Bickley does things Craig could never do

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Carl, my statement had nothing to do with the merits of immediate consumption versus delayed gratification.

Whoever coached us this year had one job to do. Namely to get games into the wide range of potential champions identified on BigFooty after our domination of the Freo B grade in the pre-season.

That's the second time you've played the Facetious Quip Deflection card.

One approach would have been to banish Doughty and give Stevens, Johncock, Scott Thompson, Rutten, Reilly, Porplyzia, Symes, Vince and Maric (i.e. everyone over 24 years old) the year off. I call this the Power approach. As it happens injury meant that we have had an average of only 6 of these "oldies" in the team throughout this year. Do you think getting flogged every week accelerates the development of younger players? Yet every game given to Stevens, Reilly and Symes apparently did untold damage to our future.

A balanced approach is to give the 18-22 years oldplayers with greater potential as many games as possible (Smith, Talia, Gunston, McKernan, Davis, Walker, Otten, Sloane, Dangerfield, Jacobs and Mackay)

Secondly provide opportunities for the next level down to sink or swim (Craig, Shaw, Luke Thompson, Young, Petrenko, Wright, Cook, Armstrong, Jaensch, Sellar, Schmidt, Martin and Henderson)

If we had very few injuries, not played as many youngsters, won 11 games and lost the first final I believe we would be in a worse situation than we are now.

I like this and largely agree with you. Before the season I said that the timelines for the club and for our coach were out of step - we were heading for a crash. The club need rebuilding, games invested and to set the foundation for 2013. Craig needed wins now to save his skin. It was an untenable situation. Craig either needed to get the arse at the end of 2010 or have been given the responsibility for what is a 3 year project.

The club did neither, sat on its hands and we have basically wasted a year and shamed one of our favourite sons in the process. Save for a bit of experienced gained.

That said, "getting games into our youngsters" is a fairly low pass mark you've set. Anyone can pick kids, especially when there are injuries.

Yes, they're playing but... Are they developing? How are they tracking compared to similar-aged players at opposition clubs? Are they being coached well? Are they being played in the right positions/roles for their development? Are long and short term aims being balanced? Are we developing players for all positions/roles on the ground? Are they being taught a game plan that will be effective in modern football? Etc. Craig could have "got games into the youngsters" and still failed in his role.

Did they finish the year as better footballers than they started?
Armstrong - no
Cook - no
Craig - no, injury
Dangerfield - no
Davis - no, injury
Gunston - YES
Henderson - no, in fact went backwards
Jaensch - YES
Martin, no, in fact went backwards
McKernan - YES
Otten - YES*, would regard his comeback season as a success
Petrenko - YES
Riley - YES
Sellar - no
Shaw - no, injury
Sloane - YES
Talia - YES
L Thompson - YES
Walker - no
Wright - YES
Young - no, injury

That's 10 yes, 7 no and 4 out injured. Enough? Not all kids are going to make it so a certain level of failure is inevitable.

Of the 10 who I regard as having improved, have they improved enough for us to say that they will become Top 10 or Top 5 players at the club? Or are they destined to fill up the back end spots in the 22?

I'd regard this as a poor year in terms of development, especially given that with retirements/injuries so many spots have been available. And that reflects poorly on all the coaches at the club, not just Neil.

I also believe that it became commercially untenable for Craig to continue which doesn't mean it was the best course of action. People power has spoken, just like it has at Richmond on numerous occasions over the last 25 years. I hope it works out better for us.

Here it is again. Falling crowds, disgruntled fans, media speculation, damage to our brand... that was what forced Craig out? On football merits alone he should have stayed?

 

[Slippery Pete]

Thoughts on yesterday's game, A Few Good Men?

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Thoughts on yesterday's game, A Few Good Men?

We're playing better but it's certainly not because of the new coach. And it's not because of any changes that have been made. In fact he hasn't made any changes. It's the same team in the same positions. With the same mindset and approach. We'd be doing just as well if Neil had stayed.

 

[cmndstab]

We're playing better but it's certainly not because of the new coach. And it's not because of any changes that have been made. In fact he hasn't made any changes. It's the same team in the same positions. With the same mindset and approach. We'd be doing just as well if Neil had stayed.

