binman

I like Smith as a pressure forward

I'm confused. Viney available for selection. In two weeks?

It doesn't surprise me the Hawks are number 2 as Clarkson has always been about controlled ball movement. It does surprise me the dogs are so high as the play pretty ballistic style of footy. It goes to show how many skilled ball users they have, by hand and foot - and how brilliant they are at being able to handball their way through heavy traffic.. And it is pretty good evidence of how dangerous a side they are A team that combines winning clearance, strong contested footy, off the charts pressure and high DE is gong to cut a lot of teams up. Can't wait to see how we go against them because i'd have them as favorites for the flag if i was setting a market. Will our pressure be enough to disrupt their game and reduce their DE? The tiger's pressure destroyed them in the second half of their game. I have not seen the port dogs game. I wonder how the power's pressure was in that game?

I think that was the week before kayo started showing vfl games. The audio on the all the goals video was def the casey radio call as I listened to it live. Actually a very entertaining and enjoyable call. Perhaps mote so if a Casey fan, but they were not too over the top in their support/focus on Casey.

Possibly. Bu I think the biggest factor is our tactical model, where we look to go forward to get territory, rather then sideway kicks back and for the across the backline waiting for an opportunity to switch or pick our way through a opposition press or zone (the way the Eagles do - i'm guessing they or perhaps Geelong top the DE table?) And with our Goodwinpress and focus on trapping the ball inside our 50 as I noted in my previous post it is often super congested in our front half which means less space and increased risk of disposals not hitting their target.

I actually think you are both right. We definitely still press high when the ball is on our half. And often in a very tight formation, when the ball is inside our inside 50 meter arc. Which is at the heart of the Gengenpressing philosophy. That is really evident watching live, particularly when you sit behind the goals up high. It is crazy how often 36 players are within say 70 meters of the ball and contest when the ball is in our 50. I liken it to a fluid cell The goal is to trap it in our forward half - and if that fails create pressure on the exit kick, force a turnover and get a reentry. We have been brilliant at stopping teams switch, which is the go to way of breaking a press. Players like Rivers and Hunt, who are stationed on the edges of the 70 metre cell work super hard to get across and ideally force a turnover or at the least get to mark so they cant immediately move it on. At the same time other players have gut run to cover the down the line option, meaning the opposition often get stuck at their HB line. That was really evident against the Swans When we do force, what is essentially an offensive turnover, the kick back inside 50 is often a challenge because it still super crowded because of our press. This is definitely a factor in our inaccuracy this season. The last quarter against the blues was the was the perfect example. By that stage we were monstering them and our very effective Goodwinpressing meant the ball lived in our forward half. Which also meant our forward half was more often than not super congested. So the two options seem to be a short chiselling kick of the sort Langdon hit to Nibbler to set up a mark and goal. Or a kick to the pocket, where we look to mark it with our bigs, bring it ground for our smalls or force a stoppage so we can reset. All very predictable and if the opposition do win win the ball once again it is in traffic and under pressure creating another opportunity to create another turnover. And our tall forward line means max doesn't have to take stoppages deep inside our 50, allowing him to station himself just outside 50 on the perimeter of our cell. So if the opposition do win the ball they are often faced with kicking it to gawn or instead taking the riskier option of trying to switch and opening up the goal face. If i understand it properly, that all seems to be congruent with the Gengenpressing philosophy But you're right AF, we also zonally guard space. However what i would say is that that they do so still as part of a fluid cell that as you say requires massive work rate to constantly shift and reposition the zone. When the opposition do get past our forward press we do everything we can to slow their transition and flood back en masse to get to their designated spot in the zone they have to guard, as evidenced by that footage King showed (and all the pointing). As King noted, and you point out, we have a defender deep in goal keeper role to support the zone. That was Tomlinson, now Petty (thoughas you say they seemed to have mixed that up a bit against the blues, so it will interesting to see if that continues). However that player still presses high when we go forward, but on the outside of the perimeter and closet to the opposition goal (sometimes he might only go up the centre, but often further) and will run back to say 30 metres out from their goals as the ball is transitioned. That play that petty almost got caught out on was the perfect example. He got aggressive and pushed up super high and almost got caught out. Good thing he got back, but had to sprint super hard to do so. We have been utilizing key elments of this model since about half way through 2018 when we realized we were getting hurt too often on the counter. Omac was the goal keeper in that model and they stopped pressing so high, but still pressed. And we abandoned the players running off the back of the square too. I think we are actually more aggressive with that press now, but that's perhaps because our players are so much fitter and can get back when required. From round 12 that year we conceded the least points on the back of this change. And since that time have been defensively very strong. Your point about our stoppages is really god one. As you say we don't bring an extra to stoppages and often have a player, say 40 metres away, on the defensive side to intercept opposition kicks. Which is exactly what happened against the blues. So that tactic has clear elements of a zone system but is still consistent with the Gengenpressing philosophy because it supports our efforts to trap it in our forward half, particularly if the stoppage is within 60 metres of our goal. On Kickett guarding the corridor at marks we have been doing that all season. Nibbler does it often as does Spargo. Very disciplined. It is clever because it makes it harder to go the corridor and/or switch and so supports our model. It is also one reason why opposition teams don't seem to have been able to hurt us with the new stand rule.

