Roast I've seen Ross Lyon-coached sides play more exciting football

Danger!Selwood

All Australian
May 18, 2016
800
1,027
AFL Club
Geelong
Why though? It's obvious enough that there are times in games when we are left with no choice that we take the game on and move it quickly. I really don't understand why it isn't tried more.

But I do accept that when you are constantly on the back foot because of the midfield getting flogged it makes it hard to plan an execute anything else at all.
We tried to play that way the first few weeks of the season and conceded over 60 inside 50's each game (only allowed over 60 once in 2017 I believe). It doesn't work for the team we have at the moment.

Its not as simple as get it and move it as fast as you can, otherwise everyone would do it.

The part we struggle with when we are forced to go long down the line, is that we have next to no one in our forward half and midfield we can rely on to make a contest, let alone take a mark. Going to be more of an issue now Ratugolea is gone for the season.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Sticksman

Club Legend
Feb 7, 2013
1,815
3,512
AFL Club
Geelong
So many forget the single most obvious answer.
“There are 2 teams out there.”.
Most of the time this “slow ball movement” is due to opposition tactics and structures to disallow fast ball movement, just as we also Setup to do the same.
So true. As they say in the classics "it's bleedin' obvious when it's said like that."

Although it's obvious it's often forgotten or ignored.
 

Mad_Hatter

Norm Smith Medallist
Nov 12, 2015
9,677
18,026
AFL Club
Geelong
How do you explain then the tactics of the 1st half of the Eagles game - ridiculous short passes going nowhere - Geel looked pathetic- just keep possession - then what happened in the 3rd qtr - chalk and cheese . Eagles didnt play negative football in the 1st half - so your argument falls to bits
What?
This doesn’t even make sense.
You do realise all sides have defensive structures right?
 

Frappe

Club Legend
Jul 29, 2006
2,701
2,579
Australia
AFL Club
Geelong
I agree with everything you say there,but it raises a few questions.
1 Are we so poorly coached or mentally weak as a side that we can let bottom sides dictate how the game will be played?
2 Is Scott happy enough just to roll with an ugly game if he feels he will get the 4 points anyway.
3 Are we as supporters over rating this group.
4 And my opinion only is we have a game plan the players are not capable of carrying out,we get up and down the ground o/k but to slowly and our skills with the ball and decision making are far to often hopeless .
Answer to 2

I think as a coach during the game, Scott would not necessarily be worried about the game as a spectacle. He might be worried about style etc if it’s detrimental to the result, but the 4pts is what counts on the day.
 

Mad_Catter

Club Legend
Apr 8, 2011
2,841
4,853
AFL Club
Geelong
If the Geelong rep who used to post on this board would read some of this... it would change.... little to nothing (probably nothing unfortunately).

Its like asking a business to care about quality and the environment and other social issues... but in the end only one thing really matters to them.Making money. Not getting caught breaking the rules while making money , being clean green citizens , being a banner leader in the rainbow parade are all good clothes ..but what what feeds the dog is making money. Make no money..no business.

And just like a business a footy club is all for entertainment , and kicking goals , being fan friendly , taking a lead in social issues , wearing orange socks and visiting old peoples homes.. but it all starts to mean jack.. if they don't win.When was the last coach sacked .. for playing lousy style that was winning?

So in the end we are just cows to be milked. Hey cows ..why dont you moo more when the players need a bit of a lift. Hey cow please buy a $100 raffle ticket. Hey cow dont you forget to buy your membership this year and next ..can we setup an auto debit. hey cow how dare you critic the farmer..you just don't understand the modern farm. We have coaches who thinks its a good idea to reduce game time even more. 20 minute quarters are too long ..the game is too long , the youth of today just cant handle games being to drawn out , we need to get those families home earlier. As if.. reducing the playing time onfield will mean we get home earlier... dont they know the clubs got to sell hamburgers and donuts in that extra time between quarters to all the cows that got off their chairs and came?

Yep I guess Im questioning where its heading to.. but like Partridge said... Its a professional game now.
Well summarised Turbo, you're dead right and I couldn't agree more. Until us supporters stop buying memberships, stop going to the games, stop watching it on TV etc, nothing will change, not as long as they continue to rake in the money and their bottom line is still as healthy as ever.
 

numbwombat

Team Captain
Sep 15, 2010
514
624
AFL Club
Geelong
I agree with everything you say there,but it raises a few questions.
1 Are we so poorly coached or mentally weak as a side that we can let bottom sides dictate how the game will be played?
One thing I wonder about is fitness - in the preseason the club said they designed it around ensuring player availability/avoiding injuries instead of maximising players’ ability to tun out the season. I guess with that in mind they probably expected to be able to rest players like 2011, so when injuries did hit, we lost that option, plus the onballers probably ended up spending more TOG than usual with the reduced benches. I haven’t checked how many km.s players like Danger/Duncan/Selwood etc have run in recent games vs their usual average, but it might partly explain a change to slower ball movement as well as the midfield struggling recently.
 

