binman

Totally pennant. I think a change for the dees, that actually started in 2019, is how hard we are to score against when on. When teams open us up it usually because our all team defence and two way running has dropped off. This year we have been really strong in this regard. The other change that has contributed to our defensive strength is how well our back half is going. And how well they are working collectively to maintain their fluid zone. This really started last year. And has been on show this year. I'm confident we win if we get these two elements right, particularly the all team defence and two way running. The all team aspect is psychological, not physical, so a failure to bring it would me a massive fail. And inexcusable. This is where the coaches responsibility stops and the players begin. The coaches will get the ready and do all the talks and yadda yards. But if they lose because they drop off defensively, even a tiny bit, it is 100% on the players.

I had the red and blue pills a long time ago. I think my mistake was having both, as I thought they were supposed to make me see things as they were. But I start every season seeing a flag.

I reckon another factor with the poor disposal, theirs particularly, was late in quarters, and most of the last, both teams were stuffed

Agree with all points. On the first one, one of the joys of going to the footy is being able to see the whole ground, watch the set ups/structures and see the defensive running players do. I was up on level 3 in the pocket so had a great view down the ground. I made exactly the same point to my mate as you did in your first paragraph.

Or for that matter about the woeful rurn up by hawks fans today. Perfect day for footy. Middle of the day. The g. Amongst a victory team? Or is just the dees fans who cop it? Maybe the saints should have asked to swap the hawks game to get a game at the g in?

I went last night and discussing this issue with my mate guessed 25k. At 75% capacity crowd would be 37k. So where is the faux outrage at saints fans for not turning up?

Yep. A poster (forest demons perhaps) made the good point last week that it is quality over quantity. Better to get one really good clearance that creates a scoring chance than 3 scrappy ones that the team have won by extra numbers at the contest that don't create a scoring chance. Or worse set up an opposition rebound off hb

Two years ago a win like that and we would have smashed them in clearances. Tonight? 34 clearances to both sides. We have changed the way be play quite markedly. I'f you can't see that, you ain't really watching. A related stat ( ie related to the reduced focus on clearances and the increased tactical focus on rebounding from half back): we only had one more inside 50 than them. And they had 13 less scoring shots than us. 13.

Funnily enough I watched it a couple of weeks back too. Didnt think of lever. Will now. Fun film but best actor oscar? Please

Funnily enough I watched it a couple of weeks back too. Didnt think of lever. Will now. Fun film but best actor oscar? Please

And one less day's recovery. The rain and the extra day were key reasons I tipped us. That and I'm a happy clapper.

How's this for a comment: Dangerfield initially thought a lengthy suspension was not a possibility..... “After the game, I didn’t think there was anything in it at all, to be honest,” he said. “And then the hours unfold ... it goes from ‘I didn’t think there was anything in it’, because it was within play to, ‘I’m in a bit of trouble’.” Nothing in it? He broke Kelly's nose and knocked him out [censored] cold. Nothing in it? Even if he thought it was 'within play' (please), surely a player of his experience would know instantly that such a brutal incident would be heavily scrutinized and that he was almost certainly going to be in more than 'a bit of trouble'. I mean c'mon, its not 1979! And leaving aside all of that how do that pathetic comments square with his role as president of the AFLPA? I have lost total respect for him

Surely Hunt would be chance to go out for Hibberd. almost like for like. And Hibberd is better player, if nowhere near as quick.

The injury list has Hibberd(ankle) ) Melksham and Viney (foot) as as test this week. But also notes all three made it through the VFL practice match unscathed. So you'd reckon all three are good to go, unless they are not match fit.

Ok. Then my answer makes sense. I have always thought he could be winger, but again the problem is he doesn't get enough of the pill. And i'm not sure how good his aerobic fitness is

A mate is getting our tickets. I always sit level 3, behind the goals at the city end (which I think is the Coventry?) at that god awful place. So i hope that's what is left.

I just don’t understand why Hunt has been moved back to the backline in the first place: I reckon the thinking is to take advantage of his pace and ability to run and carry of half back. Mtres gain will be his KPI Speed is super important, and we are not the quickest side that for sure. So Hunt helps with that. And with the fatigue from rotations and longer quarter and arguably the man on the mark rule change (though i reckon the jury is still out on the impact of this ) there will be more space so running players are going to be more important than ever. Problem is he simply doesn't get enough of the pill. (note: perhaps you meant you don’t understand why Hunt was moved FROM the the backline in the first place. If so my comments above makes no sense!)

I have a feeling that this year they will generally only run two pure inside mids at a time, and sometimes perhaps even only one. Meaning a mix of two (sometimes one) of Oliver, Viney, Tracc and sometimes Sparrow. Which leaves no rotation for Gus i don't think. To augment this set up, as they have shown already in the two practice games and the Freo game, they will run players like Jordon, Kozzie, Sparrow, Harmes (when available), ANB and even players like Melksham and Jackson (who i'm sure will at some point play as mid whilst Max is still in the ruck) as mids.

