binman

Fair call. Kicking 5 straight is certainly a good start.

Voss noted on his presser that they were really focused on a fast start to try and exploit the 5 day break factor. Fatigue may have impacted some individual players more than others (fritter is usually much better one on one for example) but I think the impact was more mental than physical. Not switched on early and we paid the price. Wevl had clearly planned to be ready and the way we dominated the last quarter and a half, and crazy good pressure numbers tells me fatigue wasn't an issue. In fact it appeared to be more of an issue for the blues, who were paddling in the last. We had set ourselves for a win and you could tell from goodys presser he was very frustrated we didn't get the job done.

By the by, I've been critical of the blues defence this season. But credit where it is due - they were excellent defensively last night, particularly in the first half, won some critical one on one battles and were a huge factor in the win - perhaps the biggest.

Goody DID adapt our game plan for the wet weather. Goody gets bagged all the time for not 'adapting' to the conditions when it rains. Wet weather footy is traditionally territory first, get it forward and deep inside 50. Which is exactly what we did. So, on this occasion we did adapt (though we did keep trying high risk quick handballs, many of which came unstuck). The numbers reflected that, winning the inside 50 count and the territory battle as evidenced by the anomalous (this season) time in forward half numbers: Quarter For Against 1 53% 47% 2 50% 50% 3 51% 49% 4 76% 24% Match 59% 41% And there's the rub. A key reason goody doesn't like to make big changes to method week to week is we are a system based team. It' no small thing to suddenly use another method- even if it is one that was previously our primary method, particularly given we are trying to implement and bed down a new system this season. Another factor was the forecast was for no rain. I doubt they would have planned for it to be so wet, and likely not trained for it. I was shocked when it started raining at the ground an hour before the game. So they may have had to change their tactics on game day (after possibly training for a different method during the week). It dried out considerably after half time - there was no rain, or at least not in the last. And we bounced off half back and spread the ground much more and reverted to the style we have been using tgis season - one more suited to dry weather.

Yeah, of course. I wasn't suggesting that he only would have focused on the x score and given them a pass. He would make clear what they were doing wrong and what they need to address. But the days of a coach tearing strip's off players and only focusing on what the team had done poorly are well and truly history. So he would have made clear what they are doing poorly, identified issues (eg kicks inside 50, defensive issues - i tgought tmac had his worst game this season and Martin worried us early) and provided solutions (something goody has said is what game day coaching is about). AND he would have pointed out what we are doing right, using the x score (and other metrics) as evidence of that - and that the gap between the two performances wasn't as big as the scoreboard suggested. He would have also pointed out our efforts wasn't miles off in the first - 186 to 200 in the first quarter and after getting smashed early for cp we turned it around. We were def on our back foot early in the contest- down 10 cp after 15 mins, but after that we were +2 for cps for the rest of the match. So they fought back. And we were up in tackles, and other key metrics, eg inside 50s. And he would have pointed out at half time, boys you are still in tgis. Keep grinding. And he was proven correct. This was the pressure ratings for the match, suggesting we doubled down and really got to work: Quarter For Against 1 186 200 2 189 163 3 217 209 4 221 201 Match 202 194 Improve what needs to be improved. Stick to your roles, keep the contest and pressure up. Trust the system You're in this. The wheel will turn. And it did. I have heard maxy say that is precisely what goody's message was at quarter and half time of the pies final. You could visibly see the blues wilting, and us wresting the momentum. I said as much to my mate at the game - predicting even after we went 38 points down we were still a chance to win. I think a key factor in the loss was when we did start wresting momentum they got a couple of goals straight after a goal from us. Those sort of goals really hurt. But ultimately, as goody said straight up in his presser, the game was lost going 6 goals down. I'd be guessing in the history of footy it would be no better than i in 30 for teams winning after being 6 goals down at any point in a game.

Fair play to I think cotteral. That was great defensive pressure.

Of course. Particularly the point in the match those misses occurred. Petty's miss wa a heartbreaker. But players miss a high percentage of such shots. Against that, we kicked some clutch goals. Tracc was unbelievable, discos nailed a long set sho on an angle and maxys long range bomb, after barely taking any time, was elite.

