binman

Its interesting actually. Bucks was basically whinging that he is always asked the same things and people just don't get it. For example hits our being a useless stat. Said every other coach would say the same and are asked bonehead questions. My words. I get he says, super frustrated. But those questions are a function of how puerile the coverage of the game is in terms of tactics and tbe meaning of stats. How about the coaches try and educate the fans.

It depends how you define it. If you define the ruck position as the person who takes ball ups, bounces and throw in then maybe. But as bucks said that's actually a small part of the role. Athletic talls ie ruck man can play a critical role structurally. Just as Max does. For example maxy running hard defensively and blocking the corridor inside 50 severely disrupts the quality and effectiveness of the opposition's entries. When they're not kicking it to him, they're trying to avoid him, which forces them to kick to the pockets. The saints game was the perfect example of this. 13 less scoring shots from 2 less inside 50s was in part down to the Max factor. Similarly he disrupts opposition kick outs and defensive clearing kicks. And then there is his impact pushing forward. Someone has to man him up, and there is often a mismatch. He creates goals. I can think of four of tbe tip of my head in tbe first two games. And whilst opposition teams can set up to rove to Max he can still create 2 or 3 goals from stoppages agamr, like the viney goal. In games of small margins that is critical. Bucks point was tap outs is a nothing stat. But not stoppage work, clearnces, goals from them, marks around the ground etc etc. I reckon the dees are now really maximising Max. And I also reckon he is in our top 3 most important players. So def nor trash.

Great question. I am to High Performance Management what the demons are to premiership success, but i reckon Burgess seems to have the ability of convincing the players they are fitter than other teams and that they can, and will run out quarters and games. Now, i'm sure all HPMs try and convince their charges of the same thing but you only have to listed to the dees players post the 2020 preseason and this year to understand they have drunk the Burgess kool-aid. They believe they have the edge. Maybe the best HPMs are the ones that combine knowledge, communication skills, interpersonal skills AND high level sport psychology skills.

From a tactical perspective the dogs are really interesting I reckon. Of all the clubs their model is the most different from the tigers territory, forward half, high pressure template. The dogs like a fast game that is based on speed of ball movement, aggressive transition from the back half and above all (fast) precise transition that involves lots of super quick, high risk handballs/throws and kicks (as opposed to the dees and tigers who of course will link up when there is a clear option to do so, but otherwise will kick for territory - which makes players like Kozzie and Spargo critical in terms of winning the ground ball). Super exciting to watch with lots of complex scoring chains, high risk kicks, incredible amount of in close handballs/throws and bullet passes to leading forwards. Clearly they have recruited to support this model and as result the ace in the pack for the dogs is how many excellent kicks they have. And leaving aside how often they throw the ball they are brilliant at in close handballs and moving the ball by hand When they have the game on their terms they are going to very hard to beat. The challenge for them I reckon is when the game is not on their terms. The tigers are obviously the benchmark - and we have adopted many elements of their game plan. One example is going into tempo mode at different points in games, as we did so effectively against bot the dockers and Saints when they were pressing to stop their momentum and/or suck time out of the clock. Tempo footy really disrupts the dogs, in large part because it stops the game being played on their terms. The dogs eagles game was fascinating from this perspective as both teams wrestled to get their game on their terms. Great game. Th other query about the dogs game is how well their model holds up under finals pressure. The other team with a different tactical model is the Saints, who like the dog's rely on fast ball movement and transition, but are much more reliant on switching across the ground to get around zones (the dogs likes to switch too but are more than happy to go straight through a zone, or down the corridor). The Saints model is weaker I reckon. As the dees showed if you can stop their switch the Saints really struggle on transition. We did that brilliantly last Saturday night and it all but took their medium forwards and runners out of the game as they had no space ahead of them or to lead into.

Jeez, after the shock I recalibrated pretty quiick when I realised how much more time in my day I would have to achieve my life goals and long shelved dreams. Did a quick meditation and watched the sun rise. Then checked dl one last time to wish you all well and realised I had been fooled. Now I feel foolish and my dreams have drifted back to the horizon. Oh well. Banana skin game for us this week.....

I'm happy to provide some ideas for Clare on how comms.could be improved at the mfc, should she be interested. Replying to emails from members would be one. Particularly those that are specifically about poor communication. Like the one I sent nearly three weeks ago and have yet to receive a response.

