binman

Jeffo great tackle inside 50. Kicks his 4th goal. Good signs.

Calm down? All I said was bollocks, hardly an example of getting wound up or a furious repudiation of your opinion. Jesus. Thin skin much.

Kolt"s energy, effort and body language much, much better than last week. Good signs.

Sestan on fire.

Great one grab contested mark by jeffo. Goes back and nails it. By the came after a nice intercept mark by sestan followed up by another neat short kick that hit its target. JVR also has clunked a couple of strong marks. Great signs

Laurie kicks a goal on the back of two sestan 30 metre kicks in the scoring chain that hit their target. Easy kicks yes, but they are exactly the kicks that need to be hit 90% of the time but that we struggle with. I reckon sestan is not far away from breaking into the seniors.

Great post EO. It highlights a critiical element of modern coaches' philosophy, particularly goody's - a huge emphasis on percentages and probability. That's to say say strategies informed by the probability of them increasing scoring (or decreaing oppo scoring). A great example is the shift in the NBA to taking massive numbers of 3 point shots. That tactical shift, one many people really hate, is a direct result of the data showing that even though a higher percentage of shots get missed than 2 point shots, there is statistical advantage to take more 3 point shots In terms of scoring. That's to say teams score more taking a higher volume of lower percentage shots. Goody won a flag playing the percentages - namely a higher volume of inside 50s and winning territory. There was a tactical response from other team which has changed the percentages and we've had to adjust our method as a result.

I made this post in another thread, but it fits better in this thread. Note: the context is our improvement in what could be considered goody's core fundamentals- contested possessions, pressure etc: Agree those stats reflect goody's focus on his fundamentals - pressure, contest and inside 50 tackling and pressure. Bur we are definitely making some fundamental changes to our method, a process we began in thefirst two thirds of last season For example we are third in the AFL for uncontested possessions, a reflection of the way we are chipping it around to stretch opposition zones and maintain possession until we can find a path to attack and then press the button. I reckon another factor in using the chip it around strategy, which freo also use, is it helps to minimise turnovers and intercepts because there's less emphasis on getting it forward at all costs We're still turning it over too much (4th - Swans are number 1) but we're way better in terms of clangers. We are 14th for clangers, two spots better than the pies and just above Suns, Dockers, Dogs and Hawks - all teams that arw considered excellent kicking sides. By the by the Swans are number one for most clangers, which bodes well for us if we bring the heat, which I fully expect us to do I don't put much stock in the kicking efficiency stat, but for what it's worth we are above the Swans this season, 68% to 64.9%. In fact we are 2nd in the afl (behind freo), though that's probably a function of our chip it around strategy, which freo also use. The Swans' clangers and key stats really show the impact if losing so many quality plsyers, Gulden being the big one). Another change is how quick we are moving the ball when we take a mark or win a free. I'm not sure whete we're are at now but 3 weeks ago we were top 3 for how quickly we played on after a free or mark. We've still got a long way to go to get the transition game right - we're 18th for scores from defensive half for example. Bur we're getting there. Take that last stat. Yes we're not scoring enough from our back half. BUT we are actually 5th for transitioning the ball from our D50 inside our 50. We are one posiion above a hawks team many consider to be thev best transition team and below other excellent transition team in the Dogs, Suns, (surprisingly) Blues and Cats That suggests that we are actually transitioning effectively but breaking down once we get inside our 50 (no shock to dees fans). If we can improve our last kick inside 50, and our forward line effectiveness more generally we can really improve our scoring from the back half very quickly, which makes us a big threat if we can maintain our contest and pressure levels.

