1. Kudos to the coaches. Following the ho-ha from last week and more significantly, the critique of the first quarter in the Melbourne game, Sam and his coaching crew deserve plaudits for the way in which they set up and managed the game plan and game strategy.
a) The game strategy was adapted to both circumstances and situations. With the early onslaught, it was recognised that the back six needed some additional help, so Hardwick went back as an extra defender to assist with the defensive set up. This meant that we had forward 4 as we still started the high half forward, leaving a plus 1 in our defensive 50. What was interesting is that both teams were happy to have a plus 1, however when Hardwick went forward so too did his direct opponent. This had two ramifications – i) their forward 50 was crowded for leading lanes for Naughton & JUH which has often been how they set up their scoring shots. This meant that they bombed to the hot spot which, aside from two notable exceptions, we were able to kill or intercept; and ii) our forward 50 was quite open which gave our forwards space to work in and really assisted Gunston and Dear as the back 5 of the Dogs could be easily separated and not allow for the interceptor (usually Jones) come across to spoil or take the mark.
Then when Sicily went down, Hardwick became the temporary replacement until Larazus-like, Sicily re-appeared. Interestingly, late in the 2nd quarter, Hardwick started as a defensive wingman that pushed Morrison into the high half forward role as we looked to shore up the red time pressure which is still a work in progress. It may be a statistical first that he has played as a forward, mid & defender.
b) Selection of and implementation of the sub. Undoubtedly, the selection of the sub has been one of the mysteries of life for supporters this year but may well reflect the impact of injuries on selection. In selecting Watson who would have been on manage minutes, he became the impact sub, although if Lazarus hadn’t had risen, it may have been a different story. Similarly, bringing him in the 3rd quarter was a recognition that there was going into space in our forward 50 to work with and the speed of Watson was to be more significant than the endurance and strength of Mackenzie who hadn’t had a poor game.
c) Sicily going forward in the final quarter appears to be a consensus decision, however no one builds a statue to a committee, so Sam should be recognised for making the final decision. As is said of good coaches: “coaches take the blame and players take the praise”. Late in the quarter, it was also Will Day who came back to play the extra defender when the stakes were at their highest, yet our mids were still competitive around the ball.
2. Learning is happening amongst the playing group. For those of us who made the trip out to Whitten Oval for the pre-season game against the Dogs, the first three minutes would’ve created some serious cases of PTSD as to how this game was to play out. However, aided by the strategic decisions from the coach’s box, a number of senior players took the bit between their teeth and weren’t going to accept what was happening. This coincided with the rotation of Nash into the centre square which Sam alluded to in press conference. If you have the chance to watch his first 5 minutes on the ground, it is worth noting the impact he had on the game to turn the tide. It was curious that our starting centre square was Newcombe, Worpel & Day given Nash’s record against Bontempelli and Liberatore.
3. “Meek and potatoes" with gravy this week. Whilst the first few minutes didn’t augur for Meek and brought back memories of the pre-season game, he showed a further dimension to his game this week in a couple of ways. Firstly, by getting his knees dirty and getting into the ground ball pack with his huge frame, he allowed Day, Newcombe, Nash & Worpel to become the outlets for any ground ball wins whereas in previous weeks he had looked to be the receiver of their dirty work. Secondly, whilst he wasn’t always able to keep up with English, he put himself into dangerous situations with the clever tap to Ward for the crumbing goal as well as his own goal from the interference in the marking contest. Structurally, the first skill set – getting to the bottom of packs - is really important to us as it allows us options on the outside and secondly, it also keeps Nash fresh for when he has to act as the chop out ruck around the ground. Meek also learnt his lesson from last week in a defensive pack situation to kill the ball rather than trying to mark it.
