 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Gonzalo
Joined: 30 May 2016
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| 5 from the wing on debut wrote: | | Gonzalo, your argument falls down. Your position is that the change to rotations which only commenced this season caused the problem yet in your previous posts you bemoan the injuries which have been occurring since 2012 even though the game plan has not changed since 2010.You also overlook how young the 2010 team was. Looking at your posts I have the impression that you want to lay blame and keep adapting your reasons to whatever someone else says, but you are inconsistent. |
No, it doesn't fall down.
The 2010 team had a squad of 30 players that were rotated heavilly in and out of the side. You have failed to address the point that the likes of Lockyer, O'Bree, Presti (he was the first choice FB going into the GF but got injured), Fraser and Medhurst played large chunks of the year until they were superseded by the younger players at the end of the year. It also had very experienced players in Jolly, Ball, Brown, Didak, Davis and the like in the best 22.
You have also failed to address the point of rotations. The high amount of rotations that Malthouse implemented allowed the side to play a very high intensity game based on manic pressure and tackling. Rotations dropped the following year with the sub and they have reached a point where they are capped.
You have nothing. |
|
|
|
 |
Cuthbert Collingwood 
Once was on fire, now all at sea
Joined: 08 Dec 2005
Location: The BBC (Brunswick Bowling Club)
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^ this is you talking to yourself yeah?
_________________
McRae for Governor-General! |
|
|
|
|
The Boy Who Cried Wolf
Joined: 26 Sep 2013
Location: We prefer free speech - you know it's right
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies4shaw wrote: | | The Boy Who Cried Wolf wrote: | | RudeBoy wrote: | | thompsoc wrote: | Would not have a clue about the cause of our injuries.
But, statistically no matter which way you look at it, there seems to be that our injuries could be considered as an outlier in comparison to the competition.
Is it way outside ....no... but it still is a concern. |
And yet, despite us having more injuries to key players, Bucks has kept us competitive, unlike the way the Dockers have collapsed in a hole. Seems to me Bucks is a frigging genius to have us playing as well as we have. |
Competitive? You're kidding right?! I mean I know we have been a lot better last 2-3 weeks, but really this year so far has been nothing short of _shockingly horrid_!!! |
It must be deeply troubling for you that the Mods locked the "Sack Buckley" thread. |
Must admit I was a little surprised, but I guess this isn't a democracy. Still it will be impossible to eradicate the topic entirely as it will instead flow through other subjects.. which I personally think will be a pity. |
|
|
|
|
The Boy Who Cried Wolf
Joined: 26 Sep 2013
Location: We prefer free speech - you know it's right
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Pies4shaw wrote: | | RudeBoy wrote: | | The Boy Who Cried Wolf wrote: | | RudeBoy wrote: | | thompsoc wrote: | Would not have a clue about the cause of our injuries.
But, statistically no matter which way you look at it, there seems to be that our injuries could be considered as an outlier in comparison to the competition.
Is it way outside ....no... but it still is a concern. |
And yet, despite us having more injuries to key players, Bucks has kept us competitive, unlike the way the Dockers have collapsed in a hole. Seems to me Bucks is a frigging genius to have us playing as well as we have. |
Competitive? You're kidding right?! I mean I know we have been a lot better last 2-3 weeks, but really this year so far has been nothing short of _shockingly horrid_!!! |
Apart from the Swans/drugs fiasco, we have been competitive in every game we've played, even the one's we've lost. In fact, we should have won the Melbourne, Carlton and Saints games. Even against the Eagles we were competitive. Our percentage shows we have not been getting smashed by anyone. That is a fact not an opinion. |
RB, your loyalty does you credit but this particular view seems to be over-egging the pudding somewhat or, if you prefer, giving the trolls a free suck of the sauce-bottle. As a reasonably fair-minded supporter, not generally prone to over-reaction (I did once compare Leon Davis unfavourably to a cactus - but that remains, in my respectful opinion, an accurate summation of his game on the day), I would have said Collingwood was hopeless against the Swans, fair against Richmond (but we should have lost), pathetic against Melbourne, worse against St Kilda (who won the game, despite having injury problems, including having their all-time best player injured for the whole second-half - they only average 87 points for, despite having played Essendon, Melbourne, Fremantle and Port but somehow racked up 119 against us)), good against Essendon (like every other team in the competition, except Melbourne), lucky not to lose by 400 points to the Wiggles (OK, there's a little hyperbole in that but the game was well and truly over before our team quite got off the plane), unacceptably non-competitive against Carlton, good against Brisbane (like every other team in the competition, except Gold Coast), great for the first quarter and last quarter against Geelong and just good enough in the middle two quarters to hold them out) and we kicked 7 goals against a team with a dismal record away from Docklands. Hence, we are 4 wins and 6 losses. Happily, we have already played Hawthorn, Adelaide, North Melbourne and GWS - and we don't have to play West Coast again or Footscray at Docklands, so it's all easy from here. |
That is a very fair assessment imho. Nice post. |
|
|
|
|
jackcass 
Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Gonzalo wrote: | | 5 from the wing on debut wrote: | | Gonzalo, your argument falls down. Your position is that the change to rotations which only commenced this season caused the problem yet in your previous posts you bemoan the injuries which have been occurring since 2012 even though the game plan has not changed since 2010.You also overlook how young the 2010 team was. Looking at your posts I have the impression that you want to lay blame and keep adapting your reasons to whatever someone else says, but you are inconsistent. |
No, it doesn't fall down.
