Rumour Bluemour Discussion XXXVIII

[Aphrodite]

#BUMP from February


Re: 'Alleged' rumours resurfacing ...

Folks, this is the way things are here.

Posters are responsible for what they post. Moderators can not attest to the accuracy or otherwise of any rumour posted.

Moderators will intervene for a couple of reasons.

1. If a thread is threatening to be derailed because of a post.

2. If invested parties request the removal of material.

None of this draws a conclusion as to the accuracy or otherwise of the original post.

There is no need to further speculate. What will be will be.

Also, you need to remember that this thread like all parts of this forum is bound by the rules of poster conduct. If you want to express skepticism towards a rumour that's fine, but having a crack at posters who are contributors to this forum is simply not on and will be acted upon.

Simply put, don't be a dick.

Thanks all!

 

[AB_Blue]

Re: TKD we all know he is gone…take the top 10 pick and move on

Re JSOS it’s up to him, the club will survive regardless…I won’t lose sleep either way

 

[CrippaTheGoat9]

 

[Benaly28]

Not sure why this was even brought up.As loyal as they come but if he did want to then that’s fine as well.Hes earnt the right.

 

[CrippaTheGoat9]

Not sure why this was even brought up.As loyal as they come but if he did want to then that’s fine as well.Hes earnt the right.

The made up rumours of him wanting out.

 

[Wickzki]

The made up rumours of him wanting out.

When rumors need addressing it shows that some pretty significant people were spreading them.

 

[JJBagger]

I will be a bit disappointed if Jack goes, but the way info has been fed to the media has been disgusting. Rewriting history and narratives that hold no weight and that are completely untrue. I do wonder whether there will be a lot of baggage coming back with him, but I will get behind him - as always!

 

[reubsblues]

Rumors on here are like a grain of salt
So TDK and JSOS likely staying

 

[carlton_99]

Rumors on here are like a grain of salt
So TDK and JSOS likely staying

It's our version of Schroedinger's cat

 

[Aphrodite]

hello i am admin

View attachment 2391332

 

[Benaly28]

When rumors need addressing it shows that some pretty significant people were spreading them.

Or just making stuff up.

 

[Aphrodite]

Ok. Mod has all the info. I will share what I have without giving away too
Much. If mod wants to delete them fine.

Family member of mine has a connection with The Silvagni family. By family I mean close close family. Question was asked of JSOS. Basically the response was Jack has met with Pies dogs and dons. Jack not impressed with dogs or dons.not sure why. SOS has also told Jack that he does not want him to go to pies as he does not think it is a good fit for him. He is leaning towards staying

Obviously Jack has decision to make but maybe it’s not out the door like we all think

Can confirm

 

[Aphrodite]

That ‘Cripps going back to WA’ rumour

 

[Aphrodite]

Rumors on here are like a grain of salt
So TDK and JSOS likely staying

 

[V23]

Assuming the latest ITK update is true:

Happy that TDK is leaving

Indifferent to JSOS leaving

 

[Number_9]

I find the overlap of people interesting that say 'why are you attacking them, its only a rumour' but then also clown on rumours they don't like

 

[jj1978]

Too long, I wanna know today

Delayed gratification

 

[JustOneTime]

I mean, Hardwick's plan at Richmond for an awfully long time was isolate Martin out the back one out and get it in to him as quickly as they could. Pagan's Paddock was a thing for a while.

In isolation any plan is a good plan; the problem is the ability of our side to funnel opposition play into that plan. I've seen it said of martial arts that the key isn't to be brilliant at everything but brilliant at one and good enough at everything else to funnel them into that one thing. If you look at that Richmond side, the whole idea behind their setup was to get their opposition panicking from inferred pressure and kicking to Rance, Grimes, Vlaustin and Houli for 3 terms, then to unleash their still fresh A grade mids on them in the last term.

Our problem is not that we are a clearance and stoppage side. Our problem is an inability to funnel opposition efforts consistently into the stoppage, leaving the game being played on their terms.

... all of which to say is that any plan can be a good one, provided your opponent cannot escape it.

The game is evolving and changing from your reference points. The top teams hit multiple targets with maybe the exception of Geelong. They are opting to build multiple targets because 1) it is injury proof and 2) helps salary balance.

