rapid devlopment. A player who has the athletic ability, brains and skills to play any position, a true utility. Also a very determined individual. If he continues his current development could really be a top line player. GREEN Regardless of what people say, is one of the most courageous at the club. A very good player who can play in most position and does it well. Would like to see him spend more time up forward this year, especially as we look to have other options in the backline. Could kick 30-40 goals if we stay competitive for the year. GRIMES Heartbreak for the kid to have a recurrence of his injury. He looks to have the class and brains to be a very good player. I really hope that injury doesn't prevent him for reaching the heights. JAMAR The big hearted ruckman tries hard and puts in. Struggles skill wise and not as mobile as the modern ruckman needs to be. Doesn't have the athleticism or height to mix it with the top line ruckmen. Can take a mark occasionally in the forward line but often shanks the kick. Is a stopgap ruckman until a better option presents(see Jake Spencer). JETTA I like everything I hear about this kid and apparently has his fair share of mongrel which we really need. Can apparently run, kick, mark, tackle and kick a goal. All sounds great! From Bailey's comments I don't expect him to play much senior footy this year but he may be the sort of player who cant be ignored for selection. JOHNSON Has all the attributes but for some reason can't consistently take a game by the scruff of the neck. He has pace, endurance, strength and can take a grab. Hasn't been able to consistently perform in the fwd line. Has upside as a ruckman as a extra midfielder but cant match it with the big ruckmen especially at the bounces. Will be used as second ruck/fwd this year but would like to see him played as a marking wingman ala Richo. I like him, he needs to do more. JONES A player who in my opinion struggled with the expectations that he put on himself last year. He wins the footy, can sometimes crash through with strength and is a good kick. He needs to understand that he cant do all of these things all of the time. Would help to have a stronger midfield and some handball options around him. Is a very good footballer and with some mental reprogramming will make huge inroads this year.

So lets get this right. You have selected a group of players who in your opinion have poor kicking actions. A couple of these are second year players, but still you have assessed thier kicking action as the reason for them not hitting targets. Not only that you are trying to convince us that you know what is going on in the palyers' minds when they are kicking the ball. Biomechanics expert and reader of minds. You are quite an impressive individual.

Freak where did you recieve your degree in biomechanics? And how did you come to the conclusion that the players you mentioned have poor kicking actions and not have an issue say with distance judgement, pressure or decision making?

exactly

That's the company line but are you telling me that we didn't concentrate on skilled, pacy players in the 2008 draft. And that in past drafts we didnt try and grab strong inside mids, the evidence suggests different.

MO, without rehashing all the stuff that has already been discussed I want to make the following 2 points. 1. There is a difference between recruiting to a gameplan and recruiting on a needs basis. I dont believe for a second that our inside midfielders were recruited so that we could change a gameplan. They were recruited because at the time there was a recognition (which was correct) that we did not have enough contested footy winners. We now have a need for pacy, skilled runners and have recruited accordingly. 2. To call a gameplan "run and carry" or whatever you wish to label it is far too simplistic. A team full of run and carry types who wont win an iside footy is doomed to failure. As is a team of good ball winners who cant deliver the footy properly or convert. To simplify a game plan into a three word plan is just nonsense. What I hope and believe that we are trying to create is a well rounded football team. What I want from the vast majority of our players is the ability to win a hard footy and deliver it to a team-mate, this should be a requirement for all players. Dean Bailey has correctly identified that our ability to take the game on and successfully deliver the footy to a teammate in a better position is deficient. He is therefore attempting to address this isue by both drilling the players that were on our list and by adding players to the list with this ability. To suggest that Bailey is trying to change our gameplan is simplistic and wrong. He is merely addressing our deficiences which is exactly what he should be doing.

He can kick a goal on the run but he struggles to take the ball in the air. IMO Dunn does not have the ability to play as a tall. I have watched him on the few occasions he has been played as a fwd target, he gets completely lost in the contest. I dont know whether it is a lack of commitment to the contest or he just doesnt have the natural ability to judge the footy in the air.

I agree 100% that the midfield improvement is absolutely crucial. With a bit more luck with injury I expect us to make the improvement. We have also have a number of players who I hope will bolster our class factor in the midfield ie wona, maric, maybe even morton, strauss, jetta, bennell. I still believe that a midfield containig a fit mclean, moloney, grimes and jones will have the inside contests covered (if fit). We desperately need some class, pace and skill to carry and clear the footy. We have recruited to solve this problem, maybe I am optimistic to expect this to improve this season?

We will struggle to convert. No consistent targets in the forward line at the moment. We need to have a few consistent winners with the ability to kick a score. I feel we will improve on all lines this year except the forward line will remain static or improve only marginally imo.

They also display a remarkably similar intellect and spelling ability.

Ok then give us the correct, unadulterated version of what KB said without Occo's enhancements.