Review Geelong tries its best to lose and finds a way to stagger to a 4 point win over Demons

[Seeds]

I'm going to get in trouble. But I liked the discipline in the way we played and our skill execution.

Did I want more scoring? Sure. Bye not scoring we kept Melbourne in it.

But that game style effectively cut out the influence of Gawn, Viney, Petracca.
We minimised stoppages by playing keeping off.

Well done to fort.
And I thought o'connor was excellent right up until he almost handed them the game.

Excellent coaching. Albeit a defence first plan, he got the players to buy in.

When you have 3 of the best midfielders of the past thirty years, plus a 4 times best and fairest midfielder plus duncan then if we want to avoid midfield stoppages something is seriously wrong.

 

[Tony Barber]

When you have 3 of the best midfielders of the past thirty years, plus a 4 times best and fairest midfielder plus duncan then if we want to avoid midfield stoppages something is seriously wrong.

It was simply taking away their one advantage. Melbourne is built on inside workers.
The only thing the sideways movement did that wasn't great was to give the Melbourne defence a chance to set up.

The game plan worked. The ladder says so.

 

[Drunkcat]

The one thing Scott frustrates me is playing out of form players and players coming back from injury every blo-dy year

 

[Seeds]

It was simply taking away their one advantage. Melbourne is built on inside workers.
The only thing the sideways movement did that wasn't great was to give the Melbourne defence a chance to set up.

The game plan worked. The ladder says so.

Its only an advantage to melbourne if you rate the importance of rucks far far more than me. And i rate rucks compared to most. You must be tearing your hair out at the way our club has treated the ruck department since ottens left.

 

[Cataholic]

I'm going to get in trouble. But I liked the discipline in the way we played and our skill execution.

Did I want more scoring? Sure. By not scoring we kept Melbourne in it.

But that game style effectively cut out the influence of Gawn, Viney, Petracca.
We minimised stoppages by playing keeping off.

Well done to fort.
And I thought o'connor was excellent right up until he almost handed them the game.

Excellent coaching. Albeit a defence first plan, he got the players to buy in.

Well, I hope they adjust to playing in an empty stadium regularly because I doubt the supporters did, or will, buy into that mind numbing crap.

 

[catempire]

I'm going to get in trouble. But I liked the discipline in the way we played and our skill execution.

Did I want more scoring? Sure. By not scoring we kept Melbourne in it.

But that game style effectively cut out the influence of Gawn, Viney, Petracca.
We minimised stoppages by playing keeping off.

Well done to fort.
And I thought o'connor was excellent right up until he almost handed them the game.

Excellent coaching. Albeit a defence first plan, he got the players to buy in.

People are conflating the spectacle with the substance. The spectacle stunk but I totally agree that coaching was what won the game. It was boring but very effective. I think it’s going to be a problem over the course of the season though because I don’t rate Melbourne and better teams will shut down space better.

 

[Tony Barber]

People are conflating the spectacle with the substance. The spectacle stunk but I totally agree that coaching was what won the game. It was boring but very effective. I think it’s going to be a problem over the course of the season though because I don’t rate Melbourne and better teams will shut down space better.

There is no way that the style is in the fits all category.
Only elements of that would suit playing Richmond for instance. Because quite simply they score too quick.

What I would probably have liked was to see five minutes each quarter where they went full attack through the middle and then back it off again.
Smack on a few goals and then lock it up.

The Aussie cricket team has done it for decades.
They'd bowl magill for instance because they knew he could take wickets. But they knew he'd go for runs.

Need to be able to switch it up and down I think.
Not sure if the restrictions on runners has affected that aspect.

 

[Cataholic]

People are conflating the spectacle with the substance. The spectacle stunk but I totally agree that coaching was what won the game. It was boring but very effective. I think it’s going to be a problem over the course of the season though because I don’t rate Melbourne and better teams will shut down space better.

The spectacle IS the heart and soul of the game though CE.

People turn up to watch the spectacle. If they don't like it, they don't turn up. No crowds = no club/s = no competition.