This is where x score is useful. I have zero doubt goody would have used it at quarter and half time to reinforce that the scoreboard didn't reflect the relative performance levels, and certainly not the effort levels. It shows their kicking for goal, particularly early was brilliant- but anomalous. Their set shots from say 40 are 50-50 chances. Credit to them for kicking them, but once kicking for goal there's nothing we can do about their chances of kicking the goal. In most circumstances they are something like 3.2 or 2.3 at quarter time and the game looks very different. And our accuracy was bang on average. Like the lions game, it wasn't a game we threw away because of innacracy. The lions and blues won because of their accuracy Yes, we could point to bad misses, Petty comes to mind. But take that miss. On average that goal is still only kicked perhaps 70-75% of the time. For me the issue in terms of our kicking was the last kick inside 50, for most of the match, but particularly the first. The game was actually pretty evenly balanced performance wise in the first 10 mins, but we butchered the ball going inside 50 - and credit to their defence, they were excellent- so had nothing to show for our efforts. A couple of decent inside 50s and we get an early goal or two and the game looks different.

No change.

In the pre match thread I said I was not bullish about the match because of a huge number of variables, including: - what, if any, impact will the umpires have on the game?

Um. Really? Best tell pies to give their flag back

Too right. I could not be prouder of the players and my club.

A player is going to get seriously hurt doing exactly that.

Light misty rain here at the g.

At most clubs you might get a new watch, or some such. At Carlton they get a paper bag with a silhouette of John Elliot and his bulbous nose.

Steve albini died? You're kidding. He can't have been that old. That's a shock. Legend is thrown around too easily in my humble, but there's no debating his status as one of the all time great producers, particularly in the rock space. Righteous fella too. Vale Steve.

JNR, why do you think they have reverted to the territory front half, trap it inside 50 game (basically much the same as our 2021 to 2023 model)? I mean, they used that model for the first half of last year and were woeful. They turned things around by implementing a turnover game, making a prelim after looking certain to miss the finals at the half way point of the season.

Good point about the strength of our team compared to our last game against them. I mean, in addition to losing melk and Petty late in the season, having no bbb and a half fit tmac, we had lost both Gus (injury) and JVR (suspension) from the previous game. Gus was a massive loss because he was one of our most reliable big game players. And losing him the week before made it hard for someone to come in, get up to speed, and play his key mid - defensive role. And jvr was also a huge out, one because he was really the last man standing in terms of key forwards, and two he was our key back up ruck. It's remarkable really that we dominated most of that game. On the team running out tonight, it's arguably very close to our best 23 (salo is the obvious one missing and Melk and McAdam are both in the mix too i guess). As for your blues mates, I'd be getting into them abour their [censored] weak defence. When they start bleating about Marchbank, saad and McGovern tell them great defences are built on sytem not personell (and remind them we have had three kids down back). If they still bleat, remind them the cats put 20 goals past them two weeks back, but could only manage half that against us a week later (let them worry about innacurate goal tallies- if they are quibbling about how bad they are defensively you have made your point and are in their head).

Funnily enough I'm the exact opposite.

Us or them?

