Opinion Chris Scott's coaching - PART III

[Catters 070911]

No, he wouldn't.

Richmond won a flag with small players yes, but they applied massive pressure around the ball and hunted the ball carrier.
We aren't Richmond.

So your point about playing a smaller team is wrong then.

Your criticism is about our pressure, and that should apply no matter what size the team is, so the "bigger team, smaller team" thing was just another made-up thing to bag Scott for.

 

[Catters 070911]

I look forward to coming on these posts after wins from now on, and making you admit that Chris Scott played a part in the victory.

But, I forgot, most of you don't post here after victories.

 

[Willo_]

I'm in now way a Scott basher or a Scott defender... I'm grey on my views, some weeks I'm happy some I'm not. I do think people blaming the assistants is a cop out, the buck stops with Scott.. The assistants are effectively Scotts Staff, if they aren't delivering the message or getting the results that is a reflection on him.

But on today ... That first half cost us the ****ing game and also gave us a blue print of how not to play for the rest of the year, and even the Scott defenders need to question it

And it's not like we haven't seen that movie before, when we crab the ball around slowly, we are ineffective, put ourselves under pressure and turn the ball over.
Sure we turned it round 2nd half and that is great, but it shouldn't have even got to that stage... And it's the 2nd week in a row when we have done the same. Attacked when we had no other option and absolutely thrived.

Let's hope he's not to smarmy and stubborn to realise that plan A is garbage and to play to our strengths instead of trying to hide our weaknesses

 

[Munich]

He cops it every week, win or lose, off season, in season.
There is no let-up. The thread had to be stopped over summer.
In some ways, being forced to play so many kids now will be great for this team, and we'd better get used to losing > winning which is inevitable when this happens.

It's all well and good to play the kids but for gods sake play a proper ruckman.

It's embarrassing that Smith isn't getting games and Blitz is the alternative.

 

[Catters 070911]

I don't think we will start winning either.

So you think we will lose every game for the rest of the season.

You are an idiot. We have made finals in all but one year under Chris Scott, so we must win some games during the year.

Go on, I dare you and some of the others to name one thing, ONE DECISION, one tactic that you give Chris Scott credit for.

If you don't do it, it proves my point.

 

[Vdubs]

It's all well and good to play the kids but for gods sake play a proper ruckman.

It's embarrassing that Smith isn't getting games and Blitz is the alternative.

Not really.
Take away injuries to Cocky- who was coming good, GAJ whose 3rdQ was superb, Guthrie- we had no rotations, and yet 15 points up 15 mins into the lastQ. We quite easily had the momentum, WCE could do zilch about it, Natanui or not. Sav and Blic were reasonable today.
CS is serving notice to Smith and Stanley that more is expected of them both.
Superman Hawkins , who many rate as our MVP, lost our momentum today twice, at critical times.

 

[Catters 070911]

geelong_crazy26, some others, and I bring this up a lot- never gets addressed.

what do you bring up all the time?

All I read from most here is how Chris Scott doesn't even deserve credit for the 2011 flag, because it was made up of a team that Bomber coached (more likely a team that Stephen Wells recruited).

Tell me a time you have given credit to Chris Scott.

 

[Catters 070911]

People blame Chris Scott for everything.

How about blaming Tom Hawkins. The guy is lazy, overweight, and goes for the easy goal. He doesn't work hard enough. How come there is not more criticism of him.

Players get let off the hook too easily, and are never blamed for anything.

 

[Vdubs]

what do you bring up all the time?

All I read from most here is how Chris Scott doesn't even deserve credit for the 2011 flag, because it was made up of a team that Bomber coached (more likely a team that Stephen Wells recruited).

Tell me a time you have given credit to Chris Scott.

Every day.
Maybe you should read the CS threads.
You've been here since Oct 17- I've been defending him since 2013, or whenever the threads started.

 

[Catters 070911]

I'm in now way a Scott basher or a Scott defender... I'm grey on my views, some weeks I'm happy some I'm not. I do think people blaming the assistants is a cop out, the buck stops with Scott.. The assistants are effectively Scotts Staff, if they aren't delivering the message or getting the results that is a reflection on him.

But on today ... That first half cost us the ******* game and also gave us a blue print of how not to play for the rest of the year, and even the Scott defenders need to question it

And it's not like we haven't seen that movie before, when we crab the ball around slowly, we are ineffective, put ourselves under pressure and turn the ball over.
Sure we turned it round 2nd half and that is great, but it shouldn't have even got to that stage... And it's the 2nd week in a row when we have done the same. Attacked when we had no other option and absolutely thrived.

Let's hope he's not to smarmy and stubborn to realise that plan A is garbage and to play to our strengths instead of trying to hide our weaknesses

Maybe then you should blame Stephen Wells' for not recruiting players who can play that way.

Maybe you could blame the medical staff and fitness staff for not getting players back from injury ASAP.

