Our spread can kill sides and the way that is countered is denying us any space to move.
I don't underestimate the impact of a struggling Dempsey and Zaharakis to our season so far. Has definitely limited our run and carry game. I would expect that Dempsey finding some form (Zaharakis is looking like he's turned the corner the last couple) will have a positive effect on the team's ability to break the lines.
We lack outside runners. These two are keys in that regard.
We are one game behind 5th
Two games behind 2nd
Of coarse were having a tilt
Its only half way though a long season
We will grind it out the nex phase before peaking coming into the finals
The Swans and cats have been doing it like this for years. We are one game short (saints game) of where we would be placed quite nicely. Just behind the leaders coming into the last bend before getting the whip out into the last straight. We only need our nose in front at the final siren of the final game.
Doubt it. We’ve got winnable games against Melbourne and Freo coming up but after that the fixture goes south in a big way… Geelong, Port (a), Collingwood, Bulldogs, Sydney. We’ll need to win three of those to play finals.
The teams above us have to keep winning too. GWS, Lions, Melbourne, Saints & Dogs will most likely all create the occasional upset. We need to win 7 from the next 11 thats not out the question.
I have a couple of questions.
I've never seen us play 'ugly' like what we dished out against WB, Lions and now GWS.
Is Bomber making us play that way? Or are teams forcing us to play that way with their pressure and one-on-one contests?Bomber is refusing to take the easy way out.
He is playing the long game (i.e. no short cuts) and, as others have intimated, insisting on a certain style of football being played that goes against the attacking grain of players naturally but is critical in winning big finals. It results in ugly, low scoring football until the players truly "get it" and really buy in to playing that way. Nearly all premiership teams of the past decade went through this transition of low scoring, ugly scraps before blossoming into high scoring behemoths that look unstoppable: Geelong (Thompson), Hawthorn (Clarkson), Swans (Roos), Pies (Malthouse). Only a Ross Lyon coached team has fallen short - and just fallen short, twice.
It's the same sort of battle Malthouse has raged at Carlton the last 2 years but appears to have lost. No coincidence that Bryce Gibbs had a "great" game last Friday night when it was a free flowing, low tackling, low intensity around the ball type game.....the sort of play Malthouse normally detests but now seems resigned to accepting.
The "better" teams we have played and belted - Roos, Blues, Tigers - all tried playing their way and got belted buy us. The "lesser" teams we have played - Saints, Dogs, Lions, GS - all started, or quickly went, man on man to ensure we didn't have a a spare across HB and set play up (i.e. adapted a defensive posture against our game plan). Bomber has insisted we continue to play the "right" way regardless and the players get caught between sending a somewhat risky pass to someone on a lead or chipping it sideways/backwards as a safer bet...which leads to players up the ground not leading. Our players don't quite have the courage of their conviction yet in taking the game on and sending that pass forward to someone on a hot but get-able lead, but they are slowly getting there.
Good news is is that our defensive structures held up Saturday night despite nearly all our defenders have average nights individually (Baguley easily the best of them) - yet as a unit they were excellent. And JD showed just what a monster forward he will turn into when given a 1:1 opportunity against his own age group.
Expect a low scoring, classic slog-fest against the Demons next Sunday as it's a twilight game. Another "ugly" win will do just fine.
I've seen similar theories banded about, so i'm curious other than faith, what evidence is there that the theories in this post are acurate ?
Bomber is not taking the easy way out, and wants to teach them how to play a certain way ??
Yet he has said he's been nothing but surprised at how they aren't playing the way he wants, so how is he teaching them how to play, when he continually admits they aren't doing what he wants them to.
and if he was playing the long game, surely he'd drop the biggest culprits of not playing his way, to make a statement.
and it still begs the question that if he is only NOW instilling how to play his way, what the ■■■■ has he been doing the last 3 years ?
I understand people need to believe in nothing more than faith that things will turn around, It just doesn't make any sense.
