YOU CAN'T WIN THEM ALL

[Face Your Demons 175]

Dr Gonzo. It's the 50/50s that never go our way. you would think at least a few would. Or more to the point were they are paid. Just a little bit of luck and it might have been a 2 goal game at 3/4 time. But at the end of the day we are just not playing well enough to win these games.

[Face Your Demons 175]

I think Green is one who will hang up his boots at seasons end / or be told to.

[rpfc 28,047]

I am sick and tired of this obsession with QB. We build it up into more than it should be, and Dr Gonzo is right - it is cringeworthy to read the players opinions on how 'important' the game is.

Drum into the players that this is just another opportunity for 4 points. The fact that they get to play in front of 40k Collingwood numpties more than usual is worthless and pointless.

Malthouse is right, it is our GF and it is pathetic.

Edited June 11, 2012 by rpfc

[Grapeviney 9,499]

Forget about winning 50/50 umpiring decisions.. we need to start kicking the 70/30 shots on goal - Green in the first quarter was criminal and whoever it was in the third from 25m out directly in front (Garland?)

[Grapeviney 9,499]

Also what was the business with the 1st quarter collingwood goal / hit the post ? did it actually go to review or was it knocked back because a goal had already been given?

[frankie_d 1,467]

A very poor coaching decision to put 2 players behind the ball in the first quarter,allowing the Pies an extra 2 players at each contest.They killed us around the stoppages for this reason and just kicked over our spare 2's heads for goals.

This mistake was rectified at 1/4 time when we went man on man and from then on,we lost the game by 7 POINTS!!!!!!!

This really puzzled me too. Neeld is not a dummy, and not ignorant of the Pies' structures. So why? I'd really like to know - interesting that they stuck with it all quarter and changed at 1/4 time. I wonder if they could have sent the runner out after, say, 5 goals (!) and go man on man with 6 forward and 6 back.

[Chook 14,997]

Also what was the business with the 1st quarter collingwood goal / hit the post ? did it actually go to review or was it knocked back because a goal had already been given?

First of all, a goal had already been given. Second, the Collingwood player's boot was touching the post. The ball bounced off his boot. As far as I know, that means it's still in play.

[Jaded No More 67,636]

Neeld, who coached the Collingwood midfield for many years, had no idea how to neutralise it today, which was the most disappointing coaching aspect for me.

[Hellaintabadplacetobe 4,282]

Despite a horrible first quarter and a bit, we had a crack against the premiership favourite for the rest of the match. Pies were clinical with the ball at times and smashed us in the centre clearances so in the end it wasn't a bad result.

Improve our disposal, master the gameplan and well win more than we lose for the rest of the year.

Jones is a lock for the Bluey.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

Goddamn it, I'm generally not one to have a go at or blame the umpires, but we were absolutely raped today. A number of decisions/non-decisions indrectly resulted in goals particularly in the first quarter. There was a number early but the most blatant were the HTB on Magner and the non-call of the shepherd on Clark which both resulted in goals. There were a number of others more evident on the replay as well and I haven't even finished the first quarter yet.

EDIT: that's not to say we didn't make stupid mistakes and decisions as well but bloody hell it makes it hard when the umps only see black & white.

How many times did they block our players in the back line allowing their forward to take the easy unopposed mark?

I thought that was illegal.

[cowboy_from_hell 2,390]

How many times did they block our players in the back line allowing their forward to take the easy unopposed mark?

I thought that was illegal.

That page of the rule book was torn out for the day. Was that Jordan Bannister making a fool of himself as an umpire again? He either doesn't like us or he needs more development then a Lucas Cook muscle building DVD.

[Hellaintabadplacetobe 4,282]

First of all, a goal had already been given. Second, the Collingwood player's boot was touching the post. The ball bounced off his boot. As far as I know, that means it's still in play.

Just watched the replay. It actually did get reviewed which was surprising because it wasn't called for at the time of the goal, only as they were about to bounce the ball. Interesting that you say that it's still in play. I saw a similar incident this weekend where a player who had the ball in his hands touched the behind post and a throw in was called.

I thought the incident today should ave been called a point but clearly you are right and I'm wrong!

