Well wtf did you expect? If you were expecting us to miraculously turn into Geelong in the way we play then you are a dreamer. I saw some very positive signs in our defence and some of our ball movement. We definitely lacked polish and lacked the extra quality needed but that will come. I don't know if you rememeber round 1 and 2 and to a lesser extent round 3 but there is definite improvement there. And also today I heard that this was the most inexperienced side Neeld has fielded. That shows me that some of these young kids are gonna be very good for this club.

It's like groundhog day on here every week, we lose and then people are calling for heads and saying it's the worst performance we've seen. We are a young a poor side at the moment maybe you should understand that and instead of bagging some of the young fellas get behind them because I can definitely se

e effort being shown from a number of players.

I'm surprised there is no reference to our selected side. We did not need to be too short on the forward line. Either Pederson or Sellar should have played. Any time our mids looked forward there was no tall target whenever either Spencer or Gawne was on the bench, what is the point of a whole forward line with no-one of 6ft or more?

The game was lost before we went out onto the field. Neither Pederson or Sellar would have taken many marks but they would have created chances. Awful errors in selection.

I saw enough today...

No - not enough for me to give it away.

I saw enough attack at the footy to think that the players still have drive inside them.

I saw enough chains of disposal to believe that, as this group plays more games together, we will become a more cohesive unit throughout the year.

I saw enough discipline in players playing their roles to hope that Neeld's message may get through to the whole playing group in time.

I saw a team who desperately want to do what it needs to do to win, but can't. A team that could get its hands on the footy but couldn't use it through half forward (especially in the second term). A team that was burnt on the turnover.

I saw a team who is a few high quality mids from improving dramatically (though, I suppose, all teams are).

I saw a massively overrated team who will, in time, get found out against better opposition and will probably be lucky to make finals.

I saw a team that should head into next week as favourites - if only just!

I saw embarrassing turnovers, poor decisions and players refusing to attack the ball and instead trying to tackle the guy who did.

I saw our two future rucks get smashed all over the ground.

I saw pathetic efforts by our forwards.

Let's not kid ourselves, we were pretty bad today. The skill errors were cringe-worthy and some of the contests our players gave would be lucky to be called half-hearted. Fortunately, this was to be anticipated and I was well prepared to face these occurrences. I do wonder what will happen next week. GC have a very good midfield and their forwards are in great form. We should be able to stretch their back line if we can get the ball in there though.

Yeah, bummer that a guy who has played 4 games doesn't look like a seasoned pro.

It was a dumb comment. He doesn't look lost. He looks inexperienced.

Take a seat on the cushion and meditate.

Grimes is injury prone and weak. He kicks it straight to the opposition.

*not sure if serious*

Grimes is injury prone and weak. He kicks it straight to the opposition.

Grimes is weak?! WTF?!

I just wish we knew how to kick and that when we did win the ball that players would RUN FORWARD.

Our forward 50 is emptier than Mitch Robinson's brain!

Jaded, watch this week's game again and last week's carefully. You'll see that some players who get what the game's about, like Evans, do run forward or lateraIly away from congestion as soon as they perceive or see that we have won possession.

In some cases, players are running hard (making space) forward/lateral of the player they've just handed off to expecting to receive it back and for that player to then block/shepard after in order to protect space and allow the receiver enough time/freedom to spot up the next lead up target or player in space. Something Geelong do on the bit. Basically looking to create as much overlap play possible and run the lines.

The point i'm trying to make is it is happening with some players in the team, they're working hard for the receive, but in many cases the other player with the ball just refuses to give off even though it appears to be the obvious and potentially most damaging option!

I can't pin point the exact moments in last week's game but there was one passage of play where Evans ran forward of Terlich off the back half in the first quarter (near the boundary). I think Evans had just given it off to Terlich (although don't hold me to that). Evans was running past Terlich, heading inside and the best option for Terlich was to give it straight back to Evans and then protect/block to allow him the extra time/space/freedom to take the ball and deliver to a leading high forward. But no, Terlich ignored Evans and instead turned around, looked back and gave the handball off (backwards) to one of our boys who was surrounded by 2 or 3 Lions. Those 2 or 3 Lions would have been left behind had Terlich done the instinctive thing and given it straight to Evans as he ran past, but no.....he looked to go back to a boundary option. The outcome was that we lost possession and it resulted in a stoppage in our back half instead of a quick transition into our forward half.

