Opinion Chris Scott's coaching - Part II [NEW POLL ADDED]

[Landgraft]

I think you're being a bit cynical, I reckon they trained for ultra-quick handball then at times in games in the moment when they went to dish it off under pressure they didn't get the technique right because it was rushed or they changed their option at the last minute etc. I don't think it was deliberate, I think it was a product of pressure in the moment most of the time.

The system was deliberate, the incidents were not. They would have known it was creating throws as a consequence although that was not the aim and chose to persevere with it (while also presumably making refinements).

 

[BlightysCats]

Also take into account that no commentator (especially an ex Geelong player) would come out in the media and rubbish Scott or any other coach for that matter for lack of communications considering the amount of times they'll cross paths during the year, if anything they'll praise them even if it's not warranted.

That's true but I do believe Mooney is being sincere when he said Scott has changed, Mooney has also said Scott has two years to win a flag or should be axed, I wonder if that will be as embraced by those quoting him about Scott's new found communication skills.

 

[BlightysCats]

The system was deliberate, the incidents were not. They would have known it was creating throws as a consequence although that was not the aim and chose to persevere with it (while also presumably making refinements).

Most definitely the super fast handball system was deliberate and it revolutionised the game because it was able to break down compact zones around the ball and end up releasing Bulldog players in to space. I loved it and will continue to this season.

 

[Landgraft]

...depending on how hard the Umps crack down on the throws, of course

 

[Ray Donovan]

I completely agree. The throws were a consequence of a deliberate model that intended to handball within the rules, albeit on the fringe. At some point the line blurred.

But at the same time they were probably aware internally of the throwing, they'd be going over their own footage with a fine toothed comb. Just saw no reason to break with a functional system that was right most of the time.

Alan Richardson said it best he didn't say anything.

This is no different to the "Duckwood" rule changes.

I know Joel isn't a ducker or shirker of contested ball. He's got the attributes strong core shorter frame and knows when to roll his shoulder the right way to expose a poor tackle. Its a skill and it's earned the hard way.

The dogs handballing is no different they are playing the game within the rules like everybody else. Hand balling in traffic out of congestions is one of the hardest things to train Brendan McCartney was brilliant at teaching and moulding contested sides using handballs to break open games inside. We do remember right Geelong ? Our former development coach assistant

I think its disappointing Scott goe's down this pointless rout. It doesn't help Geelong commenting on law makers interpretations. Implying teams can flick the ball to clear congestion, implying the AFL would prefer the game to move quicker.

More about how Geelong is going to improve their contested ball numbers in 2017. How we improve our midfield depth ! How we stay at the top of our game other than whinging about what happened in 2016 and rule interpretations in front of a camera that obviously behind the scenes has been queried at AFL house by Geelong and other clubs most likely north.

Stop worrying about 2016 and commenting on teams you didn't even face in the finals. Question the integrity of the best team in the land one thing I know for sure is now the WB, GEE game is going to be red hot.

Stick to coaching football

 

[Ray Donovan]

Not Scott related but I found this to be a moving insight into different ways to coach.







Two smackdown's in 3 posts. What a day

Listen I have no opinion on his player communication skills and relationships with players good or bad. Its a hard job people are always going to be upset 45 list spots. 22 senior team not everyone is going to be happy 45 personalities.

But the article and Mooney's quotes actually are saying his communication might not have been where it needed to be.

" the man knows how to coach but he needed to change some things over summer"

The loss of his brother really made him change the way he goes about his relationships with players.

" a massive, massive change"

His brother passed in November

It actually says his relationships with players needed to improve. Not the other way around.

And through this horrible event its probably put football in perspective for him. As a fan sometimes i can't stop thinking about football imagine what it's like in the AFL bubble with scrutiny players not executing his plans etc. So much pressure involved. He is from the Leigh matthews school tough men club when your out your out I've heard matthews wouldn't talk to guys out of the 22.

But its just football and I'm sure he has a new respect for relationships that might only last a brief time take nothing for granted.

But the article says he needed to work on this aspect and has which is the sign of an evolving coach all you could ask for.

