Review Purple Tiger Tamers - Freo beat Richmond by 54 points at the MCG

[dockshark]

First, gotta get this off my chest. Not directed at any single individual, but the whole "you must've been watching on TV / If you were at the ground" thing sh*ts me no end. It reeks of superiority, and unless you genuinely spend the entire game watching anything and anywhere other than the ball, I think the supposedly greater insights you get from watching the game from a fixed position, at a distance from large passages of play, are vastly overstated,

For my part I was just observing that for this particular game there was a stark and noticable difference between the live view, being able to take in the full ground and see the way Richmond were structured (or not structured!) behind and ahead of the ball, and the telecast which essentially showed very little of this. One frustration I have with the variability of telecasts is associated to this, where some do a good job of integrating 'down the ground' views and utilising replay oppurtunities and breaks to provide better better insight into what the teams are doing structurally and some don't and just maintain a real ball and stoppage focus. If this came off as somehow superior it was totally unintended and I apologise.

In my opinion, the pressure was low, yes, though at least in part because Freo made it low. They played and held the full width, making good use of consecutive switches, and using what they gambled would be their superior fitness (given the oppo's number of kids) to stretch Richmond's zone, tire them out and then dominate in the fourth.

You might be right that this "game plan" won't hold up in finals, but the question to consider is whether it was precisely a game plan and not a season plan to be stuck to at the business end. I'm skeptical of the utility of an idea of "game plan" as an analytical device, let alone a predictive one, but — without denying that coaching and playing groups aim for a certain degree of consistency and predictability — I think we've seen enough variation across the games this season to suggest that the core group are comfortable enough playing together to at least attempt to implement different strategies at different moments in games.

That's not to say that it's in any way guaranteed to work. If it does rain on Friday, this will be one of the interesting things to keep an eye on, as lots of people have already noted.

One thing I do agree with you on, though, is the overstating of the terribleness of Brayshaw's kicking. He was responsible for some quality I50s and other moments, as much as he botched a couple. Meanwhile, Serong started the second with a couple of terrible shanks, but no one seems to be highlighting Serong's "sh*t" kicking as the only legitimate thing to criticise.

Fair enough. I think it's an interesting set of observations about the concept of 'gameplan' which is in reality a bit of a catch-all term to describe method. I think we've been fairly consistent though this year in terms of having higher scoring pressure when we are able to play uncontested footy and struggled more when forced to play contested and that's the bit that needs fixing if we want to go deep in September. But there's time to fix it, and the next four weeks we have 3 games against high contested footy teams so will be better able to assess. Thanks for sharing.

 

[dockerfemme]

Does anyone know the differences between the team they fielded in the previous 2 or 3 games and the team they fielded against us? I know they have a lot of injuries and have lost Lynch, Taranto, Prestia and Balta since their first few games. At a quick glance it seems the team we played is much the same as the team played by Melbourne, the Eagles and St Kilda. If that is the case we outperformed all those teams and, as others have said, managed ourselves for a 5 day break. It seems a good tactical outcome.

 

[mike91]

Late to the party (new job)

But I was pleased with Johnsons game. His goal was actually brilliant

Treacys last term was very encouraging. Young was good, though a bit hit and miss with his kicks inside 50

Emmett does a lot right, but his awareness and footy IQ.....man, it's seriously questionable.

 

[ignoramus]

If this came off as somehow superior it was totally unintended and I apologise.

No need for apologies. As I said , it wasn't directed at any individual, because it is a common refrain. Your use of it just happened to be the one that prompted me to say something about it because I wanted to say something about your assessment in any case.

 

[largebus]

Does anyone know the differences between the team they fielded in the previous 2 or 3 games and the team they fielded against us? I know they have a lot of injuries and have lost Lynch, Taranto, Prestia and Balta since their first few games. At a quick glance it seems the team we played is much the same as the team played by Melbourne, the Eagles and St Kilda. If that is the case we outperformed all those teams and, as others have said, managed ourselves for a 5 day break. It seems a good tactical outcome.

In: Jayden Short, Tyler Sonsie
Out: Jacob Hopper, Jack Graham

 

[freo84]

I watched the replay on Kayo this morning and now I see why people are so much more positive about it. The telecast doesn't go close to showing the lack of pressure applied by Richmond. So I suspect there's potentially a stark difference between those that watched live and those that watched the TV and their observations of the game. Most, if not all of the commentators that are crtitical of us were at the ground for the telecast or radio.

I was sitting with a large group of Freo members at the ground and none of us could believe the lack of frontal pressure being applied. We had plenty of forward movements where there was almost no structural defensive pressure applied and we still made it look very difficult for much of the first 3 qtrs. In the last qtr the tigers totally lost their way structurally and it looked very much like watching training drills rather than an AFL level match.

I guess some here are only interested in positive posts, others are more analytical.

That last sentence is uncalled for mate.

