On 24/07/2011 at 07:46, Jaded said:

Yeah sure, they had a dip... for about two a half quarters and then sh*t went against us and then everybody just shut up shop.

I don't care that we lost, I expected it, but it's how we keep losing that is unacceptable.

Why should we sit in the stands and support the players until the final siren when the players themselves don't seem to give a sh*t or want to actually fight out a match?

It's embarrassing and humiliating.

And Dean Bailey, FFS what the hell was that?

Why is his default panic move dropping Watts back into the hole? Why the f' was Trengove in the backline when we were crying out for some talent in the middle? Why can we not play under pressure?

Dumb coaching.

I think you've underestimated the amount we've spent in Darwin.

It was obvious when we started to bomb long in the second Qtr, the players were struggling with the wokload required to keep setting up through the mids, time and again. The writing was appearing on the wall that we couldn't match the run following our northern Jaunt.

And Buddy was looking awesome, even without a big effort or great supply himself. Answ: Send help back. (gains) wattsy gets more experience helping out instead of being smashed up by their defenders.

Try to absorb the damage coming.

We rested some players this week after Darwin,,, and the Hawks were playing to honor a Legend.

  On 24/07/2011 at 08:00, why you little said:

Sylvia is not happy with a 450K contract so we hear....You gotta earn that kind of coin Col.

Didn't see that today...Club must stand firm on these situations.

I'd like to know how much he's been offered to put things into perspective.

  On 24/07/2011 at 10:37, Redleg said:

Allowed Burchall to run free the whole game.

Played Watts on the wing.

Had no discernable structure to our forward line.

Played an extra player behind the ball which may have led to my first point.

Left out a fresh Bartram who might have helped shut down Rioli.

Hasn't taught us how to tackle properly.

Hasn't taught us how to apply the forward press against a good side.

Has no method to our kick in.

Has no method to the opposition kick in.

Has no plan B.

Hasn't improved the skills in kicking, handballing and decision making.

Hasn't got players to be prepared to gut run or simply offer a lead or make position.

etc, etc, etc.

seriously, the coach is responsible for this? c'mon

  On 24/07/2011 at 09:58, bush demon said:

Last three games (at least) how many times have Hawthorn mid-fielders broken away from tackles with pirouettes? we just can't lay hands on them.

Even if we do they are brilliant at getting their hands free and moving the ball on .... did you see their drill before the game where they simulated tight match conditions inside a small square ... brilliant idea for their mids.

  On 24/07/2011 at 10:42, 36DD said:

seriously, the coach is responsible for this? c'mon

Whose job is it to get players to lead and make position, the boot studder?

I have not criticized the Coach since he started with us but today I am a little angry and am venting.

  On 24/07/2011 at 10:37, Redleg said:

Allowed Burchall to run free the whole game.

Played Watts on the wing.

Had no discernable structure to our forward line.

Played an extra player behind the ball which may have led to my first point.

Left out a fresh Bartram who might have helped shut down Rioli.

Hasn't taught us how to tackle properly.

Hasn't taught us how to apply the forward press against a good side.

Has no method to our kick in.

Has no method to the opposition kick in.

Has no plan B.

Hasn't improved the skills in kicking, handballing and decision making.

Hasn't got players to be prepared to gut run or simply offer a lead or make position.

etc, etc, etc.

They're trying to bring the young players on as quickly as possible.. Thats obvious, & when you bring in a host of young players without games, they make mistakes as they learn. So which young defenders did you want out, out of Strauss, Tapscott, Nicholson, or out of Howe up forward, or Maric? Bring in Bartram sure, but for which small back do you want out? We dropped Morton, rested IMO Scully, & Jurrah out,,,,, for Dunn, Bater, Bennell ins.... Maybe we could have also rested Gysberts as well, but for who'm to come in? so what do you do with the matchups after all this then, and the structures?

So you think Westy is no good as a midfield coach? And Williams is crap as an Ball movement coach? And our fitness & conditioning guys are no good for not being able to get more run into us for this week? And the ruck coach is no good this week?

