 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Magpietothemax 
magpietothemax
Joined: 27 Apr 2013
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
I've been following this debate about the role and impact of the coach very closely for the last few weeks. On one extreme, we have the position that the coach has almost no impact on gameday, and the players are responsible for poor execution and skill errors. The coach cannot be held responsible for these. On the other hand, we hear the opposite extreme: that the coach is responsible for absolutely every stuff up.
As in most discussions of this type, the truth certainly lies in between. Coaches can have some impact on game day by responding to what the opposition is doing well by trying to limit it. Evidence for this is provided frequently. However, it is also true that if our players make wrong decisions, or fail to hit targets, or simply don't run hard enough, this is clearly the responsiblity of the players.
However, I think it must be viewed globally, as an entire picture. The coaching staff provides the overall landscape, and the players on game day execute the details. Afterall, what is the coach's role otherwise? So all our preseason training, game plan development and drills, etc, should be the backdrop and essential preparation against which the details are filled in on game day.
To me, it looks like this landscape is far too incoherent. We play around the boundary, backwards, sideways....Until we hit the corridor, when we win a couple of games....and then when our opponents plan for this and block the corridor, we have no prepared or drilled plan but to revert to the sideways, backwards transition, which erodes confidence and inevitably produces skill errors.
At the moment, it seems that we can only execute our skills if we are allowed to.
No doubt, partly the players, but in my mind clearly also the coaching regime.
Look at Bolton at Carlton. Surely their list is not better than ours?? But they are playing cohesive, inspired footy.
I cannot shy away from the conclusion that our coaching is below par. |
|
|
|
 |
watt price tully 
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
As usual a combination of factors resulted in the disappointing game and result today. Not just the players but the coaching too was to blame.
1. Anyone with half a brain saw Hodge control the backline & the first point of rebound attack. Did the coach have any strategies and tactics to deal with this? Sadly no. Greenwood ought to have tagged him.
2. The fact we kept going sideways as an almost intuitive response when have the ball. This happens through practice & repetition that is, training. This element is exacerbated when players are injured and newer players come into the team - less time to gel
3. Coach v coach: Clarkson learnt a lot from 6 weeks ago, Bucks didn't. Clarkson knew how to apply pressure in the clearances from the last time we played them. (Smith played a great game last time but dropped this week)
4. We need Varcoe's hardness & run off the HBF which would allow Crisp to play higher up the field than deep in the backline. It wasn't great coaching to have Maynard so far away from the play a fair bit of the time.
5. As had been noted the players missed opportunities & had a lot of unforced errors as well as forced errors. That was Howe's worst game & Pendlebury had a shocker.
Summary:
The loss is a combination of player & coaching input:
* To suggest it's just the players is utter denialism about the coaches role and is plain ill informed if not dumb
* To suggest it's all Buck's fault is sheer stupidity as the players are the ones today who failed big-time in skill execution & as usual stupid decison-making. The fact that stupid decision making continues as this week showed is not the only time this occurs reflects poorly in the first instance on the players but also reflects negatively on the coach.
** To suggest it's not a combination of many factors is being ridiculous as it is self evident as it is obvious.
Now to appoint Moore-Trealoar & thomsoc as joint coaches and lovers.
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
inxs88
Joined: 17 Aug 2014
|
| Post subject: | |
|
It's all "white noise" people. We are simply not good enough! Everything else is purely academic.
_________________
I love the Pies, hate Carlscum |
|
|
|
|
mooretreloar
Joined: 21 Sep 2016
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| watt price tully wrote: | As usual a combination of factors resulted in the disappointing game and result today. Not just the players but the coaching too was to blame.
1. Anyone with half a brain saw Hodge control the backline & the first point of rebound attack. Did the coach have any strategies and tactics to deal with this? Sadly no. Greenwood ought to have tagged him.
2. The fact we kept going sideways as an almost intuitive response when have the ball. This happens through practice & repetition that is, training. This element is exacerbated when players are injured and newer players come into the team - less time to gel
3. Coach v coach: Clarkson learnt a lot from 6 weeks ago, Bucks didn't. Clarkson knew how to apply pressure in the clearances from the last time we played them. (Smith played a great game last time but dropped this week)
4. We need Varcoe's hardness & run off the HBF which would allow Crisp to play higher up the field than deep in the backline. It wasn't great coaching to have Maynard so far away from the play a fair bit of the time.