4. Midfield cohesion and clean hands in the centre square. For our mids, given that they are not fleet of foot, the need to be clean and connected around the contest is really important if we are to start our attack from forward of centre. With Day returning, the rotation of our midfield looks to be more balanced and better able to run out games. For brief periods, Worpel & Newcombe went forward and Day back with Nash playing the around ground ruck after Dear had contested the centre bounces. The first clearance of the last quarter demonstrated the type of clearance we are looking to enact with quick hands around the centre circle with Nash handballing to Impey off half back for a strong forward entry and goal. It had shades of the way the Tigers used Rioli off half back from time to time. There was another example earlier in the game as well. The unfortunate aspect of when clean hands don’t work for us was when the Dogs came out of the contest to kick two quick goals to shift the momentum – Newcombe both times was the unlucky one in not body lining the ball and then half fumble. I realise some will say that this is harsh, but when you play Bont and Libba, this is all they need.
5. The “whipping boys” played their roles. Every club has them and supporters “love” to flog them, however in a game like this, they need to be given their dues. The issue for them is that too often the subtlety of their roles are not “respected”. In taking on Williams, Maginness was able to cut down an exit avenue for the Dogs which lead to some back half turnovers. Similarly, Morrison on the other wing was able to ensure that they didn’t have a clear alternative route to their forward 50. Think of the times that they had to kick across wing to wing to switch their attack. Yes they both do both make skill/decision errors, however their application to their role has to be recognised. Another player who I think is unduly “whipped” and he was made mention of in Sam’s presser is Impey who cannot be faulted in any game for his effort and sometimes, I think bites off more than he can chew which draws the ire of the supporters. Nash provided the two opportunities for Dear in the last quarter. For this group, when the “better” players are more consistent and add their dash of brilliance eg. CMac & Weddle, their contributions are more effective.
6. The question of leadership has to be put to bed. Again, it has been interesting to hear some concerns about the leadership qualities of Sicily since the season started. As most of us only see two hours of their week, it is an area that is fraught with danger when one looks to pass judgement. Given that actions always speak louder than words, thus when he puts his arm to come back on; then realise that he may be a risk to the team, but provides a strategic alternative; we have to pause and recognize that perhaps we are too quick to judge. Similarly, his bake of Watson for his miss, whilst not perfect, was driven by the right intention and is another leadership learning for him. (However, Sis’s memory may be like most supporters for a player to miss two shots from as close as that in his first four games is some feat! Cats’ game was the other one.)
7. Clean entries inside 50 allow for better scoring opportunities & reward for effort. This is the first time for the year that I can recall the majority of our scoring shots were between the 45 degree arc from the goal square/centre corridor rather being closer to the boundary line, aside from Gunston who was caught wide a few times. Notwithstanding, the outrageous goals from CMac and Weddle, the other goals where much more makeable this week. When you look at our scoring efficiency I50 this week was 67% whereas from Rd.1 to 7 it read 49% (Dons); 43% (Dees); 40% (Cats); 34% (Pies); 37% (Suns); 50% (Roos); 42% (Swans); there is a significant difference. I’m sure this % will prove to be an outlier, however, if we can get to the high 40% more regularly, then the chances of posting a defendable score will be significantly increased.
8. Predictability is a key to performance. When you look at the way the game panned out, being predictable to each other made a significant difference to the pattern of play. Nothing typified this more than Weddle’s searching runs which were in straight lines towards to the goals rather than including a half circle or stop/start component to them. This would have assisted those inside 50 to work out their own leading patterns. Similarly, as mentioned earlier, with the big bloke fighting on the ground, the mids were able to set up a defensive/offensive structure around these packs. The back six has had this component all year with the way Scrimshaw, Frost and Sicily have worked to spoil or intercept forward entries, whereas the other two parts of the team hadn’t quite gelled yet.
• We can match it with the “middleweight” division. Whilst one win doesn’t make a winter, if we can match it with the Dogs, what’s to say that we can’t prove ourselves to be more than competitive with the middleweights of the competition.
• Goes without saying but has to be said: “The best four quarter effort for the year”.
• If you tipped that the Hawks would win the marks inside 50 count (15/13), you wasted your chance to tip the Tattslotto numbers on Saturday night.
