Lyon Promises Exciting Footy

[SainterK]

I would suggest that getting the ball in the hands of your players that either use it the best or run and create is good coaching.

Limiting players like Blakey & Bakes from being the players that bring the ball out of deep defence is common sense.

I think RF & a few others would rather see a game plan akin to a local game at Under 10 level, where everyone chases the ball, is free to kick wherever they like & structures are unheard of.

2009 we played defensive footy but that allowed us to slingshot the ball forward & score heavily.

2010 we had a number of players up & down form wise (Chips, Gilby, Joey, Dal), struggle for form all year (Mini, Zac, Kosi) or injured (Raph, Roo, Gram). It was a HUGE effort to get where they got & despite how shattering it was to have it end in a horrible way, the indications are that in 2011 we will be challenging again.

Let's hope that the filth suffer a bit of what we copped this year... I'm not sure they are mentally strong enough to deal with what our boys did.

Yup.

2009 missed a flag by a kick (effectively).

2010 missed a flag by a kick.

I blame our missed chances in front of goal... from players who are highly paid to slot them when it counts.

We'll rightly see evolution next year, not revolution.

Yep

This time the story was 8 behinds in 30 mins of football.

You don't think Collingwood's 7.13 to our 7.5 at 3/4 time in GF1 was at all the slightest bit relevant?

Or is inaccuracy only a factor when it's us missing shots?

Meh...Collingwood are Collingwood, they miss all the time....

We are normally more reliable, and make the most of the opportunities.

1/8 at half time GF2

[markp]

I would suggest that getting the ball in the hands of your players that either use it the best or run and create is good coaching.

Limiting players like Blakey & Bakes from being the players that bring the ball out of deep defence is common sense.

I think RF & a few others would rather see a game plan akin to a local game at Under 10 level, where everyone chases the ball, is free to kick wherever they like & structures are unheard of.

2009 we played defensive footy but that allowed us to slingshot the ball forward & score heavily.

2010 we had a number of players up & down form wise (Chips, Gilby, Joey, Dal), struggle for form all year (Mini, Zac, Kosi) or injured (Raph, Roo, Gram). It was a HUGE effort to get where they got & despite how shattering it was to have it end in a horrible way, the indications are that in 2011 we will be challenging again.

Let's hope that the filth suffer a bit of what we copped this year... I'm not sure they are mentally strong enough to deal with what our boys did.

Yup.

2009 missed a flag by a kick (effectively).

2010 missed a flag by a kick.

I blame our missed chances in front of goal... from players who are highly paid to slot them when it counts.

We'll rightly see evolution next year, not revolution.

Yep

This time the story was 8 behinds in 30 mins of football.

16 Clubs striving, over how many games of footy(?), and we miss a flag 2 years in a row by a solitary kick... the game plan must be shyte! We're stifling the creative genius of our payers! (not sure which ones... Baker and Blake maybe).

Feel your pain, too... I'm still gutted, still unable to face the prospect of saddling up for 'the journey' again next year.

[rodgerfox]

I would suggest that getting the ball in the hands of your players that either use it the best or run and create is good coaching.

Limiting players like Blakey & Bakes from being the players that bring the ball out of deep defence is common sense.

I think RF & a few others would rather see a game plan akin to a local game at Under 10 level, where everyone chases the ball, is free to kick wherever they like & structures are unheard of.

2009 we played defensive footy but that allowed us to slingshot the ball forward & score heavily.

2010 we had a number of players up & down form wise (Chips, Gilby, Joey, Dal), struggle for form all year (Mini, Zac, Kosi) or injured (Raph, Roo, Gram). It was a HUGE effort to get where they got & despite how shattering it was to have it end in a horrible way, the indications are that in 2011 we will be challenging again.

Let's hope that the filth suffer a bit of what we copped this year... I'm not sure they are mentally strong enough to deal with what our boys did.

Yup.

2009 missed a flag by a kick (effectively).

2010 missed a flag by a kick.

I blame our missed chances in front of goal... from players who are highly paid to slot them when it counts.

We'll rightly see evolution next year, not revolution.

Yep

This time the story was 8 behinds in 30 mins of football.

You don't think Collingwood's 7.13 to our 7.5 at 3/4 time in GF1 was at all the slightest bit relevant?

Or is inaccuracy only a factor when it's us missing shots?

Meh...Collingwood are Collingwood, they miss all the time....

We are normally more reliable, and make the most of the opportunities.

1/8 at half time GF2

But really, it's like ordering a dog turrd sandwich at a cafe then complaining when it tastes bad.

We keep recruiting rejects with notoriously poor skill level. And everyone gets upset and shocked when we miss targets whether it be at goal or around the ground.

This comes back to my concern about relying on the guns too much. We put all our eggs into the baskets of our stars and the roles they play, that we've created a monstrous gap between our guns and the rest.

