Player Reviews NAB Cup Rd 1

[KJpie]

Boundary line play goes a long way back. Look at the tactics of Malthouse's Eagle sides, which were really talented, but played very defensively, around the boundary all the time. I can remember when he came to us saying that I hated his negative style of play and didn't want it at the club I supported. When the talent was finally available to him, it did get us a flag, as it did the Eagles. I still don't like watching it much though.

How many coaches could only dream of being afforded 12 years to finally achieve the ultimate? Yes the Boundary line was always Mick's best friend but the forward defensive press was the icing on the premiership cake. Watters

 

[jonbe54]

Collingwood were fantastic to watch during MMs last five years. We were intense, we moved the ball quickly and scored heavily. It wasn't until last year that our style of play became cumbersome.

It was always cumbersome sr, just that the rest of the AFL hadn't caught on to how limited boundary line play is.

It cuts back on turnovers. . . fine

BUT

Once the opposition wakes up to itself they can cramp you up against the boundary and throttle your ability to create.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

It was always cumbersome sr, just that the rest of the AFL hadn't caught on to how limited boundary line play is.

It cuts back on turnovers. . . fine

BUT

Once the opposition wakes up to itself they can cramp you up against the boundary and throttle your ability to create.

And yet we won a flag, made 2 gf's and played finals in every year we used it.
If its a crap plan then more crap plans please

 

[KJpie]

It was always cumbersome sr, just that the rest of the AFL hadn't caught on to how limited boundary line play is.

It cuts back on turnovers. . . fine

BUT

Once the opposition wakes up to itself they can cramp you up against the boundary and throttle your ability to create.

Agreed Jonbe,
In a nutshell we have become to predictable?

 

[jonbe54]

And yet we won a flag, made 2 gf's and played finals in every year we used it.
If its a crap plan then more crap plans please

BJ it isn't a crap plan, just a plan who's time has passed. Coaches have always come up with counters to new plans and that's what happened with MM's boundary line play. We were lucky it lasted long enough for us to make 2 GF's.

Sooner or later every master plan meets its Waterloo and constant boundary line play has met its.

 

[jonbe54]

Agreed Jonbe,
In a nutshell we have become to predictable?

Very much so KJ they were waiting for us down the line on the boundary all the time last year and we kept playing into their snares.

 

[KJpie]

And yet we won a flag, made 2 gf's and played finals in every year we used it.
If its a crap plan then more crap plans please

We won the 2010 flag by pure luck based on the first GF that year (it come down to seconds). We were the better side by a fair margin for the majority of the year, however Lyon worked out our strengths/ weaknesses and almost pulled of a Saint's win against the odds.

As premiers our game plan was rightly scrutinized, copied, improved upon and negated by teams as a result.

 

[KJpie]

If its a crap plan then more crap plans please

BTW,
Who said it was a crap plan?

 

[Mungo Mulligan Stew]

BJ it isn't a crap plan, just a plan who's time has passed. Coaches have always come up with counters to new plans and that's what happened with MM's boundary line play. We were lucky it lasted long enough for us to make 2 GF's.

Sooner or later every master plan meets its Waterloo and constant boundary line play has met its.

Perfect summary.

 

[KJpie]

In actual fact, boundary line play was a tactic devised to support the press. You can't defend space as easily when going through the middle of the ground, so if we went along the boundary, it meant that there was almost half as much space to defend.

Agreed Re Press,

Space is only relevant to the game plan, we hug the boundary whilst almost every player of the opposition flood that area leaving one or two of their player's in the center capable of real hurt on the rebound.

All teams have been defending space for years Vr's picking up a direct opponent.

 

[look at him goooo!]

Bit late, I know, but haven't had a chance to check this site for a while. The game is what I pretty much expected, with the players just doing their thing, waiting for the big stuff. A couple of things that caught my eye:

• Witts- looked really promising. Has great athleticism for someone of his height, his second and third efforts were really encouraging, and took a good contested mark. As for his ruckwork, while work is still needed, there is a lot to like- had some clear hitouts to advantage to a player on the move.
• Young- Loved his game. Pulled the trigger twice to go into the centre square when everyone probably expected he was going to go along the wing. The first pass was a pinpoint bullet which yagmoor somehow managed to drop. The second one didnt come off, however I was still happy that it seems to be an automatic reaction to go inwards. Also his hard running to link up was great to see- he had a handball in the defensive 50, and ran hard to the HFF to get on the end of the play. Once again he finished with a poor kick but I'm happy to give him leeway due to seeing his injury and having already seen his capabilities.
• Mccaffer- loved his game, he is just so clean with the ball and is a really smart player. Understandably he tired towards the end.
• O'Brien- Worst on ground for the night. He is actually a terrible defender and butchers the ball when he has it. In the bulldogs game, for the entire first half he was matched up to Giansericusa. At halftime the bulldogs had 3 goals. Giansericusa had 2 goals and 1 goal assist. He seems to be lacking in footy smarts and lacks a knowledge in knowing where to be in regards to positioning. Seems to only be able to defend when his opponent is running directly away from him to the ball and he can use his athleticism to close the gap and spoil, however once his opponent has him turned or leads on an indirect route, O'brien is a fish at sea

 

[Avatar]

I think plenty of people expected young to kick to the middle, it was either that or kick on his right. I think he did actually kick on his right once later on and it wasn't too bad though.