[Grapeviney 9,499]

I saw a similar incident this weekend where a player who had the ball in his hands touched the behind post and a throw in was called.

i saw the same one HB

[Chook 14,997]

Just watched the replay. It actually did get reviewed which was surprising because it wasn't called for at the time of the goal, only as they were about to bounce the ball. Interesting that you say that it's still in play. I saw a similar incident this weekend where a player who had the ball in his hands touched the behind post and a throw in was called.

I thought the incident today should ave been called a point but clearly you are right and I'm wrong!

Interesting.

Why do you think I'm right? If it's just because my opinion happens to agree with todays atrociously inconsistent umpiring team, then that's no ringing endorsement at all!

[Dr. Gonzo 23,700]

Also what was the business with the 1st quarter collingwood goal / hit the post ? did it actually go to review or was it knocked back because a goal had already been given?

They actually did go to review and because the ball hit the players heel which was between the ball and the post it was cleared as a goal. I saw a game recently where they paid out of bounds because the player with the ball ran into the point post even though the ball itself didn't touch the post so who knows WTF the rules are. Might have to go and actually check the rule book to find out because it is clear the muppets in fluoro green wouldn't have a clue.

And I do agree with us taking advantage of our opportunities but really the decisions on the replay weren't even 50/50's they were blatant calls/non-calls and it happened all game.

[tonatopia 278]

Neeld is responsible for the following;

our slow decision making

Our lack of contested possessions

Our constant second guessing

Our poor ruck structures

Our poor skills

Allowing Players such as tapscott, trengove, moloney, jamar, Sylvia, davey and green to perform well below their potential.

Turning us into a reactive, negative and mentally slow team.

What should be done;

Play our underperforming 'guns' in the backline

Fb: rivers frawley Sylvia

Hb: trengove watts moloney

Get a new midfield happening with grimes, jones and mckenzie playing well, add tapscott, Howe, Nicholson and couch for some new vigor.

Start thinking about tough one on one defensive structures.

Allow midfielders too express their offensive game and get in the right positions to get the Ruck clearances.

Drop seller and Morton and Brian royal.

Play blease and bennell on the wing for raw speed.

We desperately need a crumbing forward pocket, so get davey to do what he was designed to do.

We have lost 10 games and won 1. In my eyes, neeld is responsible for our predicament.

[daisycutter 29,317]

Let down by our senior players again - Sylvia, Green, Moloney, Jamar

We just can't carry this many non-performing senior players

[Chook 14,997]

Let down by our senior players again - Sylvia, Green, Moloney, Jamar

We just can't carry this many non-performing senior players

You know who's conspicuously absent from that list? Jarred Rivers. Take a bow, Riv, cause you're the only one of our relics from the Daniher era who has escaped his evil curse.

[Hells Gates 505]

Neeld is responsible for the following;

our slow decision making

Our lack of contested possessions

Our constant second guessing

Our poor ruck structures

Our poor skills

Allowing Players such as tapscott, trengove, moloney, jamar, Sylvia, davey and green to perform well below their potential.

Turning us into a reactive, negative and mentally slow team.

What should be done;

Play our underperforming 'guns' in the backline

Fb: rivers frawley Sylvia

Hb: trengove watts moloney

Get a new midfield happening with grimes, jones and mckenzie playing well, add tapscott, Howe, Nicholson and couch for some new vigor.

Start thinking about tough one on one defensive structures.

Allow midfielders too express their offensive game and get in the right positions to get the Ruck clearances.

Drop seller and Morton and Brian royal.

Play blease and bennell on the wing for raw speed.

We desperately need a crumbing forward pocket, so get davey to do what he was designed to do.

We have lost 10 games and won 1. In my eyes, neeld is responsible for our predicament.

Gee that's a slow backline sir!!

[rpfc 28,047]

Let down by our senior players again - Sylvia, Green, Moloney, Jamar

We just can't carry this many non-performing senior players

Amen, and a common refrain.

And yet - who are we eating alive?

The old guy behind me at the game - Jack Watts, and on Land - Cale Morton.

Wake up, people.

Edited June 11, 2012 by rpfc

[Chook 14,997]

"Gee that's a slow backline sir!!"

