Opinion Chris Scott's coaching - Part 1 [closed, see Part II]

[abet]

These posters are so pathetic .Can you imagine if Scott had of moved Selwood to the forward line what they would be saying ?

It would be Scott is the worst coach in the AFL ,he moved our most important midfielder when were struggling at the clearances to the forward line when we needed him to win clearances and the ball wasn't even going to the forward line and Selwood is no not a forward .Sack Chris Scott by moving Selwood the forward line he made us lose in Enrights 300th game sack him sack him now

Your love for CS is clearly clouding your mind to the point you have to defend him at all cost, even if you’re wrong.

Round 15 last year Geelong Vs Essendon, Geelong was on top in the first half but Essendon turns up the heat in the third quarter and hits the front, Selwood wasn’t travelling to good with a hard tag and a niggling hamstring complaint, in one of his rare occasions CS decides to throw Selwood forward, Selwood kicks a couple of goals and helps ignite the forward line and we end up winning.

Now all BlightysCats was asking was why couldn’t it have been tried against Melbourne on the weekend, the way I see it is Selwood was getting beaten, Viney was actually hurting us more than what Selwood was hurting them. Wouldn’t it have made sense to at least have tried swinging him forward for 10 or so minutes, he still would have been in the play as we had more inside 50s than them? Viney might have followed and could have been out of his comfort zone or someone like SJ could have gone in the middle on Viney and might have had a better impact than Selwood. Even in a game this year Selwood was having a shocker for the first three quarters and at the start of the last went off for a rest, when he came back on he was a different player and won us the game, who knows what can work sometimes.

I know his our best clearance player but when you’re getting beaten, it’s worth a gamble to try something, even GAJ got moved forward from time to time just to try and break up the opposition stranglehold or shake a tag. I don’t get why CS doesn’t switch it up when things don’t go to plan, on the weekend he could have tried plenty of things but chose not to try anything, what was wrong with trying Mackie forward, even Domsy or SJ deep forward and the Hawk at CHF.

But if you guys are happy for CS to just sit there like a stale bottle of piss while we get pumped then go ahead but don’t be such a twit and call posters pathetic because they want to see changes when we’re getting beat.

 

[Munich]

Your love for CS is clearly clouding your mind to the point you have to defend him at all cost, even if you’re wrong.

Round 15 last year Geelong Vs Essendon, Geelong was on top in the first half but Essendon turns up the heat in the third quarter and hits the front, Selwood wasn’t travelling to good with a hard tag and a niggling hamstring complaint, in one of his rare occasions CS decides to throw Selwood forward, Selwood kicks a couple of goals and helps ignite the forward line and we end up winning.

Now all BlightysCats was asking was why couldn’t it have been tried against Melbourne on the weekend, the way I see it is Selwood was getting beaten, Viney was actually hurting us more than what Selwood was hurting them. Wouldn’t it have made sense to at least have tried swinging him forward for 10 or so minutes, he still would have been in the play as we had more inside 50s than them? Viney might have followed and could have been out of his comfort zone or someone like SJ could have gone in the middle on Viney and might have had a better impact than Selwood. Even in a game this year Selwood was having a shocker for the first three quarters and at the start of the last went off for a rest, when he came back on he was a different player and won us the game, who knows what can work sometimes.

I know his our best clearance player but when you’re getting beaten, it’s worth a gamble to try something, even GAJ got moved forward from time to time just to try and break up the opposition stranglehold or shake a tag. I don’t get why CS doesn’t switch it up when things don’t go to plan, on the weekend he could have tried plenty of things but chose not to try anything, what was wrong with trying Mackie forward, even Domsy or SJ deep forward and the Hawk at CHF.

But if you guys are happy for CS to just sit there like a stale bottle of piss while we get pumped then go ahead but don’t be such a twit and call posters pathetic because they want to see changes when we’re getting beat.

Never has a truer word been spoken.

 

[Biggy_Boy]

Cmon don't overreact Stanley will be back within a couple of games. 3-4 games with the bye week in the middle.

Now do you want to answer the original question?

Will he, now? Wouldn't want to overreact, but it seems we might be back to the good ol' Walker/Blitz combo that has served us so well these past three years.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

It's poor list management. You can debate whether that's Scott's fault or not, but that's what it is.

Hogwash. Not with Stanley it isn't. You're on a fast track to ignore. Rarely value add, just whine and moan.

