sinbagger wrote:
Hornet wrote:
bondiblue wrote:
Hornet wrote:
The problem with the game plan...
It requires Cripps to be in Brownlow form...
It requires Curnow to be in Coleman form...
It requires Weitering to be in AA form...
...to have any chance. We lose these 3 to LTI's and then we're truly [REDACTED].
Players unavailable is an issue but there's problem with treating an injury list amount as an arbitrary number. Most players you should be able to replace as the next man up... in a proper system based plan.
True.
Except your last line seems to be contadictive.
Injury is an issue, but a number doesn’t represent a tipping point?
Not arbitrary at all. It’s empirical and we have not been able to win with more than 8 out, consistently, even against the bottom teams. Fact. Says something about our list.
We had 6 kids, not one which is what Pies had. Can’t put a seasoned head on 6. We are spread too thin and promoting players to get games into them, not the panacea to fill a gap…..we had 10 gaps to fill. There’s a breaking point. We know what it is. No point ignoring it, believing another coach can weave their magic to overcome inexperience and unproven kids.
Ok, let's use your theory...
Collingwood's injury list is bigger than ours... didn't stop them making us look foolish
I think you’re missing the point, our total list lacks depth so eight out all out.
Collingwood’s list does have depth so they can cope with many more injuries than we can.
Like X said, it's who is injured rather than how many...
Pies depth players go ok playing their roles... they even have the luxury of resting 5 of the best v Freo away and still getting the job done... how would they go under Voss' bomb, bomb, bomb system? who knows...
Remember two years ago we had great depth, we were winning, Carlton supporters were happy... this year prior to round 1, with this list, some even predicted a top 4 finish, only to now have changed their tune. 2 years ago mad skillz... today no skills?
Have you factored in that the game speed has changed massively in the last 2 years and because we lack leg speed we have to move the ball faster, which in most cases is kicking long to contests or out numbered players. Who often get beaten by more agile, faster opponents.I'll give the coaches some credit as they identified that we can't go forward playing the way we did, so they tweaked things a bit and it worked to address a weakness, unfortunately it's created another weakness. We're better defensively but now struggle to kick a winning score. It's created uncertainty and confusion.
Having forwards missing easy shots on goals especially with the amount of service that goes into the F50 is the only uncertainty I can think of. This alone causes a lack of trust and confusion in the team.The game plan is unsustainable for this group...
Sounds like a list issue? Especially when you factor in the speed of the game has changed.
Login
Register
FAQ
