The two things we’re doing differently this year that is showing up our midfield is we’re not winning as many clearances as previous years (mixture of a loss of Paddy, injuries to defensive and inside mids and down form of remaining mids) as well as making very basic skill errors when running forward. A missed kick or a move to handball sideways and getting tackled puts all of our players out of position and leaves us open to be burnt on the run the other way.
It kind of feels like the whole club had agreed we over estimated ourselves and now we go hard to "refresh" the list. I think this is the right decision and actually removes a lot of the pressure on hird. If everyone is on the page then there is no concern for short term results.I’m looking forward to going to the footy this week.
I don’t see it so much as an over estimation. I think we were legitimately able to challenge, but that window has now closed (for a multitude of reasons).
Our list was at it’s best in 2012-14 IMHO.
Had we had a competent sports science department, a key forward, and consistent coaching, might well have achieved a fair bit. Not to be.
The "plan" ... Be competitive (don't look like you're tanking) Don't win the next 9 games. Finish second last (has Essendon ever finished bottom of the ladder?) Play the kids and find out if they're any ■■■■■■ good. Place a marker that says, "this is what the club stands for"Setting a line in the sand moment after you've admitted you're just looking at the kids is not the greatest idea I've heard.
Clarkson + early draft picks/recruit to plan + kids + setting a marker of intent/establishing a plan = success. Oh, yeah ... having a string leader like Kennett who takes no prisoners probably helps too.The "plan" ... Be competitive (don't look like you're tanking) Don't win the next 9 games. Finish second last (has Essendon ever finished bottom of the ladder?) Play the kids and find out if they're any ■■■■■■ good. Place a marker that says, "this is what the club stands for"Setting a line in the sand moment after you've admitted you're just looking at the kids is not the greatest idea I've heard.
Rest the senior guys for the remainder of the year by rotating them out each week and play some of the younger guys.
Might see some passion and hunger spread back through the club as young, enthusiastic kids can sometimes have that effect on a list if they are playing well and are confident.
Bring in Langford, Laverde, Dalgleish and Browne next.
Will some one at EFC head office, please put Jobe on the LYTI list and send the paperwork to the AFL. Please no more forgetful episodes like Sean McK. being upgraded.
Clarkson + early draft picks/recruit to plan + kids + setting a marker of intent/establishing a plan = success. Oh, yeah ... having a string leader like Kennett who takes no prisoners probably helps too.The "plan" ... Be competitive (don't look like you're tanking) Don't win the next 9 games. Finish second last (has Essendon ever finished bottom of the ladder?) Play the kids and find out if they're any ■■■■■■ good. Place a marker that says, "this is what the club stands for"Setting a line in the sand moment after you've admitted you're just looking at the kids is not the greatest idea I've heard.
I think you have to say the words “line in the sand” to three different journos, from three seperate media outlets, in three consecutive interviews, that are 3 minutes apart, for it to work. No guarantees, but it is worth a try. Can you get on that for us?
It kind of feels like the whole club had agreed we over estimated ourselves and now we go hard to "refresh" the list. I think this is the right decision and actually removes a lot of the pressure on hird. If everyone is on the page then there is no concern for short term results.I’m looking forward to going to the footy this week.
I don’t see it so much as an over estimation. I think we were legitimately able to challenge, but that window has now closed (for a multitude of reasons).
Our list was at it’s best in 2012-14 IMHO.Had we had a competent sports science department, a key forward, and consistent coaching, might well have achieved a fair bit. Not to be.
2012/2013 yes, good, well balanced side with a forward line that kicked goals. 2 ruckmen. The injury to TBell in the 2014 pre-season meant we relied on one ruckman, and he played very well which got us into the 8. Once he left, our midfield was left without a effective ruckman and its been massive pressure on a depleted midfield ever since. Effectively no ruckman, no tagger, no 2nd big bodied /defensive mid. In 2014 we covered up the cracks, in 2015 the dam wall broke.
Can someone point out a side that's susceptible to slow sides? Or susceptible to a side not smashing them at the contest?Play a young quick side. In Laverde, Delgleish and Ashby for Dempsey, Stein and Gwilt for a start. In Browne for NOB also and probably Edwards for Melksham.Like this, not sure why Hird would put a limit on the number of young players you can play…wouldn’t that be detrimental to developing a good culture in your young players. Besides Dalgleish, Browne, Ashby couldn’t do any worse than some of the senior players at the moment
Essendons gameplan is very susceptible to a team playing fast spreading style with overlap run. The teams playing this style especially are Collingwood, StKilda and Geelong. This is exactly how Collingwood beat us on Anzac Day. Beating us to the ball and spreading
I have yet to identify whether it is player effort or just that other sides are picking faster players on the flanks . But its certain that teams are out spreading us , and then if we get a turnover, they run back and man up against us very fast.
