Dermie, Robbo, Lloyd on SEN

[kelvin_sheedy]

Pretty strong stuff from these guys this morning. They said something along the lines of:

Robbo - "I don't know what Essendon is going to do with Knights after 18 more games, they might have to pay him out"

Dermie - "I've only ever seen Williams put in a serious effort when Dew was kicking the ball to him in the GF"

Lloyd - "Losing Lucas, Lovett, McPhee takes away a fair bit of experience and there's no leadership down there".

Robbo - "The guy who recruited Williams hands must be shaking, 3 years for this bloke"

Dermie - "Gumby looks alright but should be playing VFL. Essendon are sacrificing wins to play this bloke"

[Nuts4Bolts]

Was Horsburgh or Evans President when Knights was given an extension?

[kelvin_sheedy]

No idea.

[Nuts4Bolts]

Fingers crossed it was Horsburgh, that way it will be easier for Evans to chop Knights without any egg on his face.

[LeeARM]

Dermie - "Gumby looks alright but should be playing VFL. Essendon are sacrificing wins to play this bloke"

I kind of agree with this except I'm not sure who we'd replace him with.
The Neagle/Hurley forward line wasn't going too badly last year but he's not a great replacement.

[AndyLesPaul]

Neagle is a suitable marking option, he's the only replacement, but theres not much difference.

[Longy413]

Was Horsburgh or Evans President when Knights was given an extension?

Jackson's parting gift...

[HFF_07]

Do you agree with the statements made though Kelvin_Sheedy?

Me personally, YES.

Knights does not have a plan B, I stated all along that M.Williams will not aid the EFC, as for losing all our more experienced players in one hit.

Just deplorable from the EFC really.

[kelvin_sheedy]

Pretty much agree with all.

The mistakes are starting to pile up and it looks like we are in a world of hurt and about to go the Richmond ( we need to start again route ).

The way Dermie spoke he was pretty baffled as to why we'd given Williams a 3 year deal considering he knew what shotgun had to offer.

[Ludwig van Bertstare]

Jackson's parting gift...

Not a fan of it?

[DVD Player]

Fair enough considering what we have seen this year. Very interesting to see what transpires come off season.

[Daytripper]

Do you agree with the statements made though Kelvin_Sheedy?

Me personally, YES.

Knights does not have a plan B, I stated all along that M.Williams will not aid the EFC, as for losing all our more experienced players in one hit.

Just deplorable from the EFC really.

It coudn't be helped.

Lucas was finished. He didn't have another year left in him.

McPhee walked. He wanted a 3 year deal and we wouldn't give him one.

Lovett asked to be traded. In hindsight we did well there.

Lloyd retired. I don't know how many times he has to say it. Either way, he was looking ordinary towards the end, he wouldn't be playing now due to suspension and his absence enables the development of Hurley/Gumbleton as a key position pairing. They need time to work out their forward patterns tpgether, something they would not have got if Lloyd was there.

[Andrew_5]

Do you agree with the statements made though Kelvin_Sheedy?

Me personally, YES.

Knights does not have a plan B, I stated all along that M.Williams will not aid the EFC, as for losing all our more experienced players in one hit.

Just deplorable from the EFC really.

Agree 100%
We should cut our losses and get rid of Knights, I heard there are 11 odd coaches out of contract this year, is that right?
We need someone with experience..

I am now on the "Get Knights out" bandwagon...

[Daytripper]

Pretty much agree with all.

The mistakes are starting to pile up and it looks like we are in a world of hurt and about to go the Richmond ( we need to start again route ).

The way Dermie spoke he was pretty baffled as to why we'd given Williams a 3 year deal considering he knew what shotgun had to offer.

Again, Willliams contract has no bearing on how he's playing now. Lets revisit it when he's in his third year.

[ningnangnong]

Why we got Williams in the first place is beyond me.

Pay him out and get who? I like Neale Daniher, at least he has some fire in the belly.

Why did we never pursue Barry Hall?

[George Washington]

Why we got Williams in the first place is beyond me.

Pay him out and get who? I like Neale Daniher, at least he has some fire in the belly.

Why did we never pursue Barry Hall?

Is that a joke? Seriously?

[DaSawx]

Why did we never pursue Barry Hall?

For 1-2 years? What's the point?

We need midfielders and HBFers who can play if we're stuck with this gameplan.

[BOMBERS 4 LIFE!!!!]

Pretty strong stuff from these guys this morning. They said something along the lines of:

Robbo - "I don't know what Essendon is going to do with Knights after 18 more games, they might have to pay him out"

Dermie - "I've only ever seen Williams put in a serious effort when Dew was kicking the ball to him in the GF"

Lloyd - "Losing Lucas, Lovett, McPhee takes away a fair bit of experience and there's no leadership down there".

Robbo - "The guy who recruited Williams hands must be shaking, 3 years for this bloke"

Dermie - "Gumby looks alright but should be playing VFL. Essendon are sacrificing wins to play this bloke"

the only point i agree with

[The Donners]

Pretty strong stuff from these guys this morning. They said something along the lines of:

Robbo - "I don't know what Essendon is going to do with Knights after 18 more games, they might have to pay him out"

Agree.

Dermie - "I've only ever seen Williams put in a serious effort when Dew was kicking the ball to him in the GF"

Didn't hear him saying this when Williams kicked 60+ goals 2 seasons in a row.

Lloyd - "Losing Lucas, Lovett, McPhee takes away a fair bit of experience and there's no leadership down there".

No shit. The only player we're missing on-field is Lovett.

Robbo - "The guy who recruited Williams hands must be shaking, 3 years for this bloke"

Robbo has had it in for Williams from day dot. Why didn't he say, the guy that recruited our midfielders who can't hit a target by foot must be shaking. If our midfielders could hit a target Williams would kick 50 goals.

Dermie - "Gumby looks alright but should be playing VFL. Essendon are sacrificing wins to play this bloke"

I can't disagree more with Dermie. The Bombers aren't going to win the premiership and Gumbleton NEEDS game time at senior AFL level.

[The Donners]

Is that a joke? Seriously?

You're right, by drafting Barry Hall it could make people think that we're trying to win the premiership.

[lemon chicken]

Dermie - "Gumby looks alright but should be playing VFL. Essendon are sacrificing wins to play this bloke"

Judging by this i dont think Dermott has looked at the team list to see who else there is.

Wouldnt mind being a fly on the wall when Lloyd and Knights cross paths any time in the near future. Knights was questioned the other week after Lloyd said we wont win a premiership with the game plan and replied along the lines of all comments regarding the the game plan will remain in house. Media are starting to turn the screws.

[kelvin_sheedy]

Judging by this i dont think Dermott has looked at the team list to see who else there is.



I think he was referring to the fact that we need to get more size down there and someone that can compete or change it right up so we play to a different structure.

I reckon we have enough guys to do this and can use Neagle, Daniher, Laycock with Hille, Ryder, Hurley down there.

He also said that Davey should come in and even though he's not playing well at least we can lock the ball up in there instead of it coming back out so easily.

[lemon chicken]

^^^agree on the structure. Im not sure hurley is a FF and its a bit of a waste really.

[silk]

I reckon we have enough guys to do this and can use Neagle, Daniher, Laycock with Hille, Ryder, Hurley down there.


I agree, been saying it for awhile, but people get annoyed when you suggest gumby isn't jesus reincarnated.

Alse LLoyd is "retired" so we can develop Neagle and yet he is dropped after 1 afl game.... :confused:

[Knight Ryders]

The way we are kicking into the forward line, Brownie or Riewoldt wouldn't get a kick either.

[Daytripper]

The way we are kicking into the forward line, Brownie or Riewoldt wouldn't get a kick either.

Exactly right.

