Warby wrote:
BV.....I was generalising there......but why aren't others peeling off to offer alternative targets for instance....it's all pretty basic stuff we learned at School.
Yes, I know we'll improve in that area with Fisher et al; but it is disappointing to see a lack of imagination in our attacking moves.....except of course when we win !............

Lack of imagination? We hardly did a forward set up drill for 4 years!
We expect our opponents to do the right thing and come out and play man on man.
How can you expect our players to improvise and be imaginative? They play as they train.
As a rule, if you want to beat Carlton, force our players to face something other than the norm.
Take them out of their comfort zone and force them to make decisions.
If you look at our successes during the Wizzer Cups of 05 and 07, our opponents allowed us to play the games on our terms.
They allowed us to play one on one with 4 players each in our forward line.
Come the real stuff, our opponents suddenly focus on reducing our effectiveness instead of developing their own structures.
Round one of 05, Dean Laidley played 6 defenders to our 4 forwards and we kicked the ball to them. The same happened against Geelong.
Fevola is our key. What opposition analyst worth his salt wouldnt tell them to get numbers back, wait for us to kick the ball to them and run the ball out with the loose men?
We can ask why our players dont peel off and create options but until our players become competent and confident at making correct decisions, the problem will remain.
I've been pushing this point for 4 years now. If you dont allow players to be creative and make decisions, they lose the ability to do so.
The day Pagan walked in the door, he demanded players play to his gamestyle and direct gameplan. No holding the ball up, no lateral movement, no going out of the corridor, no making your own decisions.
Not negotiable.
You're seeing the results and effects of that now.