Blue Sombrero wrote:
Just watched the Dogs game and the first quarter against Geelong.
Both were free flowing hard running using the corridor at all opportunities and we slaughtered them.
I have no idea why we stopped attacking the game early on in the year and reverted to the crap short stuff down the line that caused us to win and lose by small margins.
If they play daring footy like that every week and only play chippy chippy when we need to control the pace of the game (e.g. to stop a run on) we should really trouble most sides.
If we look at the teams who are still in it, they all play run and carry football and back themselves forward of the footy. Teams who play slow are mid-table and below.
Yep.
I liked Brisbane (v Richmond) this past weekend, particularly from the opening bounce where it came out rapidly to Rich who just sized up the goals from outside 50 and banged it straight through!
Failing to recall anyone from Carlton grabbing it by the scruff of the neck like that this year.
Why wouldn't that type of effort be the goal every single time?
I absolutely cringe when it goes around the boundary; if you look at the ground layout it's 50 metres from the goalsquare to the edge of the centre square (one kick) then another 50 metres to the forward 50 arc (another kick) and a modern AFL player should then be in range of the goals.
Instead of all the effort in structuring 'set ups' around the boundary that require half a dozen successful passes to make any progress why wouldn't it be more profitable and efficient to get the damn ball successfully into the 2,500 square metres of real estate called the centre square from which one decent kick is a goal-bound attack???
All Premiership teams manage to make this a feature of their dominance.
Why can't we?