binman

Go Redlegs.

Their fans have every right to be confident, even cocky. A big test for us - but one i'm confident we'll pass. I'll be looking for super high pressure on every Swan player who is about to kick the football, swarming all team defence, and really going hard at contests. I'll also be looking for us to be daring and fast with our ball movement. If we see all things, which i think we will, we win. We'll know 10 minutes in i reckon.

He'll still kick a bag.

I agree wholeheartedly with almost of the above - not so sure about not winning means no premiership, but i take the point nonetheless and my confidence in our chances will certainly take a hit if we lose. Huge test of where we are at on a couple of fronts. One, we need to psycologically rebound from last week and the impact of Maxy going down. We need to stand up this week and prove that we can win without Maxy and that there are mutiple leaders. And two, the numbers are stark - i had forgotton how bad (4 win in 20 games? Shesh). I think a big factor in that record, at least in the last 2-3 seasons is that their method (fast ball movement off hb, quick transition, incisive kicking etc) works well against our game plan. We have made some tweaks to our game plan, defensively and offensively. Offensively the tweaks involve faster ball movement, playing on from marks and more changes of lanes, particualry into the corridor. In many ways these tweaks are a direct response to the way the Swans and Pies are playing. We struggled to implement those tweaks last week, for whatever reason, until the resumption after the break. In this week's game we realy need to make sure we continue to implement the changes to our approach we worked on all preseason. For me that's part of the reason why this game will be a real test of where we're at, and one of the reasons why, as you say gator, this game is so critical. The weather will be perfect. We can plan for no Max. We will have a strong team on. No exuses. So i'm really hoping to see, right from the get go, fast ball movement, quick transition from the back half and aggessive kicks to the corridor.

I'm going to interview my family and five mates ahead of the interview tomorrow. Interview loading. Taper Wednesday. Talking on top of the the ground come interview time.

Yep. And losing to the roos AT HOME in round two, after losing round one, is a shocker.

A bonus about their losses the controversial finish will feed in nicely into freo's fans and players sense of the world is out to get them and the Jackson recruitment is a curse that will condemn them to mediocrity until his retirement.

Scans this morning

Feeling sick. Just plain sick. One thing helping me not panicking is a few years back at on of our preseason qld camps maxy hurt his knee. He was devastated, with vision of him looking similarly dejected ad he was sure he had done his ACL. Turned out he was wrong.

Agree, not likely to finish that low. But a handful of players, including Jackson and Darcy, dont look AFL level fit. And they only need a couple of key injuries to start getting the wobbles, particularly if there is any disharmony (not suggesting there is....but).

My take on tonight? We win by 6 goals plus Why? We are in absolute peak shape at the moment, fitness and injury wise (salo being the one exception) We seem to be in grate psychological shape Can' speak to their fitness levels, but being hammered round one is not a great sign re: their psychological shape They seemingly haven't addressed their two biggest issues - leg speed and a modern defensive system We killed them for leg speed when we played them last season and in 2021- with the second half of the semi being the outlier when we were out of gas We have added leg speed, they haven't and Coleman out hurts big time on that front We know how to exploit their game plan (win contested ball) and our game plan matches up really well with theirs They don't looked to have adjusted their game plan at all - whereas we have tweaked ours so they will need to do more tactical homework One example of above is the decision to bring Foote into the side - considered plan or desperation? We travel well They are the ones under pressure, not us We are a 4 goal better team For punter, there are two bets that appeal. The line is 4.5 our way (was 3.5 an hour ago). That's crazy. Way too low. Money for old rope Kade Chandler is $34 to kick most goals. Good value With Kossie out, Chandler will be our main crumber and will get his chances. if he can sort out his set shots he can snag 3 or 4, which might be enough with Fritter back in spreading the goals

No, not a huge difference. But there is a difference - well two really. The first difference is the time the dees player has with his kick inside 50. From a stoppage (scenario two) the player can take his full allotted time to determine exactly where, and how to kick it. He's not rushed into a dump kick. That also gives the dees forwards time to set up in designated spots - often seemingly 20 meters out straight in front (but not always - the kick to Brown that set up his banana goal is an example of set play where the forward runs into the only available space - the pocket). Our forward 50 is still crowded (because the oppo have used the time to get back in numbers) but the defenders gravitate to the same spot as the forwards to make sure there are no free players, no one on ones and to maximize their chance of winning the ground ball. In scenario three, the dees player has little time to dispose of it (because he hasn't marked it or got a free) and so has to kick quickly, meaning the forwards don't have time to set up in their predetermined structure, and are more likely to be spread more evenly in the area inside 50 - as are the defenders. On a related note, you are spot on about us kicking harder, flatter and straighter inside 50 on several slow/congested entries in the Richmond practice match. I think the idea is to make it harder for defenders to zone off and disrupt our talls attempt to mark. They did it against the saints too - i didn't notice it so much against the dogs. They also seem to have been practicing the weighted kick into a hole between defenders - the kick to BB reference above is an example. Hunter is brilliant at such kicks and Langdon seem to have developed the knack of nailing a sort of soccer like cross kick from the boundary line into a hole. His beautiful kick to Spargo to set up a goal being a good example.