Good points. He is so dangerous hitting contests at pace. And on Saturday many of kicks inside 50 were flatter - and much more dangerous as a result given how much quickly it comes in. Playing him that way does two related challenges for the opposition. One I reckon it creates a headache in terms of how to guard him/limit his impact. Can tag him but that won't stop him hitting the contest at pace. And two any efforts to block or impede him become really obvious, meaning he might start winning some deserved frees. Closer to the contest he is constantly scragged and held - and rarely protected by the umps.

I think an important element is that tracc, Oliver and viney are all close to their prime years as players. All are excellent inside, contested ball winners but are physically stronger than two years ago, particularly tracc who is dangerfield strong now. All 3 have become very difficult to beat in a contested ball situation and as Aob so astutely noted you can take that to the bank and reduce players at rhe contest. I said last night on the podcast that I questioned drafting jordon on the basis I thought he was another inside mid. But that is not how they are playing him. I was amazed to see of his 20 possessions, 18 were uncontested. I am also amazed how good he is. I was thinking petty was the only young, potential A grader who didn't play last year to come into the side. But jj looks as if he is 100 game veteran. Not flashy, but high footy iq, neat skills and makes great decisions. A natural. Giving him 23 was genius.

To be clear I'm not saying they would ever plan to lose a clearance. Its just that it is no longer priority one. And they are backing their mids to win their fair share of clearances with fewer players at the contest, sometimes just one. And for maxy to sometimes hit it to spots that only give us say a 50 50 chance of winning the clearance as opposed to say 70-30. Bottom line is we were winning clearances and inside 50s against good teams. And getting beaten.

That's a really interesting observation. I reckon you're right. In part it might be related to a having a stronger more seasoned team. But perhaps also a conscious decision to take on the tackle more. Tracc, viney and Oliver do so regularly now. Tracc and viney are both beasts. But the best example was Jones near the end of the third. Took butler on 30 from their goal, risking a sure goal. Instead started a scoring chain that resulted in fritters goal. A goal I reckon that sealed the win.

I think your stats partly answered this question IT, as does part of AOBs post Set ups for clearances that are more likely to create scoring chances can often be a set up that gives us less chance of actually winning that clearance. The very first center bounce of the game against the Saint's is a great example. if the objective was to win that clearance Kossie would not have started in the centre and two players might have gone to the contest. Instead one player did (i think Viney?), won it, fed it out to kossie who handballed to Oliver who had gone to the goal side of the contest, some 10 metres away, who then fed it back to Viney, who could run inside 50 and kick a goal. That aggressive clearance set up increased the chance of creating a scoring opportunity from that stoppage. But conversely reduced the likelihood we would win it. In 2019 Viney and Oliver would have gone to the contest, won it but not be able to spread it so well (one reason being one less player to give it to) and often the player who received the ball was on the defensive side of the contest and then would get tackled

I reckon because once the ball hits the ground tmac is a liability, whereas Jackson is crazy good for a big fella in terms of ground ball gets.

Assuming of course that there will be more space for forwards. Something I'm not convinced about. The Dees gave Freo and the Saints precious little space up forward (or the tigers and dogs in the practice matches for that matter) and as consequence both teams struggled to get marks inside 50 and score. My gut feeling is that the increase in pace on the game, which is the driver of open forward lines because the ball gets in there quick, is less a function of the rule changes, more a function of the psychology of the players. Carlton have been very aggressive with their ball movement. But are two zip down. Lets see if Teague remains as aggressive. I suspect he won't be and they will revert to slower ball movement, because whilst fast ball movement creates more one on ones and helps a team score it also exposes to them to the rebound. And a teams like the tigers and dogs will kill them on transition.