 

[Biggy_Boy]

Hogwash. Not with Stanley it isn't. You're on a fast track to ignore. Rarely value add, just whine and moan.

So your argument is that it is good list management to keep a bunch of injury-prone players and recruit even more?

 

[Art Vandelay_]

So your argument is that it is good list management to keep a bunch of injury-prone players and recruit even more?

a) it's not relevant to this thread you bumping my post. and my post was a discussion about NM where you made a bad oversight.
b) unlike Hmac for example Stanley played 37 games in the last two seasons. So being injury prone is a stretch argument.
c) We'd have less wins than what we have now without Stanley given Hamish and Dawson have been injured, but no doubt you'd gloss over that fact..

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Your love for CS is clearly clouding your mind to the point you have to defend him at all cost, even if you’re wrong.

Round 15 last year Geelong Vs Essendon, Geelong was on top in the first half but Essendon turns up the heat in the third quarter and hits the front, Selwood wasn’t travelling to good with a hard tag and a niggling hamstring complaint, in one of his rare occasions CS decides to throw Selwood forward, Selwood kicks a couple of goals and helps ignite the forward line and we end up winning.

Now all BlightysCats was asking was why couldn’t it have been tried against Melbourne on the weekend, the way I see it is Selwood was getting beaten, Viney was actually hurting us more than what Selwood was hurting them. Wouldn’t it have made sense to at least have tried swinging him forward for 10 or so minutes, he still would have been in the play as we had more inside 50s than them? Viney might have followed and could have been out of his comfort zone or someone like SJ could have gone in the middle on Viney and might have had a better impact than Selwood. Even in a game this year Selwood was having a shocker for the first three quarters and at the start of the last went off for a rest, when he came back on he was a different player and won us the game, who knows what can work sometimes.

I know his our best clearance player but when you’re getting beaten, it’s worth a gamble to try something, even GAJ got moved forward from time to time just to try and break up the opposition stranglehold or shake a tag. I don’t get why CS doesn’t switch it up when things don’t go to plan, on the weekend he could have tried plenty of things but chose not to try anything, what was wrong with trying Mackie forward, even Domsy or SJ deep forward and the Hawk at CHF.

But if you guys are happy for CS to just sit there like a stale bottle of piss while we get pumped then go ahead but don’t be such a twit and call posters pathetic because they want to see changes when we’re getting beat.

I 100% understand the argument being put forward. But it is ultra simplistic to say things aren't working, a certain change should be made and if its not the coach has made bad call.

Sometimes a coach is faced is with two choices and there is not always a clear right and wrong one to make as they both have logical reasons for and against. This is the case on the weekend with Selwood .

Lets look at some the reasons for and against Selwood spending time up forward

For
-He is not having much impact in the middle
-He might shake the tag
-He might kick a few goals
-He might unsettle the opposition
-Nothing to lose by moving a players whos not playing well in the middle up forward.

Against
-He is our best midfielder and clearance player
-Why not back him in to turn things around , players with far less ability do it all the time
-We were only 11 points down at 3 quarter timer, put him up forward and ricks having 4 goals quickly kicked against us
-He is our on field leader ,we need him in the most important part of the ground which I also the area we struggle most in
-Could result in another player like Motlop being put under a close tag that he cant cope with
-Selwood does not have the attributes that other midfielders have to play up forward

A you can see its far more complex than things aren't working so a coach must make a certain move or he has done a poor job.

 

[catempire]

This thread is starting to go off the rails again. Keep it on topic and keep the personal shots out of it.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Will he, now? Wouldn't want to overreact, but it seems we might be back to the good ol' Walker/Blitz combo that has served us so well these past three years.

So your argument is that it is good list management to keep a bunch of injury-prone players and recruit even more?

Things cant keep going on like this with injuries but this is the problem .

What good ruckman that is not prone to injury prone could we have possibly taken ?

We have had 2 choices since Ottens left

1.Take a risk with injury prone ruckman
2.Play ruckman who are just no good.

Sadly we just haven't had the chance to get a good ruckman that's not injury prone.

 

[abet]

I 100% understand the argument being put forward. But it is ultra simplistic to say things aren't working, a certain change should be made and if its not the coach has made bad call.

Sometimes a coach is faced is with two choices and there is not always a clear right and wrong one to make as they both have logical reasons for and against. This is the case on the weekend with Selwood .

