Coaching Staff Senior Coach: John Worsfold - Thank you John

[LB#16]

Did he forward tag anyone tonight? Their defenders all seemed to be going so well I couldn't quite tell what Bags was doing.

A mate of mine came along on Saturday night and his words were "you guys really need a tagger" and then I had to explain to him that Woosha doesn't use them to which he was very baffled.

 

[Lore]

A mate of mine came along on Saturday night and his words were "you guys really need a tagger" and then I had to explain to him that Woosha doesn't use them to which he was very baffled.

We don’t have a dedicated negating player but we still have guys that run with certain players in certain parts of the ground. These players are still expected to play an attacking role but need to man up at contests sorta thing.

 

[lenny2013]

We really need to recruit some assistant coaches who have been involved in success in the last 5 or so years.

I would say the same in with our list management. We need to move away from the boys clubs we are currently running.

 

[yodellinhank]

We really need to recruit some assistant coaches who have been involved in success in the last 5 or so years.

I would say the same in with our list management. We need to move away from the boys clubs we are currently running.

We should run a mens club?

 

[Falcon27]

We really need to recruit some assistant coaches who have been involved in success in the last 5 or so years.

I would say the same in with our list management. We need to move away from the boys clubs we are currently running.

And if recruiting these type of assistants means a succession plan, we should having a good look at someone like Sam Mitchell at WCE.

 

[yaco55]

I thought he was thoroughly out-coached by Dimma. Not to worrying proportions, but we should have been better prepared for Richmond considering they set up the same last time we played.

But was he seriously outcoached - We played Richmond in the pre-season in which they dominated territory and inside 50's and in which EFC struggled to get the ball in our forward half and especially inside 50's - From memory we struggled to reach 30 inside 50's, while this time forward 50's and territory were nearly the same - This was a player issue of forwards pushing too high up the ground and terrible kicking, especially in the forward half - Do you realise EFC had 29 forward half intercepts which resulted in 3 shots for goal which is unprecedented in an AFL game, while Richmond had 33 forward half intercepts for 15 scores - This result is on the players.

 

[JayJ20]

But was he seriously outcoached - We played Richmond in the pre-season in which they dominated territory and inside 50's and in which EFC struggled to get the ball in our forward half and especially inside 50's - From memory we struggled to reach 30 inside 50's, while this time forward 50's and territory were nearly the same - This was a player issue of forwards pushing too high up the ground and terrible kicking, especially in the forward half - Do you realise EFC had 29 forward half intercepts which resulted in 3 shots for goal which is unprecedented in an AFL game, while Richmond had 33 forward half intercepts for 15 scores - This result is on the players.

I think he was out coached because although the defensive zone was pushed up the ground, Richmond still set up exactly the same way.

It was basically the same way they beat us last time except only closer to goal. Whilst we managed to push Richmond's defensive zone back to match them for "territory", we still didn't penetrate their defence. It means basically it was useless because the main thing we struggled with was breaking their defence open. It's why we only had 6.7 43 points.

Looking at stats and where the turnovers happened means nothing when we can't convert in the same fashion we couldn't previously. The fact that we had so much inside 50 for so little return definitely shows that we struggled with Richmond's defensive set up.

 

[yaco55]

I think he was out coached because although the defensive zone was pushed up the ground, Richmond still set up exactly the same way.

It was basically the same way they beat us last time except only closer to goal. Whilst we managed to push Richmond's defensive zone back to match them for "territory", we still didn't penetrate their defence. It means basically it was useless because the main thing we struggled with was breaking their defence open. It's why we only had 6.7 43 points.

Looking at stats and where the turnovers happened means nothing when we can't convert in the same fashion we couldn't previously. The fact that we had so much inside 50 for so little return definitely shows that we struggled with Richmond's defensive set up.

But in the pre-season game EFC couldn't get the ball into forward 50 - We were able to push their press into their defensive 50, hence 56 inside 50's and 29 forward intercepts - This game comes down to the players poor skills and decision making.