The gameplan and player selection currently is focused on skill above all else. This is a gameplan with Sheedy DNA in it. Sheeds was never concerned that much about speed, but more about skill and ruggedness. But now we find ourselves in the position where we cannot execute our skills under pressure, because once we gain possession, they close in on us very fast, and we are not rugged like the 1999/2000 team…
When Jobe and Heppell have played well, we have been able to mask this problem back to a 50/50 contest, but over the last couple of years , we have become over defensive, and delivery I50 has a lower rate of return than most other clubs , so we have to well and truly beat the opposition with clearances to kick a winning score. With Jobe down and out, this is not happening.
The game is moving on, its getting faster and well, Sheeds DNA doesnt work too well today. Apart from the KPPS most clubs are picking fast players at half back, on the wings and half forward flanks. We have them, like Dalgleish, even the forgotten man, Aylett but we are not picking them.
Its not just a matter of playing young players IMO they must be young and fast. So thats a Dalgleish, not an O Brien, Its an Edwards not a Kav. Its a McKenna not a Gwilt, its a Kommer.
The X factor is speed, but with adequate skill level. Get out in front, spread, and you dont have to execute the skill under pressure.
Thats what gets you into the 8 in 2015. To get into the top 4 you need 3 A grade inside mids and a dominant forward.
Yeah i think that is all pretty spot on. The other factor of course is that our stoppage work has fallen away because we lost ryder and have steadfastly refused to pick a proper ruck division.
Of course we have known speed was our kryptonite for a while, norf elimination final 3rd quarter anyone, as you say though we were able to cover it up better.
“Spread well, win the contest and work hard defensively” describes every effective game plan ever. We’re not doing 2 or 3 and we’ve never really done 1 all that well.
Even that Norf game was a hell of a lot more about them winning clearance upon clearance (it was something like 8-2 centre clearances in the 3rd - and I wouldn’t describe any of their mids bar Harvey as fast) rather than speed.
Yes Hap and Ivan I think we pretty much agree.
Too many Blitzers are focusing on this player or that player being rubbish on any given game day. The problem is not just a player problem. Seems to be a massive structural problem . there is a prevailing attitude that ruckmen are not important. I say thats crap. A good ruckman helps the mids to perform.
Look at it this way. If it was random, each side would win an equal number of clearances. If a ruckman succeeds in directing hitouts and the mids win 6/10 clearances already your side has 60 clearances to 40 over the whole game and potentially a match winning 20 more I50s.
Can someone point out a side that's susceptible to slow sides? Or susceptible to a side not smashing them at the contest?Play a young quick side. In Laverde, Delgleish and Ashby for Dempsey, Stein and Gwilt for a start. In Browne for NOB also and probably Edwards for Melksham.Like this, not sure why Hird would put a limit on the number of young players you can play…wouldn’t that be detrimental to developing a good culture in your young players. Besides Dalgleish, Browne, Ashby couldn’t do any worse than some of the senior players at the moment
Essendons gameplan is very susceptible to a team playing fast spreading style with overlap run. The teams playing this style especially are Collingwood, StKilda and Geelong. This is exactly how Collingwood beat us on Anzac Day. Beating us to the ball and spreading
I have yet to identify whether it is player effort or just that other sides are picking faster players on the flanks . But its certain that teams are out spreading us , and then if we get a turnover, they run back and man up against us very fast.
The gameplan and player selection currently is focused on skill above all else. This is a gameplan with Sheedy DNA in it. Sheeds was never concerned that much about speed, but more about skill and ruggedness. But now we find ourselves in the position where we cannot execute our skills under pressure, because once we gain possession, they close in on us very fast, and we are not rugged like the 1999/2000 team…
When Jobe and Heppell have played well, we have been able to mask this problem back to a 50/50 contest, but over the last couple of years , we have become over defensive, and delivery I50 has a lower rate of return than most other clubs , so we have to well and truly beat the opposition with clearances to kick a winning score. With Jobe down and out, this is not happening.
The game is moving on, its getting faster and well, Sheeds DNA doesnt work too well today. Apart from the KPPS most clubs are picking fast players at half back, on the wings and half forward flanks. We have them, like Dalgleish, even the forgotten man, Aylett but we are not picking them.
Its not just a matter of playing young players IMO they must be young and fast. So thats a Dalgleish, not an O Brien, Its an Edwards not a Kav. Its a McKenna not a Gwilt, its a Kommer.
