- Feb 11, 2015
- 5,050
- 8,339
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Time to get a little serious. I am loving the journey I am being taken on by Bolton and his team, but I feel as if though we are encountering one to many roadblocks. The biggest of them being the current game plan. It's only a short living one. And some of the young kids coming in to be exposed to it, are not seeming to handle it well as we would like (e.g. Pickett, Macreadie and occasionally J.Silvagni). It leaves me wondering whether we will be able to make the transition, regardless of when it happens. It makes me wonder whether we are in a different time and that building the foundations similar to that of the Hawthorn rebuild back in 2004-05 is pointless.
I say it is time to take risks. This defensive game plan has too many flaws that are constantly getting repeated by media and supporters all of the time. It is making our younger crop look relatively weaker compared to most others. The last thing I want to see is North Melbourne's group leap-frogging over us in their rebuild. It's one thing to have patience, but it's another thing to make progress. And I don't think making progress should involve Bolton and the coaches lacking faith and confidence in the list. Here are some reasons why the change of the game plan is where to begin.
1. Let's start off with the obvious. It isn't attractive footy.
While I'm super excited with the plethora of potential young stars walking through our doors, I'm just not excited with the club right now. Not even when they were going through their purple patch. It would be more enjoyable to see players kicking bags of goals and the entire team doing heaps to have a greater influence on the scoreboard. You can tell that some of them already look to be playing the role quite effectively, but imagine how much better they'll become when they are given the freedom to create damage and worry their opponents.
I don't like associating Carlton with boring matches (the GWS match probably the only exception), but it is the truth. Low scoring, slow-play, kick around footy doesn't really scream excitement. It's like you are not getting your money's worth. I can see players like Charlie, Jack, Wright, Lamb and even McKay kicking bags of goals consistently moving forward. If we continue to leave them pushing too hard, I fear they may not handle the transition. This style of play makes our defenders look fantastic while the rest of the team appears as if they could go one step further, without being given the chance to do so. This leads me to my next reason.
2. Certain players just don't suit this style of game.
When I look at the likes of David Cuningham, Jarrod Pickett, Samo Petrevski-Seton, Kym Lebois, Cameron Polson and Zac Fisher, I think of the huge amount of potential they have. But I fear that they'll never reach it if we continue to go down the hold back, set up and start again strategy of winning games. Most small players are quick on their feet and can be quick to think of their next move as well, which helps greatly with allowing teammates to find more space. Their evasiveness around play also sees them being a genuine threat to the opposition (e.g. Rioli, Elliot, Fantasia, Walters). That is what made those such as Betts and Garlett fun to watch. A defensive-minded game plan only looks to prevent all of this. With the current strategies in place, getting games into those such as Pickett is and will remain as ineffective and a waste of time.
I honestly could see someone like Fisher really thriving in an Adelaide or Richmond style of game, given the space to run and carry and make brilliant decisions with his lethal left foot. Him having to use his strength more than his speed and flexibility to win the ball in a tight contest most of the time, has him tire out pretty quickly. Hence why he most certainly will not see a rising star nomination nor does he get much recognition for what he already does. He applies a lot of pressure which is one half of his game looking good, but the other half won't be found having him being held up with everybody pushing up in front of him.
3. It mounts more pressure onto our players.
No doubt many of our players are below the required skill level. But I believe this defensive game plan is the reason why. Having our best players like Simpson and Murphy constantly hold up play after taking a mark diminishes their true ability to impact the game like they've been known for doing. All I have seen is every player either waiting for someone that never pops up or kicking long bombs forward that only ever see their teammates out-muscled in congestion. Taking it slow only looks to put more pressure onto players to make the right decision, with them not doing so making them look a lot worse than they should.
