Adam The God

Disagree about our attack. Particularly based off last night's game. People seem to only remember the finals series when we clicked. All the way through the H&A season we did what we needed to score wise, but weren't huge scorers. Our entires pretty much all night were superb. In the first half when the game had less fatigue in it, we shifted and moved rhe ball patiently inside 50 and really showed up their defence. Notwithstanding the mitigating factors of post finals exits, which has become a huge misnomer IMO - 2022 most of our guys were banged up, Trac played with a broken leg etc, 2022 we had a piecemeal forwardline due to constant injury, Petty, then Melksham, and missing Fritta for important games - we're not playing the same way at all as previous years. Not only do we play a much deeper zone, we've changed emphasis on clearance and ground ball, to rebound 50s and playing fast. And the way we played keepings off at half back last night for all of the first half until the game opened up with fatigue, is not even remotely Melbourne under Goodwin. We've been very much a long down the line team. We're not a finished product yet, but we're not even half way through the season yet. Having been at the game and then watching the replay when I got home, that is the best I've seen us move the ball. We're getting there, but it really is a significant change to the way we play the game.

Horrible analysis.

Yep, I admit I was wrong about TMac. Thought he was done, thought it was very hopeful we were trying him as a defender again, but I clearly have no idea what I'm talking about. He was been an undeniable revelation back there.

Bowser is good 1v1, particularly for his size, fast and our best kick. If he's fit, he's in. Woey was good, but suspect he drops back to the sub role.

The approach tonight that was noticeable was our keepings off game at half back. We only played it in the first half, but it was really good tempo footy, because it meant 1) they didn't have it and 2) we weren't dumping it long down the line to see it slingshot straight back at us. I was at the game, but hadn't clocked how often we used uncontested marks until getting home and watching the replay. What was interesting was hearing that we apparently have the most uncontested marks in the competition this season. Can anyone confirm this? I hadn't really noticed how heavily we were relying on this until watching the replay. We were also far more prepared to switch and go fast tonight than we have for the last few weeks.

Really great win. That last quarter was brilliant. I loved how we played keepings off in the first half. Which was quite old Geelong. Our patient entries inside were elite. I actually think Goodwin and co out coached Scott and co. They wanted to go fast and often we didn't let them, but if we did, our deep lying defence held them up. Playing the chip game, rather than kicking down the line, seemed to surprise Geelong and they failed to adjust. We should have been 3 or 4 goals ahead at 3/4 time, but fortunately managed to play a clutch 4th quarter. It'll be interesting to see if we change up the team at all against Carlton in 5 days time. I hope Bowser is back, meaning although he was good in defence again, Woey probably drops back to the sub role, and Laurie out altogether. In some ways it was a really good precursor to the Carlton game, because our defence has again held up against a potent team that moves the ball super quickly. Do we let Carlton play the game in their forward half and look to slingshot and/or do we play keepings off like we did tonight? I said we needed to go 2-1 or 3 zip between Richmond, Geelong and Carlton to solidify ourselves in the top 4. I think we're actually going to need to go 3 zip, so this Carlton game is huge. Win it, and this stretch will set up our season.

He is hitting the scoreboard, should have had 2 tonight, possibly 3, give the 3 points. He also beat (was it?) Cameron on the wing in a 1v1 at one point. A very good game again.

Apparently.

That's exciting. I figured since Alwyn's son was already drafted, that Aaron's kids hadn't made it.

I think the framing of this is really important. Domestic or family violence doesn't cover it. The Sydney attacks were clearly directed at women, and that does not fit under the realm of the home, but the public sphere, where indeed much violence towards women occurs. I frame this as male violence, rather than violence against women or "a women's issue", and I think it's incumbent upon the next generation and future generations of parents to educate and support their young boye to treat women as their equals, as human beings. There is a fine balance between blaming young boys inappropriately and setting the basic level of understanding and respect. I'm glad it is getting more media coverage, because governments on the Left and particularly the Right have often cut vital front line services, not to mention public housing (started by the Left), which is the safety net for homelessness and would allow women escaping family violence or hoping to escape family violence an option of secure housing. As it stands, public housing stock is woefully inadequate, with demand far exceeding supply, and really what this comes down to is a values conversation. It's not Left or Right, it doesn't even have to be political. Menzies ensured adequate public housing for decades. It's that we value a mythical idea of the individual nowadays, over the collective prosperity of all Australians. Something that used to have bipartisan commitment in this country. So it's education, it's funding, it's safety nets etc. Lots of nuance needed that a post on Demonland will never be able to cover. I'm currently executive producing a film for Stan where a man killed his wife for having an affair, and then argued provocation and manslaughter, which remains a legal defence in some states to this day. I hope the film sparks robust conversation on how we treat family violence and male violence, and with this increased awareness, we get public policy going in the right direction to scaffold the societal changes needed to stamp out this unacceptable behaviour.