I don’t think it’s a bad thing that teams are having to work hard, physically; and sacrifice some of their own attacking game to beat us.
That’s not a bad thing, that tells you you’re playing relatively honestly - rather than relying on some tricky tactic, particular mode of ball movement, or just a few players that’s only going to take one or two matchups/adjustments to stop.
Doesn’t mean you’re an insta flag side though.
I've seen similar theories banded about, so i'm curious other than faith, what evidence is there that the theories in this post are acurate ?
Bomber is refusing to take the easy way out.
I have a couple of questions.
I've never seen us play 'ugly' like what we dished out against WB, Lions and now GWS.
Is Bomber making us play that way? Or are teams forcing us to play that way with their pressure and one-on-one contests?
He is playing the long game (i.e. no short cuts) and, as others have intimated, insisting on a certain style of football being played that goes against the attacking grain of players naturally but is critical in winning big finals. It results in ugly, low scoring football until the players truly "get it" and really buy in to playing that way. Nearly all premiership teams of the past decade went through this transition of low scoring, ugly scraps before blossoming into high scoring behemoths that look unstoppable: Geelong (Thompson), Hawthorn (Clarkson), Swans (Roos), Pies (Malthouse). Only a Ross Lyon coached team has fallen short - and just fallen short, twice.
It's the same sort of battle Malthouse has raged at Carlton the last 2 years but appears to have lost. No coincidence that Bryce Gibbs had a "great" game last Friday night when it was a free flowing, low tackling, low intensity around the ball type game.....the sort of play Malthouse normally detests but now seems resigned to accepting.
The "better" teams we have played and belted - Roos, Blues, Tigers - all tried playing their way and got belted buy us. The "lesser" teams we have played - Saints, Dogs, Lions, GS - all started, or quickly went, man on man to ensure we didn't have a a spare across HB and set play up (i.e. adapted a defensive posture against our game plan). Bomber has insisted we continue to play the "right" way regardless and the players get caught between sending a somewhat risky pass to someone on a lead or chipping it sideways/backwards as a safer bet...which leads to players up the ground not leading. Our players don't quite have the courage of their conviction yet in taking the game on and sending that pass forward to someone on a hot but get-able lead, but they are slowly getting there.
Good news is is that our defensive structures held up Saturday night despite nearly all our defenders have average nights individually (Baguley easily the best of them) - yet as a unit they were excellent. And JD showed just what a monster forward he will turn into when given a 1:1 opportunity against his own age group.
Expect a low scoring, classic slog-fest against the Demons next Sunday as it's a twilight game. Another "ugly" win will do just fine.
Bomber is not taking the easy way out, and wants to teach them how to play a certain way ??
Yet he has said he's been nothing but surprised at how they aren't playing the way he wants, so how is he teaching them how to play, when he continually admits they aren't doing what he wants them to.
and if he was playing the long game, surely he'd drop the biggest culprits of not playing his way, to make a statement.
and it still begs the question that if he is only NOW instilling how to play his way, what the fark has he been doing the last 3 years ?
I understand people need to believe in nothing more than faith that things will turn around, It just doesn't make any sense.
When has Bomber said he's surprised that they're not playing the way he wants?
I watch every press conference and I watch him on AFL 360 every week and I've never seen him say it once.
He's been disappointed that they haven't played that way but he's also acknowledged that it's hard and it takes time.
I agree with Baker's comments.
Bomber is playing a 'long game'. He might have thought/hoped that the long game was quicker than it looks like being, but that's no reason for him to change plans now. I just hope he's still around in some capacity next year.
Doubt it. We've got winnable games against Melbourne and Freo coming up but after that the fixture goes south in a big way.. Geelong, Port (a), Collingwood, Bulldogs, Sydney. We'll need to win three of those to play finals.
No point making finals if you can't beat three of those.
NO. I wish people would give up this delusional notion.I have wondered if Bomber is foxing to a certain extent. Holding the boys back to have a strong run at the end of the year.