Not to forget our kicking for goal is (hate to say it) below average. While Casboult has improved with the help of Sav, everybody else is struggling with set shots. Charlie (more-so earlier in the season), Jack, McKay and many of the midfielders look to be missing some really easy shots for goal that I reckon many of us supporters would nail. Many of them are indeed young, but this defensive game starves them of the opportunities to improve their kicking for goal when it matters most. Either that or they are saving their best from the boundary line pre-game. The more often they are given the space to take strong marks and line up for goal, the better their set-shot kicking will be. All this comes from taking the game on.
4. We get exposed too easily.
For the second year in a row, we have been turned inside out. Having Cripps and Ed out does become a reason for our downfall in the second half of the season. But I've also noticed we've recently been implementing offensive strategies to a fixed system, which only has seen us come off worse than before. We are looking like the Collingwood side of a few weeks ago, confused and no sense of direction. Our playing group are in two minds and it is seeing us lose by greater margins. The current game plan also depends on having the right players on the field. So either our depth is terrible (which it is) or depth itself means very little.
I'll also agree that our young kids are tiring out a little, but how come the kids of teams such as Richmond, North Melbourne, Fremantle and Brisbane look to be getting better with each game? How come Charlie Curnow has lifted lately? This shouldn't be an excuse at all, given the expectations laid upon any player that takes a step onto the big stage. I blame the game plan. Our kids are good, but they can be so much better with the proper space to run, carry and deliver effectively.
5. It makes us look as if we are not trying.
Not so much tanking, but just about putting the cue in the rack. We are always demanding for our players to take the game on and hit the scoreboard themselves. We are making and effort to show up and expecting our team to do the same. We are whipping players that we shouldn't need to whip. It wouldn't be so bad if we were kicking a bigger score. An attacking style of game will make it look like we are putting in more effort. It would prevent the players from looking unmotivated. Having them not bothered when the ball is in their hands sucks the life out of the supporters and members. For almost 30 consecutive games we haven't kicked a 100+ score.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Once we get a few young midfielders over the off-season, I think it is time to immediately expose them to a fresh new Carlton. One that will try and work both ways rather than just worry about what the opposition does. Playing like the Fremantle of 2014 is not going to help them out in any way.
Right now we are once again, close to another wooden spoon. which would see us potentially with another number one pick. And I don't know about you lot, but I'm not that excited by it. I see pick 1 to be quite overrated anyway. Most of them don't turn out as absolute stars. We have four of them already and only one of them has been proving why they were a good choice (Kreuzer).
I say it is time to take risks. This defensive game plan has too many flaws that are constantly getting repeated by media and supporters all of the time. It is making our younger crop look relatively weaker compared to most others. The last thing I want to see is North Melbourne's group leap-frogging over us in their rebuild. It's one thing to have patience, but it's another thing to make progress. And I don't think making progress should involve Bolton and the coaches lacking faith and confidence in the list. Here are some reasons why the change of the game plan is where to begin.
1. Let's start off with the obvious. It isn't attractive footy.
While I'm super excited with the plethora of potential young stars walking through our doors, I'm just not excited with the club right now. Not even when they were going through their purple patch. It would be more enjoyable to see players kicking bags of goals and the entire team doing heaps to have a greater influence on the scoreboard. You can tell that some of them already look to be playing the role quite effectively, but imagine how much better they'll become when they are given the freedom to create damage and worry their opponents.
I don't like associating Carlton with boring matches (the GWS match probably the only exception), but it is the truth. Low scoring, slow-play, kick around footy doesn't really scream excitement. It's like you are not getting your money's worth. I can see players like Charlie, Jack, Wright, Lamb and even McKay kicking bags of goals consistently moving forward. If we continue to leave them pushing too hard, I fear they may not handle the transition. This style of play makes our defenders look fantastic while the rest of the team appears as if they could go one step further, without being given the chance to do so. This leads me to my next reason.