[bacon buster]

exactly right. ball use in the midfield is a real problem at the moment. makes our forward structure look hopeless.

zaharakis is playing well in the forward line, but we'd almost be better off him kicking into the forward line at the moment. lovett's delivery last year was such a luxury. we really need winderlich to step up.

knights can't make the players execute their skills properly.

whether or not they are buying into the gameplan though (considering all the criticism of it in the media) is another story,

[Kong]

He also said that Davey should come in and even though he's not playing well at least we can lock the ball up in there instead of it coming back out so easily.Do you agree with that?

[Macca18]

For some reason I already see similarities to our season in 2010 to Terry Wallace's final season/half season at Richmond last year...

It ended in pretty ugly circumstances. If we cannot win 1 of our next 3, it's going to get enormous...

Due to our relative success over a long period of time the media, thankfully, don't react very well to whenever Essendon are doing poorly and the pressure on the club will explode...

They'd want to improve and fairly quickly or heads are going to roll in a big way. Interesting times ahead.

[kelvin_sheedy]

Do you agree with that?

Yep, I had Davey as my ins with Hurley for the game.

I've been harsh on Davey lately because he's been useless but on the big ground up there and after a good game at VFL level he needed to come back in.

[Kong]

Yep, I had Davey as my ins with Hurley for the game.

I've been harsh on Davey lately because he's been useless but on the big ground up there and after a good game at VFL level he needed to come back in.But Dermie advocated bringing him in for defensive pressure alone; something you've stated was not enough to warrant selection.

[Boucks09]

Yep, I had Davey as my ins with Hurley for the game.

I've been harsh on Davey lately because he's been useless but on the big ground up there and after a good game at VFL level he needed to come back in.

So although he has been useless on smaller grounds and has run out of puff in the first half, you would bring him in on a bigger ground? He would've made no difference last night whatsover.

I couldn't care less what Robbo thinks, he is just another disgruntled Essendon fan who had high expectations, got sucked in, wrote a heap of fluff pieces and now looks stupid.

Ofcourse Dermie is going to bag Willo - it's hardly surprising and so far Willo has done much more than Burgoyne and Gibson - the players they paid plenty and moved heaven and earth to get.

Lloyd is pointing out the obvious, but as Daytripper has clearly said we have done really well out of losing all of those players. We could do nothing about it.

[The Donners]

He also said that Davey should come in and even though he's not playing well at least we can lock the ball up in there instead of it coming back out so easily.

I do agree with this but I also agree that Davey needed to be dropped. He's been remarkably soft amongst other things.

[The Great Barry Besanko]

Most commentators thought the Williams trade was a good deal. Didn't hear Robbo complain then.

Most commentators thought Knights did a good job last season, 5-6 games ago.

Robbo and Dermie are flogs. Wasn't Dermie the one who wanted Ayres appointed Hawks coach. Luckily Dunstall got his way.

Seriously the Sheedy gang are ****ing delirious.

Pursue Barry Hall??!! **** that!!

[kelvin_sheedy]

But Dermie advocated bringing him in for defensive pressure alone; something you've stated was not enough to warrant selection.

Horses for courses.

I thought we needed his pace on Subiaco and they are terrible coming out from behind. We also have Williams who doesn't chase or tackle.

[HighettBomber]

What does it matter what Dermie says, its almost as much fun listing his quotes as it was with George Bush.

"Darren Hulme will be as important to Carletong as Anthony Stephens is to North Melbourne" and the old favourite "Aaron James has more natural ability than Wayne Carey" both come to mind.

We have a forwardline and midfield full of blokes that can't kick straight, adding a bloke who can, Mark Williams, was a worthwhile punt in my opinion. He showed what he can do against Carlton, we may well have lost that game without him. If we can start bringing the thing in quickly and with a bit of accuracy I think he will kick a lot of goals. Having said this, he needs to improve his workrate and defensive pressure.

[kelvin_sheedy]

I couldn't care less what Robbo thinks, he is just another disgruntled Essendon fan who had high expectations, got sucked in, wrote a heap of fluff pieces and now looks stupid.



I'm pretty sure the coaching staff had high expectation also as per what they said at season launch. Didn't they say they fear no one and expect to play finals this year? Isn't it what Knights is trying to sell to us?

Robbo said Knights was delusional on the radio today - don't think he likes him so wait for the Knights bashing in the HS this week.

[Boucks09]

We also have Williams who doesn't chase or tackle.

Mark Williams had 4 tackles last night.

More than Hille, Fletcher, Melksham, Dyson, Lonergan, Pears, Hurley and Gumbleton.

Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story though. Pretty poor effort for a small full forward playing in a side which gave him nothing all night.:rolleyes:

[The Great Barry Besanko]

What does it matter what Dermie says, its almost as much fun listing his quotes as it was with George Bush.

"Darren Hulme will be as important to Carletong as Anthony Stephens is to North Melbourne" and the old favourite "Aaron James has more natural ability than Wayne Carey" both come to mind.

We have a forwardline and midfield full of blokes that can't kick straight, adding a bloke who can, Mark Williams, was a worthwhile punt in my opinion. He showed what he can do against Carlton, we may well have lost that game without him. If we can start bringing the thing in quickly and with a bit of accuracy I think he will kick a lot of goals. Having said this, he needs to improve his workrate and defensive pressure.

:D It's like he thinks i'll just make these outrageous nonsensical statements in the hope that one will stick and I can brag about for years.

Agree with what you said about Williams as well.

[Boucks09]

I'm pretty sure the coaching staff had high expectation also as per what they said at season launch. Didn't they say they fear no one and expect to play finals this year? Isn't it what Knights is trying to sell to us?

Robbo said Knights was delusional on the radio today - don't think he likes him so wait for the Knights bashing in the HS this week.

Ofcourse the coaching staff have high expectations. So they ****** well should!

The difference is that they will keep working and stick to their guns after only 4 weeks whilst gutless sooks like Robbo and other Essendon supporters will jump off like rats on a sinking ship, then back on again when we start to show something.

If you are using the thoughts of Mark Robinson as support for your anti-Knights campaign you a really on struggle street.

[kelvin_sheedy]

Mark Williams had 4 tackles last night.

More than Hille, Fletcher, Melksham, Dyson, Lonergan, Pears, Hurley and Gumbleton.

Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story though. Pretty poor effort for a small full forward playing in a side which gave him nothing all night.:rolleyes:

For a total of 6 for the year. :rolleyes:

Great work by him. Third last on average tackles per game this year for us. :thumbsu:

[TeamHurley]

The get rid of knights snowball is gaining momentum.

His post game press conference spray against the players was sickening. How about he takes some blame on his shoulders. He is being outcoached. Why can we compete for one quarter and then not have a shot on goal for the next two quarters. Why are we getting large strings of goals kicked against us. Why are we fading at the end of quarters.

If the game plan is daring dash through the middle then why does it always look like we are pushing a boulder up hill getting the ball forwards and then the other way opposition teams can waltz through us the length of the ground with free men everywhere including in the forward line.

It seems that knight's tactical reaction to all the faults is to hold onto the ball for a minute or two at the end of each quarter. Ground breaking stuff knights you genius.

We have gone backwards from last year after having the best preseason in recent memory and a full list to chose from.

We should have gone with hardwick and the total rebuild a couple of years ago. But the club bought knights bullshit and here we are with our list still clogged with rubbish.

Dont let the door hit you on the way out you piece of shit.

[TeamHurley]

Ofcourse the coaching staff have high expectations. So they ****** well should!

The difference is that they will keep working and stick to their guns after only 4 weeks whilst gutless sooks like Robbo and other Essendon supporters will jump off like rats on a sinking ship, then back on again when we start to show something.

If you are using the thoughts of Mark Robinson as support for your anti-Knights campaign you a really on struggle street.

Do you really think that knights is getting the best out of our list?

[Ludwig van Bertstare]

Robbo likes to sink the boots in any chance he gets. I don't care much for his opinion.

[Boucks09]

For a total of 6 for the year. :rolleyes:

Great work by him. Third last on average tackles per game this year for us. :thumbsu:

So Mark Williams is in the side to 'lock the ball in' is he? The ball has also been deep in our forward 50 an awful lot this season hasn't it :rolleyes:.

