Jump to content

  • Demonland Interviews

Demonland

Post Match Discussion - Round 12

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
15 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

I reckon the loss of Lever hurt more than we realise

One player shouldn't make a 7-goal difference. We were at full strength otherwise.

I hope all those here who were ridiculing Champion Data's rating of the Collingwood midfield are thinking again. De Goey, Pendlebury, Sidebottom, Treloar et al are a very good combination and well above ours.

BTW, I don't think Cox would be anywhere near as effective if it were wet. Collingwood had better hope for dry finals.

Edited by mauriesy
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its games like this where if the other team is getting a run on I’d like to see us do more to slow the game down and frustrate our opponents. Our game style when up and running is great and the quick ball movement is the thing of beauty to watch. But it feels like when we are down and things aren’t going our way we rely on this to get back into the game while the opposition momentum just continues for what feels like forever. I understand this isn’t for everyone but I’d like to see a bit more lock down in these situations. Keeping possession, making the opposition starve a bit. In other words, frustrate the heck out of them. I’m not talking about full on Ross Lyon 101 but to be able to do this when required would make us much harder to play against.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, layzie said:

Its games like this where if the other team is getting a run on I’d like to see us do more to slow the game down and frustrate our opponents. Our game style when up and running is great and the quick ball movement is the thing of beauty to watch. But it feels like when we are down and things aren’t going our way we rely on this to get back into the game while the opposition momentum just continues for what feels like forever. I understand this isn’t for everyone but I’d like to see a bit more lock down in these situations. Keeping possession, making the opposition starve a bit. In other words, frustrate the heck out of them. I’m not talking about full on Ross Lyon 101 but to be able to do this when required would make us much harder to play against.

100%.

You mean, a Plan B?? Something to fall back on when we are being dictated to?

Hmmmm

Edited by timbo
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

Pederson's only option IF he gets another game is CHB IMHO.  We lack a tall marking general down back without Lever now and i would give him one more chance to try and show something in this specific role.  Otherwise i just dont see how he fits or works in this line up.

It's good to have options eh?

Pedo back.

Weid in, or not

Tyson, Garlett, Petty, Tim Smith, Gaff. Oh wait, that's next year.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, mauriesy said:

One player shouldn't make a 7-goal difference. We were at full strength otherwise.

I hope all those here who were ridiculing Champion Data's rating of the Collingwood midfield are thinking again. De Goey, Pendlebury, Sidebottom, Treloar et al are a very good combination and well above ours.

BTW, I don't think Cox would be anywhere near as effective if it were wet. Collingwood had better hope for dry finals.

It shouldn't, and I didn't suggest that he made a 7 goal difference.  It was more that you could see we went back to our previous structures when Lever was still settling in to the backline, and it looked like we had that problem without him yesterday.  It certainly would have made us a better side with him there, but not a 7 goal difference.  I'd like to believe though that our structures would have been better which would have kept us in the game longer, giving us more of a sniff in the final term.  But that's assumption more than anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, layzie said:

Its games like this where if the other team is getting a run on I’d like to see us do more to slow the game down and frustrate our opponents. Our game style when up and running is great and the quick ball movement is the thing of beauty to watch. But it feels like when we are down and things aren’t going our way we rely on this to get back into the game while the opposition momentum just continues for what feels like forever. I understand this isn’t for everyone but I’d like to see a bit more lock down in these situations. Keeping possession, making the opposition starve a bit. In other words, frustrate the heck out of them. I’m not talking about full on Ross Lyon 101 but to be able to do this when required would make us much harder to play against.

Totally agree about managing the game tempo. 

The problem yesterday was the first quarter when 80% of the game was played in their forward half.  They kicked 5.5 to our 2.0.  That is 8 center clearance opportunities and 5 kick in opportunities and we till couldn't get it into our fwd 50. 

So our opportunities to frustrate them early on were virtually zip.  We just couldn't get our hands on the ball and if we did our disposal was straight back to them or a 50/50 ball which they won. 

We were never really in a position to manage the tempo in the first quarter and we never recovered.  We then had to play catch up and never got within 3 goals.

Edited by Lucifer's Hero
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pies could've/should've been 50 up at half time also, wasted many opportunities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Totally agree about managing the game tempo. 

The problem yesterday was the first quarter when 80% of the game was played in their forward half.  They kicked 5.5 to our 2.0.  That is 8 center clearance opportunities and 5 kick in opportunities and we till couldn't get it into our fwd 50. 

So our opportunities to frustrate them early on were virtually zip.  We just couldn't get our hands on the ball and if we did our disposal was straight back to them or a 50/50 ball which they won. 

We were never really in a position to manage the tempo in the first quarter and we never recovered.  We then had to play catch up and never got within 3 goals.

