Post-Game Review: The 20-Minute Elite Review Model

Most community-level post-game reviews are often too long (an hour video session no one absorbs) or too vague (a half-time speech with no specific action). The elite version is short, structured, and ends with clear action items.

Why most reviews fail

Three failure modes show up at community level:

• The narration review: Walking through every quarter chronologically. Players tune out by the second quarter; nothing actionable comes out.
• The vibe review: "We weren't intense enough." True or not, no one knows what to train next week or what specific areas of the game require attention.
• The kitchen-sink review: Twelve issues, none prioritised and no clear theme. Players walk out remembering none of them.

The 20-minute model fixes all three by enforcing structure, prioritisation, and action.

The 20-minute structure

Five minutes per phase, five minutes for the action list. That's the whole thing. Coaches at elite level often spend longer prepping the data, but the team-facing review is short by design.

Step 1 — Territory (5 min)

Start with where the game was played.  Numbers can help to tell the story:

• Inside 50s — for and against.
• Time in forward half.
• Intercept map — where on the ground we generated turnovers. 
• Metres gained from Intercepts and clearance

Territory tells you whether you controlled field position. If you performed strongly in territory metrics and lost the game, the issue is quality or structural — For example, we were able to control field position through clearance wins, however we sent up a forward into stoppage as an extra midfielder to increase our chances of winning clearance. Ultimately this means the opposition has an extra player behind the ball, and this may impact the ability to score from these chains. 
 
Understanding the specific chain type and area of the field territory was won or lost allows coaches to accurately replicate these moments within training drills and ensure what players are doing on the track, directly translates into the game day moment we are seeking improvement.

Step 2 — Contest (5 min)

Numbers:

• Stoppage win % — and where on the ground.
• Clearance type — clean exits vs hack-and-hope.
• Metres gained from clearance 
• Clearance to in50's / Score

Contest tells you how often you won the ball while it was in dispute. Most community games are decided here, so this is often the most actionable phase to review. While the pure win/loss numbers are important, powercoach allows you to dig deeper and look at the quality of contest wins. 

Step 3 — Offence (5 min)

Numbers:

• Chain length — the metres gained from our attacking plays and eventual outcomes.
• Score per inside 50 — were our entries quality?
• Chain type — did we score from kick ins, intercepts, or stoppages?

Was the issue quality or supply? and what area's of the ground did we have success or failure in moving the ball. Understanding the context around where your territory and scoring opportunities came from allows you to accurately recreate these moments within training. 

Step 4 — Action list (5 min)

This is the most important step, and the one most reviews skip. Three buckets:

• What to train next week: One or two specific drills tied to a phase you under-performed in. Not "tackle harder" — something like "Outnumber to exit" so address a rebound issue or "clearance to inside 50" to work on the connection between winning clearance and creating scores.
• Which players need role clarity: Anyone whose role didn't match what the game demanded. Not "play better" — a specific role conversation. Ideally provide a clear opportunity within training to rehearse the actions you expect to see from this role. Quality repetitions is the best way to learn and improve.
• What structural issues to fix: Any positional pattern that hurt us — wing depth, stoppage shape, forward spacing. These get rehearsed at training, not just spoken about.

By the end of Step 4, you should have a written list of three to five concrete items. Anything that doesn't fit on the list shouldn't be in the review.

How Powercoach short-circuits the data step

Most of the time spent on a community-level review is the data-gathering — pulling stats together, watching the vision, finding the moments. Powercoach automates this part:

• Chain data, conversion maps, stoppage trends, and intercept patterns are populated automatically.
• Magic Margin vs actual score tells you whether you "played well and lost" or "got out-hustled" — which changes the entire review framing.
• Quarter-by-quarter breakdowns let you isolate the moment the game turned, without scrubbing through video.

The result: instead of spending 90 minutes assembling data and 10 minutes deciding what to do about it, you spend 5 minutes confirming the data and 15 minutes building the action list. That's the right ratio.

Common questions from community coaches

After the game, where should I start my review?

Territory. It frames everything else. If you didn't control where the game was played, no other phase analysis matters — that's the first thing to fix.

What's the most important stat to look at first?

Magic Margin vs actual score. It tells you whether the result reflected the performance or whether you over- or under-performed. The framing of the entire review depends on this answer.

How do I link what I saw to what actually happened?

Pick the moments where your eye and the data agree, not where they disagree. Show those moments to the players — that's how the lesson sticks.

How do I keep a review simple instead of overwhelming the players?

Use the 20-minute structure and end with a list of three to five action items. Anything that doesn't make the list doesn't get said.

What's the best way to use Powercoach to guide our next training focus?

Look at the phase you under-performed in. Each phase maps to specific drills — for example, contest losses in defensive 50 map to stoppage-exit drills. The phase tells you what to train. It is also important not neglect what worked in the game. This should also be reflected in training and mindset towards turning our strengths in weapons.

What should I look at to understand whether our game plan actually worked?

Magic Margin and chain length together. If Magic Margin says you controlled the game and chain length says your offence was effective, your plan worked — even if the scoreboard didn't reward it that day. If either is off, the plan needs adjustment.

That's the series

Six modules, one objective: helping you watch AFL games the way elite coaches do. The frame, the live cues, the data loop, the adjustment categories, the momentum signals, and the review structure. None of it is complicated. All of it takes practice.

Pick one module to focus on this weekend. Run the freeze-frame technique, or commit to the 20-minute review, or just spend the first quarter watching the system instead of the ball. One change is enough.