layzie

Carlton have managed without Pittonet reasonably well, Grundy has been out since Anzac Day and the Pies just won 4 on the trot. It is possible, it might look different but it is possible to work around this. I know Max is a special player and we will miss his presence no doubt but this is where our coaches and strategists will earn their bucks. Have to give them a chance.

Well that's just it, sometimes from these moments you're forced to shift to a new setup that catches teams by surprise with it's unpredictability. Remember when Cam Pedersen had to stand in for Max around 5 years ago? For the short term the opposition never knew what to expect at bounces and it actually benefited us.

I'm more than happy to accept loading as a key factor, what I don't want it to take away from is our ability to play the game of football. This means gathering a ball cleanly, handballing to someone 3 metres away, making good decisions etc. I am glad to see Binman presenting facts on loading and being unequivocal in his stance on this, I respect that a lot. What I don't want is people (and yes they are in the minority) using loading as an excuse for missing a shot from 15 out, fumbling in the goal square and stuff like that. Yes we might be loading but I still want to win the games if we have a chance to because otherwise scrap loading just send a reserves team out there.

Next four are Bris, Adel, Geel, Port. Not ideal but not the scariest jobs for Jackson ruck wise.

Good god I want to be sick. After waiting a few seconds I still want to be sick but we have to face reality. Luke Jackson the time is now and let's make sure he gets some support in someone who will compete like their life depends on it for the next month or so.

My thoughts are very much along these lines Gonzo, we made the ground small and it was intimidating. Teams coughed it up in bad areas and we pounced. It’s my armchair opinion that to cover the loss of May (and even Langdon to an extent as he is limited) we decided sitting back a bit deeper with numbers was the way to go about this, and maybe it was. However it does move away from what the gameplan is built on and it is hard to apply forward pressure when you aren't as high up the field. I hate to bring up a Soccer comparison because I know that not everyone likes it but in the EPL Liverpool went through a very similar things last year when their star Centre Back and leader Virgil Van Dijk went down with an ACL. This guy is akin to Steven May in many ways with his ability to cover territory quickly, strength in contests and also his ability to direct the troops on the field. The other thing with Liverpool is they typically play a high press where a lot of their goals come from the two full backs Alexander Arnold and Robertson who get very high up the field and put in damaging crosses if not scoring themselves. Van Dijk was so quick and able to react quickly that you never worried about pressing too high because he tracked back every time to cut out the danger without fail. When Van Dijk went down things changed dramatically. The two full backs had to sit much deeper than they were used to so they could cover while a few different backup centre backs and even midfielders were trialed through there but either injury prone or not able to offer anywhere near the same output. The different structural shape really did change everything and it ended up being a very average season. The point I’m trying to make here is that while a team should never be relying on just one player and you should be able to cover for them, the loss of that player can sometimes have a real flow on effect structurally with the way you setup territory wise. Which as silly as it sounds can make a team look completely different. In footy a tactic or strategy never works 100% of the time. On one day sitting back and letting them try to pick through us can work absolute wonders and you’re just waiting for the turnover, on Monday it almost seemed as if the Pies were relishing getting their hands on the footy more and getting a head of steam up. Those quick short passes succeeded in shifting our zone just enough to break through and kick the winning score. I also noticed more numbers running forward, which is strange because it goes against the narrative that we’re tired but where I noticed little ‘unrewarded’ running in the second half against Sydney last week I saw often waves of 2 or 3 players regularly. The real shame being that we fumbled relentlessly at those moments and failed to execute, Pies rebounded through the middle and you know the rest. Lastly, I supported the decision to drop Jayden Hunt and Trent Rivers in the last few weeks but possibly we could have used some speed to try and break a line when we had the ball deep in defence and nothing was working? Just brainstorming there but we did look predictable exiting the backline.

Look you're definitely right Binman and between us fans on DL in the know it should be a hot topic of conversation. But I'm hearing so many casual fans using it as an excuse now for our poor performances and expecting things to just spring up again when we deload or whatever. For what it's worth I'd love to hear it in a forum of ex players and commentators. That is precisely where I want to hear it, and i agree that is where it SHOULD be the hot topic rather than from Joe Shmo or random messenger chats from people who know little about what they are actually talking about but is so adamant it's all about loading. So it's more of an annoyance than a gripe with any sort of proper reasoning. I'll also note it's definitely not you that is one of these people Binman, if I could hear more of you and less of the peanut gallery of friends and bozos when it comes to loading I'd be happy. Please write the thesis :)

Very well said. I'm glad we had this discussion and appreciate this response.

