Woosha – final moments or finals moment?

[Klawdy]

Damn you and your superior intellect.

[wimmera1]

I was just summarising your post.

[Scorpio]

Disagree. Its the AFL contantly changing the rules to try to counteract what the coaches were doing. If they had just left the rules alone the game would have evolved as another coach started to counteract the tactics of a previous coach. Instead of letting this natural progression take place, the AFL had to start jumping in to try to change the game.
I wonder if they have every done a proper analysis of any of their changes prior to implemenation, and I doubt very much they have ever done one after. They just bring in another rule.
They have given us what we have to day. In a bid to try to stop the coaches tactics to win games, being effective.
You couldnt make this ■■■■ up.

The AFL have an obligation to keep the game attractive enough so that people want to go and see it and keep growing it so that other sports don’t eat into viewership.

Coaches begged for extra interchange so that they could cover for injured players as they cried that they were losing games because they only had 17 fit players left (Which was true at times)

So the AFL gave them extra interchange and what did the coaches do?

They turned the game into a shuttle run, with Collingwood recording 170 rotations in 1 game and 150 + every game.

The coaches talk a good game but the bottom line is they don’t give a rats ■■■■ about the state of the game all they care about is winning so it is the AFL’s job to try to fix what the coaches break.

The biggest mistake the AFL have made is to ever listen to one word the coaches have said and this BS about having them over to dinner at Gills is a joke.

The coaches are a cancer on the real game of football that was based on 1 v 1 contests between great players and was once great but is now pretty ordinary.

I agree with all that too. But I think it’s the efforts they have made to stop tactics. They didn’t like the flood, so they tried to speed the game up. So they stopped the number of ball ups (and created a balls up) by changing the holding the ball rule. Firstly with prior opportunity. Then when there was still too many ball up they let it spill free in a tackle.
Then they changed the deliberate point, because they want the ball to stay in play. They they changed the kicking to the boundary because they don’t want a ball up.
Somewhere in amongst all this the coaches realised they needed more interchange rotations so the AFL have to give them what they want because they, the AFL, want the game to be fast.
Then it was in the back, then Hands in the back, then sliding into the legs, which are all a direct result of trying to speed up the game.
It’s like any skill you try to do too fast, skill level drops.
There are very few great marks anymore, there’s too much interference. Those calls don’t get made because the AFL doesn’t want to stop the game.
It’s a vicious circle, and although some games are still ok, the skill level on display is woeful, people can’t even kick a goal from a set shot.
Think of the highest score, 37 17, Most teams would be lucky to kick that in their first five games each year.
Thing was, they had a free flowing game, and because the coaches got more professional started using better tactics the AFL went on a Blitz to keep their broadcast partners happy. And ruined the game in the process.
This is probably the wrong thread but too late now.

[wimmera1]

This is probably the wrong thread but too late now.

No, no.
This is still all Worsfold’s fault somehow.

[rossoneri]

Coaches need to win, no matter what. The AFL tried to quicken up the game, then slow it down. They have now put a cap on rotations and in their eyes this was to make the players more tired and run less. So what have the coaches done? They’ve slowed the game down to conserve energy in their players.

Wasn’t 6-6-6 and the fact you don’t need to kick it to yourself before playing on supposed to help scoring?

[Speedy_Gonzales]

6-6-6 only helps from centre bounces if side gets clean take away

So barely any impact really as not many goals being scored

[AD_Don]

Is it the AFL rule changes?

It’s not necessarily the rule changes. But the AFL haven’t got their high scoring games they were after so they’ll chase their tail again no doubt.

Yep.

Next will be that I could see coming is its play on if you kick backwards to a mark. Thus becoming risky to d!ck it around backwards, forcing quicker play on etc and forward movement

IIRC they trialled this in the preseason previously

In all honesty that would probably suit us

That would make it harder for teams to move the ball quickly from defence to attack because the option of switching the ball will be riskier and harder to achieve. If you don’t have the protection of being able to mark the ball it will make it harder to switch the ball back across the ground and therefore easier for teams defending to force teams up the line with a slow kick.

[Sameolds2010]

If the afl where serious about slowing the game down they’d ban training.

[andrewb]

Fois gras clause in the standard player contract- all players to be force fed a kilo of puréed cheeseburger and 2 liters of warm beer before every half.

[Sameolds2010]

The Van der haah procedure

[Klawdy]

Where do i sign up???

[FurryLog]

If the afl where serious about slowing the game down they’d ban training.

They certainly slowed our game down for a year when they trained banning

[Sameolds2010]

Where do i sign up???

His place - application fee being a slab

[Kj_11]

You forgot smashing down half a pack of durries too.

[Henry_s_Angry_Pills]

This is the guy who spent 10 years arguing every problem with Essendon was down to Brent Stanton, and his defensive efforts. All the while, excusing Jobe (and others) completely.

There has to be a public enemy number 1.

[wannabe]

I guess what most people want to see from a coach is:

a) Winning. But it has to be in style, not good enough to just get the 4 points. And it has to be against good opposition, who are in good form, and that team has to win the following week or it doesn’t count.

b) Potential for ultimate success. If you can play finals then you’re potentially only some development and some tinkering away from a flag.

In the absence of the above I think coaches should rightly be under pressure, especially after a few years in the job.

In Woosha’s case his first 2 years were a bit unusual and he’s been without a spearhead in attack that last 2. I don’t doubt that with JD fit we’d have much better percentage and at least 1 more win (first game against the swans).

Still too early to judge this season as we could crash and burn big time (maybe) or even make top 4 (unlikely). Games against Norf (in form), Crows, (both on the road) and Port will tell us a lot about where we are at. All very losable, all very winnable. Pies in the final round will be the final test (if we don’t make finals).

But based on the season so far, we aren’t in the eight so I’d rate this season a “misfire” but still back Woosha in for 2020.

[andrewb]

In Woosha’s case his first 2 years were a bit unusual and he’s been without a spearhead in attack that last 2. I don’t doubt that with JD fit we’d have much better percentage and at least 1 more win (first game against the swans)

Good teams don’t miss players.

West Coast won the flag last year without NicNat or Gaff.

GWS have had Patton and Ward out and Greene, Whitfield and Kelly have missed lots of games.

Richmond have had most of their best players out for big chunks of the year.

Collingwood won last night with a decimated list.

It mostly comes down to the game plan and players’ willingness to execute it.

We have shown signs in the last four weeks that we are finally buying in, but we are still woefully underperforming compared to talent

[Diggers]

Good win, Boss.

[Cgates]

Amazing how they’re winning and the moron is sitting by himself on the bench. NOT coaching

[Your_Team]

There will be a brief intermission from sucking it this week to allow passengers to board the train.

Enjoy.