• Mackenzie looked to use his left foot twice in the game – unfortunately one was smothered, and the other was a miskick shot for goal. This is the next stage of development for him.
• D’Ambrosio had a couple of minutes in the second quarter he’d like to have back with a marking contest and a couple of kicks missing targets/goals. Interesting that he only had 23% of TOG in the last quarter. With Amon going to half back and Morrison & Maginness on the wings, where is his spot?
• The first quarter we were too cute with the ball when the scoreboard pressure was on us early e.g. looking to kick around corners for 15-20m to teammates under pressure. (Fortunately, the Dogs had a similar issue – the surface at Marvel appears to be slipperier than the ‘G.)
• Newcombe’s first half was Jai of 2023, however the 2nd half was statistically quieter, his presence around the midfield was strong.
• Ginnivan’s last quarter reeked of football IQ and whilst it may not have been his day, aside from being his 50th game, he certainly played to a couple of key moments in the quarter.
• In the 1st quarter, rather than CMac handballing to Meek just outside the goal square, I’d like to see Meek shepherd for CMac to take the shot.
• Dear debut – 6 kicks, 2 handballs, 5 marks, 4 tackles, 2 goals – however the most pleasing aspect of his game were the marks he took up the ground towards our half back line. At times, this year we have real difficulty exiting our defensive 50, so if he can provide a marking target there, this may prove to be as valuable as any goals.
Starting 4:
1st qrt: Newcombe (24), Worpel (16), Day (22)
2nd qrt: Nash (19) Newcombe Worpel
3rd qrt: Newcombe, Worpel, Day
4th qrt: Nash Day Newcombe
(Meek 27; Moore 8; Dear 4; Mackenzie 4)
Coach killers:
Given the season he’s had to date, I prepared to give Frosty a mulligan/his season’s free pass for his two “frostball” moments – one led to a behind and the other he worked hard to redeem the poor pass.
Aside from that, I think Sam, after the first 3 minutes, may have not had too many moments where he was pulling his hair out or giving the phone a fair working over.
Issue for the week: how will we match up against a strategic coach?
Given Sam got the chocolates over Beveridge, how he goes against Lyon may have a major say in our fortunes for the game this week. There is a significant difference in style and playing personnel with the Saints being quick across the ground coming from a defensive position. Last year, Marshall marked Meek’s card very early in that contest as the Saints kicked 9 goals in the first quarter to put us away early. The Saints are quite mobile in the forward 50, so again being able to play off the line for our defenders will be a test and the Saints drive off half back will be a watch for our role players.
I’m not having that leadership is put to bed. Sicily was brave physically and it was a great effort to go back out but that is not leadership or if it it’s the old school macho bullshit leadership that is associated with too much that is wrong re toxic masculinity.
I want to see him making other players better when he is there not when he moves to the other end of the ground. Making them better not by winning his physical contests but by rallying them through attitude, behaviours and posture.
I'm sorry it's not an example "..old school macho bullshit leadership..." nor "... toxic masculinity ..." when, as the Captain, you go to the Coach and say that you won't be able to perform to your best in your designated position and that they would need to come up with an alternative for the betterment of the team's performance - this is leadership to the core. I hope you heard Mitchell's press conference as to how they came to the decision to swap Sicily with Hardwick.
Similarly, in the post-match interview, Sicily also acknowledged that he hadn't responded well to Watson's miss and had already spoken to him on that and was going to follow up again later.
(Also in the last quarter after the Dogs kicked two quick goals from centre breaks, Sicily did go into the centre square and had a word with the midfielders.
Seriously Mick, you should be working for Champion Data. Great analysis and very enjoyable reading, as always. A couple of notable points for me were:
1. We stopped the intercept marks in our forward 50. This has been a killer all season with so many of our entries quickly neutralized by an opposition mark.
2. This in turn helped to reduce the quick rebound from our forward 50, which has been an issue all season, no more so than the previous week against Sydney. In this respect we were aided to an extent by several blooper moments from the Dogs when attempting to exit our forward 50, but overall we did an excellent job in countering their rebound.
