Will it stand up?

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #30 – April 21, 2014, 07:04:24 pm

It was the old Essendon footy under Hird....attack, play on at all costs, get in front on the scoreboard and then hope you have the legs to hang on.....or in Curnows case..leg.

Doesnt hold up over a whole season as you run out of troops and the ones you have left get tired... then your skills drop off and you you take some real hammering's.

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #31 – April 21, 2014, 07:11:59 pm

Quote from: TheSheik – on April 21, 2014, 06:11:09 pm

http://www.carltonfc.com.au/video/2014-04-20/cfc-tv-malthouse-post-match-r5

During the post-match press conference, Malthouse was asked about the gameplan at 4:57 :

Reporter : "Did you tinker with the gameplan at all during the week or were you guys .... ? "

MM : "NO (talking over the reporter), not one inch".

Surely the players went into a different flight-plan for this match, it was way different to anything else we've seen this year ??

Mick doesn't always tell the truth

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #32 – April 21, 2014, 08:18:07 pm

If we can use a style of game plan that gets us the win and 4 points, then we are doing the right thing. We can use a different plan when the going gets a bit tough. I hear our tackle rate, intensity for the ball, for the opponent, and running hard was a key to our success in this game, and in any game in the past. If we can execute this strategy better, Mick will have an easier job culling the list to get us what we need quicker. If we carry lazy footballers, than it appears Mick needs to roll over the entire list.

Make his job easier, but making your workload stand out supporting an effort that benefits the entire team. Simple game plan. Not rocket science.

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #33 – April 21, 2014, 08:52:24 pm

Quote from: Gointocarlton – on April 21, 2014, 06:41:58 pm

@ Krudd RE Cause and Effect
But Krudd don't you think some of that was also caused by our increased run and spread this week? I felt we definitely ran a lot harder this week and created our own opportunities.

Watching the first 4 weeks of football this year, one thing has stood out to me and it has driven me mad. Disposal.
I have flashbacks from the first 4 weeks of us, usually Walker but sometimes Yarran, streaming through the middle of the ground (much like yesterday) and instead of hitting up a target, they kick directly to the opposition, who kick it back over our heads and usually goal from it.

Some of our kicks inboard to the centre in previous weeks have not hit their target, same result. Others have hit their target, but have made us stop and go back to get the kick, and thus lost our opportunity to continue with the thrust down the centre.

So to answer your question, i think we did run harder this week...i think we did everything harder this week. I think some of the players we had in the side allowed us to, veterans Carrazzo and Scotland didn't tire like kids such as Menzel and Buckley may have previously.

I also think, as mentioned above, that our kicking was much better this week.
We kicked 7.16 last week. 23 scoring shots to get 7 goals.
Yesterday it took us 10 scoring shots to kick 7 goals....we had 7.3 at 1/4 time.

I do think that we ran the bulldogs off their legs and they were unable to clog up the middle of the ground as much as they would've liked....and generally keep track of us.
- How many times did Murphy simply run away from a stoppage with Wallis struggling behind him?
- Why did the keep Wallis on him when he was obviously struggling to stay with him?
- Why did wallis continue to stay boundary side of him and allow him to run through to the centre of the ground?
- Why did they not clog up the centre corridor of the stoppages to help out Wallis and stop Murphy from running through there unopposed?

So...IMO the reasons we won this week as opposed to previously.
1. Overall, a fitter group of players out there.
2. Much better use of the ball all over the ground and in front of goal.
3. Dogs failing to stop us from using the corridor
4. An increased hunger across the players, a lift of 5% from each became infectious. So much so that it enabled us to withstand a last quarter without having much of a bench to play with.

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #34 – April 21, 2014, 09:16:21 pm

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.

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #35 – April 22, 2014, 08:49:21 am

Quote from: shadesy – on April 21, 2014, 03:17:00 pm

Absolutely kidding yourself if you never noticed the difference yesterday.