 

[JayJ20]

But in the pre-season game EFC couldn't get the ball into forward 50 - We were able to push their press into their defensive 50, hence 56 inside 50's and 29 forward intercepts - This game comes down to the players poor skills and decision making.

Poor skill and decision making partly because Richmond set up very well defensively. It wasn't just about poor skill. It was a structural problem.

Why the preseason game? Look into out game last year. We lost the inside 50s count 71-42, but won the clearances, tackles and contested possession.

So the territory shifted from our defence to the midfield. The rest of our stats are fairly identical, including our inability to generate scoring shots.

Last year, Richmond had 26 scoring shots to our 16. This year, 29 to our 13. The only thing that happened is that Richmond became a better side and the "territory" shifted to the middle instead of our defence. Rest of the game is the same. That's why I think Woosha was out-coached again just as he was last year. We could have learned a lot from our last game, which was disappointing.

 

[BrunoV]

Poor skill and decision making partly because Richmond set up very well defensively. It wasn't just about poor skill. It was a structural problem.

Why the preseason game? Look into out game last year. We lost the inside 50s count 71-42, but won the clearances, tackles and contested possession.

So the territory shifted from our defence to the midfield. The rest of our stats are fairly identical, including our inability to generate scoring shots.

Last year, Richmond had 26 scoring shots to our 16. This year, 29 to our 13. The only thing that happened is that Richmond became a better side and the "territory" shifted to the middle instead of our defence. Rest of the game is the same. That's why I think Woosha was out-coached again just as he was last year. We could have learned a lot from our last game, which was disappointing.

Wasn't the biggest problem on the night the inability to execute under pressure? That's what yaco is saying.

The numbers certainly indicated that we were playing the game in the right way, at least in the first half.

It's not just contested possession or clearances or territory but a combination of it all. The forward half turn over stat is consistent with everything else and certainly with my recollection of the first quarter when fumbles and poor kicks meant that we didn't even register a score when there were four or five opportunities you would assume would result in scores.

I wouldn't think that having extra numbers forward, to guard any loose men, would make a difference.

Not much a coach can do about the inability of players to deal with pressure. That comes with confidence and there is no better example of that than Richmond. There are some genuine s**t-trucks who have now become players.

There were some seriously worrying trends both in terms of the way we were playing the game and also at the selection table prior to the Geelong match. A lot of those trends have been reversed recently and injuries have resolved a lot of the questionable selection decisions that were previously being made. The skill level under pressure remains a problem.

We need a few more weeks to see how things settle. Bellchambers is largely responsible for the clearance numbers and I just can't see that trend continuing so we'll then need to see how the midfield holds up when Bellchambers is tested in the hit-outs. I also want to see what happens with team selection when everyone is fit, I'm not assuming that any lessons have been learned.

But as long as the positive trends continue, we're beyond blaming Worsfold for every loss.

 

[Mr Mojo Risin]

Wasn't the biggest problem on the night the inability to execute under pressure? That's what yaco is saying.

The numbers certainly indicated that we were playing the game in the right way, at least in the first half.

It's not just contested possession or clearances or territory but a combination of it all. The forward half turn over stat is consistent with everything else and certainly with my recollection of the first quarter when fumbles and poor kicks meant that we didn't even register a score when there were four or five opportunities you would assume would result in scores.

I wouldn't think that having extra numbers forward, to guard any loose men, would make a difference.

Not much a coach can do about the inability of players to deal with pressure. That comes with confidence and there is no better example of that than Richmond. There are some genuine s**t-trucks who have now become players.

There were some seriously worrying trends both in terms of the way we were playing the game and also at the selection table prior to the Geelong match. A lot of those trends have been reversed recently and injuries have resolved a lot of the questionable selection decisions that were previously being made. The skill level under pressure remains a problem.

We need a few more weeks to see how things settle. Bellchambers is largely responsible for the clearance numbers and I just can't see that trend continuing so we'll then need to see how the midfield holds up when Bellchambers is tested in the hit-outs. I also want to see what happens with team selection when everyone is fit, I'm not assuming that any lessons have been learned.

But as long as the positive trends continue, we're beyond blaming Worsfold for every loss.

