Longmire.

[Steve]

Longmire in his press conference specifically pointed out how proud he was of the efforts put in by the players.

Playing the second half with 20 players did mean he couldn't use his go-to line "lack of effort" to explain a loss. It was the first half where we lost it - completely out-coached - and at that point we had 21 players and hadn't felt the full effect of the 1 fewer rotations we had at that stage.

It's an interesting argument - is it best to indoctrinate a single (one dimensional) plan in the belief that doing that extremely well gives a better overall chance of success (across a whole season, and in the pressure-cooker of finals) OR be flexible enough to adjust to the different plans and approaches you will encounter across the competition.

Longmire clearly believes in the former - and in fairness it has led to consistent finals campaigns despite the unnecessary dropping games during seasons to the likes of Richmond (as mentioned earlier in this thread - a team who has played a certain style we can't handle). You could also argue Hawthorn have done that - however for me the huge difference is that they had the players and plan for which they could genuinely say "if we do this right, no-one else can beat it".

Yet we persevere with a game plan which basically says "we'll give you a chance - if you're good enough you'll definitely win". And we lost two GF's watching the other team do just that.

And even without Hawthorn in the finals mix, for 2017 onwards you have to expect GWS to be able to be that sort of skillful team as well - so it's not as though we could have been thinking 'alright, from now onwards at least there's no-one else who is good enough to do that to us'.

I just hope that the disaster that is not even making the finals (with the list we have and being a GF team the year before) is the catalyst for Longmire to address the flaws that have been lingering for a number of years. If we are ruthless about achieving the ultimate success, anything less (ie. all the talk of we've played x of y years in the finals, made 3/5 last GF's etc etc) is just accepting the 'almost there' and 'better than most others' status we have had.

[Nico]

I just don't agree with the Longmire bashing. Our early season was riddled with injury, (people were saying it was good we were blooding young players and wrote off the season), we got players back and hit form, then all of a sudden we get 2 concussions. How can you blame that on the coach. Longmire took over from Roos and continued the success. Most clubs would kill to have been in 3 grand finals and win one. Just ask Richmond and Saints supporters.

[crackedactor]

Longmire in his press conference specifically pointed out how proud he was of the efforts put in by the players. Hayward has already signed a contract extension.

He is proud that we got within a goal of a team made up of primarily Box Hill Hawks players??? Am I missing something?

[Boddo]

The big criticism of Longmire on here is there is no change to the game plan. The game plan that last year got us to a grand final, the game plan that ripped St Kilda apart last week. We lost our best HBF from basically the beginning of the game so the slack was picked up by a first year & 2nd year players in Mills & Newman n then had to turn to Rohan. No1 can tell me that had no effect on the game plan. We also lost Reid before half time not later in the game. It destroyed our structure up forward. Those 2 loses are massive to a game plan that apart from 3 useless umpires would have us a reigning premiers.

[The Big Cat]

Has it ever entered the thoughts of the Longmire critics that it is his coaching that has got a team with limited skills to a string of grand finals? In other words Horse is not the cause of us falling short, but the cause of us getting the absolute maximum out of the team at his disposal.

[Blood Fever]

Has it ever entered the thoughts of the Longmire critics that it is his coaching that has got a team with limited skills to a string of grand finals? In other words Horse is not the cause of us falling short, but the cause of us getting the absolute maximum out of the team at his disposal.

Fair Call Big Cat

[Boddo]

Has it ever entered the thoughts of the Longmire critics that it is his coaching that has got a team with limited skills to a string of grand finals? In other words Horse is not the cause of us falling short, but the cause of us getting the absolute maximum out of the team at his disposal.

Exactly!! Look where our midfield was taken in the draft, Hannebery, Kennedy & Parker were not drafted as elite midfielders they were later picks & were not expected to excel like they have. Then look at the defenders Smith, Rampe, Lloyd, Melican, Grundy & Newman all were rookie speculative picks. Then our forwards Papley, Towers & KJack all rookies. All these players have limitations in there skill set so imo he has done a very good job with what he's had to work with.

[Ludwig]

What we need is a coach who gets more youthful with the passage of time.

screenshot-www.afl.com.au 2017-05-27 12-00-30.jpg

[Boddo]

I

What we need is a coach who gets more youthful with the passage of time.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]1877[/ATTACH]

Bwahaha!!!!

[Merdo5555]

Given that Horse has a huge say in who is drafted and has been in the club for ages its bordering on the surreal to say he hasn't gotten the players he wanted. He constantly went for the "harder" players and ignored the "skill" players. Any great team needs a balance so why haven't we drafted accordingly. Because Horse has a vision of contested football and that is well it. When we can't get a game on those terms we're stuffed.

