Fortunately, I use my fingers rather than my toes on my keyboard, BV, so there really was no great likelihood that I'd trip over the keyboard

Last year, the Eagles won the Premiership using a hard-running one-on-one style. The concession to beat Sydney's attempts to stifle it's run was to use handball to break up the Swan's attempts to flood back. Their lack of key forwards and the strength of their midfield meant their running game was the key to their success.

Sydney won the previous year using possession footy.

Port's key position players were a real key to its win over Brisbane.

But what about the triple premiership Lions outfit? That was a shining example of the benefits of direct footy. That was typified by Keating, whose favourite tactic was the big thump forward at centre bounces allowing his midfielders to run onto it and take shots at goal or feed Lynch, Brown and Bradshaw. They were reknowned for their directness. The illusion that this was a style that was outmoded by "tempo football" was created by the fact that the Swans had success against them towards the latter part of the Lions' dominant period.

The idea that "modern football" is irrevocably drifting towards possession football is flawed. Every dominant side brings with it the illusion that its style of football is the only way to go. Essendon* and Brisbane were replaced by teams who created their own style. If we try to become a pale imitation of a ladder leader now, we'll be destined to play catch-up with the top sides of the future.

Surely it shouldn't be that hard for the new guys coming into the seniors.

All Pagan would need to drill into them before a game is....

"ok kids, think under ten's, think under ten's...thump it long...think under ten's".

Muzza

Watching the 2004 Grand Final, it appeared to me that Port Adelaide's fleet of pacy players allowed them to run over the top of Brisbane

Looks like you agree with the rest of the post then Effes

The old school, one on one direct footy is great when the other side is willing to go head to head with you but most sides know the key to beating us is to get numbers back and rebound. Last year WC went one on one with us and we did well and were unlucky to lose, this year they had a couple dropping back in the hole to help out Glass and the game was over very early. Geelong and StKilda employed similar tactics and got the same result.

_________________
"We used to sit around and talk about how bad the game plan was." Anthony Koutoufides

So why are we 14th with 2 wins and the next win no where in sight.
Laidley is a hack ask anyone- his efforts at trade week made him the laughing stock of the AFL - He has topped up with genuine recycled hacks his list is shot to pieces .

Why are they winning and we are not and we play the same games style

By the way who said I had a preference for possession footy - My preference is for smart footy there is a difference . We play smart footy until we enter the forward fifty - then we play dumb footy - last week I stopped counting at 10 (some time in the second 1/4) the number of times we bombed it to the top of the square and it rebounded back out

_________________
If you allow the Government to change the Laws in an emergency
They will create an Emergency to change the Laws

Despite the claims of detractors, I don't think the game plan is to bomb it long without trying to find the best option. Pagan told the media last week that he was disappointed when that has happened.

And I doubt that Santy's brain fade and arguably Walks not finishing off his good work with a goal were a result of the game plan. They were more instances of poor execution or decision-making.

Have a look at the following youtube clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wkZ2vO3czY. Somehow I don't think Gibbs was dressed down for going to the loose man instead of a contest or a designated spot.

Fev is a mixed blessing because he attracts defenders like a magnet but his teammates also are drawn into passing to him repeatedly, blinded to other options. The absence of a highly skilled and composed Stevo compounds the problem, as does the absence of Bett's willingness to pressure the rebounding defenders.

Barry's game plan is basically the same as Denis has used in recent years and is based on teaching young players the basics they need in the AFL - namely accountability, manning up, creating space, switching the play, carrying the ball and kicking to the best option.

He is somewhat hamstrung by the fact that he is forced to play all or most of the Carlton listed players - even if it stuffs up the balance of the team - and the limited player resources at Preston. Its damn hard to play high risk running football if you have a team full of giants with glacial speed and a bunch of hasbeens or neverwasses.

Like most coaches with at least half a brain, he tries to make the best of what he has whilst ensuring the players learn the basics.

_________________
Hey Rocky; there are too many rabbits ... in China.

we could implement the ideal game plan and its still wouldn't owrk because our players make countless simple errors.
we need to cut down the error rate..

I'm not sure that the Aisake and Hampson are glacial giants. And Benjamin, Anderson, Bower, Bannister, Edwards, Raso, and Jacko (all of whom have spent some time in the Ants) might be tall but they are hardly glacial as well.

You're right when you say that the Ants don't have much depth in nippy and talented midfielders in the Ants. But then again we have a similar problem in the seniors. I don't know that it explains a reliance on a possession game. In many ways, a more dynamic attempt to get it into our talls may well be a better solution.

