SA Footy

JK wrote:Yep that's a fair call too, and Walsh seems to be a supporter of taking the emotion out of things and focussing on sticking to processes in order to have the best chance at winning. Hard to argue with him too.

You still want them to play with some emotion/flair otherwise they'll go down the "crow-bot" path when Craig was at the helm.

The niggle is what got the Crows back into the game when they were three goals down in 5 minutes.

I haven't got a real problem with what Vince did. He did nothing more than what Crowley has been doing for years.

Is it in the spirit of the game? Maybe not. The umprires take control early and pay free kicks they missed and Vince thinks twice about continuing with his tactics.

I agree it took the Crows players too long to step in, but how much can you 'step in' these days?? Is a jumper punch and stretched guersney really going to stop a tagger? No. You do anything else these days and you miss weeks. Would have liked to see Thommo etc put more blocks on for Danger around stoppages etc.

Also i don't think Danger will like the look of a few replays where he over extenuated contact to draw a few frees.

Good to see Vince join all the players at the Alma on saturday night where Tex and the boys were stirring up Danger, some banter on social media with Danger having Vince in a headlock, all with big smiles on their faces.

Great post Hawks.

And your last paragraph makes me smile. Shows that there is no hard feelings, which is how it should be.

Regardless if its im the spirit if the game, I think Dangerfield can expect this treatment most weeks now.

stan wrote:Regardless if its im the spirit if the game, I think Dangerfield can expect this treatment most weeks now.

for sure. i think every player goes through this in the transition from being extremely good to being truly one of the best in the comp.

Ron Burgundy wrote:I rated the game Vince played on the weekend.

Two of the better games I've seen Vince play is when he has been heavily involved in the rough and tumble. One, in 2008 in a Showdown when Daniel Motlop ran through him. He was more on the receiving end that day but won the Showdown Medal. And on Saturday.

For me Dangerfield is a good target for this style of play. Danger, although intimidating in his attack on the ball, doesn't seem intimidating as a person. I think we will see more of this going forward. Not a Crowley style niggle, but more picking his moments to put some heavy hits on. Its a fine line for Bern though, get the head once and there will be trouble.

Thought it added real spice to the contest.

Agree totally I'm a Crows fan but that was an awesome game by Vince.

Great article by Robbo about Phil Walsh

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/a ... 7308300112

bennymacca wrote:

stan wrote:Regardless if its im the spirit if the game, I think Dangerfield can expect this treatment most weeks now.

for sure. i think every player goes through this in the transition from being extremely good to being truly one of the best in the comp.

Perhaps but its how he handles it thats the key. Vince may have been out of line a few times but it seemed to be effective. This weekend will be interesting.

Agreed, Vince has given the blueprint for every club now. Up to danger to work through it. Which I think he can and will.

bennymacca wrote:Agreed, Vince has given the blueprint for every club now. Up to danger to work through it. Which I think he can and will.

I think if he puts his head down and works hard, I would suggest he can break the tag. He is a very explosive player and they can be hard to stop.

Also you could isolate him in the goal square with the tagger. I can't see Vince been able to stop him in that role. Also all the hanging on and what not seetma to be a lot clearly for a forward rather than a midfielder around the ball.

stan wrote:

bennymacca wrote:Agreed, Vince has given the blueprint for every club now. Up to danger to work through it. Which I think he can and will.

I think if he puts his head down and works hard, I would suggest he can break the tag. He is a very explosive player and they can be hard to stop.

Also you could isolate him in the goal square with the tagger. I can't see Vince been able to stop him in that role. Also all the hanging on and what not seetma to be a lot clearly for a forward rather than a midfielder around the ball.

Good points Stan. As soon as he looks like getting that real close attention chuck him FWD, once he is in the game with a few touches/goals and his confidence etc takes over, the tag is broken easier.

So is having a run with player/Tagger a new thing? Wow when did this all start? I've never heard anything like this before........

carey wrote:So is having a run with player/Tagger a new thing? Wow when did this all start? I've never heard anything like this before........

You have missed the point of the discussion Carey, its more on how Dangerfield can deal with it and still impact the game. Having a tagger is not new, the level of the tag, the tactics and the players ability to deal with the tag is the issue.

