Binmans PA

45 minutes ago, demon3165 said:

And what's your point, what has he done since, we were like the dogs right place right time, what have they done since?

What was your point? You tried to say we turned him into something he wasn't and I said he won us a flag...

Game, set and match, Binmans PA.

22 minutes ago, demon3165 said:

BB was a leading forward we tried to make him a pack mark forward. 

And we won a flag with him...

@Lucifers Hero (love that you're back posting again), didnt we go for Ben Brown instead of Wright?

IMV, BB was the better bet at the time.

3 hours ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

I think we've rushed back some players this year when they should've played VFL.

Spargo played round 0 off no pre season game minutes and that turned out terribly.

Bowey was poor last week and should've returned via Casey. Eight weeks off is a long time to get back up to speed, particularly in a high stakes top 4 kind of game.

I'm on the fence on whether a 4 week absence for Salem is considered a lack of match fitness. If it is then, playing he and McAdam probably isn't the wisest of moves as you pointed out.

We'll miss Langdon's run.

 

I think this is fair, but there is some 20/20 hindsight here.

10 hours ago, Cranky Franky said:

Yep you were right & I end up looking like a goose 

Mind you his selection totally contradicts Goody's earlier comments that McAdam would not play until he had several Casey games under his belt.

Let's hope this works out better than the Petty or Bowey returns when they were clearly underdone.

As he says in the presser, Shane gets his go because of injuries. ie we wouldn't have played him yet were it not for JVR and Turner being out.

Both our wingers play defensive sweeper/goalkeeper at most D50 stoppages if the opposition pushes their forwards out of the goalsquare.

On 11/05/2024 at 12:31, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Assuming he’s available, do we put the Salem to midfield experiment back on the agenda?

I think Trac needs to spend far more time up forward as he’s a natural forward who will get plenty of looks each game. But we’re robbing Peter to pay Paul.

There's no reason why the plan to play Salo through the midfield won't resume with his return. That was the plan had he not been injured.

Unless we go Rivers into the middle. But given the pre season, I think it'll be Salem into the midfield rotation.

On 10/05/2024 at 20:04, DeeSpencer said:

He’s goaled more weeks than not but with 3 talls, Fritsch, Pickett and Tracc last night he’s not often in position to score. 

That's precisely why I reckon you're off about Fritta.

It's a bit feast or famine given modern ball movement, and the fact we like to play a deeper defensive set up with less emphasis on inside 50s and more on rebound 50s.

On 10/05/2024 at 10:43, DeeSpencer said:

Toby Greene's 3 times the footballer, and I'd probably rather Jake Waterman, Will Hayward, Ollie Henry, more complete players who provide more than goals.

Good second half for Fritsch, but why did it take a new role for him when he had the easy match up for a half and could've found the ball if he was willing to lead up every now and then and provide anything more than a witches hats effort when the ball hit the deck?

Fine if it was a one-off but he was the same against Geelong, the same against Richmond. He's too talented and vital to just be Bayley the Goose out the back for half a game each week. And if that's what he'll be we may as well have him as sub so someone else can have a go for the first half.

There's no denying he's our most talented forward but he can't have invisible halves with really poor effort level. And I get the supply is bad and the forward line dysfunctional but he has chances to impact and doesn't give it his best.

I'm usually with you on Fritta's defensive game in tackling terms, but you're way off here IMO.

1 hour ago, rpfc said:

....I would prefer Clayton understand how he can use his endurance and smarts to get us going on defensive transition than do basketball like set plays that come off 4 times a game....

Good call. Me too. If we can use his contest and ground ball game to release our slingshot from ground ball/contest situations in D50 that's utilising his skill set.

But then I'd prefer we then play ultra defensive from centre clearance, at least when things go against us. Our mids should stand up to stem the tide against and shift momentum back in our favour.

Were our centre stoppage set ups too aggressive in the first quarter? Even when they started putting scores on us, we never really reverted to a defensive set up, and continued to go for the clean break away clearance.

