Have you taken a breath yet? The players were certainly struggling for them at different stages during a high-intensity Round 1 of AFL football that was often times exhilarating in its execution.
The talk around town during the off-season was of clubs looking to adopt the attacking attitudes, if not the game styles, of Hawthorn and Port for 2015, or at least mimic them to the extent that the player groups at each respective club could handle.
Fast footy was going to be on the menu this season, and we saw the evidence of it immediately over the weekend.
Instantly playing on after a mark or free kick was very much to the fore. 45-degree kicks inboard, which are the most effective in breaking the lines, were commonplace.
Melbourne was almost unwatchable at times last year despite, or perhaps because of, Paul Roos adding more defensive steel to their game plan. With over a third of the side represented by players making their debut for the club, including noted runner Heritier Lumumba and speedster Jeff Garlett, the Demons were bold and thrilling in style, piecing together electrifying passages of play.
It didn’t hurt that they had the much anticipated Jesse Hogan as a focal point up forward. He took four contested marks on his own in his first AFL game. Essendon as a team only took two. The Dogs took five. Even Port only took six.
Adelaide left North shell-shocked with the ferocity of their attack on the ball, and the swift manner of their execution. In fact, execution is the right word. It was as brutal and efficient as a mob hit.
Every Crow player had his head on a swivel whenever winning the ball in a mark or free-kick situation.
Saving three or four seconds when making a decision with ball in hand is critical on a football field. An AFL player can cover 25 to 30 metres in that time to cover off a man or guard the space in front of a dangerous leading option.
It’s reasonable to assume the Crows have been trained and coached to attune themselves to every quick movement opportunity, and save those valuable seconds. Phil Walsh has had an impact.
Of course, we saw sides play themselves on into trouble by acting first and thinking later, but this is no bad thing. Better to learn on the run than not to try it at all.
Being quick of mind is what allows you to be quick of hand or foot, and we need look no further than Hawthorn for the perfect balance.
Hawks players are ever aware of what’s around them before the ball comes their way, and teammates are already moving into position up ahead of the immediate play, because they are all masters at reading what’s going to unfold. This allows them to only need a split second to assess what’s happening around them once the ball arrives, and then make the right decision in this time.
Awareness is one of the most important skills in football. We marvel at the likes of Gary Ablett and Scott Pendlebury when they effortlessly display it. Hawthorn has a team full of those blessed with it.
It will be an even more important trait from this point on, with the new rule change allowing players less time to dispose of the ball once they’ve had an opportunity. Across the weekend we saw many players take on one tackler, but get nailed by a second, losing the ball and costing their team.
Fast footy is what we want, and it looks like fast footy is what we’ll get.
But this isn’t just about speed by foot, racing on top of the ground. More important is speed of mind.
And from the look of it, it will be yet another area that Hawthorn will gain a competitive advantage over the competition. And that is a scary thought.
Doc Disnick
Roar Guru
The short answer to that Don is a bit of both. However, you know me, I rarely go with the short answer :) I'll make it clear here again, I'm not a big fan of Chris Scott or his brother Brad. I think Chris is a nice guy and he talks well, but I don't think he has evolved the Cats one bit past where Bomber had them. Bomber was tired in 2010 and you could tell that, and when Scott came in he added that glossy new feel to the club, but he didn't really change much. He even admitted himself that he felt uncomfortable in the first year and he backed a lot of the senior players. Well 4 years have past and now he needs to earn his money. I'm not convinced. I also think this is a good opportunity for me to further explain the differences in some defences, which ironically is quite relevant to ouor previous discussion here. Cast your mind back to 2007 and the Cats were one of the most formidable outfit to ever play AFL. I did a statical analysis of all the teams for the past 25 years when it comes to being offensive and defensive and remarkable the Cats in this year were PERFECTLY in balance. The chances of a team being equal in their points 'for' & 'agaist' relative to the league scoring average is well...improable, but that's exactly what they were. Despite having one of the most impressive attacks, it was their unbelievable defence which was loaded with talent. It was not as systems based defence, it was a pure back-six defence, much like the Swans also. What this allowed was fast attacking football through the corridor and should a turn over occur then the back six was capable of saving the day. Now this is vastly different to Freo's defence, because they don't two way run like Hawthorn or the Cats use to and play less risky football. As such your back six don't need to be as good. Now I'm not saying your back six aren't great, but you can't justify them as individuals as being better due to this. I'll use this scenario to make my point clearer: If you run a drill involving a forward attack coming out of defence unopposed, then the Cats most likely at their best would be able to counter an attack more affectively than Freo's defence. The Swans last