Maybe you could blame the players for missing easy shots at goal, turning the ball over, not tackling, and not manning up.

Maybe you could blame the AFL for stacking two clubs with heaps of early draft picks, which pushes every other team down the draft order, and means that we don't get our first pick until the 40's, or blame the AFL for kowtowing to crybaby clubs who wanted the father-son rule changed because we benefitted from it.

But you say "the buck stops with the coach". Does that mean in times of victory, and if we win a flag, then the coach is 100% responsible for it as well, or does that just apply when it suits you?

 

[Catters 070911]

Every day.
Maybe you should read the CS threads.

You're not so bad Vdubs.

It is Biggy Boy and others whose commitment to the Geelong Football Club I question, when they would rather us lose so that Chris Scott will be sacked.

What people here should want is for Chris Scott to prove you wrong, to show you he can coach. But many here have already made up their mind, and did so the day he was appointed as coach, rather than Ken Hinkley.

 

[Vdubs]

You're not so bad Vdubs.

It is Biggy Boy and others whose commitment to the Geelong Football Club I question, when they would rather us lose so that Chris Scott will be sacked.

What people here should want is for Chris Scott to prove you wrong, to show you he can coach. But many here have already made up their mind, and did so the day he was appointed as coach, rather than Ken Hinkley.

There is truth in much of what you believe.
I for one wanted CS as our coach when there was talk of Sando, Hinkley etc.
I still maintain he is simply the best coach we could have.
I have said this every year.
This year has not changed my thinking- it is all very circumstantial what is happening to our team, nothing about coaching.
His ruck selection is a clear message to Smith and Stanley to get better. Simple I like it. Strong leadership.

 

[The_Todd07]

People blame Chris Scott for everything.

How about blaming Tom Hawkins. The guy is lazy, overweight, and goes for the easy goal. He doesn't work hard enough. How come there is not more criticism of him.

Players get let off the hook too easily, and are never blamed for anything.

Theres plenty of critisism aimed at the players on this board, some warranted some not.
This however is a thread about the fortunes of the coach so therefore you should expect to see less discussion about individual players.

The players should be assessed on their individual performance while the coach is assessed across the team collectively.

If a player misses a kick or panics under pressure. Thats on them
If the entire team constantly misses kicks and panics under pressure. Thats a coaching issue

If a player starts a game sluggishly you look at if they have prepared themselves properly.
If the team constantly starts games sluggishly, tgen obviously the coaching staff arent preparing them effectively

We seem to have a lot of team wide issues at the moment and therefore you have to look at the coaches first.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

I'm in now way a Scott basher or a Scott defender... I'm grey on my views, some weeks I'm happy some I'm not. I do think people blaming the assistants is a cop out, the buck stops with Scott.. The assistants are effectively Scotts Staff, if they aren't delivering the message or getting the results that is a reflection on him.

That is true.
Maybe a change of message or ideas could be gained from changing the assistant mix.

Pretty much the same group for 3-4 years now.
Not sure we replaced Caracella did we?

But on today ... That first half cost us the ******* game and also gave us a blue print of how not to play for the rest of the year, and even the Scott defenders need to question it

And it's not like we haven't seen that movie before, when we crab the ball around slowly, we are ineffective, put ourselves under pressure and turn the ball over.
Sure we turned it round 2nd half and that is great, but it shouldn't have even got to that stage... And it's the 2nd week in a row when we have done the same. Attacked when we had no other option and absolutely thrived.

Two weeks running we've gone quick and fast to get back into the game after HT. Do we lack the ability to play that high octane footy when the heat is still in the contest? Do we need the sting to go out first before being able to execute our skills? Sides like the Tigers and Swans won't let up in the 2nd half with their pressure.

But yes we get nowhere playing slow footy and Hawkins thrives when we get it in quick.

 

[Biggy_Boy]

I look forward to coming on these posts after wins from now on, and making you admit that Chris Scott played a part in the victory.

But, I forgot, most of you don't post here after victories.

The first one in here after the loss was you.

 

[Willo_]

Maybe then you should blame Stephen Wells' for not recruiting players who can play that way.

Maybe you could blame the medical staff and fitness staff for not getting players back from injury ASAP.

Maybe you could blame the players for missing easy shots at goal, turning the ball over, not tackling, and not manning up.

Maybe you could blame the AFL for stacking two clubs with heaps of early draft picks, which pushes every other team down the draft order, and means that we don't get our first pick until the 40's, or blame the AFL for kowtowing to crybaby clubs who wanted the father-son rule changed because we benefitted from it.

But you say "the buck stops with the coach". Does that mean in times of victory, and if we win a flag, then the coach is 100% responsible for it as well, or does that just apply when it suits you?

Did you actually even read what I said?
Or are you just shaking uncontrollably in a fit of rage at anyone that dares question Scott in any way?

 

[Biggy_Boy]

His ruck selection is a clear message to Smith and Stanley to get better. Simple I like it. Strong leadership.

