Please explain: What is a ‘system’? What are ‘tactics’?

[SaintPav]

A quick read, and I think Shane G is the only one who mentioned "strategy". So, kudos. Unfortunately, the explanation of what strategy is, was wrong.

Strategy sits atop the tree - it's the identification of where you are, cf where you want to be, the gap, and broadly what you need to do to bridge the gap.

System is what you employ to give the strategy its best chance of working. For want of a better term, its your m.o., fed by your strategy.

Tactics are purely arbitrage used to exploit short term opportunities presented by your oppositions deficiencies against your strategy, and system, or your superiority cf the opposition's situational shortfalls.

Nailed it.

The system is the method, though I don't think business analogies work that well when it comes to football.

I agree with Clarko, game plans have become very rigid. Where are all the big match winning moves these days? There aren't none.

So this begs the question:

What is the source of our problem?

Is it our strategy or is it the system? Tactics are like shoving your finger in a dyke and are next to useless if you have a lousy system.

Another question: if everyone is aware of Richmond’s system - it's not like it's a big secret, why can't anyone, so far anyway, effectively disrupt it? After all, it's just a system.

[cps]

Nailed it.

The system is the method, though I don't think business analogies work that well when it comes to football.

I agree with Clarko, game plans have become very rigid. Where are all the big match winning moves these days? There aren't none.

So this begs the question:

What is the source of our problem?

Is it our strategy or is it the system? Tactics are like shoving your finger in a dyke and are next to useless if you have a lousy system.

Another question: if everyone is aware of Richmond’s system - it's not like it's a big secret, why can't anyone effectively disrupt it? After all, it's just a system.

Don't forget that there is also execution - you have to be able to implement the system and the players must adhere to it.

I tend to think of it like this:

System - Poor Execution - Poor => Oh dear!
System - Poor Execution - Good => Not good, requires rethinking the approach
System - Good Execution - Poor => Can be fixed with coaching and experience, etc.
System - Good Execution - Good => Ideal

[Cairnsman]

A system is placing my car keys, wallet and phone in the exact same place every night before I go to bed.
When I leave the house I know exactly where they are, and they are exactly where I left them every single time.

A tactic, is to just chuck them somewhere every night. Then when I'm racing out the door each morning and I've lost them and I'm late for work, I frantically offer my kids 5 bucks if they can find them for me, cause they're good at finding stuff.


The system is the far better option, obviously.


But, if someone moves my keys - I'm rooted. The system falls apart! And that's when I need to fall back on my tactics. Which, if I don't have up my sleeve will render me late and angry.

Brilliant explanation

No its not. It's not what a system is and the explanation of a tactic is completely wrong.

Are you here for the 5 minute or the 10 minute argument? (Python).

What's your take on it?

I agree with the Fox.

A system is a set of procedures that you regularly follow. Like putting your keys in the same place at the same time.

Tactics is an addition or an alteration to the system for a particular perceived circumstance.

Taking this back to Clarkson taking umbrage at the suggestion he was employing a new tactic and suggested Journo's didn't understand his system?

So then by definition isn't a tactic an action or strategy carefully planned to achieve a specific outcome and isn't a system by definition a set of procedures working together as parts of a mechanism or interconnecting network where the output from one procedure inputs into another.

And so isnt the key, wallet and phone example (placing them in the exact same place), merely rote learning of a task which in footy terms generally has a duration much longer than a week between games so making it difficult to develop and implement into a procedure which could be successfully executed as a new tactic (not a random act of throwing them somewhere) and whereby the task in itself is not a procedure, tactic nor a system by definition. What happens if you start to introduce other tasks like filling up the car with fuel and studying a map and driving and then order them logically so the outputs from one task input into another task, is this a procedure or a system? And how does rote learning help? Does it help if one of the procedures requires you to drive across town during peak hour traffic to drop off some blood to hospital and it's important each task is performed correctly and under extreme pressure?

You often hear coaches say things about the likes of Hawthorn (more so during thier 3 peat), and now Richmond, "we know what thier system is, being able to beat is another thing".

A new tactic and rote leaning conflict with each other in the context of RFs explanation and Clarkos back bite.

[shanegrambeau]

So I take it tha we failed with ‘system’ ‘tactics’ ‘strategy’ because all three are highly influenced by “the cattle” - that or other teams had bettered us in all three? We must agree on that if Richo is (metaphorically) in the noose. I also wonder, where and how “motivation” fits into the picture. Most pundits agree that St Kilda players ‘have a go’, don’t they?

[Cairnsman]

So I take it tha we failed with ‘system’ ‘tactics’ ‘strategy’ because all three are highly influenced by “the cattle” - that or other teams had bettered us in all three? We must agree on that if Richo is (metaphorically) in the noose. I also wonder, where and how “motivation” fits into the picture. Most pundits agree that St Kilda players ‘have a go’, don’t they?

I'm guessing our systems is fairly similar to the 17 other clubs, and beneath that I'm guessing our game plan is also fairly identical to 17 other clubs. I'm guessing it does come down to execution, or cattle if you want to use that description.

I've heard pundits claim it can take around 18 months for a new system to gain traction which I'm guessing is linked to the rote learning methodology of most training programs and that is probably another example of why new tactics would be very difficult to introduce one week prior to a game.

I'm guessing there is still room for tactics, especially ones tailored to specific oppo teams or components of specific oppo teams, however I'm guessing most of these types of tactics are established during the pre season early enough to learn them by rote.

If this is true then you'd imagine your competitive advantage comes from good oppo intel and analysis to allow to plan for different contingencies and train your tactics, or game modes for want of a better description, again by rote.

Introducing a new tactic on game day without having trained it would more than likely end in failure.