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

[iameviljez]

Surely Joel Corey has to be in that discussion somewhere?

Different draft intake though. You're thinking of Charlie Gardiner

 

[OzeSparky]

I think it shows that we miss Duncan, he is that link up man with excellent skills that we seem to miss badly when he is out.

 

[Partridge]

Whereas Kelly can tag and play defence.

I'm not sure he can play defence anymore.

 

[you pick one]

totally frustrated with Walker.....shows something one week then useless for the next 4-5 weeks.....does little or nothing.

Kersten looks the goods at times...but doesn't appear to me to get enough of it when the games on the line....

Kersten kicks 5 in the VFL last week...do we give him a run then? Couldn't do much worse...

The only thing I will say there is if we swap horses now we may condemn both players to the Mitch Brown fete,if we leave Kersten in the 2s and he continues to perform for the remainder of the year his valve at the trade table will increase,,similar with Walker show some faith and hope like hell he can put up one more good effort at AFL level and he also remains tradable.
Remember we brought Brown back under similar circumstances last year and he only proved he wasn't up to it at the time and 17 other clubs noticed,I believe had we left him in the 2s late in the year he'd have found a new home.

 

[Partridge]

totally frustrated with Walker.....shows something one week then useless for the next 4-5 weeks.....does little or nothing.

Kersten looks the goods at times...but doesn't appear to me to get enough of it when the games on the line....

Kersten kicks 5 in the VFL last week...do we give him a run then? Couldn't do much worse...

The problem is, we've had no shortage of players who have looked very promising at VFL level, it's getting that translated to the seniors that's the issue. Walker has kicked 5 at VFL level too.

 

[Partridge]

The only thing I will say there is if we swap horses now we may condemn both players to the Mitch Brown fete,if we leave Kersten in the 2s and he continues to perform for the remainder of the year his valve at the trade table will increase,,similar with Walker show some faith and hope like hell he can put up one more good effort at AFL level and he also remains tradable.
Remember we brought Brown back under similar circumstances last year and he only proved he wasn't up to it at the time and 17 other clubs noticed,I believe had we left him in the 2s late in the year he'd have found a new home.

Pretty sure his papers were stamped long before then. Plus he played well against Brisbane and was far from our worst against North. As it has transpired he may have a new home next year regardless.

What it has shown is that every player is different. Walker has now had double the opportunities Brown had, and may need more to convince Scott he's worth holding onto. Kersten has enjoyed far more preferential treatment than either and has probably showed the least. Hopefully next season they can each take a step forward.

 

[Partridge]

Anyone who wants Walker as a key forward needs their head read.

Walker should be dropped this week...replaced by Menzel......and cut up into little pieces to make french fries.......absolutely useless.

Kersten?...somebody convince me...

I respect your views DtC, but may I ask that you express what you're really thinking.

 

[Partridge]

Shows the talent we now miss when Corey can be considered 4th rung

I'd have only Ablett ahead of fwiw. The most underrated as a player and the most underrated player we've lost

The only one apart from Ablett to win a club best and fairest as well (and he won two of them).

 

[you pick one]

Pretty sure his papers were stamped long before then. Plus he played well against Brisbane and was far from our worst against North. As it has transpired he may have a new home next year regardless.

What it has shown is that every player is different. Walker has now had double the opportunities Brown had, and may need more to convince Scott he's worth holding onto. Kersten has enjoyed far more preferential treatment than either and has probably showed the least. Hopefully next season they can each take a step forward.

Deja Vu,either should thank their luck stars to survive the cuts but sheer numbers of departures this year may help their cause.

 

[Bobby_]

Deja Vu,either should thank their luck stars to survive the cuts but sheer numbers of departures this year may help their cause.

at least they are contributing and trying to make something of their careers all the while getting paid peanuts compared to others on our list who are doing absolutely nothing on the field as we speak and getting paid double the amount of what emergency doctors are getting paid.