3. As you say, Sam had very few 'hair losing' moments with our diabolical error rate as low as it's been all season and probably for some time. Last week, we had two 2 goal turnarounds and countless occasions where we butchered the ball, the impact of which was to deny us a scoring opportunity and/or to create a scoring opportunity for the opposition.
4. A couple of issues that need work:
* While Connor Mac had a productive game with his three goals, it would be good to find a way to get him into the game more. He has a lot to offer but can have blocks of games where he's just not involved at all.
* What to do with Josh Ward who is struggling to have the impact we'd hoped to see in this, his third season? He's perhaps a victim of playing outside of his ideal role, which is as an inside midfielder, but with the return of Will Day, it's hard to see how that's going to change. He's a good and creative user of the footy and he's another one that we need to find a way to get more involved.
*Centre bounce goals again hurt us, and this has been a recurring theme across the season and had we lost, would have been the biggest contributing factor. It's disappointing and surprising given that we were so strong in this area last season.
*Aside from centre bounces, the other factor that could have cost us that victory was our goal kicking. Sam made reference to it after the game, specifically that we can't do any more work on it than we currently are, but it is an ongoing concern.
*Take your point about the role playing of Morrison and Maginness, and it's hard to see how there's a role for either Finn or Harry as this group develops. The continued selection of Finn in a non-tagging role is odd and perhaps he's just a place holder until Chad is available. But this isn't a week to be negative.
5. Selection will be interesting this week. Mabior returns, but it's very hard to work out who goes out, suspect it will be Harry or Josh Ward and it's likely that Watson will be in the 22, which likely leaves Harry or Ward as the sub.
I think the centre square clearances reflect the foot speed issue of our mids which does leave them open to clean exit if they can’t impact the initial clearance. This is where our half back flankers have been caught “in between” and not been able to impact the oppo mids coming out the front. Similarly, our half forwards allowed Dale to sweep from behind as well.
On Finn’s role against the Dogs, he did have a run with role on Williams and did have an impact on his metres gained and as their defensive winger, this was a structural contest. Admittedly, Williams was able to get free for their last goal.
Chol will be a watch as his left wrist/arm has been strapped/braced over the past week.
This was the bull case for the team. Jury still out on whether it was better coaching and setup that allowed so many to show off their better selves or because dogs/beverage are so weird. Easy to say a bit of both but reality is that even in our good losses against well set up teams eg pies we have significant underperformances from too many.
Let’s hope everyone got what they needed from it. St Kilda could be anything really.
1. We held onto the ball. 20 less turnovers than the Dogs! And about 20 less than we averaged all year.
2. We controlled the air. Over 100 marks but very, very different to the Melbourne game marking fiasco.
3. We out tackled and out worked them. 16 more tackles than season average and 13 more than Dogs
We scored a lot from turnover. This is a really good sign. Fluid ball movement and control.
These numbers and game style approximate the three peat Hawks in some ways. Those teams didn't win clearances either.
The Dogs are not strong defensively and their classy mid-field is not known for two way running so maybe we were lucky in some sense but nonetheless a strong effort and well thought out.
Loved the game of;
Ginni - he is a very smart player,
Meek was terrific - and not because he got more useless hitouts - his presence in general play +++
Moore and Macdonald - terrific.
Scrimshaw and Weddle - very strong. A great combo of class and attacking explosiveness.
Impey - maybe his best game for the club
Dear - excellent
Newcombe - nice to see the explosiveness back
Day, Mackenzie and Ward all did some nice things
Frost - solid. The Bulldogs talls could not get into the game.
Many others...
The only negative...
Did not love Sicily's little temper tantrum with Watson's miss - after giving him a crap handball. He played well but he has to be better than that.