Pretty much the case unfortunately. The opportunities were rarely there to control possession early on.  Not much you can do when you get smoked in the clearances and their pace and ball movement is lightening.

It's definitely something I'd like to see a bit more of going forward. Our game style is very focused on doing our thing and doing it well, which I like. However the times will come where the opposition has a run on and we just need to throw a spanner and jam their bike spokes. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

In the first half they got three goals from stoppages.  That is far too many and will need to be looked at.

Viney, Jones and Oliver are see ball get ball types, too many times the filth were able to get the ball to the outside with ease.  We may need to reassess this mix against quality opposition mids.

Edited by Stretch Johnson
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, timbo said:

It's good to have options eh?

Pedo back.

Weid in, or not

Tyson, Garlett, Petty, Tim Smith, Gaff. Oh wait, that's next year.

Pedo probably not the answer either Timbo.  We lost Lever's height with no genuine "as tall or taller" replacement.  Smith ok but not sure he is a genuine Lever type option either just yet.  More time needed of course.

I would think Frost and/or Weids across HB at some point are our best longer term options but hec even they might not be what's needed.  Vince is a big worry at this stage as well.

Edited by Rusty Nails
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Rusty Nails said:

Pedo probably not the answer either Timbo.  We lost Lever's height with no genuine "as tall or taller" replacement.  Smith ok but not sure he is a genuine Lever type option either just yet.  More time needed of course.

I would think Frost and/or Weids across HB at some point are our best longer term options but hec even they might not be what's needed.  Vince is a big worry at this stage as well.

What to do about Vince?

And whatif Jetta out?

We have Petty and Frost to choose from, maybe Weid swung back too. Anyone else?

  • Shocked 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

anyone know why we didn't kick to Hogan yesterday?  he took 3 marks, zero contested.  well below average.

in the first half especially we never went to him.  I know Mac is on fire but [censored] me we needed Hogan to get in the game. Not sure when Hogan went on the ball but it should have been half way through the first quarter when it was very clear Pies were on top

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clearly a very disappointing performance, but not the end of the world. We were poor against the Bulldogs and got away with it because of the lack of opposition. We were equally poor yesterday and got what we deserved. The timing is pretty good for us to receive a major reality check with 11 days until our next game. There were some bad trends creeping into our play that need to be eradicated and we have time to work on them.

Our midfield was really poor. As in all of our bad performances there was a major disconnect between Gawn and his midfielders. I've previously thought it was Gawn at fault, but I'm not so sure about that yesterday. Jones and Viney were miles off the pace and Oliver's disposal was as bad as I've seen from him. We just didn't handle the pressure from Collingwood early and then continued to panic even when the pressure came off later in the game. Why Goodwin didn't give more (any?) centre square time to Salem, Brayshaw and Harmes is beyond me. At least Brayshaw or Harmes could have run with De Goey when he was dominating early.

I commented about three minutes into the game that we would concede 20 goals and that sadly was proven correct. The Smith selection was a poor one given the role that he was asked to play, and at no stage did we look to have our match ups right. Why Lewis is allowed to play loose man in defence without plugging the hole in front of the number one forward is beyond me. He just won't put himself in danger of getting hurt. Arguably Smith should have played that role, and Frost should have played Smith's role. I'm convinced that Vince and Lewis can't play in the same side, especially not in the same part of the ground.

I'm a Pedersen fan but his presence seemed to unsettle the forward line. Hogan was invisible, and McDonald was wasted on the wing in the first half. Spargo and Hannan are miles off the top level and both need a spell at Casey. Tom McDonald is an absolute star and was the only reason we got within 12 goals of Collingwood.

Goodwin had another poor day yesterday. It is one thing to have the team winning when everything is going your way, but I'm yet to see Goodwin dig a plan B out of the back pocket to change the course of a match. His match ups and game plan were sadly inadequate and he never looked like stopping Collingwood's midfield dominance. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, DubDee said:

anyone know why we didn't kick to Hogan yesterday?  he took 3 marks, zero contested.  well below average.

in the first half especially we never went to him.  I know Mac is on fire but [censored] me we needed Hogan to get in the game. Not sure when Hogan went on the ball but it should have been half way through the first quarter when it was very clear Pies were on top

He was on his own at one point at HB asking for it for at least 5 seconds or more and i think it was Lewis who either chose to ignore or didnt see.

Insisted in playing from behind at times so maybe part of his own doing....eg;  not presenting enough.  At the same time i cant recall us hitting many targets up at all inside 50.  We went back to our old bad habbits.  Either that or the Pies pressure on the ball carrier forced our hand here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, poita said:

Goodwin had another poor day yesterday. It is one thing to have the team winning when everything is going your way, but I'm yet to see Goodwin dig a plan B out of the back pocket to change the course of a match. His match ups and game plan were sadly inadequate and he never looked like stopping Collingwood's midfield dominance. 

This is a key issue (yesterday, and against Hawks/Tigers, and was a complaint last year when things didn't go our way. I am not in any saying Goodwin is an issue).

Edited by timbo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we have a prediction posting rule of a maximum of 12pts a win?

If we do win by more, posters may claim they tipped exact margin - based on a trust system.

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Stretch Johnson said:

In the first half they got three goals from stoppages.  That is far too many and will need to be looked at.

Viney, Jones and Oliver are see ball get ball types, too many times the filth were able to get the ball to the outside with ease.  We may need to reassess this mix against quality opposition mids.

That is where our problem lies. To many in packs trying to get ball out with little quick hand passes and as soon as a fumble happens or it gets pushed out wide all our guys are in the pack and away the Maggies went on their own. Doggies did it also but could not sustain it hence we got on top but Maggies to their credit kept it up all game. This is where our on field Generals need to make adjustments. When pressure on we seem to go back to old habits.

As  I have said before, it is not end of world and we have a opportunity in 2 weeks to show everyone what we can do against the Power. Or I hope so!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The day started beautifully, sunny day nice walk from the city to the Gee, then they didn't open the gates until 1.20 PM?????? What were they thinking. Watching the coaches was fun and watching the boys kick goal after goal in the warm up looked the goods, we won the toss but once the siren sounded we looked flat and the Pies were On.

It was hard to watch apart from a couple of cameo roles and a stand out performance from TMac, we looked a long way off Collingwood and even Dunny out ran Hannan then Howe stopped us in our tracks with a couple of nice marks and hit up targets like a good player should. How many times did we kick the ball directly to the opposition and on the Big Stage to, 83,000 people at the game.

 

Very disappointed that the boys didn't dig deeper and run harder. We were the hunted and we went to ground.

Go Dee's!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still kicked the fourth highest score (91) points this round, nothing we did worked, just a bad day, it happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely old habits coming to the fore again. Long high balls into forward 50 to packs where Dunn and Howe had a field day. Long bombs down the wing as well, back to our hold habits. Over the last 6 weeks we'd stopped doing that - guess when [censored] hits the fan we revert back to our old habits? Also seemed to have forgotten to put someone in the goal square, noticed it in a few of our wins lately where Hibberd would wait in the goal square whenever it looked like the opposition were having a shot at goal - saved a number of dribble goals the last few weeks. Hibberd in the square would've stopped a number of goals that went through cause we had no one there. 

Good passage of play was when I think it was Gus had a shot at goal 30m or so out but on an acute angle - sideways kicked it to square it up and we got the goal. What Hogan should've done with his one shot on goal. But that's how we played in our wins - kicked it to someone on the outside of the 50m arc, who when the opposition expected us to go for a shot at goal we centred it with a short, low pass to someone with a better angle. 

I think Pedersen back would still work better than Weideman back. Weideman has height but lacks the body strength to out compete key forwards which Pedersens 95kg's and 193cm height can do as we saw with some of his strong contested marking. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also have been waiting the last month or so for Hannan, Spargo and Fritsch to be dropped for a rest. Hannan probably has the best tank of the trio as he's already played a season of senior footy, but I was expecting the other two to be fatigued by now and yesterday showed it. Bugg, Kent, Jeffy into the side for the Port game?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, david_neitz_is_my_dad said:

Height 1.87 m, Weight 82 kg

Height 1.93 m, Weight 100 kg

De Goey is listed as 191 cm and 91kg on the AFL app (current vs his draft year)

Screenshot_20180612-120027_AFL.jpg

Edited by Dr. Gonzo
  • Shocked 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

De Goey played the best mid’s game I’ve seen from any player in any game this year. Cox wasn’t even the best forward on the ground (hello TMac), let alone the best player. JDG should have one Danners trophy on the shelf.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Nasher said:

De Goey played the best mid’s game I’ve seen from any player in any game this year. Cox wasn’t even the best forward on the ground (hello TMac), let alone the best player. JDG should have one Danners trophy on the shelf.

De Goey is an absolute gun and I agree best game from a mid this year (i have seen). He has a tank, pace, intensity, great foot skills and good overhead. A dynamic footballer. Unfortunately, the Pies had too many guys with similar attributes. Despite comments on this thread, I would love to have Cox in our side. Reads the game well, mobile, and accurate kick. His height and long arms make him very difficult to combat. Also a very good backup for Grundy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Collingwood worked the ball well out of a congested contest to an outside player waiting to receive the ball. We didn’t seem to have that outside runner and would handball it around in close until someone was just able to kick the ball clear, normally straight to the opposition. I think this highlights how much we need Gaff or a similar player.  Our game plan holds up when there’s little to no pressure however crumbles when it’s applied.

Edited by Ethan Tremblay
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×