Another example today was McKenzie. I'm pretty sure it may have been Evans again providing the run and option to go inside on the Southern wing, but Mckenzie ignored him and handballed backwards/along the line to a player surrounded by Blues who gobbled him up and couldn't believe their luck.

If this is a Neeld training expectation or method then we're buggered.

However, If it's a confidence or mental issue (ie., lacking in footy smarts in the top paddock) then maybe it's possible to turn this crappy "losing" style of play around through more skills/drills or an injection of more skilled/instinctive players that don't see the boundary as their first option as soon as they take possession.

When more of our players start looking "INSIDE" as their first option and when we finally have more players who can execute by hand and foot we might finally be able to start to look like an AFL standard team.

Is Neeld training/teaching them this BS style/method? He couldn’t be surely! And if he isn’t, is he capable of changing the mind set/methods/skills of many of them from being SO defensive? instead getting them to realise that in many cases/situations times you have to just GO GO GO, give off the instinctive lightning handball to a forward/lateral running player or just play on and run forward on the burst as we saw at one stage in the last quarter through the middle with the resulting sweet goal on the run to Sylvia. This came out of hard chasing and pressure on the southern wing. I’m all for defensive pressure and acts, but for god sake look inside as your first option, learn how to dispose of the ball effectively and get the boys to run and take their opponents and the game on more often!!

Opposition players will pay us no respect (and already don’t) and keep running off into space (seemingly spreading so much better than us!!) if we continue to play so defensively and turn the bloody ball over as easily as we do, often in mid field. And no wonder. The bloody defenders are under the pump so often, they’re no doubt half fatigued by the time they get free and look to dispose the ball up field from the place where it has just come....over and over again.

I made the choice to watch from home today. Earlier in the afternoon I settled in and watched Footy Flashbacks which featured our 2000 Qualifying Final win over the Blues. It brought back great memories of a terrific win, and a team that was everything that our current side is not. It also went a long way to reinforcing my sadness and bewilderment regarding the present state. We were a tough unit back then. We had hardened bodies like Neitz, Schwarz, Rigoni, Powell, Leoncelli etc, to support kids like Green and Bruce. Today, we throw kids like Jack VIney to the wolves and expect they're going to have the answers in their first couple of games. Back then we had system, spirit and fight. We attacked. We could deliver the ball. We were smart with our hands. We had skill. How different that is to the mess we're contending with today. We are so second rate and it's hard to see just where the improvement will come from. Until that day comes, I'll be stuck reliving past glories, as a reminder of what this club used to be!

Howe WOG for mine.

This is why we can't play him as a permanent forward as so many have called for, he needs to rotate up the ground. This happened later in the game but we had run him out of form by then.

I don't think he was our worst though, bit harsh that 'Nasher'.

I made the choice to watch from home today. Earlier in the afternoon I settled in and watched Footy Flashbacks which featured our 2000 Qualifying Final win over the Blues. It brought back great memories of a terrific win, and a team that was everything that our current side is not. It also went a long way to reinforcing my sadness and bewilderment regarding the present state. We were a tough unit back then. We had hardened bodies like Neitz, Schwarz, Rigoni, Powell, Leoncelli etc, to support kids like Green and Bruce. Today, we throw kids like Jack VIney to the wolves and expect they're going to have the answers in their first couple of games. Back then we had system, spirit and fight. We attacked. We could deliver the ball. We were smart with our hands. We had skill. How different that is to the mess we're contending with today. We are so second rate and it's hard to see just where the improvement will come from. Until that day comes, I'll be stuck reliving past glories, as a reminder of what this club used to be!

The game has advanced at such a rate of knots, our coaches since that time have been found lacking tactical nouse.

Daniher had no idea about the flood, Bailey had no idea about the press or defensive accountability.

We have no hardened bodies and our recruiting has been fvcken atrocious.

Decisions to take Morton, Watts, Bennell, Cook, et al might yet bury this club.

Noticed that Darling bagged a quiet 5 today.

Jaded, watch this week's game again and last week's carefully. You'll see that some players who get what the game's about, like Evans, do run forward or lateraIly away from congestion as soon as they perceive or see that we have won possession.