We're talking game style here and ability to execute it? And specifically, the back to front slingshot transition, winning whilst conceding territory or...?

I'm excited. The next two games will give us a huge sense of the rest of the season.

Great post mate.

It means they'll play slingshot, like they do every week. We just have to make sure we score big from stoppage and neutralise their stoppages.

I agree. I go every week.

Mid to late 40,000s I reckon.

@binman has alluded to this on the podders, but usually when we play Geelong down at the Cattery, it's much later in the season, where we are struggling to kick straight, not necessarily struggling to generate scoring shots mind you. For example, last season we each had 23 scoring shots, we kicked 8.15 and they kicked 11.12, but the last time we played them at the MCG, early in the season was 2021, where we beat them comfortably. Again, no Dangerfield that day either. So I think it'll be a different game to what we've seen since 2021. I don't think we'll struggle to score, but what's interesting for me is whether they can get through our defensive system.

Me too. It was driven by the fact that the Olympic Torch went around the MCG that day.

A bloke I coach with who is a Geelong supporter was bragging today about how they'd smash us this weekend and said Cameron is playing a decoy role. And I said Cameron and Hawkins are playing decoy roles? Wowee. What a forwardline. The smalls and mid sized forwards are the ones that tend to trouble us. Let's see how we go. I'm looking forward to when I see him next week after a Melbourne win.

I'd be staggered if Rivers plays on Cameron. We lose a lot of drive from our slingshot game if Rivers is playing on someone rather than playing +1 interceptor, which he often is.

TMac and May to tag team between Hawkins and Cameron. I'm not against Howes taking Cameron too.

In terms of elite kicks, we have Bowey, Salem and Fritsch, and you could argue Kozzy, Howes, McVee, JVR and maybe Windsor could qualify. Collingwood are similar. The Daicos boys, particularly Nick, Pendlebury and Sidebottom. I'm sure you could make the argue for a few more of their guys too. I'd suggest you have a different definition of elite kick to me.

Good post, @binman. I'd argue you don't even need 5 or 6 elite kicks to pull this off. 2-3 is fine, because it's really the exit kicks rather than the kicks inside 50 that are the score creating disposals. The reason being we're often kicking into space with forwards running back towards goal. Most of our mids can hit those kicks. Trac is an beautifully penetrating and attacking field kick for example.

I agree that Geelong were lucky to win and certainly had the potential to lose. My point was more that IMV, you are looking at the wrong stats. I don't think Scott would rate those indicators. Exactly. Rebound 50s is a stat Scott would rate highly.

I think your analysis on the podders, boss, and your potential fears for the Carlton game aren't unfounded. I expect and hope we'll be right to go against Carlton. The intangible at this stage is how heated and charged is the Carlton v Collingwood game on Friday night. Are there injuries? How emotionally taxing is that game in front of an expected 90,000+, versus what we face on Saturday night, knowing the result of that match too. If we lose to Geelong, it'll be interesting to see how we approach the Carlton game. From 2011-2015, they had no Ablett (they lost him at the end of 2010) and no Dangerfield (they gained him in 2016), so they had to rely less on clearance. IMV, they have played a slingshot game his entire tenure. The battering ram that has become Dangerfield, was Selwood in those years, and others who were nearing the end like Bartel (retired at the end of 2016). But they had an elite defensive mix that set up attacks. Think Scarlett, Taylor, Enright, Lonergan. They've replaced these guys with Stewart, Kolodjashnij, Henry, De Koning with Bews and Z Guthrie as the support hands. The game has changed to place even more emphasis on intercept, but I'd argue Scott has had the most influence on the modern game of any coach. This idea also explains why Geelong has been thereabouts for so many years. Now the modern game is all about intercept. Goodwin took it to an aggressive level, with how we hemmed teams in with our modern press and with our elite mids and frenetic forward half pressure forced teams to kick it to our intercepts in May, Lever and to a lesser extent Petty. But we've clearly eventually said the slingshot game is more effective over the journey than playing a forward half game for 22/23 rounds + finals. In one of my rare differences of opinion with you, I'm also not as convinced that the game will revert to forward half territory in finals. Collingwood played slingshot in that QF against us. Again, it'll be an interesting watch. You could well be right here. Meanwhile, hopefully by the back end of our fixture, we'll have perfected our slingshot game, and with Clarry, Trac and Viney at our disposal, I'd be backing us in against Collingwood. Carlton's midfield could compete and beat us, but as you and @george_on_the_outer said on the podders, they currently lack the defensive system we do, which should give us the edge. GWS are the team to beat I reckon, but let's see how Geelong go for the rest of the season. We've written them off many times before...