PDA

View Full Version : Did you detect a difference in Williams coaching style?



PedroArvy
22-08-2011, 11:15 PM
I imagine as an assistant coach there are times when you'd be thinking geez I wish the coach would do more of this and less of that. Paul Williams got his chance on Sunday and I only saw snippets of the game. Did anyone detect a difference in the team's play? Stuff that wasn't present under Rocket's usual game plan??

These sorts of things are pretty tough to see, at least for me, but I was wondering whether anyone here picked anything up.

The Coon Dog
23-08-2011, 12:05 AM
I didn't to be honest, but then again it really was a glorified training run. We'll get a better idea this week.

PedroArvy
23-08-2011, 12:17 AM
I heard him talking about a successful forward press, and I heard mumblings from other coaches this was missed by Eade.

1eyedog
23-08-2011, 12:18 AM
No and he mentioned as much himself. The onus was on the mids to support the backs and that's about it.

LostDoggy
23-08-2011, 08:00 AM
No swearing and phone throwing, no sprays? lol

chef
23-08-2011, 08:30 AM
I thought we had better forward pressure, at least for the first half.

bornadog
23-08-2011, 10:06 AM
I thought we had better forward pressure, at least for the first half.

Especially that 1st quarter, Port couldn't get the ball past the centre.

Mantis
23-08-2011, 10:07 AM
Especially that 1st quarter, Port couldn't get the ball past the centre.

Did it say more about us or more about them?

LostDoggy
23-08-2011, 10:08 AM
Pretty useless discussion really, Port are a ramble. Had Jones not handballed at the end of the first quater we would won by 100+.

bornadog
23-08-2011, 10:10 AM
Did it say more about us or more about them?

To me it looked like constant tackling and pressure which they couldn't handle.

bornadog
23-08-2011, 10:10 AM
Pretty useless discussion really, Port are a ramble. Had Jones not handballed at the end of the first quater we would won by 100+.

Yeah what the hell was Jones thinking.

Mantis
23-08-2011, 10:13 AM
Yeah what the hell was Jones thinking.

Murphy called for the handball when behind Jones, Jones released the ball to where he thought Murf was heading, but in the meantime Murf had stopped.... Ball goes to ground and Port were away.

Mofra
23-08-2011, 10:13 AM
Yeah what the hell was Jones thinking.
Murphy called for it than stopped. If he kept running he would have taken possession of it.

As the senior player who called for it, he surely must take some of the blame.

bornadog
23-08-2011, 10:15 AM
Murphy called for it than stopped. If he kept running he would have taken possession of it.

As the senior player who called for it, he surely must take some of the blame.

But you don't hand ball it if he isn't there.

Mofra
23-08-2011, 10:18 AM
But you don't hand ball it if he isn't there.
He was running to the space, called then stopped dead.

You don't handball to a player, you handball to where he will be when the ball gets there.

LostDoggy
23-08-2011, 10:23 AM
I thought Murph slipped still someone must of told Jones how long there was left. Not sure if Murph was asking for it but the sensible thing to do was kick it 50m up the ground.

bornadog
23-08-2011, 10:24 AM
He was running to the space, called then stopped dead.

You don't handball to a player, you handball to where he will be when the ball gets there.

Well we can argue all day but in the end Jones had the ball and incorrectly disposed it. In any case it doesn't matter in the scheme of things.

LongWait
23-08-2011, 10:25 AM
He was running to the space, called then stopped dead.

You don't handball to a player, you handball to where he will be when the ball gets there.

I'm with you Mofra - it was entirely Murphy's fault. He just stopped dead in his tracks after running up from behind Jones calling for the ball.

I would imaging team rules dictate if Murphy calls for the ball streaming off half back we give the ball to him every time. Bit hard to blame Jones.

LostDoggy
23-08-2011, 10:29 AM
Why can't you blame Jones? It was the wrong time to try it. He had the ball and needed to take respoonsibility. Instead of giving it off, kick it.
Reflected his game of late.

bornadog
23-08-2011, 10:36 AM
Why can't you blame Jones? It was the wrong time to try it. He had the ball and needed to take respoonsibility. Instead of giving it off, kick it.
Reflected his game of late.

Jones has a long way to go and its great he has played every game this year to learn, however, there were many weeks he could easily have been dropped and no one criticized him. If it was Stack, we would have 5 pages on this one hand ball.

Cyberdoggie
23-08-2011, 12:18 PM
No swearing and phone throwing, no sprays? lol

He did mention in his PMPC that he is a calm and relaxed person in the box.

Also that he thought they operated/communicated well in box on the day (not sure if this was a comment directed at Rodney Eade but if felt like it might have been slightly).

