Strategy Round 5 Changes vs Richmond Tigers

[Jezzitizle]

whenever someone is negative on Switta's contributions to the team I always know to instantly dismiss their opinion. And the whole Dudley or Switta debate is so ****en stupid when Banfield is in the 22.

Definitely contributes, sometimes (but not nearly every game) he is really damaging with his ball use, and his blindside tackles can be great. He is really good tackling at stoppages.

Pressure is good too.

I’d have him in the team over Banners because he won’t have the skill errors.

But when we are talking Reid (who seems to be playing the Switta role) or Dudley - that’s a more difficult decision. Their ball use is very good, plus they hit the scoreboard, and can kick more than 30m.

Dangerous small forwards make us a very different proposition, harder to roll off against our other forwards, and we don’t need forward pressure if we are kicking goals in the first place. Also makes opposing rebounders more accountable.

I think they can roll off Switta without much worry.

The most important thing for me is we pick players based on performance - not reputation. And I can’t say that is always what we do.

 

[dont bowl there]

whenever someone is negative on Switta's contributions to the team I always know to instantly dismiss their opinion. And the whole Dudley or Switta debate is so ****en stupid when Banfield is in the 22.

Our small have never looked this dangerous but sure dismiss away.

 

[Dale147]

 

[Spirit Level]

whenever someone is negative on Switta's contributions to the team I always know to instantly dismiss their opinion. And the whole Dudley or Switta debate is so ****en stupid when Banfield is in the 22.

Ahh yes, the old "anyone who doesn't agree with me is stupid and wrong" argument.

How embarrassing

 

[ubiquitous226]

Definitely contributes, sometimes (but not nearly every game) he is really damaging with his ball use, and his blindside tackles can be great. He is really good tackling at stoppages.

Pressure is good too.

I’d have him in the team over Banners because he won’t have the skill errors.

But when we are talking Reid (who seems to be playing the Switta role) or Dudley - that’s a more difficult decision. Their ball use is very good, plus they hit the scoreboard, and can kick more than 30m.

Dangerous small forwards make us a very different proposition, harder to roll off against our other forwards, and we don’t need forward pressure if we are kicking goals in the first place. Also makes opposing rebounders more accountable.

I think they can roll off Switta without much worry.

The most important thing for me is we pick players based on performance - not reputation. And I can’t say that is always what we do.

The challenge back the other way is people are always excited by the next new shiny thing and it's the flashy visible stuff that stands out.

An AFL club would be very aware of what the actual performance of a player was, but it may or may not match up with what us mostly casual observers see.

 

[Mags98]

I also don't want Richmond close early, or even worse get behind and have to chase the game.

We were very lucky against he bulldogs, as we were smashed in the middle and gave up a huge number of inside 50's.

I don't think you will win many games while losing the inside 50 count 44 to 63.

i50 counts is a very shallow stat. if were scoring with 70% of our entries we can absolutely win games with a low i50 count. what good is it to get the ball i50 that many times if it just spills out straight away?

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Hmmm, its a harder decision than I realised. If Jackson was playing id play him mid/ruck and go "smaller" up front but that's not an option for a few weeks.

So you have to pick 7 forwards out of Freddy, Amiss, Bolton, Treacy, Switta, Voss, Dudley and Banfield...

 

[go_the_dockers]

i50 counts is a very shallow stat. if were scoring with 70% of our entries we can absolutely win games with a low i50 count. what good is it to get the ball i50 that many times if it just spills out straight away?

The concern I have is getting smashed in the middle, like we did vs Geelong.

 

[swanny1234]

whenever someone is negative on Switta's contributions to the team I always know to instantly dismiss their opinion. And the whole Dudley or Switta debate is so ****en stupid when Banfield is in the 22.

I’m fine with Switta coming in for Banfield, but not for Dudley.

 

[Jezzitizle]

The challenge back the other way is people are always excited by the next new shiny thing and it's the flashy visible stuff that stands out.

An AFL club would be very aware of what the actual performance of a player was, but it may or may not match up with what us mostly casual observers see.

Definitely true.

They also go for stability and don’t want to drop established players lightly.

I think we are too loyal at times to individuals, to the detriment of the team.

I also think we have been prone to undervalue actually kicking goals, in valuing defence and things which can lead to goals.

JL is clearly unhappy with how he is labelled, it may well be making a difference in his thinking.

If Reid and Duds keep kicking and creating goals, and then either are dropped for Switta, who then holds his spot whilst being less offensively productive - we can definitely make some conclusions.

 

[Jezzitizle]

Hmmm, its a harder decision than I realised. If Jackson was playing id play him mid/ruck and go "smaller" up front but that's not an option for a few weeks.

So you have to pick 7 forwards out of Freddy, Amiss, Bolton, Treacy, Switta, Voss, Dudley and Banfield...

Missed Reid?

Fred Amiss Jackson
Bolton Treacy Reid

Duds bench.

Switta sub or emergency - if Dudley is kicking 1.5 goals per game and performs well in his other roles, pressure, ball movement etc.

When Walters is back - sub.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Missed Reid?

Fred Amiss Jackson
Bolton Treacy Reid

Duds bench.