In some cases, players are running hard (making space) forward/lateral of the player they've just handed off to expecting to receive it back and for that player to then block/shepard after in order to protect space and allow the receiver enough time/freedom to spot up the next lead up target or player in space. Something Geelong do on the bit. Basically looking to create as much overlap play possible and run the lines.

The point i'm trying to make is it is happening with some players in the team, they're working hard for the receive, but in many cases the other player with the ball just refuses to give off even though it appears to be the obvious and potentially most damaging option!

I can't pin point the exact moments in last week's game but there was one passage of play where Evans ran forward of Terlich off the back half in the first quarter (near the boundary). I think Evans had just given it off to Terlich (although don't hold me to that). Evans was running past Terlich, heading inside and the best option for Terlich was to give it straight back to Evans and then protect/block to allow him the extra time/space/freedom to take the ball and deliver to a leading high forward. But no, Terlich ignored Evans and instead turned around, looked back and gave the handball off (backwards) to one of our boys who was surrounded by 2 or 3 Lions. Those 2 or 3 Lions would have been left behind had Terlich done the instinctive thing and given it straight to Evans as he ran past, but no.....he looked to go back to a boundary option. The outcome was that we lost possession and it resulted in a stoppage in our back half instead of a quick transition into our forward half.

Another example today was McKenzie. I'm pretty sure it may have been Evans again providing the run and option to go inside on the Southern wing, but Mckenzie ignored him and handballed backwards/along the line to a player surrounded by Blues who gobbled him up and couldn't believe their luck.

If this is a Neeld training expectation or method then we're buggered.

However, If it's a confidence or mental issue (ie., lacking in footy smarts in the top paddock) then maybe it's possible to turn this crappy "losing" style of play around through more skills/drills or an injection of more skilled/instinctive players that don't see the boundary as their first option as soon as they take possession.

When more of our players start looking "INSIDE" as their first option and when we finally have more players who can execute by hand and foot we might finally be able to start to look like an AFL standard team.

Is Neeld training/teaching them this BS style/method? He couldn’t be surely! And if he isn’t, is he capable of changing the mind set/methods/skills of many of them from being SO defensive? instead getting them to realise that in many cases/situations times you have to just GO GO GO, give off the instinctive lightning handball to a forward/lateral running player or just play on and run forward on the burst as we saw at one stage in the last quarter through the middle with the resulting sweet goal on the run to Sylvia. This came out of hard chasing and pressure on the southern wing. I’m all for defensive pressure and acts, but for god sake look inside as your first option, learn how to dispose of the ball effectively and get the boys to run and take their opponents and the game on more often!!

Opposition players will pay us no respect (and already don’t) and keep running off into space (seemingly spreading so much better than us!!) if we continue to play so defensively and turn the bloody ball over as easily as we do, often in mid field. And no wonder. The bloody defenders are under the pump so often, they’re no doubt half fatigued by the time they get free and look to dispose the ball up field from the place where it has just come....over and over again.

Absolutely. Saw this happen a couple of times with Evans. Ran to space, wanted the stationary melb player and Carlton opponent away but got ignored. This guy gets it. A good forty brain. In the ptesser, Neeld said that Evans would be a player. I agree.

we are rebuilding the rebuild boys, sit back and enjoy the ride

If I knew what the antonym for rebuild was I would insert it here:_________

If I knew what the antonym for rebuild was I would insert it here:_________

Deconstruct.

Today Carlton had 110 more possessions yet somehow also had 30 more tackles. 30.

Before today we averaged 94 less disposals and 4 less tackles per game.

No question the effort lifted for a little while today, but why is our defence so bad when we've brought in an apparently defensive minded coach?

Never been so frustrated with the club I love. If 186 was the players telling us something, what has this year been so far?

Stuie, where did you get the tackle stats from? AFL stats say we lost the tackle count 79-64, which still isn't good enough, but is a lot better than being beaten by 30.

For what it's worth, I thought today was a big improvement in intensity and effort. Thought the boys ran hard all day. We were let down by poor disposal, and the lack of a forward line. Our hurried kicks under pressure looked terrible today, but when you have a Clarke / Dawes / Hogan down there to contest and bring the ball to ground, it will make us a lot better team.