The AFL is but a sporting version of Broadway, and the players are paid actors, who earn their keep by putting on a show that we want to see, that is better than others, and makes us feel justified in handing over our hard earned cash in return.

The sh*t show the GFC is putting on will neither help attract, or retain, its supporters and it sure won't provide us with anything of substance come any finals we manage to fall into.

 

[catempire]

Need to be able to switch it up and down I think.

Agree. That’s what they will be focusing on. People wanting to see fast and direct play as the dominant style are going to be disappointed.

 

[catempire]

The spectacle IS the heart and soul of the game though CE.

People turn up to watch the spectacle. If they don't like it, they don't turn up. No crowds = no club/s = no competition.

The AFL is but a sporting version of Broadway, and the players are paid actors, who earn their keep by putting on a show that we want to see, that is better than others, and makes us feel justified in handing over our hard earned cash in return.

The sh*t show the GFC is putting on will neither help attract, or retain, its supporters and it sure won't provide us with anything of substance come any finals we manage to fall into.

No argument from me on this. Comes back to the question of who has responsibility to make the game attractive? I think Scott’s right: it’s not the coaches job. It’s the administrators.

 

[Cataholic]

No argument from me on this. Comes back to the question of who has responsibility to make the game attractive? I think Scott’s right: it’s not the coaches job. It’s the administrators.

Hmm...... I agree the administrators must take some ownership of the problem, but I disagree with absolving the likes of Scott from all responsibility.

The game plan we are employing has his mindset all over it - by his very nature he defaults to a dour, careful, slow strategy and he has persisted with it for years now.

I believe he has a personal role to play in changing his mindset for the betterment of the club, and by extension, the competition.

 

[dewah07]

How are we guys,

Just wondering what got into O'Connor over the weekend? Was his increase in stats based off stewart going down? if not who do you think picks up the slack and kick in duties for stewrat?

 

[Larry Donohue]

People are conflating the spectacle with the substance. The spectacle stunk but I totally agree that coaching was what won the game. It was boring but very effective. I think it’s going to be a problem over the course of the season though because I don’t rate Melbourne and better teams will shut down space better.

The chip kicking could just as easily cost us the game in the end. Wasn't coaching it was Melbourne's inability to finish th a t won us the game

 

[Goggin Our Best]

The spectacle IS the heart and soul of the game though CE.

People turn up to watch the spectacle. If they don't like it, they don't turn up. No crowds = no club/s = no competition.

The AFL is but a sporting version of Broadway, and the players are paid actors, who earn their keep by putting on a show that we want to see, that is better than others, and makes us feel justified in handing over our hard earned cash in return.

The sh*t show the GFC is putting on will neither help attract, or retain, its supporters and it sure won't provide us with anything of substance come any finals we manage to fall into.

This might sound like an idiotic thing to say - because in the example i will give it was to Geelongs detriment

In the final desperate minutes of the 2013 PF - Mitch Duncan kicked a couple of absolute bombs in from full back - and Ben Stratton ( from those monster kick ins ) took a couple of terrific one grab - strong overhead contested marks - now if you are a neutral watching that you would say - how exciting is that - thats what i want to watch . Not the FB kicking some 15 metre pass to the back pocket - rinse and repeat all over the ground .- where is the remote - i will switch it to the NRL

 

[catempire]

Hmm...... I agree the administrators must take some ownership of the problem, but I disagree with absolving the likes of Scott from all responsibility.

The game plan we are employing has his mindset all over it - by his very nature he defaults to a dour, careful, slow strategy and he has persisted with it for years now.

I believe he has a personal role to play in changing his mindset for the betterment of the club, and by extension, the competition.

His job is to win games and to put forward the best plan to do that. That includes winning ugly if it takes it.

 

[Baudolino]

No argument from me on this. Comes back to the question of who has responsibility to make the game attractive? I think Scott’s right: it’s not the coaches job. It’s the administrators.

