List Mgmt. Geelong Premiership, why not? Drafting utilities, that's why.

[Pure_Ownage]

It is if your midfield lacks footskills.

Your outside players are supposed to be the ones that deliver the quality kick by foot not your extractors. One of the problems is we don't have enough quality outside players and the ones we do have are injured or inconsistent.

 

[Spazz Cat]

Your outside players are supposed to be the ones that deliver the quality kick by foot not your extractors. One of the problems is we don't have enough quality outside players and the ones we do have are injured or inconsistent.

I agree. It's exactly what I've been saying.

 

[Spazz Cat]

I find it to be a shallow analysis.

"we're too slow on turnover hence our defence is too tall" is often muttered or variations of that, it's cause and effect. The cause is the turnovers and the effect is we concede scores. Personally I'd rather fix the cause and not the effect as we may still have these problems if you don't fix the root cause. Ablett should help as he uses the ball well and is accustomed to high pressure football.

Shallow analysis maybe. But the simple answer is most often the right one.
The cause can be fixed somewhat by dropping a tall and bringing in a smaller quicker player to add more pressure and provide more run.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Shallow analysis maybe. But the simple answer is most often the right one.
The cause can be fixed somewhat by dropping a tall and bringing in a smaller quicker player to add more pressure and provide more run.

I don't think more run is the problem. How we use the ball is the problem requiring a fix.

 

[Spazz Cat]

I don't think more run is the problem. How we use the ball is the problem requiring a fix.

I agree with that especially under pressure.
The best way to reduce pressure (and create it) though is having numbers around the ball.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

I agree with that especially under pressure.
The best way to reduce pressure (and create it) though is having numbers around the ball.

I'm not convinced adding another suspect user will necessarily fix it. I'd say the guys waiting to get in would be players like Murdoch, Thurlow, GHS and Ruggles should we drop a tall for an extra small. How many of those would you say use the footy well?

 

[Spazz Cat]

I'm not convinced adding another suspect user will necessarily fix it. I'd say the guys waiting to get in would be players like Murdoch, Thurlow, GHS and Ruggles should we drop a tall for an extra small. How many of those would you say use the footy well?

Yep That is a problem. Obviously Thurlow but he was so out of form this year.
Murdoch & GHS I don't even wanna talk about.
I love the Rug but yeah he can't kick.
Losing Mots and Lang wasn't ideal right now.
At least Ablett will help.
Saw Jones apply about 10 mins of the most manic pressure you'll ever see once in the VFL this year.
Doubt he has the tank yet though to do it consistently in the AFL.

 

[Racing line]

Didn't we finally play well in a final against Sydney.
Hmm wonder what we did differently that game?

If you ask oppo supporters mate it had nothing to do with us sydney was just cooked.

 

[cynical]

Kicked the football. Cheers
We've been playing the 3 + Mackie for over a decade and it is not why we lose.

We lose big games under pressure when our 2nd tier mids don't stand up and when we butcher the ball going forward, what happens on fast transition going the other way is inconsequential. We'd concede big scores on turnover with a small defence too in those circumstances. That first half v Richmond it was the defence, particularly Lonergan, that kept us in the game, and it happens often where this tall defence some deride are actually saving our bacon in bad games/halves/quarters.

Now, losing Mackie and Lonergan with no replacements seems to suggest we may see a different structure but I do laugh at the constant "we're too tall down back" rhetoric. It's not why we lose, but it has been part of why we win.

tall defence = slow transition, so when our defence has the ball it doesnt transition it very well resulting in poor forward 50 entries which result in turnovers, so the opposition get the ball back

so our talls can defend as well as they like because they arent contributing to us getting scores on the counter attack

it is much better to give up more goals defensively if you can get extra goals from counter attacking

why do you think that structurally most teams have smaller defences?

what are these teams with 3 dominant KPFs?

having a tall defence isnt the only reason why we cant win a flag but it is one

 

[Spazz Cat]

tall defence = slow transition, so when our defence has the ball it doesnt transition it very well resulting in poor forward 50 entries which result in turnovers, so the opposition get the ball back

so our talls can defend as well as they like because they arent contributing to us getting scores on the counter attack

it is much better to give up more goals defensively if you can get extra goals from counter attacking

why do you think that structurally most teams have smaller defences?

what are these teams with 3 dominant KPFs?

having a tall defence isnt the only reason why we cant win a flag but it is one

Yep. I dunno the stats or anything but I would think more goals than not are created from teams back 50/60 metres.
There's a reason why forward pressure is rated so highly these days.

 

[El Dubya]

Yep. I dunno the stats or anything but I would think more goals than not are created from teams back 50/60 metres.
There's a reason why forward pressure is rated so highly these days.

It's the same reason we were happy for Menzel to shop himself around.