The X factor is speed, but with adequate skill level. Get out in front, spread, and you dont have to execute the skill under pressure.
Thats what gets you into the 8 in 2015. To get into the top 4 you need 3 A grade inside mids and a dominant forward.
Yeah i think that is all pretty spot on. The other factor of course is that our stoppage work has fallen away because we lost ryder and have steadfastly refused to pick a proper ruck division.
Of course we have known speed was our kryptonite for a while, norf elimination final 3rd quarter anyone, as you say though we were able to cover it up better.
“Spread well, win the contest and work hard defensively” describes every effective game plan ever. We’re not doing 2 or 3 and we’ve never really done 1 all that well.
Even that Norf game was a hell of a lot more about them winning clearance upon clearance (it was something like 8-2 centre clearances in the 3rd - and I wouldn’t describe any of their mids bar Harvey as fast) rather than speed.
Yes Hap and Ivan I think we pretty much agree.
Too many Blitzers are focusing on this player or that player being rubbish on any given game day. The problem is not just a player problem. Seems to be a massive structural problem . there is a prevailing attitude that ruckmen are not important. I say thats crap. A good ruckman helps the mids to perform.
Look at it this way. If it was random, each side would win an equal number of clearances. If a ruckman succeeds in directing hitouts and the mids win 6/10 clearances already your side has 60 clearances to 40 over the whole game and potentially a match winning 20 more I50s.
good taps to advantage lead to scoring opportunities, it builds momentum. if aren’t getting the taps to advantage you need to at the very least have a good compeditor in their to try and reduce the number of taps to advantage the opposition win. It’s why giles should be playing. You can’t reliably turn the ruck into a 50/50 without, you know, playing a ruckman.
Can someone point out a side that's susceptible to slow sides? Or susceptible to a side not smashing them at the contest?Play a young quick side. In Laverde, Delgleish and Ashby for Dempsey, Stein and Gwilt for a start. In Browne for NOB also and probably Edwards for Melksham.Like this, not sure why Hird would put a limit on the number of young players you can play…wouldn’t that be detrimental to developing a good culture in your young players. Besides Dalgleish, Browne, Ashby couldn’t do any worse than some of the senior players at the moment
Essendons gameplan is very susceptible to a team playing fast spreading style with overlap run. The teams playing this style especially are Collingwood, StKilda and Geelong. This is exactly how Collingwood beat us on Anzac Day. Beating us to the ball and spreading
I have yet to identify whether it is player effort or just that other sides are picking faster players on the flanks . But its certain that teams are out spreading us , and then if we get a turnover, they run back and man up against us very fast.
The gameplan and player selection currently is focused on skill above all else. This is a gameplan with Sheedy DNA in it. Sheeds was never concerned that much about speed, but more about skill and ruggedness. But now we find ourselves in the position where we cannot execute our skills under pressure, because once we gain possession, they close in on us very fast, and we are not rugged like the 1999/2000 team…
When Jobe and Heppell have played well, we have been able to mask this problem back to a 50/50 contest, but over the last couple of years , we have become over defensive, and delivery I50 has a lower rate of return than most other clubs , so we have to well and truly beat the opposition with clearances to kick a winning score. With Jobe down and out, this is not happening.
The game is moving on, its getting faster and well, Sheeds DNA doesnt work too well today. Apart from the KPPS most clubs are picking fast players at half back, on the wings and half forward flanks. We have them, like Dalgleish, even the forgotten man, Aylett but we are not picking them.
Its not just a matter of playing young players IMO they must be young and fast. So thats a Dalgleish, not an O Brien, Its an Edwards not a Kav. Its a McKenna not a Gwilt, its a Kommer.
The X factor is speed, but with adequate skill level. Get out in front, spread, and you dont have to execute the skill under pressure.
Thats what gets you into the 8 in 2015. To get into the top 4 you need 3 A grade inside mids and a dominant forward.
Yeah i think that is all pretty spot on. The other factor of course is that our stoppage work has fallen away because we lost ryder and have steadfastly refused to pick a proper ruck division.
Of course we have known speed was our kryptonite for a while, norf elimination final 3rd quarter anyone, as you say though we were able to cover it up better.
“Spread well, win the contest and work hard defensively” describes every effective game plan ever. We’re not doing 2 or 3 and we’ve never really done 1 all that well.
Even that Norf game was a hell of a lot more about them winning clearance upon clearance (it was something like 8-2 centre clearances in the 3rd - and I wouldn’t describe any of their mids bar Harvey as fast) rather than speed.
Yes Hap and Ivan I think we pretty much agree.
