Why do we use the wings ?

[DoubleO7]

We 'don't have to cattle' to use the corridor so we have to find an alternative route and the only other route available are via the wings/flanks.

 

[Chase the Ace]

starka is DL

Its a conspiracy I tell ya

 

[Optimax]

We 'don't have to cattle' to use the corridor so we have to find an alternative route and the only other route available are via the wings/flanks.

yet i saw us use teh corridor in the first qtr against geelong and the third atr against geelong

Must of swapped jumpers or something because i swear i saw us use the corridor and have shots from the corridor that we duly missed

Just today i saw the dogs use the wings and the tigers use the corridor

just like i saw teh dogs kick long and the tigers handpass

Go figure

 

[FuManchu]

Its a conspiracy I tell ya

its a knobhead whose anti psychotic drugs are running hot and cold

 

[Ant85]

We 'don't have to cattle' to use the corridor so we have to find an alternative route and the only other route available are via the wings/flanks.

Bollocks. Even when we did have the cattle (Bucks), we were still kicking wide.

We have the cattle now. I was really annoyed when MM talked us down post-Geelong, just as he talked us down post-Carlton last year.

We didn't have the cattle last year when we were suffering injuries, perhaps, but what's the excuse today? Why doesn't he have faith in his players?

 

[DoubleO7]

I was quoting MM, ffs! Straight from the horses mouth.

 

[Heater39]

Bollocks. Even when we did have the cattle (Bucks), we were still kicking wide.

We have the cattle now. I was really annoyed when MM talked us down post-Geelong, just as he talked us down post-Carlton last year.

We didn't have the cattle last year when we were suffering injuries, perhaps, but what's the excuse today? Why doesn't he have faith in his players?

It's just MM shifting the blame away from himself. I don't mind MM but his constant excuses really give me the shits.

 

[Chase the Ace]

It's just MM shifting the blame away from himself. I don't mind MM but his constant excuses really give me the shits.

Then you would have been happy with his presser after the Geelong game, yes?

 

[FuManchu]

Bollocks. Even when we did have the cattle (Bucks), we were still kicking wide.

We have the cattle now. I was really annoyed when MM talked us down post-Geelong, just as he talked us down post-Carlton last year.

We didn't have the cattle last year when we were suffering injuries, perhaps, but what's the excuse today? Why doesn't he have faith in his players?

Understand this very simple concept, because for all I bag MM out for, he and I and anyone who watches the game knows, as it stands, WE DONT HAVE THE CATTLE TO WIN A FLAG.

Thats why he doesnt have faith in his players, he knows that they are not good enough to match it with the top teams , playing at their best.

Look at our best team and then look at the top teams and compare them player to player playing at their best. We fall down in most positions. Are people so blinded by their barracking to not be able to see the truth? Stop fantasising about where you wish we were and start looking at what we have, what we lack and what other teams have that we dont. Its not that hard to do. Or is it?

 

[Mental Magpie]

I don't care if we use the wings. I don't care if we use the corridor. What I care about, is that more often than not, we are defending against a wave of unmanned players. When it comes to manning up, we are hopeless.

Why not assign a man to each opposition player. Follow him wherever he goes. Old school I know, but hey, it's worth a shot.

Surely we can't use the "we don't have the cattle" excuse for this as well.

MAN UP!!!

 

[loki04]

One of the most classic instances was during the Geelong game a players was sprinting the ball out of our d50 (had possesion in the center) and there was space to go directly up the guts but he chose to go wide to a flooded wing. Ball gets there and slowed up we end up turning it over on the hff and geelong rebound it straight up the guts.

If he went through the center we would of more then likely had a shot on goal, Geelong was open there but his 1st instinct was go boundary side.

 

[daics cousin]

I just watched another replay of the Collingwood game. What i still can't understand is why Collingwood continually play down the wing. Yes we might not have the skills to control the centre but what I don't understand is why sometimes instead of chipping it around, we should go direct through the middle of the ground. What I found is that since we use the wings, most of the time the ball is delivered to the forwards near the boundary and half of there shots are pretty difficult to kick rather than been shots in front of goal example Thursday night game. The only time we seem to generate run and consistent play of football is down the centre, I am in all support of Mick but I can’t understand why we can’t play direct football and use the middle and delivered the ball to our forwards in centre as the results of using the corridor.


