Bickley does things Craig could never do

[Allefgib]

What else would drive it?

Come on Jen you're usually the best at random 'possibilities' to support a positive view on things.. .why the change?

Something I believe could drive it is the players being removed from a situation where they felt they were doing everything asked of them, despite the fact that they didn't really get it or have 100% confidence in it, and realised that here was a new opportunity to have a clean slate and actually feel like they had full influence on the future trajectory of their, and the clubs, onfield performance.

What did someone like Petrenko have to feel guilty about? He has always always busted his ass. If anything Craigy owed him a bit more of a show of faith, or a change in approach to bring out the best in him. Vader too.

if you don't like my reason consider the following:
- relief
- needing to fight to preserve their position in the team and its pecking order
- maybe the effort hasn't changed but how it has been harnessed is.... (the simple 3 to 4 key points from bicks vs the complexities of craigy's expectations. Don't tackle them, corrale them. Unless you need to tackle them. And if you do make sure they stay down. But don't give away a free. Certainly never give away a 50m. (or the bicks approach, go out there and put pressure on the ball carrier, chase and tackle him down. If you give away a free - so be it) You tell me which one is easier to put intensity into?

I genuinely believe, in the main, the players did love Craigy and did want to do what he asked. Craigy was just incapable of getting their best out of them anymore. Too complicated, too stale, too out of touch with the modern game.. who knows... it was too 'something'. And worse, on top of being too 'something' he couldn't admit it and change his approach.

What were Craigy's last words when he left?

'Care for them.'

Not

'I hope someone else can get them to pull their finger out.'

You say the players loved him.. sure, I believe that in the main.
I also believe Craigy was genuinely satisfied with most of the efforts he got from the group. It just wasn't working with the way he wanted the team to play and he wasn't able to capture their imagination to have sufficient confidence and inspiration in how he was asking them to play and with the value system he put on the group.

 

[Allefgib]

Lets just agree to replace "feeling guilty" with "feeling responsible"

ah yes but responsible for and feeling in control of their performance and contribution... not necessarily feeling responsible for the coach walking.

Do you truly believe Craigy was that awful a coach they put in sub-par performances? I don't. They clearly loved him and probably felt they were giving their all for him.

 

[Allefgib]

Another possible point of difference - use of dougie.

Like Reilly, Dougie was a staple of the centre square setups under Craigy.

Bicks had him in the guts after the first 2 goals on Saturday.
GC then went on to kick two in a row.

Dougie NOT sighted again in the centre square for the rest of the first half at least. (possibly at the start of the 2nd quarter - game analyser makes it hard to get to the quareter starts).
Dougie only in 2 (possibly 3) of the 17 centre bounces in the first half.
(will try to get to the 2nd half tomorrow).

Would Craigy have done this? I highly doubt it. He kept him in there most the year from memory but happy for someone to prove me wrong. Love to especially see the Melb game and Pies last quarter.

 

[spexau]

A clear difference between the way Bicks is managing the team compared to Craigy is that Craigy always believed that his structures and game plans could win regardless of the cattle. Bicks on the other hand believes that you need your best players in their best positions and has made these subtle changes. The biggest difference is the treatment of the midfield. Bicks is keeping his best ball winners on the ball for the longest time possible and keeping the better deliverers on the flanks and wings.

 

[jenny61_99]

Allefgib you are absolutely right in that it is clear now craigs message wasn't getting through. Whether these tweaks bickley is making are sustainable against quality opponents is yet to be proved as well as removing the feelings of responsibility/guilt from the equation. It will be interesting to see what the new coach brings to the table and how the players react. Exciting times ahead!

 

[Wood_Duck]

A clear difference between the way Bicks is managing the team compared to Craigy is that Craigy always believed that his structures and game plans could win regardless of the cattle. Bicks on the other hand believes that you need your best players in their best positions and has made these subtle changes. The biggest difference is the treatment of the midfield. Bicks is keeping his best ball winners on the ball for the longest time possible and keeping the better deliverers on the flanks and wings.

This is spot on.

Craig always believed that it was about the process not the people.

 

[Slippery Pete]

I'll stand by my belief that Neil had very little understanding of player psychology. Well worn lines like "we welcome expectation and criticism," "we'll keep being demanding," "there'll be no backing off.." I could on, and on.....