I find it hard to imagine Bickley has changed too much in terms of game tactics, skills training, etc. Not in three weeks.

However, a couple of game moves, and more importantly, a fresh mindset has done the Crows wonders. A change is as good as a holiday, they say.

 

[jenny61_99]

I find it hard to imagine Bickley has changed too much in terms of game tactics, skills training, etc. Not in three weeks.

However, a couple of game moves, and more importantly, a fresh mindset has done the Crows wonders. A change is as good as a holiday, they say.

Exactly right Stabbie. To be all aflush with joy about the new Bickley era is a tad premature. Bicks hasn't changed that much - much of the play we've been seeing in the last three weeks is what we saw towards the end of last year and in several games earlier this year. Walker would have been back in at the same time as Bicks bought him in under Craig. The fresh mindset - or what I like to call the size 12 boot up the clacker - is what has woken our boys up. Clearly Craig had come to the end of his tenure, but let's not read things into the story that aren't there. These boys know they are playing for their futures. No guaranteed anything from three weeks ago - and aren't they playing just like that? A change IS as good as a holiday. I remember when Craig was persisting with Maric and there were howls of disapproval from the BF gallery only now to hear many of them say it's an inspired move by Bickley. Maric, like the rest of them, knows he's playing for his future.

 

[A FEW GOOD MEN]

Thoughts on yesterday's game, A Few Good Men?

Well we have gone backwards since our home game against Geelong last year (and I can still remember your generous praise about that game and our narrow loss to Collingwood on election night) however I have to admit it was like watching a new team.

Johncock and Otten running the ball out of our backline, Doughty locking down their gun forwards, the inspired new centre square extractors; Thompson, van Berlo, Sloane and Dangerfield. And hats off to Bicks for moving Petrenko into the role of small forward, encouraging the gut running of Henderson and providing the space for those long piercing leads from Taylor Walker. I liked the way we didn't mess around with our entries into the forward 50 kicking it long and high to a contest. I was most impressed with the courage of bringing back Tony (pr0n star) Armstrong, why didn't Craigy pick him as soon as his 4 game suspension was completed, let alone leaving Ivan languishing in the SANFL. I admire Bicks courage in demanding more from Martin and Tambling before giving them another shot.

Now to the game plan, the new Collingwood-like approach of attacking down the sidelines worked a treat, oh wait that was last week, the new approach of attacking down the corridor worked a treat and I loved the way we ran the ball down the ground with waves of handballs.

The key difference however was that we won the clearances. Being a student of the game Pete can you explain to us what we did differently?

 

[srv23]

A Few Good Men -

Your thought on our "6ft2 crumbing forward who doesn't take contested marks and is not someone you can build a forward line around" given that he is

1)Now our leading goal kicker despite playing 5 less games than Tippett

2) Now third on our list of contested marks per game with 1.4 behind Tippett (2.2) and McKernan (1.6) and ahead of our lead ruckman Jacobs (1.0) and every other key position player and ruckman who has played for us this year including Maric and Rutten.

3) In games where Walker has played and Tippett hasn't - Walker has averaged 3.75 goals per game, in games where Tippett has played and Walker hasn't - he has averaged 1.4 goals per game.

Interestingly the lazy Taylor Walker is also averaging 1.3 1%ers a game as compared with the hard working Kurt Tippett who is averaging a whole 0.3 1%ers a game more with 1.6 per game.

 

[A FEW GOOD MEN]

A Few Good Men -

Your thought on our "6ft2 crumbing forward who doesn't take contested marks and is not someone you can build a forward line around" given that he is

1)Now our leading goal kicker despite playing 5 less games than Tippett

2) Now third on our list of contested marks per game with 1.4 behind Tippett (2.2) and McKernan (1.6) and ahead of our lead ruckman Jacobs (1.0) and every other key position player and ruckman who has played for us this year including Maric and Rutten.

3) In games where Walker has played and Tippett hasn't - Walker has averaged 3.75 goals per game, in games where Tippett has played and Walker hasn't - he has averaged 1.4 goals per game.