Also very interesting that Garlick was there in the box and he was right up the front in the hot seat. Not somewhere i would expect him to be.

mjp
23-08-2011, 12:18 PM
Jones has a long way to go and its great he has played every game this year to learn, however, there were many weeks he could easily have been dropped and no one criticized him. If it was Stack, we would have 5 pages on this one hand ball.

Agree with all of that.

Stack did make his own bed to an extent though - he got lots of people off-side through an unwillingness to put his head over the footy and some pretty insipid efforts in his first dozen or so games...therefore everything he does wrong is magnified in peoples minds by past errors.

The fact that he was dropped after the Freo game in Perth remains one of the seasons bigger mysteries though.

Topdog
23-08-2011, 12:21 PM
I thought we had better forward pressure, at least for the first half.

Better than what though? We've had a very good press at times this year the problem is it usually lasts for 1 quarter or at best 1 half.

I was really disappointed with the last quarter fade out on Sunday.

mjp
23-08-2011, 01:46 PM
Look at it this way. If there had been some kind of amazing change in game-style after a single day of training and a pre-match address, then Williams would be the greatest coach to have ever walked the earth...which would have been obvious in his previous role and Eade would long ago have stepped aside to make room for the prodigy.

As it was, there was a little bit of pepper in the group early - their coach had been sacked and many would have thought that they were next - but that faded as the day wore on and the result became predictable.

chef
23-08-2011, 06:22 PM
Better than what though? We've had a very good press at times this year the problem is it usually lasts for 1 quarter or at best 1 half.

I was really disappointed with the last quarter fade out on Sunday.

The majority of the year.

w3design
23-08-2011, 07:19 PM
He did mention in his PMPC that he is a calm and relaxed person in the box.

Also that he thought they operated/communicated well in box on the day (not sure if this was a comment directed at Rodney Eade but if felt like it might have been slightly).

Also very interesting that Garlick was there in the box and he was right up the front in the hot seat. Not somewhere i would expect him to be.
I didn't like seeing Garlick in the box. What was the rationale for that, I wonder?

bornadog
23-08-2011, 07:47 PM
I didn't like seeing Garlick in the box. What was the rationale for that, I wonder?

Check out a candidate for the coaching role, first hand.

Ghost Dog
23-08-2011, 08:44 PM
I thought the highlights reel of Willo was hilarious. You couldn't tell what was going on in play at all.
Even when a player fluffed it and they crossed to get his reaction, just business as usual, sipping on his coke, finger pointing and ear glued to the phone.
Looks alert but not alarmed does Will. Certainly a change from Rocket.

Mantis
23-08-2011, 08:57 PM
I thought the highlights reel of Willo was hilarious. You couldn't tell what was going on in play at all.
Even when a player fluffed it and they crossed to get his reaction, just business as usual, sipping on his coke, finger pointing and ear glued to the phone.
Looks alert but not alarmed does Will. Certainly a change from Rocket.

What was there to get upset about?... we smacked them.

Ghost Dog
23-08-2011, 09:21 PM
Not in the last quarter, we didn't

AndrewP6
23-08-2011, 09:29 PM
I thought the highlights reel of Willo was hilarious. You couldn't tell what was going on in play at all.
Even when a player fluffed it and they crossed to get his reaction, just business as usual, sipping on his coke, finger pointing and ear glued to the phone.
Looks alert but not alarmed does Will. Certainly a change from Rocket.

First game honeymoon period. Wait till a few losses start coming, then we'll see.

always right
23-08-2011, 11:32 PM
Why can't you blame Jones? It was the wrong time to try it. He had the ball and needed to take respoonsibility. Instead of giving it off, kick it.
Reflected his game of late.

Are you serious? The wrong time to try it? What was so critical about the timing?

bornadog
24-08-2011, 12:29 AM
Are you serious? The wrong time to try it? What was so critical about the timing?

Keep them scoreless for the first quarter.

LostDoggy
24-08-2011, 08:00 AM
Are you serious? The wrong time to try it? What was so critical about the timing?

Seconds to go in the quarter, must of know. Play it safe. Already 10 goals up. The Port goal lifted their spirits.

Mantis
24-08-2011, 09:12 AM
Seconds to go in the quarter, must of know. Play it safe. Already 10 goals up. The Port goal lifted their spirits.

So shouldn't the onus be on the senior player (Murphy) to instruct his younger team-mate to kick long rather than to call for the handball and then stop?

always right
24-08-2011, 09:17 AM
Seconds to go in the quarter, must of know. Play it safe. Already 10 goals up. The Port goal lifted their spirits.