He did not understand that pragmatism does not always equal performance. He did not appear to understand that much of our great game is played in a player's mind. Or, perhaps he didn't acknowledge it because it wasn't a strength of his. He was largely incapable of getting into the players' minds, because of his pragmatic take on all things life and sport. He was a scientist. Scientists don't pay much attention to things they can't measure.

He was proud of labels like the "Crowbots." He prided himself on that, he wore that as a badge of honour. He was proud that we had the lowest tribunal rate, that we were predictable, that we were ultra-disciplined, that we never did anything by stealth. His aim was to create such a perfect football team and game plan, that no amount of variable factors would throw it off course. He wanted to be predictable. That's important for us to understand. He didn't want to win games with one-off measures, or by stealth, such was his perfectionsim. He believed that this was succumbing, that it would get away from the bigger picture of what he wanted to create. He wanted to create a Germanic, superior, all-conquering, well oiled, predictable machine that could not be beaten.

What he did in the meantime was overlook so many factors that contribute to toward winning a game of football.

He did this for so long, that the players even forgot them.

Footballers are very malleable, and on the whole, simple men. It doesn't take long for them to soak up the wrong info, but conversely, it doesn't take long for them get back on track either. We've seen healing already.

I hope we see more.

 

[Allefgib]

A clear difference between the way Bicks is managing the team compared to Craigy is that Craigy always believed that his structures and game plans could win regardless of the cattle. Bicks on the other hand believes that you need your best players in their best positions and has made these subtle changes. The biggest difference is the treatment of the midfield. Bicks is keeping his best ball winners on the ball for the longest time possible and keeping the better deliverers on the flanks and wings.

Yup.

In reviewing the centre bounce setup for the first half on Saturday: Thommo, Danger, VB were there nearly all the time.
Small cameo from Dougie but then banished.
Vince/Rory also had 4 or 5 turns each (presumably when the 'A-team' were on the bench).

 

[jenny61_99]

Was Dougie banished? Or because it was his first game back from injury, did they decided to limit his exposure in the middle?

 

[spexau]

He's not that effective in the middle IMO. Often when he gets the ball he gets tackled and isn't able to dish the ball off he sort of just hunches over and accepts fate because he lacks the ability to stand up in tackles.

 

[Allefgib]

Was Dougie banished? Or because it was his first game back from injury, did they decided to limit his exposure in the middle?

I thought he actually had quite a good game back from injury.
Given the use of Reilly since Bicks has taken over I'm comfortable to assume Bicks would rather not play Dougie through the middle.

I'll review the 2nd half quickly tonight to see if it was more coincedence.

My gut feel is Bicks wanted a look at him in there - didn't like it, so changed it. (yes I'm still in shock.. )

 

[Allefgib]

He's not that effective in the middle IMO. Often when he gets the ball he gets tackled and isn't able to dish the ball off he sort of just hunches over and accepts fate because he lacks the ability to stand up in tackles.

I think his 'size' probably plays a part in that (and in decisions, if made, to not play him through there).

He just can't block and create space in congestion like a Thompson, Danger, VB. Also not as polished as a Vince with his use. Like Reilly probably thrives more as a receiver in space with time to dispose.

 

[pext]

Yup.

In reviewing the centre bounce setup for the first half on Saturday: Thommo, Danger, VB were there nearly all the time.
Small cameo from Dougie but then banished.
Vince/Rory also had 4 or 5 turns each (presumably when the 'A-team' were on the bench).

Is this really what we want at this point of our season? Do we really want to have our best two extractors Thommo and Danger in the guts with our captain all day or do we want to pump time into some kids in order to find out who can handle the centre clearances? Using the obvious choices of Thommo and Danger all day smacks of trading off long term development for a cheap win or two.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Rollerball]

Is this really what we want at this point of our season? Do we really want to have our best two extractors Thommo and Danger in the guts with our captain all day or do we want to pump time into some kids in order to find out who can handle the centre clearances? Using the obvious choices of Thommo and Danger all day smacks of trading off long term development for a cheap win or two.

Just my 2 cents.

Fair point but I think at this stage we just needed some wins for the sake of morale of both players and supporters, and to show players like Walker who were possibly contemplating their future that there is light at the end of the tunnel.

 

[spexau]

I supposed when we have players with natural inside ability we can start developing them in the middle like we're doing with Sloane at the moment but what more can you do?

