Walsh wrote:
Blue Vain wrote:
Fagan, Bolton and now Noble have the teams playing an identifiable brand in the first 12 months. Then they had time to hone it.
We ignored defence for 2+ years and sadly, Teague is going to pay for it.
We haven't ignored defence at all - we have players that are too lazy to run back and lay tackles.
Focussing on ball movement doesn't mean you take players away from behind the ball. Pressing up and intercepting exit kicks from the opposition is a part of defence also running back behind the ball with speed. The faster joggers in defensive transition are weeded out the better - we have the worst midfield in this regard.
They are at fault almost 80% of the time in defensive transition. Lack fitness/desire/hunger/talent all of the above who knows.
Bolton put 18 players behind the ball and won 4 games in 44.... major failure.
Can't play homogenous football and expect to win flags.... ball movement is the alpha and omega in todays game and turn overs will occur and either current crops work rate in defensive transition improves or find players that can.
Unlike others I agree with a lot of what you post, and I do think our ball movement is pretty good, our defence had been better the last month but we fell apart on Saturday.
It is a concern we are killed so often on transition, and that’s been a problem for 2 years now.
In saying that I think we reached a tipping point with players out on Saturday.
I’m still in favour of bolstering Teagues assistants and pumping more resources into our football program, as I get the feeling we have been more worried about keeping purse strings tight with covid, but think that will change.
In saying that, I’ll trust the findings of the review, and Teague wouldn’t want any repeat performances of the North game for the rest of the season, especially if we have Harry and Charlie in the side.