Interestingly the lazy Taylor Walker is also averaging 1.3 1%ers a game as compared with the hard working Kurt Tippett who is averaging a whole 0.3 1%ers a game more with 1.6 per game.

Bad luck about missing the game yesterday, it was very entertaining.

Would you like the statistics on Taylor's contested marking in the last three weeks? The number of one on one situations and the wins, losses and draws against those three beasts (Salter, Staker and Lonergan). I love the one handed efforts. Did you comment on the head dropping against Brisbane?

So yesterday there was the one hander, a Joe the goose over the back (I've never questioned Taylor's ability to lead away from the ball carrier) and a third goal from am uncontested mark.

You've clearly made your point SRV, it's the stuff you can build a forward line around.

I will be heading north this week-end and I will be happy to provide further in depth analysis of those piercing leads and pack marks.

P.S. Taylor could become a very handy third tall in a good team, Tippett would get a game in all 17 other teams.

 

[SydCrow]

A Few Good Men -

Your thought on our "6ft2 crumbing forward who doesn't take contested marks and is not someone you can build a forward line around" given that he is

1)Now our leading goal kicker despite playing 5 less games than Tippett

2) Now third on our list of contested marks per game with 1.4 behind Tippett (2.2) and McKernan (1.6) and ahead of our lead ruckman Jacobs (1.0) and every other key position player and ruckman who has played for us this year including Maric and Rutten.

3) In games where Walker has played and Tippett hasn't - Walker has averaged 3.75 goals per game, in games where Tippett has played and Walker hasn't - he has averaged 1.4 goals per game.

Interestingly the lazy Taylor Walker is also averaging 1.3 1%ers a game as compared with the hard working Kurt Tippett who is averaging a whole 0.3 1%ers a game more with 1.6 per game.

yes, it was an outstanding 8 disposal game from Tex

 

[Slippery Pete]

Well we have gone backwards since our home game against Geelong last year

Did you forget that McLeod and Goodwin played in last year's game? I think you did.

The key difference however was that we won the clearances. Being a student of the game Pete can you explain to us what we did differently?

Last night's game was a shootout, 6 v 6 forward and back, and head to head in the midfield. Reilly usually came up to stoppages to sit on a Geelong player, which freed up an Adelaide player - usually Vince. There was spread from stoppages and there was a clear decision to run the ball at the opposition with aggression and take on the press instead of switching, switching, switching....

Just on that - feel free at any time to comment on the use of Reilly, who is for the first time ever, being played in his correct position.

Figment of our imagination?

 

[Slippery Pete]

yes, it was an outstanding 8 disposal game from Tex

That's an incredibly poor post.

He's kicked 11 goals in the last three weeks. Averaged out, that's an 80 goal season. Not happy with that??

The fact that he can jag 3-4 goals from limited opportunities, or when playing below his best, is a point firmly in his favour as a footballer, and I'm not surprised one bit that fact is lost on you and A Few Good Men.

 

[jenny61_99]

I can't believe anyone is bickering over the value of having Tex in the side. He's a very important cog and has done well in his 3 return games. I'd still like to see him work a little harder, but you can't argue against 3+ goals a game!

 

[A FEW GOOD MEN]

Did you forget that McLeod and Goodwin played in last year's game? I think you did.




Last night's game was a shootout, 6 v 6 forward and back, and head to head in the midfield. Reilly usually came up to stoppages to sit on a Geelong player, which freed up an Adelaide player - usually Vince. There was spread from stoppages and there was a clear decision to run the ball at the opposition with aggression and take on the press instead of switching, switching, switching....

Just on that - feel free at any time to comment on the use of Reilly, who is for the first time ever, being played in his correct position.

Figment of our imagination?

Don't quite agree.

Firstly despite the wonderful analysis of the Fox commentators both teams were not playing man-on-man. Both sides were rolling one and sometimes two midfielders back into defence. Where was Bartel playing? Where was Tony Armstrong playing? If our back six were Johncock, McKernan, Otten, Doughty, Talia and Reilly then why did Armstrong and Vince get so many of their possessions in the D50?

