binman

Fair question. He has the green light to tale on risky kicks, which might explain those numbers a bit. I rate him as elite kick, but perhaps you're right and I'm over rating his kicking skills.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

No, I'm asking you a simple question. Do you think the way we play will change as we approach the finals, as it did in 2021 and 2022, with our scores going up and the game style being more expansive and looking like rounds 1-6 this year? I'm not asking how we might achieve that, I'm asking if you think we will go back to the way we played in our preseason and round 1-6. It's not a trick question. And It is really a yes or no answer - maybe is a bit wishy washy.

Agree on all points. It is definitely a high wire act. It is a fascinating question I think as to how much teams are prepared to risk losing in the home and away season to increase their chances of winning a flag. I think the dogs and tigers fundamentally changed the calculation for many teams. Both teams played a style unsuited to playing a full home and away season - as their results attested. But a style definitely suited to winning a flag. Recent history is crystal clear, the brutal, chaos football the tigers introduced is the template - since 2017 the only winner play8ng a different style outlier was the eagles in 2018 (ironically after the tigers had their best home and away season almost ever, only to lose the prelim as 1.40 favs). If you include the dogs win (diff approach, but still chaotic) six of the seven flags have been won by teams using very similar methods. In that same period, the lions, Port and the cats (until they famously changed course ladt year) were brilliant performers in the home and away phase, and perennial top 4s, but couldn't get it done when it counted. Fans happy rounds 1-23. Not so happy come finals. Meanwhile, goody is in his seventh season as an AFL coach, has made finals in only three of those seasons (will be four this year) - making a preliminary in 2018, a flag in 2021 and our in straight sets last year (having earned a double chance). I'd take that record over say, ken Hinckley, who despite having incredible resources, strong teams and a pronounced home ground advantage, has not even made a GF, let alone win one. Much the same could be said about Fagan and the lions.

Basically, with the advent of tbe sophisticated defensive zoens, every team is the same forward line game plan, including the pies. The exception is the cats and the lions, who both try to engineer as much space as possible to give Hawkins, daniher, hipwood and Cameron opportunities to be one out. But even doing so, as soon as the ball is stopped zones get back and it becomes all but impossible to find space ot take contested marks. The only way to create space now in footy, is win the ball from centre clearances whilst the 6 6 6 is still in force (which was brought in for exactly this reason - create space and one on ones in the forward line by stopping teams flooding their defensive zone) OR go fast on transition so teams can't get their defensive zones set. The latter is basically the pies game plan, and how we played preseason and rounds 1-6. I know this sounds a little fey, but i really wish dees fans had more faith in goody. He has well and earned that with our team's first flag in 57 years. If that holds no water because it is history, then I don't want to hear about the program not working last year. We won't flick a switch as such, more slowly open the valve. And if they have got their fitness program right, we will soon (rounds 19 or 20?) be back to our offensive, fast transition best. Stay the course people. Have some faith. It's all about winning the war, not the battles

Spot on jnr. I didn't see this post before making my previous one. 'My observation is that during pre-season and the early part of this season we were playing a lot more daring football and kicking angles into the corridor. Hence our accuracy at goal as many of the shots were front and centre. But as we have seen in the past 5 weeks it has shifted dramatically to old style of kick along the boundary and bomb the ball into our fwd line.' This is exactly right. In a nutshell, it is my contention that in the middle of the season they don't have the run in the legs to implement the model you describe we employed in the first third of this season (and in the first halves against the pies and lions ladt season,and the back end of 2021). But will employ again if we can get the run in our legs back. The interesting question is whether goody should modify the model now to mitigate the core elements of the game plan that make brutal and blunt now (forward half pressure, contest, reentries etx etc). Essentially adopt a new, or at least modified sytem. Or if doing so risks players not instinctively understanding the system and the role they play in it come finals. Goody has clearly gone with the latter philosophy (though had def made some adjustments this season in this mid year phase eg reinforcing the defensive focus, less rusky kick etc). And one assumes that is because it will increase our chances of winning the flag.

A serous question rpfc. Do you think the way we play will change as we approach the finals, as it did in 2021 and 2022, with our scores going up and the game style being more expansive and looking like rounds 1-6 this year?

