Blueboy_Dan wrote:
verbs wrote:
Looking like, after three rounds, we've made a pretty big mistake. Knee jerk, hype driven decision which has come back to bite us.
Gee talk about irony.
The guy needs a season and a half at the very least, give him a chance.
I think the board believed he was going to come in and just take us straight to the top 4, to be honest.
BUT:
The list isn't as good as it looks on paper it seems.
MM's game plan was based on reducing the number of turnovers and reducing the turnovers in the middle of the ground to almost nil.
You can see from the Collingwood game last week in the last qtr and then Geelong last night where the two teams chip and run, chip and run around the boundary and then centre if for the F50 entry to a forward leading or to a tall forward in a contest 10 metres out from goal.
I don't believe we have the players who can play this sirt of game plan. Apart from Scotland Yarran, Gibbs, Touhy and Henderson, we lack the footskills to actuslly keep possession. Players like Walker, Murphy, Garlett, Armfield, Simpson pass the ball at the feet of their team mate instead of into the space. Happens every week. Judd is oK when he gets space and he has the vision to change the direction of attack. Most of the rest are just bombing it to a contest. Robbo, AJ, Jamo, Bootsma, Davies don't have the foot skills to carry it off.
The reason I am highlighting this is that I don't think MM has the cattle to implement his traditional game plan. If he is to improve this group, he will have to change it to suit the skinny runners we have and the lack of true marking KPP. I think that's why we are still playing Ratts game plan with a few long kicks for good measure. The list was put together by Ratts for HIS game plan. It has the most probability of succeeding with a plan that suits the list, not by trying to change the players into something they are not.