Lets look at some the reasons for and against Selwood spending time up forward

For
-He is not having much impact in the middle
-He might shake the tag
-He might kick a few goals
-He might unsettle the opposition
-Nothing to lose by moving a players whos not playing well in the middle up forward.

Against
-He is our best midfielder and clearance player
-Why not back him in to turn things around , players with far less ability do it all the time
-We were only 11 points down at 3 quarter timer, put him up forward and ricks having 4 goals quickly kicked against us
-He is our on field leader ,we need him in the most important part of the ground which I also the area we struggle most in
-Could result in another player like Motlop being put under a close tag that he cant cope with
-Selwood does not have the attributes that other midfielders have to play up forward

A you can see its far more complex than things aren't working so a coach must make a certain move or he has done a poor job.

You can never ever agree with someone, you always have to try and defend CS at all cost.

Well if you haven't worked it out yet, CS went with the against option you're pointing out and it didn't work this time unlike the Essendon game last year where he went with the for option and it worked, so it was a poor choice this time round from your idol.

 

[Biggy_Boy]

Things cant keep going on like this with injuries but this is the problem .

What good ruckman that is not prone to injury prone could we have possibly taken ?

We have had 2 choices since Ottens left

1.Take a risk with injury prone ruckman
2.Play ruckman who are just no good.

Sadly we just haven't had the chance to get a good ruckman that's not injury prone.

I'd argue that the ruckmen we've been playing, while not only injury-prone, haven't exactly set the world on fire.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

I'd argue that the ruckmen we've been playing, while not only injury-prone, haven't exactly set the world on fire.

I agree none of them are brad Ottens .

If anyone knows how we can get good ruckman that isn't injury prone please let the club know ASAP.

Will say tho the best ruckwork in my opinion we have seen since Ottens retired came from Simpson in 2013 .Come on Simpson show us what you got.

 

[DeanoT]

If anyone knows how we can get good ruckman that isn't injury prone please let the club know ASAP.

It is disappointing to learn that there is noone at the club paid to do just this.

 

[JUBJUB]

2850 posts and the same people are saying the same things over- and-over- and...............

This thread reminds me of a scene from European Vacation - it just keeps going around in circles

 

[Vdubs]

But if you suggested that in 2013 you would end up with pointy objects sticking out of your back very quickly. Just a little bit revisionist to start saying now we all knew they were finished because plenty were arguing quite vehemently against it two years ago.

But I did, and you did, and we both know it.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

You can never ever agree with someone, you always have to try and defend CS at all cost.

Well if you haven't worked it out yet, CS went with the against option you're pointing out and it didn't work this time unlike the Essendon game last year where he went with the for option and it worked, so it was a poor choice this time round from your idol.

I said before that trying him up forward or keeping him in the middle were both ok options with good reasons for and against both. Scott choose to keep in the middle which is fine. Read my above post about the reasons for keeping him in the middle.

Just because Selwood played forward against Essendon last year doesn't mean he should have automatically of played ford against Melbourne a few days ago . For a start its a different opposition and we also had more quality players available against Essendon who could cover for Selwood in the midfield.Just look at our leading disposal getters against Essendon last year who did not play against Melbourne on the weekend

-Bartel number 1 disposal getter
-Duncan number 5
-Christenson 8
-GHS 9
-Kelly 11
-Varcoe 11

Than you have Johnson at number 4 who dosent have the same impact as a midfielder anymore and Simpson in the ruck .

I suggest you try and get in touch with our ex president Frank Costa and tell him how you feel about our coach. I am sure he will tell you how important unity and solidarity are to a football club , do you want us to turn into Richmond ??

 

[BlightysCats]

Not sure I follow VD. I've never said anything other than that Scott deserves total credit for the 2011 premiership, and while we're at it the last 2 years finishing in the top 4. He's in charge. That's how it works. But unlike others, to me that also means he's responsible where things go wrong. Some don't like that part of it.

Don't start using logic on here Partridge it'll fry some posters pea brains.

 

[BlightysCats]

But if you guys are happy for CS to just sit there like a stale bottle of piss while we get pumped then go ahead but don’t be such a twit and call posters pathetic because they want to see changes when we’re getting beat.

It's so, so, satisfying when you occasionally see sanity prevail on these threads.