Shame on you Mark Williams. Shame on you. You should be getting 6 tackles a game. No you should be getting more. In fact every single time the ball is in your vacinity (which is maybe twice a quarter), you should lay a tackle. Because that is what you will be judged on by those in the know. Forget taking your opportunities as a goal kicker, forget leading, forget laying a sheppard. Just tackle.....

because then we can bitch about the fact that you are not doing your job as a full forward.

[Boucks09]

Do you really think that knights is getting the best out of our list?

I don't think he has found our best 22 yet. There are still a lot of questions about our list and best positions for players. Until that happens he probably isn't getting the best out of the group.

Saying that he can't help it when players miss a target from 20m away. If players can't execute skills that is a playing error, not a game plan issue. The "Thunder Bolt' tactic was employed early last night when WCE got a run on. That is sound coaching. The problem was that we just didn't have the players to execute the skills. Yet if we had just played on and taken the game on we would've been ridiculed for not having a Plan B. That's not Knights' fault.

[kelvin_sheedy]

Forget taking your opportunities as a goal kicker, forget leading, forget laying a sheppard. Just tackle.....


Not sure what you are going on about here because he's doing nothing.

[Bombermania]

I don't have a problem with Mark Williams.

My problem with this club is simple the mid-fielders are too busy hand balling it to one another while no one in the forward fifty threatens to kick a bag.

Gumby needs time but looks good
Hurley needs a week or two but we know he is good

Last night we missed Gus and Stants

I will repeat myself, I am happy with the list, i am not happy with the game plan.

I am not ready to sack Knights but i would be sitting him down and pointing out that we are Essendon and we are in the business of winning premierships.

[stay true]

Yeah I don't think Mark Williams is the reason why we lost and if Davey was playing I doubt very much he'd have changed the outcome of the game on his own. Sure he would have given us some forward pressure, but let's be honest, we lacked pressure and intensity all over the ground and mainly in the midfield. The midfield just didn't work hard enough to find space and create options for teammates and it seemed like at every contest the Eagles had us outnumbered 3-to-1 giving us no chance really.

So this causes problems for both the defence (lack of pressure on Eagles midfield going inside 50) and us going forward. Delivery inside 50 was pretty poor. The amount of times we'd kick the ball on top of our leading forwards heads was infuriating.

One glaring thing that bothered me from very early in the first quarter was Knighter not realising (or ignoring) that the Hille v Natanui and Ryder v Cox matchups in the ruck were simply not working. I can understand that we wanted Hille to get into Natanui physically but he was no where near him all night.

Midfield needs some changes.

[yaco55]

I think he was referring to the fact that we need to get more size down there and someone that can compete or change it right up so we play to a different structure.

I reckon we have enough guys to do this and can use Neagle, Daniher, Laycock with Hille, Ryder, Hurley down there.

He also said that Davey should come in and even though he's not playing well at least we can lock the ball up in there instead of it coming back out so easily.

Kelvin

Davey has never been a player who locks the ball up - He is too lightly framed like a rag doll.

He is effective at chasing defenders out of the forward line and making them rush their disposals.

[Seb78]

Most commentators thought the Williams trade was a good deal. Didn't hear Robbo complain then.

Most commentators thought Knights did a good job last season, 5-6 games ago.

Robbo and Dermie are flogs. Wasn't Dermie the one who wanted Ayres appointed Hawks coach. Luckily Dunstall got his way.

Seriously the Sheedy gang are ****ing delirious.

Pursue Barry Hall??!! **** that!!

He managed to scrounge out 10 and a half wins, its not all that great a result. In a normal year it might land you 10th or 11th position on the ladder

[Slattery_20]

I am not ready to sack Knights but i would be sitting him down and pointing out that we are Essendon and we are in the business of winning premierships.
I laugh at comments like this.

BM: "we are in the business of winning premierships. WE IS ESSENDON!!!"
MK: "premierships? Really? I've been coaching on a philosophy of finishing about 10th, maybe I should pull out my magical fixing-everything game plan, and we'll win 8 straight flags. Thanks for the heads up."

[TheDon35]

So Mark Williams is in the side to 'lock the ball in' is he? The ball has also been deep in our forward 50 an awful lot this season hasn't it :rolleyes:.

Shame on you Mark Williams. Shame on you. You should be getting 6 tackles a game. No you should be getting more. In fact every single time the ball is in your vacinity (which is maybe twice a quarter), you should lay a tackle. Because that is what you will be judged on by those in the know. Forget taking your opportunities as a goal kicker, forget leading, forget laying a sheppard. Just tackle.....

because then we can bitch about the fact that you are not doing your job as a full forward.

Top post:thumbsu:

If they are going to play him there, I don't want him running around like a lunatic trying to move up on the average tackles per game list, I want him getting dangerous in front of goal.

As for Davey, His form has been disgusting and it's going to take more than 1 game at VFL level to convince me that he's CAPABLE of playing league footy with the scared & cowardly approach to the game that he currently has.

[AndyLesPaul]

What the hell happened to the preseason.

Wasn't it boasted to be absolutely amazing?

[Skeeta Olly]

Yep.

Fittest we've been since Knights has been at the club.

[HFF_07]

I don't think he has found our best 22 yet. There are still a lot of questions about our list and best positions for players. Until that happens he probably isn't getting the best out of the group.

Saying that he can't help it when players miss a target from 20m away. If players can't execute skills that is a playing error, not a game plan issue. The "Thunder Bolt' tactic was employed early last night when WCE got a run on. That is sound coaching. The problem was that we just didn't have the players to execute the skills. Yet if we had just played on and taken the game on we would've been ridiculed for not having a Plan B. That's not Knights' fault.

Gee, pretty stiff on the supporters wanting to know what our best 22 is when the coach doesnt even know it himself :o

[Smyth94]

He managed to scrounge out 10 and a half wins, its not all that great a result. In a normal year it might land you 10th or 11th position on the ladder

Irrelevant.

[Smyth94]

^^^agree on the structure. Im not sure hurley is a FF and its a bit of a waste really.

Yeah the fact that Hurley averages over a goal a game whilst spending at least half of his short career in defence gives you that impression :rolleyes:

[Lance Uppercut]

Dermie also said that no matter what, Knights will be there til the end of next season. The only question is whether he sticks around for the last year or we pay him out.

Point is, we have Knights until the end of next year. We can bitch & moan as much as we like, but that's our lot.

We all get so hung up on the week's results. Knowing us we'll come out & give Collingwood a touch-up this week.

I'm getting ****ing jack of the inconsistency, but I don't see what good anyone is going to get out of white-anting the coach, tbh.

Once Hurley gets some touch, & if Gumby keeps improving, & we get Stanton back, & Neagle/Williams find some form, we'll be a different side.

No issues with highlighting problems with the team/game plan/structure but just being outright negative ain't going to help anyone.

Of course, I don't expect that to have much of an impact with most round here, but it's my 2c

[DaSawx]

Didn't he sign till the end of 2012?

If the players say they buy into him, then that's all that matters.

Until the players lose faith then bye bye Knighter. We lost more than we won last year, we're still very young and inconsistent, we're a few years away anyway.

We need to keep working on the midfield while playing the young spine.

Just don't know why we play people like Hocking who is not above average in any skill or attribute, just an average player, at least play Myers who has a racking kick, Prismall is the same while Welsh should be weeded out, he won't be in the next premiership side.

[rines]

Your right Lance, us pointing out the obvious that Knights sucks doesn't do a lot of good. But maybe we still believe in the principals of a footy CLUB and by that MEMBERS have a say!!!

He gets outcoached every week. He has no working gameplan. He can't get the best out of players. He seriously pissed off two of our champion forwards (L&L) with the way he botched the end of their careers. Everything he does SMACKS of Tigers football. He is not Essendon and hence he will always believe mediocrity is acceptable.

