AFL Toast Dreamtime Winning

[windyhill]

i enjoy winning.

Barely beating bottom 3? Not so much.

Maybe I'm very much on the outer here.

Brother, it’s a very even league, afl would be rapt apart from the norf basket case. I’m as pessimistic as anyone, I’m ****ing loving this season, 11 in a row v norf,2 in a row v rich (we’re spuds apparently) Comfortably account for the rising hawks. Look at where we’ve come from. I don’t think B.Scott is getting enough credit btw.

 

[ant555]

Can’t find a link but I saw before that Tapping said after the game that ‘conditions presented a real challenge for us and we took a while to adapt’.

Would that be the zero wind and no rain night game at the MCG we play at least 7 times a year? Those conditions?

Cold? Is he talking about the temperature?

Well it was a bit slippery. Having just watched the replay blokes were sliding a fair way along the ground.

 

[Old Campaigner]

It's still hard to know what to think about that game. Were we rubbish or were the tuggers decent or a little bit of both? Are we running out off puff or struggling to compensate for injuries to some key players? There's also rumours of a virus that went through the club like a dose of salts too, which might offer an explanation.

All that aside we're certainly not as good as our ladder position would suggest (our percentage is probably the better indicator of where things are at imo). I wouldn't be completely surprised if we drop out of the 8 at some point, it's still really tight down to 9-10 on the ladder with only a few games either way separating those sides.

 

[ant555]

Finally watched the game for the first time. Initial observations.

Tigers played a decent one on one defense for a lot of the game and that is our kryptonite as we do not have the personal to deal with it. Until we find a strong marking target forward of the ball we will have issues with sides playing one on one or 12 man midfield zone defense. It strangles the game. It also let Richmond use their speed to get out the back. Not having a strong marking CHF and a decent marking ruck is our biggest achilleas heal IMO. Gives us no plan B. Every time we get one on one defense against us it is a hard slog as we have to rely on half back intercept.

Think we are going to Langford too much. Last couple of weeks he has been matched with slightly taller defenders who have limited his one on one marking.

Midfield got done because Nank gave Goldy an absolute bath .

We simply need a CHF . Jones or Caddy to stand up or someone for outside to come in. Need a fast tackling small forward to come through to the next level. Need a decent ruck who can mark. Not sure we have that. Need our wings back. We miss the up and back running Duursma gave us.

 

[ant555]

It's still hard to know what to think about that game. Were we rubbish or were the tuggers decent or a little bit of both? Are we running out off puff or struggling to compensate for injuries to some key players? There's also rumours of a virus that went through the club like a dose of salts too, which might offer an explanation.

All that aside we're certainly not as good as our ladder position would suggest (our percentage is probably the better indicator of where things are at imo). I wouldn't be completely surprised if we drop out of the 8 at some point, it's still really tight down to 9-10 on the ladder with only a few games either way separating those sides.

Tigers where good in the areas that counted. Solid defensive effort and simply ran hard and kicked the ball forward. No stuffing around. They lacked a bit of polish but they came to play this week after embarrassing themselves in the last few weeks. Their old heads played close to the best they have played all year. Then there was the ruck. Nank dominated and they got they advantage.

 

[Old Campaigner]

Finally watched the game for the first time. Initial observations.

Tigers played a decent one on one defense for a lot of the game and that is our kryptonite as we do not have the personal to deal with it. Until we find a strong marking target forward of the ball we will have issues with sides playing one on one or 12 man midfield zone defense. It strangles the game. It also let Richmond use their speed to get out the back. Not having a strong marking CHF and a decent marking ruck is our biggest achilleas heal IMO. Gives us no plan B. Every time we get one on one defense against us it is a hard slog as we have to rely on half back intercept.

Think we are going to Langford too much. Last couple of weeks he has been matched with slightly taller defenders who have limited his one on one marking.

Midfield got done because Nank gave Goldy an absolute bath .

We simply need a CHF . Jones or Caddy to stand up or someone for outside to come in. Need a fast tackling small forward to come through to the next level. Need a decent ruck who can mark. Not sure we have that. Need our wings back. We miss the up and back running Duursma gave us.

