Thoughts

[macca23]

Originally posted by ok.crows
If that WAS our game plan (even if poorly executed), then that is a career-terminating plan for Ayres. If he sticks with it & tries to get the players to execute it during the season proper, it will take Ayres a number of weeks (or maybe even a couple of months) to figure it isn't working.

By then the season is kaput. If that happens, the Ayres is kaput also.

That was sort of our supposed new game plan but it all went pear-shaped.

The game plan they have been practicing DOES include all that fart arsing around backwards and forwards across half-back until they can make a clear break through the middle and then deliver it cleanly to the forwards.

It seems to forget that while they are dithering around in the back-lines the opposition are flooding back into our forward lines!!

The only part we got right of the game plan was to stuff around with short chipping in the backlines.

We should scrap the first part of the game-plan and move it as quickly as possible into our forward lines - but look for a man, rather than bomb it.

It's a very simple theory IMO. I remember Blighty saying that footy is a very simple game.

 

[macca23]

Originally posted by PAfolwr

The one that caught my eye in that game was Farren Ray. I wasn't really watching him, but he did a few things that caught the eye. Not sure if he will get many games this year, but one to watch for the future. Would have liked to have seen the Bulldogs game the other night, but missed out on it. It was on at the same time as the Freo-Essedon game. Does anyone know how he went?

I was channel surfing the 2 games so I saw a bit of him. He did some very clever things and is a genuine player of the future.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by PAfolwr
Does anyone know how he went?

Very impressive especially in a little patch in 3rd QTR where he was a catalyst for a Doggies scoring run at the start of the quarter.

With a bit of muscle he will be a gun.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by macca23
That was sort of our supposed new game plan but it all went pear-shaped.

The game plan they have been practicing DOES include all that fart arsing around backwards and forwards across half-back until they can make a clear break through the middle and then deliver it cleanly to the forwards.

It seems to forget that while they are dithering around in the back-lines the opposition are flooding back into our forward lines!!

The only part we got right of the game plan was to stuff around with short chipping in the backlines.

We should scrap the first part of the game-plan and move it as quickly as possible into our forward lines - but look for a man, rather than bomb it.

It's a very simple theory IMO. I remember Blighty saying that footy is a very simple game.

Thats sounds a bit like Brisbane's game plan. They do a lot of switching in their defence until they open up a bit of space and they quickly kick it straight down the corridor into an open forward line. They do it much more effectively and much quicker. If the game plan is same as Lions then I like it but we have to learn to execute it as well if its to be effective.

 

[macca23]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
Thats sounds a bit like Brisbane's game plan. They do a lot of switching in their defence until they open up a bit of space and they quickly kick it straight down the corridor into an open forward line. They do it much more effectively and much quicker. If the game plan is same as Lions then I like it but we have to learn to execute it as well if its to be effective.

Yeah, but there's the difference. Brisbane hold it until they get the loose man through the middle and attack the goal front-on.

We hold it and then give it to some-one loose on the boundary and try to come around the flanks that way. Port have demonstrated in finals the folly of that style. We proved it again on Sunday.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by macca23
Yeah, but there's the difference. Brisbane hold it until they get the loose man through the middle and attack the goal front-on.

We hold it and then give it to some-one loose on the boundary and try to come around the flanks that way. Port have demonstrated in finals the folly of that style. We proved it again on Sunday.

Which one are we trying to implement.

I know we played the "Port" style against St. Kilda but in training which one did we actually practice??????

 

[macca23]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
Which one are we trying to implement.

I know we played the "Port" style against St. Kilda but in training which one did we actually practice??????

We practiced the Brisbane style one but performed the Port style one. That's what I meant when I said it went pear-shaped.

 

[PAfolwr]

Haha!
You have delisted Marsh, but now sounds as if you need Kingsley in your defence.
Sorry, but you'll have to wait till trade week.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by macca23
We practiced the Brisbane style one but performed the Port style one. That's what I meant when I said it went pear-shaped.