Some terrific posts in the last little bit. Some random reflections on some charry picked comments from EO, layzie, DFA, Flash and george, starting with EO's post above (i'll get to other comments through the day): What I am interested in now is about the last point - and the delivery and 'positive risk' to now seemingly to deliberately choose to NOT kick to pockets and play the percentages of minimising options for the defence should they obtain the ball with choices of lanes to get out of the D50. I don't think it accurate to say we will be choosing not to kick to a pack in the pockets. Kicking to the pockets will still be the go to depending on the type of entry inside 50. I can't recall which coach it was, goody or yze maybe, but in response to a question in an interview about our forward entries they said something to the effect that there were three entry scenarios. Scenario one, the ball is in motion, and we are transitioning from the back half at speed (and i guess also from center square clearances). In this scenario we create free players inside 50 because we run in waves and create outnumbers ahead of the ball (which is where the running power and high cruising speed of players like Nibbler, Spargo, Langdon and Hunter is so critical). This method creates or best chance to score, particularly if they go via the corridor - as it is the best chance of creating free targets or a leadup hit (forwards often have leading lanes in this scenario because the defence has not been able to get set). In scenario one, we will try and hit a free player, or kick to a one-on-one contest - of which there is likely to be several becuase we have got it inside 50 quickly making it hard for oppos to set up their zone or get numbers behind the ball (and impossible in the case of clean center squares clearances). The video of the week, which starts with Tomo winning the ball at half back and ends with Spargo kicking a nice goal after being free just outside 50 is an excellent example of this type of entry (on Spargo kicking that goal rather than passing to a free Brown, my take is that is another example of Goody playing the percentages. I suspect players are under instruction to go for goal in such scenarios more often this season because it is almost as hard to hit that pass to brown as it is to kick the goal - and if he does hit the pass, brown still has to kick the goal from a tight angle. So the percentages favor Spagro going for goal. There was almost exactly the same scenario in the tigers praccy match, with Gawn completely free in the pocket and Spargo instead opting to kick for goal and/or chandler running into goal. There were several other similar examples in the 2 practice matches) The second scenario is kicks inside 50 from a stop play (not sure what the right term is - i mean the kick after a mark or free with an oppo player standing the mark). Based on the two practice matches and last weeks game, this scenario is the one where we seem to be kicking more often to the top of the square. The kicker can take his full 30 odd seconds to decide where to kick and the tall and small forwards can set up how they would have trained all preseason to do. And Tmac can do what he does so brilliantly - block for BB, Maxy and/or Grundy. It is still a risk because if we lose a ground ball contest the oppo win that ball in the corridor and have three lanes to choose from to exit their defensive area. But the dees have put a big emphasis on forward pressure this season (after being pretty average with that last season) which mitigates that risk because we are more likely to win the ground ball, but if we don't we put the kicker under tonnes of pressure, often creating a turnover. And of course, we press up and create our wall and often win the ball back (which flummoxed Daniel at least twice - costing at least one turnover goal). The third scenario is we've trapped the ball in our front half, front half is super crowded because oppos have flooded back, they win the contested ball, but we put them under mega pressure forcing a dump kick outside 50 - but we have set up a wall, win a turnover, the ball stays in motion and it bounces straight back inside 50. But it does so into a super crowded area. Goody plays the percentages, so the high kick to the pocket is the go-to play in this scenario (unless there is an obvious free player). It's the percentage play because the kicker often has to kick it quickly (so little time to consider options), the ball is in motion, it's chaotic, the forward line is packed and there is no time to orchestrate a set play (eg talls blocking for each other, smalls positioning themselves, dummy leads etc). And the forwards know where the ball is likely to be kicked - as they do in all three scenarios. Predictability is key. If we can't clunk a mark, a boundary line stoppage is the most likely outcome, with us winning the ground ball hopefully the next most likely outcome (which wasn't always the case in the second half of last year). But if THEY win the ground ball, they only have one realistic exit lane option - the lane they are in. And we can set up accordingly. Sure, they can elect to take the corridor on or switch across to the outside lane. But both options are super risky, and the dees sweat on that kick - particularly against the dogs who used to love taking those options (i think they will do so less this year).