The thing is with the kicking skills isse, there is no easy fix, and they certainly won't solve themselves naturally (which is not to say we can't try something up forward - but really rhey are pretty limited what they can do. They have after all tried petty and brought Smith) Goody has built a game style that this list of players can win flags with. What's the point of us, say adopting the pies model if we don't have enough players who can reliably hit high risk kicks that model demands. We went all in on contested ball winners in tracc, oliver, Gus and viney - none of whom who are elite kicks. We had Max, a generalation ruck - but just a passable kick, albeit he has really improved his kicking over the journey. Only two elite kicks, in Watts and Salem, though Wattsy not tough enough, or committed I'm guessing, for goody, so he's soon out. And in Salem, we essentialy took him and Hunt, instead of Kelly, who is exactly the sort of plsyer we now need. Max, tracc, viney, oliver, gus and salo. Some A grade stars. Contested ball beasts. Bulls. Not much silk. But, with the exception of salo, often unreliable by foot and only salo an elite kick at the Pendulbury, Sidebottom level. That's the foundation goody inherited. To that he added key the structural players in May, Lever and Langdon he needed to build a premiership team. But again, all three are ok kicks, but certainly not elite. In May's case he is elite sometimes- but turns it over way too often in the 20-30 metre range, often under no pressure. It will take time to bring in some really skilled players to support Max, trac et al - all of whom are locked in on long contracts. Taylor has been working on it though. JVR is a terrific kick, nice simple technique, Mcvee is a great in, Laurie is waiting, Howe looks like he has neat skills, and I really like Sestan's kicking - has the knack of balancing up a touch before hitting it. And Hunter was a good pick up - adding an elite kick straight in to the 22. When the weather improves and we get closer to finals, we will increase tge speed of ball movement and transition. And all things being g equal we look like we did rounds 1-6. More space, more free players ahead of the ball, more movement by hand, riskier corridor kicks leading to better angles leading lanes openingup etc etc- all of which mitigates the kicking skills issue. Frustrating, but we're close to playing that sort of ballistic, fast game that everyone loves. Let's just hope it doesn't rain again this year. It's also worth remembering that the method goody has built is based on that of the tigers - who also had a pretty average list in terms of kicking skills. The tigers also built a model to take advantage of the strengths of their list - and won three flags.

Agree. The model works completely differently in the dry. For one thing a forward line with three talls in it ( say resting ruck, bb, jvr) has a chance of marking - or in Brown's case keep his feet. And we convert more ground ball wins. We can spread and switch, and take on more risky kicks. But in the wet, the model becomes too blunt. All congestion. Contest to contest. A battle. Perfect for viney, but not many others. And there's the rub. Why doesn't goody change the approach? One possibility is he believes the system is the key, and to maximise the likelihood every player executes their role on grand final day every game should be used as an opportunity to drill the system so it becomes instinctive. For an infinite range of other possibilities, please see the Is Goodwin the right coach uber thread.

Sure In dry conditions. And besides 77 inside 50s is very misleading. I'm guessing half of them were reentries. Meaning the ball was coming back into a forward line with 30 odd players in there. No space at all. No leading lanes. All but impossible to take a contested mark. Wet. Slippery. Chaos. We basically didnt score on transition. In part because the ball was in our forward half most of the time. Meaning there was almost always congestion ahead of the ball. And no overlap run meant no free players ahead of the ball. And again, its worth pointing out the giants scores to inside 50 efficiency was significantly worse than ours - 26% to our 36%. Unfortunately their goals to inside 50 ratio was a hell of a lot better than ours. We kick straight. We win.

Another theme in the wet.

Great post. Didn't mcvees ball handling skills really stand out. Classy player.

That's a fair point - though it's worth noting their smalls didnt do any damage either. And the reality is we don't have any small forwards ready to play seniors at Casey. But if koz kicks 2.1 like Greene did from hid three shots, instead of 1.2, we win the game. Tbe swans have some terrific smalls and medium forwards. Didn't help them kick accurately in their draw with the cats - a game also played in the wet and one they too should have won easliy.