 

[Cataholic]

2850 posts and the same people are saying the same things over- and-over- and...............

It's clear there are two distinct camps here, and neither side is going to budge an inch or concede anything to the other.

Guess we'll just have to see what the next 12 - 18 months bring to know who has made the correct call.

In the meantime, this is gonna grow to be one looong thread.......

 

[BlightysCats]

There lies our current dilemma :
Bundy - gone
Bartel - amazing warrior but in decline and injured
Johnson - IMO he is best as a forward now , absolute minimum time in the midfield for mine
Corey - one of my all time favs but sadly gone
Duncan - potentially elite but injured
Selwood - amazing warrior in need of a chop out

Caddy and Guthrie are trying hard but are still B graders who need time , thank God for Blicavs who is our minister for everything , Hartmann - gone , Stokes - energiser Bunny but certainly not an A grader , Lang - showing promise as a mid but a better defensive forward at the moment , Gore - injured , Cockatoo - still raw , GHS - injured , Luxford - raw , Cowan - injured
The bottom of that midfield barrel is looking very bare
I would defenitley debut Jansen soon - FFS he was as good as Cripps at Colts and is just what we need at the moment - a big body who finds the ball and can feed it out.
The midfield is clearly in transition and we need to have a good look at all these kids with an eye to the future

Completely agree Farmer2Goggin however the whole which midfield was more talented in 2013 debate came about from an argument with GC26 about clearances being related to the talent of a midfield, I was simply saying Gold Coast had more average clearances per game than us in 2013 so that proves talent in the midfield doesn't reflect clearance numbers, but just to prove it further so did GWS, Essendon, St Kilda, Port Adelaide, Brisbane Lions just to name a few, I suppose they all had more talented midfields than us as well...

 

[BlightysCats]

Corey was cooked that year

He got career high contested possessions and goal assist counts within a game in 2013, he wasn't as good as he was but was hardly 'cooked.'

 

[BlightysCats]

The games far too professional for a wish and hope approach.

I'd hardly say it's a wish and hope approach in fact many coaches change up the size of their forward line quite regularly when in trouble and change the game, but even if we hadn't, who cares we lost anyway and you could see we were going to lose if nothing changed. There's no place in AFL for conservative wimps on or off the field...

 

[David the Cat]

It's so, so, satisfying when you occasionally see sanity prevail on these threads.

Ahhh BC…the old "if you agree with me you're sane/clever, but if you don't ….." argument.

An oldy but a goody.

 

[BlightysCats]

Ahhh BC…the old "if you agree with me you're sane/clever, but if you don't ….." argument.

An oldy but a goody.

It is actually a pretty sane/clever concept to change the way you do something when what you've been doing is not working....
And that's more a universal truth than me just pumping up someone that agrees with me. Sir Alex Ferguson seems to think it's a good idea too "Some of the greatest moments in my time at United have been in the last 15 minutes, without question," Sir Alex explained. "Say you're down 1-0 or 2-1, there's no point in being conservative and playing your normal game because it hasn't worked for 75 minutes. So risk and shove an extra player up front."
But hey I'd rather listen to you David the Cat, or Vdubs, or NFSB, or GC26 and your love of the stellar coaching of Chris Scott on Sunday when he did absolutely nothing to try and change the game, than take on board the words of the most successful manager of any football code in the world ever.

 

[catman2006]

It is actually a pretty sane/clever concept to change the way you do something when what you've been doing is not working....
And that's more a universal truth than me just pumping up someone that agrees with me. Sir Alex Ferguson seems to think it's a good idea too "Some of the greatest moments in my time at United have been in the last 15 minutes, without question," Sir Alex explained. "Say you're down 1-0 or 2-1, there's no point in being conservative and playing your normal game because it hasn't worked for 75 minutes. So risk and shove an extra player up front."
But hey I'd rather listen to you David the Cat, or Vdubs, or NFSB, or GC26 and your love of the stellar coaching of Chris Scott on Sunday when he did absolutely nothing to try and change the game, than take on board the words of the most successful manager of any football code in the world ever.

I agree with Blighty a little, Scott could try something up in games where we are ahead by a bit or getting smashed to see if a player can shine, but disagree in the melb game as maybe only Hawkins to the ruck may have had a small effect, but moving Selwood or Domsy or even leaving Taylor for entire quarter would have worked as we were well beaten in the middle and our delivery was poor all game