  On 24/07/2011 at 08:22, Nasher said:

It's hilarious that I can not catch a single minute of the game, see the scoreboard and predict exactly what the response on Demonland will be.

Wow you are obviously a Prophet! Come on mate, of course its easy to predict, there is always disappointment after a loss. I am actually the same as most on here though, I don't feel as bad as usual. The boys had a real crack today just were totally outclassed. That is all. We'll take a lot outta today and develop as a team.

  On 24/07/2011 at 10:56, dee-luded said:

They're trying to bring the young players on as quickly as possible.. Thats obvious, & when you bring in a host of young players without games, they make mistakes as they learn. So which young defenders did you want out, out of Strauss, Tapscott, Nicholson, or out of Howe up forward, or Maric? Bring in Bartram sure, but for which small back do you want out? We dropped Morton, rested IMO Scully, & Jurrah out,,,,, for Dunn, Bater, Bennell ins.... Maybe we could have also rested Gysberts as well, but for who'm to come in? so what do you do with the matchups after all this then, and the structures?

So you think Westy is no good as a midfield coach? And Williams is crap as an Ball movement coach? And our fitness & conditioning guys are no good for not being able to get more run into us for this week? And the ruck coach is no good this week?

Read the last line of my post 55. Now go and take a bex and lie down, I am going to.

PS. As an aside do you think our coaching panel is allowed to be criticized or is that forbidden?

Four out of seven of Demonland's banner boys were missing. Not quite sure if that is significant or not.

Three things stood out to me today

1 we need experienced players that we don't have and we have NO elite level players in our squad

2 being a top 3 draft pick doesn't guarantee success

3 green is our most selfish player, easily

Let's put things into perspective.

Hawthorn missed the finals 5 years in a row: 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006

In 2007 they made the finals.

2008 they won a flag.

2002 = 2007

2003 = 2008

2004 = 2009

2005 = 2010

2006 = 2011

Hawthorn finished 9-13 in 2006, a record we seem likely to be similar to. They got their fair share of beltings in 2006, a mere two years before their flag.

  On 24/07/2011 at 10:37, Redleg said:

Allowed Burchall to run free the whole game.

Played Watts on the wing.

Had no discernable structure to our forward line.

Played an extra player behind the ball which may have led to my first point.

Left out a fresh Bartram who might have helped shut down Rioli.

Hasn't taught us how to tackle properly.

Hasn't taught us how to apply the forward press against a good side.

Has no method to our kick in.

Has no method to the opposition kick in.

Has no plan B.

Hasn't improved the skills in kicking, handballing and decision making.

Hasn't got players to be prepared to gut run or simply offer a lead or make position.

etc, etc, etc.

Watts was Birchalls man for the first half. This is one of the reasons Watts was moved to the wing.

Bartram was not left out he did not get through training during the week.

Agree with all other points though.

Wow, I can't believe some of the crap in this thread.

  On 24/07/2011 at 07:24, BattlerBailey said:

Care to elaborate?

Turnovers killed us, plain and simple. I wouldn't blame the coach for that.

I'd love to elaborate.

1) We resorted to the loose man in defence. Again. It has never, and will never, work. Moreover, we don't even use the loose man in an appropriate way, we just stick an extra player at CHB and that's that. It's a pathetic tactic, but a predictable one from Bailey who always resorts to it when the other side gets a run of goals on. Time to think of something new Dean.

2) Green was kicking goals. He kicked all three of our third-quarter goals. Yet he was continually sent into the midfield, where he was ineffectual. No idea why.

3) We defended from too far back. Again.

4) Garland was left on Rioli for far too long.

5) Watts was flicked between forward and defence without getting a chance to settle either way.

6) We kept sending third men up at ruck contests even though we were killing it in the ruck, thereby making us have one less member on the ground for the clearance work.

