very important out. He's not great but thats a bit of run off half back that they miss and he's also one of those solid but unspectacular triers in the nic Newman mould.
I'm pretty sure that it was Brad Scott, while on his sabbatical with the AFL, who explained that AFL coaches can do little to change the course of a game. He made it clear that games are won and lost in the week leading up to the game when tactics and match ups are decided. The introduction of the 6-6-6 rule and restrictions on runners have made it even harder for coaches to influence the outcome of games by positional or tactical changes made during the game. Of course, if the coach doesn't have the cattle, or the cattle are out of sorts, nothing the coach can do will affect the outcome.
Winning games of footy starts in the off season when the coaches review what did and didn't work in the previous season and adjust the game plan, structures and personnel accordingly The fine tuning for each particular opponent is critical, get the match ups and tactics wrong and there's no coming back.
Before and during the game, the coaches focus on getting the right balance between arousal and anxiety, reinforcing good play and correcting errors. Half time gives the line coaches and the players the opportunity to clarify structures and roles and, from time to time, adjust match ups. Rousing speeches, sprays, changing the game plan, and moving the magnets aren't part of the process.
Vossy's coaching hasn't been picked apart but we did get hammered by a much better team and we've lost some close ones that could have gone either way. Vossy's knowledge of Port Adelaide from four seasons ago would have played little part in our preparation for the game. Our opposition analysts would have provided much better information about Port's current game style and that would have formed the basis for our tactics and match ups.
Then there's the selection moves that work out and give us an advantage that may fly under the opposition radar; Williams to defensive half forward, Cincotta to run with midfielder and Cowan to half back.
Im inclined to mark the Sydney week as a week where illness may have effected the whole squad.
We haven't played collectively that bad in a long time for such a long period in one match.
Coaching might play a part in that, but is anyone truly surprised to see Sydney with John Longmire in charge from Paul Roos before him with a continuity of message, method, and the capability of handpicking players to play the way he likes during that tenure, much more well drilled than the schitzophrenic approach to player and management that has existed at Carlton?
There is a strong positive correlation between coaches in charge at clubs and their clubs performance over time. The ones that have changed coaches more, have suffered from poor coaches, and poor structures, and its arguable that they may not have performed as badly with less chopping and changing.
^^ Its not all doom and gloom, but suggesting that the ones in the ones currently deserve to go out based on what they dont do, based on what else is there, is a bit fanciful. They need form, fitness, and in some cases to build the ability to compete at VFL level before thinking about AFL footy. How many times do we moan about making an opponents kid a superstar? None of ours are showing that sort of capability at the minute. Thats fine, it means they arent ready for the step up. Mohr did show a little bit, but they all flashed in and out of the game. Dropping an AFL hardened competitor for one of these kids at this stage of their development is likely to break their confidence and send them backwards.
I dont want them in because it will likely break them not because they couldnt play. You would have to know their fortitude and faculties rather than anything else to know for sure.
Reality is the Bullants are very ordinary but they still had more standout players imho. eg The big kid Elliott , son of Matthew the cricketer is clearly AFL bound and looks to have more potential than Lemmey, McMahon etc. I thought our VFL players were better than the AFL players with the exception of Carroll who played wide of his opponents and got plenty of ball but for some reason I remain 50/50 on his future as a senior player.
Jorgensen was very impressive, as was Cahill and Ramshaw too. Lemmey wasnt terrible, but again, given the quality of opponent should have been well on top. Mirkov would be the only one who could potentially give us something at AFL level because he is an awkward size and shape, but I would rather see him against a mason cox than anyone else in the AFL.
I cant say I saw how the game played out, but funny how Gold Coast get a bit of umpiring leeway. Its almost like the AFL has a vested interest in them being successful.
You know, I'm not against anyone getting a game anywhere at any time, but in the VFL the bullants vs the blues was the equivalent of West Coast or the current Richmond seniors vs North Melbourne. Both teams have 1 win for the year.
The AFL listed players (all of them) were borderline competitive at this level and guys like Cahill, Ramshaw, Jean-Luc Vellissaris, McMahon were the ones who were the better of the lot playing.
Carroll the only one truly knocking on the door and even he wasnt above the standard.
there's a strong 4 goal wind going that way. When the blues had it second quarter we kicked 1 goal 6, so it's doable. That last kick by McMahon would have been handy.
If I didn't know who was an afl player and who wasn't you'd be looking at cahill, Carroll, ramshaw and maybe lemmy if we needed a tall, but McMahon ahead of him if we didn't need a ruck.
Biggest concerns is that our boys don't seem to like the contest and most of our afl boys don't look like being consistent over 4 quarters at this level aside from Carroll. Unless we have an injury. We shouldn't be making changes next week.
It seems one of those accepted truths in AFL that a whole-of-club positive trajectory is an important component of success for the seniors. If so, we've got a way to go with the VFL team. They seem to be going backwards.
as much as this might be true, a lack of continuity and injury issue in the ones has the flow on effect in the twos. It's also a 4 goal southerly blowing according to the commentary team which favoured the ballasts first quarter. We'll see how the second goes I reckon which might give us an indicator.
People saying his pace won't come back or his performance won't lift, we've seen this before. We got a busted up daisy Thomas for a few years. His last couple of years better than his first couple. Orazio has been here for not long. He's doing some deep running and providing some leadership in the absence of other options. When they come back he may not get a game in these roles.
Or he might. Don't judge people on what they aren't providing look at what they do. He's rarely wasteful with his possessions. He brings others into the game. He does some deep running.
He is playing a peripheral role. He's missed a lot of footy in recent seasons and he's making others earn a spot. That's not bad for the team. Some might have a subjective opinion on his worth relative to others but we aren't there 100% of the time. Pretty sure he wont be on huge dollars either, so in the event we lose another small and he actually starts playing like the orazio of old we might get a win. We don't know what mentality he provides to others too. There are intangibles in games.
At least he'd not missing half a season like another 5 or so on the list who should be playing his role and thats worth remembering when bagging him.