I wondered about why they don't do that. I reckon it is becuase they only want transition down one wing. If forced to go to the other wing they want it as open as possible with lost of space for players like Kozzie to run into. They rarely seem to switch, at least compared to other teams. And don't use the corridor very often either. I also reckon they like having two talls contesting for that long ball from defence. It means the outcome is very predictable - it is almost never marked by the opposition and if we don't mark it hits the ground and our flankers etc can sweep it way. Like the kick to the pocket inside 50, these things suggest they are trying to be ultras predictable. Must help with disposal efficiency becuase they can be so confident where everyone is at any given time (eg the over the head handballs that go to dees player) Max said on RSN this morning that real benefit of having the three talls forward is that he doesn't have to take as many of those down the line, often bone jarring, contests as the other fellas give him a chop out and take some.

And he is such a competitor. I think back to his devestation in the rooms after I think the freo game last year. And I loved his perplexed reaction to a free given against him on the weekend. Hw also backs himself. Takes players on and takes risky options with his kicks. In doing so, like Hunt, is both a defensive ans offensive threat. And those two players playing their role has freed Salem to get further up the ground. As a result Salem has become much more of an offensive threat. Almost all of his kicks now go forward. And most hit targets. Ane because he is kicking from higher up the ground those targets are often in dangerous areas. It was interesting that. On on the couch when asked what he would do to break the dees down, lyon said clamp down on Salem.

Spot on. Which is clearly why Melksham got dropped. But he is the exception to prove the rule. And who would want to lose their spot in this team at this point in time? To that list of players add Jordon. A young player who has done everything that has been asked of him this season. And is fully, all chips in. That was crystal clear in his phenomenal performance on Saturday. He was clearly asked to play Viney's role as the hard nosed, defensive mid and was a big reason why we won the center clearance count, albeit by one, after last weeks lopsided differential. His pressure was off the charts as evidenced by his game high 37 pressure acts and 13 tackles (also game high). By the by it is interesting that Jordon's DE was 50%. He is normally up in the 80-90% range, in large part because he is an excellent kick. But more significantly, we have used him as an outside player on the flanks, so he usually has a bit of time and space to dispose of the ball. As a pure inside mid he is obviously under heaps more pressure. It is a good reminder, i reckon, to look at DE in context for players like Viney, Tracc and Oliver. Pity Brayshaw doesn't have that get out! On DE, although their disposal numbers were pretty low, May (and he kicks it out i guess) and Lever were both in the 90s and Rivers was mid 80s. Solid. And makes so much harder for them to get the ball back from us. That said Petty, who i think is an excellent kick, went at 55%. That needs to be an outlier.

I reckon Goody does too. I wonder if they, knowing jack was likely to come back against Adelaide, wanted to give Chandler a game to reward his effort, give him some more AFL experience and some confidence that the club think he is ready for the call up when it comes. If so they would have worded him up so his confidence didn't take a hit when dropped after the one game. It is a bit unfortunate for him that he had such a quiet game. But apart from being doused in milk, the experience can only be a positive.

Such calls from dees fans, who i assume actually watch our games. are headache inducing. Add calls for nibbler to be dropped to that mix. And I needed a pack of panadol to deal with the suggestion fritter should be dropped after the swans game.

Is it time for a woman to coach our AFLW team?

Or at our social club. Wait a minute....

Never heard of a flash mob? Joking. Not Joking

When we win a grand final, be it this year or next, the whole demonland community should meet to celebrate! Joking. Not joking

This times a million. As much as anything BT just seemed bored out of his mind. I wouldn't mind so much if i could have got to the game, but watching it only on the box was infuriating. I watched a bit of a game over the weekend (can't recall which game - perhaps the dogs game?) and Brenton Speed was calling it. So refreshing just hear someone call a game properly. No theatrics, no attempts to force some wordplay/puns into the call (note to derwayne - please stop it: repeat after me: i am not Denis Cometti), no meandering and no stupid blokey jokey routines with his mates in the box. Just a fella doing his job.

