Bicks on 5AA

[KingJames23]

Mark Bickley was interviewed on 5AA. One of my least favourite interviewees, mainly because he gives nothing. Anyway, here is the general discussion from the interview.

- Enjoyed his time without Craig being around (he was lying, i bet he missed him!). But it was business as usual though.
- His goal is to be senior coach one day. Didnt say directly but alluded to it. But happy now to do his apprenticeship under Craigy.
- Knows he has to do a lot right as an assistant to get a senior gig.
- Talked about the demands of footy and how you need to love it. But after channel 9 stint, easy decision to come back to footy.
- Bicks assessment of where the team is at: health of the side physically and mentally is good. Guys enjoying training. Most guys on track and in a great place compared to last year (no surprises there - i did say he gives nothing...!). Next 3 weeks will get more footy in as the running part of training reduces.
- Talked about senior players who left, mentioned that those guys would sometimes run trainings, and were barometres for the rest of the kids. Now they've left, its really shifted the focus to the younger guys which he thinks has helped... Douglas, vince, Reily etc. Really taken on more responsibility at training.
- Expects to tweak game plan. Some adjustments made in conditioning, game plan and movement of the ball.
- Crows will look to be more damaging from stoppages this year - werent enough goals from stoppages last year.
- Talked about the lack of intimidators that the crows have. Bicks mentioned that not much time in the game to play unsociable football. Mentioned tackling as an area for improvement and will use that to intimidate. But said that if having a campbell brown-type works for you, then great... but didnt really think it has a place in modern day footy.
- Forwardline was discussed. Need more time to work together and play more cohesively. While Tippett would be great around the ground, opposition defenders would have more of a problem with him at FF.
- Not sure how sub and interchange will pan out - mentioned sellar and smack as possibilities.
- Wants some variation up forward - sharing the goals rather than having one focal point. Tipp, walker and porps to share the bulk, with danger, knights etc. to chip in with their share.
- Peter Jonas done plenty of work on accuracy for the forwards. Confident they have made some inroads in this area.
- No formal trial matches before NAB cup (redlegs) but probably just an internal trial.

 

[Schulzycrow]

Thanks KJ23

Like all coaches he doesn't offer up much. Who knows who's listening in.

Get Rendell on the show, he is always good value.

 

[Damp Squarie]

His goal is to be senior coach one day.

And he will be...he's already been annointed.

 

[The Sloane Ranger]

And he will be...he's already been annointed.

my money is on Goody

 

[Vessel]

my money is on Goody

If Craigy does not get the boot soon, I think you are right.

 

[Truck Rutten]

Mark Bickley was interviewed on 5AA. One of my least favourite interviewees, mainly because he gives nothing. Anyway, here is the general discussion from the interview.

- Enjoyed his time without Craig being around (he was lying, i bet he missed him!). But it was business as usual though.
- His goal is to be senior coach one day. Didnt say directly but alluded to it. But happy now to do his apprenticeship under Craigy.
- Knows he has to do a lot right as an assistant to get a senior gig.
- Talked about the demands of footy and how you need to love it. But after channel 9 stint, easy decision to come back to footy.
- Bicks assessment of where the team is at: health of the side physically and mentally is good. Guys enjoying training. Most guys on track and in a great place compared to last year (no surprises there - i did say he gives nothing...!). Next 3 weeks will get more footy in as the running part of training reduces.
- Talked about senior players who left, mentioned that those guys would sometimes run trainings, and were barometres for the rest of the kids. Now they've left, its really shifted the focus to the younger guys which he thinks has helped... Douglas, vince, Reily etc. Really taken on more responsibility at training.
- Expects to tweak game plan. Some adjustments made in conditioning, game plan and movement of the ball.
- Crows will look to be more damaging from stoppages this year - werent enough goals from stoppages last year.
- Talked about the lack of intimidators that the crows have. Bicks mentioned that not much time in the game to play unsociable football. Mentioned tackling as an area for improvement and will use that to intimidate. But said that if having a campbell brown-type works for you, then great... but didnt really think it has a place in modern day footy.
- Forwardline was discussed. Need more time to work together and play more cohesively. While Tippett would be great around the ground, opposition defenders would have more of a problem with him at FF.
- Not sure how sub and interchange will pan out - mentioned sellar and smack as possibilities.
- Wants some variation up forward - sharing the goals rather than having one focal point. Tipp, walker and porps to share the bulk, with danger, knights etc. to chip in with their share.
- Peter Jonas done plenty of work on accuracy for the forwards. Confident they have made some inroads in this area.
- No formal trial matches before NAB cup (redlegs) but probably just an internal trial.