The 2010 team had a squad of 30 players that were rotated heavilly in and out of the side. You have failed to address the point that the likes of Lockyer, O'Bree, Presti (he was the first choice FB going into the GF but got injured), Fraser and Medhurst played large chunks of the year until they were superseded by the younger players at the end of the year. It also had very experienced players in Jolly, Ball, Brown, Didak, Davis and the like in the best 22.
You have also failed to address the point of rotations. The high amount of rotations that Malthouse implemented allowed the side to play a very high intensity game based on manic pressure and tackling. Rotations dropped the following year with the sub and they have reached a point where they are capped.
You have nothing. |
I'm not even sure what you're actually trying to say (other than promoting a theme that Collingwood does nothing right) or that collating a few disparate points in any way coalesces the point.
If it's not a rude question, how old are you and what previous names have you posted under?
PS: I think about 19 or 20 players played at least 20 of the 26 games in 2010 so it was ultimately a pretty stable side, 33 players used over all. We've already used 36 players this season and only about 9-10 have played every game and 2 of those were Fasolo and Moore.
Last edited by jackcass on Tue May 31, 2016 7:47 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
thompsoc
Joined: 21 Sep 2009
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| jackcass wrote: | | Gonzalo wrote: | | 5 from the wing on debut wrote: | | Gonzalo, your argument falls down. Your position is that the change to rotations which only commenced this season caused the problem yet in your previous posts you bemoan the injuries which have been occurring since 2012 even though the game plan has not changed since 2010.You also overlook how young the 2010 team was. Looking at your posts I have the impression that you want to lay blame and keep adapting your reasons to whatever someone else says, but you are inconsistent. |
No, it doesn't fall down.
The 2010 team had a squad of 30 players that were rotated heavilly in and out of the side. You have failed to address the point that the likes of Lockyer, O'Bree, Presti (he was the first choice FB going into the GF but got injured), Fraser and Medhurst played large chunks of the year until they were superseded by the younger players at the end of the year. It also had very experienced players in Jolly, Ball, Brown, Didak, Davis and the like in the best 22.
You have also failed to address the point of rotations. The high amount of rotations that Malthouse implemented allowed the side to play a very high intensity game based on manic pressure and tackling. Rotations dropped the following year with the sub and they have reached a point where they are capped.
You have nothing. |
I'm not even sure what you're actually trying to say (other than promoting a theme that Collingwood does nothing right) or that collating a few disparate points in any way coalesces the point.
If it's not a rude question, how old are you and what previous names have you posted under? |
Here it goes again..... the endless questioning of a Posters competence by the one and only Nicks Mr right!
It is so so so boring.
_________________
we don't eat our own at collingwood we just allow them to foul our nest. |
|
|
|
|
Gonzalo
Joined: 30 May 2016
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| thompsoc wrote: | | jackcass wrote: | | Gonzalo wrote: | | 5 from the wing on debut wrote: | | Gonzalo, your argument falls down. Your position is that the change to rotations which only commenced this season caused the problem yet in your previous posts you bemoan the injuries which have been occurring since 2012 even though the game plan has not changed since 2010.You also overlook how young the 2010 team was. Looking at your posts I have the impression that you want to lay blame and keep adapting your reasons to whatever someone else says, but you are inconsistent. |
No, it doesn't fall down.
