Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Will it stand up? (Read 53410 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #45 –
MM's style is based on hard running and workrate - he's stated that numerous times. If we try to play his style and don't put in then we get punished. We did put in for part of the games against Port and the Tigers (to a lesser degree admittedly) and for most of the game v. the Dogs. We looked OK at those times and we have to find a way to front up every week and do it. If we can, then we could gain some respectability by year end. There'll still be plenty of change to the list though IMO.
Reality always wins in the end.

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #46 –
Quote from: shadesy on
......

Combine the Port First Quarter with the run and carry from Bulldogs and we have a makings of a very good football side. .......

Careful there Shadesy, that would mean that the players are not as bad as many say they are  :o
Excuses year 1, blame year 2, contract extention year 3........

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #47 –
Quote from: PassIt2Carrots on
Nah disagree he gets full credit for changing things up and making it work. Whilst it wasn't his traditional gameplan it was still his gameplan.

That is how I see it, and MM can keep stating his plan hasn't changed and that would be consistent. We would hope he hasn't got one plan, and that Sunday's game was part of the overall plan. But countering that, MM looked like a cut snake in the post match presser hardly a happy coach, the Dogs coach was happier describing the game as way too open and out of control.

I think most critical posters are bagging the heavily defensive boundary hugging game plan as not being suitable to our list. Yet it seems to keep rolling out as an apparent default, even moments on Sunday we seemed to slip into that mode. It is hard to tell if that is the cause of the Dogs surge or if it is a symptom of the Dogs surging, from the outside you just cannot tell. But I do suspect it is part of the plan, primarily because the heavy running high work rate is unsustainable for a full match let alone a full season!
The Force Awakens!

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #48 –
http://win-cdn220-is-3.se.bponlinewoc2264.ngcdn.telstra.com/PlatformRelease/653/684/Carrazzo220414web_S_1936465358__326475.mp4

Carrazzo's interview yesterday.

He states that the game plan didn't change but the execution of it did.

IMHO we looked as a group, tired during the first four weeks.  Sunday we didn't.  Is it possible that our condition has improved and that made a bigger difference to our execution (and by extension the game plan)?

The Doggies have had a taxing first four weeks and looked pretty flat themselves.

For those who are wondering about the quality of the group, at one.stage on the weekend we had Rowe spoil Liam Jones, White picked up the crumbs and cleared to Casboult on the wing.  The ball was forced out for a throw, and from the next throw, Casboult got the ball down to Curnow who handballs to Tom Bell.  bell kicks to Lucas linking up.  Now, I like all these guys for doing what they can but it's a testament to how far off the pace we can be when these guys are linking up and the one thing you keep thinking is please hit a target.
"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #49 –
Quote from: flyboy77 on
Quote from: blue4life on
I didn't notice much difference in tactics, what I did notice was that our turnover percentage was way, way down on where it's been.
Confidence is a beautiful thing and yesterday we had it by the bucket load, even Tommy Bell was hitting targets and Knockers was winning the ball at ground level, whether that was down to mediocre opposition or not who knows?
The big question is whether we can play as well against quality opposition, Footscray are very average.

Footscray's midfield is actuaLLY VERY GOOD. Ditto Crameri as a key forward.

They did beat Tigers and Gold Coast.....

Tigers and Gold Coast aren't top sides.
We "held" Boyd to under 30 touches and Murphy, Cooney and Higgins all to under 20, Griffin hurt us but he's top class and hurts a lot of sides.
The big difference was our field kicking and good games from all of our better players, Waite, Murphy, Gibbs, Walker, Carrazzo and Simpson, and a very good one from Warnock in the ruck.
Some of the lesser lights were also good, Bell and Tuohy come to mind but Thomas also got amongst it and Henderson was unstoppable early on.
When the team plays well there's always a noticeable difference and it looks like you're finding more space and run, but a lot of that comes down to hitting targets instead of turning it over and being caught out of position.
We also didn't butcher it in front of goal for a change, which always helps.
The only thing in this world worth more than a hill of beans is the Carlton Football Club.

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #50 –
Quote from: cookie2 on
MM's style is based on hard running and workrate - he's stated that numerous times. If we try to play his style and don't put in then we get punished. We did put in for part of the games against Port and the Tigers (to a lesser degree admittedly) and for most of the game v. the Dogs. We looked OK at those times and we have to find a way to front up every week and do it. If we can, then we could gain some respectability by year end. There'll still be plenty of change to the list though IMO.

Which is also true. However and this concerned me last year... Collingwood were known for the ridiculous high number of rotations. More than any other club and frequently allowing players to rest and recover to implement a high intensity gameplan. a number i seem to remember is 150 plus.

Now we have a cap limit and a sub.... so surely Malthouse must himself tinker with the Gameplan to fit the rules.
"We are a club in a hurry"

#united #reset

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #51 –
Quote from: Thryleon on
Carrazzo's interview yesterday.

He states that the game plan didn't change but the execution of it did.

Did he say that, or did he say "Didn't change much?"

I would reckon it didn't change much, about the length of the center square!  ;)
The Force Awakens!

