Coach Michael Voss

Remove this Banner Ad

100%. You go into a game with a vision of game plan, how every individual will play and how you want to play the game. Sometimes that works out, sometimes it doesn't.

The thing is Brad Scott changed the game with his new rules quite a lot. There have been fundamentals in the game for 15 years that coaches have had to move away from which is not always easy. Teams are doing things now that in the past you just do not do. I don't think I have seen the ball go into the middle and get turned over in the middle as much as this in a very long time.

I think a few coaches had their own visions of how the game would be played and won with the rule changes. I think Collingwood's coaching group nailed it and that's the big reason they are up the top. They have been playing that brand for longer than any other team. I think we had a vision and it failed in a fairly big way and we have done something very difficult. Change game plan mid season and a lot of that is changing mentality and what you do instinctively on the field. A lot of that is dumping some teams rules. A lot of clubs would have had the rule of not risking a turnover in the middle a year or two ago. That's been the way for 15 years and it's gone now. Means changing players habits.
great post
 
Gman, your head is still stuck with the gameplan, but I will address it

Fly didn't invent his gameplan, it's a revised Tigers gameplan.

“Most innovation involves doing the things we do every day a little bit better rather than creating something completely new and different.“

He also, stated that he could move to the next phase of his vision, as the Pies already had defensive continuity, via Buckley

Now, let's step away from the gameplan, as we know that our players have recently confirmed that Voss nor his messaging has change all year

It was more about learning who could play the roles, not changing that gameplan/vision

While Voss (most of us) knew, the likes of Martin and Cuners would be integral, I am confident that Fogarty may not have been in his (and ours) initial consideration

But, this was the discovery, finding the right mix. In essence, it wasn't Fogarty as such, it was those attributes that complement the whole

It's less about the gameplan, it's about each cog willing to play their role and I suspect, most players have had that light bulb moment

Have to agree to disagree.

Can't see the players being open to discussing anything game plan.

Agree, Collingwood's game plan is a lot like Richmonds with some adaptations to factor in the new rules.

Voss' messaging does not necessarily mean game plan. More standards, I would read that as anyway.

What the public get fed is for us. What happens behind closed doors is for the players and coaching group and no one else.

Learning about roles, sure, how do you explain all the game plan stuff I have seen that has changed?

Fogarty was a thought of mine but did not see him coming in but it all makes sense. The must chase and tackle aspect we have now, he fits. I'm spewing Durdin is injured, or new ball movement, lets not call it game plan, he would have a field day out there. Think long term Durdin will upgrade on Fogarty.

It's a romantic notion to think this all came about from effort but that is not reality. Shackles were taken off and we have taken off. But a few other things have happened as well. Definitely.

Player selection has been controversial during this season, seems to be on the money now.

Players not playing the role, pretty much a few who don't chase and tackle, making those changes is one of many impacts where we have found improvement.

Players and coaches aren't going to say a thing about what we do tactically. We have to be able to see that for ourselves. That's in house stuff, of course players and coaches will always say very little, put it down to effort and buy in and other media/fan friendly buzz words.

Even as a regular VFL watcher, the game "style" there changed when the AFL team's one did.

You have a game plan that fails and players don't agree with, players buy out. You change it, it gets everyone up and about and if it works yo get buy in. It's very simple and that is what we are seeing.

It's not just players playing better and new players in new positions and players finding motivation all of a sudden. A hell of a lot has changed. We are very much in an evolutionary phase where we have finally embraced the new rules rather than fighting against them and embracing this more attacking football over the very defensive football we have seen the last 15 or so years.

To be honest this is the most up beat I have been about Carlton in 20+ years. Happy with the list, happy with the coach (now), happy with the way we are playing the game, faith in the recruiting staff and our player development. Think things are lining up.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Gman, your head is still stuck with the gameplan, but I will address it

Fly didn't invent his gameplan, it's a revised Tigers gameplan.

