Coaching Staff Past Coach: Matthew Knights - Finally gets his second shot - 5/5

Remove this Banner Ad

Re: why knights as coach was wrong

sigmund my man iam not living in the past i was all for a change but only if it was for the better.Knights told the board that we were top 8 this year top 4 in 2009 clearly we are know were near that, hardwick was the man!
 
Re: why knights as coach was wrong

lemon chicken said:
I not judging him on the last 2 weeks its the fact that not once this year we have gone into a game with anywhere near the right match-ups. Round 1 match included. The matchday coaching at this stage has not been great, we seem to have a lack of Plan B and C and end up putting players anywhere and everywhere.
Click to expand...

Maybe we are looking at players in various positions as well . Yes some of the match ups have been all over the place but the coach is getting a good look at who can play where.
I guess i am just one of a few that are not at all shocked at our form. In fact i started a thread on it pre season asking how long it would take until supporters started jumping off or calling for the coach on a platter when we started losing a few games. Some called it a stupid thread but i was right. Round 7 and here we are.
 
Re: why knights as coach was wrong

tockley said:
sigmund my man iam not living in the past i was all for a change but only if it was for the better.Knights told the board that we were top 8 this year top 4 in 2009 clearly we are know were near that, hardwick was the man!
Click to expand...

Hardwicke told the board we should trade Lucas,Fletcher or Lloyd as well as half our list so i dont know how having him as coach would have made us any better after round 7. On top of that his plan to go forward for the whole club was not as good.
The stuff that is happening now would have happened under any coach. Hardwicke would have had to change the game plan as well and our lazy bunch of NFI footballers would have looked just as bad under his plan as well.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Re: why knights as coach was wrong

tockley said:
sigmund my man iam not living in the past i was all for a change but only if it was for the better.Knights told the board that we were top 8 this year top 4 in 2009 clearly we are know were near that, hardwick was the man!
Click to expand...

Tocks - some have come down on you hard in this thread but for me it is clear that you want the best for the club - but you last comment is in fact evidence of living in the past. I just dont think it helps anyone talking about Hardwick or whoever else "could" have got the job
 
Re: why knights as coach was wrong

ant 555 you make some good points and you did tip this .It sounds like your pot is on the players more than the coaching panel people seem to be getting upset when i pot knights but its just my opinion and i hope we do improve and play good footy under him maybe it is that i lack faith in him and so do some players by the way they play.


DYSON MONFRIES SLATTERY JOHNS are not up to it maybe thats who you are potting
 
Re: why knights as coach was wrong

sigmund fair call deal with what we have but i do have good inside info as you can tell from some posts i have put on this board .Alot of people as you know i cant name names just dont respect the man as a coach and ex footballer i just have no faith in knights ,jackson and co it is not the power club it was other clubs laugh at us and that makes me sick
 
Re: why knights as coach was wrong

tockley said:
ant 555 you make some good points and you did tip this .It sounds like your pot is on the players more than the coaching panel people seem to be getting upset when i pot knights but its just my opinion and i hope we do improve and play good footy under him maybe it is that i lack faith in him and so do some players by the way they play.


DYSON MONFRIES SLATTERY JOHNS are not up to it maybe thats who you are potting
Click to expand...

I am potting a lot of players. You can have a shot at Knights for keeping Dyson and recently signing up Slattery again. You are right the four you mentioned are ordinary plus Jay Nash , NLM and Andrew Welsh to name 3 more who are not up to it.
 
Re: why knights as coach was wrong

are you serious about slatterys signing i didnt know that that worries me even more i agree with all your pots besides nash i think he has a bit of skill and run
 
Re: why knights as coach was wrong

tockley said:
sigmund fair call deal with what we have but i do have good inside info as you can tell from some posts i have put on this board .Alot of people as you know i cant name names just dont respect the man as a coach and ex footballer i just have no faith in knights ,jackson and co it is not the power club it was other clubs laugh at us and that makes me sick
Click to expand...

Tocks -- I really do hope that Knights is the man.. We may not agree on this one, but clearly we both want what best for EFC.. It does hurt though to know that we would be classified by most players and coaches at the moment as a "pencil it in game". But things can turn around quickly - e.g., Hawks
 
Re: why knights as coach was wrong

tockley said:
are you serious about slatterys signing i didnt know that that worries me even more i agree with all your pots besides nash i think he has a bit of skill and run
Click to expand...