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #52 –
Quote from: LP on
That is how I see it, and MM can keep stating his plan hasn't changed and that would be consistent. We would hope he hasn't got one plan, and that Sunday's game was part of the overall plan. But countering that, MM looked like a cut snake in the post match presser hardly a happy coach, the Dogs coach was happier describing the game as way too open and out of control.

Sounds to me like he got out coached, that Carlton played the game on our terms.

Quote from: LP on
I think most critical posters are bagging the heavily defensive boundary hugging game plan as not being suitable to our list. Yet it seems to keep rolling out as an apparent default, even moments on Sunday we seemed to slip into that mode.

In Malthouse's last two seasons at Collingwood they were the second highest scoring team in 2010 and the highest in 2011, maybe Mick's "heavily defensive" game plan is a bit of an urban myth.
The only thing in this world worth more than a hill of beans is the Carlton Football Club.

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #53 –
Quote from: shadesy on
Quote from: cookie2 on
MM's style is based on hard running and workrate - he's stated that numerous times. If we try to play his style and don't put in then we get punished. We did put in for part of the games against Port and the Tigers (to a lesser degree admittedly) and for most of the game v. the Dogs. We looked OK at those times and we have to find a way to front up every week and do it. If we can, then we could gain some respectability by year end. There'll still be plenty of change to the list though IMO.

Which is also true. However and this concerned me last year... Collingwood were known for the ridiculous high number of rotations. More than any other club and frequently allowing players to rest and recover to implement a high intensity gameplan. a number i seem to remember is 150 plus.

Now we have a cap limit and a sub.... so surely Malthouse must himself tinker with the Gameplan to fit the rules.

You'd have to think so Shadesy. Maybe a bit of tempo footy or keepings off to give the boys a breather at times during the game. That's where we've been falling down a bit though and making mistakes. It was very noticeable v Port and the Tigers. We just didn't get started against the Bummers and the Dees. On Sunday, you could see us come off the gas a bit halfway through the 3Q and into the 4Q before picking it up again. The Dogs couldn't capitalise though.

If our fitness improves we may be able to keep it going longer in a game as the year goes on?
Reality always wins in the end.

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #54 –
Quote from: blue4life on
In Malthouse's last two seasons at Collingwood they were the second highest scoring team in 2010 and the highest in 2011, maybe Mick's "heavily defensive" game plan is a bit of an urban myth.

So the seasons Collingwood finished top of the ladder they scored more than most others, feck me it's a miracle, hardly!  ;)
The Force Awakens!

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #55 –
Quote from: LP on
Quote from: blue4life on
In Malthouse's last two seasons at Collingwood they were the second highest scoring team in 2010 and the highest in 2011, maybe Mick's "heavily defensive" game plan is a bit of an urban myth.

So the seasons Collingwood finished top of the ladder they scored more than most others, feck me it's a miracle, hardly!  ;)

St Kilda finished on top in 2009 and were the 4th highest scoring but in points against were 360 points behind their nearest rival, Lyon definitely has a defensive game plan.  ;)
The only thing in this world worth more than a hill of beans is the Carlton Football Club.

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #56 –
Even Malthouse says his gameplan is based around defence. Not sure what you're trying to say.
Ignorance is bliss.

ONWARDS AND UPWARDS!

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #57 –
Quote from: blue4life on
St Kilda finished on top in 2009 and were the 4th highest scoring but in points against were 360 points behind their nearest rival, Lyon definitely has a defensive game plan.  ;)

You are effectively arguing against your own points!
The Force Awakens!

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #58 –
Quote from: PassIt2Carrots on
Even Malthouse says his gameplan is based around defence. Not sure what you're trying to say.

Every good coach bases his game around defence, I can remember Yabby Jeans saying the same thing 30 years ago and when Parkin coached us to the flag in 1995 we were the second best defensive side in the league, in '87 and '82 we were the best.
Every Premiership team is built on a solid defence, it's nothing new.
Lyon is by far the most defensive coach in the AFL and he's gone close a couple of times, but no one remembers who came second.
Fremantle were the 13th highest scoring team in the AFL last season and played in the GF, but it could be argued that their inability to score cost them the game and the Premiership.
I don't see anything particularly negative in Malthouse's style and never have.
The only thing in this world worth more than a hill of beans is the Carlton Football Club.

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #59 –
Quote from: LP on
Quote from: blue4life on
St Kilda finished on top in 2009 and were the 4th highest scoring but in points against were 360 points behind their nearest rival, Lyon definitely has a defensive game plan.  ;)

You are effectively arguing against your own points!

How so?
I don't think Malthouse is any more defensive than any other successful coach of recent times, Lyon is much more defensive but so far he hasn't been successful.
As someone else here said, it seems that when we lose we can't play to his game plan or it doesn't suit our players, yet when we win it's because we abandoned the game plan and gave our players their heads.
If it was that simple I think Mick would have thought of it, he's many things but an idiot isn't one of them.
The only thing in this world worth more than a hill of beans is the Carlton Football Club.