Defensively, the gap is narrow which reflects in our defensive stats for the past 3 years. But offensively the gap is enormous.

We almost don't have a 'middle 6' anymore. It's either a gun or a plodder. And when your guns aren't firing, that means you're rooted.


This is my concern with our inflexible structure and game plan.

[SainterK]

Or perhaps it's simply a case of our 'guns' and 'x-factor' players declaring themselves fit, when they are not?

You have your opinions regarding the players you think butcher the ball, however it was guys like Schneider, Joey, Fisher who were among those who missed....you normally wouldn't trust them to take a shot on goal?

[SainterK]

Feel your pain, too... I'm still gutted, still unable to face the prospect of saddling up for 'the journey' again next year.

Oh I can face the prospect, so excited for 2011

[markp]

Feel your pain, too... I'm still gutted, still unable to face the prospect of saddling up for 'the journey' again next year.

Oh I can face the prospect, so excited for 2011

I'll spend the (football) year about as excited as the guy in your avatar... till we hold up that freaking cup!

[Dr Spaceman]

Feel your pain, too... I'm still gutted, still unable to face the prospect of saddling up for 'the journey' again next year.

Oh I can face the prospect, so excited for 2011

I'll spend the (football) year about as excited as the guy in your avatar... till we hold up that freaking cup!

We go through years, and in fact decades, without looking like threatening to win a flag and have no trouble saddling up again the next year.

We get desperately close two years in a row and wonder how we can go on.

Although it does makes some sense, in reality it makes no sense at all

[rodgerfox]

Or perhaps it's simply a case of our 'guns' and 'x-factor' players declaring themselves fit, when they are not?

You have your opinions regarding the players you think butcher the ball, however it was guys like Schneider, Joey, Fisher who were among those who missed....you normally wouldn't trust them to take a shot on goal?

Joey and Schneider have always been mentally fragile and find ways to go missing when it matters.

So again, why the shock when it happens every year?

[SainterK]

Or perhaps it's simply a case of our 'guns' and 'x-factor' players declaring themselves fit, when they are not?

You have your opinions regarding the players you think butcher the ball, however it was guys like Schneider, Joey, Fisher who were among those who missed....you normally wouldn't trust them to take a shot on goal?

Joey and Schneider have always been mentally fragile and find ways to go missing when it matters.

So again, why the shock when it happens every year?

Oh OK, so you want designated kickers then?

[Dr Spaceman]

Or perhaps it's simply a case of our 'guns' and 'x-factor' players declaring themselves fit, when they are not?

You have your opinions regarding the players you think butcher the ball, however it was guys like Schneider, Joey, Fisher who were among those who missed....you normally wouldn't trust them to take a shot on goal?

Joey and Schneider have always been mentally fragile and find ways to go missing when it matters.

So again, why the shock when it happens every year?

Oh OK, so you want designated kickers then?

What's Ben Graham up to these days?

[rodgerfox]

Joey and Schneider have always been mentally fragile and find ways to go missing when it matters.

So again, why the shock when it happens every year?

Oh OK, so you want designated kickers then? [/quote]

I'd prefer it that most of the list can kick.

[markp]

Feel your pain, too... I'm still gutted, still unable to face the prospect of saddling up for 'the journey' again next year.

Oh I can face the prospect, so excited for 2011

I'll spend the (football) year about as excited as the guy in your avatar... till we hold up that freaking cup!

We go through years, and in fact decades, without looking like threatening to win a flag and have no trouble saddling up again the next year.

We get desperately close two years in a row and wonder how we can go on.

Although it does makes some sense, in reality it makes no sense at all

I've never been more gutted after a season than this one... ever.

That makes no sense to you?

And we lost a flag to the filth... over 2 GF's... which we are every chance (odds on, in fact) to see again next year, as our window closes.

Now that would really freaking hurt....

Still makes no sense that 8 weeks after such a unique reaming, I'm yet to embrace the anticipation of footy (and the prospects another one) in 20ll?

I'll be there when the time comes around... but I wont get my hopes up nearly as much as I did this year, and I wont be putting off travel plans or organising my social calendar around games.

[SainterK]

I'll be there when the time comes around... but I wont get my hopes up nearly as much as I did this year, and I wont be putting off travel plans or organising my social calendar around games.

Footy fitting around living is a normal thing Mark

[Thinline]

Just getting back to the 'roles' bit, in reference to what Teflon has said above....

Part of the reason we get held up and don't attack is because the opposition know that certain players are not allowed to kick the ball forward.

Jason Blake in his role for example, isn't allowed to break a line with kicking - even if the opportunity to do so is blatant.