Too bad most of Nash's running is behind his direct opponet who is leading him to the footy. I was a bit of a fan but it is fading with every game i see him play.
 
Re: why knights as coach was wrong

yeah fair call and then you have peverill johnson rama stanton laycock lee so our list is pretty crap could be 4 years and in that time you will lose lloyd lucas michael and fletch our recruiting staff must be all told to leave and a new breed must deliver
 
Re: why knights as coach was wrong

Hardwick's plan to have a total rebuild like Hawthorn would have failed due to the incoming Gold Coast and West Sydney teams. We wouldn't have had the top five pick in any draft that would be required.

I admit that I want/wanted Dimma, but that's because he's my all-time favourite player.

Hawthorn struggled in Clarkson's first year, just like we are. Look at them now, that could very well be us in two or three years.
 
Re: why knights as coach was wrong

tockley said:
yeah fair call and then you have peverill johnson rama stanton laycock lee so our list is pretty crap could be 4 years and in that time you will lose lloyd lucas michael and fletch our recruiting staff must be all told to leave and a new breed must deliver
Click to expand...

Well there has been some changes in recruting already but it would not be a huge shock if their where a couple more to go before the next draft.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

ESSENDON coach Matthew Knights still believes applying an attacking game plan will ultimately benefit his inexperienced players, despite the fact Sunday's loss to Port Adelaide produced the Bombers' fourth in a row.
Knights, who watched his undermanned side go down by 64 points to the Power at Telstra Dome, said backing his players to take the game on might produce "highs and lows" in the short term, but will be advantageous beyond that.
"There are two schools of thought. You could play two or three numbers behind the ball, and you could get rolled over 12 goals to eight, and that's all good and well," he said, post-match.
"Or you could encourage your players to play a pretty direct style of football, try and link up and take the game on, but at times if you don't get that right, you're going to pay the price.
"That's what we're doing at the moment. But I would certainly be keen for my players to keep playing against better and stronger opposition and learn the game.
"I don't think it will help in two or three years time if we put numbers behind the ball. I don't think they'll learn anything. That's my view on it."
With a spate of injuries forcing the Bombers to blood three players on Sunday, the side took to the field with seven players "with 10 games and under" to their names.
But Knights said that was no excuse as to why the side was so comprehensively beaten by Port Adelaide.
"[There is] no hiding away from fact we've got to be better.
"Even though we had significant personnel down, you expect a team to play better. We came here today to win the game, no matter whether we were putting a young team out or an experienced team," he said.
"That's the way we attacked it. It didn't come off, and that's the reality of it. We didn't win, we weren't good enough, and were clearly outplayed by Port Power.
"But that's irrelevant with the players out. If you haven't got the players because of injury, you can't do a lot about that."
He praised Port Adelaide for being quick to pounce on mistakes after gaining the initiative early and holding on to it for the duration of the match.
"They were first at the ball, first at the contest, and I think it was about five goals to one at quarter-time," he said.
"We were certainly on the back foot from that point. At different stages in the game, I thought we applied decent pressure to try and get some momentum, but just some basic errors at times cost us.
"We turned it over and then they went down and capitalised. When you're playing a side like Port Adelaide that is pretty skilful, they will capitalise on your errors, and that's what happened at times."
Knights said he would prefer the Hall of Fame Tribute match wasn't next weekend, as he would prefer the Bombers to play again and attempt to atone for such a disappointing loss.
"That might sound a bit out of left field considering we've got a few guys on the sidelines, but I would like to get stuck back into it sooner rather than later," he said.
"We just have to wait now until the Sunday following when we play Sydney, in Sydney."
He also said the Bombers would seek clarification over some umpiring decisions made in the opening quarter, after skipper Matthew Lloyd was dismissed by the umpires when he "rationally" approached them to ask for an explanation on the holding the ball rule.
"I asked David Calthorpe [team manager] if we could send the captain over to speak [at quarter-time]. I asked Matthew to go over and ask for a clarification, but the umpire sent him away," he said.
"Obviously it had to be after the quarter-time break for that to happen. I'm going to have to speak to Jeff Gieschen.
"From my perspective, whether it's my game today or other games, there doesn't seem to be a holding the ball rule anymore, or prior opportunity.
"It just seems to be that part of the game, you make tackles, and even if there is prior opportunity, it's just a restart. It's a bounce.
"We've just got to adjust to that as a team. We haven't really adjusted to that rule very well, so we're going to have to adjust, and I'll go through the right channels and speak to Jeff about that and see if we can improve our game in that area."





http://afl.com.au/tabid/208/Default.aspx?newsid=59064






Views?
 