The 2010 team had a squad of 30 players that were rotated heavilly in and out of the side. You have failed to address the point that the likes of Lockyer, O'Bree, Presti (he was the first choice FB going into the GF but got injured), Fraser and Medhurst played large chunks of the year until they were superseded by the younger players at the end of the year. It also had very experienced players in Jolly, Ball, Brown, Didak, Davis and the like in the best 22.
You have also failed to address the point of rotations. The high amount of rotations that Malthouse implemented allowed the side to play a very high intensity game based on manic pressure and tackling. Rotations dropped the following year with the sub and they have reached a point where they are capped.
You have nothing. |
I'm not even sure what you're actually trying to say (other than promoting a theme that Collingwood does nothing right) or that collating a few disparate points in any way coalesces the point.
If it's not a rude question, how old are you and what previous names have you posted under? |
Here it goes again..... the endless questioning of a Posters competence by the one and only Nicks Mr right!
It is so so so boring. |
I'm not sure what I am pointing out is exactly hard to understand.
The gameplan we employed in 2010 was based on manic pressure, causing turnovers and locking the ball in the forward 50.
The explosion of the interchange rotations by Mick was a cornerstone of this. The high rotation numbers allowed players to play the pressure game at a very high level.
If you read the book by James Coventry on tactics there is one chapter on this philosphy.
The gameplan became more taxing on the players as the interchange rotations gradually reduced from 2011 when there was an introduction of a sub and it has gone to a stage where interchanges are capped.
In 2010 we may have had a young 22 that won the flag, but we had a strong core of 30 players that had a number of very experienced players in that rotation. From Ball to Presti, to Jolly to Didak.
In 2016 rotations have been capped and we simply don't have this squad of experienced players. That is a big reason why the manic gameplan is fatiguing the list and injuries are being recorded at epidemic levels. |
|
|
|
|
thompsoc
Joined: 21 Sep 2009
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Dear Mr Gonzalo
Jackcass spends half of his life on Nicks.
That is sad I know.
Explaining your views to him is pointless.
Because there is Jackcass world and Posters like you should not grace this board with opinions that are not suitable to post.
But you serve one purpose.
That is to be mocked!!!!!
_________________
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: | Dear Mr Gonzalo
Jackcass spends half of his life on Nicks.
That is sad I know.
Explaining your views to him is pointless.
Because there is Jackcass world and Posters like you should not grace this board with opinions that are not suitable to post.
But you serve one purpose.
That is to be mocked!!!!! |
Actually Jackcass does Nick's a service by challenging the various people whose sole purpose on this board seems to be to denigrate Collingwood. I do not include you in this Thompsoc, as I have read you making interesting and useful observations based on building the club, attending the 2s, etc, rather than just tearing it down. But there is nothing supportive from some of these other characters, and I don't think you should support them.
I had the same question about Gonzalo's prior identities. Pretty clear to me that the Boy who cried Wolf is Jack Spain (the love for the Hawks is a giveaway), and the late lamented jez07 - who vapourized the minute we started winning - seems to have handed the baton over to the newbie Gonzalo. It's a pretty fair question from Jackcass.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
thompsoc
Joined: 21 Sep 2009
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Dear Mugwump
I have not heard of Mr Gonzalo until today
He is not Jack Spain
In actual fact Jack Spain sent me an email yesterday.
probably worth posting as it is relevant to this thread.
Gonzalo is not Jez07 because I know exactly who Jez07 is.
My problem with Jackcass is that he mocks and belittles other posters which I really dislike.
from Jack
Hi Guys,
Pleased with the effort in the first three quarters yesterday, although we turned the ball over too much to threaten the good sides. But the injuries killed us. That's five years of terrible injuries in a row now. Surely it is more than bad luck. The law of averages suggest that things would be on the improve if it was all down to just bad luck.
Okay, so what's the problem? It's obviously a curse of some sort. Some say Bucks is cursed. Maybe he is. 2002 and 2003 spring to mind when he was a player. And he's had no luck as a coach.