year were the best at it, as statically they mitigated against turn overs the best of any club. This is a very powerful stat, because turn overs account for nearly 1/3 of all scores, so if you can mitigate against it then defensively you are a powerful unit. The back-six save the day basically in one-on-one contests or as a collective back-six unit. Now same scenario, but this time the attack is coming out of of defence under pressure. The Cats are next to useless at this now, the Swans quite good but do you know who is the best at this? You guessed it, Freo are the HARDEST team to score against coming out of the back 50. All round ground defence Freo are supreme. A lot of the time a teams attack has either been completely stopped, to stifled allowing more time for the defence to set itself. If not then at the very least the counter attacking teams offence is coming into the forward 50 usually with less precision due to the enormous pressure it is under. That's the big difference at the moment and the Cats I believe made a mistake in their recruiting to some extent. I like the acquisition of Clark for some reasons, but here is the big problem with getting him, which I don't believe anyone in the media has mentioned. The Cats are the tallest team in the competition by a fair margin, and this has one significant disadvantage. Should the ball go to ground in your forward 50, it is much harder to keep it in your forward 50. If you don't have the back-six to counter this then you are asking for trouble. This happened all-day long against Hawthorn, add poor inside pressure and lack of class on the outside and you are bound to get flogged. In comparison Freo have probably the best collective small forward line in the game. This has it's disadvantages also, but it's also probably the reason why their offensive press is so effective and why it's so hard to transition against, thus taking the pressure off the back-six. Like I said, the short answer is I believe the Cats are in trouble. They most likely will be top 8, but only just. Your boys are more likely to win the premiership along with Port. Swans maybe, and I tipped the Crows as finishing 6th, but they have the potential to win the flag. I like them and the reason for this is the Crows have six elite rated players, second only to the Hawks with 8. Their top 22 in my opinion is top 4 material, but you have to question their depth. Should they have minimal injuries like Port had last year then perhaps they are a change. Everyone else is playing for podium positions I'm afraid.
Don Freo
Guest
Rick, just on your Cats... Did Hawthorn look so good because the Cats were so bad or did The Cats look so bad because Hawthorn were so good?
Balthazar
Guest
What you say makes sense but then again look again at my post of 7/4 at 2.26pm. Your analysis should, in my view, take into account the lack of output from Gumby, Walters, Mayne (Mayne, 39 and 37 goals in previous 2 years down to 13 and Son Son 46 goals down to 15), along with Zac Carke with a stuffed knee. We didn't have other forwards to look to - although Tabs came on towards the end of the year - so Freo's relative increase in scoring is actually quite reasonable. Proof in the pudding is if we go better this year. I think we will, and I think a forward set up of Pav, Ballas, Tabs, Mayne and a rotating Walters/Crozier/Fyfe looks much better on paper than last year's structure. Also Pav and Fyfe will rotate a bit. If they kick straight. Another factor is that Neale has improved his output. Better Cattle, as I say!
Dalgety Carrington
Roar Guru
You obviously love micro-analysis Rick, but I think you get a little lost from the starting point when you go out on a long searching run of analysis. Sure there are different types of physiological conditioning that will suit different types of physical activities, but I think the detail of how you get the maximum out of both speed and endurance for the playing group is different from getting the mix right along with everything else. Port probably devoted more time to that than everyone else over the past 2 (pre)seasons and so was able to establish a better fitness base (however well it was tailored to their game) than Fremantle (however well that was suited to the old world, although having watched them closely they definitely struggled towards the end of games and especially after 6 day breaks last year). We'll see if a different approach over the pre-season just gone will give them a new gear as the year goes on.
Doc Disnick
Roar Guru
"Of course clubs use data but they would never use them as you do…a superficial reading where you pick out random data to support an already formulated theory." I'll remind you again of this statement Don. That's an argument, but I think I have made my point. Whether you want to accept it is irrelevant at this stage. Macca - it's not about giving up on anything. I'm always happy to have a conversation with anyone on this site, including Don :) I actually enjoy blasting away on my keyboard when I get some spare time at work. Keeps the brain ticking over and it's always great to talk about the AFL.
Don Freo
Guest
Macca, I don't think Rick is going to pal up with you....two slightly different levels of conversation there.
Don Freo
Guest
Can't say I recognise any of those excuses. Injuries cost us against Port. The only excuse.
Macca
Guest
Rick - Give up - When discussing anything with Don you always need to remember he doesn't like stats because they can demonstrate his opinion is wrong and he will never answer a question that will allow his opinion to be demonstrated to be wrong. Also Rick on predictions I think Don predicted Carlton to be bottom without winning a game (definitely) and Adelaide (could be wrong on this) to be bottom 2.