This ^^. There was a clear change in direction, players were allowed to run through the corridor into space and the ball carrier was directed to always look in board. You could tell from the start pretty sure I mentioned it about 5 minutes in.

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #36 – April 22, 2014, 09:22:48 am

Quote from: blue4life – on April 21, 2014, 09:16:21 pm

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.....

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #37 – April 22, 2014, 10:43:26 am

No difference in tactics. Whenever we win or play well people say we changed our tactics, when we lose it's Malthouse's bad game plan.

Do people believe in our first quarter of the year against Port Adelaide we didn't play to Mick's game plan? Turn it up.

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #38 – April 22, 2014, 10:50:28 am

Quote from: madbluboy – on April 22, 2014, 10:43:26 am

Do people believe in our first quarter of the year against Port Adelaide we didn't play to Mick's game plan? Turn it up.

Stood up for one quater, that should get us through the marathon that is the season.

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #39 – April 22, 2014, 10:55:14 am

Quote from: madbluboy – on April 22, 2014, 10:43:26 am

No difference in tactics. Whenever we win or play well people say we changed our tactics, when we lose it's Malthouse's bad game plan.

Do people believe in our first quarter of the year against Port Adelaide we didn't play to Mick's game plan? Turn it up.

Isn't that what Malthouse said himself about that game?

I recall him talking about, our good attack on the ball and our desire to compete as being very good, but we played nothing like the game plan! I think he alluded to as much in the FC Hot Seat session, he talked about being good for 3 out of 8 quarters but not adhering to the plan.

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #40 – April 22, 2014, 10:58:38 am

OK

Whenever we lose it's Malthouse's game plan, whenever we do well we're not playing his game plan.

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #41 – April 22, 2014, 11:01:05 am

Quote from: madbluboy – on April 22, 2014, 10:58:38 am

OK

Whenever we lose it's Malthouse's game plan, whenever we do well we're not playing his game plan.

It's OK to deride us if you like, I suppose it makes you feel better about things.

But these are comments coming from Malthouse himself, either in TV interviews, post match conferences or on radio! Even on Sunday evening on one of the post match radio grabs he made a similar comment. He said something like our desire, work rate, contests were all much better but.....!

You cannot seriously think that any AFL coach will accept that open style of game, even though it suits our list, have a watch of the losing coaches post match interview to get some perspective.

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #42 – April 22, 2014, 11:25:00 am

Quote from: madbluboy – on April 22, 2014, 10:58:38 am

OK

Whenever we lose it's Malthouse's game plan, whenever we do well we're not playing his game plan.

No at all, it has to be the coach's game plan, but on this occasion it didn't look like the heavy defensive, boundary game plan that he says has served him well for 30 years. Blind Freddie can see that the style was different on Sunday. Kudos to Mick for changing things up and managing to get the team up for a game. He obviously had to change something after the previous 4 weeks.

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #43 – April 22, 2014, 11:32:27 am

Quote from: madbluboy – on April 22, 2014, 10:58:38 am

OK

Whenever we lose it's Malthouse's game plan, whenever we do well we're not playing his game plan.

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.

Re: Will it stand up?

Reply #44 – April 22, 2014, 11:41:20 am

Quote from: madbluboy – on April 22, 2014, 10:43:26 am

No difference in tactics. Whenever we win or play well people say we changed our tactics, when we lose it's Malthouse's bad game plan.

Do people believe in our first quarter of the year against Port Adelaide we didn't play to Mick's game plan? Turn it up.

Nope, I don't believe that. The first quarter against Port Adelaide was as good a quarter as I have seen, and had Mick Malthouse all over it. I was very excite. Yet we couldn't convert enough early shooting from the pockets and the players fell into old habits. From there, we have lost our drive and flair which makes us a good football side.

Combine the Port First Quarter with the run and carry from Bulldogs and we have a makings of a very good football side. it took Mick 5 rounds last year to tinker (FACT) and it may be the same this year.

MBB you believe the game style played in the first quarter against Port and the Bulldogs game were the same?