“Most innovation involves doing the things we do every day a little bit better rather than creating something completely new and different.“

He also, stated that he could move to the next phase of his vision, as the Pies already had defensive continuity, via Buckley

Now, let's step away from the gameplan, as we know that our players have recently confirmed that Voss nor his messaging has change all year

It was more about learning who could play the roles, not changing that gameplan/vision


While Voss (most of us) knew, the likes of Martin and Cuners would be integral, I am confident that Fogarty may not have been in his (and ours) initial consideration

But, this was the discovery, finding the right mix. In essence, it wasn't Fogarty as such, it was those attributes that complement the whole

It's less about the gameplan, it's about each cog willing to play their role and I suspect, most players have had that light bulb moment
I’m trying my hardest not to engage in a debate on this but can’t let this statement ride - it’s pure interpretation of comments made by players and coach stated as fact.
My interpretation of the commentary is very different - the references to “tweaks” in my view strongly leans to game plan changes.
 
I’m trying my hardest not to engage in a debate on this but can’t let this statement ride - it’s pure interpretation of comments made by players and coach stated as fact.
My interpretation of the commentary is very different - the references to “tweaks” in my view strongly leans to game plan changes.

As I have stated some time ago, it's chicken or the egg

IMHO, sustained intent has been the catalyst for our changing output

But, my detailed analysis (my version) would take up 2 pages
 
I think where a lot of teams followed the Collingwood model
Like you wanted us to do? Even when the Collingwood model was actually the Richmond model?
 
I'm not that bothered with this discussion because the Blues just pulled off something special last weekend but someone else fired up on gameplans might be keen enough to dig back far enough.

Before the Tigers first flag Dimma was on camera saying something along the lines of this is my last roll of the dice on a gameplan (ninth gameplan) to try and make the tigers successful or he would walk away.

I might have it slightly wrong but that was the gist. Indicated on camera that basically they had decent cattle but just needed a successful gameplan to launch them from ninthmond. That he was almost willing to walk away because of it.
 
Which correlates with what Voss was saying during our crapola run of games … he kept banging on about defense … maybe he was right …
One of the best one liners I ever recieved in my student days was from my stats Professor in grad school

"...if you rely on your eyes you will only be looking and never seeing - let alone understanding"

unless the numbers support a view it is just that a 'view' an 'opinion'

nothing wrong with 'opinions' - as long as that is all a discussion is about.

but when a discussion is about sacking a coach one needs to have a deeper look and longer look - the stakes are high, very high.

To your point - Voss consistently talked back to interviwers saying at one point- "dont ask about scoring that will look after itself - we have to get the defensive aspects of the game right - that is what needs work"

He has been consistent in a focus on defensive effort all year - because he understands that to win the territory battle requires pressure up front as well as betwen the arcs. Defense is everywhere not just the back fifty.

I understand people have a natural bias to 'seeing' attack - but in my experience - you cant attack without the ball and to win the ball you have to defend and win the contests not only in your defensive fifty - but everywhere. The closer you cause a turnover to the oppositions goals - the greater the chances of scoring - simple as that.

His focus ticks my box - because the team has 'mongrelled up' - finally, which can be seen the way that Collingwood's vaunted handball and kicking game through the guts was deconstructed , put away and turned against them - by team defense. It was a magnificent defensive effort - loved every minute of it and if the team can sustain that kind of pressure it can match any other team.

Then the difference becomes kicking accuracy - and again the closer to forward fifty you win teh ball - the less time teams have to structure up and flood back and the easier it is to kick to advantage making scoring easier - makes everything easier.

Which is why I emphasise the importance of getting Cuningham and Martin back into the forward fifty - that lift in ability also makes it easier for developing players to play better as well - when the forward defensove effort conssted of Durdin/Owies/Fisher and Motlop - not making tackles - whcih was common and commented on by all on here - the whole game was under constant pressure.

The thing I must admit I didnt see as an extra positive was playing Fogarty as a defensive forward - he had been playing all year in VFL as an onballer- the Fogarty selection was very smart by Voss. He is stil lunreliable as a set shot kick - but his defensifve work and support and brains in general play kinda more than makes up for that.
 
Gman, your head is still stuck with the gameplan, but I will address it

Fly didn't invent his gameplan, it's a revised Tigers gameplan.

