binman

For me this is the critical question. Goody and bevo are the perfect example of my type one and type two coaches. With type one being fully committed tho their system (eg Longmire, Buckley and goodwin) and making few big changes on game day. And type two having a system of course but being more flexible and focused on responding to the opposition strengths and weakness. And much more likely to make structural and positional changes. The problem with type one is every player has to buy in for it to work. Maybe they thought they did yesterday but it was clear our defensive and forward pressure was appalling. pretty much for the whole game (it improved in the last). So leaving aside march day coaching for me the critical questions i why weren't the players ready. Of course the players have personal responsibility for being ready but in team sports there is another intangible aspect - the collective enegery of the team And graz i'm with you on this - it is the job of the coach to have his charges ready. Preparation plays a roles but it is also where the ability to motivate comes. I'll bet Bevo has this ability. it was on did play yesterday i reckon. Does goody? Twice in big games we have failed to be ready. To be honest the failure this time was worse than against Port, because we had a seven day break and then Port experience to learn from. And still came out flat. And worst of all we came out flat after half time. That speaks to me of a coach who struggles to find a way to motivate - to get his players to dig deep deep and push though the barrier, to commit to the system, to gut run, to tackle, to harass. Too often this year that effort has come n the last quarter when scoreboard pressure does the job of motivating - just as it again seemed to yesterday. Another issue raised its ugly head yesterday. And that was on field leadership. Who in the third said enough, i am going to stand up and gut run, tackle like a crazy man, kick a goal against the run. Instead we got our stand in captain giving utterly pathetic 50 and looking a petulant teenager. That was the only time i got really angry in that game as i knew that 4 goals was likely going to be bridge too far.

Coincedentaly I just read the article (not realising there was this thread). Heartbreaking. So much trauma. I started going to the footy regularly (ie most weeks), usually by myself, as a 11 year old in 1978 and fans yelling racial abuse was so common as not to be even noticed. The footy show episode says everything you need to know about racism in this country. And how far we have to go to even get close to meaningful reconciliation. Assuming of course we actually want to get there. Which I am far from convinced about. No doubt many would say oh that was long ago. Well one of those aresehokes who thought such a 'skit' was funny is the president of Collingwood (in a lineage that includes that pig mcallister) who still thinks racial jokes are hilarious. And the other shamefully still has a very public voice. And was just sued by Nicky winmar for defamation after claiming he was lying about his famous protest (one i didn't know Robbie muir had made a decade before) I feel ashamed for using the mad dog epithet many times over years when talking about Robert Muir.

I don't think the dogs put any extra pressure on us in the third which is where lost the game. If so its not about buckling under pressure. Our mids and forwards simply did not do enough defensive running and they have the players who can exploit that just about more than any other club because they have so many excellent field kicks. And are drilled to switch and take the kick on. Which is bevo's game plan That is is why I was worried about this game beforehand. We didnt do enough defensive running in the first half either, particularly tbe first quarter. We were dead lucky to be in front at half time. In the third we gifted them goals through turnovers and we missed our opportunities. And that is because our Achilles heel is how many players we have with terrible kicking technique. Wind of the sort today, just like rain exposes poor technique. As it did today. For me the real issue is why the players did not work hard enough today. That is as much on the coach as the players. They did not have a single excuse not to be ready.

I don't recall anyone suggesting melksham will be dropped

They won't make many changes, given two are forced with Sparrow and Jones and preuss will come out for maxy. But I'd be really disappointed if melksham isn't dropped. The 50 was pathetic from a supposed leader. That goal was the nail. His body language straight after was pathetic. Shameless to be act confused. A fifty every day of the week. And a lazy, careless one too. But unfortunately that was not the worst example of a lack of leadership. Not going back hard and marking inside 50 (I forget who kicked it, Salem maybe) was just unforgivable.

Effort. Pure and simple

Lost it in the third when applied zero pressure on the ball carrier. They showed their gee wiz pressure gauge late in that quarter. And we barely registered. Lyon said rhat was a result of not having the ball. Peanut. That's why we couldn't get the ball. Defensive running stopped and as I feared you don't pressure their ball carriers (any clubs really) they chop you up. And did. [censored] poor leadership from melksham. That 50 was simply not on.

There is not rhe appropriate response button indicating agreement (a thumbs up might suggest it been a top year). But I agree.

Agree that is one of their strengths but I think our defensive system negates it because they won't have space to run into. What worries me most is their kicking - players like the bont, macrae, Daniels and crozier will look to get through our zone with sharp, accurate kicks. Key will be our pressure on the kicker (and those little flick passes they love). If we bring the heat we win.

I prefer teak

Agree. I'm more talking about model than outcome. But where it useful to compare us to the tigers is where we are at in terms of our development as a team. The tigers are the best team of the last 3 years. But it 5 years of development and plenty of heartache, prior to that to get there. We are building. No guarantee we will get there but what the tigers show is there are no shortcuts.

