Is Horse impressing anyone?

[Dosser]

Its really not us that matter. Its whether he is impressing ,in all senses of that word, the players. If the players respect and follow his instructions and play to his plan who cares if he impresses us or not. Personally I am reserving judgement.I see good trends and believe he has been unlucky with injuries which have influenced the sub and the ruck and forward structure. The enigma that is White has also not helped the coach, nor has Bradshaws injury. Change any of these and this thread would not exist. Yeah,I will give him a year to see how he goes! Keep the jab going Big Al!

+1

[chammond]

Before I get shouted down, I know it's early days and I know he's not the only one making decisions. But he is the head coach and enough water has gone under the bridge to cast an eye over his impact so far.
What I don't like:
1) The way he has handled Mummy...he came off a limited pre season, after finishing last year with 2 bung knees, and was thrown straight in and required to run out games as the number 1 ruckman. Then when his backup Pyke went down, instead of bringing in the player they recruited as their number 1 ruckmen, Seaby, he brought in an underdone LRT, a deadest defender, and ask him to play backup ruckman/ forward. He's a pinch hitter in the ruck even when fully match fit. Thus leaving Mumford with an even bigger work load. Surprise , surprise, he's got a sore knee, which sounds like the injury from last year flaring up...that's never a good sign long term. Terrible player management.
2) Playing Everitt in defence for 5 or 6 games when his only decent quarter of footy was as a forward.
3) Playing Bevo in defence. We all know what happens when Bevo plays in the backline, so do our opponents.
4) Appointing McVeigh as co captain, a most uninspiring choice, which so far is looking like a stuff up that's going to be hard, if not impossible, to reverse with out having a negative effect on the team.
5) Not letting White settle into one position as a key forward, (or IMO as a key defender) and continuing to play him in the ruck, where he performs like a blind chicken. You could see him loosing confidence with every spell in the ruck.
6) Game day tactics have been much more reactive than proactive.
One example.. Letting Scarlett run free for so long was unbelievable.
7) Sub selections, IMO only one has effectively helped the team in 8 or 9 games. But my biggest beef here is using a 1st gamer. Where the chance of them having a positive impact on the result is negligible. They need a full game to settle into the pace and intensity, and hopefully gain some confidence.
8) I'll add one more I overlooked, our complete lack of forward structure..It's been woeful, playing LRT forward, Mattner forward at times, what a joke while, while Seaby, White, Johnson, TDL all languish in the 2's...pushing at best coming from a headcoach who was a key forward...You don't win games if you don't kick goals.
I've approached this from a negative angle, obviously, and would like to hear some positives..

Most of this is just simplistic whinging . . . being wise after the event. But a couple of points are interesting: the ruck and forward issues are both worrying for different reasons.

Our forward group has been largely dysfunctional since round one. Our best forwards, Goodes, O'Keefe and McGlynn, are only part-timers, and the rest are novices. The only youngster that has shown any real improvement in the forward 50 is Everitt, and he's been dropped.

This forward problem was identified some time ago: Bradshaw and Dennis-Lane were recruited as a short-term fix, and Johnston, Rohan, Lamb, and Reid were drafted as the longer-term solution. Bradshaw and Dennis-Lane haven't yet fired a shot in anger, and the youngsters will obviously take more than 8 games to transform into match-winners. Surely, none of this can be laid solely at Longmire's feet. If we have to lay blame, it probably should go to Roos and his gang for poor planning?

The transformation of our rucking group from the strongest (as a whole) in the league to an unfit rabble is quite remarkable. Obviously the main contributor to this has been the "unknown" factor - the new substitution rule - and the resultant over-reaction regarding the use of ruckmen. Longmire is certainly culpable in that respect.

Overall, I think Longmire has performed okay. He took over a middle-of-the-road group of players, and the team is continuing in that vein. He's made the odd bad decision, but he's blooded some very exciting youngsters, and we're playing a more interesting style of footy this year. He doesn't have Roos' charisma, but I think he has just as much footy-smarts. As a player, Longmire was a top-class forward who occasionally helped out in the ruck, so he ought to have the knowledge to get us through these problems.

[Jewels]

Its really not us that matter. Its whether he is impressing ,in all senses of that word, the players. If the players respect and follow his instructions and play to his plan who cares if he impresses us or not. Personally I am reserving judgement.I see good trends and believe he has been unlucky with injuries which have influenced the sub and the ruck and forward structure. The enigma that is White has also not helped the coach, nor has Bradshaws injury. Change any of these and this thread would not exist. Yeah,I will give him a year to see how he goes! Keep the jab going Big Al!

Well said.

[caj23]

Very underwhelmed with what we have seen so far, I expected a bloke who has been with us for 9 years to hit the ground running and IMO he hasn't. The team has gone backwards this year with a list that on paper is superior to 2010.

The main positive (and change from Roos) I can see is in terms of the blooding of youngsters and our defence has been good considering how dire our midfield has been

The negatives include lack of any clear gameplan, disfunctional forward line (what's new though?), puzzling team selections, clueless on the sub rule, dual captains (just pick one ffs), ruck set up and selections, match day tactics, and our inability to win games by more than 2 goals (again not a new problem).

The whole selection process (i.e. what process?) was deeply flawed and we are seeing the results of it now.

[ernie koala]

Most of this is just simplistic whinging . . . being wise after the event. But a couple of points are interesting: the ruck and forward issues are both worrying for different reasons.

