POST MATCH DISCUSSION

[Redleg 41,397]

Just saw Jack Grimes on the Channel 7 Game day. Happy, professional, articulate.

I bet he interviewed really well for the job as captain.

The bloke has no go in him.

That is rubbish, his only problem is some occasional poor and costly disposal.

No go, he would run through a brick wall.

[Carrot Top 947]

The loose man we'll have to agree to disagree, it was obvious from where I was sitting it was killing us going forward and then on the rebound when they ran it off half back kicking into an open forward line. You're right our forward line was pathetic but that doesn't mean you leave the guy alone and hope it comes good or blame them for the loss. If the forward line is poor and the loose man is killing us you have to do something to address that not just let it go and so "Well if we had Clark there the loose man wouldn't be hurting us."

So what do you do as a coach? Put another man in to man him up, and clog up the 50 more? A loose man in defence is a tourniquet against a good forward line. Against an OK one they are there for pressure and some rebound. For what we had they are there to pick up stats and Chas votes. If we had real forwards there they'd lead to make him run to keep their hands off it. That opens up the forward line for others to run into. And if they don't double team the real forward the he gets an easy mark 40 odd out on a 35% angel.

[DeeSpencer 26,065]

Nah, that's a cop out. We were missing Clark - who may never play again and hasn't played for a long time, Dawes - who hasn't played many games and Hogan - never played. Other key misses were Viney and Garland. We lost Fitzy.

They were missing Hayes, Montagna, Jack Steven, Schneider.... Dal and Milne out since last yr, plus one down on their list because of Saad. Please, we were no worse off than them.

I don't expect us to be a good side early though. Yes I would've liked us to win regardless. Yes St Kilda were missing a lot and are still heading for about a 5 win season at best I think. But we lost by 17 points. We had our 3 best tall forwards, plus Fitzy (4), plus Gawn (5) unavailable. And the reason they won was Riewoldt turned the game in 5 minutes on an injured McDonald.

My point was structurally considering it's early days in Roos' tenure we were ok. Effort wise we were ok. Talent wise we are a bottom side regardless but with so much missing and going wrong during the game all the saints had to do was drop a man back and compete.

Adding Cross, Vince and Tyson is not enough to increase our talent level if we lose our CHB, reliable defender in Garland and our entire forward line.

[chook fowler 19,519]

Byrnes was on the end of 2 Joe the Goose goals. Can't get his own ball or tackle. Nowhere near good enough

[TGR 1,367]

Don't recall watching a Melbourne team that was harder contest after contest inside. Tackling was good also. Paradox was that I can't recall one smother. Mitchie had an easy chance to smother and didn't bother. Other than the smothering, 9/10 for the hard stuff.

Rohan Bail dissapointed me.

Spencer gave his all.

Frawley confirms my long-held thought that the guy runs like a chook with his head cut-off. No awareness at all. Runs to handball-receive right into trouble.

Georgiou was bloody good.

Good to see Watts taking them on a bit more. Instinctively hasn't got the repeat contest in him yet. But he doesn't waste a kick.

Tyson looks in control and smooth; but his short passing aint A+ grade

Our mids are slow, so when we hesitate with ball in hand, we will get tackled.

We will pay for the Neeld selections of Pedo, Byrnes, Gillies etc.. for years and years and years. We seem to forget that hole that has been dug.

The obvious is that we need forward targets. But we need a dash of speed (Blease must play) and some strong overhead (In an ideal world, Clark would play ruck) around the ground.

[DeeSpencer 26,065]

That is rubbish, his only problem is some occasional poor and costly disposal.

No go, he would run through a brick wall.

I reckon Grimes badly needs about 5kg of muscle. A shanked kick fair enough, but pushed off the ball nearly the boundary line as handballing leading to a turnover, that's yuck. He's got no power in his game. He isn't taking intercept marks or attacking the loose balls and turning defense in to attack any more. It's a concern. He starting to play like Garland of early 2013 not like Garland of mid to second half 2013.

[Tatu 416]

It actually felt palpable in the crowd. After the first 15-20 minutes the air seemed to go out of the side and while they battled on they didn't seem to have the zest they did in the first 10 minutes.

the intensity in the first 10 min, was great... But it was never going to last.... The saints did well to contain the damage and settled into the game better... With that intensity we need to kick four goals...