But the article really reaffirms he needed to work on that aspect not the other way around !

 

[David the Cat]

...depending on how hard the Umps crack down on the throws, of course

I suspect they won't....clearing congestion is now a primary focus of the AFL.

The other clubs are not going to sit by and let teams exploit the relaxation in the rule....

 

[00VicWard001]

Chris Scott hasn't been inside those walls obviously but unfortunately either have any of his assistants. I know the club is tight for money this year but we should of found the cash to get a new assistant this year as it would of been extremely beneficial.
If Chris Scott wasn't really pushing hard for one he cares more about Chris Scott than the club.
That sounds harsh but its true.

Whoa there horsey. We did that last year (Lloyd). And the year before (Scarlett). Can't just keep bringing in Assistants every year. Some need to be developed internally. Just like the list, a couple of external coaches, a couple of developed coaches and we let them blend.

 

[Spazz Cat]

Whoa there horsey. We did that last year (Lloyd). And the year before (Scarlett). Can't just keep bringing in Assistants every year. Some need to be developed internally. Just like the list, a couple of external coaches, a couple of developed coaches and we let them blend.

Umm, We lost a senior assistant last year and didn't bring another one in.
The game changes a lot in 5 years. Would of been good/essential to get one who's worked in 2-3 different environments in that time.
Was good to get Lloyd. But he's actually a director of coaching. Actually not sure how much he has to do with tactics, developing players etc.
I don't know much about other clubs, but I wonder if they have a forwards coach and a ruck coach.

 

[00VicWard001]

Now you're catching on.

Just like only the gold medallist was a contender to win in the race.

And how water tastes like water?

If you look at the real statistics over a 10 year period in the GF's, then we can see that the teams who've regularly contended for a premiership are in the top four.

2016 Western Bulldogs Sydney (7 v 1)
2015 Hawthorn West Coast Eagles (3 v 2)
2014 Hawthorn Sydney (2 v 1)
2013 Hawthorn Fremantle (1 v 3)
2012 Sydney Swans Hawthorn (3 v 1)
2011 Geelong Collingwood (2 v 1)
2010 Collingwood St Kilda (1 v 3)
2009 Geelong St Kilda (2 v 1)
2008 Hawthorn Geelong (2 v 1)
2007 Geelong Port Adelaide (1 v 2)

So I count 9 instances out of 10 where two top four teams played off. I also count 5 out of 10 times where it was 1 v 2. The amount of times that 1 ends up in the GF is 9 times out of 10!!!

To me, it's pretty obvious that the double chance had significant impact over the past 10 years. Year 10 however is the first time we had that stupid bye. And it's fairly obvious that the bye, along with some strong play by the doggies gave them a chance to rest and give an almighty push.

Now who knows how 2017 finals will pan out. On one side, the top four receive a double chance and teams who have that first week victory will find some way to keep match fit now that they know that a long break causes critical issues.

On the other side, teams finishing outside the top 4 will look at the Dogs run last year and think 'we can do this'.

What this tells me, and probably every logical educated reader, is that in 2017, anyone in the top 8 can be a premiership contender.

So a coach with a high win percentage over the regular season, who is an excellent coach and communicator, would be in huge demand in modern times, since he's the man that gets teams into the finals. Which gives them every chance to win a premiership. Hmmm...

 

[00VicWard001]

If Scott's changed it's good but we see in the article that it mentions reports Scott's relationship with some players was distant, at the same time it's not going above and beyond to be a communicative coach it's simply what he should've been doing all along - it's amazing to me that the club didn't discuss his communication issues with him earlier?? He's a senior AFL coach for Christs sake!?

No no, read the article again. There are two separate things that Mooney say:

1) he was known to be distant to more junior players
2) he is a fantastic coach and communicator.

There is nothing to say that he has now become a fantastic communicator from his tragic experience.

Mooney's words are quite black and white. He is a fantastic coach and communicator. Clearly stating that he was always a fantastic coach (I mean he does how some sort of best winning percentage record and all, so he is a fantastic coach - please please don't bring up Damian Hardwick as being better) - and always a fantastic communicator (as the sentence is definitive and brings those two premises together).