Re: why knights as coach was wrong

I think its a bit stupid to compare Knights to Clarkson cos lets face it he isnt him. Not every new coach that comes to a club runs like clarkson. Harvey, Ratten, Bailey are all there own people as Knights is and they will do it there own way. The fans have the right to be angry cos the promise the team showed in the pre season and rounds 1,2 and 3 are not there anymore. Yes we can put some of it down to the injuries. But if we are planning for the future then isnt the 22 players we have seen on the park to cover these injuries our future? I went to the collingwood and the port game today and the guys lack the simple skills and knowledge that you get through juniors and the TAC. We have not been acountable for our players the defence plays loose as any team in the comp and then we actually get the ball they chip it around giving the opposition time to man up . This is why we struggled to get it out of our back 50 today.
The team just seems to lack the passion to play at the moment, there is no emotion, no getting around players when they do something well, not enough putting there head over the footy and the discipline is just not there, giving away 50's, frees and not tackling correctly would get a player dropped from any suburban team. Essendon needs to get the passion in these kids to want to put there arse on the line for the club! This is where the buck stops and Lloyd and Knights they are the leaders and need to get this out of our players. So is Knights under pressure? Hell yeah he is, the fans want the essendon passion back we were used to in the 90s and early 2000's!
 
He says the same things every week. A bit boring.

The team doesn't seem to be improving on the areas they're getting wrong and Knights seems to ignore this, just talking about how it's going to stand them in good stead in the future. Maybe it will, maybe it won't.

He basicly has this whole year to stuff up though, so I'm not going to get on his back too much yet. Next year is when the real criticism will apply.
 
Given our skill level at the moment any game plan would look bad. The over use of the handball is annoying but most of the time it is becasue our workrate up the ground is not good enough and there are no targets to go to. This puts pressure on the blokes running from half back and thats where the 5,6 or 7 handballs start coming from. Our blokes simply dont seem to be able to break well organised midfield zones or be able to play smart enough footy to get around it.
We just do heaps of dumb stuff all the time. Things like two or three players leading to the same spots. Players calling for the footy when they are standing still. Players not having enough vision to see they are handballing to players under pressure. When we havnt got the footy it is worse. I dont know how many times i saw two or three players getting sucked to the contest and giving the Port player with the ball an easy handbll option. Or how many times i see two blokes running over to man the mark. The comunication is no existant a lot of the time. You see a lot of arm waving but no one want to put in the extra effort to pick up loose players.
No one fears us becasue they know we lack physical pressure and they know we will trun the footy over often enough for them to get the footy back.
 
ant555 said:
Given our skill level at the moment any game plan would look bad. The over use of the handball is annoying but most of the time it is becasue our workrate up the ground is not good enough and there are no targets to go to. This puts pressure on the blokes running from half back and thats where the 5,6 or 7 handballs start coming from. Our blokes simply dont seem to be able to break well organised midfield zones or be able to play smart enough footy to get around it.
We just do heaps of dumb stuff all the time. Things like two or three players leading to the same spots. Players calling for the footy when they are standing still. Players not having enough vision to see they are handballing to players under pressure. When we havnt got the footy it is worse. I dont know how many times i saw two or three players getting sucked to the contest and giving the Port player with the ball an easy handbll option. Or how many times i see two blokes running over to man the mark. The comunication is no existant a lot of the time. You see a lot of arm waving but no one want to put in the extra effort to pick up loose players.
No one fears us becasue they know we lack physical pressure and they know we will trun the footy over often enough for them to get the footy back.
Click to expand...

I'll add another one - switching the ball when there is absolutely no movement from our forwards, it just creates more congestion.
 
Smyth94 said:
I'll add another one - switching the ball when there is absolutely no movement from our forwards, it just creates more congestion.
Click to expand...

Agree. The switch is only as good as the workrate of the second and third player who is in line to recive the ball.
 
Ant you're too nice.