No time to be rational now. I'll just go for what I think is the most plausible irrational suggestion, i.e. we have had the bone pointed at us somewhere in our distant past. Something fundamentally changed for the worse after the 1950s. The rot set in and the Colliwobbles myth was born. But in truth I don't think the Colliwobbles explain much - just that we've lost a hell of a lot more grand finals than any other club. I am talking club-wide curse, that affects everything from administrative decisions, the lack of success in recruiting true champions, horrific injuries and of course terrible finals losses.
I wonder whether yesterday had something to do with the heart of our curse. Think about it. It was Indigenous Round, and yet Collingwood has been and still is the whitest of white sides. We have played the least number of indigenous footballers of any club throughout the entire history of the VFL/AFL. And then there was that disgraceful episode with Nicky Winmar at old Victoria Park that embarrassed the club, but didn't really change much around the place. We still draft fewer aboriginal kids than any other club. I mean thank God we recruited Varcoe, because it would have been humiliating for us to walk out on Indigneous Round with no aboriginal players. So there it is, I am convinced that someone in our past has literally pointed the bone at Collingwood. We are cursed, and until we seek the assistance of some aboriginal "witchdoctor" to rid us of this curse we are going to struggle for success.
Something has to be done. We may as well give this a go, because at this rate we might only win two more flags this century (we've only won two in the past 58 years!). Of course by that stage Hawthorn will have notched up their 40th flag and Geelong their 35th!
I feel sick. 2016 is another wasted season I'm afraid. And it is only made worse by the feeling that Carlton will win their next flag BEFORE us because they picked a guy who actually can coach!
_________________
we don't eat our own at collingwood we just allow them to foul our nest. |
|
|
|
|
think positive 
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Gees this is exhausting
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
The Boy Who Cried Wolf
Joined: 26 Sep 2013
Location: We prefer free speech - you know it's right
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Mugwump wrote: |
Snip:
I had the same question about Gonzalo's prior identities. Pretty clear to me that the Boy who cried Wolf is Jack Spain (the love for the Hawks is a giveaway), and the late lamented jez07 - who vapourized the minute we started winning - seems to have handed the baton over to the newbie Gonzalo. It's a pretty fair question from Jackcass. |
Incorrect, I despise the Hawks. The difference is I'm willing to acknowledge that in short to medium history, they have blown us off the park as far as silverware goes.... |
|
|
|
|
jackcass
Joined: 01 Mar 2005
Location: Bendigo
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Gonzalo wrote: | I'm not sure what I am pointing out is exactly hard to understand.
The gameplan we employed in 2010 was based on manic pressure, causing turnovers and locking the ball in the forward 50.
The explosion of the interchange rotations by Mick was a cornerstone of this. The high rotation numbers allowed players to play the pressure game at a very high level.
If you read the book by James Coventry on tactics there is one chapter on this philosphy.
The gameplan became more taxing on the players as the interchange rotations gradually reduced from 2011 when there was an introduction of a sub and it has gone to a stage where interchanges are capped.
In 2010 we may have had a young 22 that won the flag, but we had a strong core of 30 players that had a number of very experienced players in that rotation. From Ball to Presti, to Jolly to Didak.
In 2016 rotations have been capped and we simply don't have this squad of experienced players. That is a big reason why the manic gameplan is fatiguing the list and injuries are being recorded at epidemic levels. |
Thank you for writing it out clearly for we simple folk. I don't agree that the philosophy of high pressure football has gone purely because we now have a cap on rotations. I would have thought the primary reason we lifted our training loads by 30% in 2013-14 and again in 2014-15 preseasons was specifically to allow the exact same philosophy to be applied in a reducing rotations paradigm. Think footy in 2016 is more manic than it has ever been. |
|
|
|
|
Gonzalo
Joined: 30 May 2016
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| jackcass wrote: | | Gonzalo wrote: | I'm not sure what I am pointing out is exactly hard to understand.
The gameplan we employed in 2010 was based on manic pressure, causing turnovers and locking the ball in the forward 50.
The explosion of the interchange rotations by Mick was a cornerstone of this. The high rotation numbers allowed players to play the pressure game at a very high level.
If you read the book by James Coventry on tactics there is one chapter on this philosphy.
The gameplan became more taxing on the players as the interchange rotations gradually reduced from 2011 when there was an introduction of a sub and it has gone to a stage where interchanges are capped.