If he was to say 'he is a fantastic coach, and now has become a fantastic communicator' then this would prove your idea that he has had communication issues that the club should have jumped on.

Reading the article, Mooney says Scott was a bit distant in the past, okay, that's a good insight and to see Scott change that is interesting. Mooney's insight is that tragedy has made Scott less distant as a person. This may be an improvement, it may not be. Who knows.

All we can really say, once again, based on an insiders knowledge was that Chris Scott is and was a fantastic coach and communicator.

 

[cynical]

The premiership contenders are the top finishing sides, the bulldogs was a freak event due to an even competition and the fact that they had so many injuries.

Out of the top sides sometimes there are pretenders who get more wins than they should due to an easy draw/big home ground advantage but whose game style wont work in September.

This season you have GWS and the Bulldogs having a lot more talent than the next teams, other clubs in the mix like Sydney, WCE, Adelaide will need a lot of luck/improvement.

 

[00VicWard001]

The premiership contenders are the top finishing sides, the bulldogs was a freak event due to an even competition and the fact that they had so many injuries.

Out of the top sides sometimes there are pretenders who get more wins than they should due to an easy draw/big home ground advantage but whose game style wont work in September.

This season you have GWS and the Bulldogs having a lot more talent than the next teams, other clubs in the mix like Sydney, WCE, Adelaide will need a lot of luck/improvement.

Yes, I completely agree. I do think that the Cats have a chance. I still rate GWS and the Swans as the highest chance simply because GWS is a star-studded team that is going to peak soon and the Swans are just a high-level disciplined team.

I'd say the Cat's and the Bulldogs and the Eagles and the Crows are inconsistent wildcards that could peak at the right time and sweep the field.

 

[Frappe]

...depending on how hard the Umps crack down on the throws, of course

Very hard to crackdown on what you can't see (or judge). The umpires tend to be judged (by umpire coaches) if they've guessed as opposed to missing a free kick.

The pace and congestion makes it very hard to make a call unless they're front on to the player. They do give a bit of license in terms of deciding if the fist made clean contact with the ball off the palm, however I think now the only time they really call a throw is if the ball has clearly left the palm before fist makes contact.

Re the doggies exploiting the rule. I don't believe they set out to do so. I think it probably evolved as the year progressed and they figured if they weren't being called for it then it was within the rules.

 

[romeohwho]

Very hard to crackdown on what you can't see (or judge). The umpires tend to be judged (by umpire coaches) if they've guessed as opposed to missing a free kick.

The pace and congestion makes it very hard to make a call unless they're front on to the player. They do give a bit of license in terms of deciding if the fist made clean contact with the ball off the palm, however I think now the only time they really call a throw is if the ball has clearly left the palm before fist makes contact.

Re the doggies exploiting the rule. I don't believe they set out to do so. I think it probably evolved as the year progressed and they figured if they weren't being called for it then it was within the rules.

Yep, quite agree-the doggies flick it out so quickly that it's very hard for the eye to see, let alone call it as illegal. And because the afl want to speed the game up they will tolerate it. It's a pity because handball has been an integral part of our game but things are changing. Lots of players have been throwing for years but dogs have taken it to a whole new level. The dogs footy is certainly attractive to watch so time for us to get on board, which means we have to learn to flick it out ourselves ( in the prelim against the Swans our mids just got nailed every time, whereas dogs get it out, a lot) And we need to find ways to reduce its impact in the opposition-maybe more fine tuning of placement to enable more intercepts or tackle the flipping hands!

 

[Bobby_]

I'd say the Cat's and the Bulldogs and the Eagles and the Crows are inconsistent wildcards that could peak at the right time and sweep the field.

With what forward line though?
You saw first hand what happens in the finals if you only have one quality forward and it barely got us past a team who were missing their own key forward.