Our forward group has been largely dysfunctional since round one. Our best forwards, Goodes, O'Keefe and McGlynn, are only part-timers, and the rest are novices. The only youngster that has shown any real improvement in the forward 50 is Everitt, and he's been dropped.

This forward problem was identified some time ago: Bradshaw and Dennis-Lane were recruited as a short-term fix, and Johnston, Rohan, Lamb, and Reid were drafted as the longer-term solution. Bradshaw and Dennis-Lane haven't yet fired a shot in anger, and the youngsters will obviously take more than 8 games to transform into match-winners. Surely, none of this can be laid solely at Longmire's feet. If we have to lay blame, it probably should go to Roos and his gang for poor planning?

The transformation of our rucking group from the strongest (as a whole) in the league to an unfit rabble is quite remarkable. Obviously the main contributor to this has been the "unknown" factor - the new substitution rule - and the resultant over-reaction regarding the use of ruckmen. Longmire is certainly culpable in that respect.

Overall, I think Longmire has performed okay. He took over a middle-of-the-road group of players, and the team is continuing in that vein. He's made the odd bad decision, but he's blooded some very exciting youngsters, and we're playing a more interesting style of footy this year. He doesn't have Roos' charisma, but I think he has just as much footy-smarts. As a player, Longmire was a top-class forward who occasionally helped out in the ruck, so he ought to have the knowledge to get us through these problems.

Oh I see, when I make comments they're just.." simplistic whinging ", please tell me where and why and then perhaps we can engage in a discussion...the whole point of the web site...
As for your comment..."being wise after the event", what, as opposed to your comments ?? Of course if I could find my crystal ball I could of discussed Horses coaching from R10 and beyond. Pathetic comment.

[Mr Magoo]

My view is that the 2nd /third and fourth year players have not come on yet as expected which therefore has made us more reliant on newer players like Reid , Johnstone , Johnson. If White, Bird, Hannebery, TDL etc had gone to another level many of our problems would be solved. They havent so we struggle at clearances and in the forward line where those guys play.

[Triple B]

0/2 Cheer Squad.

He's improving...

[ernie koala]

Its really not us that matter. Its whether he is impressing ,in all senses of that word, the players. If the players respect and follow his instructions and play to his plan who cares if he impresses us or not.

I agree with this sort of. But I could also suggest that none of the footy discussions we have on here matter, because clearly, they don't. We're looking in from the outside and can only comment from that perspective...If we choose not to do that because it doesn't matter, then there's not much to talk about really.

[SydAFLFan]

If Roos was still coach would we be feeling the same way? I think following Roos was always going to be a hard task for any coach and perhaps we put Longmire's decisions under the microscope more than we would Roos. I too have concerns, especially on our forward half, but I agree that its way too early to judge Longmire's coaching ability just yet.

But if we don't play finals footy at the end of the season I reserve the right to retract all of the above and argue the complete opposite although I still feel confident we will be in the top eight come September.

Having said that I know we haven't taken a massive backward step as seen north of the border when Voss took over at the Lions and the future does look bright with the next generation of players all pushing for a spot in the first team.

[ugg]

If Roos was still coach would we be feeling the same way? I think following Roos was always going to be a hard task for any coach and perhaps we put Longmire's decisions under the microscope more than we would Roos. I too have concerns, especially on our forward half, but I agree that its way too early to judge Longmire's coaching ability just yet.

If you go searching for posts around Round 15 last year (we also played the Kangas) - we had that mid-season slump after being 6-1 to start the year, we had unexpectedly capitulated to Richmond the previous weekend. The posts there were as uncomplimentary as they are now and Roos copped a fair bit of heat at the time too (too defensive, prefers experience over youth, should leave now not at the end of the season etc.). So while the coach may have changed, posters around here are as unforgiving in their scathing criticism and vitriol directed at the team and staff. The funny thing is, to me at least, is that if we win this weekend those same people will be the first to lavish undying praise and paint what a bright outlook there is for the coming week. There really is no middle ground for them.

[ernie koala]

My view is that the 2nd /third and fourth year players have not come on yet as expected which therefore has made us more reliant on newer players like Reid , Johnstone , Johnson. If White, Bird, Hannebery, TDL etc had gone to another level many of our problems would be solved. They havent so we struggle at clearances and in the forward line where those guys play.

There is an interesting question to come out of your observations. Is Horse suffering from Roos' not blooding and persevering with enough youngsters over the last 3 to 4 years?

[ernie koala]

If you go searching for posts around Round 15 last year (we also played the Kangas) - we had that mid-season slump after being 6-1 to start the year, we had unexpectedly capitulated to Richmond the previous weekend. The posts there were as uncomplimentary as they are now and Roos copped a fair bit of heat at the time too (too defensive, prefers experience over youth, should leave now not at the end of the season etc.). So while the coach may have changed, posters around here are as unforgiving in their scathing criticism and vitriol directed at the team and staff. The funny thing is, to me at least, is that if we win this weekend those same people will be the first to lavish undying praise and paint what a bright outlook there is for the coming week. There really is no middle ground for them.

Ugg, it's easy to be scathing and belittling about "them", ( which I assume in your mind I'm one). The fact is, the point of this thread is to discuss peoples observations on Horse ,as head coach, so far. Personally I haven't seen much that has impressed me.
Which is why I particularly asked for positive feedback. I'm actually interested in others views, whether I agree with them or not.
If it doesn't interest you, don't read it.
A win this week would be great, and if they have a good win, then of course I'll praise them. But it will take more than that to change my overall opinion.