10 goals up against the poorest side in the comp and you want us to play it safe?

LostDoggy
24-08-2011, 11:01 AM
10 goals up against the poorest side in the comp and you want us to play it safe?

With seconds to go in the quarter yes. There was more chance of them scoring from turnover than us manufacturing another goal.

LostDoggy
24-08-2011, 11:02 AM
So shouldn't the onus be on the senior player (Murphy) to instruct his younger team-mate to kick long rather than to call for the handball and then stop?

Maybe. Would have thought more onus being on the player with the ball in his hands. As mentioned already he needed to take responsibility.

bornadog
24-08-2011, 02:43 PM
Maybe. Would have thought more onus being on the player with the ball in his hands. As mentioned already he needed to take responsibility.

Chops some players can do no wrong = Jones.

Mantis
24-08-2011, 03:03 PM
Chops some players can do no wrong = Jones.

Yeah that's it.... You got it one.

bornadog
24-08-2011, 03:06 PM
Yeah that's it.... You got it one.

Thought so:D

Topdog
24-08-2011, 03:39 PM
The majority of the year.

We didn't get to play a side that would lose to a U16 WRFL team for the majority of the year.

Ozza
24-08-2011, 03:59 PM
Starting to get close to the 5 pages that would have ensued if Stack gave that handball!!

bornadog
24-08-2011, 04:25 PM
Starting to get close to the 5 pages that would have ensued if Stack gave that handball!!

yes gone right off the topic.

Bulldog4life
24-08-2011, 05:51 PM
I heard Williams on SEN this morning. He was asked the question whether the game plan was different. He said the only difference was the all players had to run back an extra 30 to 40 yards to help out. Said he was very happy with the first 3 quarters but players had tired in the last as they were not used to it.

Desipura
24-08-2011, 05:52 PM
Back on topic, Williams on SEN did not instill any confidence in me that he was the man for the top job.
When quizzed about he may replace Hall he replied we would look within and possibly look at a defender playing full forward.
When asked if that backman was Lake, he is one they could look at was his reply.

Seriously, the guy was an AA full back last year, what makes him think he could turn Lake at 30yo into a successful
full forward????????

Ghost Dog
24-08-2011, 09:49 PM
Back on topic, Williams on SEN did not instill any confidence in me that he was the man for the top job.
When quizzed about he may replace Hall he replied we would look within and possibly look at a defender playing full forward.
When asked if that backman was Lake, he is one they could look at was his reply.

Seriously, the guy was an AA full back last year, what makes him think he could turn Lake at 30yo into a successful
full forward????????

Plenty of guys in the history of the game have had mobility issues and were summarily plonked in the square to sink or swim.
Could be just the spark to get his confidence up. Kick a few bags

Flamethrower
24-08-2011, 11:58 PM
Back on topic, Williams on SEN did not instill any confidence in me that he was the man for the top job.
When quizzed about he may replace Hall he replied we would look within and possibly look at a defender playing full forward.
When asked if that backman was Lake, he is one they could look at was his reply.

Seriously, the guy was an AA full back last year, what makes him think he could turn Lake at 30yo into a successful
full forward????????

1. Brian was a forward when recruited by the club.

2. Alistair Lynch did the same and helped the Lions to 3 straight premierships.

The biggest difference to our game style against Port was that there was more emphasis on defensive running, with the forwards and mids pushing back deeper than they did under Rocket. Willo mentioned that this would happen at one of his pressers during the week leading up to the game so it was no surprise.

As for the observation that our forward press seemed to work better, that had everything to do with the opposition. They were insipid at stoppages allowing us to continually pump the ball forward, and had a near zero workrate when trying to clear our zone which allowed us multiple repeat inside 50s. In fact if it wasn't for Jackson Trengove, we may have put 20 goals on them in the 1st quarter.

Desipura
25-08-2011, 08:04 AM
1. Brian was a forward when recruited by the club.

2. Alistair Lynch did the same and helped the Lions to 3 straight premierships.

The biggest difference to our game style against Port was that there was more emphasis on defensive running, with the forwards and mids pushing back deeper than they did under Rocket. Willo mentioned that this would happen at one of his pressers during the week leading up to the game so it was no surprise.

As for the observation that our forward press seemed to work better, that had everything to do with the opposition. They were insipid at stoppages allowing us to continually pump the ball forward, and had a near zero workrate when trying to clear our zone which allowed us multiple repeat inside 50s. In fact if it wasn't for Jackson Trengove, we may have put 20 goals on them in the 1st quarter.

