Strategy The Phil Walsh gameplan

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
GTOA said:
I don't agree about him not liking the sub rule.

The sub rule is one of the better rules. It evens up matches when a team gets an injury, since it is no longer 21 v 22 but 21 v 21 (since the other team must sub out a player as well, fit or not).

Secondly, the sub rule can be used as a tactic, and can be handy for injecting a speedy player when your team has run out of legs, and the player can run over the opposition.

It also allows a debutant the chance to get a senior game, and can be injected late into the game so that the coach can "have a look at him" rather than play him the entire game, where he might get smashed, and dropped the next week. It gives a new player time to "find his feet".

Yet Phillip Walsh lead the charge on wanting to scrap it. Why doesn't he put his words into actions. You don't have to bring a sub player on. It's optional. If Walsh really hates the sub rule, then he should keep the sub on the bench for an entire game, to make a stand. Then he will see if a sub is important or not.

Also, I don't think the club should have sacked Brenton Sanderson. He got the Crows to finals in 2012. In 2013, Tippett jumped ship, and Walker went down with a knee, so the season was stuffed. In 2014, Taylor came back, but hadn't had a pre-season, because of the knee, so it hindered a finals berth. So, really Sanderson took the Crows to finals, and circumstances out of his control cost him two other seasons of finals, so I thought it was a bit rough that he wasn't given much of a chance, and felt that he was sacked because Crows fans wanted him gone, rather than his coaching record being poor (which it wasn't).
Click to expand...

You've got no idea.

No offense, but there is no need you to post on our board, especially with that kind of garbage, so please don't.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

GTOA said:
I don't agree about him not liking the sub rule.

The sub rule is one of the better rules. It evens up matches when a team gets an injury, since it is no longer 21 v 22 but 21 v 21 (since the other team must sub out a player as well, fit or not).

Secondly, the sub rule can be used as a tactic, and can be handy for injecting a speedy player when your team has run out of legs, and the player can run over the opposition.

It also allows a debutant the chance to get a senior game, and can be injected late into the game so that the coach can "have a look at him" rather than play him the entire game, where he might get smashed, and dropped the next week. It gives a new player time to "find his feet".

Yet Phillip Walsh lead the charge on wanting to scrap it. Why doesn't he put his words into actions. You don't have to bring a sub player on. It's optional. If Walsh really hates the sub rule, then he should keep the sub on the bench for an entire game, to make a stand. Then he will see if a sub is important or not.

Also, I don't think the club should have sacked Brenton Sanderson. He got the Crows to finals in 2012. In 2013, Tippett jumped ship, and Walker went down with a knee, so the season was stuffed. In 2014, Taylor came back, but hadn't had a pre-season, because of the knee, so it hindered a finals berth. So, really Sanderson took the Crows to finals, and circumstances out of his control cost him two other seasons of finals, so I thought it was a bit rough that he wasn't given much of a chance, and felt that he was sacked because Crows fans wanted him gone, rather than his coaching record being poor (which it wasn't).
Click to expand...
Hmmm, you are really, really determined to make yourself look completely foolish on our board.

Congratulations you have been successful & can now head home to your own board.
 
beartoo said:
Fyfe had no room to move last night, Just about every time he got the pill he got buried by half a dozen fast-tackling Tigers. Haven't checked the stats, but that would be his least effective game this year.
Click to expand...
I haven't looked at the stats either, but just from watching, he looked like the player that got them back into the game. He and Walters were stand outs in the second half, I thought.
 
Iron said:
I haven't looked at the stats either, but just from watching, he looked like the player that got them back into the game. He and Walters were stand outs in the second half, I thought.
Click to expand...

You may well be right and me wrong. Named as their best. 26 disposals, 12 kicks 14 handballs, DE 65% & 6 tackles is a game you'd take from anyone. I know stats don't tell the complete story. I had the impression that the Tigers' defence negated him to a degree.
 
Its fantastic that Walsh feels he has a responsibility to supporters to have the best players go head to head...
But his first responsibility should be for his own supporters.
I just want to see us win...

Today Carlton had 1 gun midfielder... Marc Murphy
Surely, common sense says shut him down, shut Carlton down?
He should have been tagged
 
mattymac said:
The sub rule is a nonsense and Sando lost the players.
Click to expand...

The coaches called for the sub rule to begin with, and now some of the same coaches are asking to get rid of it.

This is why coaches in general should NOT be consulted when changing rules. Just make the rule, and coaches will have to adapt.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

trolling
Kane McGoodwin said:
Hmmm, you are really, really determined to make yourself look completely foolish on our board.

Congratulations you have been successful & can now head home to your own board.
Click to expand...


You people are just pissed off because Patrick Dangerfield will be playing for my club next season.

Maybe if Walsh had appointed Dangerfield, or Sloane, as captain, instead of Walker, then Dangerfield may be re-signed by now.