But I just question why do we do this

Your thoughts

Mate,i have been questioning why we play like this for years.
MM is the main culprit,becuase he has no second or third game plan.
It's simple isn't it.Get the centre clearance,bang the ball forward quickly through the centre corridor to a leading forward,best chance to score quickly and stop the flood if we can move the ball quickly and directly.

 

[daics cousin]

Understand this very simple concept, because for all I bag MM out for, he and I and anyone who watches the game knows, as it stands, WE DONT HAVE THE CATTLE TO WIN A FLAG.

Thats why he doesnt have faith in his players, he knows that they are not good enough to match it with the top teams , playing at their best.

Look at our best team and then look at the top teams and compare them player to player playing at their best. We fall down in most positions. Are people so blinded by their barracking to not be able to see the truth? Stop fantasising about where you wish we were and start looking at what we have, what we lack and what other teams have that we dont. Its not that hard to do. Or is it?

Fu may have a point here.So what do we need to win a flag?
Well we need two more gun midfielders,a good bullocking ruckman,another good KPP backman,and aforward structure that works,oh yeah we need a coach that knows what it takes to win a flag,that must insist on toughness, has more than one game plan,and that can make the hard decisons when players are not playing well.....Enough said get Choco at year's end...then Buckley in say 3 years.Or Choco as coach and buckley as his assistant......If Eddie can bear it.

 

[loki04]

Fu may have a point here.So what do we need to win a flag?
Well we need two more gun midfielders,a good bullocking ruckman,another good KPP backman,and aforward structure that works,oh yeah we need a coach that knows what it takes to win a flag,that must insist on toughness, has more than one game plan,and that can make the hard decisons when players are not playing well.....Enough said get Choco at year's end...then Buckley in say 3 years.Or Choco as coach and buckley as his assistant......If Eddie can bear it.

I too would like choco to return as coach, he wont take soft crap , he values good ruckmen, he has port playing a fast dircet brand of footy and has recently won a flag that he built not inherited.

 

[DNine]

Case in point, Dale Thomas second quarter, runs the backward and forward in defence, and runs the non members wing, and shortly after has a kick. That kick was sloppy and ill directed, and it is because his legs were stuffed from sprinting the boundary line. Had he taken length off the run by venturing closer to the centre of the ground, the kick would of had more chance to be direct. Our kicking generally is missing targets, and this scenario highlighted the fact that we are running too far unneccessarily. Geelong when they used the corridor, they looked alot fitter, because they were getting their goals. We looked alot fitter when we used the corridor, because the kicks where taken by players that didn't run miles to get the kick.

We have to use our depth of height, and work on contested marks at the CHF/FF positions. It is not that poor an option to use the boundary up until wing position, but then the ball has to be more often than not be directed into the middle of the ground to give us higher percentage of shots on goal. Smaller players in the forward line, have to learn to get more front and centre to the packs, so if the ball comes to ground, we still have a decent shot.

Key position players in the forward line, need to protect the drop zone of the ball more often to make space for their marking efforts. Seems Cloke and Anthony are leading the defender right to the ball, and with the lobbing of the ball higher than ideally required, the defender has the easiest job in the world to spoil.

If the ball is rebounded out of the forward line a fair bit, until we got used to playing this way, don't throw the idea out. Persevere, as the alternative, which is playing the boundary also has its failure rate, in poor disposal, and high turnover in itself.

If the ball goes out of bounds we haven't got a dominating ruckman to win the tap, for our midfielders to win the ball, so the boundary is not our saviour, when our wins in the stoppages are usually behind that of the opposition. With this in mind, I would of thought to reduce the stoppages, would be the way to go, and that is by not putting the ball in a position that goes out of play regularly.

I have coached before, when I was 20, but other than that, I have no formal qualifications that guided my understanding of all this, just my fanatic observation, and this is what annoys the crap out of me, when someone mentions the name Michael Malthouse, because he has been around for ever, yet fails to see what is basic football knowledge. Hence my fanatic need to get rid of the bloke. (This is not the MM thread, point complete.)

My Ins and outs for this weekend;

IN: Bryan, Rocca, Goldsack, Cook, Sidebottom
OUT: L.Brown, Maxwell, Johnson, Shaw, Dick

 

[Ant85]

Understand this very simple concept, because for all I bag MM out for, he and I and anyone who watches the game knows, as it stands, WE DONT HAVE THE CATTLE TO WIN A FLAG.