Don't agree with the view on Harry but that has been discussed plenty already. btw I think fish do alright at sea.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

If Gault trains better than Cloke until the season starts, would you pick Gault ahead of Cloke for round 1? You have to take history into account.

Trains better or plays better?

If Gault outplays Cloke for the rest of the NAB Cup, and assuming that Cloke is not injured or dead in this scenario, then you'd certainly be looking to find Gault a spot in the side come round 1. I think it's pretty bloody unlikely that Cloke gets dropped, as you'd think Lynch and possibly another forward would go first, but you've got to reward good performances and you sure as hell don't penalise guys for the way they played in another team in another year.

 

[sr36]

Trains better or plays better?

If Gault outplays Cloke for the rest of the NAB Cup, and assuming that Cloke is not injured or dead in this scenario, then you'd certainly be looking to find Gault a spot in the side come round 1. I think it's pretty bloody unlikely that Cloke gets dropped, as you'd think Lynch and possibly another forward would go first, but you've got to reward good performances and you sure as hell don't penalise guys for the way they played in another team in another year.

So does Daisy have to outperform all fringe palyers in a practice or VFL match to get a senior gig, or does he just have to perform reasonably on the track and demonstrate that he is match fit. I think the majority of people - significantly the selectors - will go with the latter. History matters.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

I've already conceded earlier in the thread that a number of our elite players would be picked if in form, and picked if out of form in the hope of playing them back into form. Also you're trivializing the argument by suggesting the decision would be made based on one game, where clearly I'm talking about an entire preseason.

In terms of the battle for the remaining spots, Russell's history at another club, in another role, in a different year is irrelevant.

I mean, Yagmoor got a game to start last season... you don't think they look at preseason form either?

 

[sr36]

I've already conceded earlier in the thread that a number of our elite players would be picked if in form, and picked if out of form in the hope of playing them back into form. Also you're trivializing the argument by suggesting the decision would be made based on one game, where clearly I'm talking about an entire preseason.

In terms of the battle for the remaining spots, Russell's history at another club, in another role, in a different year is irrelevant.

I mean, Yagmoor got a game to start last season... you don't think they look at preseason form either?

We'll have to agree to disagree, because I think that your bolded comment is totally wrong. If Russell continues to go well this preseason, I think that he'll play round 1. One of the factors that they'll use to select him, like Lynch and Young is that they have previously at another club shown that they can perform a role to a decent AFL standard.

 

[Number 10]

Macaffers sustained a minor corky and will be in doubt for the intra club but should get back up for the game against WCE. From all reports he is being extremely diligent with all his training/rehab.

 

[KJpie]

Macaffers sustained a minor corky and will be in doubt for the intra club but should get back up for the game against WCE. From all reports he is being extremely diligent with all his training/rehab.

Cheers 10 for the info.
Was also "extremely diligent with all his training" last year prior to the reco, corky in comparison is great news.

 

[Number 10]

Cheers 10 for the info.
Was also "extremely diligent with all his training" last year prior to the reco, corky in comparison is great news.

Yeh in comparison it is. In an article today I think on AFL website, Lappin was saying that he has been in the top 2-3 trainers this pre season and it is showing with his physique on friday.

 

[KJpie]

Yeh in comparison it is. In an article today I think on AFL website, Lappin was saying that he has been in the top 2-3 trainers this pre season and it is showing with his physique on friday.

Cheers 10,

Just saw the spiel on our home site to, any news on Gualt or JT?

 

[DaVe86]

I think the boundary line play works fine.

The thing is though that if we have a few weapons like Young and Seedsman who can find targets in the corridor, then it adds a new dimension to our game.

Teams plan for us to go around the boundary...so that has to leave space in the middle. I would still stick to playing the boundary because we have the gun extractors and having Ball back will be huge.

However...the boundary line play is only good if you're defence is tight. The point is that you suck the life out of the game and you force opposition defences to kick wide to a contest.

If your forward pressure is not good, then teams just attack you through the corridor and expose your defence. Good teams did this to us last year. We defend for the boundary line, so teams just set 1 or 2 players in the middle to camp and if the ball gets out then they are away right through the guts.

In reply, we go wide, indirect and slow. It gives our forwards no hope. Going the boundary is fine if you can lock the ball in. If you are not winning the contests or your pressure is down, then you can't suck the life out of your oppositon.