I don't really feel like we need payback. Pies, yes. Blues, not so much. Which is not to say I don't love the chance to beat the blues, but they didn't steal that final, unfortunately we lost it. I was really confident we'd beat the cats. And i think we win tonight. But I'm not nearly so bullish Head to head I think we are a better team. And I think we have targeted the cats and blues games in the same way we did the port and crows double. We can at least nullify their one wood - their midfield and contest - whereas they can't do much to disrupt ours - our defence, which blunts their other key strength - two gun key forwards. And they are doing a good job themselves of blunting that strength by not, for whatever reason, playing a turnover transition game that means McKay and curnow get fewer one on one opportunities than they did in the second half of last season. All things being equal we win most games we play against them. But all things are not equal. I don't bet on dees games, but if I was a neutral I'd leave this game well alone as there are way too many variables: - impact of the 5 day break (even if we have planned our program to be fresh and ready as possible, there's no guarantee it will work - we were running out of steam in the quarter against the crows) - yes the blues only have 6 day break, but that one day can make a big difference - what is the impact of the blues compressed scheduling of their last 3 game? - the blues likely have set themselves for the pies dees double - I hate to say it, but I rate the pies and increasingly think they are a contender (though will struggle big time to make top 4) - yes, the blues lost that game, but really should have won, and if I rate the pies then it's folly to under rate the blues (though their defence is suspect) - the impact of our respective last games: The blues lost a physically taxing, contest heavy, dramatic finals like game against a bitter rival in front of a heaving crowd We won a finals like intensity game against an unbeaten, likely top 4 side. The big difference was our game was a low stoppage, low contest, high uncontested mark game that was not as physically taxing but more aerobically taxing because of all the running we did - how ready are the blues 4 ins: will they help bring fresh legs or will they blow up first game back? - what is the impact of making four changes, something coaches usually hate to do? - we have only made the one change: is that a risk in terms of not bringing in some fresh legs (it's not Griffith's style to do so, and it's probably a sign he is confident all are good to go, but high performance is part science part art) - leaving aside issues related to readiness or fatigue, do the blues ins improve them more than our one in (I think not, Bowser in is awesome. Straight to hb to improve our transtion, with woey a super sub)? - how will goody approach this game tactically: Try and beat the blues at their territory, time in forward half, contest game (unlikey)? Run them ragged with uncontested marks like we did against the cats (unlikely, mainly because I doubt we have the legs)? Be more attacking from the back half, use the corridor more and take on high risk kicks to exploit the blues' defensive weakness? (even though a turnover game might help Curnow and McKay get some good looks, I think this is the most likely scenario. Attack. Hopefully get a 3 goal plus lead by 3 quarter time and control the tempo in the last so they can't exploit any lack of run from us and get back in it) - how will Voss approach this game tactically? - it is likely to be dewy again, what impact will that have (it may favor the blues given their ability to win contests and ground balls)? - what will the impact of a big blues home crowd be? - what, if any, impact will the umpires have on the game? - as we saw in our last home and away game against the blues, luck is always a factor: which team will lady luck smile on?

@WheeloRatings Oh, sorry I completely missed that. Thanks so much. I was actually thinking in terms of week to week numbers to include in the stats file, but if it's not readily available don't worry. And as per my comments below may actually not be that relevant for us this season. But those tables are fascinating. What an amazing drop off in both stars, particularly post clearance possessions. Hardwick had always said post clearance contested possession is the most important stat. Well did when he coached the tigers. But I have to assume from those numbers that it is important for the forward half, territory model he developed and we adapted. We were number 1 for that stat in 21, 22 and 23. But are only 12th this year. Surely that's a reflection of our changed method? Curiously the blues, after getting the transition, turnover game working last year, have reverted to a forward half model. Ditto for hawks who i heard on christin.say on the espn pod they ste number one for ground ball gets this year by a mile. No coincidence the blues and hawks are one and two for pccp this year.

I asked in another thread @WheeloRatings, but you may not have seen it Are you able to get hold of the post clearance contested possession numbers?

You're right, the reason why the pressure rating was low in the second was the lack of stoppages and how often the ball was in motion with us hitting up leads etc. That's because of how they calculate the pressure rating which is: Pressure points are the weighed sum of pressure acts. Physical pressure acts are worth 3.75 points, closing acts are worth 2.25 points, chasing acts are 1.5 points and corralling are 1.2. So with low low stoppages, ball in motion and lots of uncontested marks there is fewer opportunities for the pressure acts that really drives the number up - tackles, bumps, contested possessions etc But as you say it was definitely frenetic in that quuater. And it definitely didn't feel low pressure. I didn't realise the stoppage numbers were so low and you're right it's a good stat to consider when trying to explain anomalous pressure rating. Out of interest here is the pressure numbers for the dogs game, where we had 141 uncontested marks: Quarter For Against 1 175 166 2 171 164 3 195 162 4 167 155 Match 177 162 And from the cats game (117uncontested marks): Quarter For Against 1 183 173 2 161 158 3 171 165 4 193 181 Match 176 170

I occasionally look at the tracker data @Watson11. But in isolation I'm not sure what it's telling me and unlike you havent tracked it to see if there is pattern, or how one week compares to another or in aggregate. As i noted on the pod. I thought this data was really interesting. The top 5 players for speed in defence, which is defined as running when the opponents have the ball. It really gives a sense of how hard we work defensively and how much work our our all team defence demands. I think it also supports your point about how elite we are in term of running power.