Lade joins Tiger coaching ranks (RFC)

[Muscles]

Just wondering how folks feel about the success of Lade as our ruck/stoppages coach over the last two years?

At a pre-game event in Cairns this year where he was speaking, he made a joke that the most improved ruckman at Richmond was TV, who had been training exclusively as a forward, who BL had not been coaching.

Has he been successful?

Are we better at stoppages?

Does he have the cattle to work with?

Could we do better?

[tigs2011]

Just wondering how folks feel about the success of Lade as our ruck/stoppages coach over the last two years?

At a pre-game event in Cairns this year where he was speaking, he made a joke that the most improved ruckman at Richmond was TV, who had been training exclusively as a forward, who BL had not been coaching.

Has he been successful?

Are we better at stoppages?

Does he have the cattle to work with?

Could we do better?

Clearly needs better ruckman. Not sure im a fan of him being stoppage coach as well. Hopefully with more money being poured in this will change. Having said that, we do still have duds running through the middle. When we threw Lids, Martin, Cotch, TV in the guts against Norf we dominated for a few clearances. Then its back to 2nd stringers.

[tony_montana]

Just wondering how folks feel about the success of Lade as our ruck/stoppages coach over the last two years?

At a pre-game event in Cairns this year where he was speaking, he made a joke that the most improved ruckman at Richmond was TV, who had been training exclusively as a forward, who BL had not been coaching.

Has he been successful?

Are we better at stoppages?

Does he have the cattle to work with?

Could we do better?

Clearly needs better ruckman. Not sure im a fan of him being stoppage coach as well. Hopefully with more money being poured in this will change. Having said that, we do still have duds running through the middle. When we threw Lids, Martin, Cotch, TV in the guts against Norf we dominated for a few clearances. Then its back to 2nd stringers.

hoprfully next year its Conca, Foley Tuck as 2nd string

[mightytiges]

Just wondering how folks feel about the success of Lade as our ruck/stoppages coach over the last two years?

At a pre-game event in Cairns this year where he was speaking, he made a joke that the most improved ruckman at Richmond was TV, who had been training exclusively as a forward, who BL had not been coaching.

Has he been successful?

Are we better at stoppages?

Does he have the cattle to work with?

Could we do better?

I think Cambo had the midfield coaching gig in 2010 and we were winning contested footy (got smashed on the outside and spread though). This year it flipped around. We improved on the outside as far as uncontested footy but we had the worst clearance stats in the comp. with the opposition winning the clearance from 44% of stoppages and we averaged 5 fewer clearances per game than the opposition which was also the worst in the AFL. So not great stats for Lade. Having said we don't yet have the midfield depth to maintain consistency in the midfield. While the likes of Cotch, Dusty and Lids (when he plays midfield) are top quality or at least building towards A-grade mids, our 2nd/3rd tiers are one of the worst in the comp. We need to add more quality into our midfield group so we can rotate say 12 A/B-grade players through the midfield rather than relying on Jacko, Tuck, Edwards and co. to fill in when Cotch and Dusty are taking a breather.

[Penelope]

i wonder if the turn around from winning lots of contested footy to uncontested footy is due to a change in focus from the coaching staff. Year one put high focus on contested, year two on uncontested? Perhaps year three get the balance right?

Despite both the coach and players at times talking about how winning contested footy wins games, i reckon that it is uncontested footy possessions that wins games, as long as it is not cheap pointless uncontested possies, a la bowden and co.

If you win the uncontested footy count this means that you are spreading and opening up the opposition, which is when you can hurt the enemy on the score board

[mightytiges]

i wonder if the turn around from winning lots of contested footy to uncontested footy is due to a change in focus from the coaching staff. Year one put high focus on contested, year two on uncontested? Perhaps year three get the balance right?

Despite both the coach and players at times talking about how winning contested footy wins games, i reckon that it is uncontested footy possessions that wins games, as long as it is not cheap pointless uncontested possies, a la bowden and co.

If you win the uncontested footy count this means that you are spreading and opening up the opposition, which is when you can hurt the enemy on the score board

I think you may be right al about us finding the right balance in year three. At least hopefully that is the case.

As for which is more important it does have a bit of the chicken and egg argument but IMO contested footy is still the most important part of the game especially in finals where there's less time and space. If you can't get your hands on the footy in the first place you aren't going to win too many big games. It's then for those without the footy to spread hard with gut-running so you get clean clearances and disposals away from contested situations such as stoppages. I agree from that you can then hurt sides the most on the scoreboard via the hard running and winning uncontested footy. That's why we must improve over the offseason our fitness and ability to gut-run harder and for longer. If we do that then we can begin to approach and match the efforts of the top sides.

[bojangles17]

its never that easy to measure the outputs of assistant coaches, do they have the material to work with or are they expected to perform miracles...leppa would have appeared to with the improvement seen in defenders...would seem though that popular opinion is gus and browney are beyond salvation. ...ive been told not to wipe broney just yet, carried a hip for the latter part of year

[Penelope]

i wonder if the turn around from winning lots of contested footy to uncontested footy is due to a change in focus from the coaching staff. Year one put high focus on contested, year two on uncontested? Perhaps year three get the balance right?

Despite both the coach and players at times talking about how winning contested footy wins games, i reckon that it is uncontested footy possessions that wins games, as long as it is not cheap pointless uncontested possies, a la bowden and co.

If you win the uncontested footy count this means that you are spreading and opening up the opposition, which is when you can hurt the enemy on the score board

I think you may be right al about us finding the right balance in year three. At least hopefully that is the case.

As for which is more important it does have a bit of the chicken and egg argument but IMO contested footy is still the most important part of the game especially in finals where there's less time and space. If you can't get your hands on the footy in the first place you aren't going to win too many big games. It's then for those without the footy to spread hard with gut-running so you get clean clearances and disposals away from contested situations such as stoppages. I agree from that you can then hurt sides the most on the scoreboard via the hard running and winning uncontested footy. That's why we must improve over the offseason our fitness and ability to gut-run harder and for longer. If we do that then we can begin to approach and match the efforts of the top sides.

They are/were pretty much my thoughts regarding contested posseions, MT, but I've noticed that last year, even when we'd lose, we would often be there abouts in terms of contested possessions, but smashed in uncontested. These year, we have won games where we have been beaten in contested possessions, but easily won the uncontested count. If we'd lose in both we would get spanked.

You still have to be at least competitive in that area, But I'm starting to think that it's not the be and end all. The other area I have a suspicion that is important is the number of turnovers you can force, particularly if you can spread and get worthwhile uncontested possessions from them.

In terms of building up a fitness base to be able to match the top sides, it took collingwood 4 or 5 years to do this. There was 2 or 3 years where they started the season well but dropped off as the season went on. As their core group of players approached the 23-25 age bracket they developed the fitness base required to play out the whole season