Funny you should ask that binman. I was wondering the same thing. Here are my thoughts on that question: From Goody's first two seasons we have made some pretty big tactical changes to way we play the game. In some respects some of the fundamentals have changed. For example winning clearances is not as an important indicator/focus as it was in 2018 and 2019. To be clear clearances are still important - just not central to our game plan. If i was to put a figure on it i reckon the club would be happy to end the year on break even in clearance differential as opposed to being say plus three in 2018 And some fundamentals have not changed - for example winning contested ball remains critical. The tactical shift commenced in 2019, when we took the opportunity of a lost season to introduce tempo footy (which also helped mitigate the risk of demoralising thrashings), something we took into 2020, and was on display in both our two games this season. In 2020, particularly the second half of the season, we moved away from being a stoppage and clearance based team first and foremost to a team : that has shifted the dial to trying to win pure clearances that result in scoring opportunities - even though in doing so we 'lose' more clearances than we have historically done when we 'lose' clearances we put the ball carrier under pressure, force a poor kick or handball and look to create a turnover from HB that we can counter attack from and set up scoring chains that is now all about intercept marks (Cameron will now be sweating on how to prevent Lever and May having field day) This tactical shift has been really evident this year. As evidence of this shift we have had different mixes in our center square set ups - eg Kossie starting each quarter there, Jordon playing as a mid (unlike the bulls, most of his possessions are uncontested), Nibbler and Harmes (they used Melksham this way too last the end of last year). Another example is letting one player try and win the contested ball (instead of multiple players at the contest) and having players on the outside to receive if they do win it - which if it is Viney, Trac or Oliver is more often than not the case. Jordon, Spargo and Kossie have all been great this year being that outside the contest receiver, as was Salem on the weekend. Another shift, albeit a less dramatic one, is we are now all about territory. I guess we always have been - and in some ways it was key to our tactics in 2018 - but territory is a kpi again. Get it forward. The difference between now and 2018 is that we are prepared to give ground to make ground now. All of the above speaks to a team that is evolving tactically and contradicts the erroneous narrative that Goody as coach has not evolved. I also think it speaks to some of our challenges - these sort of big tactical shifts can't be easy to implement and some players will find it harder than others to change. I wonder if brayshaw is one such example. On Gus, he better learn how to adapt because his future at the dees is on the wing. With our new way of playing the very last thing we need is another inside bull.

Good question. And thanks for posting in this thread Grr-owl. Now that we have kicked off the season i'm keen for some more football nerd tactical talk. Perhaps we can kick off season 2021 with some questions for discussion What will the impact of the rules changes be? Will, as Grr-owl suggests, there be more one on ones in the forward line? With the changes in rules favour us, particularly in terms of recruiting Brown? Has our game plan changed form a tactical perspective over the time Goody has been coach - and if so how? What is the go with the reduction in clearances this year? Other?

From Goody's first two seasons we have made some pretty big tactical changes to way we play the game. In some respects some of the fundamentals have changed. For example winning clearances is not as an important indicator/focus as it was in 2018 and 2019. To be clear clearances are still important - just not central to our game plan. If i was to put a figure on it i reckon the club would be happy to end the year on break even in clearance differential as opposed to being say plus three in 2018 And some fundamentals have not changed - for example winning contested ball remains critical. The tactical shift commenced in 2019, when we took the opportunity of a lost season to introduce tempo footy (which also helped mitigate the risk of demoralising thrashings), something we took into 2020, and was on display in both our two games this season. In 2020, particularly the second half of the season, we moved away from being a stoppage and clearance based team first and foremost to a team : that has shifted the dial to trying to win pure clearances that result in scoring opportunities - even though in doing so we 'lose' more clearances than we have historically done when we 'lose' clearances we put the ball carrier under pressure, force a poor kick or handball and look to create a turnover from HB that we can counter attack from and set up scoring chains that is now all about intercept marks (Cameron will now be sweating on how to prevent Lever and May having field day) This tactical shift has been really evident this year. As evidence of this shift we have had different mixes in our center square set ups - eg Kossie starting each quarter there, Jordon playing as a mid (unlike the bulls, most of his possessions are uncontested), Nibbler and Harmes (they used Melksham this way too last the end of last year). Another example is letting one player try and win the contested ball (instead of multiple players at the contest) and having players on the outside to receive if they do win it - which if it is Viney, Trac or Oliver is more often than not the case. Jordon. Spargo and Kossie have all been great this year being that outside the contest receiver, as was Salem on the weekend. Another shift, albeit a less dramatic one, is we are now all about territory. I guess we always have been - and in some ways it was key to our tactics in 2018 - but territory is a kpi again. Get it forward. The difference between now and 2018 is that we are prepared to give ground to make ground now. All of the above speaks to a team that is evolving tactically and contradicts the erroneous narrative that Goody as coach has not evolved. I also think it speaks to some of our challenges - these sort of big tactical shifts can't be easy to implement and some players will find it harder than others to change. I wonder if brayshaw is one such example. On Gus, he better learn how to adapt because his future at the dees is on the wing. With our new way of playing the very last thing we need is another inside bull.

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