5. As had been noted the players missed opportunities & had a lot of unforced errors as well as forced errors. That was Howe's worst game & Pendlebury had a shocker.
Summary:
The loss is a combination of player & coaching input:
* To suggest it's just the players is utter denialism about the coaches role and is plain ill informed if not dumb
* To suggest it's all Buck's fault is sheer stupidity as the players are the ones today who failed big-time in skill execution & as usual stupid decison-making. The fact that stupid decision making continues as this week showed is not the only time this occurs reflects poorly in the first instance on the players but also reflects negatively on the coach.
** To suggest it's not a combination of many factors is being ridiculous as it is self evident as it is obvious.
Now to appoint Moore-Trealoar & thomsoc as joint coaches and lovers. |
Smith was injured, hamstring tightness, so not dropped.
To suggest that a coach is responsible for skill errors and poor decisions shows that a poster has not played sport even at a basic level. It is ill-informed and is also just plain dumb. Skill errors and poor decision making is the reason we lost today, plain and simple and it is the reason we have lost 7 of our 9 games this season. At least 3/4's of their goals today came from our skill errors or poor decisions.
The coaching group's job is to provide the players with the information to put them in a position to win the game. The coaching group delivered this today and have done so each and every week in 2017. In 7 of our 9 losses, our players let the coaching group down by executing their skills poorly and making dumb decisions. The other two losses the opposition were better than us on the day.
If the coaching group were not doing their job we would consistently be losing by 10 goals +.
Last edited by mooretreloar on Mon Jul 03, 2017 12:00 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
Magpietothemax
magpietothemax
Joined: 27 Apr 2013
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| inxs88 wrote: | | It's all "white noise" people. We are simply not good enough! Everything else is purely academic. |
Sorry INXS, but your comment is "white noise". There is no need to "Mystify".
We need to analyse why we are not performing up to speed. That is the issue for every Pies' supporter. |
|
|
|
|
Magpietothemax
magpietothemax
Joined: 27 Apr 2013
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| mooretreloar wrote: | [
The coaching group's job is to provide the players with the information to put them in a position to win the game. The coaching group delivered this today and have done so each and every week in 2017. In 7 of our 9 losses, our players let the coaching group down by executing their skills poorly and making dumb decisions. The other two losses the opposition were better than us on the day.
If the coaching group were not doing their job we would consistently be losing by 10 goals +. |
Dear MT
Can you please explain to me what you mena by "providing information to put us in a position to win the game". I heard Michael Hurley on the radio today explaining how he has become a star defender. He explained that he "wasn't going to give away Essendon's defensive plan and structures", but suffice it to say that they were instructed and drilled on the positions they needed to take in order to be able to play with aggression out of defence.
He was directly attributing to the coaching regime and the drilled practice their new system in defence.
I have not played high level sport, so I don't presume to know.
However, I think that the "information" that the team needs to execute is contained to a significant extent in precisely this drilled practice and assimilation by the players of what they are aiming to achieve. This is what I do not see happening with us. |
|
|
|
|
mooretreloar
Joined: 21 Sep 2016
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Magpietothemax wrote: | I've been following this debate about the role and impact of the coach very closely for the last few weeks. On one extreme, we have the position that the coach has almost no impact on gameday, and the players are responsible for poor execution and skill errors. The coach cannot be held responsible for these. On the other hand, we hear the opposite extreme: that the coach is responsible for absolutely every stuff up.
As in most discussions of this type, the truth certainly lies in between. Coaches can have some impact on game day by responding to what the opposition is doing well by trying to limit it. Evidence for this is provided frequently. However, it is also true that if our players make wrong decisions, or fail to hit targets, or simply don't run hard enough, this is clearly the responsiblity of the players.
However, I think it must be viewed globally, as an entire picture. The coaching staff provides the overall landscape, and the players on game day execute the details. Afterall, what is the coach's role otherwise? So all our preseason training, game plan development and drills, etc, should be the backdrop and essential preparation against which the details are filled in on game day.
To me, it looks like this landscape is far too incoherent. We play around the boundary, backwards, sideways....Until we hit the corridor, when we win a couple of games....and then when our opponents plan for this and block the corridor, we have no prepared or drilled plan but to revert to the sideways, backwards transition, which erodes confidence and inevitably produces skill errors.