2. Certain players just don't suit this style of game.
When I look at the likes of David Cuningham, Jarrod Pickett, Samo Petrevski-Seton, Kym Lebois, Cameron Polson and Zac Fisher, I think of the huge amount of potential they have. But I fear that they'll never reach it if we continue to go down the hold back, set up and start again strategy of winning games. Most small players are quick on their feet and can be quick to think of their next move as well, which helps greatly with allowing teammates to find more space. Their evasiveness around play also sees them being a genuine threat to the opposition (e.g. Rioli, Elliot, Fantasia, Walters). That is what made those such as Betts and Garlett fun to watch. A defensive-minded game plan only looks to prevent all of this. With the current strategies in place, getting games into those such as Pickett is and will remain as ineffective and a waste of time.
I honestly could see someone like Fisher really thriving in an Adelaide or Richmond style of game, given the space to run and carry and make brilliant decisions with his lethal left foot. Him having to use his strength more than his speed and flexibility to win the ball in a tight contest most of the time, has him tire out pretty quickly. Hence why he most certainly will not see a rising star nomination nor does he get much recognition for what he already does. He applies a lot of pressure which is one half of his game looking good, but the other half won't be found having him being held up with everybody pushing up in front of him.
3. It mounts more pressure onto our players.
No doubt many of our players are below the required skill level. But I believe this defensive game plan is the reason why. Having our best players like Simpson and Murphy constantly hold up play after taking a mark diminishes their true ability to impact the game like they've been known for doing. All I have seen is every player either waiting for someone that never pops up or kicking long bombs forward that only ever see their teammates out-muscled in congestion. Taking it slow only looks to put more pressure onto players to make the right decision, with them not doing so making them look a lot worse than they should.
Not to forget our kicking for goal is (hate to say it) below average. While Casboult has improved with the help of Sav, everybody else is struggling with set shots. Charlie (more-so earlier in the season), Jack, McKay and many of the midfielders look to be missing some really easy shots for goal that I reckon many of us supporters would nail. Many of them are indeed young, but this defensive game starves them of the opportunities to improve their kicking for goal when it matters most. Either that or they are saving their best from the boundary line pre-game. The more often they are given the space to take strong marks and line up for goal, the better their set-shot kicking will be. All this comes from taking the game on.
4. We get exposed too easily.
For the second year in a row, we have been turned inside out. Having Cripps and Ed out does become a reason for our downfall in the second half of the season. But I've also noticed we've recently been implementing offensive strategies to a fixed system, which only has seen us come off worse than before. We are looking like the Collingwood side of a few weeks ago, confused and no sense of direction. Our playing group are in two minds and it is seeing us lose by greater margins. The current game plan also depends on having the right players on the field. So either our depth is terrible (which it is) or depth itself means very little.
I'll also agree that our young kids are tiring out a little, but how come the kids of teams such as Richmond, North Melbourne, Fremantle and Brisbane look to be getting better with each game? How come Charlie Curnow has lifted lately? This shouldn't be an excuse at all, given the expectations laid upon any player that takes a step onto the big stage. I blame the game plan. Our kids are good, but they can be so much better with the proper space to run, carry and deliver effectively.
5. It makes us look as if we are not trying.
Not so much tanking, but just about putting the cue in the rack. We are always demanding for our players to take the game on and hit the scoreboard themselves. We are making and effort to show up and expecting our team to do the same. We are whipping players that we shouldn't need to whip. It wouldn't be so bad if we were kicking a bigger score. An attacking style of game will make it look like we are putting in more effort. It would prevent the players from looking unmotivated. Having them not bothered when the ball is in their hands sucks the life out of the supporters and members. For almost 30 consecutive games we haven't kicked a 100+ score.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Once we get a few young midfielders over the off-season, I think it is time to immediately expose them to a fresh new Carlton. One that will try and work both ways rather than just worry about what the opposition does. Playing like the Fremantle of 2014 is not going to help them out in any way.
Right now we are once again, close to another wooden spoon. which would see us potentially with another number one pick. And I don't know about you lot, but I'm not that excited by it. I see pick 1 to be quite overrated anyway. Most of them don't turn out as absolute stars. We have four of them already and only one of them has been proving why they were a good choice (Kreuzer).
Last edited:
