binman

Of course. But even without the benefit of hindsight did you think that the selection of a not fully fit max gawn was going to be the difference between winning and losing the game against the crows? Did you think so against a better team, with a much better ruckman, for the roos game?

Agree its not the same thing. But surely we didn't really assess the selection of maxy as critical to a win versus the crows, particularly given we had almost a full list to choose from. They had not won a game. They had a percentage of 55. They made 9 changes. Their one star was out and spargo could have competed against their ruck. The roos are as better team, with one of the best rucks in the AFL and we beat them by the same margin with no max The risk reward ratio was all out of wack. It was a pretty important game for the pies finals chances too. And they had four of their best out. And elected to rest arguably their most important player. And I'm not being Harry hindsight. I said we should rest him prior to crows game.

But kozzie is clearly in goody's best 22. Id say best 11. In a must win game you don't rest a best 22 player.

Then why did rest kozzie?

Agree. But why take any risk. Surely he wasn't worried the crows would beat us.

Exactamundo. You'd be travelling pretty well as club if you could voluntarily leave a top 10 player out of your team

I take Nasher's point about Burgess being an expert and obviously Maxy ok to play and not too much risk of damaging his lat further. But again i question the decision making of the FD, specifically goody's. Even without the lat injury maxy has carried a massive load this season, barely been off the ground and as goody said himself after the crows game teams have been deliberately smashing him all season. An of course did gain in the crows game. Given his importance to our side surely the smart play is to rest him for both the crows and roos game. One to give him much needed rest. And two to avoid the risk of an injury. I''m to fitness knowledge what martin pakula is to quarantine (paging Webber) but my understanding is fatigue increases the risk of injury and blind freddy could see that, even without a scan showing a back injury, maxy could have done with a rest. It is not as we didn't have options.

Fair points. Just as being defender is not natural for some (and is for others) and takes time to master so does any forward role, and the the small forward role even more so. A tough gig, no doubt But my vibe is he has really good instincts up forward, and to my eye looks like he has those natural forward skills, not least of all his ability to crumb packs. Which why i'm bullish about his playing that tole, not exclusively, but as i say perhaps 70--30 or even 60--40. And viney could also play a bit of defensive role where he looks to shut down players who like to run off HB or even get in the hole in front of intercept markers and disrupt them. Plus i reckon he could offer a bit of protection for Kozzie the way Nieta used to for jeffy.

I'm fully on board the viney as a forward train. As you suggest his forward pressure would be off the charts. he would scare the bejusus out of any defender, small or large. like a pocket rocket version of Tony Lockett and the fear he instilled into defenders who thought about of dropping back into his leading space. Love the idea of him and kozzie working in tandem. Would be the AFL equivalent of the Malachi brothers and their infamous Malachi crunch. I reckon he has really good forward smarts and an instinct for a goal. Exhibit A was the pearler he kicked on his right forward in the crows game when he sharked a tap. Like TMac, he can spray his kicks in general play field but is an excellent set shot (at least from no more than about 40 metres). He is super fit so playing forward he could be on the ground for aprox 90% game time. i'd love to see him play 70% forward and 30% as a mid, predominately swapping with trac - what a one two punch. The defenders would sigh with relief when the little bull left the area, only for the big bull to saunter in there. But he also could give Brayshaw and Oliver a chop out when required. At 30% on ball Viney would still be a weapon as an inside, competed ball winner in the centre and around the ground, in addition to any time the ball was inside our 50. Make it happen Pollyanna.

I'd like him to stay the team too, just not as defender. Has he had a bag kicked on him? No, but consider this. He played as a key big defender against the two worst teams in the AFL who could only manage 5 goals each. Four of those 10 goals were kicked by his direct opponent (Himmelburg - after easily out marking him, Daw, Larkey x 2). So 40% of the opposition goals in the two games he has played as a defender have been kicked by his direct opponent. Has he been thoroughly beaten? Might well have been had Goodwin not moved him in both games. Goody took him off Himmleburg after that first quarter mark and goal. And once it was obvious Larkey had his measure (after his second goal at the end of the first quarter) moved Tomlinson off him too. In both games he ended up playing basically as a half back flanker against players smaller and shorter than him. And in both games played much better once moved because he could get up the ground and use his tank. Play him on the wing, which is the role we recruited him to play and where he is best suited. Good tank, provides a marking option down the line and gets good penetration on his kicks, which is really helpful in clearing from the half back line and with the last kick inside 50. Jones out and Tomlinson take his spot. Simples

The way they man the mark is really noticeable. I reckon that is more worth of a 50 than encroaching the protected zone. Intetsing point about the smaller ground. Optus is mcg size but the others are way shorter, which on hand makes zones more difficult to penetrate wirh slow play (I assume) but ate easier to score on from centre bounces or stoppages as kicks go in deeper from the centre square.

Some terrific discussion and also some top notch descriptions of the zone system fro AoB and A F. I will try and work out how in the OP i can edit to include links to posts that explain things, such as the zones well, as i couldn't believe how hard it was to find any decent information about this and other tactical information on the web. The articles dee man linked to on ABC news are really terrific and i like how the y use giphs to demonstrate things, very helpful As dee man notes there are some videos on Youtube from FootyA2Z. They are pretty basic really, (though they don't pretend to be otherwise but the only others i could find dated back to 2012! One of their clips explains the zone defensive system pretty well, once you get past the mogodon voice over! A couple of question for AoB, A F and deanox (and anyone else who has a view) about zones: I heard a pundit say, not sure where or who but i presume on fox (though it could have been on radio) that an evolution of the zone this year has been that rather then set horizontally, as described in the video above, they are being set diagonally across the ground. The idea being that doing so provides less opportunities to switch and forces opposition teams to either kick down the ground or take on a higher risk switch or kick to the corridor. I saw vision of Port forcing Gawn to kick to a high risk spot rather than down the line after taking away the switch option (something they did to great effect all game against us) I have heard a number of commentators talk about questioning why teams so often go down the line rather than crossing more often to the fat side and i suspect this is the reason. I I'm pretty sure we employ this tactic, but have no real way of knowing (though deanox's ingenious use of the AFL app might help) The first question i have is does that observation (diagonal zone) ring true? And if so doe we employ it?