At the moment, it seems that we can only execute our skills if we are allowed to.
No doubt, partly the players, but in my mind clearly also the coaching regime.
Look at Bolton at Carlton. Surely their list is not better than ours?? But they are playing cohesive, inspired footy.
I cannot shy away from the conclusion that our coaching is below par. |
This is an excellent post Magpietothemax.
Carlton's list is made up of a lot of high draft picks and thus they are classy footballers.
Let's look at who played for them on the weekend.
In their older playing stocks, they have Gibbs, Kruezer, and Murphy, all number one picks and Thomas a number 2 pick via us.
In their younger playing stocks they have Weitering (number 1 pick), Marchbank (no 6, via GWS), Plowman (no 3 pick, via GWS), Docherty (no 12, via Brisbane), Cripps (no 13), Charlie Curnow (no 12), Sumner (no 6 via GWS), Cunningham (no 23). Petrevski-Seton, no 6 pick, didn't play on the weekend, but has played most games.
So, 12 of their 22, pick 23 or under. Classy footballers, so good users of the ball and smart footballers, so good decision makers. Pendlebury is really our only one in this category and probably Wells. De Goey took a big step in the right direction today. Some of our better players are just butchers of the ball, Sidey and Adams and to a lesser extent Treloar.
We have tried to rebuild without going to the real lower depths of the ladder, so we lack class footballers, thus our skill and decision making is not in the top echelon. 2 of our top 10 picks we had in Scharenberg and Freeman haven't helped us for various reasons that are well documented.
Improvements have been made in our skills and decision making, but we still have a lot of improvement to go. I still think there is the nucleus of a good football side on our list, it is just taking longer to develop these players because we did not go to the bottom of the ladder to rebuild. However, despite my positivity, the jury is still out with respect to whether rebuilding this way is going to work.
In terms of our coach, if I thought he was the biggest issue and the reason we are struggling, I would post as such. However, I think the current lack of class footballers on our list and the current lack of senior class or elite players on our list is the biggest issue, thus I don't think a change in coach will make a big difference in the short to medium term. However, I am expecting a change in coach to occur.
Last edited by mooretreloar on Mon Jul 03, 2017 12:32 am; edited 4 times in total |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| mooretreloar wrote: | | watt price tully wrote: | As usual a combination of factors resulted in the disappointing game and result today. Not just the players but the coaching too was to blame.
1. Anyone with half a brain saw Hodge control the backline & the first point of rebound attack. Did the coach have any strategies and tactics to deal with this? Sadly no. Greenwood ought to have tagged him.
2. The fact we kept going sideways as an almost intuitive response when have the ball. This happens through practice & repetition that is, training. This element is exacerbated when players are injured and newer players come into the team - less time to gel
3. Coach v coach: Clarkson learnt a lot from 6 weeks ago, Bucks didn't. Clarkson knew how to apply pressure in the clearances from the last time we played them. (Smith played a great game last time but dropped this week)
4. We need Varcoe's hardness & run off the HBF which would allow Crisp to play higher up the field than deep in the backline. It wasn't great coaching to have Maynard so far away from the play a fair bit of the time.
5. As had been noted the players missed opportunities & had a lot of unforced errors as well as forced errors. That was Howe's worst game & Pendlebury had a shocker.
Summary:
The loss is a combination of player & coaching input:
* To suggest it's just the players is utter denialism about the coaches role and is plain ill informed if not dumb
* To suggest it's all Buck's fault is sheer stupidity as the players are the ones today who failed big-time in skill execution & as usual stupid decison-making. The fact that stupid decision making continues as this week showed is not the only time this occurs reflects poorly in the first instance on the players but also reflects negatively on the coach.
** To suggest it's not a combination of many factors is being ridiculous as it is self evident as it is obvious.
Now to appoint Moore-Trealoar & thomsoc as joint coaches and lovers. |
Smith was injured, hamstring tightness, so not dropped.
To suggest that a coach is responsible for skill errors and poor decisions shows that a poster has not played sport even at a basic level. It is ill-informed and is also just plain dumb. Skill errors and poor decision making is the reason we lost today, plain and simple and it is the reason we have lost 7 of our 9 games this season. At least 3/4's of their goals today came from our skill errors or poor decisions.
The coaching group's job is to provide the players with the information to put them in a position to win the game. The coaching group delivered this today and have done so each and every week in 2017. In 7 of our 9 losses, our players let the coaching group down by executing their skills poorly and making dumb decisions. The other two losses the opposition were better than us on the day.
If the coaching group were not doing their job we would consistently be losing by 10 goals +. |
MT it's always a combination of both player & coach - this isn't brain surgery or rocket science. I've played competitive sport before & competitive VFL as it was called in my day. In fact mine is bigger than yours.......yawn.....
The fact you can't acknowledge that it is more than just players reflects poorly on your ability to analyse.
To then say something as stupid as if the coach were not doing their job we would be consistently losing by 10 goals or more each week is simply a foolish thing to say. Given I've said both coach & players are to blame, it is more accurate to say (given we have been losing more than we have been winning for many years including this year & this game) that the coaches have not been doing their job - well enough.
But you choose to deal with an "either or" no room for nuance or sophistication.
Anyway time for you to tell us how wonderful you are, that yours is the only opinion that matters .....because I haven't heard that much from you .... 
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
mooretreloar
Joined: 21 Sep 2016
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| watt price tully wrote: | | mooretreloar wrote: | | watt price tully wrote: | As usual a combination of factors resulted in the disappointing game and result today. Not just the players but the coaching too was to blame.
1. Anyone with half a brain saw Hodge control the backline & the first point of rebound attack. Did the coach have any strategies and tactics to deal with this? Sadly no. Greenwood ought to have tagged him.
2. The fact we kept going sideways as an almost intuitive response when have the ball. This happens through practice & repetition that is, training. This element is exacerbated when players are injured and newer players come into the team - less time to gel
3. Coach v coach: Clarkson learnt a lot from 6 weeks ago, Bucks didn't. Clarkson knew how to apply pressure in the clearances from the last time we played them. (Smith played a great game last time but dropped this week)
4. We need Varcoe's hardness & run off the HBF which would allow Crisp to play higher up the field than deep in the backline. It wasn't great coaching to have Maynard so far away from the play a fair bit of the time.
5. As had been noted the players missed opportunities & had a lot of unforced errors as well as forced errors. That was Howe's worst game & Pendlebury had a shocker.
Summary:
The loss is a combination of player & coaching input:
* To suggest it's just the players is utter denialism about the coaches role and is plain ill informed if not dumb
* To suggest it's all Buck's fault is sheer stupidity as the players are the ones today who failed big-time in skill execution & as usual stupid decison-making. The fact that stupid decision making continues as this week showed is not the only time this occurs reflects poorly in the first instance on the players but also reflects negatively on the coach.
** To suggest it's not a combination of many factors is being ridiculous as it is self evident as it is obvious.
Now to appoint Moore-Trealoar & thomsoc as joint coaches and lovers. |
Smith was injured, hamstring tightness, so not dropped.
To suggest that a coach is responsible for skill errors and poor decisions shows that a poster has not played sport even at a basic level. It is ill-informed and is also just plain dumb. Skill errors and poor decision making is the reason we lost today, plain and simple and it is the reason we have lost 7 of our 9 games this season. At least 3/4's of their goals today came from our skill errors or poor decisions.
The coaching group's job is to provide the players with the information to put them in a position to win the game. The coaching group delivered this today and have done so each and every week in 2017. In 7 of our 9 losses, our players let the coaching group down by executing their skills poorly and making dumb decisions. The other two losses the opposition were better than us on the day.
If the coaching group were not doing their job we would consistently be losing by 10 goals +. |
MT it's always a combination of both player & coach - this isn't brain surgery or rocket science. I've played competitive sport before & competitive VFL as it was called in my day. In fact mine is bigger than yours.......yawn.....
The fact you can't acknowledge that it is more than just players reflects poorly on your ability to analyse.
To then say something as stupid as if the coach were not doing their job we would be consistently losing by 10 goals or more each week is simply a foolish thing to say. Given I've said both coach & players are to blame, it is more accurate to say (given we have been losing more than we have been winning for many years including this year & this game) that the coaches have not been doing their job - well enough.
But you choose to deal with an "either or" no room for nuance or sophistication.
Anyway time for you to tell us how wonderful you are, that yours is the only opinion that matters .....because I haven't heard that much from you .... |
Congratulations on playing competitive sport and VFL, however yours is not bigger than mine. An international sport, not an Australian only sport.
That you continually indicate that our current predicament is joint coaching and joint playing group, shows you are not watching the game anywhere near close enough and that your analytical skills are lacking. |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| mooretreloar wrote: | | watt price tully wrote: | | mooretreloar wrote: | | watt price tully wrote: | As usual a combination of factors resulted in the disappointing game and result today. Not just the players but the coaching too was to blame.
1. Anyone with half a brain saw Hodge control the backline & the first point of rebound attack. Did the coach have any strategies and tactics to deal with this? Sadly no. Greenwood ought to have tagged him.
2. The fact we kept going sideways as an almost intuitive response when have the ball. This happens through practice & repetition that is, training. This element is exacerbated when players are injured and newer players come into the team - less time to gel
3. Coach v coach: Clarkson learnt a lot from 6 weeks ago, Bucks didn't. Clarkson knew how to apply pressure in the clearances from the last time we played them. (Smith played a great game last time but dropped this week)
4. We need Varcoe's hardness & run off the HBF which would allow Crisp to play higher up the field than deep in the backline. It wasn't great coaching to have Maynard so far away from the play a fair bit of the time.
5. As had been noted the players missed opportunities & had a lot of unforced errors as well as forced errors. That was Howe's worst game & Pendlebury had a shocker.
Summary:
The loss is a combination of player & coaching input:
* To suggest it's just the players is utter denialism about the coaches role and is plain ill informed if not dumb
* To suggest it's all Buck's fault is sheer stupidity as the players are the ones today who failed big-time in skill execution & as usual stupid decison-making. The fact that stupid decision making continues as this week showed is not the only time this occurs reflects poorly in the first instance on the players but also reflects negatively on the coach.
** To suggest it's not a combination of many factors is being ridiculous as it is self evident as it is obvious.
Now to appoint Moore-Trealoar & thomsoc as joint coaches and lovers. |
Smith was injured, hamstring tightness, so not dropped.
To suggest that a coach is responsible for skill errors and poor decisions shows that a poster has not played sport even at a basic level. It is ill-informed and is also just plain dumb. Skill errors and poor decision making is the reason we lost today, plain and simple and it is the reason we have lost 7 of our 9 games this season. At least 3/4's of their goals today came from our skill errors or poor decisions.
The coaching group's job is to provide the players with the information to put them in a position to win the game. The coaching group delivered this today and have done so each and every week in 2017. In 7 of our 9 losses, our players let the coaching group down by executing their skills poorly and making dumb decisions. The other two losses the opposition were better than us on the day.
If the coaching group were not doing their job we would consistently be losing by 10 goals +. |
MT it's always a combination of both player & coach - this isn't brain surgery or rocket science. I've played competitive sport before & competitive VFL as it was called in my day. In fact mine is bigger than yours.......yawn.....
The fact you can't acknowledge that it is more than just players reflects poorly on your ability to analyse.
To then say something as stupid as if the coach were not doing their job we would be consistently losing by 10 goals or more each week is simply a foolish thing to say. Given I've said both coach & players are to blame, it is more accurate to say (given we have been losing more than we have been winning for many years including this year & this game) that the coaches have not been doing their job - well enough.
But you choose to deal with an "either or" no room for nuance or sophistication.
Anyway time for you to tell us how wonderful you are, that yours is the only opinion that matters .....because I haven't heard that much from you .... |
Congratulations on playing competitive sport and VFL, however yours is not bigger than mine. An international sport, not an Australian only sport.
That you continually indicate that our current predicament is joint coaching and joint playing group, shows you are not watching the game anywhere near close enough and that your analytical skills are lacking. |
Now you're in denial. To keep on repeating wrong information that is, it's only the fault of the players does not make it right. In fact it defies logic.
With respect to international sport etc who gives a fat rats clacker?
You don't have to be a cow to know about milk.
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
mooretreloar
Joined: 21 Sep 2016
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Magpietothemax wrote: | | mooretreloar wrote: | [
The coaching group's job is to provide the players with the information to put them in a position to win the game. The coaching group delivered this today and have done so each and every week in 2017. In 7 of our 9 losses, our players let the coaching group down by executing their skills poorly and making dumb decisions. The other two losses the opposition were better than us on the day.