Deconstruct.

Thank you.

If Neeld still thinks what he's doing is rebuilding this team then he's seriously mistaken.

Weak means frail and injury prone

Weak means frail and injury prone

He got ridden into the ground at full tilt you pelican. I reckon the most durable of players would've struggled to come out unscathed from that incident.

FMD.

Weak means frail and injury prone

Same as Mitch Clark?

average games 47 to 94 tells a big story about today. Evans, Gawn, MJones, Viney, Kent and Terlich have played just 37 games between them.

Think of the players not out there today that will/might be part of the side in the future: Jamar, Clark, Dawes, Watts, Grimes, Blease, Fitzpatrick, Toumpas, Hogan and Barry

In other words what we saw today is far from a complete picture of where the side is heading

By my count we have played 9 decent quarters in the last 4 weeks

Obviously we need to get this number up to 16 and we will be highly competitive

I'm not sure if it a mental thing or a physical thing, but every week we come undone due to being dominated for a couple of 10-15 minute periods

Tommy Mac wtf has happened to him, he was awful today again.

Howe is being wasted, we need to find a way to get his talent into the game

Sylvia and Jones did some genuinely elite things today

I like the efforts of both Spencer and Gawn

Tapscott, MJones, Strauss, Nicholson, Strauss, Bail, Evans this group of players are starting to show something, they all have a long way to go

Frawley and Garland are looking better

Mitch Clark also injury prone. Won't be back till next year.

Stuie, where did you get the tackle stats from? AFL stats say we lost the tackle count 79-64, which still isn't good enough, but is a lot better than being beaten by 30.

For what it's worth, I thought today was a big improvement in intensity and effort. Thought the boys ran hard all day. We were let down by poor disposal, and the lack of a forward line. Our hurried kicks under pressure looked terrible today, but when you have a Clarke / Dawes / Hogan down there to contest and bring the ball to ground, it will make us a lot better team.

They were from the AFL site straight after the game, seems like it was changed, didn't think they were THAT slow to update!

average games 47 to 94 tells a big story about today. Evans, Gawn, MJones, Viney, Kent and Terlich have played just 37 games between them.

Think of the players not out there today that will/might be part of the side in the future: Jamar, Clark, Dawes, Watts, Grimes, Blease, Fitzpatrick, Toumpas, Hogan and Barry

In other words what we saw today is far from a complete picture of where the side is heading

By my count we have played 9 decent quarters in the last 4 weeks

Obviously we need to get this number up to 16 and we will be highly competitive

I'm not sure if it a mental thing or a physical thing, but every week we come undone due to being dominated for a couple of 10-15 minute periods

Tommy Mac wtf has happened to him, he was awful today again.

Howe is being wasted, we need to find a way to get his talent into the game

Sylvia and Jones did some genuinely elite things today

I like the efforts of both Spencer and Gawn

Tapscott, MJones, Strauss, Nicholson, Strauss, Bail, Evans this group of players are starting to show something, they all have a long way to go

Frawley and Garland are looking better

All the experts who have been slating Neeld when comparisons come in with Clarko & Bomber say their sides struggled for a while but you could see glimpses of what they were trying to achieve.

Not fully sold but seen a fair few positives on that side today. Need to see continued positives

They were from the AFL site straight after the game, seems like it was changed, didn't think they were THAT slow to update!

Use your eyes and what you see Stuie forget about quoting stats, the intensity, intent and desire was there today, not much but a positive none the less

Use your eyes and what you see Stuie forget about quoting stats, the intensity, intent and desire was there today, not much but a positive none the less

I'm not using the tackle or uncontested possession stats to try and show lack of effort, I thought our effort was good today, I use them to highlight our lack of structure and how we don't know what we're doing in the zone. We always seem miles away from opponents.

Use your eyes and what you see Stuie forget about quoting stats, the intensity, intent and desire was there today, not much but a positive none the less

Mostly agree.

I thought about 100% effort for close enough to 80% of the game.

Next step - 100% for 100%.

Mitch Clark also injury prone. Won't be back till next year.

Clark has had ONE injury. A serious one. His more recent foot injuries related to that, which is why he's having this pin out. Back in 4+ weeks is not "next year".