Unofficial Preview Changes and Early Discussion Vs Saints

[rye]

Tunstill out. No defensive game. We have lost 5 of the 8 games he has played. Coincidence? Fort must replace Day he's a better Ruck and more mobile. We could then give Oscar more of a breather up forward on rotation.If Lohmann is good to go he's in. If AhChee is needing a rest Beecken could debut or McKenna back. St Kilda are going to run and gun much more than recently so we are going to need mobility. Maybe Dev in as a defensive forward on Wanganeen Milera

i thought jimmy was fine tbh. only dunkley and berry had more tackles than him and he was hardly in a role that was around the ball. one of the few who really cracked in , albeit should be more fresh than the players who have been in the seniors.

 

[martinson]

Drawing a conclusion that your least experienced and probably least competent player is the reason you lost a game is up there with the world's biggest cop outs.

He actually did ok on Thursday in a game where it was hard for him to do a lot right. He's just that moment or two a trifle slow to evaluate and react which can lead to a sloppy execution. He needs experience at the level which he probably won't get with us.

Fort and Day are around the same age and if you analyse their careers Fort has played a lot more decent games than Day has. He also seems better with his hands , probably a touch quicker ? , bigger , and a more than competent ruckman. But I don't see a change any time soon and Sam might kick 2 or 3 one of these days.

Pity the Saints have stunk it up hopelessly tonight.

 

[buttermuffs]

Not the biggest fan of Tunstill at AFL level, but I would say him coming in usually means we're missing one or more top line players so while it's not a coincidence, it's probably not because of Jimmy's efforts specifically.

His effort is great, I just don’t think he clean enough under pressure. Seems to not be able to make the right choice a lot of times and doubts himself and gets caught out.

We had plenty of quality players leave the side injured last year and had depth players stand up and look composed. Reville and Brain are the main two who debuted last year and have shown a lot more composure.

A ten game player is the last player to blame for a 50 point loss. Like Dev (and Keays) he’d probably be a lot better of getting proper inside midfield minutes at a rebuilding club and learn through those mistakes with security than be stuck in a secondary position for only a couple games before an omission again. Not sure any more VFL games will help with progressing to the next step.

 

[mpal6]

Marvel is a fast deck so I'm keen on adding some speed to the backline. McKenna in for experience. I'd like to keep Fletcher in the wing but may be it's too early to move him away from backline.

Starce won't be there to mind Higgins so it has to be either Wilmot or Answerth. Owens will be the matchup for Payne, Sharman will try to play negative role on Andrews. With no clear second tall on their playing 22, Andrews should have a good game patrolling the air.

Saints play like us in terms of fast movement and transition so we'll get our chances going the other way. We need to convert and play to our usual standard - forget about the thursday 2nd half stinker and get the job done.

 

[Section 5]

The lowest 5 players from the Pies game.
Four will play next week so need to improve big time for us to get a win over the Saints. Ah-Chee on injury watch.
Last 3 columns Clangers, Disposal accuracy and TOG.
Apart from Hippy, the Lions season leading goal scorers did not register a goal. Result we only kicked 7 for the game.

Bailey had only 9 wing attendances so forward a far bit. A down game from him after having a good season to date.
Ah-Chee off very early in the 4th quarter, but no impact for 3 quarters.
Will also had no impact on the game after a good first 5 games

Brisbane Lions: 7.11.53

 

[Section 5]

The Lions players do need to immediately change something even though they are mostly doing it within the rules.
The umpires obviously have an AFL directive to clamp down on the under 15-meter kick for a mark.
As usual with these directives the umpires go further than is needed. At best, very inconsistent rulings which we are seeing.
Lions players just need to make sure they kick the ball 18/20-meters.
If they don't, a rushed kick will happen and that usually leads to a turnover.

At times the shorter kick may be the only safe option, but the receiving player needs to play on immediately not claim the mark and cause a stoppage or a free against.
No point complaining about it just adjust.

