The Worsfold coaching situation mega-thread, part 2

[philibuster]

reality is we finished last!
ultimately someone must take the blame, let hope there is some sort of improvement next year.if by half way through next season we are having a similar season to this year ,then nobody should be surprised is questions are asked of worsfold coaching and recruitment.
you couldnt say that the board have not been supportive so far.

lets just see what happens.....but as a supporter i cant put up with another season like this!

 

[GO EAGLES]

You must have him confused with Justin Longmire

I meant Justin Longmire the ruckman sorry.

I've had a bad 2 days.

 

[Winky]

Well winky, i phrased in an aggressive and emotive manner to get the natives like Pat Footy jumping and hopping with anger just to amuse myself. But i am making 2 serious points.

1. It's extremely difficult to gauge the output of assistants from the outside. People on here do a lot of bagging of assisants like Metropolis, Broadbridge, Walsh etc, but really what are they are basing that on? How can you know from the outside? The only person on the coaching panel who you can make a semi educated assesment of is the senior coach as he is supposedly where the buck stops. He is the decision maker. The assistants can only work within the paremeters he sets and suggest ideas. It's up to the senior coach to make the calls and be responsible for the overall outcome/output.

2. Of all the senior coaches i have ever seen in the AFL Worsfold is more resistant to change in general and change in use of tactics etc than any other. He rarely changes anything and even when he tries it's usually just a half hearted attempt that quickly gets abandoned, such as the zone. That is not necessarily a disadvantage. Denis Pagan didn't change much either. Adherence to an old plan can be a good thing. But i would suggest that when the teams currently at the top of the ladder got there by doing the exact opposite as you and use structures, tactics, hard tags and positional changes within a game very heavily then maybe you need to rethink whether your old plan is past it's use by date and needs to be changed. All coaches need to change and evolve to survive in the long run. It would be very hard being an assistant to Worsfold and especially in the field of innovation and tactics because he rarely deviates from his existing beliefs and plans and he will not implement many of the changes you suggest to him. I think that is a fair comment.

Fair points! The game plan and structure isn't all that complicated in any team but as you say, you have to work it to get the best out of players and I will agree that the buck stops with the coach. Its not all that bad though as there have been a few signs that things have been working but it all looks like absolute chaos when players may be doing the right thing and are let down by crap skills. That is my biggest worry. Not only have the younger players gone backward with skills but players who were previously reliable like Embley and B Jones have also turned the ball over under no pressure. As skills and development coach, Broadbridge had to take the rap for that even tho' Worsfold may be overall responsible. It remains to be seen what happens with the new coaches but even Worsfolds strongest supporter wouldn't argue to support him if there isn't significant improvement whether its his fault or someone else responsible for the coaching employment decisions made over the past few years.

 

[Arcassius]

I meant Justin Longmire the ruckman sorry.

I've had a bad 2 days.

Justin Longmuir?

BTW - Agreed regarding the Freo vs Eagles comparisons being pointless. Personal opinions expressed werent on the basis of 'what our team does vs what your does' but more objective. It's got nothing to do with who supports what, or linked to the success of either team Not here to gloat!

 

[Lach72]

I meant Justin Longmire the ruckman sorry.

I've had a bad 2 days.

Sensational stuff

 

[Mayneman]

What rubbish. We have had Kennedy, Seaby, Hansen, Lynch, Wilson, Cox, Naitanui and a number of talls tried at full forward to varying degrees of success (and failure) for some years.

And?

Plonking big blokes in the goal square doesnt automatically make them a Full forward.

It's quite obvious that the like of Lecras and Mckinley have been given preference as evidenced by their goal tallies over the past three years.

They have been trying McKinley in tandem with LeCras and that hasn't worked very well as both are also lead up forwards rather than genuine crumbers. They have not however, been full forwards.

Sorry mate, they have. You said it yourself, they are both lead up players. Both start predominantly from the square. Both lead wide. Why?

Worsfold and his band of clowns have no idea about the roles of KP's and manafacturing space for each other.

The best example of a side that has been able to generate space for a long time is Geelong. Lost count of the times their coaching ensured there was space for forwards and a viable target for the midfield.

Sometimes you just have to lead to help out the bloke behind you.

Ive never seen a forward line more dysfunctional than West Coasts.

Blokes run into each others space, the little blokes kick more then the big fella's and in the case of Mckinley and Lecras, two smalls, neither even attempt to apply any pressure on the way out.

It looks nice to kick 60 + goals a year Lecras, but who are you really looking after, you or the team?

Pretty sure this thread is about Worsfolds inability to coach, not Fremantles recent, outstanding rise up the ladder on the back of superior drafting and quality coaching.

So let's keep freo out of this eh?

 

[Bacchus]

^ Why are you here? Is the Fremantle board boring?

 

[Winky]

And?

Plonking big blokes in the goal square doesnt automatically make them a Full forward.

It's quite obvious that the like of Lecras and Mckinley have been given preference as evidenced by their goal tallies over the past three years.




Sorry mate, they have. You said it yourself, they are both lead up players. Both start predominantly from the square. Both lead wide. Why?