How in the world did we allow Hawthorn to play their style, yet again. Surely if we manned up closely it was more likely to be a contested game which would have suited. No instead lets have our players trail their opponents by 10m easily allowing the Hawks to play the only way they can now win. This is an awful Hawks side we should never have lost to. Injuries are no longer an excuse, so what now, oh 2 players injured during the game. What rubbish the Hawks have cracked every time they can't play their style, we only need 3 quarters of solid effort to win, we could have cruised through the 4th even down on rotations.

- - - Updated - - -

We need a coach who train our players on Plan B, let alone C & D. Instead its the same game style every week. Can anyone show me a similarly tactically limited side that actually has a large number of good players.

Something is wrong in Sydney and I think change has to come from the top to fix it.

[Steve]

Any calls for Longmire's sacking are clearly over the top and unwarranted.

But below that there is a legitimate difference of opinion between supporters - are we happy with our results in the last 5 years, or do we think we should have done better. I don't think an opinion that Longmire needs to evolve, and that what he has done has ultimately fallen short of the obvious end goal, necessary makes you a 'critic' or 'against' him.

IMO Hawthorn and Sydney were at very similar positions at the end of 2012 and 2016, respectively. In a bigger picture sense - had won a premiership 4 years earlier, been consistently a top team since then, but ultimately fallen short of the success they desired.

Personally I have concerns that we are not evolving to the point we need to, to go a step further. But I appreciate (genuinely - not a sarcastic comment) other supporters' view that things are OK and consistently being a top 4 team, making GF's (albeit losing ones) etc is a hell of a lot better than not getting close. I just think that when you get yourself into a position where you can have a realistic crack at going one better, you need to be brave enough to evolve to do so - which I don't think we have done (or are looking like doing) - and potentially that will be more detrimental as we probably slip from the (good but not great) standing we have held the last few years.

[Merdo5555]

In the end its the cups that count, who wants to just be there on the day.

Its understandable to say our style has produced success, but we have never changed how we played the other great team of the era, the Hawks. Given that our preferred method has consistently failed the biggest tests surely some out of the box Plan B thinking was critical. Given the game itself is changing Plan A is dead and buried against good teams. John has been successful but reality is he hasn't got a Plan B (either he doesn't have one or can't coach the players to one) and therefore its time to go.

In this game if you stand still you're going backwards.

Does anyone really think playing tight man on man last night for at least the 3 quarters wouldn't have led to a better result? Sure if we were overrun in the last quarter by injuries you could understand. But every time we developed some momentum the Hawk went back to their kick and mark game and killed our roll. Bashing your head into the wall might break it but I will bet that most times your head will break first. Therefore why oh why do we let Hawthorn play how they want to.

[Auntie.Gerald]

It is simple
Not easy but simple

I believe our current coaching group can evolve
They should have demonstrated that yest
They let our players down
They knew what was coming and we looked like kids first two qtrs chasing the adults

If the coaching dept doesn't evolve......., well in my opinion it is unacceptable

[dimelb]

In my view Longmire stays. I agree with those who have reminded us of the bleeding obvious: (1) we had two key players out for most of the game, and (2) Longmire has shown he is a good coach. I think last week's team would have beaten Hawthorn (obviously because Reid and Lloyd would have seen out the game).

My one gripe about Horse is that we don't man up in defence. We give opposition teams room to move and they capitalise on it.

In attack we can be breathtaking. And I agree with those who have said Gary Rohan should play as a forward; he is a good kick and his speed is downright frightening when he closes on an opposition defender.

[Boddo]

In my view Longmire stays. I agree with those who have reminded us of the bleeding obvious: (1) we had two key players out for most of the game, and (2) Longmire has shown he is a good coach. I think last week's team would have beaten Hawthorn (obviously because Reid and Lloyd would have seen out the game).

My one gripe about Horse is that we don't man up in defence. We give opposition teams room to move and they capitalise on it.

In attack we can be breathtaking. And I agree with those who have said Gary Rohan should play as a forward; he is a good kick and his speed is downright frightening when he closes on an opposition defender.

When it comes to defence we don't have the cattle to go one on one so we play it as a defensive unit. Every defender was rookie listed apart from Mills which means they don't have the skill set to go one on one like say a Rance would. I totally agree it's frustrating but I can see why we play the way we do. We are a zoning defensive team. And like you have pointed out the forward line is different in that Rohan, Reid & Franklin were high draft picks meaning we have the players that have the skills to play a very good attacking game when on.