Also of note, any plan can work but when it doesnt work for a considerable length of time, you change the plan! Our plan requires Curnow and Mckay to be fit and firing for the entire season...not great odds there for our plan.

 

[DangerousD]

Kings first mark and goal was a prime example of everything we don't do. There were a bunch of leads dragging defenders all over the place. All designed to open that lane for king. Structured chaos was and is Hardwicks specialty. It's the opposite of Voss. We don't need to go that far but Harry being so easily crowded by 3 means there's minimum 2 other Carlton players being completely innefectual and wasted at that time. Which is bloody shit structure.

Being able to double team a key forward should be a sacrifice and someone somewhere else gets free. To have the luxury of triple teaming him? That's just laughing at your opposing coaching team and disregarding the 'weapons' they have as useless.

I really struggle with the idea we have a coach who can’t implement this. I feel I’m not exaggerating when I say this but, this is junior footy stuff

 

[Ash05]

There will be a lot of posters not happy with this.

Why??
It's not true. Jack is gone

 

[CrippaTheGoat9]

Why??
It's not true. Jack is gone

How do you know? Coz bigfooty and twitter told you?

 

[Treesloth]

This seems pretty unequivocal, even though there’s plenty to play out into off season. Putting my hand up to say it looks like I got this one wrong. Was passing on info from a source I trusted (on the back of the Charlie info) but based on this it seems incorrect.

Apologies if that caused any confusion or frustration but it definitely wasn’t a case of jumping on BF to make stuff up and cause friction etc.

Ya win some, ya lose some.

 

[Ash05]

How do you know? Coz bigfooty and twitter told you?

Well bigfooty and twitter said he was staying....

 

[Gethelred]

The game is evolving and changing from your reference points. The top teams hit multiple targets with maybe the exception of Geelong. They are opting to build multiple targets because 1) it is injury proof and 2) helps salary balance.

Also of note, any plan can work but when it doesnt work for a considerable length of time, you change the plan! Our plan requires Curnow and Mckay to be fit and firing for the entire season...not great odds there for our plan.

... I mean, what Richmond did was completely innovative to the point where how it worked isn't terribly well understood outside of this website. To describe the current status quo as the game evolving past it is to do a tremendous disservice to the truly innovative within the sport, which is not very many people.

Footy has been for most of its time completely tactically static: get two big blokes and kick to them inside foreard 50, have your ballwinners be better than theirs, and have your big blokes behind the ball belt, shift and cheat the opposition big blokes so they can't kick a winning score. It's only very recently - 2004 - that you have Terry Wallace invent the flood then Paul Roos using it and an almost entirely negative midfield lineup to win a flag in defiance of talent and list strength.

Then, you get Clarko reworking basketball zones creating zones in an AFL context using soccer analytics to start his scoring chains where they produce shots on goal. Clarkson - and Brett Ratten - using Roos' method to create tacklers around the periphery of a stoppage to feed an intercept marker down the line. Beverage changing the methodology around KPD's into defensive pivots.

Hardwick at Richmond changed how tackling and contests are used at AFL level to the current status quo: knock your opponent to ground however you can and beat him to the now loose ball is precisely how McCrae's Pies play.

Most ideas in this sport are extensions of pre-existing ones - both Beverage's defensive pivot and Malthouse's hard press were based on earlier versions that worked, dominant intercept defenders and Clarko's cluster respectively - and this is a sport that has been played for the better part of 150 years. There are very few things that haven't been tried on a footy field, which is why it's so important that the old timers stick around.

You cannot know what you don't know until you're told.

 

[JustOneTime]

... I mean, what Richmond did was completely innovative to the point where how it worked isn't terribly well understood outside of this website. To describe the current status quo as the game evolving past it is to do a tremendous disservice to the truly innovative within the sport, which is not very many people.

Footy has been for most of its time completely tactically static: get two big blokes and kick to them inside foreard 50, have your ballwinners be better than theirs, and have your big blokes behind the ball belt, shift and cheat the opposition big blokes so they can't kick a winning score. It's only very recently - 2004 - that you have Terry Wallace invent the flood then Paul Roos using it and an almost entirely negative midfield lineup to win a flag in defiance of talent and list strength.