“Most innovation involves doing the things we do every day a little bit better rather than creating something completely new and different.“

He also, stated that he could move to the next phase of his vision, as the Pies already had defensive continuity, via Buckley

Now, let's step away from the gameplan, as we know that our players have recently confirmed that Voss nor his messaging has change all year

It was more about learning who could play the roles, not changing that gameplan/vision

While Voss (most of us) knew, the likes of Martin and Cuners would be integral, I am confident that Fogarty may not have been in his (and ours) initial consideration

But, this was the discovery, finding the right mix. In essence, it wasn't Fogarty as such, it was those attributes that complement the whole

It's less about the gameplan, it's about each cog willing to play their role and I suspect, most players have had that light bulb moment
Yep the kane lambert to Richmond midfield - % difference of when they won with him or without him was significant - probably the least recognised mid in the comp but for some reason what he bought they needed ..
 
Like you wanted us to do? Even when the Collingwood model was actually the Richmond model?
Yes, was pretty adamant about it last season. No it's not exactly the same as the Richmond model, but it is very very similar. Pretty much the Richmond model adapted to take advantage of the new rules.

What ever it is, Richmond won 3 flags and Collingwood are top of the ladder. We didn't make finals last season and 6 weeks ago were on track to finish bottom 5. Now we resemble a top 4 side and look better than we have in 20 years. It makes sense.
 
Yes, was pretty adamant about it last season. No it's not exactly the same as the Richmond model, but it is very very similar. Pretty much the Richmond model adapted to take advantage of the new rules.

What ever it is, Richmond won 3 flags and Collingwood are top of the ladder. We didn't make finals last season and 6 weeks ago were on track to finish bottom 5. Now we resemble a top 4 side and look better than we have in 20 years. It makes sense.
Mmm. You jumped off and now back on again. Players have made a heap of in roads to playing both ways for 4 quarters too.

Very happy no one listened to the get rid of Voss rhetoric. This team are better than Collingwood.
 
I reckon we should all start relentlessly posting about changes which have led to our improvement but are not the game plan, even if they sound remarkably like changes to the game plan solely because we no longer believe that game plans can change.

Instead, we will call them strategic variables and end forever the debate about game plans.

Furthermore, we should stomp down on anyone who continues to believe in game plans because they don’t know anything about football and deserve to be scorned for failing to understand that what you observe, hear and support with data is in no way relevant to the preposterous notion that a football club might tweak its onfield structures and directions during a period where it loses 7 out of 8 games and that this might be one factor in an improved level of performance.

I’m sure there will be unanimous support for these suggestions.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Mmm. You jumped off and now back on again. Players have made a heap of in roads to playing both ways for 4 quarters too.

Very happy no one listened to the get rid of Voss rhetoric. This team are better than Collingwood.
The running both ways has improved. I think that has come from more balance in how we setup. I was very critical of how we positioned when we didn't have the ball, thought we were too negative, we couldn't go and go fast when we got it, we are a little more offensive now with that.

Think we spent too much timed defending. Sure defending hard, everyone plays along the boundary, that's old outdated footy because everyone does not play along the boundary. Ball movement over the league is faster and more direct.

What we were doing does not take any energy away from the opposition. We moved the ball slow and did not make them work hard enough on the defence. Now we are blowing sides up. Not only are we forcing teams to run really hard on the defence, we are actually getting the ball ahead of their team defence and hence our forwards have more space and are scoring more goals.

How are we doing it? We keep numbers ahead of the ball rather than everyone back. We will hold the ball up at times in D50 but once we're up in the midfield we go pretty hard forward compared to previously. What we are looking to do now is get the ball to the back of the opposition's team defence with forwards in position. That way we can open teams up, force them to really scramble to run back to defend.

In the past we have been switching and holding, looking at going along the boundary and playing more of a possession game.

I remember writing a big piece on this early in last season how we spent our energy defending too much but did not take any fuel away from the opposition. Had screen shots and all the works. Was after we beat Port and had them mount a big comeback. Tried to explain the comebacks against us were to do with us failing to defend the corridor well but also us failing to move the ball quickly through the midfield and not taking any energy out of the opposition. In shorter terms, we have been too easy to defend against. Last 6 weeks I believe we have been one of the hardest sides to defend against.