Does anyone still think we are moving forward? We sit alongside the likes of North Melbourne, Melbourne, Adelaide, Richmond and West Coast on the ladder. Its a scary scary thought.

As to the constant argument, oh but when gumby gets better and hurley gets better and we get monfries and stanton back we'll look better. Every club in the leauge has guys out injured, most of them have more than us! Also they all have young kids they are sweating on developing. By the time ours get better, newsflash: theirs will have too. Again this is NOT a potshot at those two lads, I am just saying that we can't keep hanging our hat on the ifs and buts.. we need to get serious and admit we have problems.

Maybe then we can start to look at solutions.

Step 1:Fire knights and bring in someone who can coach
Step 2: Apologise to the members for the last 6 years of shambles
Step 3: Honestly appraise the list
Step 4: Build game plan that WE can actually execute that works
Step 5: Recruit with intent and purpose and don't pass over Rioli, Palmer, Selwood, Rich et al
Step 6: Apologise again to the members

[Ben the Gooner]

don't pass over ... Rich

Why oh why do we end up with hacks like Hurley?:rolleyes:

[Lance Uppercut]

He gets outcoached every week.

ah, no, he doesn't. Ratten is no big scalp, but I seem to remember a few pretty handy wins last year.

I remember some shockers too, but saying he gets outcoached every week is exactly the type of emo commentary I would rather this board avoided

[rines]

Why oh why do we end up with hacks like Hurley?:rolleyes:

Yeah and I have agreed to disagree with you before on this board. Yes KPP are important but the modern game is about midfield dominance.

We needed to use at least one of our high picks on a quality, out and out, champion midfielder imho.

Hurley won't be able to do squat (through no fault of his own) if the ball isn't getting to him. Especially with zones and defensive pressure most sides (other than carlton) will employ, we need midfields with vision, workrate, speed and pinpoint disposals.

I know its an age old argument, who would you take first G.Ablett or Riewoldt? Who was more important Judd or Brown? etc etc.

Lets continue to agree to disagree because it probably can't be answered definitively by either of us.

[The Donners]

The get rid of knights snowball is gaining momentum.

His post game press conference spray against the players was sickening. How about he takes some blame on his shoulders. He is being outcoached. Why can we compete for one quarter and then not have a shot on goal for the next two quarters. Why are we getting large strings of goals kicked against us. Why are we fading at the end of quarters.

If the game plan is daring dash through the middle then why does it always look like we are pushing a boulder up hill getting the ball forwards and then the other way opposition teams can waltz through us the length of the ground with free men everywhere including in the forward line.

It seems that knight's tactical reaction to all the faults is to hold onto the ball for a minute or two at the end of each quarter. Ground breaking stuff knights you genius.

We have gone backwards from last year after having the best preseason in recent memory and a full list to chose from.

We should have gone with hardwick and the total rebuild a couple of years ago. But the club bought knights bullshit and here we are with our list still clogged with rubbish.

Dont let the door hit you on the way out.

100% agree but everyone is a genius in hindsight. I suppose we put our faith in the Essendon board and things were looking on the up... until we finally had no excuses with a full list to choose from.

[rines]

ah, no, he doesn't. Ratten is no big scalp, but I seem to remember a few pretty handy wins last year.

I remember some shockers too, but saying he gets outcoached every week is exactly the type of emo commentary I would rather this board avoided

Oh I'm sorry, label it emo commentary.. really mature!

Anyway onto the thrust of your post:
Agree that Ratten is no prized coaching scalp.

The few pretty handy wins you refer to. I would like to see your list but some that stand out:
Collingwood, Anzac day: Outcoached and outplayed for most of the day until in the wet, Andrew Lovett switches on a brilliant 5 minute patch of play that drags the footy club back into the game and zaka kicks a brilliant goal on the siren to secure a memorable, but sneaky, win.

St Kilda: A team well entrenched as number one. Started to fine tune training loads for the finals comes in after heavy training week. Cut them up in the first half when their pressure was very un st kilda like. Watson is BOG by a long way and the energy of a side playing for their life vs one that is treading water until finals is clear. St Kilda get a rev up at half time from their coach and then come hard at the bombers. We hold on in a tight finish. I was PUMPED at winning... but lets not include this as a coaching masterstroke. Pretty sure Lyon would shit all over Knights tactically most of the time.

Hawthorn: Two teams desperate for the win. Hawthorn come in well below strenght. Tight, physical match that culminates in the lessor of two teams having the loss recorded. Again Lovett, Lloyd and Watson drag the team across the line. Would not put this one down to coaching either.

So out of interest which of our wins last year do you put down to coaching genius? Beating melbourne? Yeah bailey is a HUGE scalp... :rolleyes:

[Lance Uppercut]

Oh I'm sorry, label it emo commentary.. really mature!

Anyway onto the thrust of your post:
Agree that Ratten is no prized coaching scalp.

The few pretty handy wins you refer to. I would like to see your list but some that stand out:
Collingwood, Anzac day: Outcoached and outplayed for most of the day until in the wet, Andrew Lovett switches on a brilliant 5 minute patch of play that drags the footy club back into the game and zaka kicks a brilliant goal on the siren to secure a memorable, but sneaky, win.

St Kilda: A team well entrenched as number one. Started to fine tune training loads for the finals comes in after heavy training week. Cut them up in the first half when their pressure was very un st kilda like. Watson is BOG by a long way and the energy of a side playing for their life vs one that is treading water until finals is clear. St Kilda get a rev up at half time from their coach and then come hard at the bombers. We hold on in a tight finish. I was PUMPED at winning... but lets not include this as a coaching masterstroke. Pretty sure Lyon would shit all over Knights tactically most of the time.

Hawthorn: Two teams desperate for the win. Hawthorn come in well below strenght. Tight, physical match that culminates in the lessor of two teams having the loss recorded. Again Lovett, Lloyd and Watson drag the team across the line. Would not put this one down to coaching either.

So out of interest which of our wins last year do you put down to coaching genius? Beating melbourne? Yeah bailey is a HUGE scalp... :rolleyes:

ok, so when we lose, it's mainly Knights' fault, but when we win, he has nothing to do with it? Interesting...

Very constructive :thumbsu:

In no way am I saying Knights is immune to criticism. I agree he had a shocker on Friday. Leaving Hille in the ruck against NicNat for so long in the first quarter was fatal, and whoever decided that it was more effective watch NicNat rather than actually go for the ball needs a ****ing rocket, ruck coach, Knights, whoever.

I just have issues with ridiculous, useless calls that don't do anyone any good. However, I'm probably in the minority ;)

[Lance Uppercut]

Yeah and I have agreed to disagree with you before on this board. Yes KPP are important but the modern game is about midfield dominance.

We needed to use at least one of our high picks on a quality, out and out, champion midfielder imho.

Hurley won't be able to do squat (through no fault of his own) if the ball isn't getting to him. Especially with zones and defensive pressure most sides (other than carlton) will employ, we need midfields with vision, workrate, speed and pinpoint disposals.

I know its an age old argument, who would you take first G.Ablett or Riewoldt? Who was more important Judd or Brown? etc etc.

Lets continue to agree to disagree because it probably can't be answered definitively by either of us.

Tambling Vs Franklin ;)

[DaSawx]

Lets continue to agree to disagree because it probably can't be answered definitively by either of us.

So we need both..........

Saint's win with pressure, but won't win a flag without Reiwoldt.

Cat's have 3 AA's in their forward line.

The harsh reality is we have to wait till mid decade, and that's if Melksham, Zaharakis and co are the players we hoped.

We simply don't have the depth in our midfield and flankers, too many Prismall's, Welsh's and Hocking's, no obvious attribute to help the team.

We decided to get our spine set first, which I agree with, but we have to wait for Melksham, Zaharakis, Myers, Colyer, T.Slattery and co. to fill their bodies out, hopefully become the players we hope then join Watson, Stanton and Winderlich to give us our depth.