Worsfold and his band of clowns have no idea about the roles of KP's and manafacturing space for each other.

The best example of a side that has been able to generate space for a long time is Geelong. Lost count of the times their coaching ensured there was space for forwards and a viable target for the midfield.

Sometimes you just have to lead to help out the bloke behind you.

Ive never seen a forward line more dysfunctional than West Coasts.

Blokes run into each others space, the little blokes kick more then the big fella's and in the case of Mckinley and Lecras, two smalls, neither even attempt to apply any pressure on the way out.

It looks nice to kick 60 + goals a year Lecras, but who are you really looking after, you or the team?

Pretty sure this thread is about Worsfolds inability to coach, not Fremantles recent, outstanding rise up the ladder on the back of superior drafting and quality coaching.

So let's keep freo out of this eh?

I'll gladly keep Freo out of this....its you that's on the wrong board and I was responding to your ridiculous claim that LeCras and McKinley had been full forwards.

Being lead up players doesn't make them full forwards...Medhurst wasn't a full forward and neither are Johnson, Chapman and Ablett for Geelong. The fact is that LeCras and McKinley to a lessor degree were able to make use space made by leading forwards like Lynch and Hansen who either dropped marks or went to ground.

As I said, worry about your own patch

 

[Mayneman]

^ Why are you here? Is the Fremantle board boring?

Why havent you countered any of my points?

Too spot on?

It's nice to gloat about how well we have drafted, traded over the past couple of years, and how well our list is coming together and how Harvey has implemented a fantastic gameplan.

Sometimes it's nice just to walk down the other side of the street.

Got to keep things balanced.

Knowhatimean?

 

[Mayneman]

I'll gladly keep Freo out of this....its you that's on the wrong board and I was responding to your ridiculous claim that LeCras and McKinley had been full forwards.

Being lead up players doesn't make them full forwards...Medhurst wasn't a full forward and neither are Johnson, Chapman and Ablett for Geelong. The fact is that LeCras and McKinley to a lessor degree were able to make use space made by leading forwards like Lynch and Hansen who either dropped marks or went to ground.

As I said, worry about your own patch

Medhurst was a full forward when he played for us, it was Mick who forced him higher and it was Mick who put him out to pasture in favour of the likes of Dawes and Cloke.

Not sure I said Ablett and Johnson were full forwards, but neither start, nor stay within in the realms of the forward 50 and neither really spend prolonged periods operating from the goal square.

Can the same be said of Mckinley and Lecras? No.

You can agrue all you want but those two, over the passed 3 years were your primary targets. Aka, your full forwards.

I noticed you couldnt counter anything else I said and, as in your lots way, you would prefer to be insular sooks, rather than looking at your forwards lines failures in a constructive manner.

I pity you.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Blokes run into each others space, the little blokes kick more then the big fella's and in the case of Mckinley and Lecras, two smalls, neither even attempt to apply any pressure on the way out.

McKinley was never really a small though. He was a 6'4" key forward trapped in the body of a 6'0" player.

You're right, there was no way the two of them coud co-exist in the same forward line. I think the coaching staff eventually came to this conclusion and that was why McKinley spent the second half of the season at East Perth and was then given away to North Melbourne for the novelty toy out of a Coco Pops box.

 

[Bacchus]

Why havent you countered any of my points?

Too spot on?

It's nice to gloat about how well we have drafted, traded over the past couple of years, and how well our list is coming together and how Harvey has implemented a fantastic gameplan.

Sometimes it's nice just to walk down the other side of the street.

Got to keep things balanced.

Knowhatimean?

In other words, it is boring. Hmm. Too bad.

 

[WCEforeverman]

You can agrue all you want but those two, over the passed 3 years were your primary targets. Aka, your full forwards.

So your argument is that the primary target is the full forward?

 

[Winky]

Medhurst was a full forward when he played for us, it was Mick who forced him higher and it was Mick who put him out to pasture in favour of the likes of Dawes and Cloke.

Not sure I said Ablett and Johnson were full forwards, but neither start, nor stay within in the realms of the forward 50 and neither really spend prolonged periods operating from the goal square.

Can the same be said of Mckinley and Lecras? No.

You can agrue all you want but those two, over the passed 3 years were your primary targets. Aka, your full forwards.

I noticed you couldnt counter anything else I said and, as in your lots way, you would prefer to be insular sooks, rather than looking at your forwards lines failures in a constructive manner.

I pity you.

What points? You make some outlandish statement about people running into each other and that is supposed to be a given because you say so? Then you make the brilliant observation that Geelong are good..can't argue with that so you can have that one..well done!

You also have a short memory as far as Medhurst and others I named are concerned and you have failed to demonstrate that people not named at full forward and not playing at full forward are actually full forwards.

Go away...and don't worry about the pity bit. Most weird people tend to pity those who aren't like them.

 

[Mayneman]

So your argument is that the primary target is the full forward?

My argument is that Lecras and Mckinley have been your full forwards over the past 3 years.

Do you agree?

 

[Geoffe_Miles]

My argument is that Lecras and Mckinley have been your full forwards over the past 3 years.

Do you agree?

I agree.