If the coaching group were not doing their job we would consistently be losing by 10 goals +. |
Dear MT
Can you please explain to me what you mena by "providing information to put us in a position to win the game". I heard Michael Hurley on the radio today explaining how he has become a star defender. He explained that he "wasn't going to give away Essendon's defensive plan and structures", but suffice it to say that they were instructed and drilled on the positions they needed to take in order to be able to play with aggression out of defence.
He was directly attributing to the coaching regime and the drilled practice their new system in defence.
I have not played high level sport, so I don't presume to know.
However, I think that the "information" that the team needs to execute is contained to a significant extent in precisely this drilled practice and assimilation by the players of what they are aiming to achieve. This is what I do not see happening with us. |
Magpietothemax, the information that I am referring to is:
a) what is the opposition going to try to do in the game,
b) what are their strengths, what are their weaknesses,
c) what are we going to do to stop their strengths and what are we going to do to exploit their weaknesses,
d) what do we want to do focus on in this game, etc.
We have been in a winning position in every game, bar last week against Port. For mine the only two sides that have been better than us in general play on the day were Port and St Kilda, who kicked crooked in the 2nd and 3rd quarters or they would have thrashed us, which left us with a sniff halfway through the last quarter. Thus, the coaching group has delivered the information, coached the group etc to be in a position to win 12 of 14 matches, unfortunately we have only won five.
The reasons for 7 of our 9 losses were our skill errors and dumb decision making at inopportune times, which gifted the opposition multiple goals. In a competition that is as even as it is, the margins between a win and a loss are extremely small and the multiple gift goals we have given the opposition is why we are 5-9 and not at least 9-5. This trait has also been evident in some of our wins, especially against Fremantle, who we beat by 20, but should have beaten by 60. |
|
|
|
|
mooretreloar
Joined: 21 Sep 2016
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| watt price tully wrote: | | mooretreloar wrote: | | watt price tully wrote: | | mooretreloar wrote: | | watt price tully wrote: | As usual a combination of factors resulted in the disappointing game and result today. Not just the players but the coaching too was to blame.
1. Anyone with half a brain saw Hodge control the backline & the first point of rebound attack. Did the coach have any strategies and tactics to deal with this? Sadly no. Greenwood ought to have tagged him.
2. The fact we kept going sideways as an almost intuitive response when have the ball. This happens through practice & repetition that is, training. This element is exacerbated when players are injured and newer players come into the team - less time to gel
3. Coach v coach: Clarkson learnt a lot from 6 weeks ago, Bucks didn't. Clarkson knew how to apply pressure in the clearances from the last time we played them. (Smith played a great game last time but dropped this week)
4. We need Varcoe's hardness & run off the HBF which would allow Crisp to play higher up the field than deep in the backline. It wasn't great coaching to have Maynard so far away from the play a fair bit of the time.
5. As had been noted the players missed opportunities & had a lot of unforced errors as well as forced errors. That was Howe's worst game & Pendlebury had a shocker.
Summary:
The loss is a combination of player & coaching input:
* To suggest it's just the players is utter denialism about the coaches role and is plain ill informed if not dumb
* To suggest it's all Buck's fault is sheer stupidity as the players are the ones today who failed big-time in skill execution & as usual stupid decison-making. The fact that stupid decision making continues as this week showed is not the only time this occurs reflects poorly in the first instance on the players but also reflects negatively on the coach.
** To suggest it's not a combination of many factors is being ridiculous as it is self evident as it is obvious.
Now to appoint Moore-Trealoar & thomsoc as joint coaches and lovers. |
Smith was injured, hamstring tightness, so not dropped.
To suggest that a coach is responsible for skill errors and poor decisions shows that a poster has not played sport even at a basic level. It is ill-informed and is also just plain dumb. Skill errors and poor decision making is the reason we lost today, plain and simple and it is the reason we have lost 7 of our 9 games this season. At least 3/4's of their goals today came from our skill errors or poor decisions.
The coaching group's job is to provide the players with the information to put them in a position to win the game. The coaching group delivered this today and have done so each and every week in 2017. In 7 of our 9 losses, our players let the coaching group down by executing their skills poorly and making dumb decisions. The other two losses the opposition were better than us on the day.
If the coaching group were not doing their job we would consistently be losing by 10 goals +. |
MT it's always a combination of both player & coach - this isn't brain surgery or rocket science. I've played competitive sport before & competitive VFL as it was called in my day. In fact mine is bigger than yours.......yawn.....