In addition to this, if the forwards and midfielders are trained not to push too far up the ground defensively and do so, not sure that’s the coaches fault. Part of the reason disposal efficiency was so poor was there were no options to kick to because of pushing up too far. Have clear options and disposal starts to look better.

 

[BrunoV]

In addition to this, if the forwards and midfielders are trained not to push too far up the ground defensively and do so, not sure that’s the coaches fault. Part of the reason disposal efficiency was so poor was there were no options to kick to because of pushing up too far. Have clear options and disposal starts to look better.

It's definitely something that is beyond being fixable between quarters.

This problem is are really more of a reflection of other failure such as poor ball use or the way that an opponent stifles ball movement.

It's not as simple as asking forwards to hold position.

 

[JayJ20]

Wasn't the biggest problem on the night the inability to execute under pressure? That's what yaco is saying.

The numbers certainly indicated that we were playing the game in the right way, at least in the first half.

It's not just contested possession or clearances or territory but a combination of it all. The forward half turn over stat is consistent with everything else and certainly with my recollection of the first quarter when fumbles and poor kicks meant that we didn't even register a score when there were four or five opportunities you would assume would result in scores.

I wouldn't think that having extra numbers forward, to guard any loose men, would make a difference.

Not much a coach can do about the inability of players to deal with pressure. That comes with confidence and there is no better example of that than Richmond. There are some genuine s**t-trucks who have now become players.

There were some seriously worrying trends both in terms of the way we were playing the game and also at the selection table prior to the Geelong match. A lot of those trends have been reversed recently and injuries have resolved a lot of the questionable selection decisions that were previously being made. The skill level under pressure remains a problem.

We need a few more weeks to see how things settle. Bellchambers is largely responsible for the clearance numbers and I just can't see that trend continuing so we'll then need to see how the midfield holds up when Bellchambers is tested in the hit-outs. I also want to see what happens with team selection when everyone is fit, I'm not assuming that any lessons have been learned.

But as long as the positive trends continue, we're beyond blaming Worsfold for every loss.

I do think it is a coaching issue because our players played exactly the same way we did last year against Richmond. i see what we were trying to achieve, but it won't work against Richmond's defence. Direct kicking (which Richmond do really well) works well if our forwards set up and compete like we did against GWS. By the 2nd quarter, we should have know that it wasn't going to work. Only in the 4th quarter did we try to swing Hurley forward. Should have been done at half time.

So sure, our execution didn't work. I just believe that we should have been more prepared for Richmond's defence

Anyway, wasn't really angry with our performance because we did well in other parts of the game

 

[BrunoV]

I do think it is a coaching issue because our players played exactly the same way we did last year against Richmond. i see what we were trying to achieve, but it won't work against Richmond's defence. Direct kicking (which Richmond do really well) works well if our forwards set up and compete like we did against GWS. By the 2nd quarter, we should have know that it wasn't going to work. Only in the 4th quarter did we try to swing Hurley forward. Should have been done at half time.

So sure, our execution didn't work. I just believe that we should have been more prepared for Richmond's defence

Anyway, wasn't really angry with our performance because we did well in other parts of the game

We were in the game in the first half time but couldn't convert. Why change the set-up that's working when it's execution that is the problem?

We played a much better game than we did last year when Richmond did not convert its domination on the scoreboard. Richmond is also a much better side.

 

[yaco55]

Poor skill and decision making partly because Richmond set up very well defensively. It wasn't just about poor skill. It was a structural problem.

Why the preseason game? Look into out game last year. We lost the inside 50s count 71-42, but won the clearances, tackles and contested possession.

So the territory shifted from our defence to the midfield. The rest of our stats are fairly identical, including our inability to generate scoring shots.

Last year, Richmond had 26 scoring shots to our 16. This year, 29 to our 13. The only thing that happened is that Richmond became a better side and the "territory" shifted to the middle instead of our defence. Rest of the game is the same. That's why I think Woosha was out-coached again just as he was last year. We could have learned a lot from our last game, which was disappointing.