Did he seriously talk about Reilly being one of our younger guys? Looks like we have a successor to Mick Doughty's throne here.

 

[KingJames23]

He did mention reilly but more in the context of the next 25-29 year olds filling the gap left vacant by the 4 older blokes.

 

[Allefgib]

Did he seriously talk about Reilly being one of our younger guys? Looks like we have a successor to Mick Doughty's throne here.

Relative to macca, goody, bird he probably is

 

[Truck Rutten]

He did mention reilly but more in the context of the next 25-29 year olds filling the gap left vacant by the 4 older blokes.

And so he should (contribute to filling the gap). He'd be around the 5th or 6th oldest bloke on our list now.

 

[Truck Rutten]

Relative to macca, goody, bird he probably is

If those guys are the benchmark then we need to refer to our teenagers as embryos

Anyway, I'm positive we'll never hear the club refer to Thommo or Truck as young/younger guys, yet they were born in the same year as Reilly.

 

[Vader]

And so he should (contribute to filling the gap). He'd be around the 5th or 6th oldest bloke on our list now.

6th oldest. Doughty, Stevens, Johncock, Thompson & Rutten are older (in that order).

 

[Slippery Pete]

- Talked about the lack of intimidators that the crows have. Bicks mentioned that not much time in the game to play unsociable football. Mentioned tackling as an area for improvement and will use that to intimidate. But said that if having a campbell brown-type works for you, then great... but didnt really think it has a place in modern day footy..

He has been severely brainwashed by the Neil Craig school of thinking.

The fact that he uses the undisicplined Campbell Brown as an example proves he doesn't even understand the question.

There's a fair bit of happy medium between Campbell Brown and some of our vanilla specialists.

 

[macca23]

Thanks for the update from Bicks there KJ23.

A fair bit of motherhood comments there, but all the same if they do everything Bicks has said there, it augurs well for the season.

The interesting one for me relates to Anderson's un-necessary retrograde sub rule. Every comment I've read from clubs on subs so far tends to indicate that they are thinking that the sub will be a tall player capable of playing in many key positions including ruck if necessary.

I know that's the path I tend to go down myself, but does anyone think that clubs will run the risk of losing a tall and opt to have a a mid-fielder as a sub to enable them to bring fresh legs on for a quarter and a bit???

 

[WALL-e]

And go with 1 ruck for the games entirety macca? That would be very hard with a four man bench, let alone a 3.

OR would you have a couple of pinch hitters floating on the field like Sellar/Moran/Smack? If that's the case you can have your ruck have 30% off which the jack of all trades rucks. Then you need a player who can cover a KPP post for short times while that player rucks.

A lot of it comes down to versatility. I think the sub rule places further importance on having players who can not only play multiple possies, but multiple roles and 'types'. Guys like Otten will float everywhere with less midfield rotation.

Coming back to your question, I think teams will try it, but will find that if you don't have a 'tall' as a sub, you have to have him on the field anyway.

 

[Vader]

One can only wonder how we managed to survive as recently as 1997, with just 3 players on the interchange bench (and no substitutes). Look Chicken Little, the sky is falling in!

 

[KingJames23]

Thanks for the update from Bicks there KJ23.

A fair bit of motherhood comments there, but all the same if they do everything Bicks has said there, it augurs well for the season.

The interesting one for me relates to Anderson's un-necessary retrograde sub rule. Every comment I've read from clubs on subs so far tends to indicate that they are thinking that the sub will be a tall player capable of playing in many key positions including ruck if necessary.

I know that's the path I tend to go down myself, but does anyone think that clubs will run the risk of losing a tall and opt to have a a mid-fielder as a sub to enable them to bring fresh legs on for a quarter and a bit???

Given all the talk about a utility-type player as a sub, I much prefer this. I would take the risk on a big guy maintaining a high standard. With the amount of rotations and conditioning the players go through, let the taller players stick it out. I think it would be much better to have, say, a martin or Jaensch come on as the sub at half time. Throw them in the middle at the start of the 3rd and let them run like crazy. I find this to be a much more valuable strategy than to bring in a seller or smack to fill a gap that he may/may not have experience in.

I think the crows and craigy have built up enough flexibility in the side that we should use the sub as a 'fresh legs' player, rather than a player to fill a gap in the event of an injury or tiring out one ruckman. And someone who can ruck 30% of the time, but starts as a KPP, should start on the field. This is where smack and seller really have an advantage. There arent too many players on the crows list who fall in this category unfortunately.