Teams like the Bulldogs, Eagles and Crows have upwards of three key forwards, we have Tom Hawkins.
It is a makeshift forward-line of part timers. Guys like Stanley, Black, Taylor, Blicavs, Henderson, but they have little to no upside.
Western Bulldogs' Redpath/Cloke/Stringer/Boyd & Adelaide's Jenkins/Walker/McGovern/Lynch are superior to what we currently have setup.

You also need to factor in the improvement to both West Coast & Western Bulldogs this year.
At the end of the H&A season, they had a lot of injury concerns (Naitanui, Lycett, MacKenzie, Jetta) & (Wallis, Murphy, Redpath, Adams).
They improve out of sight while Geelong stagnate as our list has not improved at all from last year.

 

[Ray Donovan]

Whoa there horsey. We did that last year (Lloyd). And the year before (Scarlett). Can't just keep bringing in Assistants every year. Some need to be developed internally. Just like the list, a couple of external coaches, a couple of developed coaches and we let them blend.

Simon Lloyd and Matthew scarlett are excellent additions. Scarlett was at the dogs in a brief role

 

[barmy44]

Well can you tell me the last team to win a premiership without being in the Grand Final? Call me old fashioned but I'd say in the real world a team only realistically challenges for a flag if they make the Grand Final.

rather pointless semantics really, which adds nothing of any substance to the discussion. obviously a team cannot win a final if they dont play in that final, but to say that no team is 'realistically challenging for a flag' until they are past the PF is a bit daft as well.

neither view is correct or incorrect until you define the frame of reference.

in a 'season context', there would be far too many instances to mention of teams 'realistically challenging for a flag' that season but ultimately missing the GF.

in a singular context, sure - a grand final is 'the final challenge for a flag'.

being as black and white as you were above is only really useful to furthering circular argument online.

 

[Partridge]

Pretty false equivalency there. We didn't systematically demonstrate attempts to sneak posters past the goal umps over the course of the year as a cornerstone of our gameplan, but the quick handballing of the Doggos was clearly intentional and led to the efforts that were probably more throw than handpass.

Their premiership is mostly intact in my view but when you combine the admission with the incredibly one sided umpiring on the day it's not the greatest look in the world.

That's purely subjective. I didn't think there was anything one-sided about the umpiring on Grand Final day at all. They sensibly let things go unless they were obvious and the game was better for it (as it always is).

 

[catempire]

That's purely subjective. I didn't think there was anything one-sided about the umpiring on Grand Final day at all. They sensibly let things go unless they were obvious and the game was better for it (as it always is).

I rewatched the game the other day and my subjective view is the Dogs got a great run with the umps and I was barracking for them in the day like they were my own team.

 

[barmy44]

blightys - final point on your 'realistically challenging for a flag' side journey...

anyone who said novak djokovic wasnt realistically challenging for this years australian open at the beginning of the tournament was wrong.

anyone who said he was realistically challenging for it just before the final between federer and nadal was also wrong.

frame of reference...

can you honestly imagine a season preview show where a panelist asked who was realistically challenging for a flag answered 'well, we wont know until GF week'? that person would sound like (and be) a jackass.

this final comment is deliberately petty and meant in a jovial way, but - its a strange 'real world' you live in if you honestly want to push that viewpoint!

 

[cynical]

a close prelim loss is being a serious contender

losing a prelim halfway through the first quarter is a serious pretender

 

[BlightysCats]

being as black and white as you were above is only really useful to furthering circular argument online.

I'm not being black and white, reality is black and white, you do not realistically challenge for a flag unless you make the Grand Final. Anyone who says otherwise is speaking nonsense. Again I'll ask how many teams have won a Premiership without playing in the grand final in the last 100 years?

 

[barmy44]

a close prelim loss is being a serious contender

losing a prelim halfway through the first quarter is a serious pretender

in hindsight, yes.

 

[barmy44]

I'm not being black and white, reality is black and white, you do not realistically challenge for a flag unless you make the Grand Final. Anyone who says otherwise is speaking nonsense. Again I'll ask how many teams have won a Premiership without playing in the grand final in the last 100 years?

0.