Adam The God

Haha, thought you'd be happy with Smith's inclusion. I worry about missing Hibberd's run and carry off half back. Smith, not being a natural footballer IMV, concerns me too. Unless of course we play him forward and play Harmes off half back, which could be the go too.

I realise I do have biases towards and against certain players, but I've found the more I've engaged in this thread, the more I've been calmer on game day (comparatively) and the more time I have for multiple players that I didn't in the past. For example, Nathan Jones can play in this system and his experienced body and tank is actually important. His lack of pace does not actually stand against him if we can the play the game on our terms. I actually think he's worked well in this new system. As for Oscar, I feel I've been pretty patient with him over the year, but I felt last year was a bit of a straw breaking the camel's back situation when he was still being outmuscled. That said, this year he's proved he can be stronger in the contest, but he still has some limitations and I'd prefer him to be stronger. AVB is another one I've grown on this year simply because I saw the hardness and tempo he brought to the team. (Yes, I know he's been dropped haha). I agree RE: Tomlinson, he's not the strongest overhead mark or even that strong in the contest, but he's a solid meat and potatoes player that is highly flexible and I think will be the perfect addition going forward to plug holes where needed. Also, looking forward to he and Langdon powering down the MCG wings.

Shaw very much strikes me as an interim coach. Another Brendan Bolton. Lose so many games that you can build from the draft and then get fired, only for a better coach to take over.

I'd agree that he's not meant to be Steven May, but I would like my last defender to be adequate in a 1v1. I'm still yet to be convinced on Oscar in that respect. He's certainly not quick enough on a lead. He seems a bit stronger in the contest this season, but I think that's off a low base. I like Tomlinson as the third back. I think he's an equally reliable kick, but I'd prefer we played him up the ground, so the rest of the year will be about who can cement that deepest tall defender role. Otherwise, we may look to the trade market. Anyway, maybe this particular point is a bit of a digression.

Yeah, that one was Marshall's goal. It's very rare we get done out the back, but if the ball comes in quickly from the centre clearance, we have been done out the back a couple of times that way. We probably wouldn't get done this way if it weren't for 6-6-6.

I'd be keen to hear what people think of how we should have defended that fast break from Sinclair out of the middle at the end of the second. Oscar and May were both sucked up to 20m from goal and they got that easy goal out the back. If the defenders didn't go with their opponents, the forwards would have had an uncontested mark, so they had to go. Is it just a case of poor defending from Petracca at the centre stoppage that enable Sinclair to run and good early movement from the Saints forwards or was there another way our defenders could have played this given we'd lost the centre clearance so convincingly?

It's like if Elegt, ET and GNF had a lovechild, minus the lols and riddles.

Well, fair enough then.

@ChaserJ, @Pennant St Dee... apologies if I've forgotten anyone else.

These two things seem at odds to me:

I'm sorry, but what a dumb player. I didn't notice this at the time, but bloody hell, it's pretty clear, isn't it?

I reckon it's a pretty big indictment on Ross Lyon as a coach. Two of the best wingers in the game and Neale has been a star for a while now.

I'd be trading for zippy small pressure forwards before I'd be trading for another wingman. But that's just me.

If we were to play a team that was willing to counter us with the same system, it'd be about who could use the ball better on forward entry, and whether our CP game could give us an advantage. Obviously, this is on the basis that both teams bring the required work rate to implement their defensive systems.

Yeah, I don't see Oscar ever pressing high enough to get a chance to score. You might occasionally see our half backs like Hibberd get a chance to score, but the defenders don't press that high anymore. It's mostly the mids and forwards.

If they do go for the dire contested game you discuss, I'd be inclined to match it with our strangle system and sit the zone way back, pick them off and then use the ball way better going inside 50 this week than last. It's basically a counter attacking game from the middle of the ground. Yep, good call mate. Now that you mention it, I've noted other teams doing it too. The automated reload. Yeah, interesting point. It's difficult to work out how to beat us if we're switched on though. If it's to switch the ball repeatedly ala Bulldogs, IMV this doesn't work if we cover the the ground properly. If it's to go the corridor, you want to be sure that your players can execute repeatedly or it could be very dangerous on the counter.

