but if you donât have the same skill do you not concentrate on fitness??..if your fitter and more conditioned than other teams it wonât matter how much more ability they have if you beat them to the ballâŚClare in mid 90âs done thisâŚvery limited but fitness that had them able to fly around for 70 minutes at an intensity that others couldnât live withâŚ
the backdoor has taken the upset out of hurling. since this was introduced , no team outside of tipp, kk and cork have won the all ireland.
if champion league ties were not played over two legs, there is a fair chance that barca and utd would not have contested 2 out of the last three finals.
i agree that clare raised the bar in fitness terms but it does that great team an injustice to suggest superior fitness was the reason they won. in brian lolan, seanie mcmahon and jamsie oâconnor they had three marque players which were complimented by others of a very high standard
I think weâre going around in circles here.
we will have to agree to disagree.
Indeed.
thats itâŚkeep going round to up the fitness !!! ahoyâŚ
Hardly, heâs in the development squad for the Central Coast Mariners Kev.
There is a lot of merit in what Bandage advocates here.
However a big problem is that all of the intercounty coaches are former top level players who in turn have had no exposure to tactical planning. A lot of what passes for tactics is downright chicanery. Managers worrying about how to smuggle in a dry Cummins ball for a penalty or getting a fella to go down with an injury to break up the play. Or worst of all that late 90s phenomenon of managers marking managers.
There is no possibility of an outsider coming in and revolutionizing the way people think about the game the way Wenger did. It is also no accident that there is far more tactical planning in football because there are far bigger participation rates. And that most of the innovation since the 60s has come from the North and a lot of that driven by people who have studied PE in a different jurisdiction.
Hurling by contrast is stuck in a tactical rut. There is no obvious reason to play 3-3-2-3-3 other than thatâs the way the game has always been played. If a county panel has a surfeit of good defenders then surely the best use of those resources would be to play those defenders in defensive positions rather than to fulfil some kind of nonsensical quota that demands that you play six forwards because your opponents play six backs. Even if this means as it often does leaving a better man on the line.
+1, legend. Isnât he a top notch triathlete or Mountain Climber or something now.
Iâm with you here (i think), people thinking KK didnât do tactics are crazy.
As a student of coaching, sports & exercise science,etc i can tell you, you are wrong. They are tactics no matter what way you look at them. This is Sports Science definition
âThe term used to describe the way in which a manager wants his side to play in a match. Tactics can apply either to defensive or attacking formations and methods of play.â
Just because KKâs tactics were pretty simple doesnât mean they were not tactics, in fact with tactics if you try to complicate them too much anyway youâll only cause problems, particularly with amateurs.
Clare had some master hurlers in fairness. They needed to make a few fellas better than they were, but they wouldnât have won without Seanie Mac, Lohan, Jamsie etc. These were class intelligent hurlers.
Generally this discussion makes me laugh. But one thing about tactics thats being missed here is often a good manager has a team playing a certain way without them even really knowing it. No doubt they expressed to the players how they wanted some things done, but you can set up training and the drills and conditioned games you play to get your team playing in a certain way. A manager would often say âfuck tactics, just play the game, go hardâ etc, but they would already have the team playing in a certain way. KK also had great on-the-field leaders who could carry out on field instructions for Cody, Shefflin being one as mentioned already in relation to the 06 final. I have seen yearly programs and time lines made out for IC teams and tactics are definitely something that are discussed, but i would say they are discussed more between the manager and selectors than between the players and management once the season begins.
Iâm also not sure why people think that you canât work on fitness and skills and tactics or whatever in every session, or at least every 2nd session because thats what happens.
Personally i believe Cork would have won that Final in 06 as well had Donal Oâ Grady been on the line as John Allen didnât have any control and didnât have the power to really change things.
[quote=âFagan ODowd, post: 593099â]
There is a lot of merit in what Bandage advocates here.
However a big problem is that all of the intercounty coaches are former top level players who in turn have had no exposure to tactical planning. A lot of what passes for tactics is downright chicanery. Managers worrying about how to smuggle in a dry Cummins ball for a penalty or getting a fella to go down with an injury to break up the play. Or worst of all that late 90s phenomenon of managers marking managers.