Yep, they have more skilled players. And like highly skilled players do, they take their chances Nor sure i agree, but that is a completely valid question about our game plan. But one thing we can say with certainty, given the overwhelming evidence, is it doesn't hold up in wet conditions. On the conditions, I'm glad we only had one injury. The ground was giving way and shifting all over the ground. Perfect conditions for knee injuries.

Look, if you are of a mind that we have 'connection' issues then yesterday provided a scratch for that itch. But the conditions were appalling. And combined with our game plan of trapping in our forward half meant super congested forward zone, with it all but impossible to take contested marks and the ball living on the ground. But that didn't hurt the giants I hear you say. Well, our efficiency inside 50 for scores was 36% (26 shots from 73 i50s). Acceptable in those conditions with the way we play. The winners? They MUST have been more efficient right? Well the giants were even less efficient going inside 50, with an efficiency of only 26% (12 shots from 46 i50s). Imagine the melts if we went at 26% efficiency for scores inside 50! The difference was they kicked 7.5. And we kicked 5.15. That is the game right there.

What is the prognosis on Fritter's injury?

See post above jimmy.

Fatigue is a moot point I reckon. And to he honest so is the connection and forward issues palaver. Though it didn't help having three super talls in Brown, Grundy and gawn in such horrendous conditions. Or losing our best kick for goal early for that matter. We didn't lose because of fatigue or game plan, structure, set up, etc etc. We lost that game away with our woeful kicking for goals. Again. It really is a simple as that. We dominated that game, and should have won it easliy. We smashed them in every key stat, including shots for goal. Twenty shots at goal in those conditions is fine. Particularly when the opposition could only manage 12. The expected score of 77 -43 tells the tale. A five goal win turned into a loss because we miss shots on goal we should make. Bottom line, we have too many poor kicks. Wet weather exacerbates that huge issue. The winning goal by kelly was the perfect example of how good technique stands up under pressure and in terrible conditions. And our ball handling skills are also a big worry, again exacerbated by wet weather. Even tracc fumbles way too often.

Expected score from Champion Data 77 - 43 Says it all.

The podcast is run by Elon musk this week - which is why it's not working. Good thing too. That was the most frustrating loss I can recall for a long time. Our kicking skills were absolutely horrendous. As were our ball handling skills. Good lord, we missed Oliver.

Def agree to disagree on tank - no chance bowey had the tank or high cruising speed of nibbler - an ability that is fundamental to the role. They are completely different types of athletes. And for context, unlike nibbler who never comes out of the side, bowey was dropped for a big chunk of last season and has played at Casey tgis year too. Whilst nibbler But leaving that aside, it makes little sense to take Bowey away from his best position as a distributor of half back and make him a high half forward, a role he has never played. And even less sense to take nibbler away from a specialist role he has trained and played in over three seasons and made his own to such a high level he is a clear best 22 lock. I mean a few years back, they encouraged him to look at other clubs. He stayed, and has played so well in that position that the club put him in the leadership group and resigned him on a new contract.

Bowey does not have the tank to play nibbler's role. Just about noone else does. Not yet. I find it so perplexing why people still callfor nibbler to be dropped. I mean, for one thing, he plays a very specific role, one tmac had said is the HARDEST role in football (his words, not mine), that there isn't an immediate replacement for. And leaving that aside, he has been selected in the ones for almost every game for two and half season. He has played something like 58 of our last 60 games for pete's sake. And that includes a premiership. Is there another player who can boast that record? Goody is a premiership coach, with a 58% win record. The idea that nibbler being one of the first picked and a best 22 lock is somehow related to goody having favorites, being stubborn or irrationally 'glued' to nibbler is an insult to goody. I mean c'mon, goody is the business of winning flags. If he didn't think nibbler helps us achieve that goal he's not in the side. Simple.

Lead. Bur agree - I've heard him do Casey a couple of times. Really like his work. The woman doing special comments, whose name escapes me but is an AFLW player, is good too. It makes such a difference to hear decent commentators.

Good thing we bear the other mob by 10 goals then.

Totally fair comments. I don't usually post my footy punting tips, bar the occasional comment on particular games. Was just struck by what I saw as great value accross so many games, and thought I'd share. But I get that people are sick of the infiltration of betting in footy. Me too. So I'll refrain from such posts in future.