 

[mpal6]

The lowest 5 players from the Pies game.
Four will play next week so need to improve big time for us to get a win over the Saints. Ah-Chee on injury watch.
Last 3 columns Clangers, Disposal accuracy and TOG.
Apart from Hippy, the Lions season leading goal scorers did not register a goal. Result we only kicked 7 for the game.

Bailey had only 9 wing attendances so forward a far bit. A down game from him after having a good season to date.
Ah-Chee off very early in the 4th quarter, but no impact for 3 quarters.
Will also had no impact on the game after a good first 5 games

Brisbane Lions: 7.11.53

View attachment 2290063
View attachment 2290062

Levi plays similar to Will in terms of providing that outlet kick when the ball carrier is looking around to pass it. But from what I've noticed Levi puts in genuine zip behind his run and lead - creating separation from opposition player as well as making it easier for the kicker to spot him.

Will used to get a lot of possessions this way being that release kick player but he was left to roam freely and take that possession by opposition teams in previous years. He may not have that freedom anymore.

Levi is likely take that over from here on so it'll be interesting to see how Will evolves from here. No more cheapies so his possessions may become high value, in traffic type stuff which will setup more play for us.

 

[braddsey]

The Lions players do need to immediately change something even though they are mostly doing it within the rules.
The umpires obviously have an AFL directive to clamp down on the under 15-meter kick for a mark.
As usual with these directives the umpires go further than is needed. At best, very inconsistent rulings which we are seeing.
Lions players just need to make sure they kick the ball 18/20-meters.
If they don't, a rushed kick will happen and that usually leads to a turnover.

At times the shorter kick may be the only safe option, but the receiving player needs to play on immediately not claim the mark and cause a stoppage or a free against.
No point complaining about it just adjust.

Great thinking. Perhaps something to build into training on our 9-day break to make players more aware of passing distance. I think the teams that can adjust to the short-kick crackdown will have an advantage.

On the flipside when defending they need to look for those opportunities to close an oppo player down on short kicks.

I have no issue on the crackdown if it remains throughout the season and doesn’t drop off when the umpires leadership think they have it cracked.

 

[mpal6]

The Lions players do need to immediately change something even though they are mostly doing it within the rules.
The umpires obviously have an AFL directive to clamp down on the under 15-meter kick for a mark.
As usual with these directives the umpires go further than is needed. At best, very inconsistent rulings which we are seeing.
Lions players just need to make sure they kick the ball 18/20-meters.
If they don't, a rushed kick will happen and that usually leads to a turnover.

At times the shorter kick may be the only safe option, but the receiving player needs to play on immediately not claim the mark and cause a stoppage or a free against.
No point complaining about it just adjust.

Totally agree, play on and be creative might be the easier way to get around this concern. Defensive 50 for any team is where the crackdown seems to be severe.

 

[Sunny Land]

The Lions players do need to immediately change something even though they are mostly doing it within the rules.
The umpires obviously have an AFL directive to clamp down on the under 15-meter kick for a mark.
As usual with these directives the umpires go further than is needed. At best, very inconsistent rulings which we are seeing.
Lions players just need to make sure they kick the ball 18/20-meters.
If they don't, a rushed kick will happen and that usually leads to a turnover.

At times the shorter kick may be the only safe option, but the receiving player needs to play on immediately not claim the mark and cause a stoppage or a free against.
No point complaining about it just adjust.

It's a very skillful player who can kick the footy 18-20 metres each time. Not sure how many we have in our list that could confidently do that.

 

[mpal6]

It's a very skillful player who can kick the footy 18-20 metres each time. Not sure how many we have in our list that could confidently do that.

The other option is to play into what opposition is expecting us to do, kick long, but ensure we halve the contest with our tall to get a boundary thrown in or ball up. I think this is still a work in progress and it's not as effective as what Joe used to be able to do for us last year.

Morris is too valuable closer to goal, Day plays forward ruck so stays deep - leaves us with Hipwood and BigO which is usually a bit hit n miss. Need to find some consistency here and we can work some plans around it.