It's definitely not the coaches responsibility. Coaches will always choose whichever approach is most strategically expedient in helping them win. As you would expect. The whole "the game is being overcoached" meme is absurd. Do the people who argue that really think that famously attacking sides in other sports like Pep Guardiola's Barcelona teams were so good to watch because they were undercoached? Of course not. That team had an extreme adherence to a particular coaching philosophy that Guardiola obsessed over. It just happened to be the case that he found a strategy that was both highly attacking *and* highly successful. If modern AFL coaches knew that aggressive football was strategically the best way to be success, then they would all start playing that way. But it isn't, so they don't.

The answer is to incentivise aggressive attacking coaching and make defensive coaching strategies harder to implement. It's incumbent upon the game's administrators to make changes that further those two goals.

I tend to think Chris Scott's suggestion of 16 players is the best way to go, and I also don't mind the idea of making it play on if a kick is under 20m instead of 15m as it currently is. I'm less convinced by the "any kicks backwards are play on" rule as I think it might lead to a lot of really conservative long kicks down the line instead of switches of play.

 

[catempire]

The chip kicking could just as easily cost us the game in the end. Wasn't coaching it was Melbourne's inability to finish th a t won us the game

Coach can’t kick the ball for them. That was skill execution and decision making.

 

[Cataholic]

This might sound like an idiotic thing to say - because in the example i will give it was to Geelongs detriment

In the final desperate minutes of the 2013 PF - Mitch Duncan kicked a couple of absolute bombs in from full back - and Ben Stratton ( from those monster kick ins ) took a couple of terrific one grab - strong overhead contested marks - now if you are a neutral watching that you would say - how exciting is that - thats what i want to watch . Not the FB kicking some 15 metre pass to the back pocket - rinse and repeat all over the ground .- where is the remote - i will switch it to the NRL

I like the idea of banishing the 15 metre kick, and calling anything short of - say, 30 metres - play on.

 

[thejester]

The spectacle IS the heart and soul of the game though CE.

No, it isn't. The 1963 Premiership side - heirs to the amazing Geelong tradition of attacking football - averaged 78 points a game.

 

[fpm84]

I’ll throw it out there that Melbourne and Carlton appear to have been bogey teams for us in the last few years, regardless of our form overt the past two weeks.

Our last five games v Melbourne have resulted in three wins by under a goal, a loss in the 2018 EF and a big win in round 2 last year when the Demons were extremely underdone (and they had 73 inside-50s despite the loss).

Their combination of a dominant ruck and inside mids always causes us trouble.

 

[Goggin Our Best]

No, it isn't. The 1963 Premiership side - heirs to the amazing Geelong tradition of attacking football - averaged 78 points a game.

Yeah what about 1992 - Geelong very close to a flag - led at half time in the GF - ended up runners up

So Geelong had a very good year in 1992 - what was the Cats average score in 1992

 

[Cataholic]

No, it isn't. The 1963 Premiership side - heirs to the amazing Geelong tradition of attacking football - averaged 78 points a game.

So what do people go to the footy, or any entertainment event for then?

 

[dazbroncos]

At least menegola plays direct and tries to make things happen rather than just take the safe option side ways like half the team. He had a bad disposal day. But usually his disposal is better.

If by direct you infer staight down the line after alllowing the opposition to stream past him and the mark to fill the gaps, then yes.

His last 2 weeks IMO have been anything but direct. He has been slow, deliberate and in effective at times and have directly contributed to opposition scoring chains.


Not geed enough for mine.

GO Catters

 

[thejester]

Yeah what about 1992 - Geelong very close to a flag - led at half time in the GF - ended up runners up

So Geelong had a very good year in 1992 - what was the Cats average score in 1992

Geelong VFL premiership scores, pre-2007:

1925: 10.19 (79)
1931: 9.14 (68)
1937: 18.14 (122)
1951: 11.15 (81)
1952: 13.8 (68)
1963: 15.9 (109)

Truly miraculous that footy survived the Reg Hickey years.

 

[thejester]

So what do people go to the footy, or any entertainment event for then?

Are you serious? Have you racked up 18,000 posts on a Masterchef fan forum?