What was learnt:
1. Kudos to the coaches. Following the ho-ha from last week and more significantly, the critique of the first quarter in the Melbourne game, Sam and his coaching crew deserve plaudits for the way in which they set up and managed the game plan and game strategy.
a) The game strategy was adapted to both circumstances and situations. With the early onslaught, it was recognised that the back six needed some additional help, so Hardwick went back as an extra defender to assist with the defensive set up. This meant that we had forward 4 as we still started the high half forward, leaving a plus 1 in our defensive 50. What was interesting is that both teams were happy to have a plus 1, however when Hardwick went forward so too did his direct opponent. This had two ramifications – i) their forward 50 was crowded for leading lanes for Naughton & JUH which has often been how they set up their scoring shots. This meant that they bombed to the hot spot which, aside from two notable exceptions, we were able to kill or intercept; and ii) our forward 50 was quite open which gave our forwards space to work in and really assisted Gunston and Dear as the back 5 of the Dogs could be easily separated and not allow for the interceptor (usually Jones) come across to spoil or take the mark.
Then when Sicily went down, Hardwick became the temporary replacement until Larazus-like, Sicily re-appeared. Interestingly, late in the 2nd quarter, Hardwick started as a defensive wingman that pushed Morrison into the high half forward role as we looked to shore up the red time pressure which is still a work in progress. It may be a statistical first that he has played as a forward, mid & defender.
b) Selection of and implementation of the sub. Undoubtedly, the selection of the sub has been one of the mysteries of life for supporters this year but may well reflect the impact of injuries on selection. In selecting Watson who would have been on manage minutes, he became the impact sub, although if Lazarus hadn’t had risen, it may have been a different story. Similarly, bringing him in the 3rd quarter was a recognition that there was going into space in our forward 50 to work with and the speed of Watson was to be more significant than the endurance and strength of Mackenzie who hadn’t had a poor game.
c) Sicily going forward in the final quarter appears to be a consensus decision, however no one builds a statue to a committee, so Sam should be recognised for making the final decision. As is said of good coaches: “coaches take the blame and players take the praise”. Late in the quarter, it was also Will Day who came back to play the extra defender when the stakes were at their highest, yet our mids were still competitive around the ball.
2. Learning is happening amongst the playing group. For those of us who made the trip out to Whitten Oval for the pre-season game against the Dogs, the first three minutes would’ve created some serious cases of PTSD as to how this game was to play out. However, aided by the strategic decisions from the coach’s box, a number of senior players took the bit between their teeth and weren’t going to accept what was happening. This coincided with the rotation of Nash into the centre square which Sam alluded to in press conference. If you have the chance to watch his first 5 minutes on the ground, it is worth noting the impact he had on the game to turn the tide. It was curious that our starting centre square was Newcombe, Worpel & Day given Nash’s record against Bontempelli and Liberatore.
3. “Meek and potatoes" with gravy this week. Whilst the first few minutes didn’t augur for Meek and brought back memories of the pre-season game, he showed a further dimension to his game this week in a couple of ways. Firstly, by getting his knees dirty and getting into the ground ball pack with his huge frame, he allowed Day, Newcombe, Nash & Worpel to become the outlets for any ground ball wins whereas in previous weeks he had looked to be the receiver of their dirty work. Secondly, whilst he wasn’t always able to keep up with English, he put himself into dangerous situations with the clever tap to Ward for the crumbing goal as well as his own goal from the interference in the marking contest. Structurally, the first skill set – getting to the bottom of packs - is really important to us as it allows us options on the outside and secondly, it also keeps Nash fresh for when he has to act as the chop out ruck around the ground. Meek also learnt his lesson from last week in a defensive pack situation to kill the ball rather than trying to mark it.
