Review When does the Penny drop for Sando

[Sanders]

We lost the prelim by under a kick, we had two players who barely contributed ANYTHING.

What contribution do we get from their replacements? What does your crystal ball say?

 

[Slippery Pete]

What contribution do we get from their replacements? What does your crystal ball say?

It says McIntyre played and kicked 11 goals.

 

[Wood_Duck]

It says McIntyre played and kicked 11 goals.

Yeah but Isaac Smith kicked 12.

 

[Wright Away]

What contribution do we get from their replacements? What does your crystal ball say?

A contribution, something we didn't get from Petrenko or Callinan.

 

[Frank Deville]

And ... the joke is on you, for completely missing the sarcasm which positively dripped from the post you quoted.

'Sarcasm - the lowest form of wit.'

Didn't miss it, just gave you the benefit of the doubt ;- ) >

The boys could do worse that watch this together during the bye:

 

[Mattrox]

A contribution, something we didn't get from Petrenko or Callinan.

Callinan kicked goals and got tackles.... Contributed a lot more than some.

 

[Frank Deville]

Callinan kicked goals and got tackles.... Contributed a lot more than some.

Re Stooges: Hey - nice steal: Perhaps it's something you could teach the boys.

 

[Slippery Pete]

Sanderson admitted during the week that they were outcoached - is anyone concerned about that?

 

[Mattrox]

Sanderson admitted during the week that they were outcoached - is anyone concerned about that?

Not if he learns from it and fixes it. He's coached 36 games.... He could have put up a front and lose credibility because everyone can see he was or face up to it and move on.

Either way he loses because if he said "No , I don't think I was out coached" someone would post -"Sanderson denied being out coached when clearly he was- is anyone concerned about that? "

 

[Slippery Pete]

Not if he learns from it and fixes it. He's coached 36 games.... He couldn't put up a front and lose credibility because everyone can see he was or face up to it and move on.

Either way he loses because if he said "No , I don't think I was out coached" someone would post -"Sanderson denied being out coached when clearly he was- is anyone concerned about that? "

The answer is just to not be outcoached...

Ps - John Longmire has only coached 60 games.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Sanderson admitted during the week that they were outcoached - is anyone concerned about that?

To be honest, no.

I'd be more worried if we were out-coached and the coaches were adamant afterwards that it just came down to us not showing enough fierce determination and competitiveness.

It's a good trait to recognise mistakes and then improve. So, he's got the former covered... now for the latter.

 

[Mattrox]

The answer is just to not be outcoached...

Ps - John Longmire has only coached 60 games.

How does an inexperienced coach be perfect every game?

So about twice as experienced then........ with different cattle on the park to boot.

 

[Mattrox]

To be honest, no.

I'd be more worried if we were out-coached and the coaches were adamant afterwards that it just came down to us not showing enough fierce determination and competitiveness.

It's a good trait to recognise mistakes and then improve. So, he's got the former covered... now for the latter.

I agree, but at the same time we want to see improvement in his match day performances over the journey.

 

[Schulzycrow]

Hopefully the playing players out of position penny drops today and we don't see Jaensch in the backline, but in the forward line.

 

[Slippery Pete]

Being sound in the coaches box is one of those things you want to be a non-negotiable. As a club you want to have full faith in that area as a constant, week in week out.

I'm just saying that we can ill-afford to have a coaches box learning on the job.

That's why Bailey was so important.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

I agree, but at the same time we want to see improvement in his match day performances over the journey.

I reckon his actual reactions on match days themselves are fine.

It's the actual underlying game plan that would be causing some concern down there.

Last year we moved the ball quickly, were prepared to kick to contests and generated one-on-ones for our forwards. It worked well.

After we failed in the finals, we decided that we needed more finesse at times, needed to guard possession more especially against good teams, needed to hang onto the footy at times and be prepared to attack via the slow build up occasionally with short passes rather than rushing the ball without thought into a well set up defence.

The addition of this dimension was going to be the improvement on our 2012 system.

The philosophy is fine - it is one of the strengths of the good teams over the last few years (Geelong, Collingwood) in particular that they know when to go and when to whoa. When to carefully work the ball forward with patience, and when to attack with speed. Their decision making is superb.

But it hasn't work. For one thing, we've seen a repeat of a past trait. As soon as we have a decision to make, we go into our shells and take the timid option. And once we've gone into our shell the attack, fast ball movement, hurting the opposition dries up completely. We chip it around and eventually cough it up as the opposition press up on us.

Once we've gone into our shell, it is very hard to flick the switch and say 'we're going to be positive now' - it doesn't work like that. We basically tread water until the quarter breaks and then start over.

Now, this season might be the one step backwards to go two steps forward with a more effective game plan built around correct decision making it. Or it may be beyond us and we'll continue to flounder.

