If the JLT games are used by a team as ‘dress rehearsals’ so to speak, then sure,. the final result has some bearing - but I don’t see it as the important bit. What I would imagine would be the critical elements would be how the pre-season development of the game plan was working in practice against an opponent, how cohesive it were, what were the ‘sticking points’, what didn’t work as designed/anticipated - basically a free hit to take stock, and go again. The win or loss is more an issue with supporter mentality and momentum, in my opinion,. and would have little to no effect on the team and coaches
1 Like
Cause/Causation, Chris.
That "correlation proves causation " is considered a questionable cause logical fallacy when two events occurring together are taken to have established a cause -and-effect relationship. This fallacy is also known as ■■■ hoc ergo propter hoc, Latin for “with this, therefore because of this”, and "false cause ". … fallacy.
In terms of JLT I want to see no injuries, a glimpse from a new player or two and a coherent game plan.
3 Likes
Didn’t quite work? They may have missed out on the flag but they still finished on top of the ladder.
Still beat Hawthorn by 5 goals.
I don’t have any burning need to see anything from the new players. I’d rather see the developing guys out there showing that they’ve taken the next step.
I’d be playing the best side I could.
I would be making sure the game plans were working, and taking the opportunity to fix the things that aren’t working.
I agree. I don’t expect any of the draftees to play AFL this year. It’s pointless playing then in the JLT unless 1 or 2 of them surprisingly earns it
1 Like
I get all that, but the answer I would give is that if the result is a loss, then the pre-season development of the game plan, etc., can’t be going all that well.
What we should be doing, IMHO, is heading into these games with the desire and intention to show that our training is well on track towards a successful, winning season.
And let’s not forget that the first one is against FCFC. If we don’t head into that with the intention of playing full on and scoring a big win we should be ashamed of ourselves.
You don’t actually understand what the concept of practicing something is for
With the rule changes I’d be expecting all senior players getting used to it and providing feedback through JLT. Leadership will be required without runners so expect them to share the loads across all quarters.
I’d expect at least a half of football at full strength in each match.
1 Like
Thank you for contributing to the discussion.
I think that’s pretty much the definition of “didn’t quite work”
Except no one can agree on “full strength”
See Best 22 Thread.
You’d be expecting a minimum of 28 players over a season, even with an ideal injury run.
That’s without monitoring Joey’s training loads, and Gleeson, Redman, Begley as known rehabilitations.
So about 30 - 32 players in line.
If we play Ridley or MacNiece or Long off the HBF because of the above, are we at full strength?
The coaches would want everyone in contention for Round 1 to have at least some game time, if possible, but there’s only two games to do this.
A lot of players to fit in.
‘Can’t’?
Why not? If the focus and aim is/are elements encapsulated within the game, not ‘the game’ itself, than how do you conclude that if the final result is a loss, the entire game-plan can’t be going well? I’d like to throw in analogies, but I know how that ends up.
Again - you are giving absolutes that are misleading and frankly, false.
Your alternative of performing with ‘desire and intention’ implies that by not winning the practise game, we did not have desire or intent to show etc…
Show who? Supporters? Coaches? Players?
Coaches and players are well aware what the aim, intent, desire and plan is.
In other words - the game and play can have intent and desire - without the final result of a win - contrary to your statement.
It’s an interesting one. Pies played out of their skins using a very Richmond style and against a clearly reduced Richmond side (we got done reasonably easily by an even more depleted version), and Mason Cox had the best game he’ll ever play on that occasion. Full credit to C’wood for getting to the pointy end in the right shape and state of mind but I wouldn’t be counting the 2017 premiers out. Just added probably the best young kpf in the league, (and no, I don’t think he’ll upset their ‘balance’).
1 Like
Okay. You don’t think winning these games should be an objective. I do.
We disagree. That’s enough.
1 Like
Give him a break. Its 2019. Everyone is catching on to the Trump methodology. Its the same methodology which was used to sell religion to the masses through the ages.
I am saying their winning formula worked. They finished on the top. They just had a bad night and Collingwood did a brilliant job on that night. Doesn’t mean their formula “didn’t work”.
1 Like
So a bit like us vs fark carlton then?
Neither of us had a winning formula at that point, did we?