Bailey's match day coaching leaves a lot to be desired. Yes, the turnovers hurt us big time, but we could have mitigated the damage if Bailey had had a better day.

  On 24/07/2011 at 10:53, Redleg said:

Whose job is it to get players to lead and make position, the boot studder?

I have not criticized the Coach since he started with us but today I am a little angry and am venting.

gut running is the choice of the player, they have to decide to push themselves to the limit, past what is comfortable to the point at which they are dry retching or vomiting, it must come from within the player, the coach unfortunately has no control over whether a player will push to these extremes....yes mate i'm gutted too but we are a young team, i know its the old excuse but it is pertinent, you cant just click your fingers and play like a Collingwood, Geelong or Hawthorn, it takes years and many pre-seasons.

  On 24/07/2011 at 11:06, Redleg said:

Read the last line of my post 55. Now go and take a bex and lie down, I am going to.

PS. As an aside do you think our coaching panel is allowed to be criticized or is that forbidden?

I don't need a lie down, I'm having a great time with last nights win and our win in Darwin And Webber is in front & soon I'll watch Cadel take Le Tour.

I'm not bothered by a loss this week and a win next at this stage of our development, as I can see the development taking place in the bigger picture.

Our list has never looked better, so I'm not going to get Upset,,, unless we continue to play players who will Not show the required courage in the Red 'N' Blue Jumper. So while I was hopefull of a win today the way the game unfolded showed what we were capable of today following the Darwin Heat.

I'll say a few words to excite the Real Dees supporters. Trengove, Watts, Martin, Tapscott, Bail, Gysberts, Howe, Cook, Gawn, Evans, Nicholson, Strauss, TMcDonald, Davis, Fitzpatrick,,,,

  On 24/07/2011 at 08:22, big_red_fire_engine said:

Due to our smaller bodies we pushed more into the stoppage to try and win it. Hawthorn due to their size can post some outriders to push it out to. Compared previously to when we have played Hawthorn, Carlton, Geelong, I actually thought there was a marked improvement in our ability inside the stoppage today but they simply outclassed us when they got it out.

Endeavour was good today until we ran out of gas half way through the third. However too many times we took one handball too many or handballed when the kick was the right option.

I was amazed with our lack of change in tact aside from the usual Watts behind the ball option. Garland was getting pantsed by Rioli and we lacked Frawleys dash yet even when the game was getting beyond reach we did not free Frawley up and move Garland to Franklin.

I'd have to agree with you there mate. Think Darwin last week and the outs had a significant impact on our game. I actually thought this was one of our "better" loses this year considering our opposition.

  On 24/07/2011 at 10:14, dee-luded said:

In what ways was he outcoached. What did he do, or not do, in hindsight?

Not in hindsight, but even before the game, I thought team selection and balance was very wrong.

I don't think Bate and Dunn both go in the same side. Period. It means too many easy rebounds for the opposition. It also meant Watts was playing a strange role all day. Petterd isn't a half back.

We had no rebound out of defence, and we clearly didn't switch the ball and spread well at all.

  On 24/07/2011 at 14:22, Choko said:

Not in hindsight, but even before the game, I thought team selection and balance was very wrong.

I don't think Bate and Dunn both go in the same side. Period. It means too many easy rebounds for the opposition. It also meant Watts was playing a strange role all day. Petterd isn't a half back.

We had no rebound out of defence, and we clearly didn't switch the ball and spread well at all.

They did it because we needed to put a team with the freshest possible legs out there, and bigger bodies for the coming (inc' today, Hawks/ Cats/ Blues/W/Coast). It's easy to see after what took place & looking back to selection to analyze what & why it all took place. We could do nothing else but try to bring some 'Legs' into the team.

This in essence was a rest we had to have.

Next week we should be back to something normal re run & condition, but maybe down a little on confidence & form.. It's just a pity we didn't have a 'bye', after Darwin, instead of before.

Anonther disappointing replay to watch over here in Europe. I don't think Frawley gets enough air time in these threads. F*ing legend, favourite player by far another stellar job down back. Needed more from Watts and can't wait to see Davey back in the side.