I am fully aware of Brian coming to us as a forward, if he was any good at it, he would have made a career out of it.
Lynch played forward at Fitzroy before going back then playing forward again

GVGjr
25-08-2011, 08:25 AM
Back on topic, Williams on SEN did not instill any confidence in me that he was the man for the top job.
When quizzed about he may replace Hall he replied we would look within and possibly look at a defender playing full forward.
When asked if that backman was Lake, he is one they could look at was his reply.

Seriously, the guy was an AA full back last year, what makes him think he could turn Lake at 30yo into a successful
full forward????????

I don't think West or Williams have given themselves any chance with their on air performances. Both of them seem to search for answers.

Regarding Lake to the forward line, there might just be some question marks on him regaining the type of fitness to get him back to AA full back type form. I think Lake to the forward line in some capacity might be something a few coaches consider.

Desipura
25-08-2011, 09:38 AM
I don't think West or Williams have given themselves any chance with their on air performances. Both of them seem to search for answers.

Regarding Lake to the forward line, there might just be some question marks on him regaining the type of fitness to get him back to AA full back type form. I think Lake to the forward line in some capacity might be something a few coaches consider.

If they are looking for a rap artist, look no further than Paul Williams, he could release his very own "studder rap" version

Ghost Dog
27-08-2011, 11:51 PM
I like the way Williams presents himself, and his 'look after your mates' mantra.
Thought his assessment of the game was fair.
Still think he's perhaps not the right person for the job.
Need someone to make the hard calls on underperforming players.

boydogs
28-08-2011, 01:32 AM
I heard Williams on SEN this morning. He was asked the question whether the game plan was different. He said the only difference was the all players had to run back an extra 30 to 40 yards to help out. Said he was very happy with the first 3 quarters but players had tired in the last as they were not used to it.

Anyone else shake their head hearing this?

Ghost Dog
28-08-2011, 09:36 AM
Anyone else shake their head hearing this?

I think that comment was for last weeks game??

boydogs
28-08-2011, 12:47 PM
I think that comment was for last weeks game??

I'm sure it was, just remarking that the players (a) weren't used to running defensively under Eade, and (b) weren't fit enough to keep it up all game.

It says to me that Eade coached a team of front runners. No wonder we had so much trouble against top 4 sides and in finals when defense is required.

bornadog
28-08-2011, 12:55 PM
I'm sure it was, just remarking that the players (a) weren't used to running defensively under Eade, and (b) weren't fit enough to keep it up all game.

It says to me that Eade coached a team of front runners. No wonder we had so much trouble against top 4 sides and in finals when defense is required.

I can't agree with this. The reason for the extra running was to protect the undermanned backline. Williams felt that with an inexperienced backline, the mids had to run back more to try and help the defence out.

Your comment on Eade is far from correct.

boydogs
28-08-2011, 06:15 PM
I can't agree with this. The reason for the extra running was to protect the undermanned backline. Williams felt that with an inexperienced backline, the mids had to run back more to try and help the defence out.

Your comment on Eade is far from correct.

Williams is spot on. But Eade was the coach for our first 19 games this year, with much the same backline, and yet it appears he didn't train or condition the mids to work defensively.

Seems to me we got away with it a bit from 2008-2010 because Lake, Morris, Hargrave, Gilbee, Harbrow, Williams etc. were better able to cope, but that this year Eade didn't adjust.

ledge
28-08-2011, 07:17 PM
Williams is spot on. But Eade was the coach for our first 19 games this year, with much the same backline, and yet it appears he didn't train or condition the mids to work defensively.

Seems to me we got away with it a bit from 2008-2010 because Lake, Morris, Hargrave, Gilbee, Harbrow, Williams etc. were better able to cope, but that this year Eade didn't adjust.

We could back our defense to get the ball with those players but with the younger ones we cant.

boydogs
28-08-2011, 08:02 PM
We could back our defense to get the ball with those players but with the younger ones we cant.

Why did it take Williams to realise this?

Go_Dogs
28-08-2011, 08:08 PM
Why did it take Williams to realise this?

Because for much of the year we had Morris and Williams down back? Our current backline over the past couple of weeks is the most decimated its been and I think that has a lot to do with it. I don't think your implication that midfielders weren't expected to work back defensively is right - simply it has required a stronger emphasis the past couple of games.

boydogs
29-08-2011, 12:19 AM
Because for much of the year we had Morris and Williams down back? Our current backline over the past couple of weeks is the most decimated its been and I think that has a lot to do with it. I don't think your implication that midfielders weren't expected to work back defensively is right - simply it has required a stronger emphasis the past couple of games.


Beat me to it.

Fair enough, I might have misinterpreted the comments to have a broader implication.