It was the difference, pure and simple.

Moloney had the right idea in the first quarter, there was just no one to kick it to.

Edited October 1, 201114 yr by Clint Bizkit

Agree, when we moved it with purpose and quickly we were dangerous, Miller and Robbo marked most, competed the rest and Aussie swooped on what was dropped.

Miller's best game ever by far.

Miller's best game ever by far.

x 2

Miller's best game ever by far.

The boy loves playing freo that is for sure.

Miller's best game ever by far.

QFT.

Miller's best game ever by far.

It wasn't just miller who lifted. Bate after a terrible first half played a blinder in the second half working extremely hard around the half forward line taking marks. WE ACTUALLY HAD OPTIONS UP FORWARD.

x 2

x 3

dont forget davey and robertson all returned to form

dont forget davey and robertson all returned to form

But they have played well before.

Miller hadn't.

In that last quarter he could have done the conservative thing and dished off a little handball when Schammer was coming for him, instead he just ran through the guy.

But they have played well before.

Miller hasn't.

In that last quarter he could have done the conservative thing and dished off a little handball when Schammer was coming for him, instead he just ran through the guy.

god that was good to see!

millers actions on the footy matching his frame and his push and shove.

x 3

x 4

today Miller = leadership

absolutely sensational game.... it is amazing what happens when we use the ball well going inside 50....

Actually give the forwards a chance to mark the ball and we finally kicked straight!!! 9 straight in a row in the last quarter..... Great effort boys!!

It was the difference, pure and simple.

Moloney had the right idea in the first quarter, there was just no one to kick it to.

sorry, but I have to say you're wrong... It wasn't purely and simply the difference in today's game. Moloney was stupid in the first quarter just blazing away when we had our players outnumbered and turning the ball over. You're one of those supporters who boos when we chip the ball around aren't you?

The long kicking which was effective in the second half was a consequence of the rest of our game plan working. The players were running in numbers and providing options down the field, allowing our players to kick to a target. The long kicks were simply a consequence of these things.

If all the players kicked long in the first half like Moloney did in the first half we would've been down by 100 at half time.

Having said that, was a fantastic win!

Moloney had the right idea in the first quarter, there was just no one to kick it to.

Moloney had the wrong idea in the first quarter and got the biggest baking of all time for it. Even on TV I saw Bailey point to Moloney, hold up two fingers and say "two times", which by my count was the number of consecutive times he kicked it straight to a Freo player at half forward.

sorry, but I have to say you're wrong... It wasn't purely and simply the difference in today's game. Moloney was stupid in the first quarter just blazing away when we had our players outnumbered and turning the ball over. You're one of those supporters who boos when we chip the ball around aren't you?

The long kicking which was effective in the second half was a consequence of the rest of our game plan working. The players were running in numbers and providing options down the field, allowing our players to kick to a target. The long kicks were simply a consequence of these things.

If all the players kicked long in the first half like Moloney did in the first half we would've been down by 100 at half time.

Dont disturb the poor boys dream.

Moloney had the wrong idea in the first quarter and got the biggest baking of all time for it. Even on TV I saw Bailey point to Moloney, hold up two fingers and say "two times", which by my count was the number of consecutive times he kicked it straight to a Freo player at half forward.

I thought it was 3 times he pointed out to Moloney in the huddle. It was well deserved.

There is little point in this team chipping it 15-30 metres to blokes in a crap position. All a team needs to do to us is zone properly and we will wilt trying to attempt to chip and handball our way out of the defensive 50. We have to do one of two things:

1. It still pisses me off sometimes that we take so long for someone to go back and take the kick. I realize sometimes it is done for a breather. However the first option is to kick out as quickly as possible before the opposition players have a chance to zone and hit a target 40-60 metres out like we did numerous times yesterday.

2. Wheatley is a WEAPON. If option 1 is no good F&%K chipping it 15 meters. He can nearly kick it as far as the centre circle! If it's a 50-50 cotest at least it is 80-90 metres away from goal and we will have at least half a dozen players around the ball.

last week at the gabba wheatley in the last quarter kicked long out from there goal and it made it to the centre square. what does this tell you? 1: cuts out short [censored] kicks inside defensive 50. 2: makes a contest in the middle where our taller men are going to be. 3:we got goals at the gabba from this situation. also, has anyone noticed are we just slow starters to games? its just a theory but we seem to finish well even if we are getting flogged. i heard bailey say the results will come from the training track, does this mean he has been running them off there feet every week at training or is he just talking about improving foot skills at training?

sorry, but I have to say you're wrong... It wasn't purely and simply the difference in today's game. Moloney was stupid in the first quarter just blazing away when we had our players outnumbered and turning the ball over. You're one of those supporters who boos when we chip the ball around aren't you?

This LONG KICKING to a FORWARD LINE thing could take off...

The long kicking which was effective in the second half was a consequence of the rest of our game plan working. The players were running in numbers and providing options down the field, allowing our players to kick to a target. The long kicks were simply a consequence of these things.

This LONG KICKING to a FORWARD LINE thing could take off...

If all the players kicked long in the first half like Moloney did in the first half we would've been down by 100 at half time.

Having said that, was a fantastic win!

So it was better when Melbourne turned the ball over in the midfield becuase of stupid little kicks and handpasses?

Moloney had the wrong idea in the first quarter and got the biggest baking of all time for it. Even on TV I saw Bailey point to Moloney, hold up two fingers and say "two times", which by my count was the number of consecutive times he kicked it straight to a Freo player at half forward.

He had the right idea, the problem was there was no structure, no forward line to kick it to.

This LONG KICKING to a FORWARD LINE thing could take off...

How many times was the ball turned over in the middle of the ground through short kicking and handpassing?

I was just watching the highlights of the game and here and Cometti sums it up perfectly after Moloney's long kick to Davey in the forward line: "Now they're going long to the square and they're kicking goals!".

How is kicking it 50 metres straight to Sandilands when there were no Melbourne players within 20 metres of him the right idea?

No one being there is a seperate issue to that being a good idea.

If there was a player there, it would've been a good idea, but there wasn't so it was stupid.

How is kicking it 50 metres straight to Sandilands when there were no Melbourne players within 20 metres of him the right idea?

No one being there is a seperate issue to that being a good idea.

If there was a player there, it would've been a good idea, but there wasn't so it was stupid.

The Sandilands kick was his worst, but again how many times did Melbourne cough the ball up in the middle of the ground by over using it?

The problem was, that there weren't any forward options.

Either becuase they weren't there in the first place, or that Melbourne's slow, indirect ball movement through short kicking and over using the handball allowed Freo players enough time to get back and fill in space.

I see what you mean, but i don't think the second half was tha different. It was just that when the handball came, players were then more inclined to run with the footy. Let alone there was no handballing to stagnant players, which i think was all about confidence.

Centre clearances have been shocking all year. The last quarter, suddenly we have the run, players are all moving, we suddenly start winning some. Quick handballs to moving targets who were then able to kick long to space, or where forwards had been able to move to