People keep saying its the coaches fault or it isnt its the players. Here is something Bailey could have addressed! Straight after half time our resting ruckman Jamar stayed on the pine for 6.55 min. resting from an exhausting half time break. What did Haw. do in the same 6.55 Min ?

They played their resting ruckman up forward, in the same 6.55 Min they took 5 marks and kicked 2 gaols 2 points and an out of bounds on the full. Boy Jamar must of had an exhausting half time break to need the extra break time.

As Wellington said of Napoleon he keeps coming the same old way and we keep beating him the same old way. If you are playing MFC the next week dont bother sending a scout to watch our game because nothing changes we keep doing the same old things the same old way.

  On 24/07/2011 at 18:30, ex52k2 said:

People keep saying its the coaches fault or it isnt its the players. Here is something Bailey could have addressed! Straight after half time our resting ruckman Jamar stayed on the pine for 6.55 min. resting from an exhausting half time break. What did Haw. do in the same 6.55 Min ?

They played their resting ruckman up forward, in the same 6.55 Min they took 5 marks and kicked 2 gaols 2 points and an out of bounds on the full. Boy Jamar must of had an exhausting half time break to need the extra break time.

As Wellington said of Napoleon he keeps coming the same old way and we keep beating him the same old way. If you are playing MFC the next week dont bother sending a scout to watch our game because nothing changes we keep doing the same old things the same old way.

I couldn't agree more.

When things weren't going well, our next big power forward gets thrown back. And so begins and ends plan B.

The delivery into the forward line was appalling, the forwards were playing too high in any event, and I cannot think of one occasion all game where we pressured their exit from our forward 50 and caused a turnover. Sylvia wasn't getting into it, why not put him forward and ask him to harass? Very poor coaching display.

But of course it's not just Bailey. The players have to take some responsibility too. Petterd's miss in the 2rd when we were just hanging in there was bad, the turnovers, the usual culprits that refuse to run and chase, etc...

  On 24/07/2011 at 18:14, Schneider said:

I don't think Frawley gets enough air time in these threads. F*ing legend, favourite player by far another stellar job down back.

youve got to be joking he was completely outclassed

  On 24/07/2011 at 11:16, Cudi_420 said:

Let's put things into perspective.

Hawthorn missed the finals 5 years in a row: 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006

In 2007 they made the finals.

2008 they won a flag.

2002 = 2007

2003 = 2008

2004 = 2009

2005 = 2010

2006 = 2011

Hawthorn finished 9-13 in 2006, a record we seem likely to be similar to. They got their fair share of beltings in 2006, a mere two years before their flag.

Good analysis, and lets hope that we are only a few years away from being (at least) competitive against the top 8 sides.

Unfortunately there is also the argument to say that 4 years into a rebuilding period we should / could be much better. Hawthorn are the case study of how it is possible (note - this is certainly not a saying that it is a guarantee) to rebuild within 4 years to be competitive:

2003 = 12 wins (just missed finals / basically a finals side) Schwabb in charge

2004 = 4 wins Schwabb in charge

2005 = 5 wins Clarkson in charge (Start of rebuild)

2006 = 9 wins Clarkson in charge (2nd year of rebuild)

2007 = 14 wins (finals) (3rd year of rebuild)

2008 = 20 wins (Premiership) (4th year of rebuild).

In reality 2003 the Hawks were very unlucky not to play finals. I also am the first to agree that they got their drafting spot on when they did bottom out. Well done to them.

Compare the above to MFC:

2006 = 13 wins (played finals but were lucky to scrape in - one more win than the hawks had in 2003) (Daniher in charge)

2007 = 5 wins (Daniher in charge)

2008 = 3 wins (Bailey in charge) (Start of rebuild)

2009 = 4 wins (Bailey in charge) (2nd year of rebuild)

2010 = 8 wins (Bailey in charge) (3rd year of rebuild)

2011 = ?? wins (Bailey in charge) (4th season of rebuild) (Not competitive against top 8 sides)

I agree that 4 years is NO guarantee to play finals and be competitive against top 8 sides, just look at Richmonds five year plan.