This type of game plan, means that we only attack when the ball finds itself in the hands of certain guys - meaning that certain players have to have good games for us to score.
It also means we have to play certain guys in defence as they are designated kickers. If they don't get the ball down back, there's simply no one back there who can move the ball forward by foot.

This slipped under the guard of clubs in 09, and even in 08 to an extent. But in 2010 it was obvious to everybody. Shut down our desingated kickers in the back half (Gilbert and Fisher to name 2) and we stagnate horribly.


So really, the inflexibility in the game plan and the roles of players is the thing that needs to change in order for us to become more attacking, or more to the point - better at attacking.

Who says there is such a rule?

You just make s*** up.

I also doubt there is such a 'rule'

Are you guys for real?

Dead serious.

This is classic you.

Answer a legitimate question with a deflecting smartarse question.

Makes you feel important.

Makes the world identify you as a bulls*** artist.

What alleged rule are you referring to?

Who is subject to the alleged rule?

Who told you the alleged rule existed?

Simple questions, Dodger. Why don't you answer them?

The fact is AFL is a dynamic game based on instantaneous first instinct reactions.

Rules like the one you've made up don't exist.

[rodgerfox]

Just getting back to the 'roles' bit, in reference to what Teflon has said above....

Part of the reason we get held up and don't attack is because the opposition know that certain players are not allowed to kick the ball forward.

Jason Blake in his role for example, isn't allowed to break a line with kicking - even if the opportunity to do so is blatant.


This type of game plan, means that we only attack when the ball finds itself in the hands of certain guys - meaning that certain players have to have good games for us to score.
It also means we have to play certain guys in defence as they are designated kickers. If they don't get the ball down back, there's simply no one back there who can move the ball forward by foot.

This slipped under the guard of clubs in 09, and even in 08 to an extent. But in 2010 it was obvious to everybody. Shut down our desingated kickers in the back half (Gilbert and Fisher to name 2) and we stagnate horribly.


So really, the inflexibility in the game plan and the roles of players is the thing that needs to change in order for us to become more attacking, or more to the point - better at attacking.

Who says there is such a rule?

You just make s*** up.

I also doubt there is such a 'rule'

Are you guys for real?

Dead serious.

This is classic you.

Answer a legitimate question with a deflecting smartarse question.

Makes you feel important.

Makes the world identify you as a bulls*** artist.

What alleged rule are you referring to?

Who is subject to the alleged rule?

Who told you the alleged rule existed?

Simple questions, Dodger. Why don't you answer them?

The fact is AFL is a dynamic game based on instantaneous first instinct reactions.

Rules like the one you've made up don't exist.

Oh my stars.


You are for real.



Wow.


So you what do you think everyone (including players and coaches) is talking about when they constantly use the term 'roles'? What do you think a 'role' is within a footy team?
What do you think the term 'team rules' means?



You are taking the piiss aren't you?

[markp]

I'll be there when the time comes around... but I wont get my hopes up nearly as much as I did this year, and I wont be putting off travel plans or organising my social calendar around games.

Footy fitting around living is a normal thing Mark

[SainterK]

Just getting back to the 'roles' bit, in reference to what Teflon has said above....

Part of the reason we get held up and don't attack is because the opposition know that certain players are not allowed to kick the ball forward.

Jason Blake in his role for example, isn't allowed to break a line with kicking - even if the opportunity to do so is blatant.


This type of game plan, means that we only attack when the ball finds itself in the hands of certain guys - meaning that certain players have to have good games for us to score.
It also means we have to play certain guys in defence as they are designated kickers. If they don't get the ball down back, there's simply no one back there who can move the ball forward by foot.

This slipped under the guard of clubs in 09, and even in 08 to an extent. But in 2010 it was obvious to everybody. Shut down our desingated kickers in the back half (Gilbert and Fisher to name 2) and we stagnate horribly.


So really, the inflexibility in the game plan and the roles of players is the thing that needs to change in order for us to become more attacking, or more to the point - better at attacking.

Who says there is such a rule?

You just make s*** up.

I also doubt there is such a 'rule'

Are you guys for real?

Dead serious.

This is classic you.

Answer a legitimate question with a deflecting smartarse question.

Makes you feel important.

Makes the world identify you as a bulls*** artist.

What alleged rule are you referring to?

Who is subject to the alleged rule?

Who told you the alleged rule existed?

Simple questions, Dodger. Why don't you answer them?

The fact is AFL is a dynamic game based on instantaneous first instinct reactions.

Rules like the one you've made up don't exist.

I'll take this one TL

Rule that requires designated kickers

RF doesn't like it

However he doesn't trust certain players in front of goal

Not that that means we should have designated kickers

Clear?

[rodgerfox]

I'll take this one TL

Rule that requires designated kickers

RF doesn't like it

However he doesn't trust certain players in front of goal

Not that that means we should have designated kickers

Clear?