You can see why they like Draper in the side even though he's a bit inconsistent. He takes a taller defender which leaves Langford left alone with someone he can throw around, and even though Draper probably won't mark a ball kicked in his direction his opponent probably won't either. He also gives Goldy a much needed chopout in the ruck while allowing Wright to remain in attack, and probably reduces the hitout differential somewhat (although I suspect we still get beaten).

I agree with your required additions, and I think those have been pretty consistent for a while now. I think some of the younger guys we have developing are probably a reasonable chance of being able to take the step up and fill those roles. Roberts, Davey (both of them) and Visentini have all shown enough that we can have some confidence in their ability.

How would Hayes go in attack? Probably limited forward craft but we know he can clunk a mark.

 

[WABomber]

Tigers where good in the areas that counted. Solid defensive effort and simply ran hard and kicked the ball forward. No stuffing around. They lacked a bit of polish but they came to play this week after embarrassing themselves in the last few weeks. Their old heads played close to the best they have played all year. Then there was the ruck. Nank dominated and they got they advantage.

Nank plays a tough brand of football, really gave Goldy a hiding.

 

[Zach Package]

Well it was a bit slippery. Having just watched the replay blokes were sliding a fair way along the ground.

hardly unexpected given the time of year though, the way it was phrased was almost as if they were taken off guard.

It certainly brought Richmond right into the game though.

 

[dank420_]

If people want to swallow copeium with "oh well take the win" than whatever but the body of work against the 3 worst sides in the comp should be screaming alarm bells for us. The reality is that we are not playing anywhere near a top 4 side and we are going to get exposed very very quickly if it isnt turned around.

Was anyone expecting us to be top 4?

Man just chill out and enjoy it. We will be at what we will be at.

 

[ghostdog]

It's not about just beating X team by 100 points, it's a much wider view than that.

People thinking this was a "good win" are not seeing the wood for the trees and what it means.

We barely beat West Coast, only had 1 good quarter against North, and now only just beaten Richmond, with basically a VFL team playing. Essendon simply cannot score and it is alarming.

As improved as our defence is, our AVG score is ~84 points. That is terrible. We are 9th on the ladder for scoring and we have played most of the bottom teams. Our scoring is a MASSIVE issue and it needs to be fixed urgently.

If people want to swallow copeium with "oh well take the win" than whatever but the body of work against the 3 worst sides in the comp should be screaming alarm bells for us. The reality is that we are not playing anywhere near a top 4 side and we are going to get exposed very very quickly if it isnt turned around.

We have seen this story before, literally last year we were 5th on the ladder at Round 17 last year, and got exposed.

The reality is that we've overachieved on the back of team defence. It's what we've been working on and in that sense it's a huge win for this group. The forwardline is clearly a work in progress. Wright is great but he isn't a powerful Hawkins or Lynch type who can outbody opponents. He needs to lead up. Jones is still skinny but is really just finding his toughness defensively. We clearly need a zippy small forward with goal sense and traffic skills. Stringer is aging despite his form.

I was one who mentioned that I'd like to see us bury a team. I stand by that and I think we're capable - look at how we started on Collingwood. However, I'm also under no illusions about where we're at development wise. For clarity, what I said was that top 4 sides who are genuine contenders bury lesser teams. I think we can beat anyone on our day but we're not convincing. We're pretenders. We've got some way to go yet but we look promising.

I've also advocated getting games into the youngers, Davey in particular earlier in the season. Bryan deserves now. Apparently Hayes and Roberts too. I'm just as happy to see them getting games to develop the side.

This said, I'm happy to take the wins. W is W. A culture of winning and belief in the coaching and system is priceless. The win against the Tigers was tough in spite of our challenges with team balance at the moment, but it was a win. We found a way. Can't complain about that, just accept that we remain a work in progress, and remember, we're not supposed to be second on the ladder.

 

[ant555]

Have had time to have another look at the game and also a quick look at the first quarter of the last two Tigers games . The fact is Richmond just turned up this week and from the start which they did not the last two weeks. It was not that we did a lot wrong . They simply came to play. Their effort was 1000% better . They pressured way better. They did not stuff around moving the footy. It was almost like Yze decided to go back to the old Richmond game / ball movement . They where a totally different side. Will be interesting to see if they bring it next week.
All of their senior guys stood up this week. Last 2 weeks Bolton had been very flakey and Martin not great. Baker added some edge for them.
The one big thing that hurt us was not being able to match Nank in the ruck. The previous weeks Brisbane and the Dogs matched what he was doing. We got a bath and hit hurt our midfield.