The one blindingly obvious change was that we did not man up in the centre square. Now when we did this 2 months ago it was described as the most appalling failure by a coach in the history of the AFL. In more than 50% of the centre square bounces we left one of their players on his own. It did seem to work so I will be interested to check this out next week since the Gold Coast have been clearance champions this year (although they are pulling up faster than my annual pick in the Melbourne Cup).

I do find it amusing that things that were savagely criticised three weeks ago are now inspired moves. I can't recall a whole lot of people pleading to put van Berlo back into the midfield, where he played most of the first 14 games or bringing Ivan back into the team or Tony Armstrong (am I imagining it that 6 weeks ago an astute Rooster supporter wanted him banned from Prospect for life?)

If insanity is continuing to do the same thing thing and expecting a different result then could delusional be viewing the same thing in a completely different way? What is your thoughts on using chains of handballs to take the ball away from a clearance? Can I refer everyone to the comments afterr the Carlton game?

Regarding Reilly, he has played off half back previously. I suspect it was a last chance saloon moving Brent (three weeks ago it would have been swapping the deckchairs on the Titanic). He was going through a rough patch and the loss of Jaensch created a need for someone to play the Jaensch role. Doughty was moved back into the backlines and van Berlo back into the midfield. Pretty earth shattering stuff.

Happy to send you a copy of the tape to verify my claims.

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

I'm not sure if Bickley is the right man or not, but I'm loving the new found aggression. Have been dying to see this style of football for nearly a decade.
Too be honest, besides a few exceptions (There's only one Brent Reilly), the we way tackle is Bickley like.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Don't quite agree.

Firstly despite the wonderful analysis of the Fox commentators both teams were not playing man-on-man. Both sides were rolling one and sometimes two midfielders back into defence. Where was Bartel playing? Where was Tony Armstrong playing? If our back six were Johncock, McKernan, Otten, Doughty, Talia and Reilly then why did Armstrong and Vince get so many of their possessions in the D50?

The one blindingly obvious change was that we did not man up in the centre square. Now when we did this 2 months ago it was described as the most appalling failure by a coach in the history of the AFL. In more than 50% of the centre square bounces we left one of their players on his own. It did seem to work so I will be interested to check this out next week since the Gold Coast have been clearance champions this year (although they are pulling up faster than my annual pick in the Melbourne Cup).

I do find it amusing that things that were savagely criticised three weeks ago are now inspired moves. I can't recall a whole lot of people pleading to put van Berlo back into the midfield, where he played most of the first 14 games or bringing Ivan back into the team or Tony Armstrong (am I imagining it that 6 weeks ago an astute Rooster supporter wanted him banned from Prospect for life?)

If insanity is continuing to do the same thing thing and expecting a different result then could delusional be viewing the same thing in a completely different way? What is your thoughts on using chains of handballs to take the ball away from a clearance? Can I refer everyone to the comments afterr the Carlton game?

Regarding Reilly, he has played off half back previously. I suspect it was a last chance saloon moving Brent (three weeks ago it would have been swapping the deckchairs on the Titanic). He was going through a rough patch and the loss of Jaensch created a need for someone to play the Jaensch role. Doughty was moved back into the backlines and van Berlo back into the midfield. Pretty earth shattering stuff.

Happy to send you a copy of the tape to verify my claims.

Bring back Neil!
Bring back Neil!

I'll get onto the placards now and will meet you outside the Westpac Centre tomorrow.

 

[SydCrow]

That's an incredibly poor post.

He's kicked 11 goals in the last three weeks. Averaged out, that's an 80 goal season. Not happy with that??

The fact that he can jag 3-4 goals from limited opportunities, or when playing below his best, is a point firmly in his favour as a footballer, and I'm not surprised one bit that fact is lost on you and A Few Good Men.

I love Tex and would love to see him become a power forward and kick 80 goals a year. but implying that Bicks has somehow revitalised his career is insulting our intelligence

 

[A FEW GOOD MEN]

Bring back Neil!
Bring back Neil!

I'll get onto the placards now and will meet you outside the Westpac Centre tomorrow.