I'll assume that's merely an attempt at humour?

Because it's incredibly far from anything that's been discussed in this thread.

[SainterK]

I'll take this one TL

Rule that requires designated kickers

RF doesn't like it

However he doesn't trust certain players in front of goal

Not that that means we should have designated kickers

Clear?

I'll assume that's merely an attempt at humour?

Because it's incredibly far from anything that's been discussed in this thread.

Don't usually include a when I'm being entirely serious.

[rodgerfox]

I'll take this one TL

Rule that requires designated kickers

RF doesn't like it

However he doesn't trust certain players in front of goal

Not that that means we should have designated kickers

Clear?

I'll assume that's merely an attempt at humour?

Because it's incredibly far from anything that's been discussed in this thread.

Don't usually include a when I'm being entirely serious.

Is a "" an icon for witless smarm?

[SainterK]

Was trying to have a bit of fun, nasty pasty

[WinnersOnly]

Hopefully they will take the game on a bit more...

The reasoned sucess over the past couple of years have been nice but when you hear your (non Saints supporting) mates say - they hate St Kilda because of the game style they play.

You have to wonder what damage RL's game style has caused in attracting new members to our club !

AND yes I couldn't have given 'two flying continentals' if we had of won both years....but?

[Dr Spaceman]

Feel your pain, too... I'm still gutted, still unable to face the prospect of saddling up for 'the journey' again next year.

Oh I can face the prospect, so excited for 2011

I'll spend the (football) year about as excited as the guy in your avatar... till we hold up that freaking cup!

We go through years, and in fact decades, without looking like threatening to win a flag and have no trouble saddling up again the next year.

We get desperately close two years in a row and wonder how we can go on.

Although it does makes some sense, in reality it makes no sense at all

I've never been more gutted after a season than this one... ever.

That makes no sense to you?

And we lost a flag to the filth... over 2 GF's... which we are every chance (odds on, in fact) to see again next year, as our window closes.

Now that would really freaking hurt....

Still makes no sense that 8 weeks after such a unique reaming, I'm yet to embrace the anticipation of footy (and the prospects another one) in 20ll?

I'll be there when the time comes around... but I wont get my hopes up nearly as much as I did this year, and I wont be putting off travel plans or organising my social calendar around games.

I don't doubt that you're gutted markp, or that you may be struggling at the moment to embrace the new season, but I think you may have missed my point.

[Thinline]

I'll take this one TL

Rule that requires designated kickers

RF doesn't like it

However he doesn't trust certain players in front of goal

Not that that means we should have designated kickers

Clear?

I'll assume that's merely an attempt at humour?

Because it's incredibly far from anything that's been discussed in this thread.

I just want my questions answered.

I want to know who at the club stipulates 'player x shall not kick'.

I quote RF for clarity: "Part of the reason we get held up and don't attack is because the opposition know that certain players are not allowed to kick the ball forward.

Jason Blake in his role for example, isn't allowed to break a line with kicking - even if the opportunity to do so is blatant.


This type of game plan, means that we only attack when the ball finds itself in the hands of certain guys - meaning that certain players have to have good games for us to score.

It also means we have to play certain guys in defence as they are designated kickers. If they don't get the ball down back, there's simply no one back there who can move the ball forward by foot."

That's what Righteous f***wit is saying.

If he has some insight beyond rank speculation then share it. It's a fan forum. I'm a fan. Indulge me.

Seems more like a wet opinion dressed as fact to make him feel better about the likely fact he's fifty five and lives with his mum.

As to Righteous f***wit's question about roles, surely roleplaying refers to how a player competes when confronted by specific circumstances - kick ins, ball ups, throw ins, centre bounces, zoning, third man up, whatever, the list is endless - as well as how he manages his direct opponent.

What evidence of any other definition of 'role' could possibly exist?

Even if a coach were to say : 'McQualter, don't worry about getting a kick, I just want you to to tackle' McQualter's still every chance of finding himself on the end of a kick or a handball at some point with a target or the goals in front of him. What's he gonna do? Drop the ball and cite the 'rule' as his reason for not taking an option?

So it seems to me Righteous f***wit thinks roles exist whereby a player isn't required to kick.

That, plainly, seems ridiculous.

So what comes next RF?

Maybe I get an

Oh my...

Or a

Puhlease...

or a

Wow...

or maybe a

Well now I've seen it all...

The fact of the matter is that at the end of the day all I want is an answer to a few simple question:

Who says certain players can't do certain things?

How do you know?

Geez...It's not that hard...

[bigcarl]

What we were what...second highest scoring 09?.

Fourth, I thought, but we dropped to eighth in 2010 and would have been further back but for a late season flurry.

Every other team in the eight scored more heavily.

They all leaked more, too, of course.

As you say, it's about getting the balance right.