Then hopefully will reach their peak at the same time as our spine (which has a ton of talent) to have a 22 without any holes.

[Smyth94]

Hawthorn: Two teams desperate for the win. Hawthorn come in well below strenght. Tight, physical match that culminates in the lessor of two teams having the loss recorded. Again Lovett, Lloyd and Watson drag the team across the line. Would not put this one down to coaching either.

Yep, Lloyd had a massive impact with his 2 possessions and getting flogged by an 18 year old rookie!!!

Lovett and Watson were also quiet.

It was a bloke called M Hurley who delivered with 4 goals. Or did you forget that piece of information?

[Smyth94]

ok, so when we lose, it's mainly Knights' fault, but when we win, he has nothing to do with it? Interesting...

Very constructive :thumbsu:

Lol...that's exactly the train of thought the Knights haters have here - lose = Knights fault; win = nothing to do with Knights.

[kelvin_sheedy]

Scott Lucas and Robert Shaw said some damning things this morning also.

Another 9 goals unanswered. They said the side has no gameplan to stop a run on and it will continue to be a problem.

Houli was used as an example of a guy running forward of the play with everyone looking for the ball. They said the whole side did it.

They said we should go defense first and attack second. Lucas agreed with it all.

[Lance Uppercut]

Another 9 goals unanswered. They said the side has no gameplan to stop a run on and it will continue to be a problem.



how much of this is game plan, & how much is it players just not running hard enough both ways?

Don't misunderstand me, I'm not absolving the game plan; it has some blatant issues, & the buck stops with the coach; but I'm not convinced the big bad game plan is entirely responsible.

Thoughts?

[Boucks09]

Not sure what you are going on about here because he's doing nothing.

4 goals in a match is nothing? Funny that when Hurley does it everyone gets a little bit excited.

[rines]

I thought Lloyd actually helped Hurley to get those 4 goals by taking some physical pressure but we already dissected that game ages ago.

OK as I was trying to clarify.. if we win BECAUSE of coaching then I am happy to give Kudos. This would be if we had say beaten collingwood by outplaying them all game, not just a 5 min burst at the end.

And when we lose against a team we SHOULD beat then it does come down to coaching. As you pointed out.. its the Hille vs nicnat thing, its the leaving slattery on S Johnson last year thing. Its the picking the wrong side(ie not tall blokes) thing. Its the insisting we run and carry kamikaze style with no back up plan thing. its the kick out club champions because i need to develop Neagle and then drop him thing.

Instead of you just throwing your weight around how about you tell me games that you thought he OUT-COACHED the opposition in.. I would be happy to hear your thoughts..

[Boucks09]

Scott Lucas and Robert Shaw said some damning things this morning also.

Another 9 goals unanswered. They said the side has no gameplan to stop a run on and it will continue to be a problem.

Houli was used as an example of a guy running forward of the play with everyone looking for the ball. They said the whole side did it.

They said we should go defense first and attack second. Lucas agreed with it all.

Agree regarding Houli.

I've already said that we tried to slow the game up and stem the tide of goals after they had kicked 4 goals. The problem was that the players didn't execute the skills required. It's not the coaches fault that a player can't hit a target 20m away under no pressure. That is a playing error and believe it or not sometimes the players have to take responsibility.

Nathan Brown said today that he thinks Knights is on the right path and made comparisons to Hawthorn in 2007. So you are always going to get varied opinions.

[rines]

how much of this is game plan, & how much is it players just not running hard enough both ways?

Don't misunderstand me, I'm not absolving the game plan; it has some blatant issues, & the buck stops with the coach; but I'm not convinced the big bad game plan is entirely responsible.

Thoughts?

OK but how much of blokes not running hard enough goes back to the coach?

You think every other team just has fitter blokes? Most of the list is now predominately who Knights wanted. he has coached them. They are his men and yet they put in this type of performance? I strongly believe the leader of 'men' determines the success of 'men'. If they are not running hard enough.. why not? are they not in fear of the coach? do they not respect the coach? do they not know where to run? are they being asked to run too much? You can't say.. He decided to work on attack first and then cries foul that we have a bunch of front runners?!!!

Mick Malthouse hasn't had a bunch of stars but he created a game plan that suits them. Harvey is started to build a team in his image. Hard, tough and uncomprimising. Voss decided that he didn't want to go to the bottom and rebuild.. he wanted to win. Paul Roos took an average team and has kept them pretty much top 8 for the last 8 years (apart from the blip last year I know I know), and they look like they are back on the rise again this year.

Why do you keep making excuses for this bloke? You are happy to rip into our players and unleash your fury yet you seem to let Knights, the LEADER, go through unscathed. I don't understand it. The Knights bandwagon is looking shaky and it seems that some just can't admit they were wrong.

[Skeeta Olly]

Scott Lucas and Robert Shaw said some damning things this morning also.

Another 9 goals unanswered. They said the side has no gameplan to stop a run on and it will continue to be a problem.

Houli was used as an example of a guy running forward of the play with everyone looking for the ball. They said the whole side did it.

They said we should go defense first and attack second. Lucas agreed with it all.

Bolded is what I think is interesting. Does it make a difference if we decided to start off defensively,then turned attacking or the way we've done it, in going attacking football then applying defensive structures? That is, should Knights have concentrated on the defensive aspects of the game to start off, or was he right in playing kamikaze football to begin with?

how much of this is game plan, & how much is it players just not running hard enough both ways?

Don't misunderstand me, I'm not absolving the game plan; it has some blatant issues, & the buck stops with the coach; but I'm not convinced the big bad game plan is entirely responsible.

Thoughts?

Bit of both. Players are clearly not running hard enough applying the defensive pressure that is needed, but why? The Game plan? We are known for our attacking style of football, but I find defensive zone quiet the contrary.

No I'm no expert on how a zone works, but I'd expect you'd have to have a pretty good midfield to play one. What I've seen the past few weeks is Geelong, Fremantle and now West Coast midfielders breaking through our midfield and putting a lot of pressure on our defenders.

The other problem is that we've been worked out. If teams can squeeze us off half-back, they'll force us to turn over the ball. This si where we need a plan B and even C. There is no point in trying to handball it out if it isn't working.

4 goals in a match is nothing? Funny that when Hurley does it everyone gets a little bit excited.

This.

[kelvin_sheedy]

OK but how much of blokes not running hard enough goes back to the coach?

You think every other team just has fitter blokes? Most of the list is now predominately who Knights wanted. he has coached them. They are his men and yet they put in this type of performance? I strongly believe the leader of 'men' determines the success of 'men'. If they are not running hard enough.. why not? are they not in fear of the coach? do they not respect the coach? do they not know where to run? are they being asked to run too much? You can't say.. He decided to work on attack first and then cries foul that we have a bunch of front runners?!!!

Mick Malthouse hasn't had a bunch of stars but he created a game plan that suits them. Harvey is started to build a team in his image. Hard, tough and uncomprimising. Voss decided that he didn't want to go to the bottom and rebuild.. he wanted to win. Paul Roos took an average team and has kept them pretty much top 8 for the last 8 years (apart from the blip last year I know I know), and they look like they are back on the rise again this year.

Why do you keep making excuses for this bloke? You are happy to rip into our players and unleash your fury yet you seem to let Knights, the LEADER, go through unscathed. I don't understand it. The Knights bandwagon is looking shaky and it seems that some just can't admit they were wrong.

Best post I've read on the topic. Sums up the situation brilliantly for all those questioning Knights. :thumbsu:

[Skeeta Olly]

OK but how much of blokes not running hard enough goes back to the coach?

You think every other team just has fitter blokes? Most of the list is now predominately who Knights wanted. he has coached them. They are his men and yet they put in this type of performance? I strongly believe the leader of 'men' determines the success of 'men'. If they are not running hard enough.. why not? are they not in fear of the coach? do they not respect the coach? do they not know where to run? are they being asked to run too much? You can't say.. He decided to work on attack first and then cries foul that we have a bunch of front runners?!!!