So when I provide facts (i.e. things you can measure) about team selections, game plan etc this is the best you can offer?

My contention, based on things you can measure (I note that On the Couch mentioned we are now playing down the boundary line more which is interesting since we are apparently also playing down the corridor more) is that there have been a few subtle changes to our game plan, namely not going one-on-one in the centre square and taking more risks with the kickins on Sunday but the differences are no greater than the variation in game plan in the Sydney and Essendon games. We like all other teams vary the game plan to match the opposition. The key difference is some supporters have changed from looking at everything as a reason to sack Craigy to see the same thuings as new and exciting. The Brent Reilly turnover in the centre square in the last quarter would have been more proof that Neil has to go. Now it's refreshing risk taking.

Whatever.......

 

[Wood_Duck]

So when I provide facts (i.e. things you can measure) about team selections, game plan etc this is the best you can offer?

My contention, based on things you can measure (I note that On the Couch mentioned we are now playing down the boundary line more which is interesting since we are apparently also playing down the corridor more) is that there have been a few subtle changes to our game plan, namely not going one-on-one in the centre square and taking more risks with the kickins on Sunday but the differences are no greater than the variation in game plan in the Sydney and Essendon games. We like all other teams vary the game plan to match the opposition. The key difference is some supporters have changed from looking at everything as a reason to sack Craigy to see the same thuings as new and exciting. The Brent Reilly turnover in the centre square in the last quarter would have been more proof that Neil has to go. Now it's refreshing risk taking.

Whatever.......

So your position is that nothing has changed and yet we nearly beat the form side of the competition. Are you really trying to say that under Craig we would have played excatly the same against Geelong and beaten Port and Brisbane?

 

[A FEW GOOD MEN]

So your position is that nothing has changed and yet we nearly beat the form side of the competition. Are you really trying to say that under Craig we would have played excatly the same against Geelong and beaten Port and Brisbane?

Do you mean beaten the three bottom teams and lose to Geelong and West Coast.

Is that an outrageous assumption since we have beaten Sydney who are in the 8 and were all over Essendon until we lost Johncock and Jaench in recent times.

We played much better on Sunday but was it better than our come from behind win against Sydney?

 

[Slippery Pete]

What is your thoughts on using chains of handballs to take the ball away from a clearance? Can I refer everyone to the comments afterr the Carlton game?.

My thoughts on that haven't changed, and if you read that thread from earlier in the year, my concerns were about what we were doing from defensive stoppages. Teams were breaking world records for the number of tackles inside their forward 50 against us. On Sunday night, we still had issues with too many handballs (nearly a 1:1 kick-handball ratio). We still had issues with one too many handballs out of a stoppage, and we still had issues with coming out of defence where a player wanted to handball - sometimes back into the corridor - when a clearing kick away from the danger zone was all that was required (Chris Knights, anybody?).

Nobody is expecting Bicks to be able to make wholesale changes to the gameplan or player habits. Nobody is exhalting him as some Messiah who has come in and completely turned things around. As I have said in another thread, it will take some time before the team is "de-Craigified," and Bickley might not even be the right guy to do that in its entirety.

But what I have said all along in this thread is that there have been significant positional (Dangerfield, Reilly et al), selection (Walker, Armstrong etc, Moran omission), structural (especially forward, and forward entry) and above all attitudinal changes to the team.

You cannot continue to ignore or downplay these changes, especially the attitudinal ones. What we are debating is not so much the effect that these changes have had - but that there have been changes.

 

[srv23]

Bad luck about missing the game yesterday, it was very entertaining.

Would you like the statistics on Taylor's contested marking in the last three weeks? The number of one on one situations and the wins, losses and draws against those three beasts (Salter, Staker and Lonergan). I love the one handed efforts. Did you comment on the head dropping against Brisbane?

So yesterday there was the one hander, a Joe the goose over the back (I've never questioned Taylor's ability to lead away from the ball carrier) and a third goal from am uncontested mark.

You've clearly made your point SRV, it's the stuff you can build a forward line around.

I will be heading north this week-end and I will be happy to provide further in depth analysis of those piercing leads and pack marks.