I'd like to see:

1. Forward line pressure back up
2. Go back to been the best team in the comp for clearances.
3. Attack through the middle when it is open. Choke the game up where necessary.

 

[Number 10]

Cheers 10,

Just saw the spiel on our home site to, any news on Gualt or JT?

Nah sorry, only heard news on Grundy and Macaffer. I, like you, am anxious about JT too.

 

[kevind]

Watched the NAB CUP games last night. Can't understand why people try to read that much into these games when the better players are only going at half pace. Loooking at you S Pendulbury.

Anyway, to contradict myself, I thought Witts was improved from last year. Saw him play a VFL game game early last year and he was dreadful, no where near VFL, let alone AFL standard. Doubt he would cut the mustard against the top AFL rucks yet, but at least there seems to be improvement. May be able to get a game in a not so important game

Elliot played well in the Bulldogs game, but I am yet to be convinced that he has anything of real AFL standard other than his marking ability for his size. His kicking looks a particular weakness. Hope I am wrong but am still sceptical.

Macaffer played well but I'd still have Goldsack in front as the 3rd tall forward, given he will return fit. Goldsack's main weakness is that he is not a one touch player, but his 2012 was better than what Caff has thus far produced. With Ball and Thomas looking doubtful for the early part of the year, Caff will probably get some games.

Good to hear Bucks insisting on ruckmen with a touch of mongrel. Have been harping on about this for years. Also wouldn't mind betting that Husdon plays quite a few games this year.

The game plan is obviously going to be the right option whether on the boundary or up the corridor. Agree with 4Didak4's post regarding the predictability. Certainly Malthouse's 'forward press' may have been worked out when Geelong chose to kick out of defence rather than handball, but his boundary game is a proven competitve method. I say that whilst always favouring the down the centre corridor method.

They did a study a few years ago that concluded the one sure way of working which team wins a game is to find the side with the most effective long kicks. Hawthorn did this last year with devastating effect.

Many posters on here complain of bombing the ball forward. With me, short kicking to contests, over use of handball and having players hang on to the ball for too long looking for options are what drove me nuts last year. Quick ball movement is essential to kick high scores. As was the case when we playesd that super footy in early 2011.

Agree with Gone Critical on picking players on history. Don't think the club takes NAB Cup form all that seriously tbh.

 

[watt price tully]

Thanks for the thread Snoop Dog, enjoyed reading it & some others viewpoints.

However, some people seem ridiculously harsh & need to get a bit of perspective for a first hit out in mid February.

Our first (real) game for premiership points is many weeks away.

We played a lot of inexperienced players, tried things out & blew out some cobwebs: surprisingly we still won which is not the real point of these early matches.

Both opposition teams are quite a few weeks ahead of us in terms of training.

Loved a lot of the newbies: Hudson, Russell, Young - all IMO will make contributions to our club this year.

I like Sinclair - he was important to us last year but didn't have the "legs" / "tank" to finish the year. His genuine pace worries other teams & can set things up.

(I know it's not the right thread but gee I'm getting a bit wound up about Carrrlton in round 2 this far out.

 

[Gone Critical]

Trains better or plays better?

If Gault outplays Cloke for the rest of the NAB Cup, and assuming that Cloke is not injured or dead in this scenario, then you'd certainly be looking to find Gault a spot in the side come round 1. I think it's pretty bloody unlikely that Cloke gets dropped, as you'd think Lynch and possibly another forward would go first, but you've got to reward good performances and you sure as hell don't penalise guys for the way they played in another team in another year.

I've already conceded earlier in the thread that a number of our elite players would be picked if in form, and picked if out of form in the hope of playing them back into form. Also you're trivializing the argument by suggesting the decision would be made based on one game, where clearly I'm talking about an entire preseason.

In terms of the battle for the remaining spots, Russell's history at another club, in another role, in a different year is irrelevant.

I mean, Yagmoor got a game to start last season... you don't think they look at preseason form either?

Sorry to buy into this again but as I probably started it I want to clarify things. TRS I think you have been harsh in your assessments of what was initially said. Not sure why you think anyone wants Russell penalised for what he did at Carlton just have it considered. In the same way as Pendle's seasons of elite performance will, Harry's excellent form in last years finals will, Young's solid week in week out contribution to the Hawks 22 will or Marty Clarke's inabilty to solidify a spot in the 22 late in the season will.

Those factors will go into the mix along with preseason training and form to make a round 1 selection. Not sure where the idea of a penalty came from.

This argument started around the claims a few have made that Harry's spot should go to Russell based on 1 game, round 1 NAB cup. If you want to contend that if Russell dominates the preseason comp and Harry stinks it up Harrys place is in trouble and Russell will be in the 22 I don't think you will have many arguing against that idea.