Coach Justin Longmuir Pt 2

[freo1997]

Small rumour Bucks is being poached by a club. Could it be.

 

[doppo]

Small rumour Bucks is being poached by a club. Could it be.

Absolutely zero chance given his relationship with JLo.

 

[WilloTree]

Im not blaming yesterdays loss on him. Thats why I pointed to his overall record of one finals visit in the whole five years of his time as Freo coach.
I feel we are close to being a competitive side. Its just that 1 out of 5 doesnt cut it (and thats just playing finals too let alone winning the whole thing)

Sure. I'm sure every club wants to win the Premiership every year, but there are factors involved.

The main indicators of Premiership winning teams are age and games played profile.

Not who's coach.

 

[WilloTree]

Absolutely zero chance given his relationship with JLo.

Unless they are working together?

 

[freo1997]

Absolutely zero chance given his relationship with JLo.

As an Assistant.

 

[doppo]

As an Assistant.

Ah sorry, misread you. Would love that

 

[WilloTree]

I’m on the same page as you regarding the lack of forward talent.
But dont you think we overuse the handball, especially inside 50. Isn’t that a coaching directive related to the JL gameplan?
Don’t get me wrong - it’s not JLs fault that Switta and Emmett can’t hit the side of a ******* barn door.
But the goals we do score are hard work and that’s surely somewhat related to the method and the coach no?

Might be a part of it. Or that our key forwards are still learning the game (young) and our other forwards don't inspire the confidence in the players to bang it in to them, particularly 1 on 1. It could be a range of issues. Not having a go at you personally, but 'It's the coaches fault' is so narrow minded it's getting tiring.

It's like constantly blaming your wobbly desk for getting Ds in maths. OK - it might have a bearing on your performance, but at some stage you have to look at the skills of the person performing the tests.

 

[WilloTree]

Mate, I’m not sure why you focused on one minor reference in my post about Lyon.

If you go back and re-read, my main point is why we haven’t improved our scoring in 4.5 years under JL. We’ve been bottom 6 for scoring every year (not counting this year as we’ve played more games than most).

Maybe you’re happy with our scoring. But I think it’s a legitimate concern to bring up on a public forum. I want to see improvement. I desperately want us to have our set-up and coaching right before much of our team enters their prime. So yes, I am serious.

How have we added top end talent to the forward line in that time (whilst losing Schultz)?

There's your answer.

 

[Rob]

If JL really believes it was all about the goalkicking then he's completely clueless. 10.1 to 1.10 looks like it on paper, but almost all of Sydney’s goals were easy shots, whereas almost all of ours were tough chances.

 

[dockshark]

Mate, I’m not sure why you focused on one minor reference in my post about Lyon.

If you go back and re-read, my main point is why we haven’t improved our scoring in 4.5 years under JL. We’ve been bottom 6 for scoring every year (not counting this year as we’ve played more games than most).

Maybe you’re happy with our scoring. But I think it’s a legitimate concern to bring up on a public forum. I want to see improvement. I desperately want us to have our set-up and coaching right before much of our team enters their prime. So yes, I am serious.

Try not to take it personally. This board is a bit sensitive at the moment. I agree with what you are saying, there’s a demonstrable problem with scoring under JL. Some of it is associated to players available to him, but so to is some of it associated to his game style and method.

 

[s_wd6]

If JL really believes it was all about the goalkicking then he's completely clueless. 10.1 to 1.10 looks like it on paper, but almost all of Sydney’s goals were easy shots, whereas almost all of ours were tough chances.

There's some element of it, Sydney definitely generated a lot of easy shots and way too many in the goal square, but we also had 5 shots from within 30m and no angle that didn't even score.

 

[dockshark]

There's some element of it, Sydney definitely generated a lot of easy shots and way too many in the goal square, but we also had 5 shots from within 30m and no angle that didn't even score.

Quite right. Thats why it’s pointless to try to turn this into some kind of binary ‘Is it the players or the method’ debate. Reality is that both are contributing to our inability to build winning scores against better teams that apply serious pressure.