 

[you pick one]

I agree it looks very unfair right now that's another issue though,but it doesn't take away any progress from either Walker or Kersten this year has been minimal at best and with those you allude to Clark and Stanley I presume and Vardy on the mend along with Menzel, Josh and Shane really needed to make every post a winner and they haven't done that.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

I agree it looks very unfair right now that's another issue though,but it doesn't take away any progress from either Walker or Kersten this year has been minimal at best and with those you allude to Clark and Stanley I presume and Vardy on the mend along with Menzel Josh and Shane really needed to make every post a winner and they haven't done that.

Agree there ypo. These injuries have presented good opportunities to Kersten and Walker to stake a solid claim and unfortunately they've stagnated. That's no one's fault but there's. If they're given another opportunity at Geelong and not traded will they be first choice?

 

[you pick one]

Agree there ypo. These injuries have presented good opportunities to Kersten and Walker to stake a solid claim and unfortunately they've stagnated. That's no one's fault but there's. If they're given another opportunity at Geelong and not traded will they be first choice?

No.

 

[goyoucatters]

Agree there ypo. These injuries have presented good opportunities to Kersten and Walker to stake a solid claim and unfortunately they've stagnated. That's no one's fault but there's. If they're given another opportunity at Geelong and not traded will they be first choice?

Given how they've performed in the ones over the course of the entire season, if either of them is first choice at any stage next year (without significantly improving their 2015 output), 2016 will not be a stellar year in the history of the GFC.

They have mostly been 'just going' in the ones all year.

Walker at least had his moments earlier on but he's actually shown next to nothing for some weeks now.

And Kersten was backed in a lot by the MC for relatively modest returns throughout the entire season.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

That's what I thought. Still think Walker is more likely to make it as a backman and god knows what we do with Kersten.

 

[Vdubs]

The only thing I will say there is if we swap horses now we may condemn both players to the Mitch Brown fete,if we leave Kersten in the 2s and he continues to perform for the remainder of the year his valve at the trade table will increase,,similar with Walker show some faith and hope like hell he can put up one more good effort at AFL level and he also remains tradable.
Remember we brought Brown back under similar circumstances last year and he only proved he wasn't up to it at the time and 17 other clubs noticed,I believe had we left him in the 2s late in the year he'd have found a new home.

Not exactly true. He did very little wrong in his final games. Bobby has put up his involvements. Our whole team stunk against NM until it was too late.
Brown did not look like he did not deserve to be in that 22.

 

[Munich]

Every time I see Kersten I think to myself wow what a good mark.

Yet he gets dropped every single time he plays, how many has he kicked for us in the seniors this year? Does he tackle?

 

[Vdubs]

Shows the talent we now miss when Corey can be considered 4th rung

I'd have only Ablett ahead of fwiw. The most underrated as a player and the most underrated player we've lost

Not so. The MC/coaches loved him, always up in B&F's.
Personally, liked his marking, stamina, attitude, fitness, work ethic, great role model, pivotal player in our successes, but there were some slightly better or more exciting players.
Could we have won any of those GF,s if he was out? Yes, imho.
Could you say that about all the others? Kelly, maybe....
He was a fantastic player for us, nobody disputing that.

 

[SJ]

Every time I see Kersten I think to myself wow what a good mark.

Yet he gets dropped every single time he plays, how many has he kicked for us in the seniors this year? Does he tackle?

Gets dropped every time he plays? He's played 20 games and only been dropped once or twice.

He's kicked 19 goals in 20 games, and nine of those came in his first four matches.

He only averages 3.15 marks per game.

 

[Munich]

Gets dropped every time he plays? He's played 20 games and only been dropped once or twice.

He's kicked 19 goals in 20 games, and nine of those came in his first four matches.

He only averages 3.15 marks per game.

This season I mean. I need to start paying more attention when he's in the ground clearly! :s

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Ok here we go....
number 1.
Your point about him being the architect of a turnover based game plan was completely wrong and I proved it only for you to now say he was the architect of the outside ring? WTF? The outside ring ha, ha what a load of rubbish. Our 2011 game plan was based on sitting back setting up defensive zones pressing up on the opposition as they came forward then counter attacking quickly using as few numbers as possible going through the midfiled to move it long so that if we were caught out with a turnover we still had a strong defensive structure in place, then we'd bomb it long to usually a forward line consisting of either Hawk, Pods, Ottens, SJ, or Varcoe. in different combinations.