54 point win at the MCG with the second youngest team in the AFL is an achievement. I'm going to be happy about it.

 

[dockshark]

That last sentence is uncalled for mate.

54 point win at the MCG with the second youngest team in the AFL is an achievement. I'm going to be happy about it.

I don't know what you mean..it wasn't a criticism, nor was it directed at you. Just a general observation about different people seeing things differently as a way of answering your question about some people people playing down a win.

I'm glad your happy about the win, more power to you.

 

[DragoDelph]

Anyone stop to think that they only did what was required?

Went in with better intent than the WC game, got a run through the legs, got the job done without too much exertion?

Controlled the game for the most part, before putting the foot down late.

All the mids spent time resting up forward, Pearce got more bench time than usual.

 

[MadEyeEmmy]

I guess some here are only interested in positive posts, others are more analytical.

Aren’t you the geezer who wanted to write to the club, microwave your membership and sack everyone after the loss to the Eagles?

I find your posts to be relentlessly negative and reactionary rather than analytical tbh.

 

[mattis117]

Anyone stop to think that they only did what was required?

Went in with better intent than the WC game, got a run through the legs, got the job done without too much exertion?

Controlled the game for the most part, before putting the foot down late.

All the mids spent time resting up forward, Pearce got more bench time than usual.

This is exactly what all but one posters have been saying... dockshark seems to want to denigrate the performance without evidence of what the plan was. They clearly have a bone to pick with the club management, so a narrative is being confected to read more into certain aspects of the game.

One of the dumbest things I hear/read, and you hear it a lot from the media, is: if they play like this vs. x team they'll get beaten. This is such an inane comment to make, especially when you've won a game by ten goals. AFL seasons are marathons and each team gets played differently with different plans in place. To put it simply, there is zero chance we will play Sydney in the same manner that we played Richmond.

 

[DragoDelph]

This is exactly what all but one posters have been saying... dockshark seems to want to denigrate the performance without evidence of what the plan was. They clearly have a bone to pick with the club management, so a narrative is being confected to read more into certain aspects of the game.

One of the dumbest things I hear/read, and you hear it a lot from the media, is: if they play like this vs. x team they'll get beaten. This is such an inane comment to make, especially when you've won a game by ten goals. AFL seasons are marathons and each team gets played differently with different plans in place. To put it simply, there is zero chance we will play Sydney in the same manner that we played Richmond.

This is why I love the intent of "enjoying the grind" and not leaning on emotion to get the job done through the season.

Save the emotion for the finals. If it gets used too often, it becomes ineffectual, or tiring. Sure it may mean there are times shit goes wrong (WC), or a team can run on emotion longer (C'wood), but you're right, it's a marathon.

Geelong are a great example of this, just get the job done, over and over again, then pull out the stops wen it counts.

 

[Raz]

As with all analytical discussions. Without the facts it is hard to analyze.

Eg. We rate players as not performing due to lack of kicks. or lack of goals etc. What if that player had done all the tasks the coach asked of him. Most of us will never know the coaches instructions. Right or wrong the players must follow the coaches instructions. if he says "Hey run up and down the wing screaming for the ball, but no one will kick it to you as it is my plan to use you as a decoy" the fans may think the team are not playing well as they not using an individual in space or we may think that player shouldbe dropped as they got no touches for the game.

Having coached for many years, the coaches pick of best player is not always the guy with most touchs or most goals. but a lot of times it is simply the guy that did as instructed.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

This is why I love the intent of "enjoying the grind" and not leaning on emotion to get the job done through the season.

Save the emotion for the finals. If it gets used too often, it becomes ineffectual, or tiring. Sure it may mean there are times s**t goes wrong (WC), or a team can run on emotion longer (C'wood), but you're right, it's a marathon.

Geelong are a great example of this, just get the job done, over and over again, then pull out the stops wen it counts.

You are really wise, you should be a mod

 

[DragoDelph]

You are really wise, you should be a mod

I plan to work at AFL house one day. Though I may be too intelligent.

 

[Paracleet]

This is why I love the intent of "enjoying the grind" and not leaning on emotion to get the job done through the season.

Save the emotion for the finals. If it gets used too often, it becomes ineffectual, or tiring. Sure it may mean there are times s**t goes wrong (WC), or a team can run on emotion longer (C'wood), but you're right, it's a marathon.

Geelong are a great example of this, just get the job done, over and over again, then pull out the stops wen it counts.

 

[DragoDelph]

View attachment 1982935

Must have absorbed it subliminally

 

[oldgoat]

As with all analytical discussions. Without the facts it is hard to analyze.

Eg. We rate players as not performing due to lack of kicks. or lack of goals etc. What if that player had done all the tasks the coach asked of him. Most of us will never know the coaches instructions. Right or wrong the players must follow the coaches instructions. if he says "Hey run up and down the wing screaming for the ball, but no one will kick it to you as it is my plan to use you as a decoy" the fans may think the team are not playing well as they not using an individual in space or we may think that player shouldbe dropped as they got no touches for the game.