Thats why he doesnt have faith in his players, he knows that they are not good enough to match it with the top teams , playing at their best.

Look at our best team and then look at the top teams and compare them player to player playing at their best. We fall down in most positions. Are people so blinded by their barracking to not be able to see the truth? Stop fantasising about where you wish we were and start looking at what we have, what we lack and what other teams have that we dont. Its not that hard to do. Or is it?

Winning the flag is one thing, changing game plans is another, and that's what I was referring to.

We don't have the cattle to play direct football and use the corridor, but Essendon and Carlton do?

With the rest, I agree with you, of course there's holes we need to fill. Beams and Sidebottom were excellent choices, and if developed right, will be all class. Put that along with Swan, Pendles and Thomas, who are still developing, our midfield isn't looking too bad.

 

[FuManchu]

Winning the flag is one thing, changing game plans is another, and that's what I was referring to.

We don't have the cattle to play direct football and use the corridor, but Essendon and Carlton do?

With the rest, I agree with you, of course there's holes we need to fill. Beams and Sidebottom were excellent choices, and if developed right, will be all class. Put that along with Swan, Pendles and Thomas, who are still developing, our midfield isn't looking too bad.

Playing wide is crap, unless there is a real good reason to do it. Against Geelong at times it was the most prudent course of action, because they will monster you in traffic thru the corridor. I had no problem with the game plan the other night.

Against lesser physical teams there is less reason to avoid the corridor and more reason to get the ball down quickly into a less congested forward area. But MM has the one game ploicy for all teams. There is no nuance to his game plan, there is no recognition that other teams dont cause us as many problems thru the corridor.

Our midfield in 3 years will be good, maybe not excellent, but good, thats not the real problem we have going forward though. We have far more urgent structural issues that havent been addressed correctly that will hold us back.

 

[DNine]

It is all in the head. We are a team that has just as much opportunity as anyone to dominate as Geelong is doing. Players time and time again, who are picked later in the draft, are proving that with the right attitude, it is possible to play dominating football. Our attitude is not right. If the coach has no confidence in our players, and develops a game plan to avoid our weaknesses, how do players turn weaknesses into a strength, without being exposed to it. What chance have they got in having confidence in themselves. At our best, we can beat anyone, at any time, any where. Why is it out of the relms of possibility that we can't improve one small thing, do it more consistently.

I think the worst thing that is happening at Collingwood, is we aren't dirty when we lose a contest or a game. We have to play with more passion, and the will to win. Perhaps it is because of this negative attitude that teams are ahead of us, and we seem to not have the cattle. We have the cattle, but the brain matter in between their ears is not right, and currently they are being beaten. They get paid anyway so they seem alright with that. Can you imagine if they got under 50 supercoach points, they don't get paid, THEN you would see an attitude change.

 

[Kick It 2 Me]

A magpie who doesn't use his wings is a flightless bird.

P.S. This post from CamGivesMeWood on Nicks BB:

I've seen five games of footy live this weekend.

Pies Cats at the MCG on Thursday night, Saints Eagles at the Dome on Sat arv, then straight on to the G for Carlton Essendon that night, Hawks Roos at the Dome on Sunday, and Tigers Roos today (well, technically yesterday) at the Dome again.

I saw zoning in every game except the Pies Cats game, and the Blues Bombers game, which was more like your old-fashioned footy of days of yore i.e. 2005-2007.

I also saw pretty much every team attempt to cope with the zone in one of two ways.

One way was to run and handball straight through the middle of the ground. From the evidence before my eyes this weekend (and I admit that since the teams I saw try this more often, Richmond and the Roos, aren't the most skilful in the comp, this evidence may not be conclusive), this tactic is high-risk; more goals resulted from turnovers when the runners ran into trouble or executed a handpass poorly than from successful attempts to penetrate the zone like this.

The other method I saw, much more often, by pretty much every team, was - wait for it - this is the punchline: Spotting up leading players with 40m passes AROUND THE BOUNDARY.

The Bulldogs did it with great success today, the Hawks did it with great success yesterday, and St Kilda did it with great success on Saturday.

Mick's had us doing it for years; many on this board hate it and say so frequently.

What would possess all the other teams to adopt it?

Could we be - um - in front of most of the comp in this regard?

Is MM maybe not a complete frigwit after all?

 

[FuManchu]

A magpie who doesn't use his wings is a flightless bird.

