Love to see Winders, Chappy and Godard all run riot on the forward line on Friday, and cut hawthorn to pieces
Bomber went to Essendon and bled all the red and black and they ran out of red and black and they had to close Mark McVeigh.Bomba Thompson bleeds red and black so much, that Mark Mcveigh has developed an inferiority complex
Spike was jealous so he said "Finish your bleeding and F*** off"
At one stage when a player had the ball in the middle of the ground many of the players rushed back towards the goals but Bomber stopped and berated them telling them that they should come up and take time away from the player with the ball by pressuring him rather than conceding the kick.
I was pleased to hear at one stage "F...ing get at him don't corral him!" which has been a weakness of our defensive play in the past.
Players were encouraged to spread e.g. Budda was told to get away from Chappy and the players were told to play on and be confident that people will be in the right spot.
When the ball is being kicked in "f...ing find your man and stop watching the ball."
Great emphasis is being placed on not being static at stoppages with Zaka being the go to man as often as not and overlap being encouraged.
Great to see that we're training for the opponent - this is definitely the best way to play against the Hawks.
Thanks JM.
■■■■■■■ that makes me happy. I thought Thurlow had a cracker for his first on Friday night, more so after watching the replay (honestly who didn't have one though), but it's great to see Bomber excited about the kids and their potential.Thurlow kicked a long bomb goal and Bomber was beside himself with excitement "Go Bombers!!!" he screamed at them and he was pleased to see another long goal from Joe shortly afterwards.
Give it 5-6 rounds for the guys to gel together in the fowardline, the midfielders and the coaches to figure out how to kick to the advantage of those guys and we could see the beginning the most functional forward line we've seen since the Lucas/Lloyd era.
Edit: LID OFF!!
Um thurlow is a ruckman and still on our rookie list .. You might be thinking of ambrose .. He played on friday night in the forward line ..
You're right - I meant Ambrose. Apologies to Ambrose and everyone else.
Bomber went to Essendon and bled all the red and black and they ran out of red and black and they had to close Mark McVeigh.Bomba Thompson bleeds red and black so much, that Mark Mcveigh has developed an inferiority complex
Spike was jealous so he said "Finish your bleeding and F*** off"
This is the best exchange in Blitz history.
These reports are makin me thirsty
Thanks so much JM. Very much appreciated as usual.
I don't think there is any need for all that swearing.
Fark oath there is :P
Bomba totes on the Ambrose train, good to see. Thanks Jackie, wish I coulda been there.
Thanks JM. Another great report.
Love this "F...ing get at him don't corral him!" Drove me mad
last yearthe last 3 years watching the Hawks just passing off without any pressure. We looked like farking witches hats.
fixed
LOL. OK, colour me stupid :(there is a roofGreat, you made me check the weather conditions for Friday. Rain... FFS Mootsy!Nice day today as well. Nice sunny day.
And the AFL for not playing EFC/Hawks at the MCG.
Did Carlisle train ok? Mentioned that his ankle is a problem this week after it being crunched in that marking contest.
Backing off from the ball carrier was noticeable a few times last week and l have always regarded this as a weakness, it is not really a form of defence at all as it takes the pressure off the ball carrier and allows them more time and space to spot up options. l am glad to hear that this session addressed this issue. Thanka again Jackie for the report.
You have to know who to go at with the ball and who to back off from. Some players will just side step you. Try to think about anyone going at Watson.
Backing off from the ball carrier and corralling rather than attacking aren't necessarily the same thing. Coralling without committing annoys me but as noted with some players as soon as you move they are past you and clear. But in general I would much rather players with the ball be attacked rather than corralled.
But there is another situation that does often occur: opponent has the ball, and we have a defender manning/running with a player 15 m down the field. Does that player leave his man to attack the ball carrier or let him run with it? He's not corralling the player but he is backing off by staying with his (otherwise free) man. The right decision here will depend on your ability to see what space is available in front of the possoble receiver. If he's running out of clear space, attack the carrier, if not you may be better letting the carrier run and bounce and trust your defenders further up can oragnise to close down the next longer target.