Ricketz

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 2, 2011
5,001
5,364
Wagga Wagga
AFL Club
Geelong
Let's count it up: over this last few weeks our scores have been 73, 50, 66, 93, and 69 - and three of those games were wins, and no serious weather to account for any of it. Let's face it, that's some awful footy to watch.

That'd be fine if we were an any-win-as-good-as-any-other kind of team like, say, Richmond - but we're not. I've grown up pretty much all my life watching Geelong playing attacking, high-risk high-scoring footy under Blight and Thompson, and it's something that's been great about being a Geelong supporter.

Not this, though. This is bad to watch, even when it's a win. When it's a loss, it's downright awful. It's also not exactly giving Hawkins, Gregson and other permanent forwards a chance, either. Doesn't exactly get the crowd involved.

This kind of footy should be an absolute anathema to Geelong, and it's a shame we're playing it.
I want them to win. I understand that we don't have the cattle to play like '07. I don't have a problem with this. Scott and assistants are making a rebuild side into a finals, and potentially top four, side.

Seems like a first world problem, to me.
 

foxdog50

Premium Gold
Aug 1, 2006
4,863
4,454
Australia
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Australia (Cricket)
I don't think it's our current. It's the who competition.
I posted this on another thread

football to watch is not interesting at all... If i didn't follow Geelong as much as i do, i would rarely watch it as its so ugly to watch.Im mates with a former Captain of a AFL club and he doesn't rarely watch it as its so ugly to watch it. I hate rule changes but unfortunately its the only option.
Im pretty sure that in Womens VFL that when there is a throw in from the Boundary line, there has to be 3 players from each team in the 50 mt?? I think thats a highly option to try. Or there has to be some zone thing implanted into the rules... I feel like I'm old saying this but in only is my early 30s. I miss how players use to play there position, e.g. FF would never go up to the opposition defence. This is why Country/Local football is better to watch, as its such more of a open game as there not the whole 2 teams is in 1 teams forward half....
lol there my rant
Bump.... I want to say this again .
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

foxdog50

Premium Gold
Aug 1, 2006
4,863
4,454
Australia
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Australia (Cricket)
The state of the game generally troubles me greatly but I didn’t think today was the worst example.
I personally think it did. But hey we're all have a view:thumbsu:

Like if said I hate rule changes but unfortunately there has to be some kinda rule come in.
 

catempire

Moderator
Mar 20, 2004
33,523
62,056
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
I personally think it did. But hey we're all have a view:thumbsu:

Like if said I hate rule changes but unfortunately there has to be some kinda rule come in.
Maybe for another thread but I just think rotations have got to be cut back massively. We have gone too far in favour of endurance athletes and bringing everyone back to only 1-2 short breaks a game will mean players won’t be able to gut run to congrst space all day.
 

foxdog50

Premium Gold
Aug 1, 2006
4,863
4,454
Australia
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Australia (Cricket)
Maybe for another thread but I just think rotations have got to be cut back massively. We have gone too far in favour of endurance athletes and bringing everyone back to only 1-2 short breaks a game will mean players won’t be able to gut run to congrst space all day.
Yeah I'm agree with that. If the players are such athletes they should be able to run the game out.
Maybe cut it to 50 but if a player needs to be looked that there injured then that not part of the 50
 

Mahlepi

Cancelled
Mar 16, 2015
7,631
9,447
danger zone
AFL Club
Geelong
Maybe for another thread but I just think rotations have got to be cut back massively. We have gone too far in favour of endurance athletes and bringing everyone back to only 1-2 short breaks a game will mean players won’t be able to gut run to congrst space all day.
needs to go to soccer rules, if you come off you are off for the game
then we will see football

thats how it used to be played
 

Landgraft

Norm Smith Medallist
Dec 18, 2016
5,063
8,959
AFL Club
Geelong
Maybe for another thread but I just think rotations have got to be cut back massively. We have gone too far in favour of endurance athletes and bringing everyone back to only 1-2 short breaks a game will mean players won’t be able to gut run to congrst space all day.
I still feel like a massively reduced interchange will actually hurt the non-athletes more, because they'll be run off their legs much sooner.

Blicz and Scully would have a field day playing on opponents that can't match their tank. It'd basically be like having an extra man on the ground.
 

UnitedWarrior93

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 18, 2014
13,947
11,142
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Man United, San Antonio Spurs
Maybe for another thread but I just think rotations have got to be cut back massively. We have gone too far in favour of endurance athletes and bringing everyone back to only 1-2 short breaks a game will mean players won’t be able to gut run to congrst space all day.
Nah, back in the day we saw footballers as footballers because they had a day job and trained twice a week, not many would’ve been super athletes so that’s why local footy is great to watch. Now with the AFL a 24-7 full time professional job, players are getting the best out of themselves fitness wise and recovery is huge these days so ball work during weeks is not a lot, then you add all the tactics and stuff from the coaches, and you have the game we have today.