I reckon we are looking at a different game jimmy. There any number of possible examples but here's four quick ones from from this post alone. One, they never had a look in. There were never in the game. Two - and related to the first one, our start and half start were both strong. In a year where we have won 8 previous games, that was the FIRST TIME this season we were ahead after the first quarter. For a team that had only lost one last quarter that spelt big trouble for the blues, who are a good team and who brought the heat early. And we extended that quarter time lead to be ahead by 13 points at half time. Perhaps it is a sematic thing, and when you say our start wasn't strong you mean something different to how i would define it. I would say our starts against the Saints, GWS, Hawks and the Roos were not strong. By my definition we had a strong start to this game and a strong first half. If anything we didn't have such a strong finish. And three, i have no idea what you are referring to when you say: we gave great looks in going forward from centre bounce on many many occasions - total and absolute baloney. As Teague noted in his presser they barely had any good looks going inside 50, at all, because of our pressure and the fact we completely smashed them in post clearance pressure Being asleep and out positioned at centre bounce - see above Before half time, the centre clearance and clearance count was wildly in their favour? - Really? I actually don't know what the stats were but i assume you do? What were they? We were definitely behind in around the ground stoppages but as Teague noted our pressure meant that were of no value (a point Bartel made in the call during the third quarter and again on RSN this morning). And as Goody noted in his presser it wasn't an issue as they had an extra at the stoppage and they just gave the ball back to us all day. And surely we can't have been too far behind in center clearance differential at half time as we won that stat by one. But i don't know the half time number. I assume you do. What was it? Four, it is complete rubbish, in my opinion, that Gawn has had three shockers in a row and his ruck work is just all over the shop at the moment. And on a final point i know you don't rate Goodwin, but do you really think he is going to go into the game against the dogs without making subtle tactical shifts to negate their strengths and disrupt their preferred game style? For example change his stoppage set ups, tag some key mids etc etc

If viney is right I reckon they'll play him, perhaps on reduced minutes, as it might be harder to come back against the dogs without a week getting some touch. Though I guess he hasn't been out long. Id take the opportunity to give Jackson another week's rest, even if ready. Qith his injury he would have no issue continuing to run etc so fitness won't drop old at all. And two games off would perhaps mean not having to rest him at a later point. Another wet, greasy day yesterday. So not great conditions for sam and bb (though didnt stop their aa buddy). This week in Adelaide the forecast is sunny, 21 degrees and light wind. Spring time conditions, just like finals. Those boys will be licking their lips and we will get a much better sense of how they might go all together

This won't change. Seems to be locked in as a stratgey and is quite a different one to 2020 when were often looking to cross at right angles into the corridor as a set play and if not going to the top of the square

I reckon that's because it was so clear from the get go we were intotal control and it was so evident they had no chance of winning

Was thinking exactly the same thing after the game. That and i've seen us play well in such games for years, throw everything at them, and still come out with a four goal loss. Pretty much every game against the hawks for a decade. The phrase that came to mind was professional win.

It is our game plan, so you might want to learn to enjoy it.

We won total clearances last week, meaning we smashed them at stoppages (as we lost the centre square clearances 17-4). This week had one more centre square clearances than them. I don't think they scored a single point from centre square clearance and i think we got two goals. Bick tick They 'won' around the ground stoppages, but as i have pointed out that actually hurt them and helped us. The clearance differential has become a useless stat in of itself, just as hit outs have. It is really only useful in combination with other stats, for example where both team's scoring chains start from and post clearance numbers. For example, if you just looked at the blues round the ground clearance numbers you might conclude that was a positive outcome for them. But if you look at that stat in combination with their scores from clearances (which was bugger all) and our score from defensive intercepts and rebounding you get a completely different picture. And the outcome is a net negative for them. And conversely a net positive for us.

I get that, and totally agree we don't want to give up a clearance differential to the dogs. But the clearance differential is fluid in its importance. Against some teams it doesn't matter. And against some teams it does. And it is worth remembering in this context we have beaten both last years' grand finalists, so the approach stacks up against good teams. Again as Goody noted in his presser he was not overly concerned with the blues winning the clearances because they had an extra and they were just giving it straight back to us. So Goody didn't make a tactical shift. Because their strategy was hurting them and helping us (eg 15 intercept nearly 40 odd points scored from the back half). Goody also noted the game today was one where each team had had different strengths (read different game plans) and their strength is their offensive capacity. He noted we worked to take that away from them and worked to get the game on our terms. Well, them choosing to put an extra at the stoppage helped us get the game on our terms as it is very defensive, as it prioritizes winning the clearance over having an extra player forward of the contest (which we often have). Again, they scored basically nothing from clearances and we scored nearly forty points from intercepts in the back half. So why would Goody respond? But he will respond against the dogs. And he will go into the game with some different tactics. Because like they have every game, they will look to negate the opposition strengths and take advantage of possible weaknesses, just as he did against the tigers with the higher number of handballs we employed. So, for example it is very likely we will set up much less aggressively against the dogs at stoppages and have focus on halving more clearances. Because this will negate one of their key strengths.

I noticed that. A small thing but that's leadership right there. And care. I could not be more impressed with Tracc's maturity and all round demeanor this year. Has become a true leader right before our eyes