Exactly

Again AD, it appears you have misunderstood me. I'm not sure what you mean saying i have suggested 'such a strong correlation' between winning flags and clearances or what you mean by misleading? Fact are facts. Of course there are outliers, but the facts are indisputable. The majority of flags in the last 15 years have been won by teams who have not prioritized winning clearances. It is not a statistical blip. It is evidence of a particular tactical approach. One the dees are now adopting. Thankfully. The two most successful teams of the modern era - the hawks and the Tigers have been near the bottom of the clearance differential table in their premiership year. I totally agree there any number of other key factors contributing to the success in the Hawks and tigers winning seasons. I wasn't suggesting otherwise. I didn't even imply clearances was the most important factor, or suggest they are more or less important than the other factors. You might argue forward driven defensive pressure is the most important factor. And you might be right. Or not (i would argue a team that has fully bought into the system and have a collective 'winning first culture' is the most important factor). But that is a different discussion. The dees are now less focused on the need to win clearances than we were. In this respect we are following the tiger's lead. We are also following their lead in a host of other ways, tactical and cultural. Of course we don't want to be down eight zip early doors. However it is worth nothing that we ended the game down eight in clearances, meaning from about the 20 minute mark of the first quarter we broke even. Suggesting Goodwin made some changes.

With respect, I disagree with both of these points. We have changed the way we play and we no longer prioritse winning clearances the way we did under Roos or in Goodies first three seasons as coach. Which by the by, contradicts the Goody doesn't change narrative many on DL adhere to. Again i'm not saying clearances are not important to us, but there a has been a clear tactical shift in regard to the relative importance of clearances - a shift that gathered pace in the second half of last season In 2018 we were 4th in clearance differential with +2.4 (the tigers were last, with -5.6) In 2019 we were 3rd in clearance differential with +3 (the tigers were 16th, with -4.6, the eagles, who won the flag, were 7th with +0.3) In 2020 we were 6th in clearance differential with +1.4 (the tigers were 16th, with -3.8, the team they beat in the Grand Final, the lions was 9th at +1.1) Added to the above the Hawks under Clarkson, the most successful team in modern history, have not have a huge focus on winning clearances. To win a flag recent history would suggest clearances ain't where it's at. And thankfully goodie has clearly recognised this and made the appropriate tactical change. It is worth noting in this context that under Cameron, the Giants have been very focused on winning clearances. Topped the differential table in 2017, third in 2018 and second in 2019 - the year they made the Grand Final (and got smashed by a team not focused on clearances). And in 2020? Twelfth. Coincidence? Maybe. But more likely, Cameron, like all AFL coaches, has drilled down on what factors have made the tigers so successful and tried to replicate them. Which is smart. The dogs topped the clearance differential table when they won the flag in 2016, but no doubt responding to the factors have contributed to premiership success have been mid table since. Interestingly the Power have topped the clearance differential table the last two years, so have landed on a different tactical model. Time will tell if it is works. But history suggests it won't. Source for data: https://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_team_rankings?year=2020&type=DA&sby=29&advv=Y

I never said we were deliberately conceding clearances in order to create opportunities to "intercept mark". That would be crazy. I said winning clearances is no longer the kpi it was. Important, yes. Critical, no. As i noted it is a tactical shift that started last season, and was really evident in the back half of the season. A tactical shift that mirrors the tactics employed by the team that has won three of the last four flags. As Dr Gonzo notes, we are setup very well behind the ball which means if we do lose clearances we can intercept and counter attack. And like the Tigers and West Coast, another team that isn't totally focused on clearances (and the winner of the fourth flag in the last 4 years) we now have brilliant intercept talls in May and Lever. The key to this tactical shift being effective is making sure there is pressure on the player kicking the ball and the defensive web is set up well ahead of the ball. The tigers are brilliant at both aspects.

Sure, but part of the issue for freo was one, our pressure and two well how well structured we were defensively. And our ball use was equally bad. The tigers would have been six goals up at the end of the first quarter. And gone into cruise control. Game over. Im not saying an early eight zip clearance differential is great. Just not the indicator it once was for us.

The clearance differential is not the cause of concern some are making it out to be i don't think. Essentially, like many clubs, we are modelling key aspects of our game on the tigers. The tigers don't care about clearances. Their focus is on what happens after the clearance defensively. As is ours, a shift that happened last season. Opposition win a clearance from a stoppage (which is where 80% occur, centre square clearnces are seen but not the main game). We put the ball carrier under pressure, who dump kicks into their 50. We intercept, often with a mark. We are set up well ahead of the ball and hurt them on transition (though we turn it over much more than the tigers unfortunately- which is why kozzie and spargo are so important). Rinse and repeat. Winning clearances is no longer the kpi it was. Important, yes. Critical, no. Consider this. At one point in the first i think I heard a commentator say they were 8 zip up in clearances. We were 3 goals up and dominating. And the commentators were pointing out time abd time again our intercept marks. But of course not making the connection. Because, you know who would expect full time professional to get it. Daisy would have pointed out the connection. They have arguably one of the top 3 mids in the game in fyfe and a strong support crew. They will win their fair share of clearances. And no doubt freo fans are bemoaning rhe fact they won the clearances and lost the match. Just as we did so often in say 2019. But we were always in control of that game. They pressed early in the third and once that was repelled it was game over. They got more clearances. But we killed them with intercept marks and as result got 75 odd percent of our score from turnovers. Just like the tigers. Think about how often that had happened to us in the past.

Not sure about 40, but yes I agree. In a team of butchers he is a surgeon. Well perhaps a surely is also an exaggeration but you get my point.