4. Midfield cohesion and clean hands in the centre square. For our mids, given that they are not fleet of foot, the need to be clean and connected around the contest is really important if we are to start our attack from forward of centre. With Day returning, the rotation of our midfield looks to be more balanced and better able to run out games. For brief periods, Worpel & Newcombe went forward and Day back with Nash playing the around ground ruck after Dear had contested the centre bounces. The first clearance of the last quarter demonstrated the type of clearance we are looking to enact with quick hands around the centre circle with Nash handballing to Impey off half back for a strong forward entry and goal. It had shades of the way the Tigers used Rioli off half back from time to time. There was another example earlier in the game as well. The unfortunate aspect of when clean hands don’t work for us was when the Dogs came out of the contest to kick two quick goals to shift the momentum – Newcombe both times was the unlucky one in not body lining the ball and then half fumble. I realise some will say that this is harsh, but when you play Bont and Libba, this is all they need.
5. The “whipping boys” played their roles. Every club has them and supporters “love” to flog them, however in a game like this, they need to be given their dues. The issue for them is that too often the subtlety of their roles are not “respected”. In taking on Williams, Maginness was able to cut down an exit avenue for the Dogs which lead to some back half turnovers. Similarly, Morrison on the other wing was able to ensure that they didn’t have a clear alternative route to their forward 50. Think of the times that they had to kick across wing to wing to switch their attack. Yes they both do both make skill/decision errors, however their application to their role has to be recognised. Another player who I think is unduly “whipped” and he was made mention of in Sam’s presser is Impey who cannot be faulted in any game for his effort and sometimes, I think bites off more than he can chew which draws the ire of the supporters. Nash provided the two opportunities for Dear in the last quarter. For this group, when the “better” players are more consistent and add their dash of brilliance eg. CMac & Weddle, their contributions are more effective.
6. The question of leadership has to be put to bed. Again, it has been interesting to hear some concerns about the leadership qualities of Sicily since the season started. As most of us only see two hours of their week, it is an area that is fraught with danger when one looks to pass judgement. Given that actions always speak louder than words, thus when he puts his arm to come back on; then realise that he may be a risk to the team, but provides a strategic alternative; we have to pause and recognize that perhaps we are too quick to judge. Similarly, his bake of Watson for his miss, whilst not perfect, was driven by the right intention and is another leadership learning for him. (However, Sis’s memory may be like most supporters for a player to miss two shots from as close as that in his first four games is some feat! Cats’ game was the other one.)
7. Clean entries inside 50 allow for better scoring opportunities & reward for effort. This is the first time for the year that I can recall the majority of our scoring shots were between the 45 degree arc from the goal square/centre corridor rather being closer to the boundary line, aside from Gunston who was caught wide a few times. Notwithstanding, the outrageous goals from CMac and Weddle, the other goals where much more makeable this week. When you look at our scoring efficiency I50 this week was 67% whereas from Rd.1 to 7 it read 49% (Dons); 43% (Dees); 40% (Cats); 34% (Pies); 37% (Suns); 50% (Roos); 42% (Swans); there is a significant difference. I’m sure this % will prove to be an outlier, however, if we can get to the high 40% more regularly, then the chances of posting a defendable score will be significantly increased.
8. Predictability is a key to performance. When you look at the way the game panned out, being predictable to each other made a significant difference to the pattern of play. Nothing typified this more than Weddle’s searching runs which were in straight lines towards to the goals rather than including a half circle or stop/start component to them. This would have assisted those inside 50 to work out their own leading patterns. Similarly, as mentioned earlier, with the big bloke fighting on the ground, the mids were able to set up a defensive/offensive structure around these packs. The back six has had this component all year with the way Scrimshaw, Frost and Sicily have worked to spoil or intercept forward entries, whereas the other two parts of the team hadn’t quite gelled yet.
Observations:
• We can match it with the “middleweight” division. Whilst one win doesn’t make a winter, if we can match it with the Dogs, what’s to say that we can’t prove ourselves to be more than competitive with the middleweights of the competition.
• Goes without saying but has to be said: “The best four quarter effort for the year”.
• If you tipped that the Hawks would win the marks inside 50 count (15/13), you wasted your chance to tip the Tattslotto numbers on Saturday night.
• Mackenzie looked to use his left foot twice in the game – unfortunately one was smothered, and the other was a miskick shot for goal. This is the next stage of development for him.