There is no possibility of an outsider coming in and revolutionizing the way people think about the game the way Wenger did. It is also no accident that there is far more tactical planning in football because there are far bigger participation rates. And that most of the innovation since the 60s has come from the North and a lot of that driven by people who have studied PE in a different jurisdiction.
Hurling by contrast is stuck in a tactical rut. There is no obvious reason to play 3-3-2-3-3 other than thatâs the way the game has always been played. If a county panel has a surfeit of good defenders then surely the best use of those resources would be to play those defenders in defensive positions rather than to fulfil some kind of nonsensical quota that demands that you play six forwards because your opponents play six backs. Even if this means as it often does leaving a better man on the line.
[/quote]
fagan,
have you ever actually played hurling yourself?
Kev,
Just because you read something in a book does not make it gospel. i think you are missing my point completely and you are reading what you want to read. im not going to the trouble of rehashing what ive said in the last few pages.
I would disagree with your analysis of 06 final. In 05 John Allen had no problem taking off ronan curran and brian corcoran. john allen had no problem making hard calls on the sideline. KK beat us in 06 because they were better than us, pure and simple.
crazy discussion- bogstick is similar to road bowls- bogmen just whack the ball as hard as they can
I think I must be missing your point completley too fenway. All I am getting from you is that to win an AI you need 12 decent players, and 3 marque players, and a good coach who isnt into tactics.
Kev made one point there:
and I think its applicable to fans of a team or the sport too. Cody has Kilkenny so well drilled, and players playing to a devised system, that it goes through seamless. Its no coincidence to see their players rotating at certain points in a game, or to see the understanding of a corner forward breaking off his man when another coming through the centre. You may call it good coaching, and whilst it is, it is tactics Kilkenny used, and they bring in players who fall into line with their system. thats why you see some of their players coming through and not making it. Richie Hogan, probably one of the most skillful players around, and would walk onto any team, but struggled for years to make it, and is still a question mark for many, because he doesnt fit into Codys system as well as previous players in his position. Its not always about how good the individual is, its also how good he is to play to the coaches tactics.
Fenway, I dont know how interested you are in American Football, but it is a sport that requires marque players, but they are only as good as a coaches tactics. I would equate most sports to this mantra, and American Football takes it to a different level.
Treacy out for the dudâs this weekend with a recurrence of a hamstring injury
where have i said that? to recap, in my opinion to win a senior all ireland in current era you need the following:
15 players who have bought into team concept as evidenced by good decision making on the field e.g no lotto shots, playing ball to better positioned team mate, diagonal balls to corner forwards, low balls to full forward who is not strong in air etc.
A coach who works on teams strengths and tries to eliminate weaknesses. Again a coach who employ tactics such as short passing, playing sweeper in front of full back line, or third midfielder is doing so in my opinion to address an underlying weakness in his own team. If lads want to call these changes in the traditional formation tactics, then well enough.
A coach can do drills etc to build upon strengths and eliminate weaknesses in training but its near on impossible to recreate the pressure that pure championship brings. Some players naturally always make the right decisoons eg noel mcgrath, tommy walsh etc but some will revert to type under pressure e,g. richie hogan. There is very little a coach can do about this.
You need at least three marquee players as these guys are matchwinners and make those around them better players. in addition they have the capacity through leadership and communication to get their teammates to make good decisions on field. Maybe the great limerick team of 94-96 failed to make the breakthrough as they only had two of these players i.e. kirby and carey. maybe the reason that galway are struggling to make the breakthrough is that they only have one in joe canning.
A team can try and compensate for a lack of marquee players by having a very strong panel i.e. 21/22 guys of a very high ability. Dublin are an obvious example here. Ultimately this will only take you so far as without the marquee players you cant win the ultimate prize. If you took mahers*2 and noel mcgrath off the tipp team on sunday and put them on the dublin team, then i would strongly fancy dublin to win.