 

[Allefgib]

Danger is one of our kids mate.

Sloaney also in there alot.

 

[Allefgib]

Guys like armstrong/riley are getting games. Helluva difference to when Craigy was coach.

Baby steps surely

 

[SydCrow]

I'd like to see Riley on the ball at some stage.

Although he and Danger would probably knock each other out.

 

[A FEW GOOD MEN]

Just returned from my trip up North to see "Bicks Exciting New Crows"

My apologies for the delay in posting, I wandered down to Nimbin after the game to chill out and contemplate our new game plan.

I was shocked by some of the comments on game day since I found the performance thrilling. (e.g. well thank **** Bickley is now out of the equation. this is worse than anything Craigy handed out. remember guys - this was meant to be our "best" team of the year.)

It started with the brilliant positional changes. As I had foreshadowed last Thursday, Bicks moved Andy Otten into the midfield, Pets was a revelation as a small forward and Tippett playing at centre half forward and as a back up ruckmen was a revelation. Our fab four in the centre square (Thommo, Patty, Sloane and vB) were clearance kings and it was great to see Gunna as part of the front four in the forward line.

But the really spine tingling difference was the game plan. Wasn't it great to see use the waves of handballs moving the ball out of defence and the determination to move the ball through the corridor (when we weren't moving it around the boundary line). The big difference however as outlined last week was the clearances. As we did against Geelong, we left one of our players free in the centre square and smashed them in the clearances in the first quarter. Despite their promise to "go the shoot-out" the golden ones manned up in the second quarter and played more men in defence than George W.

Can't wait to see the exciting new changes this week.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

C'mon people, join in.

Bring back Neil!
Bring back Neil!

I can feel the groundswell. I think people are starting to come around to your way of thinking, that nothing has changed. And not just nutjobs either, some genuine football experts are all starting to notice how similar things are and how the club should have persisted with a system that was clearly just about to click into gear.

It's not too late. No club has signed Neil up yet and he's still 'on staff' technically so c'mon AFC, get with the program and bring back our real messiah.

 

[FR0GGY]

It's not too late. No club has signed Neil up yet and he's still 'on staff' technically so c'mon AFC, get with the program and bring back our real messiah.

Im in, Neil puts the Mess in Messiah

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

C'mon people, join in.

Bring back Neil!
Bring back Neil!

I can feel the groundswell. I think people are starting to come around to your way of thinking, that nothing has changed. And not just nutjobs either, some genuine football experts are all starting to notice how similar things are and how the club should have persisted with a system that was clearly just about to click into gear.

It's not too late. No club has signed Neil up yet and he's still 'on staff' technically so c'mon AFC, get with the program and bring back our real messiah.

I'm on board, lets back Craig.

Bring back Neil, bring back Neil, bring back Neil......everyone.


In Neil we trust.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

Im in, Neil puts the Mess in Messiah

Just spat my coffee over the screen.

 

[Geoffa32]

Petrenko in a forward role.

He was at Tips feet for a lot of the forward entries against GC.

 

[A FEW GOOD MEN]

REALLY FINISH A SEASON IN STYLE!!!!!!


I'm not sure what was most exciting,

1) the exciting team selections

2) the innovative game changing moves or

3) that exciting new game plan

Things that flashed through my head last night

- Moving Stiffy to the forward line was the matchwinning move.

- when the game was to be won Bicks took the calculated risk.

- Bicks allows players to be creative.

- What Bicks has given us though, is a glimpse of what a paradigm shift in direction can achieve just on match day

- It was nice to instead have the approach of thinking how can we capitalise on what we're doing well and what changes can we make to improve what we're doing poorly and recognise that in order to win, that certain moves needed to be made.

- Tex, could be pure coincidence but the shackles just look like they have been released

- What has felt different in watching the boys under bicks is that the moves he has made build confidence in winning the game.. not confidence that we should be competitive.

- Then we come to game plan and positional changes; The most obvious thing to watch is the play on at all costs approach. It was high risk, high reward exciting stuff. yeah we stuffed it up a bit, and for moments on the weekend reverted back to the bang it long and hope approach, but when we got it right it was an exciting brand of footy to watch.



- The instruction from Bickley to play more unsociably

Disclaimer: There may be some plagiarism in the above comments