Too many Blitzers are focusing on this player or that player being rubbish on any given game day. The problem is not just a player problem. Seems to be a massive structural problem . there is a prevailing attitude that ruckmen are not important. I say thats crap. A good ruckman helps the mids to perform.
Look at it this way. If it was random, each side would win an equal number of clearances. If a ruckman succeeds in directing hitouts and the mids win 6/10 clearances already your side has 60 clearances to 40 over the whole game and potentially a match winning 20 more I50s.
But that is a player problem. If we had someone better than Giles available, he would’ve played.
Or do you actually believe that picking Carlisle over Giles (for 1 week) and Carlisle over Thurlow for 2 weeks last year (can’t even remember whether Thurlow was fit for Freo? don’t not have had a rookie upgrade to use either, with Ambrose elevated early) actually signifies some long running philosophy?
We kept picking TBC as the 2nd ruck last year and early this year when he was knackered. We played Hille/Ryder/TBC at some points in 2011-2012 when we were down a genuine key forward. TBC/Ryder played together most of Hird’s reign when fit.
As far as I can see about 80 of our most recent 100 games suggest they rate ruckmen as a player type - with 2 or even 3 rucks in the 22. 1 game suggests they don’t.
14 games this year out of 14 suggests they don’t rate Giles.
That’s my conclusion, anyway.
Thurlow was never fit
Hap I agree with you. The bottom line is they must rate Giles abysmally low. Lets see what happens this week. I just dont see they have any alternative but to play Giles. Having BJ or Hepp go third man up just takes them out of the stoppage so badly.
Still wonder if there’s another reason we won’t, or more correctly can’t play Giles. Not sure what, but there have been other instances of players mysteriously dropped for lengths of time, or being inexplicably injured for long periods, & only later was there some inkling as to why.
As has been said, he carried the GWS ruck dept solo for ages, then disappeared. Was that 'cause of Mummy, or did they get get Mummy, because they could not play him for a while? Then, when we are getting screwed on Judas, I suspected the AFL “helped” Giles come to us as some sort of back room compensation, the caveat perhaps being, he still couldn’t play seniors for another 12 months.
He has another 12 months on a contract doesn’t he? Wonder if he miraculously “finds form” during the next pre season. If he genuinely isn’t up to it he would have to be delisted this years end, regardless of the cost.
Just spitballing.
Maybe there is a movie studio, sealed up somewhere with the floor covered in dust, a flag hanging limply on a pole and lots of very big boot marks in the dust.
Or maybe it wasnt Oswald that killed JFK. Maybe it was one of the presidential security staff accidently shooting JFK
All sounds like highly speculative bs to me BD.
Oh, wait…
Bags Hooker Hibberd
Dagleish Hurley Ashby
That should be the 6 at the back for the remainder of the year!
No ■■■■ forward experiments for hooker or Hurley!
Bags Hooker Hibberd Dagleish Hurley AshbyThat should be the 6 at the back for the remainder of the year!
No ■■■■ forward experiments for hooker or Hurley!
Are you selecting Dal based on his form?
The two things we're doing differently this year that is showing up our midfield is we're not winning as many clearances as previous years (mixture of a loss of Paddy, injuries to defensive and inside mids and down form of remaining mids) as well as making very basic skill errors when running forward. A missed kick or a move to handball sideways and getting tackled puts all of our players out of position and leaves us open to be burnt on the run the other way.
Because Thompson & Goodwin were very good at the midfield training and tactics side of things.
They are gone now.
Still wonder if there's another reason we won't, or more correctly can't play Giles. Not sure what, but there have been other instances of players mysteriously dropped for lengths of time, or being inexplicably injured for long periods, & only later was there some inkling as to why. As has been said, he carried the GWS ruck dept solo for ages, then disappeared. Was that 'cause of Mummy, or did they get get Mummy, because they could not play him for a while? Then, when we are getting screwed on Judas, I suspected the AFL "helped" Giles come to us as some sort of back room compensation, the caveat perhaps being, he still couldn't play seniors for another 12 months.He has another 12 months on a contract doesn’t he? Wonder if he miraculously “finds form” during the next pre season. If he genuinely isn’t up to it he would have to be delisted this years end, regardless of the cost.
Just spitballing.
The former.
Giles played alongside Mjmmy for the first 9-10 weeks when Mummy got there then they chucked him and played a Patton type as the #2
Bags Hooker Hibberd Dagleish Hurley AshbyThat should be the 6 at the back for the remainder of the year!
No ■■■■ forward experiments for hooker or Hurley!
Are you selecting Dal based on his form?
For the future now lets see if you wanna pick Dempsey?