I listened to an interview with a Carlton Official on radio after the match and he said that the game plan last week was to go long to the top of the square at all opportunities and Fev to play out at CHF taking the backmen away from goal. They had analysed previous matches and realised that we did most of our attacking through Fev and thought this would bring other players into the game and provide more scoring opportunities.

This worked with Waite being too good for Bassett but the Crows stopped following Fev out to CHF in the last quarter and dropped back to the goal and we didn't change our plan or seize on their changed tactics. Both Walks and Blackwell played as instructed and kicked to the top of the square. Young players who sometimes don't read the situation and seize the initiative. They will learn.

... and so he should be, the club is not here to win premierships for Preston but to develop CFC players.

_________________
|♥♥♥♥♥♥| http://www.blueseum.org |♥♥♥♥♥♥|

Gee whiz! Only four years to figure this out. And we're still kicking to a spot. Jesus, how much longer can this go on? And for all those people who think there is some other reason for the game plan other than it's the only one Pagan knows - there isn't. Our forward line looks like Pitt Street at lunch time and down back reminds me of a couple of kids playing kick to kick on an early Monday morning golf course.

Pagan said at half time the coaches urged the players to get the ball in the coridor , move it as fast as possible and kick long to the deepest forward. He said this worked well. He said it was the plan for the whole game but in two quarters the team didnt win enough of the ball around the ground.

The scoreboard showed pagan to be correct. If the midfield and half backers win the ball and move it as they are told kicking long into the forward line is effective.

This season the blues have played at 2 tempo's. Flat out and completely stuffed. Pagan knows that if he wants he can come up with a tempo adjustment plan and stop other teams when they have a run on. This would help us win games now but he believes that by keeping the team going at the flat out tempo he is getting more miles into their legs and in time he will have a team that can do that for 4 quarters and will be unstopable.

I am glad Pagan listened to the us at the end of last year. Full credit to him for not coaching to improve his win loss ratio anymore and concentrating on team development.

Yet Carlton are one of the best clearance teams in the competition.
Our players are winning more than their share of the ball and our inside 50s are well up.
Why are we 14th on the ladder with 2 wins?



Obviously not.

We are the 4th highest scoring team in the AFL. Obviously we are winning the ball and getting it in there.
Yet we've won 2 games.
I'd suggest Pagan is nowhere near correct.



No, Pagan will end up with a broken down bunch of footballers who are worn out.
Our methods in rotating players and managing gametime are like Pagans game tactics. A relic of the past.
Humans can not physically compete at the required level without a. resting or b. breaking down.
Have a look at how many last quarters we've won since round 1.
None.

Our players are busting their boilers getting the ball into the forward line only to see it come out twice as fast. Our opposition are feasting on Pagans "kick long and move it quick" philosophy.

There is a time to fast break and a time to retain possession. Our players wont come to terms with that until our coach does.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.

If that's the gameplan fine, but how about structuring a forward line that actually reflects the gameplan - like maybe putting a tall forward who can mark the ball deep. Like the guy who was sitting on the bench with the initials Josh Kennedy?

And while you're at it maybe place some crumbers around him so that if the ball drops to the ground we actually have a chance not only to kick a goal, but also maybe to apply forward pressure to maybe try to stop the ball going straight up the other end of the ground (ala waite's dropped mark and subsequent welsh goal)?

Maybe?

It will be at the end of the year. Greg Swann said on 3AW last week that either Pagan or Mitchell WILL be gone at the end of the year. Crackers Keenan said exactly the same thing in his weekly Geelong Advertiser article this week. He went further to say that there will be no way known it'll be Mitchell that'll be going. That's why Mitchell wasn't sacked. He's considered long term by the club while Pagan isn't. So, given the short term, why would you sack Mitchell. He, on one hand, has done a great job while Pagan, on the other hand, has been nothing short of pathetic.

As for different game styles, not everyone on the Bullants list is a Carlton player. He has a respensibility to the Bullants administration to win games of football the best way he can, not be a clone of our senior coach.

Sounds good to me.

I cant see why JK cant be used in the goal square like waite was in the third last sat when fev was taking his opponents up the ground to open the forward line. And more crumber / defensive forward would be good.

Jim, what exactly has BM done that would constitute a great job?

_________________
“It is a state of mind, a system of belief, a way of seeing the world, a deep faith that, because you are Carlton, you belong to something great.” - Mike Fitzpatrick articulating what Out of the Blue means.

If the 2 gameplan theory is even remotely true it is a further indictment on the club for failing to resolve the Mich/pagan issue.

How can we expect to be taken seriously when we can't even get our house in order?

Mitchell should be told by the club who pays his wages how they wish their players to play and it what style.