Probably Sparrow or Trac.

Beaut

I'd be pretty keen to hear how you managed to measure the level of disappointment between the two extremely similar losses margin wise and performance wise. By carry through I mean get results in games that could have gone either way or statement games eg. Essendon, Sydney, Port etc. We didn't go 4W-1D-4L either, we went 1L-2W-1L-1W-1L-1W-1D-1L. Much more consistent and less falling off of a cliff performance wise and the point I'm making is maybe the damage was limited due to having less injuries. Would you not agree we are missing key personnel at the moment?

This is what I think and really had no idea how it was calculated. But I have found this which hopefully explains it. From Champion Data and from lowest to highest: Pressure Act (Corralling) - Occupying space in front of the ball carrier to prevent them moving forward Pressure Act (Chasing) - Pressure from behind by chasing, must be gaining ground or applying enough pressure to hurry the kicker. Pressure Act (Closing) - Like corralling but with frontal or side pressure where the pressure player is on the verge of contact as the ball is disposed of. The difference between this and corralling is there will be immediate impact and the ball carrier needs to dispose immediately. Pressure Act (Physical) - Direct physical contact to the ball carrier as they are disposing or applying an effective tackle that prevents an effective disposal Pressure Rating Points: Coralling acts - 1.2 points Chasing acts - 1.5 points Closing Acts - 2.25 points Physical - 3.75 points If anyone knows how the pressure rating is formed or what a good one is I'd love to know but that seems to be how it's done. Hopefully Binman this is what you were referring to because otherwise I've just wasted the last 15 mins writing this haha.

It still amazes me how much the loading theory is entrenched in the lexicon of our supporters. I even heard two casual fans who don't know much about the game talking about it at the Sydney match. It's supposed to be an afterthought not a hot topic of conversation , like extra reps in the gym. Not ruling it out as a factor but the life that this 'phenomenon' has taken on is ridiculous.

There's really no way I can answer this going purely off optics. The easy answer would be to say no but then you've got the small issue of loading to deal with. I'm sure training regimens are similar to last season, I mean why would you change a winning formula? Maybe we were able to carry through this period last year because the system and structure with most of our personnel got us there? This time round, every key player out has a multiplier affect possibly? It’s a good question, I just have no idea how to answer it.

We really were, we're a very good side but a lot went right for us as well last year. Dream run with injuries and a lot of players who happened to be in career best form at the same time.

I am also confused. But then again, I'm pretty sick right now so everything is confusing to me. Including bombing into the 50.

The constant bombing bewilders me. Bombing in can be useful especially when you're trying to get it in quick with mismatches but we rarely did anything but this. What I would have killed for even slow ball movement but chipping around the 50 patiently to see if they would drop their guard eventually. We didn't really wear down Collingwood's backline when they didn't have the ball at all. It either just went in and we kicked a lucky score or it came out very quick. Just think when we're faced with this situation where it's hard to get separation from forwards, we should either be taking the game on and taking risks or we should protect the ball a bit more and be patient with it. Bombing it from slow build ups just won't cut it.

Sorry to hear mate that's a horrible experience. Hope you and your sons get another chance to see us much better and in a much better environment.

I might be completely off with this but our gameplan usually involves playing a 'high line' and press. Yesterday in transition there were often times when we had a moderate buildup to entering 50 yet no-one in the 50 while Collingwood setup behind the ball quite ball. If we are in fact sitting back a bit then I'd say this is a clear directive to cover the loss of May just make sure the bodies are back there. It's possible that this is affecting our pressure ratings too as we are now allowing more opposition ball in the forward half. Unfortunately I was too ill to be there yesterday but for anyone who was there, were you able to see what part of the ground guys like Lever and Petty were standing in when the ball was forward of centre? Obviously this theory is a little bunk when there were a number of turnovers by us in the middle that caught us off guard and they scored from. I don't know, but it would be good to find out what is different and if it is just personnel missing or system partially failing.

It's always been a position where I've thought he could make an impact in but he always seems to get the blinkers up forward even when he does kick a few. Just doesn't seem natural

Best game for a while, thought he battled really hard. A little up and down this season but tracking nicely overall.

Our problems are deeper than a couple of changes right now so I don't really care who comes in.

That was gross yesterday

Mihocek was in doubt, Collingwood started with 5 behinds on the board, I don't really know how much more could have gone right for us other than some of the rough decisions we copped.

Night peeps, tomorrow's a new day. Go Dees.