First issue is that too many of our players are dumb and pick stupid options. They are ok with simple instruction ie attack, attack, attack where they just back their instincts and talent. Sando has come from a SMART football environment where a Steve J can sum up in a second whether to attack long to the F50 or instead to work the ball across the ground. We don't yet have decision making to pull off a varied, flexible game style.

Secondly, our footskills are average at best. Under pressure we have too many players who cough it up. Even our "elite" kicks like Reilly. A game plan that requires precise delivery and picking holes in a defence is doomed to fail unless you have strong kicking skills.

So we are trying to play a game style that is beyond our decision making level and beyond our skill level.

 

[Mattrox]

Being sound in the coaches box is one of those things you want to be a non-negotiable. As a club you want to have full faith in that area as a constant, week in week out.

I'm just saying that we can ill-afford to have a coaches box learning on the job.

That's why Bailey was so important.

Even great coaches get out coached.

 

[Wood_Duck]

Bit unrealistic to expect a coach to never make mistakes.

 

[The Sloane Ranger]

Bit unrealistic to expect a coach to never make mistakes.

Nothing wrong with making a mistake, it's when you repeat the mistake it becomes a concern

 

[VSTone]

How does an inexperienced coach be perfect every game?

So about twice as experienced then........ with different cattle on the park to boot.

inner belief is a key ingredient...

 

[Wood_Duck]

First issue is that too many of our players are dumb and pick stupid options. They are ok with simple instruction ie attack, attack, attack where they just back their instincts and talent. Sando has come from a SMART football environment where a Steve J can sum up in a second whether to attack long to the F50 or instead to work the ball across the ground. We don't yet have decision making to pull off a varied, flexible game style.

Secondly, our footskills are average at best. Under pressure we have too many players who cough it up. Even our "elite" kicks like Reilly. A game plan that requires precise delivery and picking holes in a defence is doomed to fail unless you have strong kicking skills.

So we are trying to play a game style that is beyond our decision making level and beyond our skill level.

Not sure there is a game plan that can cater for this Carl. Quite seriously, no matter whose game plan it is if the players are not skilled enough to execute it you will lose games of football often. Good luck coming up with a winning game plan that poorly skilled footballers can execute.

 

[Slippery Pete]

Even great coaches get out coached.

This is true, but we were also terribly outcoached in the qualifying final by this mob last year.

The learning needs to start taking place soon.

 

[VSTone]

I reckon his actual reactions on match days themselves are fine.

It's the actual underlying game plan that would be causing some concern down there.

Last year we moved the ball quickly, were prepared to kick to contests and generated one-on-ones for our forwards. It worked well.

After we failed in the finals, we decided that we needed more finesse at times, needed to guard possession more especially against good teams, needed to hang onto the footy at times and be prepared to attack via the slow build up occasionally with short passes rather than rushing the ball without thought into a well set up defence.

The addition of this dimension was going to be the improvement on our 2012 system.

The philosophy is fine - it is one of the strengths of the good teams over the last few years (Geelong, Collingwood) in particular that they know when to go and when to whoa. When to carefully work the ball forward with patience, and when to attack with speed. Their decision making is superb.

But it hasn't work. For one thing, we've seen a repeat of a past trait. As soon as we have a decision to make, we go into our shells and take the timid option. And once we've gone into our shell the attack, fast ball movement, hurting the opposition dries up completely. We chip it around and eventually cough it up as the opposition press up on us.

Once we've gone into our shell, it is very hard to flick the switch and say 'we're going to be positive now' - it doesn't work like that. We basically tread water until the quarter breaks and then start over.

Now, this season might be the one step backwards to go two steps forward with a more effective game plan built around correct decision making it. Or it may be beyond us and we'll continue to flounder.

First issue is that too many of our players are dumb and pick stupid options. They are ok with simple instruction ie attack, attack, attack where they just back their instincts and talent. Sando has come from a SMART football environment where a Steve J can sum up in a second whether to attack long to the F50 or instead to work the ball across the ground. We don't yet have decision making to pull off a varied, flexible game style.

Secondly, our footskills are average at best. Under pressure we have too many players who cough it up. Even our "elite" kicks like Reilly. A game plan that requires precise delivery and picking holes in a defence is doomed to fail unless you have strong kicking skills.

So we are trying to play a game style that is beyond our decision making level and beyond our skill level.

good post DABM,

our half back line is letting us down immensely, which is generally where this two speed footy is generated from... my kingdom for a penetrating and skilled decision maker on the half back line...

 

[Mattrox]

inner belief is a key ingredient...

I have great inner belief but I never made it as an AFL coach.

It's an ingredient. The key one......?

 

[Elite Crow]

Harped just said our game plan hasn't changed