 

[WilloTree]

Yep, very strange game and game plan.

We continue to select players forward of the ball who are effort over skill.

I don't know who has the biggest say at selection, but I assume the coach has a big say.

Who would you have brought in?

 

[WilloTree]

Quite right. Thats why it’s pointless to try to turn this into some kind of binary ‘Is it the players or the method’ debate. Reality is that both are contributing to our inability to build winning scores against better teams that apply serious pressure.

I agree with this to a point, but it doesn't matter how good your coach is, if you don't have the cattle - you don't have the cattle.

The AFL world pretty much agreed that Clarko was the best coach in the land by the length of Flemington, but would you say that if his only coaching record was at North?

 

[ROGS]

This is a long post about something I learnt recently and found interesting. Take from it what you will about our style of play.
I did my level 2 cricket coaching recently and one of the online speakers was a coaching analyst gooroo, formerly at Cricket Vic, Port Adelaide and now Essendon.
He promotes a 'learning' coaching style as opposed to a 'teaching' style. So players will drill scenarios over and over and learn/understand the best way to play in the situation. Keep in mind that the coaching stats guys analyse everything. Kick distance, time ball is in the air, who they kicked to, 1v1, 1v2, 2v1, etc. Etc.
Below was with PA.
One obvious scenario is 2 mins left and you need to score/defend from half back.
If the defensive team starts with the ball, the natural thing was maintain possession. Short, accurate kicks to team mates to play the clock down. No brainer.
When the attacking team starts with the ball, they naturally want to move the ball forwards quickly. What was learned after doing this dozens and dozens of times, was that the long kick to a contest down the line almost never resulted in a goal or even a score. I should add that the time it 'should' take to score from HB was 23 seconds. Repeat plays taught the players who were attacking, that the best chance of them scoring was to play in a similar way to the defenders with short accurate kicks maintaining possession. The long bomb was statically useless.
Watching games, you see this over and over. The long kick is the last option and teams are very much looking to handball or short kick rather than kick long. Maintaining possession is the most important thing.
Try and take note of how often a soccered ball out of the pack comes straight back. Picking the ball up will give the team the best chance of scoring.
Why post this? Well I think this is how we've trained our forwards to behave.
Always looking to get the ball into the hands of someone who can have a clear shot at goal rather than the hurried shot. Statically what were doing works, last night it didn't.
Walters is the only player in our team that I would say has natural goal sense. That is the ability to know where the goals are at all times and to be able to execute an accurate shot on goal almost without looking.
This skill/talent is unteachable IMO.
These players only need to pop up 4 or 5 times a game, get involved in the above mentioned handball chain and score with less time needed than most.
Walters is on a downward trajectory but he also spent the first 3/4's on the bench.
The way we play might work 80% of the time, but it also doesn't work 20% of the time. And that's why natural goal kickers are so important. That 20% is their time to shine. We score 80% of our shots last night and we are right in it, we also take thos 20% chances and we win.
I don't think the basic premise of our coaching is wrong. We will beat lots of teams. But we were beaten last night by a team that kept pressure on us all night but most importantly scored, almost literally, 100% of the time. We were no chance.
We're not playing badly, and where we need to improve is perfectly clear. The question is, can we do it?

Really like this post, can you email it to jamie graham or jlo

Sturt if he can ever get fit can be this type of player,cant judge his value by number of possessions

Apart from Sonny we have only ever had Balla`s and the Wiz (maybe Medhurst)

 

[dockshark]

I agree with this to a point, but it doesn't matter how good your coach is, if you don't have the cattle - you don't have the cattle.

The AFL would pretty much agreed that Clarko was the best coach in the land by the length of Flemington, but would you say that if his only coaching record was at North?