So he's putting inferior players in their spot to motivate them to get better?

That's like that King of the Hill episode where the coach puts Bobby Hill in the place of athletes he thinks are slacking off. I guess that's where he's getting his coaching methodology from.

 

[Catsace]

how do you define beyond a joke?

I will contend that the free against Henry when he actually left a metre long scythe in the ground as big a load of horse-shyte a decision as i've seen in my 40-odd years of watching the game, how he could be deemed deliberate when his action occurred inside the field of play was something only that umpire can tell us. Darling's free that saw his second goal in the last quarter given also was as soft as anything, and the free that Esava had given against him for a late hold after a player had released the ball was not paid at least twice in favour of Geelong as that last quarter run from the Eagles continued.

I agree with you VDubs, there was a lot to be annoyed about with how Geelong played, but it was no mean feat to come back with 45 minutes of quite amazing footy to reverse a 32 point lead and probably generate the chances to reach a similar lead......the three behinds by Fogarty and the lack of a quick handball by Esava in the chain immediately prior to his holding free against were costly, an extra couple of goals might have broken the Eagles. Sadly when in the coaches box you can do nothing much when three running players are unavailable in the last quarter.

Sadly now i think it's seven times that Cockatoo has broken down in a game, many of those have been early on as well, and i can only think of Paul Lynch as a player with great talent but a body that would always fail him. Maybe the demands of the modern game, the constant running, pressure and stuff is something that our pre-season doesn't quite replicate once the games start, but i do think one aspect of Geelong in recent years is a propensity to lose a player or two in a game, often relatively early. The way the modern game is, i think it hurts a bit more than before. Maybe the sub rule's absence after starting in Scott's first year has sort of hit Geelong harder than most, with our side's injury situation. Just a guess in a way by me, but sometimes it does feel that way to me.

 

[Benny78]

Look at 0:43 seconds guys. Isn't that awesome? Hawkins actually used to get good delivery once and it's because we played a ruck.

 

[Benny78]

I don't hate the bloke by any means, however you have to question his endeavour. Going into a game without a recognised ruckman (yes Stanley is shit but he would have done better than blitz) for "tactical" reasons is mind blowing and needs to be recognised as a major error.
This is his 8th year as senior coach and the same issues exist. Serious Questions need to be asked when a team can be so horrific in a half of football then come out and play unstoppable football.

I want answers but all we get from his press conferences is "we recognise there's an issue, but we won't discuss it publicly".

His brother at North was exactly the same. Hopefully it's just a coincidence.

 

[Warhorse]

Christ scott is terrible at developing players.

 

[Cat_Mancini]

I don’t blame the players for the first half I think it falls on the coaches. There are a lot of inexperienced kids and they are just following game plan and structures. What is remarkable is how they can flick a switch seemingly and basically become unstoppable. The coaches seem to be content over the last 3 weeks to wait and see if things can be rectifyed with game plan going into the game. Sustaining these injuries just killed us and wore us down a fit 22 would likely have got it done. Pressure has come down on Scott for this start to the year as we are too unpredictable and consistently inconsistent to win really big games and make the top four

 

[Footy_Fan2007]

So you think we will lose every game for the rest of the season.

You are an idiot. We have made finals in all but one year under Chris Scott, so we must win some games during the year.

Go on, I dare you and some of the others to name one thing, ONE DECISION, one tactic that you give Chris Scott credit for.

If you don't do it, it proves my point.

Are you actually Chris Scott’s wife or something?

 

[Footy_Fan2007]

"You have to question his endeavour".

What about the players' endeavour? What about their work ethics?

You people are so in love with the players you never blame them for stuffing up (unless it is a player you don't like like Stanley or Blicavs).

It wasn't Chris Scott missing easy shots at goal. It wasn't Chris Scott who doesn't tackle in finals. It isn't Chris Scott who turns the ball over.

The coach can only give instructions. It is up to the players to implement them, and if they don't, why not hold them responsible? Why let the players off the hook?

When we won flags, the players got all the credit. Yet it wasn't Thompson who missed shots at goal in the 2008 GF.

People need to start blaming players for what players do. Blame the coach for bad tactics, but not for injuries, poor skill execution, lack of effort or bad kicking at goal.

If you want answers, call the club. Scott is not going to reveal to the world what our problems are, for the consumption of the media. But you won't call, because you would rather whinge than actually call the club and seek answers.

Maybe it is you who lacks endeavour!

What on earth is calling the club going to do? Do you think Chris will answer the phone and be happy to answer my questions? Wtf is wrong with you.

 

[Mningasimisonda]

I think generally Scott is a great coach. And I'm sure there is some sense behind the strange selections we keep seeing.

I do wonder sometimes if there'd be a better balance with a different captain though. Having Scott who was a tough player and then Selwood wouldn't be everyone's cup of tea. But it all depends if they expect others to do as they do/did.