Mick Malthouse hasn't had a bunch of stars but he created a game plan that suits them. Harvey is started to build a team in his image. Hard, tough and uncomprimising. Voss decided that he didn't want to go to the bottom and rebuild.. he wanted to win. Paul Roos took an average team and has kept them pretty much top 8 for the last 8 years (apart from the blip last year I know I know), and they look like they are back on the rise again this year.

Why do you keep making excuses for this bloke? You are happy to rip into our players and unleash your fury yet you seem to let Knights, the LEADER, go through unscathed. I don't understand it. The Knights bandwagon is looking shaky and it seems that some just can't admit they were wrong.

I don't understand. Are you saying that it's Knight's fault that players aren't fit enough, that they can';t execute skills or man up?

If anything, players may be having trouble with the game plan, but that can hardly excuse some of the shit we've thrown up.

[rines]

I don't understand. Are you saying that it's Knight's fault that players aren't fit enough, that they can';t execute skills or man up?

If anything, players may be having trouble with the game plan, but that can hardly excuse some of the shit we've thrown up.

I'm sorry you can't understand it. Knights fans seem to have trouble with the obvious so I'll spell it out again...

YES it is the coaches fault if our blokes aren't fit enough.
Why? Because THEY dictate training schedules. THEY recruit the players and should be making sure they CAN be fit enough to play AFL. Because they SHOULD be setting standards and if players don't adhere then they are out. Because THEY should be selecting guys who ARE fit enough to play out the game plan.

YES it is the coaches fault if our blokes can't execute skills.
Why? Because THEY dictate the training drills. THEY recruit the players and should be making sure they are SKILLED enough to play AFL. Because they SHOULD be setting standards and making sure players adhere to them or they are out. Because THEY should be selecting guys who ARE skilled enough to execute the game plan. They should be having training drills that depict pressure and see how blokes go.

YES it is the coaches fault if our blokes can't man up.
Why? Because THEY dictate the zone structures and match ups. THEY recruit players and should be making sure they are HUNGRY enough and DETERMINED enough to play afl. Because they should be setting standards and making sure players adhere to them or they are out. Because they SHOULD be selecting guys who do man up and they should be making sure they CAN man up. They can't man up if you are screaming at them to zone, zone, zone. They can't man up if they are so exhausted from running your stupid kamikaze game plan for 3 quarters and their legs are jelly. They also can't man up properly if you have them on someone that is outplaying them, see Hille vs NicNat.

So in summation can I blame the coach? Absolutely yes. You think suddenly Essendon players are just worse than all the other teams? These are the same guys that were rated as Juniours, the same guys that played TAC with all the other guys. If they aren't bringing it to the AFL at EFC then it is the coaches fault. Stop making excuses and blaming it all on the players. They can only do what they are trained to do and told to do. Would you give it all for M Knights? I certainly wouldn't because by now I would know that he has NFI about how to win a premiership. My leadership group is in tatters, I have Welsh for VC ffs.. my ex-captian and club champions are now pointing out to all and sundry what a dud game plan we have and dud coach we have. Would I feel demoralised? Yep.. and with just cause. Men follow great generals into battle not because of the stars on their shoulder but because of the heart in their chest and brain in their head. The sooner knights learns that the better for our footy club.

[kelvin_sheedy]

Rines is on fire!!!

[Smyth94]

I thought Lloyd actually helped Hurley to get those 4 goals by taking some physical pressure but we already dissected that game ages ago.

OK as I was trying to clarify.. if we win BECAUSE of coaching then I am happy to give Kudos. This would be if we had say beaten collingwood by outplaying them all game, not just a 5 min burst at the end.

And when we lose against a team we SHOULD beat then it does come down to coaching. As you pointed out.. its the Hille vs nicnat thing, its the leaving slattery on S Johnson last year thing. Its the picking the wrong side(ie not tall blokes) thing. Its the insisting we run and carry kamikaze style with no back up plan thing. its the kick out club champions because i need to develop Neagle and then drop him thing.

Instead of you just throwing your weight around how about you tell me games that you thought he OUT-COACHED the opposition in.. I would be happy to hear your thoughts..

Rines...the first problem we have here is your paradigm in which wins and losses are directly related to coaching tactics on game day, as if the relationship between the two were absolute, black and white.

You are wrong.

I'm not going to delve into the many factors which determine a team's win/loss column - I'd be here for hours and I don't have that kind of time.

[Skeeta Olly]

Settle down..

I'm sorry you can't understand it. Knights fans seem to have trouble with the obvious so I'll spell it out again...

Where have I said I'm a Knights fan? I'm no fan yet, but am willing to give him until the end of this year and probably the next until I call for his head.

YES it is the coaches fault if our blokes aren't fit enough.
Why? Because THEY dictate training schedules. THEY recruit the players and should be making sure they CAN be fit enough to play AFL. Because they SHOULD be setting standards and if players don't adhere then they are out. Because THEY should be selecting guys who ARE fit enough to play out the game plan.

There are about 6 players out there that were directly recruited by Knights. It's not Knights fault that they're not fit enough, about about the fitness staff?

YES it is the coaches fault if our blokes can't execute skills.
Why? Because THEY dictate the training drills. THEY recruit the players and should be making sure they are SKILLED enough to play AFL. Because they SHOULD be setting standards and making sure players adhere to them or they are out. Because THEY should be selecting guys who ARE skilled enough to execute the game plan. They should be having training drills that depict pressure and see how blokes go.

This may be true, but on Friday night there were some shocking skill executions that were almost below VFL standard. It's not the coaches fault that they can implement the simplest of skills.

YES it is the coaches fault if our blokes can't man up.
Why? Because THEY dictate the zone structures and match ups. THEY recruit players and should be making sure they are HUNGRY enough and DETERMINED enough to play afl. Because they should be setting standards and making sure players adhere to them or they are out. Because they SHOULD be selecting guys who do man up and they should be making sure they CAN man up. They can't man up if you are screaming at them to zone, zone, zone. They can't man up if they are so exhausted from running your stupid kamikaze game plan for 3 quarters and their legs are jelly. They also can't man up properly if you have them on someone that is outplaying them, see Hille vs NicNat.

This is your strongest argument and I partially agree. This si where Knights has reacted too slowly to change to a plan B, switch players around etc. You my also raise a good point with that players are so exhausted from playing attacking footy that they can't implement a zone. :thumbsu:

So in summation can I blame the coach? Absolutely yes. You think suddenly Essendon players are just worse than all the other teams? These are the same guys that were rated as Juniours, the same guys that played TAC with all the other guys. If they aren't bringing it to the AFL at EFC then it is the coaches fault. Stop making excuses and blaming it all on the players. They can only do what they are trained to do and told to do. Would you give it all for M Knights? I certainly wouldn't because by now I would know that he has NFI about how to win a premiership. My leadership group is in tatters, I have Welsh for VC ffs.. my ex-captian and club champions are now pointing out to all and sundry what a dud game plan we have and dud coach we have. Would I feel demoralised? Yep.. and with just cause. Men follow great generals into battle not because of the stars on their shoulder but because of the heart in their chest and brain in their head. The sooner knights learns that the better for our footy club.

You raise some valid points, but I'd rather you not post bullshit and put words into my mouth (bolded).

Football clubs aren't just made up of a head coach. There are players who are paid ridiculous amounts of money to play football and they are to an extent responsible for how they play. You can blame Knights for Houli's hospital handpasses or Dempsey's turn overs. There are also coaching staff who are responsible for parts of the club, such as fitness staff.

In saying this, I'm not completely defending the coach. IN round 1, Round 2 and Round 4 he has failed to stop onslaughts on goal. Yet again, we had 9 goals scored in a row against us and this is partly the coaches fault.

So I see what you're saying now, but it's not all his fault.