Pressure is not always about defensive pressure, chasing and tackling. We have done that well and still lost games. It's also about offensive pressure. Really making teams run, making it really hard for defenders to spoil and zone off by creating one on ones in space, Midfielders being on the move at stoppages forcing tagging players to lose position or give away free kicks etc. Thing we were poor at in the past but are doing well now.

You apply a lot of offensive pressure on teams, the defensive pressure comes easier. Tired teams turn it over, move it slower, don't have to run as hard to defend against them.

We used to spend a lot more time defending, it's unsustainable. You can't defend as hard as we attempted to all game, teams will ware you down and open you up and run over the top of you. Now those momentum swings don't happen, teams are just too gassed from our hard offence and it makes it easier to run both ways. Love it.
 
The running both ways has improved. I think that has come from more balance in how we setup. I was very critical of how we positioned when we didn't have the ball, thought we were too negative, we couldn't go and go fast when we got it, we are a little more offensive now with that.

Think we spent too much timed defending. Sure defending hard, everyone plays along the boundary, that's old outdated footy because everyone does not play along the boundary. Ball movement over the league is faster and more direct.

What we were doing does not take any energy away from the opposition. We moved the ball slow and did not make them work hard enough on the defence. Now we are blowing sides up. Not only are we forcing teams to run really hard on the defence, we are actually getting the ball ahead of their team defence and hence our forwards have more space and are scoring more goals.

How are we doing it? We keep numbers ahead of the ball rather than everyone back. We will hold the ball up at times in D50 but once we're up in the midfield we go pretty hard forward compared to previously. What we are looking to do now is get the ball to the back of the opposition's team defence with forwards in position. That way we can open teams up, force them to really scramble to run back to defend.

In the past we have been switching and holding, looking at going along the boundary and playing more of a possession game.

I remember writing a big piece on this early in last season how we spent our energy defending too much but did not take any fuel away from the opposition. Had screen shots and all the works. Was after we beat Port and had them mount a big comeback. Tried to explain the comebacks against us were to do with us failing to defend the corridor well but also us failing to move the ball quickly through the midfield and not taking any energy out of the opposition. In shorter terms, we have been too easy to defend against. Last 6 weeks I believe we have been one of the hardest sides to defend against.

Pressure is not always about defensive pressure, chasing and tackling. We have done that well and still lost games. It's also about offensive pressure. Really making teams run, making it really hard for defenders to spoil and zone off by creating one on ones in space, Midfielders being on the move at stoppages forcing tagging players to lose position or give away free kicks etc. Thing we were poor at in the past but are doing well now.

You apply a lot of offensive pressure on teams, the defensive pressure comes easier. Tired teams turn it over, move it slower, don't have to run as hard to defend against them.

We used to spend a lot more time defending, it's unsustainable. You can't defend as hard as we attempted to all game, teams will ware you down and open you up and run over the top of you. Now those momentum swings don't happen, teams are just too gassed from our hard offence and it makes it easier to run both ways. Love it.
Whistle whistle. Total football.

Love it too. Joy to watch. SpiritofCarlton hearing that they've been training it all year. That makes sense to me because it's not easy to do.
 
7uozv3.jpg
 
Voss getting completely dismantled by Ross Lyon twice in the same season.

Failure to make finals this year should see him moved on.

Goof thing the club no longer listens to 'impatient' fans like yourself
 
This game is a repeat of the first game we played against them with a full team.

No excuses. Ross would be laughing in the coaching box.

Who cares about Ross Lyon ? The man is a pig and he wont come close to winning a flag with St Kilda.
 
Who cares about Ross Lyon ? The man is a pig and he wont come close to winning a flag with St Kilda.
Well again we are playing into their hands, very predictable the way they play, this is where we find out about this team & coaching to be able to change when things are not working.
 
Well again we are playing into their hands, very predictable the way they play, this is where we find out about this team & coaching to be able to change when things are not working.

Doesn't help when 3 of our top 7 most important/valuable players are missing through injury.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Coach Michael Voss

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top