| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Nathan Buckley: what should the club do with him? |
| Sack him now and pay him out |
|
18% |
[ 28 ] |
| Sack him at season's end and pay him out |
|
14% |
[ 22 ] |
| Wait and see until season's end, then review (inclined to sack) |
|
14% |
[ 22 ] |
| Wait and see until season's end, then review (inclined to keep) |
|
17% |
[ 26 ] |
| Keep him until mid-season 2017, then reassess |
|
5% |
[ 9 ] |
| Keep him until end of 2017, then reassess |
|
17% |
[ 27 ] |
| Back him for as long as it takes! All We Can Be with NCB! |
|
9% |
[ 15 ] |
| Other (please outline in the thread) |
|
1% |
[ 2 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 151 |
|
| Author |
Message |
GreekLunatic
Joined: 22 Feb 2003
Location: doncaster vic australia
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| This thread next year might make it to 300 |
|
|
|
 |
What'sinaname 
Joined: 29 May 2010
Location: Living rent free
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| jackcass wrote: | | ^Do people even understand a zone defence and how it works? |
Yes, a zone guards space on a field that is 17,720 squares metres. That number alone tells us why it is a failed strategy. |
|
|
|
|
jackcass 
Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Thanks for clearing that up for me, your insights tell me everything I need to know. |
|
|
|
|
jackcass
Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Can anyone point me to a team in the league that doesn't use a zone defence? |
|
|
|
|
MatthewBoydFanClub
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Location: Elwood
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| jackcass wrote: | | Can anyone point me to a team in the league that doesn't use a zone defence? |
You need to go outside AFL to find it.
VFL, all teams use zone defence
TAC cup, all teams there use zone defence
Northern Territory leagues and Eastern Northern leagues maybe not |
|
|
|
|
Piesnchess
piesnchess
Joined: 09 Jun 2008
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^Damned if I know, but I do know where there is a firggin long zone rabbit proof fence. !
_________________
Poverty exists not because we cannot feed the poor, but because we cannot satisfy the rich.
Chess and Vodka are born brothers. - Russian proverb. |
|
|
|
|
thompsoc
Joined: 21 Sep 2009
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Well Leppa got 3 years and Bux got 6 years to prove themselves.
Notice the difference?
_________________
we don't eat our own at collingwood we just allow them to foul our nest. |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| thompsoc wrote: | Well Leppa got 3 years and Bux got 6 years to prove themselves.
Notice the difference? |
3 years.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
thompsoc
Joined: 21 Sep 2009
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Mugwump wrote: | | thompsoc wrote: | Well Leppa got 3 years and Bux got 6 years to prove themselves.
Notice the difference? |
3 years. |
You never were one for being funny.
_________________
we don't eat our own at collingwood we just allow them to foul our nest. |
|
|
|
|
MatthewBoydFanClub
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Location: Elwood
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| thompsoc wrote: | Well Leppa got 3 years and Bux got 6 years to prove themselves.
Notice the difference? |
Is this trivial persuit?
I'm up for the challenge.
Brisbane panicked and sacked Voss when fabulous Favola self destructed.
Then panicked again and sacked Leppa to cover up the exodus of all their players at the end of each year.
Difference is we didn't panick.
Do I win the prize? |
|
|
|
|
didick
didick
Joined: 17 Jun 2009
Location: Brisbane
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| jackcass wrote: | | ^Do people even understand a zone defence and how it works? |
I'm happy to be schooled on this. My point was why did we play differently yesterday to how we played against many other teams where they kicked the ball around at will, coast to coast, without our players laying a hand on them or the ball? Was yesterday the same game plan, or a different one? And if it was different, why don't we use it more often? Or if it was the same, why do we pull off a performance like that rarely, and not against the teams around or below us?
_________________
"The night is a very dark time for me" Chaz Michael Michaels |
|
|
|
|
MatthewBoydFanClub
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Location: Elwood
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| didick wrote: | | jackcass wrote: | | ^Do people even understand a zone defence and how it works? |
I'm happy to be schooled on this. My point was why did we play differently yesterday to how we played against many other teams where they kicked the ball around at will, coast to coast, without our players laying a hand on them or the ball? Was yesterday the same game plan, or a different one? And if it was different, why don't we use it more often? Or if it was the same, why do we pull off a performance like that rarely, and not against the teams around or below us? |
My guess is that the players were more committed against Hawthorn than they were against Richmond in the second and third quarters. The $64 question is why they show more commitment in one game than another one. Over to you. |
|
|
|
|
nomadjack
Joined: 27 Apr 2006
Location: Essendon
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| thompsoc wrote: | Well Leppa got 3 years and Bux got 6 years to prove themselves.
Notice the difference? |
Yep...Leppa lost the players and Bucks hasn't. |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| BucksIsFutureCoach wrote: | | didick wrote: | | jackcass wrote: | | ^Do people even understand a zone defence and how it works? |
I'm happy to be schooled on this. My point was why did we play differently yesterday to how we played against many other teams where they kicked the ball around at will, coast to coast, without our players laying a hand on them or the ball? Was yesterday the same game plan, or a different one? And if it was different, why don't we use it more often? Or if it was the same, why do we pull off a performance like that rarely, and not against the teams around or below us? |
My guess is that the players were more committed against Hawthorn than they were against Richmond in the second and third quarters. The $64 question is why they show more commitment in one game than another one. Over to you. |
The only game where i think that heppened in the second half of the year was Richmond, and I think that was a mixture of complacency after a strong (and easy) opening to that game, plus a lumbering forward line that could not lock the ball in so that we got killed on the slingshot back over our heads. The one other possibility is that we were just physically drained after one of the most physically demanding wins ever against WCE the week before, where we made a record number of tackles.
North and Adelaide were different - slow starts, largely because we got killed in the ruck and took too long to adjust in the first quarter.
i see no reason to disbelieve the verdict of our coach who has played more football than i have - the game demands constant intensity at the contest, and young sides can struggle to sustain that across four quarters every week, week-in, week-out. Until you start the age decline, nearly everything improves with experience. The first half of the year, when 90% of the disastrous losses happened, was a function of gross collective inexperience and a lack of cohesion born of inadequate shared experience. Time was the best cure, amd we will get better again.
_________________
Two more flags before I die!
Last edited by Mugwump on Mon Aug 29, 2016 7:40 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
|
|
|
RudeBoy
Joined: 28 Nov 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| BucksIsFutureCoach wrote: | | didick wrote: | | jackcass wrote: | | ^Do people even understand a zone defence and how it works? |
I'm happy to be schooled on this. My point was why did we play differently yesterday to how we played against many other teams where they kicked the ball around at will, coast to coast, without our players laying a hand on them or the ball? Was yesterday the same game plan, or a different one? And if it was different, why don't we use it more often? Or if it was the same, why do we pull off a performance like that rarely, and not against the teams around or below us? |
My guess is that the players were more committed against Hawthorn than they were against Richmond in the second and third quarters. The $64 question is why they show more commitment in one game than another one. Over to you. |
If I knew that, I'd be a coach and be paid the big bucks. Consistency of effort is the one thing all coaches aspire their teams to achieve, and it's what separates the top teams from the also-rans. Hopefully, as our younger players become more experienced and confident in themselves and their teammates, we will become a more consistently high performance team. |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