But yes, its a complex issue that will cause even more discussion in the NAB cup and a bit of trial and error will occur as teams work out the best method. Im hoping Craigy has his science hat on and carefully plans what scenario will give us the greatest output. But if you consider rotations as per last year, Im guessing the midfield is the most heavily rotated area on the ground, so I would rather a midfielder as a sub, and look at the ruck position as a week to week scenario? We all saw how tired Sandilands got last season having to carry the load, not just for entire games, but for 17 or 18 games in a row before he started tiring (also saw the same with Maric last year). So perhaps who ever wins the no. 1 ruck duties plays most games, with the no. 2 ruckman pushing for selection as fatigue emerges. Thats the beauty of having maric, moran and jacobs fit and firing.

 

[cmndstab]

One can only wonder how we managed to survive as recently as 1997, with just 3 players on the interchange bench (and no substitutes). Look Chicken Little, the sky is falling in!

Our current crop of players have spent their formative years learning to play AFL at a particular athletic standard. Now we've lost a spot on the bench to a substitute position. Logic dictates that we will not be able to keep up the same athletic standard over the board - but will the clubs be willing to let standards slip? I'm willing to bet they won't. They'll demand the same level of running and execution as they have in the past, but there will be less rest periods for the players.

I see this move pushing us even further down the current path of killing off the game for natural footballers, as only the purest of athletes will be able to survive.

The argument that we survived in the past so we can survive now is always flawed. Try cutting off internet access to businesses that coped fine without it in 1997 and see how they react in 2011. It's not 1997 anymore, the demographic of AFL players is entirely different. I doubt the rule will provide any positive benefit whatsoever.

 

[Cap]

I have to say - i dislike the substitution rule with a passion.

 

[conVINCEd]

My initial thoughts are that the best strategy is to have a ruck/utility on the three man bench (I'd go for McKernan) and have a midfielder as substitute (I'd go for Martin, if he can't crack the First 21.

I reckon we need another ruckman (aside from Tippett) in the starting line-up.

Half-way through the third quarter would seem the best time to introduce the sub.

That way, the guy he replaces can have the half-time break to rest, then go hell for leather for 10/15 minutes before the sub replaces him.

Imagine Martin coming on at the 15 minute mark of the third quarter and tearing away from the opposition's tiring midfielders.

 

[KingJames23]

I have to say - i dislike the substitution rule with a passion.

Was the sub rule trialled in the NAB cup in past years? I cant recall....

Either way, with all the effort the afl has made with making the game faster (the 4th interchange, no touching after an opposition mark, giving the ball back immediately after a free kick... to name a few), this is an odd rule that goes against the style of play that was evolving in the AFL. Dont like it at all. And to me, it confirms that ruckman are a dying breed, as endurance capabilities are of critical importance.

Wouldnt be surprised if its abolished in a few years. Hoping so anyway.

 

[Pariah]

Was the sub rule trialled in the NAB cup in past years? I cant recall....

Either way, with all the effort the afl has made with making the game faster (the 4th interchange, no touching after an opposition mark, giving the ball back immediately after a free kick... to name a few), this is an odd rule that goes against the style of play that was evolving in the AFL. Dont like it at all. And to me, it confirms that ruckman are a dying breed, as endurance capabilities are of critical importance.

Wouldnt be surprised if its abolished in a few years. Hoping so anyway.

Yes but teams were allowed to have two subs I think.

 

[Godallblighty]

I think you have to stop thinking of it as 22 men teams. There are now 21 spots on the team with one spot shared by two players. This makes that spot a kind of super player, either super-fit (by subbing similar players) or super-flexible (by subbing different players). To a certain extent, you can decide which on the day, depending on who you take off. It's going to make for a pretty significant coaching move, with a lot of pressure on getting it right. The discussions afterward on the the timing and choice of player subbed should be entertaining. What will be fascinating to see is who judges most astutely the qualities the super-player needs and when to utilise that fitness or flexibility. And of course, an injury makes the decision for you.

I'm quite interested to see how it plays out.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

I don't know why everyone is so against the sub idea.

Don't you remember the super sub system they had with cricket a few years ago? It worked a treat eek.

 

[Sekaj]

Does the AFLPA support this new rule? You would think there'd be quite a few disgruntled ruckman in the AFL at the moment.

 

[Redcap]

And he will be...he's already been annointed.

Who by? Haven't heard this before!