Switta sub or emergency - if Dudley is kicking 1.5 goals per game and performs well in his other roles, pressure, ball movement etc.

When Walters is back - sub.

Yarp, missed Reid. Making it harder haha. I remain adamant Jackson stays out of the forwardline even with Darcy.

 

[freodog]

Fair enough the points on the new stadium if it's about the AFL showing off, which it will be.

Can't agree that Bellerive and York Park are small country style ovals.

Yeh probably went a bit far saying they are country ovals. But the are not Optus, MCG, Adelaide Oval, SCG, Gabba or even People First Stadium, GMHBA.

Gather Round is a show piece of the AFL and those venues aren't suitable to host the big games. You need a main oval like Adelaide Oval is and smaller venues for the rest. People will travel to check out the new stadium (while still too small IMHO) and Bellerive & York Park can host some smaller drawing games.

 

[worsemim]

Just what we all predicted in 2024: a selection squeeze caused by an abundance of quality small forwards.

 

[Jezzitizle]

Yarp, missed Reid. Making it harder haha. I remain adamant Jackson stays out of the forwardline even with Darcy.

I actually think we should play Jackson forward/ruck but pretty much tell him to roam, not get pinned as just a down the line option.

Anywhere up to defensive 50 and just get into spots the opposition don’t want him, and try to get mismatches on the ground and in the air.

 

[ignoramus]

Hmmm, its a harder decision than I realised. If Jackson was playing id play him mid/ruck and go "smaller" up front but that's not an option for a few weeks.

So you have to pick 7 forwards out of Freddy, Amiss, Bolton, Treacy, Switta, Voss, Dudley and Banfield...

Switta and Bolton are each only half a forward, I’m thinking.

 

[SiempreFreo]

You missed my point? The pre-emptive sooking is my point. If people simply stated that they hope he doesn't get dropped i wouldn't have said anything.

The coach that gave Amiss his first game back in an elim final, Dudley a chance out of no where, selected Reidy and then dropped him after one week, isn't some coach that's scared to make a risky call.

Disagreeing with a coach is one thing. But pre-emptively sooking in case a coach who knows infinitely more than you makes a decision that you don't like is very silly imo. At least leave the melts until after it happens.

Spoilsport

 

[go_the_dockers]

Freddy, Amiss, Bolton, Treacy, Reid, Switta, Voss, Dudley and Banfield...


HF: Bolton Treacy Freddy
F: Dudley Amiss Switta
B: Voss

inside Wing role: Reid

I wonder how Reid would go in the inside mid role that Steele Sidebottom plays for collingwood. He can already run 14+k's, and his skills are elite.

Bolton needs to run through the middle at least 30% of the game. Switta can run through the middle a bit, and Freddy can play on the wing a bit as well which should mean we can play 8 forwards.

 

[malpaso]

Hmmm, its a harder decision than I realised. If Jackson was playing id play him mid/ruck and go "smaller" up front but that's not an option for a few weeks.

So you have to pick 7 forwards out of Freddy, Amiss, Bolton, Treacy, Switta, Voss, Dudley and Banfield...

Except that Banfield can play wing in Noddy's absence and possibly Freddy. You also forgot Reid.

 

[David Bubb]

very much paraphrasing but JL said Dudley would be unlucky to be dropped for Switta but "sometimes that happens/that's footy"

 

[ubiquitous226]

Definitely true.

They also go for stability and don’t want to drop established players lightly.

I think we are too loyal at times to individuals, to the detriment of the team.

I also think we have been prone to undervalue actually kicking goals, in valuing defence and things which can lead to goals.

JL is clearly unhappy with how he is labelled, it may well be making a difference in his thinking.

If Reid and Duds keep kicking and creating goals, and then either are dropped for Switta, who then holds his spot whilst being less offensively productive - we can definitely make some conclusions.

There's definitely a philosophy aspect, someone like Beveridge seems to value sending signals to his team vs other coaches who do value stability more.

JLo talks a lot about predictability to each other, and there actually is very good evidence of the benefit of a team having a sustained period together.
So that would feed into the view that the coach can be too loyal, it may not even be about a specific player but the structure.

 

[dont bowl there]

very much paraphrasing but JL said Dudley would be unlucky to be dropped for Switta but "sometimes that happens/that's footy"

Melt on standby

 

[ubiquitous226]

I actually think we should play Jackson forward/ruck but pretty much tell him to roam, not get pinned as just a down the line option.

Anywhere up to defensive 50 and just get into spots the opposition don’t want him, and try to get mismatches on the ground and in the air.

Jackson had a big couple of games before getting injured, he was even falling back to help with Sam Darcy at once point.
I do agree we need to not lock him full time into the forward line when Darcy is back and on the field.

 

[ubiquitous226]

Melt on standby

That's not how we do it around here. It must be pre-emptive.

 

[s_wd6]

very much paraphrasing but JL said Dudley would be unlucky to be dropped for Switta but "sometimes that happens/that's footy"

Dudley is just so clean and classy every time he gets the ball. For me Switta is rated much more highly internally than I think most outside the club would rate him. Think Dudley adds an element to our forward line that Switta doesn't really do. Let MC be creative and find a way to squeeze both of them in. All of Switta/Murph/Bolton can rotate through the midfield.