You think the players are going out there each week and thinking "I know the coaching staff said not to run off you man and close down another guy, but I just will anyway". They're not that supid, not all the time.

They've been told to apply pressure and close people down, even with others are already on the guy. It seems that knights doesn't trust anyone to beat their man one on one and always wants number around every contest. As a result the opposition players get free.

You can't expect players to be able to man up tight and close players down, they're conflicting orders.

Granted many players aren't showing enough, but there are problems with what they are doing as well as what they are not doing, and some of those problems lie with the coaching staff and the orders the players have.
 
Re: why knights as coach was wrong

tockley said:
before he became head coach his jobs were bendigo coach and head skills coach.Our skills are so poor and our decision making is the worst in the league by far so how on earth was he made coach his bendigo coaching was average at best his game plan at senior level will not stand up.I was talking to a ex essendon player from the 90s who you all would respect and he is still in shock at knights been coach and says it was jackson and the board craping them selves and made a quick choice. With this coaching crew in charge campo hikmont presscott odonnell and crew it will be a long 5 years
Click to expand...

You know what makes me think this post is complete and utter crap.

1. He was never our head skills coach. He was senior coach at Bendigo and Development Coach at Essendon, that is different to being a skills coach.

2. He coached Bendigo to two finals series in three years, when they had never made the finals before he got there.

The three years he was there Essendon finished in the bottom 5, so he had some of the worst AFL talent to work with. Essendon also had long injury lists these three years as well so he was more reliant on VFL listed players than other clubs.

He also had the weakest list of VFL listed players to work with at Bendigo. So for him to get them to the finals in 2 years out of the 3 years was a great job.

3. Jackson and the board crapped themselves into making a quick decision?

They interviewed 18 applicants and took several months to make a selection. Just because they did not feel they could wait to interview Thompson after the Grand Final does not mean they rushed the decision.

It would have been ridiculous for us to enter trade week and/or the draft periods without a senior coach in place.

Knights had a great pre-season and had us at 2-1 before or massive injury list started developing. He is now 2-5, 7 games into his career and yet ____heads are already ready to write him of as a DUD.

For ____ sake grow up!!
 
Smyth94 said:
I'll add another one - switching the ball when there is absolutely no movement from our forwards, it just creates more congestion.
Click to expand...

Part of the problem is that when we hold the ball on one side of the ground the other side gets up a midfield zone and there is NO SPACE for the forwards to lead into. The only other option then is to switch the play and have players runnign hard into the open space on the other side of the pitch. However there is no intent to do this. The ball just gets passed a small distance and then players sit and wait and the opposition gets the time to move their midfield zone across.

What we need is people to be told what to do: to switch the play quickly and have players running hard into the space the other zone is not taking care of. That will force theother side to lose their shape and gets things going. But at the moment there is no movement in this area.

And this isn't something you can just do easily. You need the guy in the middle, the guy running out to the side, and the longer options up that other side. Only when you have the players working together to get such a play going will it work and not break down, and to get that happening the coaches have to get them practicing it and instructed to do it.

Which I suspect the coaches are not.
 
Great we will keep attacking because we are scoring enough to win games only problem being the other sides are scoring 150 plus every second week.


Today reminded me of a couple of years back, Adelaide would flood back and then when you try and get the ball past their whole side they would create a turnover then run in no's hurting you. Richmond who were bottom played them and said come get the ball or we will just keep it, players had stats of 25 mark each, but it caused Adelaide to come at them which changed the complexion of the game and Richmond won. We just tried to find a miniscule target amongst a whole team and paid the price.
 
Re: why knights as coach was wrong

kelvin_sheedy said:
I'm sick of you bagging Knights.

Learn how to use punctuation and spell and we might take your rubbish a little more seriously.

Stop talking to your hand.

What is Knights supposed to do at the moment? 10 guys are out and he's playing all the kids and giving chances to see if players are up to it.

No one was complaining when we had a good run in the NAB and first few rounds when we had our good players out there.

The bottom line is we don't have the depth and need the kids to get experience and help out!
Click to expand...


Firstly the guys allowed an opinion just like you are.

Secondly bringing up someones grammer on a forum like this shows a complete lack of class.

Thirdly personal insults at a guy because he doesn't like the coach continues to show your lack of class. Grow up!!!!
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Coaching Staff Past Coach: Matthew Knights - Finally gets his second shot - 5/5

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top