The Sydney match up is a fascinating one from a tactical point of view. Do we go with our aggressive three wall game or do we go for the Geelong/West Coast control defensive/smother game? Sydney have struggled to get the ball on the outside this year and they like to keep it contested. We need to ensure we utilise the likes of Langdon and our other mids to get it on the outside on the spread. I'd be inclined to go with the aggressive three wall game in the first quarter, go hard after CPs and see if we can break them early and get a lead on them. If it's absolutely not working then I'd revert to the control defensive/smother game after quarter time. Even if we get a bit of a lead early on, we could use the defensive/smother game to converse energy and make them force the game, from here we just have to use the ball well from back to front. Both styles have more methodical and considered ball movement than simply blasting it long inside 50, particularly if Sydney are able to delay our forward entries and slow the game through centre wing and half forward. We'll need to use the ball better going inside this time and this should be a major focus this week, to improve on our ball use, especially that kick that goes to half forward. We butchered it against St Kilda. Is this how others see it?

Not having a go mate, but I have Oliver 1st in the comp for pressure acts (bloody brilliant effort), Petracca 15th and Viney 21st. https://www.afl.com.au/stats/stats-pro#/?state=NobwRA1glgdgJmAXGAomANGADgQwC4AWSwYAzgKYA25AxnuXAMp74AyOARlWALqaUFSSMACV8sAOYACAAoB7WHiGYAToOEyV5UqQCuWqQEE6QgL7pw0eMLSZchYmSq16TFngDS5AJ69%2B65BVxGAl5RWUwNSFkLC0dfXJjJTBTHiA

The only reason we wouldn't play Kozzie against the Swans is if we're resting him. We won't be dropping him.

Yeah, Frost would be a shocking addition to our defensive system now. He doesn't understand how to maintain team structures, as evidenced by his headless chook routine in 2019, even when we'd stopped playing the aggressive press, he was still bolting out of defence like he was running the 100m sprint.

I disagree with this. I think it's opposition dependent and also dependent on how the midfield is functioning at any one given time. I'd also say Oliver is our best mid, but that's a difficult debate.

Hard to tell. He seemed really low on confidence in the first half. Steele was a good, consistent performer for them throughout the game and even though he didn't get high numbers, Sinclair burst from a few stoppages far too easily. The last goal of the second quarter came from very poor defending from Petracca that let Sinclair go. After that, whenever Trac went into the middle, he was all over Sinclair. Hill's another match up that was interesting, because he was brilliant in the last quarter in particular and was being shadowed by Langdon at times, and then other times, I've no idea who was playing on him. I think we kind of backed Langdon to do more damage, but he tried to tighten up on Hill in the last 10 minutes or so, still Hill was dominant. I think Oliver, Gus, Petracca and occasionally Viney still don't know what it takes to gut run a full four quarters. I don't think any of their work rate let us down last night, but I could be wrong. That first quarter point to Membrey (was it?) that came from when they cut us up off half back was poorly defended by the whole team, but I reckon the mids pushed up too high and then didn't push back hard enough. Outside of that, we seemed to be all over them and their goals came from silly little turn overs from us. I noticed one of the St Kilda supporters on Bigfooty said they essentially failed to create any scores themselves and that their goals came from our errors. Tidy up those errors, which will hopefully happen the longer we play this new system, and we'll give up very few chances for the opposition to score. When Viney gave away that soft free kick to Phillips in the second, we totally had that play covered and it was pretty much the first time we let them through the zone at centre wing/half forward. Lots of room for improvement and our mids absolutely have to lead the way here. Gut-running in midfield needs to be a prerequisite for playing at Melbourne.

Are they looking at releasing him, mate?

I like him playing deep. He's so strong in the core and has great balance, that he scares opponents deep (like Martin does), because they know he's going to stand his ground and stay on his feet. It causes panic. He's a genuine super star in the making. I think we should use him precisely how Richmond use Martin, which is that he plays wherever we need him. This is where our midfield depth moving forward is going to be devastating for opposition's if we can keep the group together. Last night, we could afford to have Petracca play forward more, because we had Brayshaw, Viney and Oliver playing midfield. With Viney as stopper, I think it worked well. We have Harmes waiting in the wings too.

That to me looks like about 12 metres.