What - the glass is half full??!

[Mantis]

Bevo is right under the spot light at the moment but could you imagine the pressure level if he wasn't signed yet?

It's going to be a long week for the club and Bevo I feel.

There is plenty of recent examples where contracts mean absolutely nothing, so I don't think it matters either way TBH.

[GVGjr]

Besides a change in personnel, I cannot see any change/adjustment to the way we are playing... or should be playing. Surely if we had been training for 3-4 months to implement new strategies that something would be visible across 240min of footy...am I missing something?

Do you think we need to reassess our 4 tall forward ambitions as it isn't working

[Rocco Jones]

Besides a change in personnel, I cannot see any change/adjustment to the way we are playing... or should be playing. Surely if we had been training for 3-4 months to implement new strategies that something would be visible across 240min of footy...am I missing something?

Yep. Even the rate good bits seem like last season, just less/shorter bursts of positive parts. It really feels so similar.

[Rocco Jones]

Do you think we need to reassess our 4 tall forward ambitions as it isn't working

I know you're asking Mantis but a few things:
- our forward pressure sucked last year anyway, so I don't think the 4 talls is that risky
- Lobb was hurt round 1 and we went with 3 in R2. We haven't really given it a chance\
- Darcy isn't offering enough atm and I would send him to VFL regardless of balance

[GVGjr]

There is plenty of recent examples where contracts mean absolutely nothing, so I don't think it matters either way TBH.

You're probably right but from what I can tell after the Saints made their move was that because they were receiving significant funding from the AFL they could make the move without having to pay out the full term of Ratten's contract. I think he got just 3 months pay.

I don't know what the level is for that clause to be inacted but it may not be as easy for us as it was for the likes of North and St Kilda. Bevo is apparently on a significant contract.

[GVGjr]

I know you're asking Mantis but a few things:
- our forward pressure sucked last year anyway, so I don't think the 4 talls is that risky
- Lobb was hurt round 1 and we went with 3 in R2. We haven't really given it a chance\
- Darcy isn't offering enough atm and I would send him to VFL regardless of balance

Our forward line sucked last year because we didn't consider replacing Bruce. In 2021 it worked well.
I agree that we haven't really played 4 talls but I do think it was very much in our planning.
Despite some moments where he stands out I did caution through summer that Darcy needed more time.

[Grantysghost]

Besides a change in personnel, I cannot see any change/adjustment to the way we are playing... or should be playing. Surely if we had been training for 3-4 months to implement new strategies that something would be visible across 240min of footy...am I missing something?

Good q : I can only go from what Bevo has intimated.

Defending the entire ground is his mantra. The back off 5 has gone as part of that.

English is definitely staying a kick behind consistently.

I've noticed our ball movement has definitely slowed, trying to be more measured with our entries.

Statistically it's hard to gauge considering we've been so bad.

We are 18th for inside 50s - could be due to trying to be more careful with entries, or that we are crap!

Kick to HB ratio is 1.31 last year it was 1.37 so that's the same.

Metres per disposal is 15.3 last year 15.4

2023 UC marks pretty much the same as 2022 (around 80)

I'll keep looking, statistically there don't seem to be any clear indicators.

[Mantis]

Do you think we need to reassess our 4 tall forward ambitions as it isn't working

It isn't working at present, but really it hasn't had the opportunity to so do with some of the reasons including:

- Lobb, Cody & Arty all injured
- JUH & Darcy are not physically capable yet to play as key forwards.
- Naughton getting held, double teamed.
- Only 37 I50's in Rd 2.. hard to have an effective forward line if you can't get the ball down there.
- Poor kicking skills in midfield & defence meaning lots of long kicks to packs or missed targets.
- Lack of clean ball from the midfield.

[Sedat]

It isn't working at present, but really it hasn't had the opportunity to so do with some of the reasons including:

- Lobb, Cody & Arty all injured
- JUH & Darcy are not physically capable yet to play as key forwards.
- Naughton getting held, double teamed.
- Only 37 I50's in Rd 2.. hard to have an effective forward line if you can't get the ball down there.
- Poor kicking skills in midfield & defence meaning lots of long kicks to packs or missed targets.
- Lack of clean ball from the midfield.

Have other teams surged past us in relation to winning clean, impactful, truly damaging clearances and in quick transition of the ball from D50 to F50 through the corridor? Are we still getting our fair share of dirty clearances because we have an outnumber at the contest, and are the opposition structuring up a kick behind play with their numerical advantage to punish us on turnover with ease? It looks as though our clearance and CP game is not at optimum this season so far, and previously if we aren't absolutely dominating in these metrics we have been blown off the park by the better/high pressure teams.

Do we honestly think that the quick dirty ball into F50 will benefit our 3-4 key forwards (2 of whom are still young and not yet strong enough to hold their ground against seasoned opposition bodies), especially when there are no quality crumbers/defensive small forwards to lock it in? And if that is going to be our modus operandi, does this game style seem to be contrary to our strengths and exposes our weaknesses (turnover game, lack of leg speed)?

The one good thing about such a poor performance on the weekend, against an opposition "weaker" on paper, is that there is absolutely nowhere to hide. It will be good for our club to play on edge, knowing there will be a searing spotlight on our on-field performances.

[jeemak]

I'd like to see how four works when Gardner comes back into the side and then playing Bruce forward. I know the latter had a shit year last year after coming back from a knee but I highly doubt he's forgotten how to play in the front half of the ground.

[bornadog]

I'd like to see how four works when Gardner comes back into the side and then playing Bruce forward. I know the latter had a shit year last year after coming back from a knee but I highly doubt he's forgotten how to play in the front half of the ground.

We don't actually play 4 talls at the same time, so would throwing Bruce down there make it work?

[G-Mo77]

I'd like to see how four works when Gardner comes back into the side and then playing Bruce forward. I know the latter had a shit year last year after coming back from a knee but I highly doubt he's forgotten how to play in the front half of the ground.

I think you've indirectly highlighted another issue and that is positional changes. So it seems to me the plan was for Bruce to play back and now we scrap that after doing an entire preseason with that plan? Didn't we do this to someone else last season? Shache comes to mind? I remember the Easton Wood to the forward line experiment worked for 1 round. The list is quite long under Beveridge's watch.

Why not just play players where they are best suited and not try to make them something they're not?

[jeemak]

We don't actually play 4 talls at the same time, so would throwing Bruce down there make it work?

We had four in the team round one, didn't we? I get they're not all plodding around the forward fifty at the same time as they rotate through ruck relief/ bench etc.

I don't think Darcy is offering much at the minute, so when Lobb comes back he goes out and if we really want to see if four tall forwards in the team can work we try it with Lobb, Naughton, Bruce and JUH.

[1eyedog]

I'd like to see how four works when Gardner comes back into the side and then playing Bruce forward. I know the latter had a shit year last year after coming back from a knee but I highly doubt he's forgotten how to play in the front half of the ground.

Even though I've really liked what I've seen of Bruce down back this year I'd be up for it. He knows how to lead into space. If Bruce goes forward Darcy has to play back if we want to continue to play him (I don't). I'd only shift Bruce out of the back half when Gardner returns because Keath is absolutely cooked.

[bornadog]

We had four in the team round one, didn't we? I get they're not all plodding around the forward fifty at the same time as they rotate through ruck relief/ bench etc.

I don't think Darcy is offering much at the minute, so when Lobb comes back he goes out and if we really want to see if four tall forwards in the team can work we try it with Lobb, Naughton, Bruce and JUH.

In the two games, we have not had 4 talls at the same time residing in the F50.