 

[Sunny Land]

The other option is to play into what opposition is expecting us to do, kick long, but ensure we halve the contest with our tall to get a boundary thrown in or ball up. I think this is still a work in progress and it's not as effective as what Joe used to be able to do for us last year.

Morris is too valuable closer to goal, Day plays forward ruck so stays deep - leaves us with Hipwood and BigO which is usually a bit hit n miss. Need to find some consistency here and we can work some plans around it.

Agree with that but I worry what we would do if we lose Hippy to injury this season. Big O can be kind of replaced with Fort but Hippy would make our spine considerably weaker.

 

[Section 5]

It's a very skillful player who can kick the footy 18-20 metres each time. Not sure how many we have in our list that could confidently do that.

Sunny Land i was not really talking about kicking a ball exactly 18/20 meters. My post intention was a minimum.

Any AFL player should be able to hit up anyone standing still or on a lead from 15-35 meters fairly easily.
Kicking longer distances and opposition pressure on any kicker come into play on accuracy.
Hope that clears it up.

 

[Sunny Land]

Sunny Land i was not really talking about kicking a ball exactly 18/20 meters. My post intention was a minimum.

Any AFL player should be able to hit up anyone standing still or on a lead from 15-35 meters fairly easily.
Kicking longer distances and opposition pressure on any kicker come into play on accuracy.
Hope that clears it up.

Crystall.
Even if its not 15, sometimes a kick out of congestion is a good thing. In my opinion some of the responsibility needs to come from the player making the lead. If the distance is in doubt of being 15m and he has someone on his hammer, he should not be calling for the ball. But, in saying that, he could also be clearing space behind him by bringing his player with him. Both Ashcrofts do this many times in a game. Sometimes good, othertimes costly.
It's really a different game now where small things return big sometimes and other times it can cost you.

 

[twhowler]

Game was over and delaying his sub let him play in the VFL to stay fit.

Game wasn't over halfway through the third though when we were 19 points down and looked short on run. Surely priority number 1 is winning the 1s? Obviously the sub often doesn;t have a huge influence. but they can be handy. look at bruce when lohmann got injured. our unwillingness to pull the trigger really irks me - and you would think as well we would have been wary of needing a sub with a bit of a weary side. anyway, rant over!

We had a lot of players massively down so i don't think we can tell too much from the game. But i think we are out of excuses now. Had 6 games, 5 day break done, 9 days off before the saints who are a decent test - let them play their way and they are quite good. Win the midfield battle and limit them off half back and they are pretty ordinary. So if we get back our concentration levels and have enough hunger we win by 4 goals plus. If not - i think you would start to ask genuine questions about where we are at. It's hard backing up and being hunted, and while 5-2 would be fine, there has been a lot of coasting.

Ah chee must be some worry, as others have noted had no impact and has been heavily strapped

Lohmann is much needed

Charlie being in any sort of form would be good!

 

[Section 5]

Crystall.
Even if its not 15, sometimes a kick out of congestion is a good thing. In my opinion some of the responsibility needs to come from the player making the lead. If the distance is in doubt of being 15m and he has someone on his hammer, he should not be calling for the ball. But, in saying that, he could also be clearing space behind him by bringing his player with him. Both Ashcrofts do this many times in a game. Sometimes good, othertimes costly.
It's really a different game now where small things return big sometimes and other times it can cost you.

Mostly agree but in my opinion all the responsibility is on the player providing a lead as well as the ones just lurking in those vacant spaces the opposition lets you fill (zoning) waiting for a miss kick or being called "play on not 15".
Those "lurking" space needs to be 25 meters away to allow for a little leading up to the ball when kicked.

We were down in work rate as a group.
This results in a lot of problems, just one being multiple players not providing the kicker choices to move the ball forward.
Hopefully we were a bit flat as others have mentioned and get back on track this week.

 

[wantok]

Drawing a conclusion that your least experienced and probably least competent player is the reason you lost a game is up there with the world's biggest cop outs.

He actually did ok on Thursday in a game where it was hard for him to do a lot right. He's just that moment or two a trifle slow to evaluate and react which can lead to a sloppy execution. He needs experience at the level which he probably won't get with us.