I thought to be a captain of a club, you have to have an IQ which was three figures, not a Forrest Gump like Taylor Walker.
 
beartoo said:
Fyfe had no room to move last night, Just about every time he got the pill he got buried by half a dozen fast-tackling Tigers. Haven't checked the stats, but that would be his least effective game this year.
Click to expand...
He and Danger both looked lethargic this week.
 
I think Phil made a rookie error in the press conference yesterday when he said he was worried after watching the Freo game on Friday night.

For those who didn't hear, he said Freo were clearly flat from the week before and he was concerned we would be too.

Players hear the coach talk about six, seven, eight day breaks and it becomes a staple of their mindset - if they're coming off a shorter break they know in their head they should
be more fatigued (even if they're not).

I'm not here to argue the science behind shorter breaks (although I would love to see the stats on it to find out if it actually is the issue coaches claim it is).

My point is simply that it doesnt serve the team to believe that travel and turnaround times have a detrimental effect on their performance.

When the going gets tough, it's usually the mind that fails first, not the body.

There'll come a time in a finals series where we'll need 22 players to believe they can run over the top of a team who has had a "better" preparation than them. You can't have players believing anything else if you want to be a premiership contender.

1998 is a great example of what wouldn't have been possible if players believed this sort of rhetoric.
 
Last edited:
I really like how we position a player on the mark and a player directly to the left or right of an opposition player when they take a mark/get a free kick in one of our forward pockets. It stops them from switching play and basically forces them to go up the line into an even contest and doesn't allow them an easy out

Something small, but you'll notice the Adelaide players making a bee line for that spot once the opposition gets the ball
 
Elite Crow said:
Surely you need to delete the post that insults our Captain?
Click to expand...

Not only that, but it's insulting his IQ, not his footy skills. And he's trolling Dangerfield.... now i'm no mod, and i love the way our mods run the board (less restrictive) but surely that's ban worthy and worth more than warning?
 
Slippery Pete said:
I think Phil made a rookie error in the press conference yesterday when he said he was worried after watching the Freo game on Friday night.

For those who didn't hear, he said Freo were clearly flat from the week before and he was concerned we would be too.

Players hear the coach talk about six, seven, eight day breaks and it becomes a staple of their mindset - if they're coming off a shorter break they know in their head they should
be more fatigued (even if they're not).

I'm not here to argue the science behind shorter breaks (although I would love to see the stats on it to find out if it actually is the issue coaches claim it is).

My point is simply that it doesnt serve the team to believe that travel and turnaround times have a detrimental effect on their performance.

When the going gets tough, it's usually the mind that fails first, not the body.

There'll come a time in a finals series where we'll need 22 players to believe they can run over the top of a team who has had a "better" preparation than them. You can't have players believing anything else if you want to be a premiership contender.

1998 is a great example of what wouldn't have been possible if players believed this sort of rhetoric.
Click to expand...
I don't think he mentioned anything about the length of the break or travel did he? It was just a tough game. The players would have known that, he didn't say it before the game. I don't have any issues. If he mentioned the break or traveling sure then it would be an issue.
 
FR0GGY said:
I don't think he mentioned anything about the length of the break or travel did he? It was just a tough game. The players would have known that, he didn't say it before the game. I don't have any issues. If he mentioned the break or traveling sure then it would be an issue.
Click to expand...


I'm sure I heard him mention the break - maybe it was in a different interview.
 
Elite Crow said:
Surely you need to delete the post that insults our Captain?
Click to expand...
Glenno23 said:
Not only that, but it's insulting his IQ, not his footy skills. And he's trolling Dangerfield.... now i'm no mod, and i love the way our mods run the board (less restrictive) but surely that's ban worthy and worth more than warning?
Click to expand...
He's copped an infraction for it

There's a note there to show it's been spotted and dealt with
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

GrommoT
Analysis SETTLE IT: Why didn't Crows go for Mattaes Phillipou?
2 3 4
Replies
96
Views
4K
Cleric
Cleric
GROTTO
Strategy Bring Back Home Mattaes Phillipou
2 3 4 5
Replies
101
Views
7K
Kane McGoodwin
Kane McGoodwin
Drummond
Roast The Rotten Stench of the AFC
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
161
Views
6K
Harris1991
H
spenze
  • Poll
Review The good, the bad, the shat - vs Fremantle R3 2024
24 25 26 27 28
Replies
690
Views
27K
conVINCEd
C
adelaidecrows
Strategy The season is lost, what should we do with the remaining 19 games?
2
Replies
34
Views
990
adelaidecrows
adelaidecrows
JPetro83
Should the club tap Tex and Rory on the shoulder now? possible farewell game
2 3
Replies
52
Views
2K
dylan123
dylan123
adelaidecrows
Roast Olsen and the board.
Replies
19
Views
350
George Kramer
George Kramer

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top