Having coached for many years, the coaches pick of best player is not always the guy with most touchs or most goals. but a lot of times it is simply the guy that did as instructed.

Here here Raz
My pal was appalled how quiet Banfield was against Tigers after his ripper the week before against the dogs.
At that stage I had only listened to the gameday radio, and just watched the highlights.
I couldnt comment.
I then watched the full replay paying particular attention to Banfield.
He was literally out of sight alot, most? of the time.
Literally out of frame.
It seemed to me he was playing a role on the flank, filling the space should the ball come wide?
With the way we often attacked through the centre, noting Tigers lack of resistance to that, he wasnt gettng many stats.
My conclusion is he played his role.
I would be interested to hear from anyone who watched the game live what they think of my speculations?

 

[Joao]

Here here Raz
My pal was appalled how quiet Banfield was against Tigers after his ripper the week before against the dogs.
At that stage I had only listened to the gameday radio, and just watched the highlights.
I couldnt comment.
I then watched the full replay paying particular attention to Banfield.
He was literally out of sight alot, most? of the time.
Literally out of frame.
It seemed to me he was playing a role on the flank, filling the space should the ball come wide?
With the way we often attacked through the centre, noting Tigers lack of resistance to that, he wasnt gettng many stats.
My conclusion is he played his role.
I would be interested to hear from anyone who watched the game live what they think of my speculations?

I reckon this is often the case with flankers and wingers and it's hard to know without asking the coaches.

 

[theGav56]

For me it was a slightly schizophrenic game. A bit of frustration and a bit of exhilaration. Reflects the stage of evolution the list is at, but comes with a massive cherry on top; the end result being a convincing win.

 

[ubiquitous226]

Here here Raz
My pal was appalled how quiet Banfield was against Tigers after his ripper the week before against the dogs.
At that stage I had only listened to the gameday radio, and just watched the highlights.
I couldnt comment.
I then watched the full replay paying particular attention to Banfield.
He was literally out of sight alot, most? of the time.
Literally out of frame.
It seemed to me he was playing a role on the flank, filling the space should the ball come wide?
With the way we often attacked through the centre, noting Tigers lack of resistance to that, he wasnt gettng many stats.
My conclusion is he played his role.
I would be interested to hear from anyone who watched the game live what they think of my speculations?

I agree with the sentiment you get very different experiences at home vs at the ground, and indeed where you sit at the ground.

Game plan or method is much more visible at the ground, particularly if you're higher up.
As is the unrewarded running often required by many players, which may have been Banners' lot in this game.
Sharp very obviously covers what we want from the wing pretty decently, plus he has shown a tendency to have a ping at the goals which is great.

Things like individual brilliance, reasonableness of free kicks, contests, etc. are better on the TV.

Hence why I, like many, love to watch it again if given the chance following a game.

 

[Raz]

AFL in my opinion is nearly always better to watch live at ground than on TV as a lot happens off the ball, up the ground and down the ground. Positioning of players etc.

On TV they focus a lot on where the ball is at times they zoom in too far i feel.

This to me is the biggest difference between Rugby and AFL. Rugby the ball movement is everything and not a lot happening off screen. The only benifit for live is the atmosphere (depending on where you sitting and other fans it can be a negative too LOL)

so as some have said. Whenever i could i would go to the live game and then rewatch it on TV to pick up on all those free kicks i missed when sitting so far away. Sadly due to work and other issues havent been to an AFL match live for quite a long time now.

 

[dockshark]

dockshark seems to want to denigrate the performance without evidence of what the plan was. They clearly have a bone to pick with the club management, so a narrative is being confected to read more into certain aspects of the game

LOL...I'm confecting a narrative to suit my agenda now am I

You could try just being a bit tolerant to alternative views and consider that just maybe I see things a bit differently to you. I responded to your last attack with some analysis as I see it, and explained the alignment between uncontested possesion and uncontested marks and scoring penetration in qtr 1 and qtr 4, and why that is something that needs working on if we intend to be competitive against tougher teams and in September. You seem more interested in being rude and reading things that arent there than in actually discussing the game though so I'll leave you to that.

 

[Righteo]

The response to thoughtful criticisms can be a bit cult-like on here at times. We don't want an echo chamber do we?

 

[ignoramus]

The response to thoughtful criticisms can be a bit cult-like on here at times. We don't want an echo chamber do we?

 

[DQ 4EVER]

In: Jayden Short, Tyler Sonsie
Out: Jacob Hopper, Jack Graham

Pre-game I commented to my mate, that my 3 goals for the game, besides the win were:
1 no Jayden Short goals
2 at least 1 Caleb Serong goal
3 a good game from Matthew Johnson
Oh well, 2 out of 3 ain't bad

On SM-G960F using BigFooty.com mobile app