No

This is an interesting game from a tactical perspective. Both teams have a huge emphasis on pressure. Though really every team now does. Both teams also are contest out. I'm not sure teally what their defensive system is, so can't say if differs from ours (though my vibe is it is) The dogs style reminds me a bit of how we played in the first half of 2018. Running in waves quick handballs, breaking down zones with speed of movement. When it works it can be devastating. But as we found the weak link is if the ball carrier is pressured super hard all game it breaks down. And I reckon that is where now differ. We zero in on the ball carrier and we more often look to get territory by kicking long, with less chains of handballs and/or neat kicks. When we do tic tac down the ground now we look to do so with the style the cats and West Coast do. Which when I think about it is a pretty big tactical shift.

I really like it. No change is a great sign.

Now that is the sort of weather forecast i can work with. Love the specificity of the diagonal breeze. I hope kozzie goes to that pocket and Langdon is on the optimal wing. Top job.

Appalling website. The ladder says it all on how bad. It has a message after 8 position saying top 8 teams make the finals. I mean really?

In the immortal words of one one Demonland's finest: Get tested, stay home, STFU.

Can't you see?

The other challenge is Goody (and any coach who comes to a club to build premiership winning team) is on the clock and losses create fugazzi. This means he needs to stay the course and have an admin that supports him. But the reality is improvement is important because fans get restless and the media loves to fan those flames. Many coaches don't get second chance if the admin blinks (which is stupid part of the AFL landscape - i was really pleased ratten got another shot, should never have been sacked by the blues, and no should bailey for that matter). In this respect 2018 was a bit of millstone as we dared to dream of flag, which if it came would have been 2-3 years ahead of goody's schedule

An area of expertise i'm guessing given your brooding avatar

Agree, fantastic insight. His injury history, even before getting to the AFL is insane. His commitment to the rehab and work required to get back to AFL level on multiple occasions is next level and must be so inspiring for his teammates. The interview is really top shelf. Andy's interviews (and this one a great example) are a terrific balance between well researched questions, good interviewing technique and coming from a shared place of passion for the club. I listen to a lot to the player and club interviews on radio and websites etc etc. More often than not they are by the book, with not much real insight and pretty dull. Vander's interview (and the others) was the opposite, genuinely interesting and insightful. As an example i didn't realise vanders isn't training between games. Provides context for his relatively average disposal efficiency. Also how close he came to permanent injury his eye is truly frightening.

AF that's a great description of the development of our game, the sequence of the blocks so to speak. I reckon the gears shift you mentioned is their ability to play tenpo footy when re we hired (or even when forced to by the opposition). We started to do that last year and are getting good at it now. The diferential in play on from marks v the pies was remarkable. I see what you mean about the way the tigere can surge when needed. For me that is all about getting control of the game's momentum, which arguably the most important thing in any sport. Our surge is a little different i reckon. Like the tigers it starts with pressure and resting the oppositins charge. But the tigers surge is a bit more of a blunt weapon. We can be lethal, and are getting better, at creating scoring chains and opportunities. We can suddenly flick the switch and be a bit more aggressive with our options and overlap run and also this is where the automated plays come in. Nothing beats score board pressure for writing back momentum.

I just saw this thread. Happy for Jim to receive the award but like all great ideas they need some work to take to the next level. I shined Jim's diamond and made it sparkle. Even wrote to the AFL to ask them to pass 'our' idea on to Gill

Refining the system is a good way of describing Goodwin approach. He has made a number of adjustments to his system. I guess it an exercise in semantics in terms of how immutable a system needs to be over time to be considered the same sytem but I agree with aob that he had a model in mind and he has been putting the blocks together. As an example I think he is prepared to add Harley now (and for that matter take the punt on Jackson and kozzie) only because he thinks he has got all the pieces of the puzzle in place. It is really interesting, in the last couple of weeks (coincidentally since this thread has started- though that might be classic confirmation bias hey EO?) all the talk from goody and players about our game plan is how critical defence is. Variations on, it all starts with our defence. I listened to lever on the zoom session tonight and he said much the same. Said they pride themselves on how hard they are to score against. He made a couple of very interesting comments relevant to our game plan. He said that in the early 2000s defence was your back six versus the forwards. But that now it is an all team concept that requires all team buy in. No surprises there. But he said that what many fans perhaps don't grasp is that low possession numbers are not an indication a player has not played well. That they often don't see how hard that player has worked to play their role in the all team defence and how important their contribution is. Specifically mentioned harmes in this respect, saying his numbers are much lower this year but he is as valuable. On possessions he said they can be a misleading stat for us as we are a low possession team that looks to kick long to a contest and battle from there. The really interesting comment was that the big improvement in our defence wasn't as result of the back six or forwards defending better it was the midfield buying into the all team defence and now really working hard both ways. He used gus getting six (I think) intercept marks in the pies game as an example. Said mids have all been star juniors used to being offensive. Working hard the other way takes some time to learn. Implied the penny has dropped. And I reckon we are seeing the result. Conceding three second half goals in the last 3 games, in total, is evidence of that.

Gold. Love it. I am going to get that slogan printed on a T shirt. Or even better some masks