Then, you get Clarko reworking basketball zones creating zones in an AFL context using soccer analytics to start his scoring chains where they produce shots on goal. Clarkson - and Brett Ratten - using Roos' method to create tacklers around the periphery of a stoppage to feed an intercept marker down the line. Beverage changing the methodology around KPD's into defensive pivots.

Hardwick at Richmond changed how tackling and contests are used at AFL level to the current status quo: knock your opponent to ground however you can and beat him to the now loose ball is precisely how McCrae's Pies play.

Most ideas in this sport are extensions of pre-existing ones - both Beverage's defensive pivot and Malthouse's hard press were based on earlier versions that worked, dominant intercept defenders and Clarko's cluster respectively - and this is a sport that has been played for the better part of 150 years. There are very few things that haven't been tried on a footy field, which is why it's so important that the old timers stick around.

You cannot know what you don't know until you're told.

This is the point with you and your posts Gethelred. You are taking me to account on nothing to do with the current subject matter or relevant timeline.

Let me hit home my point. Walls and Parkin were innovative in the 80/90s. It was great and all but it isnt relevant now. The game moves on. The teams who are innovative now which you sidetrack against me with tigers/dusty is a team like Hawthorn. Not us. They are literally changing the landscape on recruiting for roles to plug a hole they need plugged why we fill our boots on best available (Cooper lord then Ben C after having Fog/Cripps, Hewett and CDerra as inside mids). L Campo, Binns after Hollands, Cottrell and Acres. And Walsh should be playing wing with his traits.

8 years ago the game was about stoppages and bullneck mids and lots of rotations on field where stamina was less important. I'm not doing it a disservice I'm just saying it isnt relevant now with organised defences and fewer rotations. The sole or duo fwd target isnt innovative NOW and that is what counts. It isnt innovative from the point of view as everything goes into the one basket...injury then kills you. High contracts kill you. It is easy to defend against and leads to sore and injured players after 4 years of seeing it first hand.

You are taking me down a path of pointlessness which really i feel is most of your posting.

 

[Gethelred]

This is the point with you and your posts Gethelred. You are taking me to account on nothing to do with the current subject matter or relevant timeline.

Let me hit home my point. Walls and Parkin were innovative in the 80/90s. It was great and all but it isnt relevant now. The game moves on. The teams who are innovative now which you sidetrack against me with tigers/dusty is a team like Hawthorn. Not us. They are literally changing the landscape on recruiting for roles to plug a hole they need plugged why we fill our boots on best available (Cooper lord then Ben C after having Fog/Cripps, Hewett and CDerra as inside mids). L Campo, Binns after Hollands, Cottrell and Acres. And Walsh should be playing wing with his traits.

8 years ago the game was about stoppages and bullneck mids and lots of rotations on field where stamina was less important. I'm not doing it a disservice I'm just saying it isnt relevant now with organised defences and fewer rotations. The sole or duo fwd target isnt innovative NOW and that is what counts. It isnt innovative from the point of view as everything goes into the one basket...injury then kills you. High contracts kill you. It is easy to defend against and leads to sore and injured players after 4 years of seeing it first hand.

You are taking me down a path of pointlessness which really i feel is most of your posting.

The initial point was this:

... all of which to say is that any plan can be a good one, provided your opponent cannot escape it.

... and from there it's just a conversation.

I'm disputing with you that treating the game as though it's completely changed and that history has zero relevance or is completely uniformative is the way to go. Our current side is strong in some ways, weak in others: the point of looking towards the past is to see the different possibilities for the pieces you have. A Pagan's Paddock is the origins of how Richmond first developed and then used Martin through their flag run. Malthouse saw Clarko's Cluster and used a similar press to push opposition wide, building his side on exhausting waves of tackling pressure and kicking from low percentage positions.

The other thing those two examples have in common is that they were crafted out of necessity. Collingwood couldn't match Geelong's speed of ball movement throught the corridor, and had to figure out a way to drive them wide; tactically, they couldn't beat them doing what was considered in vogue. Clarko's two best KPD's were injured most of 2008, so he needed a method to play without them and still negate the best opp. tall threats. We can certainly seek to move closer to the way footy is being played now, but doing so to the detriment of all else is silly, ignorant of the past, precisely as ignorant as ignoring the training of disposal is.

You're welcome to not want to discuss this with me, but that's not the same as that discussion being pointless. If you purely want to discuss next steps, I've other thoughts there but we need to get to the end of the season first.