Adam The God

Such a disappointing thread.

If true, this worries me. I hope Goodwin isn't soft of them. What have you heard as a reasoning for why they don't like him? He pulls them up when they lack work rate? He points out other weaknesses in their game's?

It could be argued we're taking a gamble.

Probably the same sort of people that believe everything they read in the press. Conservative because they're too lazy to actually analyse anything. Regards, Sassmagas.

One of my mates has worked at Hawthorn for the best part of a decade. He says he can be a loose canon. From what he's told me of the sprays he gives players, Gen Yers seem to respond to them. Perhaps authoritarian was the incorrect choice of words, but my point was he dishes it out and those pathetic, soft Gen Yers like Luke Hodge and co take it on board.

I get sick of this attitude. Clarkson is one of the most authoritarian coaches going around at the moment. Gen yers seem to respond to him alright.

Yep. It's very clear we're using a zone defence, which incorporates a high press, when the ball is in our offensive 50. We sat on the wing in Round 1 and then in the pocket for Round 2. Week 2 gave us a really clear perspective of this at every kick in. But most times Essendon would kick to a contest 55m out. One of three things would happen. They'd manage to spoil it out and re-set for a throw in; they'd rove off the pack and break from half back by use of hands and then attacking kicks into the corridor or switching to the opposite wing; or they'd take the contested mark from the kick out or all our guys would set up down the southern wing and eventually Essendon would switch it across to the northern wing and it continued like this for four quarters. Our kick out plan from full back is similar. We basically look for Gawn at every opportunity and occasionally go for Tommy or another player if they are in space, otherwise we kick to about 55m out most times. When we move the ball short from full back, it usually means we've got guys spreading off half back and it often results in quickly movement of the ball through the corridor. It doesn't happen enough though.

And he was completely out of touch in his last year or two. Since his retirement/sacking he's deteriorated even further.

Spot on, both of you. Leigh Doddering Matthews. Doesn't have a clue. North really are going to drop off a cliff soon. They're going nowhere and are in some real strife.

Matthews is a dinosaur that has been so out of touch with the game for the best part of a decade that he's barely even worth talking about. Didn't he also question Hogan's agility? The bloke's a blithering idiot nowadays. He was a fantastic player and he was a fantastic coach, but it's been a long time since he's been relevant.

What seemed strange about Misson's statement was that he basically says Jeffy will definitely play and implied he'll play even if he doesn't train on Friday. I would have thought that wouldn't be the greatest preparation. Then again, I'm no expert...

Come on, mate. What a rubbish call. You've no evidence of that at all...

Given the impending TV rights deal and the jump in the cap, it's a rather more legitimate stance from players this time. Frawley and Howe were simply looking to use the club to up their wages. Fortunately, our FD realised we didn't need them in our plans going forward and subtly pushed them out, but they did their best to ensure we gained maximum compensation in the process. But I do agree with your sentiment.

Yeah, it's a tough one. With our inability to attract players to improve our team, Roos and co have been reliant on the draft for strengthening areas such as the midfield and at the end of the day, we only have so many picks. Our lack of leg speed off half back as been evident for a couple of seasons now, so I guess they decided to back in Kent and to a lesser extent Harmes as our 'small' forwards and looked to address run and carry off half back. If Papley comes good and Kent continues to struggle and Harmes fails to cement a spot in the best 22, we'll definitely be ruing what could have been. And even then, I'd be targeting another small, zippy forward at the end of this season too. Hopefully, the sort that can eventually play in the midfield. 178cm and 74 kg.

He did do it a couple of times last year, but not to the extent of Saturday's game. I remember Jaded rightly pointing out he was becoming petulant on more than one occasion last season.

So who's at fault specifically and was it arrogance that lead to those selections? Surely, Mahoney and/or Roos must take the blame.

I suggested something similar a couple of days ago. I think PJ is right to demand answers, but it's important he conducts this through proper channels (ie. demanding answers from Mahoney), lest he micromanage like the last bloke. As Head of the FD, Mahoney should be demanding theae answers anyway, but as our immediate success is tied to our football side's ability to become consistent and become winners, PJ's business plan is at stake here. It's funny though that someone like Barrett suggests this sort of thing, because he was one of the 'journalists' having a go at Schwab for micromanaging. (Which we now know he was)

At least we played four quarters of solid footy against the Gold Coast last year. This year we managed one and a half against GWS and none against the Cheats. I'd say being a young side we will be inconsistent etc, but we can't even play four quarters in one week, let alone every second week. There's no doubt we have a better list now, but the blokes in the 22-28 age bracket are still wildly inconsistent. Think McDonald and Watts.