P.S. Taylor could become a very handy third tall in a good team, Tippett would get a game in all 17 other teams.

So is there a problem with averaging 2 contested marks a game over the last 3 weeks. I mean our contested marking monster Tippett is averaging 2.2 for the year. Next best for the year is Smack with 1.6.

As a comparison to other forwards: Jack Riewoldt is averaging 1.7 for the year, Nick Riewoldt 1.1, Buddy Franklin 1.7, Chris Dawes 1.6, Josh Kennedy 2.2. The only guy who's way ahead of that Is Travis Cloke with 4.0.

Give you watch our games so closely I'm wondering about how you feel about your assertions that Walker is a 6ft2 crumbing forward.

Over the last 3 weeks he has kicked 11 goals. Of those:

7 came from marks inside or just out side fifty.
2 came from pressure acts directly caused by Walker - 1 vs Port where he chased and tackled in the goals square, brought the ball to ground in the tackle and then soccered the goal.
The other vs Brisbane where he chased down a bloke and tackled and recieved a holding the ball free kick.
Of the other 2:
1 came from an instance against Brisbane where he in a contested marking situation brought the ball to ground, then in a second effort received the handpass from a teammate and ran in and kicked the goal.
The other came from an instance where Walker and Lonnergan were around about the CHF position with no-one else in the forward 50 and Sloane cleverly kicked the ball over the contest into space allowing Walker to run onto the ball and kick the goal.

Call me crazy but that's a pretty nice spread of goals from varying situations and you would be very happy with that return from a key forward.

he is also number 1 for goals contrubuted this year per game for the club and in the last 3 weeks has also averaged ~12 touches, ~ 5 contested possessions and ~ 2 tackles. If you are not happy with that output from a 21 year old key forward I don't know what to say.

In 2011 he has kicked 4 goals on 4 occasions, had only 1 game where he kicked 0 goals and 1 game where he only kicked 1 goal (was injured before half time in that game)

By comparision Tippett has kicked 4 goals only once and has had 6 games where he has kicked no goals and 2 games where he has only kicked 1 goal.

Now you may well have a crack at Taylor's 8 disposal 3 goals 2 contested marks 2 1%er game on the weeknd. Tell me how does it compare to Tippett's

Rd 3 vs Freo 11 touches 0 goals 0 contested marks 1 1%ers
Rd 8 vs GC 8 disposals 1 goal 0 contested marks 2 1%ers
Rd 9 vs Pies 9 disposals 1 goal 1 contested mark 2 1%ers
Rd 10 vs Brisbane 8 disposals 0 goals 0 contested marks 0 1%ers
Rd 12 vs WC 1 disposal 0 goals 0 contested marks 0 1%ers
Rd 14 vs Geelong 13 disposals 0 goals 2 contested marks 4 1%ers
Rd 18 vs St Kilda 10 disposals 0 goals 3 contested marks 1 1%ers

You see - the kind of forwards who you can "build a team around" are the guys who even on a quiet day can still find a way to contribute. Can still kick 2-3 goals and give off a few score assists. That was Walker last week.

 

[Slippery Pete]

You see - the kind of forwards who you can "build a team around" are the guys who even on a quiet day can still find a way to contribute. Can still kick 2-3 goals and give off a few score assists. That was Walker last week.

Spot on.

 

[sworc]

Spot on.

I concur. Good players find a way. Walker is a natural, he just needs to be out there.
Tippett while athletic and smart is still learning the game, his stats will improve when teams find they cant keep triple teaming him, because they have a Walker Gunston or Porplyzia to contend with.
Both players however will be great for our team, both need to be on the park.

 

[L_Maximus]

I love Tex and would love to see him become a power forward and kick 80 goals a year. but implying that Bicks has somehow revitalised his career is insulting our intelligence

Well it has helped that Bicks has actually put him in the team...

 

[SydCrow]

Well it has helped that Bicks has actually put him in the team...

yeah, no way Craigy would have picked him once he got over his knee injury and with Tippett injured

funny how our biggest issue against Geelong was apparently our forward entries but that had nothing to do with Tex hanging out the back or sharking the packs

how can you build a forward line around that?