Post Game Passion: 2019 AFL Rd 19: Carlton vs Adelaide

[bratblue]

You mean Disposal Efficiency, that's the one stat that has changed! :o

We could attribute that to a deliberate change in training, but it's also correlated to the older guys moving back into their traditional roles displacing some of the less efficient kids.

They may well have changed training emphasis from tactics to skills, but that doesn't mean the tactics weren't already being rehearsed. Thinking it has assumes too much and it would be too much change in too short of a time period to come together like it has, it's even a little naive to think it's possible!

It's dead easy to pick a bit of this stat or a bit of that stat and make it a cause when it may just be a correlation. Like fans discussing the change in SoJ, is his current influence a cause of change or an effect of some other change, we don't get to know because we are outside the inner circle.

I'm not a stat man LP, I go by what I see. Yes it can be subjective but stats can also be read in so many different ways.

[JonHenry]

You read a sentence and presume a novel.

You can't assume the way they are playing now is something that they hadn't already trained for, but that assumption is implicit in your statement.

Anyone involved in even basic levels of football will tell you how hard it is to break trained habits mid-season, and it certainly doesn't happen in a week. Further the AFL players train more repetitively than part-timers, meaning they have far more retained memory of preferred behaviors.

What are those undeniable stats, and how do the last few weeks compare to the previous 12? But I'll be kind and warn you in advance that you'll have to be very selective to find any significant difference either overall or player by player. The main difference other than the win/loss is that disposal efficiency has improved going inside F50, all the other stats have barely changed a smidgen!

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp.thea...52b4c.html

Under Teague, they're fourth in the AFL for scoring from turnovers in their front half of the ground, compared to 14th from rounds 1 to 11. Efficiency inside their forward-50 arc is first in the AFL over those six weeks.
This shift is evident in an increase in scoring of more than three goals a game. The Blues have averaged 87.5 points under Teague, compared with 67.1 in the first half of the season that Bolton coached.

[LP]

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp.thea...52b4c.html

Under Teague, they're fourth in the AFL for scoring from turnovers in their front half of the ground, compared to 14th from rounds 1 to 11. Efficiency inside their forward-50 arc is first in the AFL over those six weeks.
This shift is evident in an increase in scoring of more than three goals a game. The Blues have averaged 87.5 points under Teague, compared with 67.1 in the first half of the season that Bolton coached.

Yes that is correct and was the main point I made above.

The only significant statistical change is disposal efficiency going inside F50. All the media beat up about massive statistical improvement across the board is bogus, the one key stat that has changed is finding targets inside F50 either on first entries or from turnovers!

Teague deserves a big tick for freeing the players up and for identifying how to fix a significant problem, but I'm can't extend the invention of the game tactics and scoring options to him in just the last 6 weeks. The back line has been steady and playing the way it's played for more than a year now, it hasn't really changed at all in the last few weeks. The argument could be made the biggest change was getting sMurph and Ed back into the midfield, which had the flow on effect of delivering lesser opponents to the likes of Fisher, Walsh and SPS as well as taking some of the team dependency off Cripps.

[JonHenry]

Yes that is correct and was the main point I made above.

The only significant statistical change is disposal efficiency going inside F50. All the media beat up about massive statistical improvement across the board is bogus, the one key stat that has changed is finding targets inside F50 either on first entries or from turnovers!

Teague deserves a big tick for freeing the players up and for identifying how to fix a significant problem, but I'm can't extend the invention of the game tactics and scoring options to him in just the last 6 weeks. The back line has been steady and playing the way it's played for more than a year now, it hasn't really changed at all in the last few weeks. The argument could be made the biggest change was getting sMurph and Ed back into the midfield, which had the flow on effect of delivering lesser opponents to the likes of Fisher, Walsh and SPS as well as taking some of the team dependency off Cripps.

You said disposal efficiency.
The article says turn overs in front half.
That is a change in the way we defend.
It means we are putting pressure on the opposition in our front half rather than letting them waltz through our pathetic zone Bolton had.
This has made us a much tougher team to play against.

