rodgerfox wrote:Thinline wrote:
Fact is people who have inside knowledge have the good sense to be discreet. Those who aren't are making it up 9.9/10.
Not sure where this supposed 'inside knowledge' thing comes from?
Fact is I worked with a board member, and he had very loose lips. Loved to brag, and loved to show how important he was by sharing information with people.
I haven't worked with him for a while now, and haven't spoken to him for some time.
Frankly, he was a waanker who even bragged about his importance by sharing players' personal lives with people.
On the topic of roles and responsibilities within the team, I'm amazed by what I'm reading here. Reading from people who follow footy closely.
Makes me wonder what the hell people do when they attend the footy each week - and makes me seriously wonder what you blokes did when you were playing!
A lot of footy clubs, nearly all, have roles within the team. Every player has a specific role.
These roles must be strictly adhered to. Some players have roles with autonomy, others have no autonomy whatsoever.
The decision to 'mark or spoil' at a particular contest is not their decision to make - it's already been made for them.
The decision to kick long or stop and kick backwards or sideways isn't their decision. It's already been made for them.
The Saints have taken the 'roles' thing to this extent. According to an ex-assistant the other week over a beer or two, he told me that this is a sticking point for the football department.
Lyon has taken it further than most other coaches - and won't budge. It was a good thing early on, but became an issue as other clubs worked out what was happening, and started to defend far too easily against us.
Not sure if I'd call that 'inside information'?? But I guess if you're a loser who sits on the couch all day then dons the scarf and beanie and screams at teenagers running around a park on a Saturday arvo, I suppose it may be considered 'inside information'.
To me, it's as plain as the nose on your face what is happening. To have it spoken about by someone who was in charge of enforcing it, wasn't a surprise. Hardly ground breaking news I'd have thought.
I don't think the game plan needs to be changed, I think it needs to have some flexibility built into it.
As I said, it needed it last year and it cost us. We couldn't score all year due to our predictability.
Our key players were targetted, and the ball was in the hands of poorly skilled recruits and guys who aren't allowed to attack far too many times throughout the year - and the finals.
The stucture is a problem too. The lack of flexibility in the structure is an issue too.
Kosi in the role of 'tall forward' failed horribly. Lyon refused to concede that this structure wasn't working.
Part of the issue was that our run and attack from defence was being stifled as our opponents knew who to stop, and who to concede the ball to. So the nut just wasn't getting up forward fast enough.
So, in the context of this thread and topic, in order to be better at attacking we need to build some autonomy into the roles of some players, and some flexibility into the structure. Gilber going forward in the GF would have made Lyon wet his pants and go into an Excessive Compulsive freakout! But it worked. He should have listened to his assistants and started the following week the same way, but he refused to veer away from 'his' structure.
He needs to acknowledge that he's been worked out. He needs to leveridge off the good work that he's done, and allow some flexibility.
" an icon for witless smarm?