Backing off from the ball carrier and corralling rather than attacking aren't necessarily the same thing. Coralling without committing annoys me but as noted with some players as soon as you move they are past you and clear. But in general I would much rather players with the ball be attacked rather than corralled.
But there is another situation that does often occur: opponent has the ball, and we have a defender manning/running with a player 15 m down the field. Does that player leave his man to attack the ball carrier or let him run with it? He's not corralling the player but he is backing off by staying with his (otherwise free) man. The right decision here will depend on your ability to see what space is available in front of the possoble receiver. If he's running out of clear space, attack the carrier, if not you may be better letting the carrier run and bounce and trust your defenders further up can oragnise to close down the next longer target.
Certainly never played at the highest level or even 2nd highest level but was taught from juniors to attack the ball carrier even if it meant leaving your man free behind you. More often than not it would draw a skill error and the ball wouldn't go over the top. Of course this changes with ability but I still believe it's the best option rather than standing in no man's landing and then half heartedly running after your direct opponent as they stream upfield. This is what we have done previously against the hawks .and, if we're going to do this again, I would prefer we wear bright orange vests so we look more like witches hats.
Did Carlisle train ok? Mentioned that his ankle is a problem this week after it being crunched in that marking contest.
He trained strongly. No sign of any problem with his ankle.
Backing off from the ball carrier and corralling rather than attacking aren't necessarily the same thing. Coralling without committing annoys me but as noted with some players as soon as you move they are past you and clear. But in general I would much rather players with the ball be attacked rather than corralled.
But there is another situation that does often occur: opponent has the ball, and we have a defender manning/running with a player 15 m down the field. Does that player leave his man to attack the ball carrier or let him run with it? He's not corralling the player but he is backing off by staying with his (otherwise free) man. The right decision here will depend on your ability to see what space is available in front of the possoble receiver. If he's running out of clear space, attack the carrier, if not you may be better letting the carrier run and bounce and trust your defenders further up can oragnise to close down the next longer target.
Certainly never played at the highest level or even 2nd highest level but was taught from juniors to attack the ball carrier even if it meant leaving your man free behind you. More often than not it would draw a skill error and the ball wouldn't go over the top. Of course this changes with ability but I still believe it's the best option rather than standing in no man's landing and then half heartedly running after your direct opponent as they stream upfield. This is what we have done previously against the hawks .and, if we're going to do this again, I would prefer we wear bright orange vests so we look more like witches hats.
What's required is other guys to push up and either be the guy who pressures the carrier or takes the (otherwise free) guy to allow the bloke looking like he should be wearing the orange vest to attack. Ball moves faster in the air than anyone can run, and handballing/chipping to a free player should be done with ridiculous ease at AFL level. The difference might be 2 seconds of further run by the ball carrier that allows our defence to close down leading players, or the carrier has to pull the trigger earlier and kick 45 m instead of 25 m. At 25 m most AFL players can put it on the advantage side of a contest when two players are 1 m apart. Much harder from 45 m, and the flight time gives the defender a chance to manoeuvre. I agree attacking the carrier is always best but requires team running - it's not always the guy who's not attacking them's fault that he doesn't run at them.
Football can be fascinating in regard to how players run and what decisions they make about running. People say north were lazy, but it's almost like they were instructed not to go with the short lead target. We'll concede that short one rather than run to defend it and allow more space for the next slightly deeper option to lead into. Maybe they were just lazy, but I'd love to know what the North coaches were saying... To me it looked like Essendon did a lot of short dummy leads, or simply positioning in a really short position waiting for a defender to come so a deeper option coul use the space, and North never closed it up, so we used it, again and again. Except at certain times. I did reckon Stanton did quite a few early dummy leads that were chased down - hence he didn't get delivered to a lot. You can say Essendon played a boring chipping game, but we did it because of how North responded (or didn't) as much as anything. I read that Bomber was surprised at how short we played - maybe he was just being cagey, but also maybe that's a clue as to how much our game style was determined by how North chose to (not) run, whether by instruction, or laziness.
Bomba from an a night out in a night club apparently
Bomba from an a night out in a night club apparently
wat?