And the same people who won't give goody credit for his confusing selections last week (jvr dropped, AJ in, Fritter keeping his spot) proving to be good calls

Agree those stats reflect goody's focus on his fundamentals - pressure, contest and inside 50 tackling and pressure. Bur we are definitely making some fundamental changes to our method, a process we began in the two thirds of last season For example we are third in the AFL for uncontested possessions, a reflection of the way we are chipping it around to stretch opposition zones and maintain possession until we can find a path to attack and then press the button. I reckon another factor in using the chip it around strategy is it helps to minimise turnovers and intercepts because there's less emphasis on getting it forward at all costs. We're still turning it over too much (4th - Swans are number 1) but we're way better in terms of clangers. We are 14th for clangers, two spots better than the pies and just above Suns, Dockers, Dogs and Hawks - all teams that arw considered excellent kicking sides. By the by the Swans are number one for most clangers, which bodes well for us if we bring the heat, which I fully expect us to do I don't put much stock in the kicking efficiency stat, but for what it's worth we are above the Swans this season, 68% to 64.9%. In fact we are 2nd in the afl (behind freo), though that's probably a function of our chip it around strategy, which freo also use. The Swans' clangers and key stats really show the impact if losing so many quality plsyers, Gulden being the big one). Another change is how quick we are moving the ball. I'm not sure whete we're are at now but 3 weeks ago we were tp 3 for how quickly we played on after a free or mark. We've still got a long way to go to get the transition game right- we're 18th for scores from defensive half for example. Bur we're getting there - take that last stat. Yes we're nor scoring enough from our back half BUT we are actually 5th for transitioning the ball from our D50 inside our 50. We are one posiion above a hawks team many consider to be thevl best transion team and below other excellent transition team in the Dogs, Suns, (surprisingly) blues and Cats That suggests that we are actually transitioning effectively but breaking down once we get inside our 50 (no shock to dres fans). If we can improve our last kick inside 59 and our forward line effectiveness more generally we can really improve our scoring from the back half very quickly, which makes us a big threat if we can maintain our contest and pressure levels.

Bollocks. Tracc's technique is woeful whether he us kicking for goal or his field kicking. Which us wh5 both is so poor. Nothing to donwirh decision making.

We're we? News to me.

It's actually one of the least confusing team selections in the last few weeks. Lever has to come in, and there's no universe goody doesn’t seleect May if fit. The other factor is Lever and May playing together is more than the sum of the parts. They've only played together five times this season, and obviously not at all whilst Lever has been out. It will be great to see them wax on Sunday. Turner stays in, and they probably want to settle him down back meaning not playing as a forward. And With Amartey and Francis out they are lacking height. All of which means a tall defender has to come out and Tmac got the short straw. Spargo is the new Nibbla. The KPIs for his role would prioritise defensive running, pressure and tackles inside 50, assists and score involvements. Yes he's a forward but goals are a bonus. Im not saying he's been brilliant (though he's been better than many have suggested) but he has played his role, is presumably meeting his KPIs (hence his selection) and is clearly an important part of our forward line structure and system. On Sculley, I reckon he's got something. Tough, reads the ball well, wins his own ball and is a lefty with a neat kick.

Yep, all excellent points. As you say Lever is always going to come back you, so a tall probably has to come out given they don't have much height up forward I suspect if Goody is asked why Tmac was dropped, which surely he will be, he'll mention management of older players (which he flagged preseason) being a factor, but also match up being a factor. And good shout out to the fitness team. We were better in the last against the tigers and Eagles, and not as bad as the blowout against the hawks looked. And then great ladt week. And we've had dmfee soft injuries once again.

They should have said managed then. Hopefully they don't play him at Casey so he can actually get a chop out. If not being tested, its an insanely tough call - tmac has been by far our best, most consistent key defender tgis season.

Its funny yiy shkuld say tbe packers are like a religion in Wisconsin l One of the interviewees, a Wisconsin sports journalistin (the context was the failure to call favre to account for his reprehensible behaviour) said 'Favre is a God here, almost literally'.

It reallyis an incredibly brutal sport. I read somewhere that a linesmen who gets to the NFL, before even playing an NFL game, is likely to have had as many as 30, 000 head knocks during their high school.snd college careers (that's to say whilst the brain is still developing in the critical 12-21 year old range). Frightening. By the by the favre doc provides an fascinating insight into how fanatic green bay packer fans are and how important team is to Wisconsin. There was a bit about the response from many fans to favre joining the arch enemies, the Minnesota Vikings - pretty full on. Do you still livein the states? If yes, do you go to nfl games regularly?

