Adam The God

Have you watched Richmond Football Club play before?

I'm excited by the challenge this presents if Max is indeed out for 4-6 weeks. The players should be excited for that challenge too. We responded in 2017 under similar circumstances. I'll back us in again.

I hope you're right mate. Wouldn't that be wonderful?

I like this a lot, but I think much of the kicking and delivery to Sam has gone through the roof since he's come back into the side. That means he's leading to the right places as well, but Geelong also have great delivery inside their forward 50. This is a fascinating stat nonetheless. Keep going, Sammy. Justin Plapp.

Except that a lot of guns have taken time to break out because they couldn't run games out in the midfield. The great and apt comparison between Petracca is Dustin Martin. Martin didn't break out until... his 7th season. Prior to that he was solid like Petracca was the last two years (particularly last year) and then became a gun in 2016. By 2017 he was probably the best player in the game. Not sure what you're a doctor in, but it's not a particularly clever analysis there, Doc.

I think they've set him different KPIs and enabled him to 'achieve', which has built his confidence. The extra pre season in the legs and in the weights room would also solidify this confidence.

Who do you plan for now if you're Collingwood, if Gawn doesn't get up? Grundy then has to be very careful about our mids sharking off him. This is going to be fascinating. I think the toughest thing is actually from our end down the line, how the hell we make Gawn more effective from stoppages.

Certainly not a win, but Kelly is nowhere. Averaging 22 disposals this year. Had a few nice seasons and got his hefty contract and shut up shop. I'd say this year there's not a great deal of difference between Kelly and Salem, so to say it's been a massive fail I think is incorrect. Tyson also gave us some solid football before he grew superfluous to our needs with our strong midfield. Kelly would absolutely walk into our side because he's the sort of player we lack, but there's not a great deal between Kelly and Salem anymore.

Bennell is our Watts now, but unlike Jack, can win football in the midfield. Fritsch plays Jack's role nowadays.

If we make finals, we definitely raise $1mill. If we don't and fall in a heap, we probably won't raise the money. No wonder Bartlett gave his spray. Performance in such a difficult economic environment is linked with financial stability when others may struggle. I think the Burgo factor could be really important and he'll service his own wage in more ways than one this year.

Fair enough. Sparrow laid 4 tackles against North, 2 tackles against Adelaide, 2 tackles against Port. If that's his role, I'd want a bit more out of him, ie higher tackle counts. What I fail to understand is why Harmes couldn't play this position instead? He was elite at it.

I think we know when to rush in behind, because these are the times when we have best mid to forward connection and our forwards really spread the width of the ground to open up even more space in behind them. It's quite marked IMO.

As per what I wrote in the EPL thread, here we go, @binman. We don't press as highly in the forward 50 as the Liverpool style, but that's because they're different games - Liverpool would press right up to the box. We tend to zone across half forward and then press hard between half forward and the wing if the opposition tries to run and carry the ball out of our offensive zone. Usually teams are out if they get through that forward press, but this year we've tweaked our zone, so we play a double wall in effect. One zone across half forward and then another zone set 20m or so back from that. It's that second zone that provides the press between wing and half forward. One of the interesting things is that teams seem to try to play quite narrow in order to get through our first forward zone at their half back. There is usually enough width to our zone to enable one or two defenders to get back and cover if both zones are pierced, and then the likes of Langdon get back to sweep as well. They also talk about getting delay on the footy. Melksham mentioned this in the post game interview on the website. This is obviously so that it gives our zone time to set itself and cover any opposition transition. In this respect, the AFL is quite different from soccer, in that there's a lot more space that a zone needs to cover, so holding up the opposition is akin to taking a yellow card and bringing a runner down when a side is on the counter in soccer. Our version of getting delay on the footy is tackling, corralling and zoning. There is a similarity between the way Guardiola plays and the way we are best served. Guardiola's teams pass the ball around midfield and the wings in a similar way to Klopp's team, but Guardiola's try to use pace to get in behind the defence once the zone is spread thin, whereas Klopp's innovation has seen an evolution of that - the backs playing as wingers and ensuring the wingers can provide those crosses or an extra outlet to get overlap and pierce the defensive zone. Man City do it a bit too, but the system isn't second nature to them, because they've relied on pace to get in behind traditionally. I think in comparison to the Guardiola and Klopp examples of attack above, we prefer the Guardiola version, IMO, where we move the ball quickly inside 50, via the corridor or around the wings (essentially getting in behind the opposition), but with devastating efficiency of disposal. So 3 or 4 40m kicks from half back result in our team walking in a goal or getting to a good position in front of goal. Where we've struggled is when teams have denied us 'getting in behind' as it were and we've had to work our way forward slowly from centre wing onwards. This requires us to hit up those little leads and use the width of the ground where possible in order to either get it to an inside 50 target or take a shot from just outside 50. My sense is we'd prefer to hit someone up closer to goal and get a higher percentage shot than taking aim from outside 50. I think we need to have a mixture of both approaches. Here is the article from the EPL thread. https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2020/jul/28/premier-league-2019-20-what-we-learned-tactically-klopp-liverpool-guardiola-manchester-city?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Lol, noticed the thread name change, @Demonland, @Whispering_Jack, @Grapeviney

The balance is someone like Sparrow too, which is why I'm mystified by his continued inclusion and I'm not sure he's offering much, despite what people have been saying. Does he play again or does he make way for Jack? Goodwin sounded awkward and avoidant when asked about when Jack's 'concussion' was sustained. I reckon they wanted to try a system without Jack, so it suited to throw him forward in the 4th against Adelaide and then rest him against North. I reckon there's a strong chance we get our wish this week or next and we start playing Viney forward.