• D’Ambrosio had a couple of minutes in the second quarter he’d like to have back with a marking contest and a couple of kicks missing targets/goals. Interesting that he only had 23% of TOG in the last quarter. With Amon going to half back and Morrison & Maginness on the wings, where is his spot?
• The first quarter we were too cute with the ball when the scoreboard pressure was on us early e.g. looking to kick around corners for 15-20m to teammates under pressure. (Fortunately, the Dogs had a similar issue – the surface at Marvel appears to be slipperier than the ‘G.)
• Newcombe’s first half was Jai of 2023, however the 2nd half was statistically quieter, his presence around the midfield was strong.
• Ginnivan’s last quarter reeked of football IQ and whilst it may not have been his day, aside from being his 50th game, he certainly played to a couple of key moments in the quarter.
• In the 1st quarter, rather than CMac handballing to Meek just outside the goal square, I’d like to see Meek shepherd for CMac to take the shot.
• Dear debut – 6 kicks, 2 handballs, 5 marks, 4 tackles, 2 goals – however the most pleasing aspect of his game were the marks he took up the ground towards our half back line. At times, this year we have real difficulty exiting our defensive 50, so if he can provide a marking target there, this may prove to be as valuable as any goals.
Starting 4:
1st qrt: Newcombe (24), Worpel (16), Day (22)
2nd qrt: Nash (19) Newcombe Worpel
3rd qrt: Newcombe, Worpel, Day
4th qrt: Nash Day Newcombe
(Meek 27; Moore 8; Dear 4; Mackenzie 4)
Coach killers:
Given the season he’s had to date, I prepared to give Frosty a mulligan/his season’s free pass for his two “frostball” moments – one led to a behind and the other he worked hard to redeem the poor pass.
Aside from that, I think Sam, after the first 3 minutes, may have not had too many moments where he was pulling his hair out or giving the phone a fair working over.
Issue for the week: how will we match up against a strategic coach?
Given Sam got the chocolates over Beveridge, how he goes against Lyon may have a major say in our fortunes for the game this week. There is a significant difference in style and playing personnel with the Saints being quick across the ground coming from a defensive position. Last year, Marshall marked Meek’s card very early in that contest as the Saints kicked 9 goals in the first quarter to put us away early. The Saints are quite mobile in the forward 50, so again being able to play off the line for our defenders will be a test and the Saints drive off half back will be a watch for our role players.
I’m not having that leadership is put to bed. Sicily was brave physically and it was a great effort to go back out but that is not leadership or if it it’s the old school macho bullshit leadership that is associated with too much that is wrong re toxic masculinity.
I want to see him making other players better when he is there not when he moves to the other end of the ground. Making them better not by winning his physical contests but by rallying them through attitude, behaviours and posture.
I'm sorry it's not an example "..old school macho bullshit leadership..." nor "... toxic masculinity ..." when, as the Captain, you go to the Coach and say that you won't be able to perform to your best in your designated position and that they would need to come up with an alternative for the betterment of the team's performance - this is leadership to the core. I hope you heard Mitchell's press conference as to how they came to the decision to swap Sicily with Hardwick.
Similarly, in the post-match interview, Sicily also acknowledged that he hadn't responded well to Watson's miss and had already spoken to him on that and was going to follow up again later.
(Also in the last quarter after the Dogs kicked two quick goals from centre breaks, Sicily did go into the centre square and had a word with the midfielders.
Seriously Mick, you should be working for Champion Data. Great analysis and very enjoyable reading, as always. A couple of notable points for me were:
1. We stopped the intercept marks in our forward 50. This has been a killer all season with so many of our entries quickly neutralized by an opposition mark.
2. This in turn helped to reduce the quick rebound from our forward 50, which has been an issue all season, no more so than the previous week against Sydney. In this respect we were aided to an extent by several blooper moments from the Dogs when attempting to exit our forward 50, but overall we did an excellent job in countering their rebound.