Number 2. We should've been playing only Hawkins/Walker deep forward then having Kersten (who's often been leading up well) Cocky, SJ, Lang and maybe Gregson up there and our mids actually looking for lead up targets down forward instead of relentlessly bombing it long (surely they would've stopped doing that by now if Scott had told them not to). I personally would've hardly had Walker and Hawkins in the same forward line rather Hawk or Walker resting on the bench while the other takes the big tall forward role for a bit.

Firstly I admire your passion for Geelong , your just don't understand how the game is played.

1. I don't think you actually understand how the game has changed since 2011.Whats happened since 2011 is far more scoring is being done from turnovers and less scoring from clearances. Lets go back to 2012 when we had just lost Ottens, Ling and Ablett 12 months earlier , to further add age had started to take a toll on Corey ,Kelly and Bartel. We got smashed in the clearances this year so as a result Scott decided in 2013 to introduce an outside ring of players around the stoppages , this was called by many in the media the ring of fire .The whole purpose of this of this was to prevent sides from scoring from turnovers against .Now of course Scott is not the first coach to place an emphasis on scoring from turnovers but his tactic was innovative and is a large reason why scores from clearances have decreased and scores from turnovers have increased.

With regards to your description of our 2011 game plan "defensive zones pressing up on the opposition as they came forward then counter attacking quickly using as few numbers as possible going through the midfield to move it long so that if we were caught out with a turnover we still had a strong defensive structure in place" this is how every single side played in 2011 and how every side plays in 2015 .Its a basic as saying every sides game plan is to kick the ball between the 2 big steps

2.With point 2 I have to start with ,"Hawk or Walker resting on the bench while the other takes the big tall forward role for " no side can ever have 2 players sharing 1 spot on the interchange .This would mean that instead of having 3 spots on the interchange being shared between 21 , 2 spots would be shared between 19.

Lang,SJ and Gregson have all spent plenty of time up forward.

Why don't our mids hit up short targets ? that's an easy question to answer . Our midfield is simply not good enough. To constantly hit up leading targets you need a midfield that can move the ball fast and when slowed down can kick the ball with precision .Our players are just not capable of doing this at the moments , its much easier for them to just bomb it long to the square .

 

[BlightysCats]

With regards to your description of our 2011 game plan "defensive zones pressing up on the opposition as they came forward then counter attacking quickly using as few numbers as possible going through the midfield to move it long so that if we were caught out with a turnover we still had a strong defensive structure in place" this is how every single side played in 2011 and how every side plays in 2015 .Its a basic as saying every sides game plan is to kick the ball between the 2 big steps

Not every team played like that in 2011, another daft comment by you, what you conveniently left out was that I said our game plan was sitting back setting up defensive zone/s pressing up on the opposition as they came forward then counter attacking quickly using as few numbers as possible going through the midfield to move it long so that if we were caught out with a turnover we still had a strong defensive structure in place" Collingwood was employing the forward press at the time and we weren't, especially against Collingwood, rather we were quite happy to sit
back wait for them to set up their forward press and then kick through it with movement and speed or kick long for touch and reset. We were the only
team that beat Collingwood that year because we sat back on them deliberately in a zone that was designed to force a turnover for us to then use with as
few possessions as possible to move quickly on the counter and exploit their lack of defenders as a result of their forward press. Look at the 2011 Grand Final most of our goals came from the counter where as most of Collingwood's came from repeat inside 50s they'd manufactured with their forward press. You arrogantly have the nerve to tell me I don't know anything about footy when you actually said Scott 'invented the game-plan of scoring from forcing turnovers,' one of the most ridiculous childlike misinformed statements I've read from anybody on here and which I proved wrong with two examples immediately. So to sum up and make it easy for you to understand, not every team played the same in 2011 most were trying to emulate Collingwood with an aggressive forward press where as we were more happy to sit back with our zone force a turnover and then have space to run into forward on the counter rather than scoring so much from repeat inside 50s being booted in to a more crowded forward line created from a hard forward press.