 

[ant555]

The reality is that we've overachieved on the back of team defence. It's what we've been working on and in that sense it's a huge win for this group. The forwardline is clearly a work in progress. Wright is great but he isn't a powerful Hawkins or Lynch type who can outbody opponents. He needs to lead up. Jones is still skinny but is really just finding his toughness defensively. We clearly need a zippy small forward with goal sense and traffic skills. Stringer is aging despite his form.

I was one who mentioned that I'd like to see us bury a team. I stand by that and I think we're capable - look at how we started on Collingwood. However, I'm also under no illusions about where we're at development wise. For clarity, what I said was that top 4 sides who are genuine contenders bury lesser teams. I think we can beat anyone on our day but we're not convincing. We're pretenders. We've got some way to go yet but we look promising.

I've also advocated getting games into the youngers, Davey in particular earlier in the season. Bryan deserves now. Apparently Hayes and Roberts too. I'm just as happy to see them getting games to develop the side.

This said, I'm happy to take the wins. W is W. A culture of winning and belief in the coaching and system is priceless. The win against the Tigers was tough in spite of our challenges with team balance at the moment, but it was a win. We found a way. Can't complain about that, just accept that we remain a work in progress, and remember, we're not supposed to be second on the ladder.

The last part is important. Building the culture of winning while you are still not the finished product is gold. It means the team is starting to shine through rather than the individual. Despite us missing a dominant CHF and a super productive small forward most weeks someone is kicking 4 goals for us so we are not totally reliant on one forward. Would be good to fill a couple of gaps in the side but right now it is good we are chipping away week by week .

 

[HirdsTheWord]

The reality is that we've overachieved on the back of team defence. It's what we've been working on and in that sense it's a huge win for this group. The forwardline is clearly a work in progress. Wright is great but he isn't a powerful Hawkins or Lynch type who can outbody opponents. He needs to lead up. Jones is still skinny but is really just finding his toughness defensively. We clearly need a zippy small forward with goal sense and traffic skills. Stringer is aging despite his form.

I was one who mentioned that I'd like to see us bury a team. I stand by that and I think we're capable - look at how we started on Collingwood. However, I'm also under no illusions about where we're at development wise. For clarity, what I said was that top 4 sides who are genuine contenders bury lesser teams. I think we can beat anyone on our day but we're not convincing. We're pretenders. We've got some way to go yet but we look promising.

I've also advocated getting games into the youngers, Davey in particular earlier in the season. Bryan deserves now. Apparently Hayes and Roberts too. I'm just as happy to see them getting games to develop the side.

This said, I'm happy to take the wins. W is W. A culture of winning and belief in the coaching and system is priceless. The win against the Tigers was tough in spite of our challenges with team balance at the moment, but it was a win. We found a way. Can't complain about that, just accept that we remain a work in progress, and remember, we're not supposed to be second on the ladder.

suppose we are saying the same thing in the end. The reality is, we are going to get exposed soon.

I dont take enjoyment out of scraping home against bottom 3 teams and I'm pretty over trying to be happy about the little things. I suppose that's my problem that i can't enjoy it, ill try not to bring you all down with me

 

[Mootsy]

Ridley is a really good player, but i've rewatched the game/tapes etc..and i get the feeling that AFL players are just not very good at taking a mark, either because it's not trained, because defence became such a focus in the game or they are just not all that fussed or just spuds at it, considering how many uncontested spillages you see occur in the modern game.

I think Ridley just has that 90s skills-set of classic style football and is smart enough to realise that a mark is just a standard/natural part of the game.

• eyes on the ball
• good radar for where the ball goes.
• cares enough to position himself in spots to take a grab
• leads to the direction of the ball drop.
• understands marking in the classical sense.
• nothing too fancy
• helps being tall

Players could really learn a lot by just wanting to take a grab, chest, timing, lead, classical, instead of punching it on to a 50/50 contest or just not timing it and looking like a spud.

Study how to be good at marking, my advice to Scott and the coaching staff. It's what Ridley does.