You can't have it both ways - I accept your premise in comparing last years game against Richmond as a better comparison than the pre-season game - Then when we improve from -29 inside 50's to -3 inside 50's indicates that there was a significant improvement in winning the territory battle, which is probably due to more effective coaching and a bit to do with the players, BUT the players failed to execute their skills, particularly in the forward half.

 

[BrunoV]

Wasn't the biggest problem on the night the inability to execute under pressure? That's what yaco is saying.

The numbers certainly indicated that we were playing the game in the right way, at least in the first half.

It's not just contested possession or clearances or territory but a combination of it all. The forward half turn over stat is consistent with everything else and certainly with my recollection of the first quarter when fumbles and poor kicks meant that we didn't even register a score when there were four or five opportunities you would assume would result in scores.

I wouldn't think that having extra numbers forward, to guard any loose men, would make a difference.

Not much a coach can do about the inability of players to deal with pressure. That comes with confidence and there is no better example of that than Richmond. There are some genuine s**t-trucks who have now become players.

There were some seriously worrying trends both in terms of the way we were playing the game and also at the selection table prior to the Geelong match. A lot of those trends have been reversed recently and injuries have resolved a lot of the questionable selection decisions that were previously being made. The skill level under pressure remains a problem.

We need a few more weeks to see how things settle. Bellchambers is largely responsible for the clearance numbers and I just can't see that trend continuing so we'll then need to see how the midfield holds up when Bellchambers is tested in the hit-outs. I also want to see what happens with team selection when everyone is fit, I'm not assuming that any lessons have been learned.

But as long as the positive trends continue, we're beyond blaming Worsfold for every loss.

Well, it looks like we're back at square 1.

Flame away!

 

[eDPS]

Well, it looks like we're back at square 1.

Flame away!

Would not be shocked to see Langford dropped the next week. I count 7 players playing that won’t be in our next premiership this week.

 

[Doss]

Maybe let the game on Sunday actually play out before you go predicting outs for next week, eh.

 

[eDPS]

Maybe let the game on Sunday actually play out before you go predicting outs for next week, eh.

 

[BrunoV]

Would not be shocked to see Langford dropped the next week. I count 7 players playing that won’t be in our next premiership this week.

Not in a premiership side? I think the bigger issue is that we're trying to work out whether guys aged between 25 and 31, some of whom have played 100 games, are genuinely AFL standard.

 

[ant555]

Would not be shocked to see Langford dropped the next week. I count 7 players playing that won’t be in our next premiership this week.

Only 7 that will not be in our next premiership side ? I suspect more than half our list will not be in the next premiership side.

 

[Doss]

Not in a premiership side? I think the bigger issue is that we're trying to work out whether guys aged between 25 and 31, some of whom have played 100 games, are genuinely AFL standard.

I don't. We know that players like Myers and Baguley are only ever going to be 'keep your head just above water' types, and I think the club would know that.

What I don't think the club has figured out, is whether it wants to approach the remainder of this year with a keep head just above water mentality, or go the full development route.

 

[ant555]

I don't. We know that players like Myers and Baguley are only ever going to be 'keep your head just above water' types, and I think the club would know that.

What I don't think the club has figured out whether it wants to approach the remainder of this year with a keep head just above water mentality, or go the full development route.

Despite personally thinking we are no hope I would really hope they have not given in yet. Tanking = Carlton results.

 

[eDPS]

Despite personally thinking we are no hope I would really hope they have not given in yet. Tanking = Carlton results.

I wouldn’t say giving the kids a go is tanking, most of our young players have earnt their call ups with good VFL form. Now I wouldn’t say guys like Mynott and Houlahan should play because it’s evident that they aren’t ready to play AFL football but players that have we know can play good reserves football like Francis and Laverde should be playing because it’s not like their selection is costing us games, hell look at the Cats game it showed we can still win playing the kids.

 

[Barry Roundhouse]

Despite personally thinking we are no hope I would really hope they have not given in yet. Tanking = Carlton results.

if Francis, Clarke or Laverde playing over Myers or Brown types could be considered giving in or tanking, we seriously are in strife.