binman

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

Great point. They worked so hard. And that work by them an others means teams can't just switch to break us down and get an easy transition (compare our work rate to our loss against the dogs last year - chalk and cheese) There was one play where Rivers busted a gut to cover the outlet. We ended up winning it back and going back inside 50. Fair play to bartel he pointed the work rate out (hunt might also have been involved?) I absolutely loved Olver's defensive work rate and defensive running today too. I thought that part of his game was critical in the first half. That run down of cripps was something he just wanted doing until this year. First class work rate from Clarry today.

We are not struggling. We are simply not as concerned with winning clearances as were up until about half way of last season. Watch goody's presser and ask if he is a ciach concerned about us losing tge clearance count. We have won 9 straight, by an average of some like 4 or 5 goals. Clearances are not an issue. I'm more worried about a lack of a gun small defender

Sure. But we won't lose clearances to them. And the blues have a pretty good midfield and a pretty good forward line. The dogs beat them last week but they hard too much firepower up until 3 quarter time. We reduced their firepower to a pop gun

Why do you think they do that?

I couldn't go today so had to watch it on the box. I was getting seriously furious with BT. It wasn't just that stupid comment. His vaudeville routine about how quiet went for the whole first half and was replaced by a routine about him not rating us blah blah blah, that the whole team bar bartel joined in on. Pathetic and disrespectful to the club and fans watching On Bartel, i have to say i'm really impressed with him. Actually brings some solid analysis to the role of special comments (eg his comment explaining why the clearance differential was not an issue and the pressure we put on the player trying to kick from the clearance). And i love how he doesn't play along with BT's clowning.

A look in? What on earth are you talking about? We were always in control of that game and we won by 4 goals easing up. They had no chance of winning that game once we came with the right level of pressure. A look in? Sheesh And we won't lose the total clearances to the dogs as they won't put an extra at stoppages to give them half a chance to win one

Disagree. Break even in the centre is fine. I don't think they scored a single point form centre square clearances. And they set up to attack. And as general rule, win around the ground clearances for stoppages. We didn't today but as goody noted in his presser they had an extra at stoppages, hence their 'win' in this stat today. Except it wasn't a win at all. If we wanted to 'win' more all we had to do is match that extra and with our bulls hey presto we 'win' more of those clearances. But, again as Goody noted he was fine with our stoppages because even with an extra at the stoppage their clearance 'wins' were under immense pressure, and so time after time they dumped kicked in to the forward half allowing (parpahrasing goody) 'our boys to go to work' . We had 15 intercept marks in our back half on a wet night, with lever 5 of them. And as a result more than third of our score came from the back. We scored about half of their total score rebounding from the backline. And they scored almost nothing from clearances. Another tactical battle won by goody.

Apologies if this has been posted, but game is on case radio https://www.caseyradio.com.au/shows/vfl-vflw/

Curious.

I feel like I'm in an alternate universe

Wow. You must be so proud. Insults. Great skill.