 

[doug85]

Have had time to have another look at the game and also a quick look at the first quarter of the last two Tigers games . The fact is Richmond just turned up this week and from the start which they did not the last two weeks. It was not that we did a lot wrong . They simply came to play. Their effort was 1000% better . They pressured way better. They did not stuff around moving the footy. It was almost like Yze decided to go back to the old Richmond game / ball movement . They where a totally different side. Will be interesting to see if they bring it next week.
All of their senior guys stood up this week. Last 2 weeks Bolton had been very flakey and Martin not great. Baker added some edge for them.
The one big thing that hurt us was not being able to match Nank in the ruck. The previous weeks Brisbane and the Dogs matched what he was doing. We got a bath and hit hurt our midfield.

We got smashed by Xerri the week before too. It’s a bit of a worry.

 

[faible]

It's still hard to know what to think about that game. Were we rubbish or were the tuggers decent or a little bit of both?

Tigers were good, they worked extremely hard to apply pressure all game.

Dusty had close to his best game for the year, looked far more 'interested' than he has in weeks.

Guys like Prestia, Bolton, Baker and Nankervis are all good, seasoned AFL players, all played well.

I don't think we were at our best, but Richmond were no easybeats last week by any means.

 

[hurlygurdy]

Finally watched the game for the first time. Initial observations.

Tigers played a decent one on one defense for a lot of the game and that is our kryptonite as we do not have the personal to deal with it. Until we find a strong marking target forward of the ball we will have issues with sides playing one on one or 12 man midfield zone defense. It strangles the game. It also let Richmond use their speed to get out the back. Not having a strong marking CHF and a decent marking ruck is our biggest achilleas heal IMO. Gives us no plan B. Every time we get one on one defense against us it is a hard slog as we have to rely on half back intercept.

Think we are going to Langford too much. Last couple of weeks he has been matched with slightly taller defenders who have limited his one on one marking.

Midfield got done because Nank gave Goldy an absolute bath .

We simply need a CHF . Jones or Caddy to stand up or someone for outside to come in. Need a fast tackling small forward to come through to the next level. Need a decent ruck who can mark. Not sure we have that. Need our wings back. We miss the up and back running Duursma gave us.

I've started to wonder about Bringing Hayes in and sending Laverde forward in a defensive/decoy role? He knows the craft and has solid weight to him these days.

 

[MiguelM]

Finally watched the game for the first time. Initial observations.

Tigers played a decent one on one defense for a lot of the game and that is our kryptonite as we do not have the personal to deal with it. Until we find a strong marking target forward of the ball we will have issues with sides playing one on one or 12 man midfield zone defense. It strangles the game. It also let Richmond use their speed to get out the back. Not having a strong marking CHF and a decent marking ruck is our biggest achilleas heal IMO. Gives us no plan B. Every time we get one on one defense against us it is a hard slog as we have to rely on half back intercept.

Think we are going to Langford too much. Last couple of weeks he has been matched with slightly taller defenders who have limited his one on one marking.

Midfield got done because Nank gave Goldy an absolute bath .

We simply need a CHF . Jones or Caddy to stand up or someone for outside to come in. Need a fast tackling small forward to come through to the next level. Need a decent ruck who can mark. Not sure we have that. Need our wings back. We miss the up and back running Duursma gave us.

Imagine if we had a Gawn type!!

 

[fairbump_playon]

Imagine if we had a Gawn type!!

The narrative around ruckmen has been interesting over recent years.

There have been stages where media (and maybe some coaches) have argued that it's not an area worth investing heavily in. A lot of pointing to hit outs won vs clearance stats etc. The implication was that you just need an ok ruckman, and to load up on A grade midfielders. Teams were rucking non-rucks.

Reckon that was just a fashion.

I think the point is not that rucks aren't valuable, more that it's hard to measure & compare their value because they have more ways to impact than other players.

They win hit outs, they can be an extra midfielder, you want them bobbing up for a few goals, you want them taking marks down the line, you want them to apply defensive pressure, you want them to intimidate.

An inside mid is an inside mid. Whereas few rucks have all of the possible ruck strengths so each is really a different type. How do you really compare Witts to Soldo to Draper. It's apples and oranges and um.. persimmons.