Don Freo
Guest
Maybe you should stop looking for an argument. I am not arguing anything. I am saying that football is far more organic than you try to make it. It is not the academic exercise you try to reduce it to
Doc Disnick
Roar Guru
"Of course clubs use data but they would never use them as you do…a superficial reading where you pick out random data to support an already formulated theory." It's funny this, because there is a saying that goes like this in most research institutions and universities around the world: "All research proves is what we already knew" Most research is started formulating a null hypothesis in order to directly advance a theory. For research to be credible, it needs to be backed up with solid statistical data and sound analysis. What I have done is partially used 'observation' to come to my conclusions about the way Freo play. After purchasing the 2015 AFL Prospectus for the first time, I was not so shocked to read my theories are very much in align with their writers opinions based on solid statistical data. Now considering you have accused me of picking out 'random' data to support an already formulated theory...well you are basically saying the same thing of Champion Data (who are the authors of this book) of doing the same thing. After all, much of what I have said comes from this very book. It just happens to be similar to what I theorised last year based on 'observation', common sense and most importantly listening to other experts within the realms of the AFL. I asked you two very simple questions, because I wanted to give some clarity to this discussion. You made a statement that Freo are good defensively, not because of Lyon's game plan, but rather they have very, very, very good defenders. To challenge this I used an example from a very credible program in AFL-360, instead if just relying on statistics. I referred to Bob Murphy's experience from last year who gave an excellent in site on their prematch preparation. Instead of taking this bit of information on board, you decided to mock a very good player who is now an AFL captain no less. Sure, the Bulldogs are not the best team and nowhere near the class of Fremantle at this stage, but to belittle a player of Murphy's quality I don't think helps your argument. I will also inform you that Robert Murphy was rated in the top 10 percent for his position as a generalist defender. This classifies him as elite compared to all the other players you mentioned who play similar roles. "There is no way Ross, Summa, Kirky,Lloydy and Matty Prior are going to cede their natural knowledge, observation and perception, making that subservient to a collection of data." No one is suggesting that people like Lyon become slaves to RAW data alone. This is a confused statement, because you have mentioned also that 'of course clubs' use data. I'm not sure what you trying to argue here, because in one instance you are agreeing with me and the next you are trying to argue they don't. It's a tool Don and no one solely relies just on data alone to formulate game plans. It is, however, a very powerful tool in helping one understand how other teams potentially play, whilst providing valuable in-house data. "Remember how many times David King applied for coaching jobs. He was rejected because the statistical party trick wasn’t enough." You know that for a fact do you Don? I'll leave the negative comments about an unproven coach to you Don. I will add that Ken Hinkley was also rejected numerous times before being appointed as the Power's coach and look at him now. King is still quite young so he may very well one day become a coach and a good one to boot. I think passing judgement like the way you have, again does not help your argument, particularly when is has zero to no relevance. "Kingy has found his place on the world…feeding footy fans with data…the footy fans who are not confident in their own feel for the game." I'm pretty confident in how I see the AFL Don. Last year I was one of the first to pick up on Clarko's rotational system. I even wrote an article last year on this very site called "Clarko's Chaos Theory' the week before the GF. Whilst most pundits and people in this site were talking up Sydney's chances, I was one of the few who confidently tipped them. Not only did I tip them, but I gave a pretty good analysis on how I thought they were going to win. It's funny how this year everyone is now talking about the versatility of the Hawks. Did I use stats to come up with this theory? No, but I now have plenty of stats to back it up though :) It's all fair game to use 'observation' and passion to come up with an argument Don. Unfortunately you have to sometimes be right more often than you are wrong in order to be taken seriously. I believe you tipped 1 ot of 9 games in the finals last year Don. Correct me if I'm wrong there. You have also freely admitted that the Docker's have had the best list for the past 3 seasons, yet when questioned as to why no Flag has been won you fall back to some pretty ordinary excuses such as: 2013 GF: Poor kicking cost us. 2012 cost the Hawks possibly a premiership also. However, in 2013 they kicked straight and corrected this deficiency. 2014 Elimination Final first half: Poor kicking in the first half cost us. Same old mistakes, poor kicking is poor football I'm afraid. Enough of the past, because I know you much prefer being positive and looking to the future. You have tipped I believe the Suns, North Eagles and Dockers to finish in the top 4, with Sydney, Hawks, Power to finish either just inside the 8 or outside it. You have also tipped Melbourne to be a smokey for making the 8 also. The Dockers are also going to finish 2-3 games clear at the top. Pavlich is going to win the Coleman and kick 100+ goals this year also just to round things out. Interesting indeed. Understand one thing though Don. If you do get some of that right, such as the D's making the finals, it won't be seen as awesome tipping. People will remember all the other things you potentially get wrong this year, just like I have remembered from last year. Always happy to discuss football with you Don.