As i understand it, there us a huge body of research on the role helmets play in concussion because of their use in gridiron. Different sport, and obviously much greater risk of concussion because they are using helmets to literally ram in to opponents also wearing helmets. So of course the helmets give players a totally false sense of security because whilst as you note they protect from say fractures they do nothing for the real danger- the sloshing of the brain inside the skull. In fact because the helmets are hard shelled they likely do more damage because they don't absorb any of the impact of collisions, in fact the opposite is true. And the amplify the impact of the whiplash effect of hitting the ground (becausevthey have no give), which is where a huge amount of the concussion damage is dome in NFL (and AFL) I wonder if the sort of helmet worn in AFL footy is slightly better in that regard (though not in terms of providing false confidence) as they are padded and so perhaps absorb a little of the contact, minimising, albeit not much, the slosh effect. Which is the principle of where they are heading in the states with the design of gridiron iron helmets. Which is helmets that have a sort of absorbent egg carton style material padding on them (and also have smart tech that measure impact and provide real time data to support doctor's assessment of concussion). I watched a doc on netflix about Brett favre ladt night Total [censored] hole. But of course deified as one of the greatest NFL quarter backs. He has recently diagnosed with Parkinsons. He would have taken thousands of huge hits to the heads, and countless whiplash incident when being driven into the ground. But that's nothing compated to the number of such events offensive and defensive linesmen suffer. Unless they sort the Its hard to see how NFL continues in say 20 years. Not because of the morap aspect of the obvious link to cte etc. But because of the financial implications of being sued. There is already a huge number of retired NFL players with CTE. Imaginehow many more there will be in 20 years given, like all eliye sports, players now are exponentially faster stronger (and therefore are hitting each other at greater velocity) than 20 years ago.

Apologies DS, apologies I missed the original quote. Ironic given the massive score a KP tonight.

Sure. If it was 1977 and zones weren't a thing.

I think your missing drevs point ds - as I noted it's also 5 metres narrower. Which means there's less area. Which us why over the last 10 seasons the average score there is aprox 10 points less than at the g, which statistically is very significant. It's a [censored] ground that's too small for modern AFL footy. Ditto kardinia Park for exactly the same reason.

Its chicken and egg. Again, id argue that people who watch footy, or at least a significant bl8ck of us arec very interested in meaningful analysis. That's certainly the case in America, as reflected in the coverage of MBL, NBA and NFL. I really can't imagine American sports fans are any more sophisticated than Australian sports fans.

Yes he does - but he explains exactly what it means clearly and with the visual aid of drawing a line down the ground to illustrate what he means (ditto 'fat side')

It would be pretty basic stuff for anyone currently playing footy, or involved in coaching or talent spotting, at a reasonable level. But not basic for the rest of us, particularly people like me who last played footy in the under 14s. I'd like to think I've got a reasonable handle on tactics and structures, but whatever I do know is a function of: Having always been really interested in the tactical side of the game Being fascinated by the evolution of tactics in footy My own observations Like a bower bird, getting scraps of information from the media to add to my knowledge All of which means my knowledge about tactics, method, game plans, structures etc etc is really just a hodge podge of cobbled together info with heaps of knowledge gaps and guess work. Which is why i find the coverage of the game so frustrating. I want to learn about the tactical side of the game, the basics and the more complex aspects and i don't think it is unreasonable to expect i get some that in the wall to coverage of the game in the same way you do in other sports. But there seems to be no interest in helping people learn about what I'd argue, given the size if the field, the number of participants, being 360 degrees, opaqueness of the rules and the speed of evolution is the most complex elite sport in the world. Which is why I loved this vid so much - smart, easy to understand when combined with visuals, doesn't talk in the stupid code and jargon ex footballers seem to love so much (eg the infuriating habit of recently retired ex footballers saying stuff like 'the fat side' or 'kicking off line' assuming people know what they are talking about when they have never bother explaining it) and above all informative and interesting. I mean, really, fox and 7 is that bloody hard?

The key is not having someone fast enough to chase him. The key Is frontal pressure and closing down the apace he has to run into. By the by that is also the key for us generally.