That gives me the ****s.

If we can adapt brisbanes game plan (including the open forward line we will cause a lot of headaches for a lot of teams but if we continue to play down the flanks with the game style we played against St. Kilda then I have serious doubts about our ability to make the 8. We just don't play that "Port" style well and besides that plan has been proven not to work in finals football.

 

[noddy]

Originally posted by macca23
We practiced the Brisbane style one but performed the Port style one. That's what I meant when I said it went pear-shaped.

If that is so then we have either a dumb playing group who can't follow simple instructions or a dumb coaching group who can't communicate simple instructions to the playing group.

Not a very good way to start a new footy year !!!

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by noddy
If that is so then we have either a dumb playing group who can't follow simple instructions or a dumb coaching group who can't communicate simple instructions to the playing group.

Not a very good way to start a new footy year !!!

I'm not too fussed yet as long as we don't end the year playing this brand of footy!

 

[napsyd]

Originally posted by macca23
Yeah, but there's the difference. Brisbane hold it until they get the loose man through the middle and attack the goal front-on.

We hold it and then give it to some-one loose on the boundary and try to come around the flanks that way. Port have demonstrated in finals the folly of that style. We proved it again on Sunday.

You'd think it would be simple then. Tell the players in the centre to half forward region to lead towards the middle of the ground, not the flanks.

Assuming they were given this instruction, what part of "don't lead to the flanks" didn't they understand?

 

[maccas_no1]

Originally posted by Wayne's-World
Did a couple of good things, but the jury is out, if he's going to be part of the midfield.
Too slow, slow disposal, and poor disposal. He's actually a good kick, but because he's always getting caught as he kicks, it's generally rushed and ineffective.

My point exactly

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Originally posted by Kane McGoodwin
I'm not too fussed yet as long as we don't end the year playing this brand of footy!

Got to say I agree, if we are that down after losing by 13 points in the first real competiticve game, how must Collingwood fans be feeling.
It not wrist slitting time yet. There were positives - we showed in the last qtr that if we get the gameplan right, have our premier midfielders in the centre, we are still a force to be reckoned with.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Three weeks to get it right – Goodwin
By ANDREW CAPEL
24feb04

THE message from Adelaide is plain and simple: "We have three weeks to get it right."

If that means sacrificing the development of some young players, so be it.
A frustrated Gary Ayres, who is understood to have yesterday sounded off at his charges following the team's insipid first-round Wizard Cup loss to St Kilda, admits that now the Crows are out of the Cup he is torn between playing his best side and experimenting with youngsters.

He is leaning to the former, especially after the "rusty" performance of some of the club's established stars against the Saints.

"What you want (before the start of the season proper) is every player you've got playing well," Ayres said.

"And there was a group of extremely talented players who certainly looked a little bit rusty (against the Saints) from the point of view of where you know their level of excellence is, which was disappointing."

Ayres, who desperately wanted his side to progress through the Wizard Cup, believing it offers the best preparation for the season proper, admits to being puzzled and frustrated by the Crows' first-up effort.

Getting his men back on track is the challenge, starting with Saturday's trial against Fremantle at Subiaco (3pm).

"How you go about that is going to be important for us," he said. "Do we take our best side (to trial games) and try to just get players playing well in those positions or do we use the next couple of weeks to keep trying (Brent) Reilly, (James) Gallagher, (Trent) Hentschel and (Ben) Hudson? Do you bring in a (Jacob) Schuback, bearing in mind that not all those guys will play in the first round, you wouldn't think?

"It's about just settling everything down, which is probably the way I would go."

Ayres, who indicated the club's premier young players who had "shown a bit" would still get a game, has veteran defenders Nigel Smart (achilles) and Ben Hart (calf) available after they were yesterday given the go-ahead to resume playing after off-season injuries.

They will be restricted to half a game each this weekend, whether it be in AFL or SANFL trials.