Great post. I think this highlights not only Garland's lack of intensity, boldness and creativity, but it also does the same for Bugg. He obviously didn't believe he could hit Gawn and he didn't want to give it off to Garland and shepherd him through for fear of Garland being tackled. Instead, Bugg kicks to a contest. I remember Collingwood doing this handball and shepherd manoeuvre to get things going a lot in their premiership year, because they were constantly taking the game on. This passage you've highlighted here speaks volumes. We played safe, dumb footy and it meant we failed to move the ball fast enough. His disposal was very poor. He either kicked it too high or scuttled it along the ground, but the idea was right. He just couldn't execute it, which is a concern. I'll be interested to see how he goes in a team that actually gives him options though. He might look less like a 'headless chook'. In fact, I'm sure he will.

Yep. So if Hogan is playing at CHF as you rightly suggest, he has to get on his bike and work hard back into the space that will be left inside forward 50. But he has to be clever about it. In effect, this will limit the sort of delivery we've been seeing to Jesse, where the ball is just sat on his head, as he stands stationary at the top of the square. Further, I think the more the media and the FD lay into Hogan, the more he'll respond. Positively that is. I expect him to kick a bag this week.

You do realise the merger was to take place in 1996. The Hawks won a flag in 1991. That's five years. And they didn't win spoon after spoon and finish in the bottom four for close to a decade. I repeat. Hawthorn's problem was that they hadn't harnessed the massive support they'd garnered from all their recent success.

Agree with all this, mate. Good stuff. The main thing for me is work rate. We have to bring the work rate. If we do, this means we don't rely so heavily on Vince or Salem's disposal off half back. Our players showed during patches in Round 1 that if they work hard to get into space, they can make even Tom McDonald look like a beautiful kick and decision maker. I also suspect that our other forwards are struggling to deal with the new forward press we've implemented this year. While we mean to constrict the opposition and cramp them for space, what we're inadvertently doing at the moment is cramping the space for our own forwards. Perhaps, it'll take a little longer to get used to this new game plan and find our own space (in particular Hogan). The best way to actually do this is through quick ball movement. Have Garlett at the feet of Hogan and the rest of the forwards leading back and forth between 30m out and high half forward. In a similar way to how things work in football/soccer, clever movement from attackers creates confusion in defences and opens space up for attacking players. This is what we need to focus on doing more of.

Not excusing Jesse. He has to get better, but Daniher has played 50 games and Jesse has played 22. We do need some perspective here. I just hope the FD are pointing out these things and aren't afraid to tell him that he needs to work a lot harder if he's going to fulfil his incredible potential. Pretty hard to build a strong culture when you're not in it together. We were implementing the forward press from our kick outs, but that was about it. We just simply didn't work hard enough to get into space or cover the opposite side of the ground. You really could see every Essendon switch coming and we were just constantly 10 or so metres behind our opponents. We did create one or two goals from the press though, but then we seemed to put the cue in the rack each time. As if it'd all fall into place after that. Because our blokes weren't working hard enough, it meant that we saw Neeld-like football. We'd take a mark. Go back a few paces, assess our options and then because we'd taken too long to dispose of it, we'd kick to contests, often 2 or 3 Bombers v 1 Demon. We weren't attacking. We went sideways from stoppages. We went long to contests from full back. We would lose possession often too close to our goal. It was an absolutely limp and tepid performance. One of the worst under Roos. Our defence managed to repel some opposition attacks, but as I mentioned, it basically came straight back because we'd kick to contests where we were outnumbered.

This is essentially what I said earlier in this thread. It's staggering to think the club was still putting spin on everything having delivered for only one quarter. Surely, internally Roos and co were displeased? Surely. Happy to get away with the 4 points in round 1, but aware that unless we played at least one bloody good quarter of football against the cheats, we'd lose. Spot on. When you go back and examine all four wins, even the three against undermanned sides, we barely managed two quarters in each game. I'd argued we pretty much played one quarter of good footy last week (as S_T also points out). There are worrying signs pointing towards a few potential blowouts this year unless we become more consistent (which we've shown no sign of doing), namely both those Hawthorn games. I'm talking 100 point beltings. So disappointing. A week ago I was saying that I hope we'd have a season without 100 point beltings, but when you can switch off like we did against Essendon (where the margin frankly flattered us), then you're bound to lose a couple of games by a long, long way to far better opposition. The frustrating thing is what the hell are the coaches for, if not to bring his body language into line? I'm sorry, but we saw this on occasion last year too and it still hasn't been addressed. Earn your money, FD.

Sorry I'm confused. What's your point? They always had a lot of support in the 90s, they just weren't signed up. The 80s made that football club and they've kept the momentum up ever since. Now they've got a ridiculous amount of members.