Everyone talks about the contrast in game plan and approaches between Bolton and Teague but you won’t concede things have changed.

They must have been training this way since pre season?
This game plan has simply fallen into place since Teague took over?

You can’t be serious

[Thryleon]

The reason you guys are arguing is because there has been a change in philosophy.

Both have their merits, depending on which way you are alligned and IMHO there is no right answer but just what is going to work today.

Bolton's zone is a defensive/offensive strategy.  It allows the forwards to have more space inside 50 because you welcome the opposition up the ground and empty the scoring zone whilst congesting your defensive area.  It is less about individuals and their ability, and more about a team causing turnovers, and then making use of those turnovers.  Bolton's plan would be more succesful with a team with a poorer set of disciplined individuals.  His game plan's major issue, is that the attack relies on being efficient, and also relies on players being able to hit targets consistently which is something that even the poorest of athletic individuals can do provided they are footballers.  It is less contested, and less combatative which means that its easier to play more consistently.

Teague is an offensive/defensive strategy.  It relies on having more opportunities to score, and means more people are pressing into attack.  It means that we are prone to scoring against from turnovers, and we are seeing teams go end to end on us quite easily (which is likely the most difficult thing to) because the major difficulty there is clearing that defensive zone, which results in more hurried kicks out due to pressure.  I've noticed that in Teague's game plan, we are less reliant on generating scoring from winning first use.  Our contested posessions have gone up (likely because our forward press is resulting in more contests inside forward 50).  We seem to be more reliant on individual ability to play football and be athletic rather than team oriented game plan than we had before. 



Which one is better is going to simply be a matter of what is "in vogue" than anything else.


Bolton was doing something that is more Hawthorn oriented.  Teague was doing something more Adelaide/West Coast oriented.

[JonHenry]

This comment below is why we are arguing

“I'm damn certain AFL teams can't significantly change game plans and tactics mid-season, which means we are implementing stuff we've worked on probably since the pre-season and doing it better or just exposing it now!”

It is simply not true

[LP]

This comment below is why we are arguing

“I'm damn certain AFL teams can't significantly change game plans and tactics mid-season, which means we are implementing stuff we've worked on probably since the pre-season and doing it better or just exposing it now!”

It is simply not true

The bulk of our game plan remains unchanged.

You might see clubs introduce new tactics as the season progress, but that doesn't mean they are doing it cold without rehearsing and training for it, and it doesn't happen in a week in the middle of the season.

It's the exact opposite of what you assert, tactics and game plans are trained for long before you ever see them attempted or implemented.

[Thryleon]

This comment below is why we are arguing

“I'm damn certain AFL teams can't significantly change game plans and tactics mid-season, which means we are implementing stuff we've worked on probably since the pre-season and doing it better or just exposing it now!”

It is simply not true

Again its all about perspective.

What one see's as a change of game plan, another might say is the same plan being executed differently.

Has the plan changed?

I think the emphasis on where the lines sit has changed.

I don't think the plans have changed all that much, although I dont think the game plans really differ much anyway.  What changes is where your opposition lets you have space.  How you move in relation to them arguably has a bigger impact than anything else.  The other thing that changes is the personnell executing the plan.

[LP]

I don't think the plans have changed all that much, although I dont think the game plans really differ much.  What changes is where your opposition lets you have space.  How you move in relation to them arguably has a bigger impact than anything else.

Exactly, it can be as subtle as a small change in the timing.

I think JonHenry confuses something he hasn't seen before, something that is new to him, with something they haven't trained for already.

A more prudent observation would be to ask where did these small changes come from, and why weren't they initiated earlier. It could well be that Teague was offering this advice to tweak the plan to BB all along and BB chose to ignore it, if so BB's demise is on him!

[kruddler]

I'm pretty sure that every team has a similar game plan....kick more goals than the opposition.

How they do that will differ from club to club.

Its all about the definition of a game plan and how nit picky you want to be about what that actually is.

Under Teague, we have played with a lot more freedom. Our setups have been different. Our use of players have been completely different.

Overall, thats enough of a game plan change to be significant IMO.