Terrific analysis AF. i'm not sue how to quote across thread. Could i ask you to pot this on the tactics thread, perhaps with the link to the guardian article. The thing that jumps out for me is the concept of set plays in attacks triggered by agreed to antecedents as opposed to allowing forwards (and others) freedom to go with the moment as take shots as the opportunities arise

I see a really strong connection, actually, in both our model and that of pies. Also see some simiarties in the AFL between the two tactical philophsies discussed in that article I am going to use that lens to look at our game against the pies on the tactics thread.

I was totally agin selecting Tmac for the roos game but in hindsight see the logic of giving him some time in a real game of AFL football, in a game we should have been very confident to win. Given there is no VFL games and it is really not possible to organise any meaningful scratch matches (goody said they had dome some work with a SANFL side?) how else could they get miles and match fitness into TMac? And he clearly needs it. But the bolded bit in the quote is spot on. When he played up forward his defender was running off him at every opportunity. The pies would do exactly the same.And it would hurt us more. And i'm amazed at any suggestion of him playing down back. Down back, his lack of mobility would be completely exploited and as Tomlinson has shown, with defensive zones and systems it is no easy thing to simply slot into the back six when you have not been training or playing there. i have been pretty harsh on tmac, perhaps unfairly so. He remains a key player for us and if we make finals and if he can get close to full fitness and his his normal mobility he may prove a difference maker. But he is a way off that i reckon. So can't see him play this week if max is fit (and maybe even if he isn't) or the following week. But maybe they might play him against the bombers if they are confident of a win going into that game.

He is a zen master

Which may well mean we are in QLD, with one maybe two games in the NT, for the remainder of the year. Which is close to optimal i would have thought.

Good point about the 666 change in terms of stifling innovation, at least immediately after a goal is scored And who knows with goody. I mean he made those comments in the context of not allowing the change to be used as an excuse. I think why 666 has not had much impact is that it only really comes into play at centre bounces. After that things go back to how they were, with teams putting play ers behind the ball etc.

Ralph said on fox footy need yesterday that it will be announced today dees to play bombers in alice springs in round 14. So pies, bulldogs and bombers. The oldest team in the league, named after the capital of Victoria, playing three proud Victorian teams in Brisbane, gold coast and the Alice. Surreal times.

Thanks, i will watch that on a tablet when i watch the game on Sat. I will find that super helpful, particularly at stoppages. I assume it helps to visualise how their zones are set? It drives me spare that on the tv coverage they don't show a graphic at say centre ball ups after a goal and after a point showing where all the players are on the ground or even match ups. It would be so easy. As would a box in the corner when teams are exiting the back half with a shot from behind the goals so you could see what options there are down the ground. As an example in the lions game after the goal umpires called for that stupid goal review the commentators said Jones was free on the wing. Why not show it? On the 666 rule Goodwin made the point a number of times befire and during the 2919 season he had stopped using the player off the back of the square about half way though 2018 so he didn't think 666 was a factor. It was at this time, probably not coincedeetally that our zone become much less aggressive in terms of how high we push up. I actually dont think the 666 rule has made much difference to footy, and not really to us either. Our issues last year were about personnel. I didn't expect it would but one surprised the ability to run out of the square after a point would see some innovation. But i guess the risk reward ratio works against taking risks kicking out of the backline.

True nuff. Though just before The whistle blew he handball it straight to a Freo player so would have turned it over anyway. That said whenever I have seen him play he had played well. Outmarked fyfe a bit later

Ahh, i knew there was someone i missed in my list of posters who have made some insightful posts about tactics of late deanox. Is the GPS on the AFL app displayed as the heat maps? I haven't really looked at them in any detail. How do you use the heat maps (assuming that is what you are reffering to)? And is there other in game data, apps etc you look at?

Fair call titan. Perhaps i was too harsh on Tomlinson. I actually rate him as player, but obviously don't see him down back. And that is not supposed to be a big knock on him. At least Smith trained as back in the preseason. As far as i know Tomlinson didn't and playing as a key defender is no easy gig. I think it is entirely possible Goody played him down there in these last two games to get some proper match time into him. They may well not see Omac as the solution to the third tall, but i'd be shocked if they are thinking tomlinson might be. But if they wanted to give him some game time and had other positions covered it would make sense to play him down there against two of the bottom sides. I suspect he will replace Jones on the wing. Not sure if that means Omac comes back in, but i hope so. Not sure what the alternative would be. They may well play only two bigs in defence this week but not sure if that is feasible going forward.

Furphies is perhaps the wrong word, as it suggest a trick. i more mean that if you asked me a few months back what is the cornerstone of Goody's game plan was(the one wood) i would have said contest out, forward half footy and intense pressure on the ball carrier, indeed intense pressure all over the ground But i am starting to reconsider this and thinking they are perhaps better thought of as the key elements of his philosophy about how footy needs to be played to win finals. And so i've been thinking that his game plan revolves around his defensive system and how attacks are both launched and defended. Which is one reason i really liked the Guardian article about the differing tactis of Man city and Liverpool you posted as it in mnay ways could be applied to the AFL.