Doc Disnick
Roar Guru
Can't argue with any of that Balt. All very good points. The complexities of the game are getting greater by the year. I think Ross and Clarko have the two most complex game plans in the AFL, yet they are polar opposites of each other. Ross wants to become more offensive relative to the competition and close the gap to the pack leaders in Hawthorn. For me though the proof is in the pudding and there is no easier way to judge whether this is the case than using points 'for' and 'against'. How they achieve this 'for' and 'against' ratio we can debate all day long, but you can't argue it relative to the pack leaders who you are trying to beat. If this is the case then we should see a spike in this very objective metric. If not then Rosco has failed yet again in this KPI, and I say failed harshly, because he is the one that has set this objective upon his team. Ryan made a very good point a few weeks ago that Freo has indeed increased in this metric relative to the competition. Where I don't agree with this though is that they didn't close the gap enough to the likes of Sydney, Port and Hawthorn. It's all fair and well to increase across the base average due to most scores being down last year, but that's kind of pointless if the premiers are moving away from this trend. No one remembers second place and people certainly don't remember 6th place, which is where the Dockers ended up last year. Don't get me wrong either, I don't think Rosco needs to change that much. I like his ability to counter attack and I think he has the best options available to 'Power Play' the Hawks. What he needs to figure out is a way to stifle the Hawks ability to change the tempo of the game as you mentioned. This is not an easy task, but were I think Freo can significantly improve in is their ability to pile on the goals when they are on top. David Parkin (a great coach in my opinion) always held the belief that you score when you are on top and you defend when the other team is hot. If you can put score board pressure on when it counts, and mitigate when you are not - you generally win. An opposition can control the game for as long as they like, but if they don't get this balance right then they open themselves up to bad losses. I think we can both agree Freo have fallen prey to this scenario far too often over the past few years. Freo absorb pressure very well, but they don't punish oppositions enough when they are on top. I don't think it's about increasing scoring consistency across 4-quarters when it comes to your boys. I think they just need to score more heavily in 10 minute patches, which is very different to what I would say about many other teams. I hope that makes sense
Balthazar
Guest
I think you misunderstood me. All I was saying was that Port were chipping the ball around a lot more than last year to control tempo. I agree they were also manning up more - this has definitely improved. Yes, the Hawks use impeccable ball use rather than running but they are the masters at controlling tempo. They just do it by "keeping off", which was the intent of the chip around game by Port. I also didn't mention Hawks and inside pressure. However, as for beating up the Swans, Clarko watched what Freo did to them on the inside in the previous year's finals. Freo is playing a very different game this year, I think (agreeing with Ryan). There's a very interesting interview with Ros son SEN where he explained that the fairly constant positional rotations (which were foreshadowed on here pre-season) were to allow Mundy, Pav et al to operate more as burst players. They almost never rotated positions last year. Back to my theme, this will work better when they add a couple more skilled players into the team in the coming weeks I think a few Port players would have been pretty surprised that they were being chased down when they decided to gut run the ball down the field.
Jack Smith
Roar Guru
Agree it is a bit of an issue.
Tim Holt
Roar Guru
Macca./AR, very true on both counts. I think for me, a rivalry is about a legacy left, usually through real heartache being felt. So as a Hawks fan, i have never felt this in regards to Geelong. Sure, plenty of frustration in the recent run, but no killer blow. I think from a Cats fan perspective there is that heart ache for we have broken their hearts over and over since back in the 80's. Just think of these games 87- Last game in H&A where we were well down in the last, but come back to beat them to deny them a place in the finals -89 H&A, they were up by 50 odd points early in the third, only for us to come back and beat them - 89 GF- needs no explanation - 91 Semi Final- once more a heartbreaker for them Factor in the constant 'handbag' taunts that we gave to them in this period, and they HATED us On to now: 08 Gf- Needs no explaining 13 Prelim- Once more we pull the rug from them. Real legacy for them. It is like for me when I think of Carlton after we left Glenferrie after 73, and all involved with them made it very clear how unwelcome we were at PP. Matches between them were always heated, and till now I still cannot stand them OR Essendon, the 84 GF, Sheedy demeaning Yabby Jeans, plus many killer blows from them And recently Sydney
Don Freo
Guest
I know you said these things last year.. You say them all the time. That's why I say, " One day, a non-Freo person might look and..." Of course clubs use data but they would never use them as you do...a superficial reading where you pick out random data to support an already formulated theory. There is no way Ross, Summa, Kirky,Lloydy and Matty Prior are going to cede their natural knowledge, observation and perception, making that subservient to a collection of data. Remember how many times David King applied for coaching jobs. He was rejected because the statistical party trick wasn't enough. Kingy has found his place on the world...feeding footy fans with data...the footy fans who are not confident in their own feel for the game. McPharlin, Dawson and Johnson are rarely beaten and, when they play together, are never beaten. That's observation.