I've seen similar theories banded about, so i'm curious other than faith, what evidence is there that the theories in this post are acurate ?
Bomber is refusing to take the easy way out.I have a couple of questions.
I've never seen us play 'ugly' like what we dished out against WB, Lions and now GWS.
Is Bomber making us play that way? Or are teams forcing us to play that way with their pressure and one-on-one contests?
He is playing the long game (i.e. no short cuts) and, as others have intimated, insisting on a certain style of football being played that goes against the attacking grain of players naturally but is critical in winning big finals. It results in ugly, low scoring football until the players truly "get it" and really buy in to playing that way. Nearly all premiership teams of the past decade went through this transition of low scoring, ugly scraps before blossoming into high scoring behemoths that look unstoppable: Geelong (Thompson), Hawthorn (Clarkson), Swans (Roos), Pies (Malthouse). Only a Ross Lyon coached team has fallen short - and just fallen short, twice.
It's the same sort of battle Malthouse has raged at Carlton the last 2 years but appears to have lost. No coincidence that Bryce Gibbs had a "great" game last Friday night when it was a free flowing, low tackling, low intensity around the ball type game.....the sort of play Malthouse normally detests but now seems resigned to accepting.
The "better" teams we have played and belted - Roos, Blues, Tigers - all tried playing their way and got belted buy us. The "lesser" teams we have played - Saints, Dogs, Lions, GS - all started, or quickly went, man on man to ensure we didn't have a a spare across HB and set play up (i.e. adapted a defensive posture against our game plan). Bomber has insisted we continue to play the "right" way regardless and the players get caught between sending a somewhat risky pass to someone on a lead or chipping it sideways/backwards as a safer bet...which leads to players up the ground not leading. Our players don't quite have the courage of their conviction yet in taking the game on and sending that pass forward to someone on a hot but get-able lead, but they are slowly getting there.
Good news is is that our defensive structures held up Saturday night despite nearly all our defenders have average nights individually (Baguley easily the best of them) - yet as a unit they were excellent. And JD showed just what a monster forward he will turn into when given a 1:1 opportunity against his own age group.
Expect a low scoring, classic slog-fest against the Demons next Sunday as it's a twilight game. Another "ugly" win will do just fine.
Bomber is not taking the easy way out, and wants to teach them how to play a certain way ??
Yet he has said he's been nothing but surprised at how they aren't playing the way he wants, so how is he teaching them how to play, when he continually admits they aren't doing what he wants them to.
and if he was playing the long game, surely he'd drop the biggest culprits of not playing his way, to make a statement.
and it still begs the question that if he is only NOW instilling how to play his way, what the fark has he been doing the last 3 years ?
I understand people need to believe in nothing more than faith that things will turn around, It just doesn't make any sense.
When has Bomber said he's surprised that they're not playing the way he wants?
I watch every press conference and I watch him on AFL 360 every week and I've never seen him say it once.
He's been disappointed that they haven't played that way but he's also acknowledged that it's hard and it takes time.
I agree with Baker's comments.
Bomber is playing a 'long game'. He might have thought/hoped that the long game was quicker than it looks like being, but that's no reason for him to change plans now. I just hope he's still around in some capacity next year.
not going back through tapes to find out specifically what day and time he said it.
But again i'll ask, if he's playing the long game, why has it taken til now for him to implement his way of doing things ?
in a one off year as coach, where he hasn't really given any indication he'll even be around next year ?
Bomba made that comment - singular - after we held Norf at arm’s length, round 1.
Clearly not meant in a “gee I didn’t think we were that ■■■■” sense, or in a negative sense at all. We changed our ball movement a lot in the 2-3 weeks after that, and (less successfully) that has continued. It’s not much of a leap to suggest he saw more 2013 gameplan on show than what they’d been putting in place over pre season, the few weeks after were very positive.
Did you really extrapolate that to get your entire, repeated point in this thread?
(Rhetorical question, yes you did)