 

[Mayneman]

What points? You make some outlandish statement about people running into each other and that is supposed to be a given because you say so? Then you make the brilliant observation that Geelong are good..can't argue with that so you can have that one..well done!

Well has your forward line operated cohesively under the watch of Worsfold, even in the years of Judd, Cousins and Kerr the knock was a the ineffieciency of the forward line which relied on volume more than system to get you over the line.

Having played the game I can look beyond who has the ball and see how forward lines set up. Yours is non existant.

Answer me this, if you have a one on one situation ahead of you and you a forward do you;

A: Bring your man to the contest
B: Scratch your arse
C: Allow your mate the freedom to beat his man on the lead of one on one
D: Make a pasta bake.

I laugh when I see that burly muppet bring his man to a one on one, I laugh when I see Kennedy push hard to the wing only to see someone like Rosa lead into his space for a cheap kick.

You also have a short memory as far as Medhurst and others I named are concerned and you have failed to demonstrate that people not named at full forward and not playing at full forward are actually full forwards.

Go away...and don't worry about the pity bit. Most weird people tend to pity those who aren't like them.

So you think when a player is named in a pocket, yet starts from the square and leads up at the ball carrier, the same player is your leading goal scorer is not a full forward?

 

[Mayneman]

I agree.

Thanks Geoff, you are enlightened man.

Just because a bloke is small doesnt mean he is not being played as a full forward.

Mckinley and Lecras, to anyone with a brain in their head, have started from the square in the last 3 years and played as full forwards.

It's really not that hard a concept to grasp.

What it does is rob your side of a get out option. A player under pressure wanting to pump it long doesnt have the confidence to drop it 20 metres out from goal, why?

He'll get scolded for bombing it on a short blokes head.

As a result, you play wide, the eye of the needle becomes that much smaller and skills look worse than they are.

It's dumb coaching and the results are testament to this.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Pav, do you think it improved over the last three weeks of the season with Callum Wilson starting from the square?

I thought the forward line looked massively better with him leading straight up the ground.

 

[Geoffe_Miles]

Thanks Geoff, you are enlightened man.

Just because a bloke is small doesnt mean he is not being played as a full forward.

Mckinley and Lecras, to anyone with a brain in their head, have started from the square in the last 3 years and played as full forwards.

It's really not that hard a concept to grasp.

What it does is rob your side of a get out option. A player under pressure wanting to pump it long doesnt have the confidence to drop it 20 metres out from goal, why?

He'll get scolded for bombing it on a short blokes head.

As a result, you play wide, the eye of the needle becomes that much smaller and skills look worse than they are.

It's dumb coaching and the results are testament to this.

Couldn't agree more. Said the same thing myslf earlier in the thread when i said that Worsfold plays short people at FF. I was think Le Cras, McKinley and Matera. I agree it's dumb coaching.

Forget about explaining it to this crew though. They will argue that Le Cras is not the FF despite the fact that he leads from the square and more than half our F50's are kicked to him. They won't be able to tell you who is the FF and why, but they just know it isn't Le Cras.

 

[Mayneman]

Pav, do you think it improved over the last three weeks of the season with Callum Wilson starting from the square?

I thought the forward line looked massively better with him leading straight up the ground.

Absolutely.

It was also improved when a bloke like Hams, played the role of a small, he fed off scraps rather than demand the ball himself.

He locked the ball when it was his turn to defend.

Knowing you can bomb the ball under pressure, and having a bloke who knows how to lead and take a contested grab, as evidenced by his work against Scarlett, gives a midfield so much confidence.

With the Lecras it has to be pinpoint, with Hansen and Lynch it needs to be on a platter. We all know this, you dont think your mids know this?

Put pressure on your skills much?

Lecras is a quality player, no doubt, but he is one way and not the type of player you should be building your forward structure around.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

It's a bit hard to resist the urge to build the forward line around a guy that's good enough to come third in the Coleman despite getting the worst delivery in the competition.

Having said that, there's been talk already this offseason about LeCras going into the midfield next year. He did spend some time there this year, although not as much as we probably expected.

 

[Pat_Footy]

He needs to be able to play midfield as well. Some games our midfield gets dominated... you need your best player in the action. If he can play both, he'll have a much greater impact on the game. Gary Ablett's role this year should serve as an aim for Lecras

 

[Underdog]

Absolutely nothing has changed. So whatever Walsh has prescribed or advised to Worsfold in the way of changes obviously has not been implemented and enacted. So you can't exactly blame the assistant for his advice being bad or ideas not working when, as far as we can see, not one of them has actually been tried. He probably regrets taking a job on Worsfold's coaching panel now. He probably feels as though he was just hired for window dressing and to be the next scape goat Worsfold blames and sacks when we have a bad 2011. An assistant can make as many suggestions and have as many ideas as he wants but at the end of the day there is just one decision maker.

Since you are certain these tremendous strategies and innovations have been suggested to Worsfold but not acted upon, can you please list me 5?

Thanks in advance.

 

[Ambrose Burnside]

I remember a final, I think it was that really stormy game against Sydney at the SCG in 2003 or 2004 and we played Sampi as a lone man in the forward line

Wilson FF Kennedy CHF LeCras to the midfield