What I find interesting is that now that we are trying to add a defensive edge to our game, which pretty much everyone has been crying out for, it is a) assumed that we are going to play like Freo and the Saints under Lyon and b) that this is now being perceived as a bad thing by some.
What evidence do we have that we are now going to be looking to adopt a strangle only game style when it is evident that we have some seriously potent players? Balance between attack and defence is where it's at and I'd put my house on the fact that it is this balance between the two that we are looking for.
I haven't watched a replay of the Dogs game so can only go on my now vague recollections of being there....so my question is whether or not the shit I sat through during Q 1 and Q 2 was-
a. our new more defensive mode
or
b. the Dogs defensive plan.
If is a., all hail Tudor.