2.With point 2 I have to start with ,"Hawk or Walker resting on the bench while the other takes the big tall forward role for " no side can ever have 2 players sharing 1 spot on the interchange .This would mean that instead of having 3 spots on the interchange being shared between 21 , 2 spots would be shared between 19.

If Walker is playing ruck and Hawk is up forward (which would be the case most of the time) then that bench spot is being used by a myriad of players. I was simply saying I wouldn't play them both in the forward line at the same time, so if Walker was resting deep forward I'd have Hawk on the bench for a few mins then when Hawk came on Walker could rest on the bench, then when Walker went back in to the ruck the interchange spot would be open for most of the quarter again for whoever, thus solving that ridiculous dilemma that I had never advocated in the first place.

 

[Go Hoops]

CS is THE man. End of!!!

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Not every team played like that in 2011, another daft comment by you, what you conveniently left out was that I said our game plan was sitting back setting up defensive zone/s pressing up on the opposition as they came forward then counter attacking quickly using as few numbers as possible going through the midfield to move it long so that if we were caught out with a turnover we still had a strong defensive structure in place" Collingwood was employing the forward press at the time and we weren't, especially against Collingwood, rather we were quite happy to sit
back wait for them to set up their forward press and then kick through it with movement and speed or kick long for touch and reset. We were the only
team that beat Collingwood that year because we sat back on them deliberately in a zone that was designed to force a turnover for us to then use with as
few possessions as possible to move quickly on the counter and exploit their lack of defenders as a result of their forward press. Look at the 2011 Grand Final most of our goals came from the counter where as most of Collingwood's came from repeat inside 50s they'd manufactured with their forward press. You arrogantly have the nerve to tell me I don't know anything about footy when you actually said Scott 'invented the game-plan of scoring from forcing turnovers,' one of the most ridiculous childlike misinformed statements I've read from anybody on here and which I proved wrong with two examples immediately. So to sum up and make it easy for you to understand, not every team played the same in 2011 most were trying to emulate Collingwood with an aggressive forward press where as we were more happy to sit back with our zone force a turnover and then have space to run into forward on the counter rather than scoring so much from repeat inside 50s being booted in to a more crowded forward line created from a hard forward press.



If Walker is playing ruck and Hawk is up forward (which would be the case most of the time) then that bench spot is being used by a myriad of players. I was simply saying I wouldn't play them both in the forward line at the same time, so if Walker was resting deep forward I'd have Hawk on the bench for a few mins then when Hawk came on Walker could rest on the bench, then when Walker went back in to the ruck the interchange spot would be open for most of the quarter again for whoever, thus solving that ridiculous dilemma that I had never advocated in the first place.

Look I am not trying to upset you but its clear to everyone who reads your post that you are very confused about why Geelong is no longer a top 4 side . So perhaps confused is a better word.

So what exactly are your whinging about with regards to Scott not changing his tactics from 2011-2015? are you saying Geelong didn't have a press in 2011 and still doesn't have a press in 2015 ?

When did I say Chris Scott invented scoring from turnovers ? scoring from turnovers have been going on since the game started 100 years ago ,I said Scott was the architect of an increase in scores from turnovers and a decrease in scores from clearances during 2011 and 2015.This is the big difference between 2011 and 2015 , scores from clearances are down why scores from turnovers are up .To say Scott has not evolved since 2011 is stupid .

You certainly could try just playing mostly Hawkins as a key forward but its not likely to do much .For a start Hawkins will get double teamed and at the moment we cant afford to have him taken out of the game .We also don't have the midfield to provide the type of delivery that would be required with a small forward line.

Its also worth noting that Hawthorn usually play 3 tall forwards , Roughed, Gunston and one of Hale/Schoenmakers/Ceglar .

You need to understand that we don't have the players capable of pulling of Hawthorns game plan at the moment.

 

[Bobby_]

CS is THE man. End of!!!

until 2017 he is, after that?