Interesting data luci. I was thinking ladt night during the game that for such a good player his kicking is woeful - and it was particularly bad last night. He had a terrible kicking technique and fatgue exacerbates poor technique. Given his game time perhaps you're right and fitness is an issue. If so, that's two of their 5 most important players not in optimal shape - the other being Hawkins. There's no catching that up, so that's a huge drag on their chances of winning a flag this season.

Agree. A bit of an issue with that theory (whcih i agree with) is if Melk has to come on early in the game to replace an injured player.

Me too! Amazing the impact of one smart, classy goal. Again, i like Melk as a sub, but to be honest it's a bit of worry that he didn't register a tackle given the emphasis this year on getting back to 2021 inside forward 50 pressure levels - not to mention lack of tackling has been a n issue for Melk, and was one of the key reasons he got dropped from the seniors in 2021 and missed out on a premiership medal.

No sure why they would do so given in a quarter of footy, where we dominated, he only got 2 possessions - albeit both being a score (one super classy goal, one point). And he had zero tackles and zero clearances. He also had 83 metres gained, which isn't too bad if you don't factor in that about 70 of those meters were from the goal he kicked from inside the center square. Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of melk as a sub, but jeez he got plenty of plaudits for 2 kicks at 50% DE in one quarter of footy.

Just had look at our fixture. We play our first three games, and four of our first 5 games at Casey, which is a nice little leg up.

My three favourite players have great names to yell - westy, paxy and goldie.

The question i'd have if i was lions fan is why in the heck are they still running a 2010 style defensive system. I might also ask why they didn't address their lack of leg speed - which we ruthlessly exploit when up and about (and are even better placed to exploit this season because Kozzie is playing more mid time, so is around the ball more and we have added mcvee and Chadler who are both quick and Hunter, whilst not super quick over the first 5 metres seems to have good cruising speed. Added to that bowser looks even quicker than he was, and the team all look super fit)

Mmm, interesting. I see what you're saying, but whilst of course it's good to have control of the ball (which this year we seemed to have really empahsied short kicks to lead up players to control possession and tempo) philosophically our game plan does not emphasis having the ball in hand. By that i mean we priortise territory over possession. So, for example, if the ball is in motion in the back half, we have possession but there is no free player up the line to kick to, but there is a free player behind the ball (which there almost is) for the bail out kick or handball. more often than not we will risk losing possession by prioritsing territory and booting it 50 metres towards our goal. For the same reason we don't do many cross-ground switches because even though it would ensure we maintain possession we gain no territory (and it gives the oppo defence time to set up) - so if we can't maintain possession by lead up mark down the line, again we kick long down the line to a contest even though that risks losing possession. Which is where pressure is so critical. Pressure helps us to ideally win that contest and if we can't do so, force a stoppage, But if THEY win pressure (as defined by that metric) is critical to our game plan because we ensure (when we are fully up and about) that the oppo kcik is under pressure. We either force a turnover (as happened many times on sat) or they are forced to dump kick and we intercept (as Lever did any number of times) and rebound of half back to create a scoring train. West coast's game plan under Simpson has a huge focus maintaining possession. The dogs game plan under Bevo also had this focus (but has shifted this season - hence much fewer switches against us) and Freo's, if their game against the saints is anything to go by, also does (what was weird against the saints is they didn't run the ball down the ground the way they like to get territory - Lyon might have tried to take this away from them). But the problem with the model of maintaining possession is twofold. One, maintaining possession invites pressure and therefore there an increased risk of turnover (which is often in the back half because that is where the ball is kicked side to side to free players - kicks we allow the oppp to have). And two, it makes scoring much more difficult when playing a team like the dees with an elite zone and all team defence because it allows that defense to get set and our defensive forwards and mids to flood back and create an outnumber. And to state the obvious you can't kick a goal from the back pocket. Bevo has realized their possession style aint gonna cut and have shifted to the territory model. Which is one reason why i'm bullish about their prospects this year.

Mmm, not sure about that. According to burgess, leading into the GF they deliberately didn't tell May, who thought he had a strained hammy, that he had torn it pretty badly (though im sure Webber would say a strain IS a tear)

You never tyre of the puns DS

Is that true?

That is just plain wrong. But it would appear your mind is made up, so won't try and convince you otherwise. And jvr is a completely different type of player. He is more competing with fritter for a spot than tmac.