7 minutes ago, rpfc said:

Fair enough. I am more thinking about the first quarter where I felt a level of inertia but I get your point. The pleasing point is when we needed 3 goals in 4 minutes we entered the forward so well for two of those - lowering eyes and hitting up the right option with confidence from up the ground. 

I'm hoping come Rounds 15-16ish our more expansive, attacking method has become more instinctive as it did Collingwood in 2022.

I do think the most fascinating watch is our midfield. What did you think of our centre stoppage set ups last night? I felt they were far too aggressive for too long.

1 minute ago, rpfc said:

Last night was a good example of progress not being linear. We were ‘punched in the face’ and our plan quickly went back to dump kicks and boring movement. 

It’s a good thing to learn from and recommit to the plan but it can be frustrating…

We need to put away the Eagles though and stay out of our shells doing it.

I disagree mate. I think we deliberately reverted to a forward half territory, long ball game because of the rain, and yes, partly because they started so strongly.

But in essence I agree with the premise that progress in not linear. I think we can still greatly improve our entries with a longer kicking and forward half half if that is what the conditions call for.

That said, one of the admirable things about Collingwood last year is that whatever the conditions, their method remained the same.

21 minutes ago, Fritta and Turner said:

Was out for dinner so missed the first quarter and have just watched the replay.  I was expecting some absolute howlers but I thought we played ok - just didnt score.

I thought our defence was a touch selfish and could have given each other more support. 

Fritta has so many half chances that come to nothing.

Gawn doesnt need to get angry but rather get physical.

If you want to keep Weitering out of the game dont kick it to his opponent.

This 100%.

We did it far too often.

1 hour ago, djr said:

I totally agree. I thought Taj made a huge impact in the last quarter. He is definitely in our best 22. He is getting better and better. Billings played the link-man/transition role very well. 

So who comes out for Salo? And does McAdam not fit in?

I think Woey is a good sub because he's shown he can play half back or half back. It provides great flexibility for us.

I don't think he's best 22 though.

1 hour ago, binman said:

Agree with all comments.

An interesting factor re: their centre clearance goals in the first is how aggressive we were with our set up.

We seemed to roll the dice to try and win some clean centre clearances.

If so, we lost that particular craps game.

Yep, this was my view too.

Hugely aggressive set ups.

I kept thinking we'll have to go ultra defensive at this next centre bounce, and then we'd leave the entire defensive side of the stoppage open. Really poor work IMV.

Sometimes you have to stem the bleeding.

And if we're defence first, let's stop the momentum by not allowing them to win centre clearance.

1 minute ago, samcantstandya said:

We have a great defensive game, but a crappy forward one. In defence we set up when in attack we blaze away. We rarely lower our eyes, kick to pockets and to contests. Why can't we lower our eyes, honour leads and chip to a player in a better forward position instead of kicking to a contest and then trying to score from any resultant ball up which is still a 50/50 as Gawn doesn't always tap it to our mids on a plate. This is why I like Spargo in the side he has great footy IQ and always chooses the best option. We usually lose games because we don't maximise our chances, kick from pockets and don't execute high conversions for goal. Bad kicking is bad football. 

I think this is an overreaction to last night.

Our forward craft and entries has been improving all year. And just the previous week, we had arguably our best forward game of the year, against arguably the second best defensive set up and personnel in the league.

Last night however, for the first 2.5 quarters our forward entries were horrible. But we changed our game style to play for territory in the rain, versus the keepings off tempo game we played in drier conditions last week.

1 hour ago, binman said:

Goody DID adapt our game plan for the wet weather.

Goody gets bagged all the time for  not 'adapting' to the conditions when it rains.

Wet weather footy is traditionally territory first, get it forward and deep inside 50.

Which is exactly what we did. So, on this occasion we did adapt (though we did keep trying high risk quick handballs, many of which came unstuck).

The numbers reflected that, winning the inside 50 count and the territory battle as evidenced by the anomalous (this season) time in forward half numbers:

Quarter	For	Against
1	53%	47%
2	50%	50%
3	51%	49%
4	76%	24%
Match	59%	41%

And there's the rub.