But what I cant stand hearing about is our list is young, our list cant compete as a result of youth. We are getting better, but we are not there yet. 4 years CAN get you back to competitive levels, it just hasn't for us.

I just don't think we can hang our hat on us getting better because we bottomed out say 4-5 years ago. Instead we need to critically evaluate if we are set up right and if we have the necessary players to get there.

I guess what I am saying is that constantly feeling how ordinary we have been for the last 4-5 years, I was really hoping we were better than we are now (maybe to optimistic and expecting too much) and I also worry about how we are going to improve considerably for season 2012.

  On 24/07/2011 at 13:00, 36DD said:

gut running is the choice of the player, they have to decide to push themselves to the limit, past what is comfortable to the point at which they are dry retching or vomiting, it must come from within the player, the coach unfortunately has no control over whether a player will push to these extremes....yes mate i'm gutted too but we are a young team, i know its the old excuse but it is pertinent, you cant just click your fingers and play like a Collingwood, Geelong or Hawthorn, it takes years and many pre-seasons.

it is the choice of the player to push themselves to the limit but it is also the coach's job to make them accountable if they are not doing it.

  On 25/07/2011 at 01:20, Born to Run said:

Good analysis, and lets hope that we are only a few years away from being (at least) competitive against the top 8 sides.

Unfortunately there is also the argument to say that 4 years into a rebuilding period we should / could be much better. Hawthorn are the case study of how it is possible (note - this is certainly not a saying that it is a guarantee) to rebuild within 4 years to be competitive:

2003 = 12 wins (just missed finals / basically a finals side) Schwabb in charge

2004 = 4 wins Schwabb in charge

2005 = 5 wins Clarkson in charge (Start of rebuild)

2006 = 9 wins Clarkson in charge (2nd year of rebuild)

2007 = 14 wins (finals) (3rd year of rebuild)

2008 = 20 wins (Premiership) (4th year of rebuild).

In reality 2003 the Hawks were very unlucky not to play finals. I also am the first to agree that they got their drafting spot on when they did bottom out. Well done to them.

Compare the above to MFC:

2006 = 13 wins (played finals but were lucky to scrape in - one more win than the hawks had in 2003) (Daniher in charge)

2007 = 5 wins (Daniher in charge)

2008 = 3 wins (Bailey in charge) (Start of rebuild)

2009 = 4 wins (Bailey in charge) (2nd year of rebuild)

2010 = 8 wins (Bailey in charge) (3rd year of rebuild)

2011 = ?? wins (Bailey in charge) (4th season of rebuild) (Not competitive against top 8 sides)

I agree that 4 years is NO guarantee to play finals and be competitive against top 8 sides, just look at Richmonds five year plan.

But what I cant stand hearing about is our list is young, our list cant compete as a result of youth. We are getting better, but we are not there yet. 4 years CAN get you back to competitive levels, it just hasn't for us.

I just don't think we can hang our hat on us getting better because we bottomed out say 4-5 years ago. Instead we need to critically evaluate if we are set up right and if we have the necessary players to get there.

I guess what I am saying is that constantly feeling how ordinary we have been for the last 4-5 years, I was really hoping we were better than we are now (maybe to optimistic and expecting too much) and I also worry about how we are going to improve considerably for season 2012.

So true. I don't think we have made much progress at all. We are uncompetitive against all of the good sides in the comp - we don't just lose, we capitulate. There is a problem with attitude. 4 years is enough time to see a turnaround. I'm just not seeing it ( remembering we have a good draw this year, and 2 of this year's wins will, hopefully, be against the Gold Coast)The kids excuse is wearing thin - Green, Jamar, Maloney, Jones, Frawley, Davey, Rivers, Garland, Bate, Dunne, MacDonald etc are not kids.