 

[cynical]

I'm not convinced adding another suspect user will necessarily fix it. I'd say the guys waiting to get in would be players like Murdoch, Thurlow, GHS and Ruggles should we drop a tall for an extra small. How many of those would you say use the footy well?

Thurlow and GHS use the footy well, Ruggles and Murdoch at least use it better than talls

even if they arent great players it makes more sense structurally to play them over all the talls, instead of every year doing the same thing and getting the same result

 

[Art Vandelay_]

tall defence = slow transition, so when our defence has the ball it doesnt transition it very well resulting in poor forward 50 entries which result in turnovers, so the opposition get the ball back

so our talls can defend as well as they like because they arent contributing to us getting scores on the counter attack

it is much better to give up more goals defensively if you can get extra goals from counter attacking

why do you think that structurally most teams have smaller defences?

what are these teams with 3 dominant KPFs?

having a tall defence isnt the only reason why we cant win a flag but it is one

Our PF opponents for one...
I don't care what other sides do, I care what we do and no the tall defense still is not the root problem as much as you think it is.

No doubt I'll be trolling now...
Just because you had us as the bees knees then off JLT games hitched your wagon to the flat earth society doesn't make you right.

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

I'd expect the data of why it didn't work to be properly analysed and an improved model come up for 2018.

I'm not sure it will change.

 

[Vdubs]

Who is going to provide you what Motlop had??

Are you going for FA??

Cockatoo.

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

Seems to be the fall back under pressure because we lack composure to hit targets by foot whilst pressured. All it leads to is a long bomb and turnover.
No wonder we struggle to score in finals.

Workrate is the cause of that problem.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Workrate is the cause of that problem.

Yeah that 2016 PF thrashing in particular was evident of that. Our forwards didn't move or lead in the first half and I mean all of them

 

[Vdubs]

Didn't we finally play well in a final against Sydney.
Hmm wonder what we did differently that game?

Longmire says we faced a team that was utterly exhausted. Losing 6 in a row meant they were facing multiple elimination finals.And we were desperate and something to prove. It all came together. We CAN do that, but not 3-4 weeks in a row.

 

[Vdubs]

Do you think Burgoyne is an A grader? Because I have Duncan above him this year. As an outside player, he was 10th in the league for disposals, 6th in the league for effective disposals, 10th for marks, 12th for Inside 50's, 21st for tackles, 29th for contested possessions and amazingly also 4th for uncontested possessions, 18th for metres gained, and 14th for score involvements.

That is some imposing consistency across a lot of areas of the game. I doubt there would be more than 10 midfielders ahead of him in that role, to be honest.

Persuasive stats.
Just something about him does not demand A grade must-have status to my way of looking, but no doubt he has become elite.

 

[Vdubs]

Genuine mid who became a utility. He was such a beautiful player to watch wherever he played.

Mackie didn't start as a utility either- promising HFF, then a winger, then a HBF.

 

[Spazz Cat]

Longmire says we faced a team that was utterly exhausted. Losing 6 in a row meant they were facing multiple elimination finals.And we were desperate and something to prove. It all came together. We CAN do that, but not 3-4 weeks in a row.

It's weird they didn't look utterly exhausted the week before though.
I thought we played well that night. Good team balance. Kicked the ball well. Didn't miss many shots.

 

[catempire]

The problem with the “too tall” thesis is that wins and good performances are mysteriously ignored whilst losses are blamed on the phenomena.

For a theory to hold up to scrutiny it at least has to follow a simple pattern.

 

[Spazz Cat]

The problem with the “too tall” thesis is that wins and good performances are mysteriously ignored whilst losses are blamed on the phenomena.

For a theory to hold up to scrutiny it at least has to follow a simple pattern.

I don't do that. I believe there is clear advantage playing an extra tall backline at KP.
Not so on wider grounds.
Results over the past couple of years would hold up to that simple pattern.

 

[Vdubs]

It's weird they didn't look utterly exhausted the week before though.
I thought we played well that night. Good team balance. Kicked the ball well. Didn't miss many shots.

A season of many firsts- CS beating Buckley, and Longmire- first for a little while anyway; Tigers beating us, winning a flag; Hawks out of finals; and some things seem to never change- Demons can not beat NM.

We did look fresh and quicker than weeks before (with Lonergan out?) and everything worked. Reverse for Swans.

 

[Spazz Cat]

A season of many firsts- CS beating Buckley, and Longmire- first for a little while anyway; Tigers beating us, winning a flag; Hawks out of finals; and some things seem to never change- Demons can not beat NM.

We did look fresh and quicker than weeks before (with Lonergan out?) and everything worked. Reverse for Swans.

Haha. I think the Demons won at Etihad too.
Dogs still cant beat us. We still can't win after a bye.