A key reason goody doesn't like to make big changes to method week to week is we are a system based team.

It' no small thing to suddenly use another method- even if it is one that was previously our primary method, particularly given we are trying to implement and bed down a new system this season.

Another factor was the forecast was for no rain. I doubt they would have planned for it to be so wet, and likely not trained for it. I was shocked when it started raining at the ground an hour before the game.

So they may have had to change their tactics on game day (after possibly training for a different method during the week).

It dried out considerably after half time - there was no rain, or at least not in the last.

And we bounced off half back and spread the ground much more and reverted to the style we have been using tgis season - one more suited to dry weather.

I actually think we played the first 15 minutes of the first quarter with our usual method. We tried to slingshot from the back, and then when they started piling on the scores and some rain arrived, we changed our method and played long and tried to take territory.

11 hours ago, Go Lordie said:

With due deference to Binman, it certainly looked like centre clearances were important tonight.

Sorry, but I'm going to pull you up on this.

No one is saying clearances can't be important, but we're urging caution in how we read those stats.

Just taking stats in isolation doesn't necessarily tell us anything.

2 hours ago, Doug Reemer said:

No you dismissed the fact that I said our midfield plays like against Carlton they’ll make us pay up forward.

But again, you're missing the point I was making after the Richmond game. We didn't allow goals out the front of stoppage, we didn't allow them out the front of stoppage at all, so you're not comparing apples with apples.

The clearance numbers themselves don't necessarily tell you anything. If the team isn't winning clearance out the front of stoppage with little post clearance pressure, then we're in good shape behind the ball. But if our mids play like they did from centre clearances last night, we undermine our defence and open ourselves up.

Richmond game, Carlton game, completely different games.

How many goals from stoppage did Richmond score? And how many goals from stoppage did Carlton score?

That is your answer.

You seem to be going for a gotcha moment, but it isn't there. 

3 hours ago, demon3165 said:

I wish he was but under pressure he just makes the wrong decision.

What? Like his brilliant pass to Max under pressure?

Sure, he makes some errors, I've been critical of him in the past, but he becoming a super damaging player with his run and carry, and his willingness to take on the corridor kick.

He's become one of our most important players for our new method IMO.

28 minutes ago, Doug Reemer said:

Smug, dismissive call it what you want.

Our midfield was exposed early tonight when the game was there to be won. Sure stoppages would have evened up when Carlton stopped dead in the last. But as far as I’m concerned that’s red time stoppage wins. 
 

We got opened up when it counted. I’ll give us a small out because of the 5 day break, but the failure to adapt to wet weather footy is disgustingly embarrassing..

You're talking about tonight, which I agree with.

Richmond game, I did not.

30 minutes ago, demon3165 said:

Rivers is not skilled enough.

We will see on that score. I have a sneaky suspicion he is.

37 minutes ago, layzie said:

Been waiting a while for this and will continue to. I think Riv could offer a lot in there with a turn of pace and just a different look.

He was very good against Brisbane when we pushed him in there in the final quarter. He won 4 or 5 clearances in one quarter.

35 minutes ago, roy11 said:

Are they waiting until Salem is back to experiment more here?

That's what I'm hoping.

35 minutes ago, YesitwasaWin4theAges said:

I like him a lot. I reckon he has paid his dues now.

Maybe he competes with Billings for the half forward spot when Salo comes back. Woey needs to be able to fill holes wherever we need them though to get a place in the side.

So far, so good.

47 minutes ago, RedLegs23 said:

Clayton Oliver is playing lost.

It's a very odd game we're playing with Clarry. He's super low on clearance numbers and I don't know if I'm reading into it or not, but he seems to be playing an unnatural game to him. Which is probably what you're alluding to. He's a see ball, get ball genius, and I think we're trying to add layers to his game, which I only hope will improve his game going forward.

47 minutes ago, layzie said:

Have you ever seen someone want to will their team to win as much as Trac?

Jack Viney? Steven May?