The cats weren't failing to shepherd, handballing out of no trouble to a player in massive trouble etc.
Also. Other sides know that Hibberd, Heppell, Hocking, Myers are too one-sided. They run them onto their right sides all the time and the best they can manage is a short handball.
and you reckon bomber has added this to the geameplan for us?
I think one of the major noticeable differences in last years' and this years' gameplan is we handball far more now. And the player who handballs off is often under no pressure. The player he handballs to is often under pressure.
You don't agree?
Of course I agree: we have been doing exactly that for a decade now, no matter who the coach has been. (Although to be fair there may have been less of this under Hird than the other three).
Why does everyone’s game plan work but ours ? I’m watching Gold Coast game right now (very little Ablett affect) , even the giants moved around better than most of our season , a wounded hawthorn moved nicely. The doggies find space to move the ball around. We are that predictable it’s ridiculous. I can pick our team apart seconds before we have the ball because you can see it unfold, and I’m a pleb supporter. Teams stop our run by standing in our way. So why the f do we not have a plan b? Oh wait … Plan b is to go backwards , so plan c?
Only skilful sides can execute a quick style of play, and I honestly believe our guys HAVE the skills. We've seen it far too often for it not to be flukey. Their disposal efficiency and cleanliness at times has been AFL-leading, so it can be done. Watch the first quarter of this years Anzac Day game - some of the chain of disposals are breathtakingly clean and quick. It can be done.
As we're talking about the slow switch, I reckon the player who looks for this as the 2nd or 3rd option (and not first option) is Fletch. And that's probably because he's got confidence, experience and cut his teeth in the 90s where risk-taking was the norm. It's also why he's still so crucial to the side. I remember that Rnd 11 or 12 game last year vs Carlton, when we were 30 pts down or whatever, and Fletch actually took the game on from the back half, numerous switches from back pockets into the corridor, as opposed to the boring across goal to unmarked player or hugging the boundary.
we have a skillful ish side, when there's little to no pressure from the opposition. The more the pressure is turned up, the more skill and decision making errors occur.
I still think we rely, whether by design or natural default of players, on intuition with our attacking side of the game. All well and good, but if you're under extreme pressure and you have less than a second to make a decision, only the elite of the elite will make the right decision more times than not.
There doesn't seem to be a designated spot and or player to kick the ball to, as a get out of jail option. The only vague option they do take, is kicking it to the ruckman when no other option is forseeable, but even then the opposition seems to outnumber us.
Watching the weekends football it became even more clear how bad slow ball movement (our current game plan is).
1. Richmond threw their game plan (possession, hawthorn footy) that Riedwoldt criticised out the window and played on at half back at every opportunity and got it one on one to their full forward who kicked 11 and team won by 100+ points. Only had 8 more inside 50s than GWS but kicked 20 more goals coz the quality of entry was very good because of their speedy ball movement which meant an open forward 50.
2. Adelaide played their crap footy of possession footy in the first half against carlton, kicked 2 goals and copped heavy criticism for being the most boring half of footy. 2nd half they took the game on and played on, kicking 10 goals.
I was also watching the replay from last years West Coast game in Perth when we were at the peak of our powers and won that game by 7 points. During the game the commentator Luke Darcy said that Essendon are the team that play on the most from a mark. Clearly that was Hirds philosophy, under Thompson we are just too slow and I can tell the players dont want to buy in.
There have been a few games this year where we have dished up poor first halfs playing possession footy (Hawks game and Syndey game) and then taken the game on to produce much better in the second half because of the fact we throw that crap game plan out and actually move the ball with speed.
This weekend will define our season, if bomber has changed things up over the break we will win, but with the same slow game plan Richmond will roll us.
Watching the weekends football it became even more clear how bad slow ball movement (our current game plan is).
1. Richmond threw their game plan (possession, hawthorn footy) that Riedwoldt criticised out the window and played on at half back at every opportunity and got it one on one to their full forward who kicked 11 and team won by 100+ points. Only had 8 more inside 50s than GWS but kicked 20 more goals coz the quality of entry was very good because of their speedy ball movement which meant an open forward 50.
2. Adelaide played their crap footy of possession footy in the first half against carlton, kicked 2 goals and copped heavy criticism for being the most boring half of footy. 2nd half they took the game on and played on, kicking 10 goals.
I was also watching the replay from last years West Coast game in Perth when we were at the peak of our powers and won that game by 7 points. During the game the commentator Luke Darcy said that Essendon are the team that play on the most from a mark. Clearly that was Hirds philosophy, under Thompson we are just too slow and I can tell the players dont want to buy in.
There have been a few games this year where we have dished up poor first halfs playing possession footy (Hawks game and Syndey game) and then taken the game on to produce much better in the second half because of the fact we throw that crap game plan out and actually move the ball with speed.
This weekend will define our season, if bomber has changed things up over the break we will win, but with the same slow game plan Richmond will roll us.
Yep.
Bomber is telling us he wants us to play faster and direct, but clearly behind closed doors he's training them to go as slow as possible.
I'm pretty sure the last team he coached was dour and boring above all. And I don't think he ever worked with Hird before, so it makes sense that they have completely different ideas on how to play.
All makes sense.
So damn pleased to hear Zaka talk about how our whole game plan is based around the hardball.
That's what I had assumed.
I have confidence that our ideal gameplan is relentless closing of any opposition space and then great coaching on how to be steady, calm and consistant in creating order, space and danger within that enclosed chaos.
If we are off our game and give the opposition time and distance then we are operating in an environment that should not exist and cannot exist if the intensity is anywhere near what it will be in big games.
In short. Basically, we are being coached to play finals footy and we've got to bring our game and intensity as consistantly as we can.