Deputy vice-captain Simon Goodwin supported Ayres' stance in fielding full strength line-ups in the trial matches.

"We need to go full-on to try to win a few games before we head into the season," he said. "We've got three weeks to get it right and I'm sure we'll be playing our best side and our best players will be looking to get into some form before Round 1."

Goodwin described the showing against St Kilda as "not the way the Adelaide footy club wants to play its footy this year".

"It certainly wasn't the greatest start but we've got three weeks to work on it before Round 1," he said.

"We've worked very hard over the past four months with our game plan, our fitness and our strength and I think we're certainly heading in the right direction.

"It's just a matter of implementing it on the day."




Macca was saying this time last year we were doing competitive work, this year we weren't.
Obviously the club was worried about the late season fadeouts, and decided not to be as advanced in their preparation as last year. It showed!
Hope Ayres reluctance to blood juniors is just an emotional reaction, considering his statements at the end of last season.
Certainly Hentschell, Gallagher and Hudson should hold their spots, with maybe Schuback being tried in place of Skippy.

Considering the difficult first 3rd of the season, the unfortunate thing about last Saturday is that we are now on the road for the trials V another home game.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by Wayne's-World
with maybe Schuback being tried in place of Skippy.

Eeerr, how about NO. How about we drop Burns and give Schuback a chance.

Ronnie is really starting to give me the sh|ts. He has done nothing in his past 5-6 games (yes including last year) that suggests that he should be even considered for a spot in our best 24. Can you honestly say that he was better than Skippy against St. Kilda??????

 

[Damp Squarie]

Skipworth must stay.
Burns is already gone.

You musnt reward mediocrity.

 

[Macca19]

Originally posted by macca23
The game plan they have been practicing DOES include all that fart arsing around backwards and forwards across half-back until they can make a clear break through the middle and then deliver it cleanly to the forwards.

So basically Ayres is trying to copy Ports much maligned possesion game? As what youve described is basically what Port do. Mostly shortish kicks to possesion and waiting until a clear lead from the forwards come.

Only thing is, it took Mark Williams 2 years to get it working properly (with finishes of 7th and 14th) and another year before it became totally deadly. And even then its been a much hated and laughed at game plan.

Ayres is playing with fire with this gameplan. It looked on Sunday like none of the players had seen each other since the Prelim loss it was that disorganised.

I hope for your sakes its just an experiment.

 

[macca23]

Originally posted by Wayne's-World


Macca was saying this time last year we were doing competitive work, this year we weren't.
Obviously the club was worried about the late season fadeouts, and decided not to be as advanced in their preparation as last year. It showed!

I did say that, and the two pre-seasons have been like chalk and cheese.

Last year we were killing each other in scratch matches every week at training. I couldn't believe how desperate and physical the players were.

This year they didn't have them - zilch, zero. It's been a completely non-contact pre-season.

Undoubtedly the idea was not to be as intense as early, so that we won't fade out this year as we did at the end of last season.

Unfortunately footballers don't have an intensity button with an on and off button on it, and that showed on Sunday.

The good thing is that we will build up our physical intensity over the next 3 weeks.

 

[Damp Squarie]

Originally posted by Macca19
Ayres is playing with fire with this gameplan. It looked on Sunday like none of the players had seen each other since the Prelim loss it was that disorganised. I hope for your sakes its just an experiment.

LOL -The sad thing is Macca19...i agree with ya
We need "run" off the halfback line not stop start swill.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
Eeerr, how about NO. How about we drop Burns and give Schuback a chance.

Ronnie is really starting to give me the sh|ts. He has done nothing in his past 5-6 games (yes including last year) that suggests that he should be even considered for a spot in our best 24. Can you honestly say that he was better than Skippy against St. Kilda??????

Given a few weeks ago, Skippy was odds on to be delisted at the end of this season, are you suggesting;
a) he is in our best 22
b) he is better than Schuback
c) either one of them at this stage is capable of being a game winner, because Ronnie still can.