The fact you can't acknowledge that it is more than just players reflects poorly on your ability to analyse.
To then say something as stupid as if the coach were not doing their job we would be consistently losing by 10 goals or more each week is simply a foolish thing to say. Given I've said both coach & players are to blame, it is more accurate to say (given we have been losing more than we have been winning for many years including this year & this game) that the coaches have not been doing their job - well enough.
But you choose to deal with an "either or" no room for nuance or sophistication.
Anyway time for you to tell us how wonderful you are, that yours is the only opinion that matters .....because I haven't heard that much from you .... |
Congratulations on playing competitive sport and VFL, however yours is not bigger than mine. An international sport, not an Australian only sport.
That you continually indicate that our current predicament is joint coaching and joint playing group, shows you are not watching the game anywhere near close enough and that your analytical skills are lacking. |
Now you're in denial. To keep on repeating wrong information that is, it's only the fault of the players does not make it right. In fact it defies logic.
With respect to international sport etc who gives a fat rats clacker?
You don't have to be a cow to know about milk. |
In your opinion, it is wrong information. As, I posted above, I suggest that you watch the game more closely and also work on your analytical skills. When you have done so, come back to me and we can then have an intelligent conversation as to why we are 5-9. |
|
|
|
|
King Monkey
Joined: 15 Apr 2009
Location: On a journey to seek the scriptures of enlightenment....
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Many, many issues, but the bench rotations, especially today, is something I just can't cop.
We had been controlling the game for a period of time in the third and were in front on the scoreboard when Grundy goes to the bench for a rest. Hawthorn go bang, bang, bang out of the centre and gain control back leaving us chasing the game again. Surely someone in the box noticed the game change without Grundy's presence out there. (Not saying he had a great game, but we clearly missed him when he wasn't there). So, then with the game in the balance he goes for another rest at about the 9 minute mark of the last. That's ok though, he must've been fresh for the last few minutes when we were 3 goals down.
The funniest one I saw today though, (I mean "funny" in the demented, psychopathic, way), was late in the last.
De Goey, whilst he has a number of limitations as a player, was clearly one of our best today. Fasolo our most prolific goal-kicker on the day and one of the few in the side that is half a chance to pluck something out of his clacker.
So, we're 11 points behind as the clock ticks over into time-on in the last and who is sitting on the bench? Yep, you guessed it: De Goey and Fasolo.  I couldn't believe my eyes......
_________________
"I am a great sage, equal of heaven.
Grow stick, grow.
Fly cloud, fly.
Oh you are a dee-mon, I love to fiiight." |
|
|
|
|
think positive 
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| King Monkey wrote: | Many, many issues, but the bench rotations, especially today, is something I just can't cop.
We had been controlling the game for a period of time in the third and were in front on the scoreboard when Grundy goes to the bench for a rest. Hawthorn go bang, bang, bang out of the centre and gain control back leaving us chasing the game again. Surely someone in the box noticed the game change without Grundy's presence out there. (Not saying he had a great game, but we clearly missed him when he wasn't there). So, then with the game in the balance he goes for another rest at about the 9 minute mark of the last. That's ok though, he must've been fresh for the last few minutes when we were 3 goals down.
The funniest one I saw today though, (I mean "funny" in the demented, psychopathic, way), was late in the last.
De Goey, whilst he has a number of limitations as a player, was clearly one of our best today. Fasolo our most prolific goal-kicker on the day and one of the few in the side that is half a chance to pluck something out of his clacker.
So, we're 11 points behind as the clock ticks over into time-on in the last and who is sitting on the bench? Yep, you guessed it: De Goey and Fasolo. I couldn't believe my eyes...... |
But surely - your not suggesting it was the coaches fault - actually I know the reason, they went to the bench themselves, refused to go back on - they just found out there was a rerun of mooretreloar playing international tic tac toe in de Nile in 1958, and they just couldn't miss it!
How could you possible think that Buckley would bench those players at that time?
(And the Grundy one shit me too!)
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
And just quietly, since we are talking about football. That would be AFL football, I would think a history of playing AFL football, or VFL as it were in the time of us dinosaurs, is more suitable for analysing the nuances of the game than if you were Kiki Roseberg, Rafa, Serena, or Lance Armstrong. Just sayin!
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