Regardless, a gun is a gun. Totally agree - our side would be so much stronger with Gawn.

 

[MiguelM]

The narrative around ruckmen has been interesting over recent years.

There have been stages where media (and maybe some coaches) have argued that it's not an area worth investing heavily in. A lot of pointing to hit outs won vs clearance stats etc. The implication was that you just need an ok ruckman, and to load up on A grade midfielders. Teams were rucking non-rucks.

Reckon that was just a fashion.

I think the point is not that rucks aren't valuable, more that it's hard to measure & compare their value because they have more ways to impact than other players.

They win hit outs, they can be an extra midfielder, you want them bobbing up for a few goals, you want them taking marks down the line, you want them to apply defensive pressure, you want them to intimidate.

An inside mid is an inside mid. Whereas few rucks have all of the possible ruck strengths so each is really a different type. How do you really compare Witts to Soldo to Draper. It's apples and oranges and um.. persimmons.

Regardless, a gun is a gun. Totally agree - our side would be so much stronger with Gawn.

Apart from the centre bounce the most important asset a ruck can have is marking capability around the ground. This is huge in the modern game and sets up multiple plays forward of centre. Game changing. Look how Gawn sets up petracca and co from a mark.

This is one area we are very poor at. Jones is probably our best mark down the line but Goldy and Draper don't take nearly enough marks. Even Cox at the Pies is better.

I grew up watching Simon Madden so I was probably spoilt.

 

[joey_jo_jo]

The narrative around ruckmen has been interesting over recent years.

There have been stages where media (and maybe some coaches) have argued that it's not an area worth investing heavily in. A lot of pointing to hit outs won vs clearance stats etc. The implication was that you just need an ok ruckman, and to load up on A grade midfielders. Teams were rucking non-rucks.

Reckon that was just a fashion.

I think the point is not that rucks aren't valuable, more that it's hard to measure & compare their value because they have more ways to impact than other players.

They win hit outs, they can be an extra midfielder, you want them bobbing up for a few goals, you want them taking marks down the line, you want them to apply defensive pressure, you want them to intimidate.

An inside mid is an inside mid. Whereas few rucks have all of the possible ruck strengths so each is really a different type. How do you really compare Witts to Soldo to Draper. It's apples and oranges and um.. persimmons.

Regardless, a gun is a gun. Totally agree - our side would be so much stronger with Gawn.

Im starting to think if you dont have a unicorn like Gawn you are better off investing in other areas of the ground and having a solid b grade bash and crash type ruck who can play 80% game time like soldo/briggs. With the change to the ruck rules this year allowing engagement before the bounce I think pure tap rucks like english arent as effective. Its better to have a guy that throws their weight around and blocks for the mids than a guy who's main strength is hit outs to advantage. If they can take a contested grab even better!

 

[joey_jo_jo]

Apart from the centre bounce the most important asset a ruck can have is marking capability around the ground. This is huge in the modern game and sets up multiple plays forward of centre. Game changing. Look how Gawn sets up petracca and co from a mark.

This is one area we are very poor at. Jones is probably our best mark down the line but Goldy and Draper don't take nearly enough marks. Even Cox at the Pies is better.

I grew up watching Simon Madden so I was probably spoilt.

worrying sign is bryan also doesnt seem capable of a contested grab. At least with draper he makes a contest and brings ball to ground

 

[ghostdog]

worrying sign is bryan also doesnt seem capable of a contested grab. At least with draper he makes a contest and brings ball to ground

'Capable' is dependent on context of the comp. I was under the impression he took an impressive contested mark on the weekend.

 

[joey_jo_jo]

'Capable' is dependent on context of the comp. I was under the impression he took an impressive contested mark on the weekend.

Ah really? He only had 4 marks for the game and I read a review on the FB supporters page saying he was dominant around grounds but still needed to work on physical side, so I just assumed he still wasnt taking many contested grabs.

 

[ghostdog]

Ah really? He only had 4 marks for the game and I read a review on the FB supporters page saying he was dominant around grounds but still needed to work on physical side, so I just assumed he still wasnt taking many contested grabs.

Could be wrong but I'm pretty sure that's what I read... maybe in the game day thread? I was surprised too, happily though.