[rines]

Rines...the first problem we have here is your paradigm in which wins and losses are directly related to coaching tactics on game day, as if the relationship between the two were absolute, black and white.

You are wrong.

I'm not going to delve into the many factors which determine a team's win/loss column - I'd be here for hours and I don't have that kind of time.

LOL.. so you would prove me wrong but you don't have time. OK champ..

Ok so wins and losses have nothing to do with coaches.. then we could still fire M Knights??? Cause M Voss has made no difference to Brisbane... I know Roos does diddly squat at Sydney.. they hate him up there!! Oh and I hear that Collingwood has just decided to realise Mick AND bucks cause they aren't required..

Good one chump.. next.

[Skeeta Olly]

Rines is on fire!!!

Hardly.

3 of his paragraphs said the same thing. :p

[rines]

OK skeeta. Glad we could move past the "rines had no idea" stage and into the "lets discuss the issues".

It is well known that Knights personally wanted that guy from WCE as head fitness coach. It is also well known that Knights takes a very active interest in the fitness and training programs of the players. Put bluntly, Knights is a control freak who runs everything.

Also yes it is the fitness staff.. but ultimately, again, who do they answer to? Knights of course. So if there is a problem with the fitness staff then Knights should be getting new ones or working with them. Or revolutionary idea here.. just throwing it into the wind: CHANGE THE GAME PLAN TO SUIT THE FITNESS AND DEVELOPMENT LEVEL OF THE PLAYERS!!

Also Knights was raving about our fitness level preseason so I don't think it is a fitness problem. I reckon even Gablett and Judd would struggle with the workload of our midfield.

By and large though I think too much emphasis is put on players and not enough on coaches and training etc. The whole "team of champions vs a champion team" debate. St Kilda has stars no doubt about it.. but they also have a lot of "duds" and "deadwood".. it just doesn't show because they are well drilled and have great structure. Geelong has Mooney and Hawkins in their forward line.. not exactly the Brown and Fev show yet 2 from 3 suggests it works. It is about designing a plan to suit your strengths. Geelong tried unsuccessfully for many many years to find a KEY forward, in the end Bomber gave up and just designed a game plan in which the mids would kick goals. See the birth place of the run and carry style. Great coaches work with what they have and create plans that suit their team. Can not see any evidence of this from Knights.

[Daytripper]

St Kilda: A team well entrenched as number one. Started to fine tune training loads for the finals comes in after heavy training week. Cut them up in the first half when their pressure was very un st kilda like. Watson is BOG by a long way and the energy of a side playing for their life vs one that is treading water until finals is clear. St Kilda get a rev up at half time from their coach and then come hard at the bombers. We hold on in a tight finish. I was PUMPED at winning... but lets not include this as a coaching masterstroke. Pretty sure Lyon would shit all over Knights tactically most of the time.

We finished that game with 18 fit men. We had no rotations in the last quarter. Football today is based around running - thats why we were knackered in the end. No players could have a rest.

You weren't at that game, were you ?

Please give it a rest about game plans. You have NFI about our game plan, as do I, as does virtually everyone outside the inner sanctum of the club.

Game plans are fluid. They change according to the opposition, the ground, the conditions, the state of the game, what the opposition coach is trying, who is playing well etc etc.

There may be a base plan that clubs try to play to but to suggest that every club sticks to one plan no matter the particular scenario is naive at best, stupid at worst.

You throw up the Hille v Naitanui example. Did Knights know that Naitanui was going to start in the ruck ? How was he meant to change at the last minute ? Where was Cox at the first bounce ? Where was Ryder at the first bounce ? Is Knights meant to foresee that Naitanui got a somewhat favourable bounce at the start ?

You pay no consideration or give no credit to the opposition. The Eagles played great. Naitanui is a freak. Its hard to stop players when they get in moods like that. You don't just go your A4 binder in the coaches box and look up "How to stop Nic Nat 101", click your fingers and he goes out of the game.

Your posts just stink of trying to find easy answers. There are no easy answers. Each game, each player must be taken on its own merits. The tactics that Knights and co will try to implement this week against Collingwood will be markedly different to the tactics we employed last week.

We got beaten by a better side. We didn't play well. Okay, lets learn from that and look ahead to next week.

[Horace Scope]

I'd have to say I've never been a real fan of Knights, and find his contract extension so early, as baffling as our supposed game plan.
But I personally can't see the club sacking him this year regardless of where we finish.
9's footy show commentators believed eventually the game plan would work once the players became better at understanding and executing it.
They used Geelong and Hawtorn as examples of sticking it out when everyone else was bagging you.
I can't see EFC sacking Knights.
So I guess we have to stick it out and hope.

[rines]

We finished that game with 18 fit men. We had no rotations in the last quarter. Football today is based around running - thats why we were knackered in the end. No players could have a rest.

You weren't at that game, were you ?

Please give it a rest about game plans. You have NFI about our game plan, as do I, as does virtually everyone outside the inner sanctum of the club.

Game plans are fluid. They change according to the opposition, the ground, the conditions, the state of the game, what the opposition coach is trying, who is playing well etc etc.

There may be a base plan that clubs try to play to but to suggest that every club sticks to one plan no matter the particular scenario is naive at best, stupid at worst.

You throw up the Hille v Naitanui example. Did Knights know that Naitanui was going to start in the ruck ? How was he meant to change at the last minute ? Where was Cox at the first bounce ? Where was Ryder at the first bounce ? Is Knights meant to foresee that Naitanui got a somewhat favourable bounce at the start ?

You pay no consideration or give no credit to the opposition. The Eagles played great. Naitanui is a freak. Its hard to stop players when they get in moods like that. You don't just go your A4 binder in the coaches box and look up "How to stop Nic Nat 101", click your fingers and he goes out of the game.

Your posts just stink of trying to find easy answers. There are no easy answers. Each game, each player must be taken on its own merits. The tactics that Knights and co will try to implement this week against Collingwood will be markedly different to the tactics we employed last week.

We got beaten by a better side. We didn't play well. Okay, lets learn from that and look ahead to next week.

Actually I was at that game.. as I was at all bar 1 of our melbourne games last year.

So the main point of your argument is that we can't blame knights cause we were just beaten by a better side?? nice.. you are admitting that under knights we are a worse side than the weagles.. ouch!

And no he couldn't know that nicnat was going to start in the ruck. But he persisted with this matchup for a quite a while. AND if he plan was for hille to go with cox.. then while they were bringing the ball back and waiting for the TV light the change could have been made. They were standing in their positions for a while before the first bounce. So you send the message. Ryder is ready for the swing ( i believe he was forward - if not he stands in the yellow box) and bang.. 30 seconds later the change is made. That is called coaching.. but i guess that would be against the spirit of you knights bandwagoneers..

I don't see top sides saying.. well we would have beaten the eagles but they played great so it wasn't really our fault.. And if you watched every game every week then guess what.. you would have an idea of our game plan.

The game plan is pretty much set and then tinkered with. OR the alternative you suggest might also explain why we suck. You really think that knights is teaching 40 odd blokes a new game plan each week?? Get serious.. it takes at least a full preseason to teach a game plan and actually far longer than that. It is not being changed on a weekly basis.

[Daytripper]

Actually I was at that game.. as I was at all bar 1 of our melbourne games last year.

So the main point of your argument is that we can't blame knights cause we were just beaten by a better side?? nice.. you are admitting that under knights we are a worse side than the weagles.. ouch!

And no he couldn't know that nicnat was going to start in the ruck. But he persisted with this matchup for a quite a while. AND if he plan was for hille to go with cox.. then while they were bringing the ball back and waiting for the TV light the change could have been made. They were standing in their positions for a while before the first bounce. So you send the message. Ryder is ready for the swing ( i believe he was forward - if not he stands in the yellow box) and bang.. 30 seconds later the change is made. That is called coaching.. but i guess that would be against the spirit of you knights bandwagoneers..