In 2010 we may have had a young 22 that won the flag, but we had a strong core of 30 players that had a number of very experienced players in that rotation. From Ball to Presti, to Jolly to Didak.
In 2016 rotations have been capped and we simply don't have this squad of experienced players. That is a big reason why the manic gameplan is fatiguing the list and injuries are being recorded at epidemic levels. |
Thank you for writing it out clearly for we simple folk. I don't agree that the philosophy of high pressure football has gone purely because we now have a cap on rotations. I would have thought the primary reason we lifted our training loads by 30% in 2013-14 and again in 2014-15 preseasons was specifically to allow the exact same philosophy to be applied in a reducing rotations paradigm. Think footy in 2016 is more manic than it has ever been. |
If you look at stats, there is no direct colleration between contested disposals, tackling numbers, pressure acts and team success.
The best sides these days are those who are most efficient with the ball. The rise of zones adapted by BB and soccer tactics have seen this as sides need to pick through these zones. Good sides are able to tire their opponents by keeping the ball in their hands and those sides are able to force turnovers by setting up zones that slow ball movement and see their opponents kick to 50/50 contests.
Until the gameplan is totally changed, the list has an abundance of skilled players that can pick through zones, we will rely on manic pressure and tackling and thus will always have long injury lists.
There have been mitigating factors but there has been no improvement and change in the strategy from 2015 to 2016. We can only beat sides if we bring manic pressure to the table. This approach is not sustainable and it eventually wears down the list in terms of injuries and fatigue. |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| thompsoc wrote: | Dear Mugwump
I have not heard of Mr Gonzalo until today
He is not Jack Spain
In actual fact Jack Spain sent me an email yesterday.
probably worth posting as it is relevant to this thread.
Gonzalo is not Jez07 because I know exactly who Jez07 is.
My problem with Jackcass is that he mocks and belittles other posters which I really dislike.
from Jack
Hi Guys,
Pleased with the effort in the first three quarters yesterday, although we turned the ball over too much to threaten the good sides. But the injuries killed us. That's five years of terrible injuries in a row now. Surely it is more than bad luck. The law of averages suggest that things would be on the improve if it was all down to just bad luck.
Okay, so what's the problem? It's obviously a curse of some sort. Some say Bucks is cursed. Maybe he is. 2002 and 2003 spring to mind when he was a player. And he's had no luck as a coach.
No time to be rational now. I'll just go for what I think is the most plausible irrational suggestion, i.e. we have had the bone pointed at us somewhere in our distant past. Something fundamentally changed for the worse after the 1950s. The rot set in and the Colliwobbles myth was born. But in truth I don't think the Colliwobbles explain much - just that we've lost a hell of a lot more grand finals than any other club. I am talking club-wide curse, that affects everything from administrative decisions, the lack of success in recruiting true champions, horrific injuries and of course terrible finals losses.
I wonder whether yesterday had something to do with the heart of our curse. Think about it. It was Indigenous Round, and yet Collingwood has been and still is the whitest of white sides. We have played the least number of indigenous footballers of any club throughout the entire history of the VFL/AFL. And then there was that disgraceful episode with Nicky Winmar at old Victoria Park that embarrassed the club, but didn't really change much around the place. We still draft fewer aboriginal kids than any other club. I mean thank God we recruited Varcoe, because it would have been humiliating for us to walk out on Indigneous Round with no aboriginal players. So there it is, I am convinced that someone in our past has literally pointed the bone at Collingwood. We are cursed, and until we seek the assistance of some aboriginal "witchdoctor" to rid us of this curse we are going to struggle for success.
Something has to be done. We may as well give this a go, because at this rate we might only win two more flags this century (we've only won two in the past 58 years!). Of course by that stage Hawthorn will have notched up their 40th flag and Geelong their 35th!
I feel sick. 2016 is another wasted season I'm afraid. And it is only made worse by the feeling that Carlton will win their next flag BEFORE us because they picked a guy who actually can coach! |
Actually you're right - "Wolfie" is not nearly as batshit-crazy as Jack became, as the extract you posted above shows. Wolfie is clearly some other kind of tear-down merchant. As for who Jez is, please tell ! Luke Ball's mum ? Nick Maxwell's butler ? Whoever he was, he was clearly wrong in his inside-information that Buckley had lost the players. The last few weeks made that plain. And then, having shone so brightly, he seemed to leave us ...
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