P.S. This post from CamGivesMeWood on Nicks BB:

Quote:
Originally Posted by CamGivesMeWood
I've seen five games of footy live this weekend.

Pies Cats at the MCG on Thursday night, Saints Eagles at the Dome on Sat arv, then straight on to the G for Carlton Essendon that night, Hawks Roos at the Dome on Sunday, and Tigers Roos today (well, technically yesterday) at the Dome again.

I saw zoning in every game except the Pies Cats game, and the Blues Bombers game, which was more like your old-fashioned footy of days of yore i.e. 2005-2007.

I also saw pretty much every team attempt to cope with the zone in one of two ways.

One way was to run and handball straight through the middle of the ground. From the evidence before my eyes this weekend (and I admit that since the teams I saw try this more often, Richmond and the Roos, aren't the most skilful in the comp, this evidence may not be conclusive), this tactic is high-risk; more goals resulted from turnovers when the runners ran into trouble or executed a handpass poorly than from successful attempts to penetrate the zone like this.

The other method I saw, much more often, by pretty much every team, was - wait for it - this is the punchline: Spotting up leading players with 40m passes AROUND THE BOUNDARY.

The Bulldogs did it with great success today, the Hawks did it with great success yesterday, and St Kilda did it with great success on Saturday.

Mick's had us doing it for years; many on this board hate it and say so frequently.

What would possess all the other teams to adopt it?

Could we be - um - in front of most of the comp in this regard?

Is MM maybe not a complete frigwit after all?


If it is so revolutionary, why hasnt it won us a flag, after all 7 years ago, it would have been even more revolutionary than it is today. Its a garbage game plan, that acknowledges our weaknesses rather than playing to our strengths. It is defeatest and whats worse, it is only 50/50 in terms of win loss. If you sat in judgement of it, that would have to be its biggest indictment. 50/50!

 

[Chase the Ace]

Playing wide is crap, unless there is a real good reason to do it. Against Geelong at times it was the most prudent course of action, because they will monster you in traffic thru the corridor. I had no problem with the game plan the other night.

Against lesser physical teams there is less reason to avoid the corridor and more reason to get the ball down quickly into a less congested forward area. But MM has the one game ploicy for all teams. There is no nuance to his game plan, there is no recognition that other teams dont cause us as many problems thru the corridor.

Our midfield in 3 years will be good, maybe not excellent, but good, thats not the real problem we have going forward though. We have far more urgent structural issues that havent been addressed correctly that will hold us back.

You mean, "in your opinion" (and you are very welcome to it)

Lets face it, in reality, you know as much about football as the average garden gnome.

 

[FuManchu]

You mean, "in your opinion" (and you are very welcome to it)

Lets face it, in reality, you know as much about football as the average garden gnome.

Well, a gnome must know more than you if you can find ways to support a coach who wins only 50% of his games.

I'm thinking you might be an amoeba in comparison.

 

[Chase the Ace]

Well, a gnome must know more than you if you can find ways to support a coach who wins only 50% of his games.

I'm thinking you might be an amoeba in comparison.

60/40 over the last 3 years, just like a fine wine he is getting better with age.

Do you wear a silly red hat?

 

[Kick It 2 Me]

If it is so revolutionary, why hasnt it won us a flag, after all 7 years ago, it would have been even more revolutionary than it is today. Its a garbage game plan, that acknowledges our weaknesses rather than playing to our strengths. It is defeatest and whats worse, it is only 50/50 in terms of win loss. If you sat in judgement of it, that would have to be its biggest indictment. 50/50!

One thing CamGivesMeWood left out was that the teams that won on the weekend, using a similar strategy, had a forward that can take a decent grab. We had Medhurst taking grabs on the flanks but JA and Cloke were comprehensively beaten.

The biggest problem with Collingwood using this gameplan is that it is so dependent on Cloke having a bottler. If Cloke takes the grabs that he should (ala 2007) the gameplan wouldn't be so questionable.

P.S. I'm all for a change of coach at the end of the year.

 

[DNine]

60/40 over the last 3 years, just like a fine wine he is getting better with age.

Do you wear a silly red hat?

The reason why I absolutely burnt you and some others, and made you into bumbling fools with no come back answers, is because you started the personal crap. I can start it up again if you want, its not hard to make you look silly. If not, stop with crappy points, it is so opposite of smart.