Don’t think cutting interchange will help a great deal, will just mean the less skilled ‘athletes’ will have an even more impact on games which will result in more poor footy.
 

goyoucatters

Premiership Player
Jan 31, 2008
3,233
6,757
Brisbane
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Stockport County, Chicago Cubs
Blicz and Scully would have a field day playing on opponents that can't match their tank. It'd basically be like having an extra man on the ground.
I'd take that over what we're seeing now. Football at the moment looks like it's permitting about three extra players per team around the ball at any given point in time. Ugly, awkward and a terrible 'showcase' of what's supposedly good about the game.

I still feel like a massively reduced interchange will actually hurt the non-athletes more, because they'll be run off their legs much sooner.
You might be right. So even a continued stepped process (down to 60 in '19, and then further reductions from there) might be better than a one-off cull of the current number.

But I would see that Sunday's match (regardless of the result) was further evidence that there is something seriously wrong with the game right now. Third against fourth in a supposed 'blockbuster' at the home of football. And what a spectacle it proved to be...

I was only able to watch the first half, and frankly I was almost grateful to have to leave it there. Scrimmage after scrimmage, scrubbed kick after scrubbed kick, fumbled possessions galore. And most of this happening with more than a dozen players within a few metres of each other around the ball at almost every stage.

Every now and then, the ball would clear the suffocating congestion and a game of footy would threaten to break out. But never for very long.

I know that 'winners are grinners' and all that. So the Tiges can rightly enjoy the first time they've transcended perennial irrelevance in over thirty years.

But when the look of the game at the highest level is actually not appreciably different to the mediocrity my son's U11 team turns up every weekend, you have to wonder how the diehard fans of tomorrow are going to be attracted by the game of today.

I'll admit to having been a long-term fan of simply reducing the interchange cap as the best measure to address the game's current malaise. But I now see the game has not looked this bad overall since I started watching in 1980. So AFL, it has come to this...

Just. Do. Something.
 

catempire

Moderator
Mar 20, 2004
33,523
62,056
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
I still feel like a massively reduced interchange will actually hurt the non-athletes more, because they'll be run off their legs much sooner.

Blicz and Scully would have a field day playing on opponents that can't match their tank. It'd basically be like having an extra man on the ground.
Agree that it might exaggerate the attributes of the elite runners, but they are very few in number.

I think the overall impact is more likely to be threefold:

1. Players who are currently getting at least one interchange per quarter will be limited to maybe one or two per game. They will now have to hold position much better as they can’t be wasting energy running up and down the ground. This will limit congestion.

2. Players holding position more = more one on one contests = A Good Thing.

3. In recruitment, if you try to get an advantage by recruiting more athletes you will likely be trading this off against the imperative to have players who can win contests. More good footballers will be recruited which will help the overall skill level in the game.
 

Freomaniac

Brownlow Medallist
May 3, 2007
17,898
8,369
Parts Unknown
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Man City, Valencia, Lazio, Panthers
Let's count it up: over this last few weeks our scores have been 73, 50, 66, 93, and 69 - and three of those games were wins, and no serious weather to account for any of it. Let's face it, that's some awful footy to watch.

That'd be fine if we were an any-win-as-good-as-any-other kind of team like, say, Richmond - but we're not. I've grown up pretty much all my life watching Geelong playing attacking, high-risk high-scoring footy under Blight and Thompson, and it's something that's been great about being a Geelong supporter.

Not this, though. This is bad to watch, even when it's a win. When it's a loss, it's downright awful. It's also not exactly giving Hawkins, Gregson and other permanent forwards a chance, either. Doesn't exactly get the crowd involved.

This kind of footy should be an absolute anathema to Geelong, and it's a shame we're playing it.
The fact that you have seen Ross Lyon coached sides play more attacking football is a statement in itself. I find some peoples View on Ross Lyon to be a bit... misleading in some degree...
feel like a freo supporter

extremely boring games
Really? I have watched every watched every Ross Lyon coached freo game and He has had freo played some attacking footy this year. Kicked 16.10.106 vs Essendon at home. 13.18 vs the suns in which we should of kicked 100 points and Kicked 16.12.108 vs the dogs.

And then you had the infamous freo vs Carlton game: 12 goals to 0 goals in the 1st half.

This isn't just a Geelong problem though, it's a league wide problem.
Its a State league problem too.

I live in SA and Watch SANFL game regularly.. Port Magpies Scored 4.4.28 while Woodville west torrens scored 2.14.28 in a whole game this year. Port had 19 out of 21 players that were Port Power listed players that played in that game.
 

iameviljez

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 20, 2004
11,867
12,089
Dili, Timor-Leste
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Pompey
The fact that you have seen Ross Lyon coached sides play more attacking football is a statement in itself. I find some peoples View on Ross Lyon to be a bit... misleading in some degree...
Freo is better to watch this year. However, Ross has been in the game long enough to have earned his reputation as a defensive, dour coach.
 

Top Bottom