Perhaps I was left with a different opinion of his finals games last year than you.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by Wayne's-World
Given a few weeks ago, Skippy was odds on to be delisted at the end of this season, are you suggesting;
a) he is in our best 22
b) he is better than Schuback
c) either one of them at this stage is capable of being a game winner, because Ronnie still can.

Perhaps I was left with a different opinion of his finals games last year than you.

a) no
b) no
c) the only thing Ronnie can still do is play mediocre football and still get praises from you. How can you reward his performance agaist St. Kilda (and against Glenelg and Norwood for that matter) with giving him another game this week?????? How can you possibly reward a bloke who came back from the Christmas break overweight and did none of his planned out program. So when he did return he has undone all the work done prior to fitness. At least Schuback and Skipworth worked their backsides off during the pre-season and in my book deserve to play in front of Ronnie.

You say playing him further up the ground adds a bit of pace to out midfield. You also seem to forget that Schuback is quicker AND a better midfielder that Ronnie. Ronnie can be a match winner but as a forward pocket not as a midfielder because he is a dud in the midfield. I don't know about you but I would prefer a player who will play his guts out every week not a player who misfires more often than not. Of all the games he played last year you could probably count all his games on the fingers of one hand. Does he make our best 22?????? I don't think so because if he does we are rewarding mediocrity and that should send the alarm bells ringing.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
You say playing him further up the ground adds a bit of pace to out midfield. You also seem to forget that Schuback is quicker AND a better midfielder that Ronnie. Ronnie can be a match winner but as a forward pocket not as a midfielder because he is a dud in the midfield. I don't know about you but I would prefer a player who will play his guts out every week not a player who misfires more often than not. Of all the games he played last year you could probably count all his games on the fingers of one hand. Does he make our best 22?????? I don't think so because if he does we are rewarding mediocrity and that should send the alarm bells ringing. [/B]

Stiffy, you said he didn't play in the midfield last year, so how do we know he's a dud in the midfield.
Yes i have often stated my preference for players who give 100% effort, and you are right there are times where Ronnie doesn't deserve his spot. But at this point in the respective careers of Schuback, Skippy, and Burns, Ronnie still has more runs on the ball than the other 2.
I'm a bigger fan of Schuback than Ronnie, but Schubacks got to edge Ronnie out, based on performances, not on his potential.
If he's good enough (and I think he is) he will succeed over Ronnie in the longrun. The coaches will decide the timing of that.
Once again I would ask you to look at your comments re ranking of players for 2004.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by Wayne's-World
Stiffy, you said he didn't play in the midfield last year, so how do we know he's a dud in the midfield.
Yes i have often stated my preference for players who give 100% effort, and you are right there are times where Ronnie doesn't deserve his spot. But at this point in the respective careers of Schuback, Skippy, and Burns, Ronnie still has more runs on the ball than the other 2.
I'm a bigger fan of Schuback than Ronnie, but Schubacks got to edge Ronnie out, based on performances, not on his potential.
If he's good enough (and I think he is) he will succeed over Ronnie in the longrun. The coaches will decide the timing of that.
Once again I would ask you to look at your comments re ranking of players for 2004.

Didn't Ronnie get drafted as a 21 year old so really he didn't have more runs compared to the 3 at this point in their respective careers.

I am pretty sure we played Ronnie on the wing last year in the pre-season and even in the season proper for a few games until we realised that as a midfielder he is as useless as **** on a bull. I just can't understand why you see some merit in playing Ronnie further up the ground when a blind freddy could see that it ISN'T working.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by Wayne's-World
I'm a bigger fan of Schuback than Ronnie, but Schubacks got to edge Ronnie out, based on performances, not on his potential.

Well Shuey was easily BOG in the trial against Glenelg, whilst Ronnie was average. Would have thought Schuback deserved a game last week based on the performance I saw. Anyone care to disagree?