You need hunger to win. Thats why it is so difficult to win back to back all irelands as you are not as hungry for your second as you are for your first. Lads devote a large part of their life trying to win a celtic cross and once you achieve that goal its difficult to have the same hunger and desire. It is easier for the likes of kk, cork and tipp to win back to back in current era as the backdoor means that they essentially have to peak for two matches at most. Cody is a master at maintaining hunger by developing a culture of competition within the camp through A vs B matches. Players know that no one is guaranteed a place and this keeps lads motivated. Cork over 2003-2006 played little A vs B matches. Senior players got into a comfort zone and resulted in a loss of hunger and i believe has resulted in many senior players being past their best when they should in theory still have plenty left to offer (other mitigating factors of course). The other problem with this is that other panel players got disenfranchised through lack of opportunities and so these lads left the panel and/or were never properly integrated. Cody is always looking to add a player of two each year. This keeps players on their toes. You can see tipp following the same strategy as do the cork footballers. This is good management as opposed to coaching.
You need on field leaders, these are often those marquee players but other times is can be some of the lesser lights.
You need good selectors who can see switches that need to be made.
You need good strength and conditioning.
You need support of your county board.
You need luck.
fair points fenway. and I get your reasoning. maybe indirectly it answers it, but my first question on this whole thing still stands:
it just seems to me that you dont think teams buy into any sort of tactics, and let them out there to play and that the good players through coaching will automatically know what to do.
I certainly dont buy into that at all. I think Kilkenny have a huge amount of tactics going on. Its not a case of them having anything radical, but you see their layout, and how players react around them, and when they play well, their tactics come into the fore. I just think its a bit old school to think its just about going out there and hurling man on man and doing your best and letting the ball in.
WTB, whereâd you source the graphs?
(tried the image properties, but just got redirected to photobucket)
Thatâs a key point in fairness. I think thereâs a misinterpretation of what tactics actually are and a lot of confusion because of it.
Tactics are just a set of principles or patterns that you adopt when youâre trying to achieve a certain objective. So when you engage in competitive activity you are by definition using some sort of tactics. I think people perceive of tactical planning as an extremely detailed and complex blueprint for how you will approach a game but it typically isnât.
Kilkennyâs tactical approach builds upon their technical excellence which gives them obvious and major advantages, and because of those strengths they can choose to play the direct attacking game that they do. They dominate most teams in the air and have (or had) forwards who were vastly superior to their counterparts in other teams when it came to winning 50-50 ball. They can choose not to focus on running with the ball and creating overlaps because that doesnât play to their strengths. But other teams donât have that luxury. That doesnât mean they are over-complicating the game, it simply reflects the reality that theyâd be eaten alive if they tried to play like Kilkenny do. If a team could run up match winning scores by simply driving long ball down the field theyâd do it! They donât abandon that approach for the hell of it. They move away from it because it doesnât work for them.
To reiterate the key point, tactics are not an extremely complex set of maneuvers that are outlined for players before each game, they are simply the principles that are coached into players and the patterns of play that are practiced. Every single team has these. Just because they donât talk about it doesnât mean theyâre not there. The very fact that they exist however, tells you that there are elements to how a team sets out to win games that will ultimately influence their success. This is recognised in every field sport in the world. Hurling might be âdifferentâ, but itâs not that different.
Nah, iâm sorry i donât believe that at all. A blind man would have taken off BC & RC, they were both red raw useless that day and getting cleaned out, and i think the kudos he got for that was grossly over the top. They had to come off, simple as that. He also had 2 class players to come, easy peasy John. And its also different to having a plan B or changing things tactically when after 8 or 9 minutes of that final it was clear KK had Cork figured out. Everyone saw it. He added nothing to Cork and just let them plough along as they were. Galway caught KK out and Cork pissed on Galway who have no bottle and a brutal Finals record against us.
The reason i put up the definition by the way is it makes sense to me, is relevant to this discussion and was written by a respected person in the Sports Science & Coaching field.
Very good point Gman, getting into reading a bit more about NFL stuff myself now, its so in-depth its incredible. They are years ahead of everyone.