Agreed, but Viney also has no gear shift. It's on the whole time and it means he's always going first in for the ball when it isn't always prudent to do so. Jack's a good midfielder, but he's nowhere near as clean or clever as Oliver (or Petracca for that matter). That's what it comes down to for me.

There are definitely some similarities. We don't press as highly in the forward 50 as the Liverpool style, but that's because they're different games - Liverpool would press right up to the box. We tend to zone across half forward and then press hard between half forward and the wing if the opposition tries to run and carry the ball out of our offensive zone. Usually teams are out if they get through that forward press, but this year we've tweaked our zone, so we play a double wall in effect. One zone across half forward and then another zone set 20m or so back from that. It's that second zone that provides the press between wing and half forward. One of the interesting things is that teams seem to try to play quite narrow in order to get through our first forward zone at their half back. There is usually enough width to our zone to enable one or two defenders to get back and cover if both zones are pierced, and then the likes of Langdon get back to sweep as well. They also talk about getting delay on the footy. Melksham mentioned this in the post game interview on the website. This is obviously so that it gives our zone time to set itself and cover any opposition transition. In this respect, the AFL is quite different from soccer, in that there's a lot more space that a zone needs to cover, so holding up the opposition is akin to taking a yellow card and bringing a runner down when a side is on the counter in soccer. Our version of getting delay on the footy is tackling, corralling and zoning. There is a similarity between the way Guardiola plays and the way we are best served. Guardiola's teams pass the ball around midfield and the wings in a similar way to Klopp's team, but Guardiola's try to use pace to get in behind the defence once the zone is spread thin, whereas Klopp's innovation has seen an evolution of that - the backs playing as wingers and ensuring the wingers can provide those crosses or an extra outlet to get overlap and pierce the defensive zone. Man City do it a bit too, but the system isn't second nature to them, because they've relied on pace to get in behind traditionally. I think in comparison to the Guardiola and Klopp examples of attack above, we prefer the Guardiola version, IMO, where we move the ball quickly inside 50, via the corridor or around the wings (essentially getting in behind the opposition), but with devastating efficiency of disposal. So 3 or 4 40m kicks from half back result in our team walking in a goal or getting to a good position in front of goal. Where we've struggled is when teams have denied us 'getting in behind' as it were and we've had to work our way forward slowly from centre wing onwards. This requires us to hit up those little leads and use the width of the ground where possible in order to either get it to an inside 50 target or take a shot from just outside 50. My sense is we'd prefer to hit someone up closer to goal and get a higher percentage shot than taking aim from outside 50. I think we need to have a mixture of both approaches.

I think in 2018, third quarters were our strength, yeah.

I think this plays into how Goodwin wants to play territory as well. You've got to be able to lock the ball in there with sustained pressure and then convert your opportunities when they present themselves. To my mind, we weren't locking the ball in well enough earlier in the year and it's why teams could rebound against us too easily. I think we've shifted the focus slightly in the last two weeks to attack from half back, rather than the centre stoppage, but against the better teams it's absolutely imperative we build the pressure by locking it inside. I think we need to pursue two talls, three mids sized and three pressure players rotating between the wing, half forward and inside 50. My ideal personnel are as follows: * two talls - Weideman and Jackson (McDonald as back up and at a stretch, Brown is depth too). * three mid sized - Melksham, Fritsch and Hannan (Bennell and Hannan probably competing for the last position here, but Bennell could eventually push up into the midfield). * three pressure forwards - Kozzie, Viney, Harmes (Vanders can play here too, as well as on the wing, while ANB is depth here, Viney and Harmes can roll through the midfield if need be too).

Given he said he'd link how our defence stood up over four quarters, I think it's fair to say we strangled the opposition the longer the games went on, despite the opposition being ordinary. It's clear our fitness is an asset. Let's see how we go against Collingwood too.

I probably should have asked you more specifically what you meant by comparing Liverpool's press with what Goodwin's trying to do. What did you mean there?

I consider myself pretty down on our team, but Errors and Omissions take it to another level.

Well, no one takes it seriously, so it's become more of a 'Praise Jason Taylor' thread.

Agreed, although it might also say that we're at that list cycle stage of going after players that can contribute immediately from day dot, rather than look to build a core over a number of years. Jackson in particular is super impressive for his ability to stay in contests and run out games given he's playing in far more contested positions than Rivers or Kozzie are. That said, all three look exciting prospects. Have you had your internet cut off, @Elegt? I haven't seen much from you since prior to the Adelaide match.

Fair enough. I disagree. I don't think he'd a lock if he was 180cm. That seems nonsensical to me. If he's good enough he'd be a lock. And as it stands, if he continues to connect mids with deeper forwards (as he did throughout 2018) it doesn't really matter if he was 170cm or 180cm. As you point out, he has elite agility, is neat with the ball and clever (ie runs to the right positions). These traits could well make him succeed, particularly in our system, across half forward. We move the ball incredibly quickly and being able to turn on a dim as he's able to and keep it moving, makes him a very handy addition to our forwardline. As @Nasher pointed out too, clearly Taylor saw something in this mixture of traits (agility, smarts and clean ball use) to use a relatively good second round pick on him. Of course, Taylor could be wrong, but I've always liked Charlie and I'd prefer to look at what he brings in-game rather than look at his profile that tells us he's closer to 170cm and seemingly make a judgement on that. Each to their own there and all apart of a rigorous, interesting discussion. : )