I don't see top sides saying.. well we would have beaten the eagles but they played great so it wasn't really our fault.. And if you watched every game every week then guess what.. you would have an idea of our game plan.

The game plan is pretty much set and then tinkered with. OR the alternative you suggest might also explain why we suck. You really think that knights is teaching 40 odd blokes a new game plan each week?? Get serious.. it takes at least a full preseason to teach a game plan and actually far longer than that. It is not being changed on a weekly basis.

So the art of being a good coach is to be completely reactive. I see. :rolleyes:

Maybe Knights was using Ryder to exploit the Eagles the other way. You don't just throw the baby out with the bathwater after one centre bounce.

You can't have been at the St Kilda game. To blame Knights for our fade out shows a complete lack of knowledge of what had occured in the previous three quarters. Players aren't machines. If they can't get a rest they will get tired and against a team like St Kilda that can be fatal. That we held on was all credit to the team and by extension its coaching staff.

Opposition teams can be 'on' different weeks. You put down the Eagles but lets not forget they ran the Lions close in Rd 1 who came out and beat the Bulldogs last night. They do have ability. A lot of people were tipping them for top 8 this year.

Your other suggestion that its only top sides who don't credit the opposition is ridiculous. Every coach blames their own players for a loss. Bailey was critical of Melbourne when they lost to Collingwood Rd 2. To admit that a side was simply better than you on the night is to admit failure and supporters don't like that.

And to suggest that we don't have different structures and plans for individual teams on a weekly basis is just stupid.

You're not Ron from Craigieburn are you ?
Or Patrick Smith ?

[kelvin_sheedy]

Maybe Knights was using Ryder to exploit the Eagles the other way. You don't just throw the baby out with the bathwater after one centre bounce.


Trip... it took Knights 53 minutes to change the ruck matchup. The game was done and dusted by then. The change should have happened 5 minutes into the game.

They had all the momentum and another 9 goals unanswered. Blind Freddy could see things needed to change but we did it way too late again.

Another game, another 5+ unanswered goals.

[Daytripper]

Trip... it took Knights 53 minutes to change the ruck matchup. The game was done and dusted by then. The change should have happened 5 minutes into the game.

They had all the momentum and another 9 goals unanswered. Blind Freddy could see things needed to change but we did it way too late again.

Another game, another 5+ unanswered goals.

What are you talking about ?
Ryder was up against Nic Nat in the first and second quarters on a number of occasions.

Naitanui is a once in a lifetime player. No ruckman in the league has the engine and spring to go with him all night when he is in the right mood. You can't just play him one out.

Plus you have the other big guy who goes all right just quietly too.

[kelvin_sheedy]

What are you talking about ?
Ryder was up against Nic Nat in the first and second quarters on a number of occasions.

Naitanui is a once in a lifetime player. No ruckman in the league has the engine and spring to go with him all night when he is in the right mood. You can't just play him one out.

Plus you have the other big guy who goes all right just quietly too.

Can't recall Ryder in the first quarter and I heard Shaw on the radio this morning say 53 minutes so I thought it was true. It could be something 3 but I thought I heard 53. Sounds a bit excessive thinking about it.

Anyway the move should have happened after 5 minutes as the display from Hille was gutless and possibly the most pathetic thing I've seen from a senior player for a very long time. Ryder at least would have provided another contest at ground level.

[Boucks09]

I guess the fact that Ryder kicked two goals in the first quarter (should've been 3 with the non free kick) was also an example of poor coaching....

[Daytripper]

Can't recall Ryder in the first quarter and I heard Shaw on the radio this morning say 53 minutes so I thought it was true. It could be something 3 but I thought I heard 53. Sounds a bit excessive thinking about it.

Anyway the move should have happened after 5 minutes as the display from Hille was gutless and possibly the most pathetic thing I've seen from a senior player for a very long time. Ryder at least would have provided another contest at ground level.

Colme on Kelvin. You can't expect players to be 100% on for 120 minutes, least of all the opening 30 seconds.

Think back to any sporting activity you have been involved in. You're not at your optimal right from the very start.

Nic Nat was smart at that opening bounce. He feigned a leap, got Hille off balance and then leapt himself. Hille was powerless to do anything really. It was simply outstanding ruckwork from Nic Nat. Nothing more, nothing less.

Blaming Hille for being gutless is just being overly simplistic. Not to mention wrong.

[Ben the Gooner]

We needed to use at least one of our high picks on a quality, out and out, champion midfielder imho.

I think we did that this year. Whether Melksham becomes a superstar, we have to wait and see, but ditto Rich, Palmer and all the other "monty" picks.

I know its an age old argument, who would you take first G.Ablett or Riewoldt? Who was more important Judd or Brown? etc etc.

Brown and Riewoldt. Every time.

St Kilda: A team well entrenched as number one. Started to fine tune training loads for the finals comes in after heavy training week. Cut them up in the first half when their pressure was very un st kilda like. Watson is BOG by a long way and the energy of a side playing for their life vs one that is treading water until finals is clear. St Kilda get a rev up at half time from their coach and then come hard at the bombers. We hold on in a tight finish. I was PUMPED at winning... but lets not include this as a coaching masterstroke. Pretty sure Lyon would shit all over Knights tactically most of the time.

We flogged them for three quarters, then ran out of players, and resorted to chipping it around and timewasting. From the mouths of the players. Huge tactical win to Knights.

Hawthorn: Two teams desperate for the win. Hawthorn come in well below strenght. Tight, physical match that culminates in the lessor of two teams having the loss recorded. Again Lovett, Lloyd and Watson drag the team across the line. Would not put this one down to coaching either.

The first Hawthorn game was better. Youngest side ever recorded, and a masterclass on how to beat the zone. Tactically, Knights flogged Clarkson.

Trip... it took Knights 53 minutes to change the ruck matchup. The game was done and dusted by then.

While the ruck was a bad loss on Friday, I'd argue the complete lack of intensity in the middle was more of a reason why we lost. Put it another way, if we break even in the ruck, we still lose handily.

[Daytripper]

I guess the fact that Ryder kicked two goals in the first quarter (should've been 3 with the non free kick) was also an example of poor coaching....

Its like some posters are almost offended if an opposition player has a good game. You can't stop everyone and you can't go into a contest being overtly negative.

[kelvin_sheedy]

Colme on Kelvin. You can't expect players to be 100% on for 120 minutes, least of all the opening 30 seconds.

Think back to any sporting activity you have been involved in. You're not at your optimal right from the very start.

Nic Nat was smart at that opening bounce. He feigned a leap, got Hille off balance and then leapt himself. Hille was powerless to do anything really. It was simply outstanding ruckwork from Nic Nat. Nothing more, nothing less.

Blaming Hille for being gutless is just being overly simplistic. Not to mention wrong.

Mate, the least I'd expect is the first 30 seconds to be the most competitive and ferocious. It's a non negotiable in my eyes. You struggle to regain any ascendancy in any sport if you start off with a lack of intensity.

I can't wear what Hille did(he has history) and I'll leave it at that.

[Slattery_20]

:LOL: at kelvin_sheedy, talking us up for top 4 now the sky has fallen. Just like clockwork you predictable muppet.

IMHO Geelong (and to a lesser degree the Saints) could play just about any game-plan and kick goals and defend well enough. They have 6 or 8 genuine stars, who can do more than 3 or 4 things right.
Game plan only goes so far. It doesn't turn *that* many matches, it can give you a defensive or attacking edge but as soon as other coaches work it out - which seems to have happened to us - it becomes a disadvantage.

There is just too big a gap between our best footy and our worst footy. Best is good enough to tackle and harrass any team and kick plenty of goals; the worst we've seen in 4 quarters this year - 4th v Cats, 3rd & 4th v Freo, 2nd v WCE.
Gameplan doesn't go far enough. Some blokes just do not rock up every 2nd week. I dunno if it's mindset, they're not playing as a group, or what but that consistency kills us.