Doc Disnick
Roar Guru
"It sounds like you are as confused as Bob Murphy. Who wouldn’t be?" Not really Don. I said these very things last year on numerous threads. The only difference this time is I've spouted out last years statistical data to back it up. BTW, every club uses this data as a valuable tool in order to determine KPI. You are of course entitled to back your opinion up with speculation, hopes and dreams. Some of us, however, prefer to be a little more precise. I hope you can at least appreciate that and the effort I put into explaining this to you.
Don Freo
Guest
I certainly don't use or value champion data. I glance at data on AFL.Com...no idea where to even find Champion Data. I'm sure Google will find it for me but there is never any need to find it. I use elite in the context of its natural meaning. They are the best at what they do. You tell me the last person to beat McPharlin...and when. If he has ever been outplayed it would be only once or twice in 7 years. He is possibly the best ever key defender...certainly the most reliable. I certainly believe you over complicate things. It sounds like you are as confused as Bob Murphy. Who wouldn't be? McCartney and Murphy didn't need to find a plan. They just needed to look at team line ups and realize Freo was going to beat them because Freo was better.
Steele
Guest
Agreed Macca, almost everyone saw this coming. It's that debate from the players perspective of restraint of trade versus an even healthy competition. More player movement makes the off season period more exciting, but you look at Hawthorns list and there are so many quality players picked off from other clubs.
Doc Disnick
Roar Guru
Balt The Hawks are a completely different beast all together. They break the offensive press of both Fremantle and the Swans by kicking with precision to the gaps. In my opinion you have one of three options then: 1. Flood back and go ultra defensive. This probably won't work even with the best defenders against the Hawks since they can hit targets inside 50 with supreme accuracy. It would also lead to the Hawks controlling the back-of-centre corridor, which would end in disaster most likely on the score board. 2. Man-up. Port did this the against Freo and employed a little trick I have not seen for about 20 years. One of the commentators was onto it and referred to it as a line-out. Basically you run a line about 20-30 metres out from the boundary at stoppages and kick-ins. Players then break in either direction opening the field of play up again along this 100 metre line. Clarko deployed something similar in 2008, which became better known as Clarko's Cluster, but I have not seen it deployed like this for a while. 3. Anaerobically bust them up. The Hawks to not carry the ball, they kick it. A ball travels faster in the air than by foot. The down side is you need people who can kick and who can mark. It also carries a heavy risk if intercepted. Running with the ball also carries risks, but the Hawks can't have it both ways. Sure they are fit, but they are not as fit as Freo or the Power, I'll bet my left *** on that. The Hawks are not an inside pressure team at all. I still don't understand why people believe this. They were ranked number 5 last year in this department, but ranked number one for outside ball movement. Even Chris Scott said this was not the area that got beaten in, it was the HAwks outside ball use in open play that killed them. Sure, in the final they beat the Swans up on the inside. I don't think the Swans can explain this and if they can't then I'm certainly not going to try here. I personally think that like all GF, everyone starts out contesting the ball, I just don't think Clarko could quite believe he was beating the Swans so easily so it kept going with his B-plan. I know that sounds ludicrous, but I actually think they won with their B-plan and all the stats back me up if you take the time to analyse it in detail. What I do know is Clark is very clever at deploying a 30 metre perimeter around most stoppages. This makes it very difficult for teams to get the ball into open play and the Hawks can then punish teams heavily on any turn overs in open play themselves. If you run the ball out of the stoppages though, this changes this dynamic completely and allows you to then either go round or over the top of it, which is how Mick's offensive press was finally defeated in 2011 by the Cats.
InvisiblePJs
Roar Rookie
Maybe it would work better if the top 4 teams in any season (i.e., the teams which contest the preliminary finals) were excluded from recruiting through free agency? To me, although I can understand the viewpoint of players getting a chance to play in a successful team, it seems these 'successful' teams don't seem to be changing! The free agency system completely undermines the concept of a draft to even out the competition.