Danger hasnt had that real physical shut down tag (well it hasnt shown) untill last week. He needs to deal with it and not worry about whinging to the umps or the bench etc he's gotta work harder, get on the move and use his explosiveness, and or as mentioned push FWD as no tagger would want to go one on one inside 50 with him.

You can put a lot of time and effort into any player and limit the damage they can do. But you have to do so at a cost to your own game. Vince is one of Melbourne's best attacking players. Sure he held Dangerfield to just being a contributor but at the same time he was no more effective for his side. Dangerfield may have had a tough time but everyone has a down day. By having his on a day when he probably learned a stack about himself and how to deal with adversity yet his side still won, I think Adelaide come out with a huge upside. No doubt many of the things Vince did weren't within the rules and could/should have brought more of a response from the men in white but I suspect in the future it will. Other sides can copy the blueprint but they may just find the tactic far less effective going forward. As for the players response, I don't think they needed to "fly the flag". Old footballers love to step in and say what they would have done, especially those with a clear bias against the club they are criticising, but the fact remains you can't afford to. Why reward Vince's tactics by stepping in and giving away a free kick? Or risk being reported for going too far? As it was the apparently meek response still was met with fines from the AFL. Those melee fines, if I'm not mistaken, eventually lead to suspensions. Perhaps some players need to realise some sentiments should have retired when they did.

If Dangerfield is off the leash and so is Vince who does the most damage? Melbourne's fiesty approach (think McDonald on Tex as well) kept them in the game. I read your other post graham about taggers and I think you are right about them - to a degree. It's fine for a team like Hawthorn that are armed with outside run and an excellent disposal rating by foot to dispense with the tagger but for a team like Melbourne that is trying to stay in a game away from home against a more skillful opponent I believe a tagger can still be of value.

Where I do agree with your tagger free philosphy is that you aren't going to have Cameron Ling types in the top sides so much as we have been used to. I believe the top sides will back thier players and systems to outmatch their opponents and perhaps use additional negating tactics for limited periods of the match rather than assign a player to do it full time.

As for your comments about flying the flag again I only partially agree with what you have said. One thing I agree with is some of the comments used by boneheads such as Dermott Brereton with his ardent love of thuggery are well passed their used by date. However I believe that if you don't fly the flag it sends a pretty piss weak message. Australian rules, even today is a game of force and intimidation (as well as a contest of skill of course) and you cannot allow your opposition any leverage what so ever. I always think it's a really bad sign when players don't fly the flag for their team mates and you'll see it from teams that are down the bottom of the ladder. Melee fines? Really? Better that than turning into a team of Jack Wattses.

regards,

REB

Fair to say that Dangerfield is the better player. If both run free you'd be backing Dangerfield to have a big game. But on the flip side whose output is more important? Dangerfield has some really good midfielders around him with a top notch ruckman. Vince is almost the only one in that Melbourne side with some class and pedigree of playing well.

No doubt at all there will be always be some blokes more worried about their opponent than other blokes. That's always going to happen. I just don't see a bloke surviving in this day and age where his game is measured purely and simply by what his opponent did.

Flying the flag can be done in many ways. Dangerfield should be strong minded enough to know that the team winning is more important. Sure, there will be a tendency to try the tactic if it affects him regularly (I don't think it will personally for long) but if sides aren't picking up wins doing it they won't persist for long. It's all about winning now. I doubt many will admit it, but there have been more than a few blokes over the journey who would have been happier to get 35 and lose than 15 and win.

And the point about the fines is that it's against the rules. Keep breaking the rules and the team ends up suffering. A melee isn't the solution. Make Vince run around a few blokes getting in his way. Get Dangerfield to run around Jacobs or Walker a few times and see if the tagger wants to try to go through a shepherd from a big bloke. Those are far more effective and legal methods that wouldn't be considered flying the flag.

I can't believe it's almost Friday and people are still talking about it. If bernie didn't do this it wouldn't have even been spoke about.
This is more directed at the media than anyone on here

well its better than the melbourne media spending every second of every show i have watched this week talking about how bad carlton are

bennymacca wrote:well its better than the melbourne media spending every second of every show i have watched this week talking about how bad carlton are

this pretty much sums up carlton from preseason til now...