Edited June 11, 2012 by Chook

[Scoop Junior 3,395]

I actually didn't think the first quarter was that bad from an effort point of view. I thought we tried, as we did all game, but a combination of bad decision making and poor execution (along with Collingwood's efficient ball movement) meant that we got punished every time they went forward.

Brad Green's miss was a shocker as we needed that goal to steady ourselves. Instead the steadier didn't come until midway through the second quarter. Green's been a sensational player for us but it's been fairly obvious this year that he struggles with the pace of the game. If you're not a marking forward or a quick crumber, you need to be able to run and go through the midfield and that's where Green is struggling.

But overall I was pleased with the effort. At 8 goals to 0 we could have been smashed, and again in the last they could have run away with a 15 goal win. But we fought back both times and while we never really looked like winning, we at least kept them honest and forced them to lift to fight us off again.

At the end of the day we're near the bottom and they're at the top for a reason. They are a classy side and I thought that the level of class was the key difference in the game.

I walked away pleased that for three weeks in a row we've had a real crack and have really only been let down by simply not being talented enough. If we can inject some young talented midfielders into that side and they maintain that level of effort then I'm confident we can turn things around fairly quickly.

And finally well done Jonesy, what a season he's having. Sensational.

Edited June 11, 2012 by Scoop Junior

[tonatopia 278]

Opposed to McDonald?

Syliva, frawley, watts trengove are fairly quick. Moloney is no slouch

[P-man 13,366]

I actually didn't think the first quarter was that bad from an effort point of view. I thought we tried, as we did all game, but a combination of bad decision making and poor execution (along with Collingwood's efficient ball movement) meant that we got punished every time they went forward.

Brad Green's miss was a shocker as we needed that goal to steady ourselves. Instead the steadier didn't come until midway through the second quarter. Green's been a sensational player for us but it's been fairly obvious this year that he's struggles with the pace of the game. If you're not a marking forward or a quick crumber, you need to be able to run and go through the midfield and that's where Green is struggling.

But overall I was pleased with the effort. At 8 goals to 0 we could have been smashed, and again in the last they could have run away with a 15 goal win. But we fought back both times and while we never really looked like winning, we at least kept them honest and forced them to lift to fight us off again.

At the end of the day we're near the bottom and they're at the top for a reason. They are a classy side and I thought that the level of class was the key difference in the game.

I walked away pleased that for three weeks in a row we've had a real crack and have really only been let down by simply not being good enough. If we can inject some young talented midfielders into that side and they maintain that level of effort then I'm confident we can turn things round fairly quickly.

And finally well done Jonesy, what a season he's having. Sensational.

A good, positive post.

Just what do you think you're playing at SJ...?

[Dr. Gonzo 23,700]

You know who's conspicuously absent from that list? Jarred Rivers. Take a bow, Riv, cause you're the only one of our relics from the Daniher era who has escaped his evil curse.

Rivers has been great this year.

Jamar is rubbish, and I don't know why we gave him 3 years. We should have given him 1, 2 at most but he is a constant underperformer. Can't kick, can't mark, can't use his size in packs or to protect our ball players. ONLY thing he can do is get his palm to the ball in the ruck, pity is he can't do a bloody thing with it once he gets the tap it just goes straight to bhis feet or to the opposition. I like the big Russian and loved his words during the week, and yes you can't shank all your older players but cold hard facts, he's been playing for close to a decade (has it been a decade?) and he has played one great season and 9 bog ordinary ones.

Moloney and Sylvia are just schizophrenic. I can't make up my mind what the hell we should do with them and I'm glad I'm not the one who has to make the decision. I can see arguments for keeping both, trading/delisting both or keeping one and trading/delisting one. I feel they both will end up staying but it wouldn't surprise me if Sylvia is gone. Moloney I think Neeld will keep just so there's someone to provide some bodywork for the kids that will come through.

EDIT: Forgot to mention Green - I like Green as well and he has been a very good player for us over the journey, and I'll never forget his game as a kid against Carlton in 2000. But he is gone. At his age and the way he is playing the only way we can justify keeping him in the side is if he can contribute a couple of goals a game. He had 3 opportunities today and blew them all. I have a feeling most of his remaining career will be played out at Casey.

Edited June 11, 2012 by Dr. Gonzo