I get it, I do. But if you do a bit of objective analysis between the lists, JL has substantially more to work with in 2024. There is issues with his method and approach, and it would be great to see the club acknowledge this and make moves to rectify. We are making up the numbers in 2024, so we should be focuessed on what has the most significant effect in preparing the list and football dept for 2025 and 2026.

And for me it remains a pretty significant point that our board, and our executive leadership had unlimited access into the state of the list in 2020/21 when they released their strategy. We are now in year 4 of the 5 year time horizon and we have failed to achieve any of the strategic objectives that they laid down.

 

[WilloTree]

I get it, I do. But if you do a bit of objective analysis between the lists, JL has substantially more to work with in 2024. There is issues with his method and approach, and it would be great to see the club acknowledge this and make moves to rectify. We are making up the numbers in 2024, so we should be focuessed on what has the most significant effect in preparing the list and football dept for 2025 and 2026.

And for me it remains a pretty significant point that our board, and our executive leadership had unlimited access into the state of the list in 2020/21 when they released their strategy. We are now in year 4 of the 5 year time horizon and we have failed to achieve any of the strategic objectives that they laid down.

You've missed what I'm saying. How do we know if there is an 'issue with his method and approach' if you don't have the players to execute?

I'll give you an example; I had a very very good tennis coach when I was a jnr. I was still a pretty lousy serve.

 

[FreoGirl]

as someone who never wanted JLo, I was proud of him in the press conference

he'sin for a bumpy ride

 

[Madas]

I saw a bunch of blokes who had other s**t on their mind last night. Ordinarily, I'd call it another example of how mentally weak this team is, but given the circumstances, I'm not sure there's much to be taken out of the game.

I honestly want to believe that because it’s tangible and convenient but I was at the game and Freo come out breathing fire and had Sydney on the ropes for most of the first quarter, but could not convert .

Then Sydney found their feet and just went about their business .
All of a sudden score board pressure is on us and we went to water

Only positive I can take out of it is the crowd seemed to be having an enjoyable evening out despite the shellacking and after the 14th point it got quite humorous.

 

[DocT]

Small rumour Bucks is being poached by a club. Could it be.

I hope not.

 

[DocT]

If JL really believes it was all about the goalkicking then he's completely clueless. 10.1 to 1.10 looks like it on paper, but almost all of Sydney’s goals were easy shots, whereas almost all of ours were tough chances.

They were not nearly all tough chances. We should have had at least 5-6 goals by that stage - when we were 1.10 we had had about 14-15 shots on goal.

 

[poshman]

Who would you have brought in?

I am talking more about our selection process in general. I would rather take a look at Simpson as sub and Delean as a crumber than have the same effort guys in each week. Will they perform better than who we have currently? I don't know... We do know what the current group provide and it is little when it comes to finishing around goal.

Given the picks we have, it would be good from a strategic pov to see if we think any of them have what it takes.

Sturt payed and didn't do much but got on the scoreboard. I would rather that than a lot of effort and nothing on the scoreboard on a regular basis.

 

[poshman]

They were not nearly all tough chances. We should have had at least 5-6 goals by that stage - when we were 1.10 we had had about 14-15 shots on goal.

And of those if we had kicked just below average we should have kicked 7. 30-40m out should be a easy to moderate kick. a couple were on a bit worse than 45 degree angle but we should have at least kicked 50%. It was a strange game and strange result. I don't think we could repeat that if we tried.

 

[Raz]

This thread so reminds me of that great Poet

" .. you either love or hate it , depending on the score...."

 

[Rob]

They were not nearly all tough chances. We should have had at least 5-6 goals by that stage - when we were 1.10 we had had about 14-15 shots on goal.

Not saying we shouldn't have done better than 1.10, other than Voss's set shot up until that point most of our shots at goal were either under direct physical pressure or from the boundary.
Compared to Sydney who had most of their shots directly in front or only a few metres out.

Whatever was going on, they were generating much easier chances than we were. That was the story of the game, it wasn't simply down to accurate kicks on goal. Unless it's the gameplan to pull goals out of our arse and win the game that way.