3. As you say, Sam had very few 'hair losing' moments with our diabolical error rate as low as it's been all season and probably for some time. Last week, we had two 2 goal turnarounds and countless occasions where we butchered the ball, the impact of which was to deny us a scoring opportunity and/or to create a scoring opportunity for the opposition.
4. A couple of issues that need work:
* While Connor Mac had a productive game with his three goals, it would be good to find a way to get him into the game more. He has a lot to offer but can have blocks of games where he's just not involved at all.
* What to do with Josh Ward who is struggling to have the impact we'd hoped to see in this, his third season? He's perhaps a victim of playing outside of his ideal role, which is as an inside midfielder, but with the return of Will Day, it's hard to see how that's going to change. He's a good and creative user of the footy and he's another one that we need to find a way to get more involved.
*Centre bounce goals again hurt us, and this has been a recurring theme across the season and had we lost, would have been the biggest contributing factor. It's disappointing and surprising given that we were so strong in this area last season.
*Aside from centre bounces, the other factor that could have cost us that victory was our goal kicking. Sam made reference to it after the game, specifically that we can't do any more work on it than we currently are, but it is an ongoing concern.
*Take your point about the role playing of Morrison and Maginness, and it's hard to see how there's a role for either Finn or Harry as this group develops. The continued selection of Finn in a non-tagging role is odd and perhaps he's just a place holder until Chad is available. But this isn't a week to be negative.
5. Selection will be interesting this week. Mabior returns, but it's very hard to work out who goes out, suspect it will be Harry or Josh Ward and it's likely that Watson will be in the 22, which likely leaves Harry or Ward as the sub.
Hey Stuart
I think the centre square clearances reflect the foot speed issue of our mids which does leave them open to clean exit if they can’t impact the initial clearance. This is where our half back flankers have been caught “in between” and not been able to impact the oppo mids coming out the front. Similarly, our half forwards allowed Dale to sweep from behind as well.
On Finn’s role against the Dogs, he did have a run with role on Williams and did have an impact on his metres gained and as their defensive winger, this was a structural contest. Admittedly, Williams was able to get free for their last goal.
Chol will be a watch as his left wrist/arm has been strapped/braced over the past week.
This was the bull case for the team. Jury still out on whether it was better coaching and setup that allowed so many to show off their better selves or because dogs/beverage are so weird. Easy to say a bit of both but reality is that even in our good losses against well set up teams eg pies we have significant underperformances from too many.
Let’s hope everyone got what they needed from it. St Kilda could be anything really.
Coaches' votes
5. Impey Bontempelli
4. Bontempelli Impey
3. Moore Sicily
2. Hardwick* Moore
1. Nash* Nash
* could be interchanged
A strong effort this week
We won because;
1. We held onto the ball. 20 less turnovers than the Dogs! And about 20 less than we averaged all year.
2. We controlled the air. Over 100 marks but very, very different to the Melbourne game marking fiasco.
3. We out tackled and out worked them. 16 more tackles than season average and 13 more than Dogs
We scored a lot from turnover. This is a really good sign. Fluid ball movement and control.
These numbers and game style approximate the three peat Hawks in some ways. Those teams didn't win clearances either.
The Dogs are not strong defensively and their classy mid-field is not known for two way running so maybe we were lucky in some sense but nonetheless a strong effort and well thought out.
Loved the game of;
Ginni - he is a very smart player,
Meek was terrific - and not because he got more useless hitouts - his presence in general play +++
Moore and Macdonald - terrific.
Scrimshaw and Weddle - very strong. A great combo of class and attacking explosiveness.
Impey - maybe his best game for the club
Dear - excellent
Newcombe - nice to see the explosiveness back
Day, Mackenzie and Ward all did some nice things
Frost - solid. The Bulldogs talls could not get into the game.
Many others...
The only negative...
Did not love Sicily's little temper tantrum with Watson's miss - after giving him a crap handball. He played well but he has to be better than that.