Fort and Day are around the same age and if you analyse their careers Fort has played a lot more decent games than Day has. He also seems better with his hands , probably a touch quicker ? , bigger , and a more than competent ruckman. But I don't see a change any time soon and Sam might kick 2 or 3 one of these days.

Pity the Saints have stunk it up hopelessly tonight.

You drew the conclusion that I thought Tunstill was responsible for our loss because I stated he has a poor defensive game? I'll put it another way. My opinion is that whilst he tries hard he does not read the play well enough to put himself in the best position to defend and that he does not work hard enough working back . I would prefer other players in the role.The Pies successfully attacked through his wing on many occasions. You can draw your own conclusions.
I actually blame the loss on our inability to contain Daicos and poor goalkicking. Our forwards regularly led to the pockets therefore increasing difficulty. Hippy was ineffectual and regularly gave up on the lead. He lacked repeated efforts.Day is not dangerous or mobile and Fort would provide better Ruck relief.Rayner must work harder. Just my opinions.

 

[Grasshopper17]

No point complaining about it just adjust.

I actually think it would benefit the club to engage in some pretty pointed and direct correspondence with AFL House about this. It seems that different clubs are being umpired differently in this regard.

Either way, kicks in different parts of the field are absolutely being adjudicated differently, which is a joke.

At least one club needs to bring to the attention of the AFL that this is simply not good enough. Might as well be us

 

[pod17]

The cynic in me says that the tightening of the rule was in response to us winning the flag, much like many Richmond fans claim with the stand rule.

That aside, the crackdown is ridiculous. Someone is going to get seriously hurt soon. A player will take a mark, think it’s 15m and stop, only to be smashed by a player who has heard the umpire call play on.

Common sense must prevail - it’s not having the desired effect of keeping the ball in motion. In fact, I’d say there are a lot of kicks to contests (based on nothing other than gut feel!) that result in repeat stoppages.

 

[Elixuh]

I don’t think the crackdown has actually impacted us too much. It’ll impact the trash teams because they’ll panic and muck it up if a ball isn’t called 15 and they’re put under pressure.

 

[Son of Superboot]

That aside, the crackdown is ridiculous. Someone is going to get seriously hurt soon. A player will take a mark, think it’s 15m and stop, only to be smashed by a player who has heard the umpire call play on.

I think the biggest problem has been that the player taking the mark has not heard the umpires call of not 15.
There was great example in the dying minutes in Hawks v Cats game yesterday where a Hawks player took a mark, and stood his ground expecting to hear a whistle, but got rundown by Dangerfield and was paid HTB.

We heard it on the TV, Dangerfield heard it because he was closer to the ump, but with 88,000 in the crowd, its damn impossible to hear the umps call.

 

[BuntonRules]

I think the biggest problem has been that the player taking the mark has not heard the umpires call of not 15.
There was great example in the dying minutes in Hawks v Cats game yesterday where a Hawks player took a mark, and stood his ground expecting to hear a whistle, but got rundown by Dangerfield and was paid HTB.

We heard it on the TV, Dangerfield heard it because he was closer to the ump, but with 88,000 in the crowd, its damn impossible to hear the umps call.

Have always reckoned the ump should call when the ball is in the air, as soon as he has decided, SHORT - so everyone knows the decision coming.

 

[braddsey]

Have always reckoned the ump should call when the ball is in the air, as soon as he has decided, SHORT - so everyone knows the decision coming.

They have started doing that with NOT15, but doesn’t help if the player taking the mark can’t hear the call.
I’m aligned with many of the media - just change the rule to 20 meters instead of 15 - then adjudicate as they currently are. They’ll still get many wrong, but it should take out the 10-meter kick being paid as a mark.

 

[Perrip]

No Bruce or Smith for Saints clash.

 

[twhowler]

No Bruce or Smith for Saints clash.
View attachment 2291470

After this weekend, in terms of clear best 23 players, only Starce on it really.