[Redleg 41,397]

Re McDonald, it's always easy to be wise after the event. Do you think Roos doesn't know to move an injured player playing on their game-winner? More likely it wasn't clear how bad McDonald's injury was initially.

Now Sue you and I usually agree but not on this point.

Let me start by saying I am rapt we have Roos as a Coach and I am confident he will turn us around over time. He will change the list and culture and game. However, it was abundantly clear to me sitting 75 metres away, how incapacitated Tom was.He was telling a trainer on the ground he could barely run. Everyone at that ground knew he was injured.

It was a mistake to leave him on one of the hardest runners and best marks in the game after his injury. Tom should have gone to FF or the FP and otherwise the bench.

Just because he is Roos does not mean he cannot be criticized. I think if asked he might even agree.

As for hindsight, Coaches act in the minute, when they get it wrong you can always bring up hindsight as an excuse.

BTW, after watching the Tigers Nab cup game my son and I wrote off Pedersen finally and for good. Unfortunately due to injuries, the Coach made another mistake and didn't do the same .

[Mr Steve 3,820]

Out played, if we missed just the easy shots we would have beaten them by 5 goals and 100 plus touches, i hate that we lost but i am thrilled with the difference since last year, the effort for four quarters was very solid.

I agree My comment was in response to all the criticism on here. The team played well just had no one up forward. Those misses hurt big time.

[rjay 25,061]

But last night he was only a liability in aerial one on ones and if we persist with delivering the ball long and high to Toumpas we are in a world of trouble. His job was to be the half forward streaming to space. He did that well especially early when we moved the ball well. He attacked some balls on the ground with decent conviction and got the handball off.

Toumpas version of one on one contests is using his brain and legs to get off his opponent. I thought he along with Bail were the only forwards who made positive contributions towards winning the game.

Some balls but got knocked off the ball too easily. He will be a liability if he can't get the aerial one on ones together the way the game is heading. With the push to taller mids it was interesting to see Port expose Murphy by kicking in the air to one on ones realising he wasn't a threat.

[dee-luded 2,959]

another Mark neeld special

3 year contract to an absolute spud

How much is he on?

[DeeSpencer 26,065]

Don't recall watching a Melbourne team that was harder contest after contest inside. Tackling was good also. Paradox was that I can't recall one smother. Mitchie had an easy chance to smother and didn't bother. Other than the smothering, 9/10 for the hard stuff.

Our mids are slow, so when we hesitate with ball in hand, we will get tackled.

We will pay for the Neeld selections of Pedo, Byrnes, Gillies etc.. for years and years and years. We seem to forget that hole that has been dug.

The obvious is that we need forward targets. But we need a dash of speed (Blease must play) and some strong overhead (In an ideal world, Clark would play ruck) around the ground.

Meh. Rodan and Gillies are gone. Byrnes will go after this year. Pedersen the next. None cost significant draft picks and there wasn't a whole lot of eligible quality free agents around.

We are and will continue to pay for the Prendergast drafting from 2008 until 2011, add in Morton and Maric under Cameron in 2007. And that complete failure of Bailey to provide sustainable development (hampered by resources) and Neeld to provide any kind of development at all to the majority of the list. When you're down you got to get talent in and develop them. We didn't. So we are still down. Hopefully Roos can make something out of Watts, Tyson, Fitzy, Spencer, Gawn, Trengove, Terlich, Matt Jones, McDonald, Howe, Blease, Strauss, Michie - those mid level guys who are around the mark but need to be consistent performers.

Salvage something from that lot and start some proper development and Hogan, Toumpas, Viney, JKH, Kent, Salem will be the cream.

[pitchfork 181]

What happened last night was the worst case scenario. We had no forwards, and then our makeshift forwards were injured + MacDonald.

Probably had 7 out of the ten best on the ground...strange game.

* Very tough hand we were dealt, a better team manufactures goals...I reckon if the mids, as good as they were, had 10 games together then they may have been able to do it.

- Only thing that grated with me was how long Roos persisted with Howe out of the goal square. It makes no sense why Howe was so useless at FF, but he should have been moved up the ground midway thru the second qtr, not late in the third.

Edited March 23, 2014 by pitchfork

[DeeZee 7,445]

Saints were great , they played pure simple footy, a mans game, we were timid and hesitant.

[sue 9,126]

Nah, that's a cop out. We were missing Clark - who may never play again and hasn't played for a long time, Dawes - who hasn't played many games and Hogan - never played. Other key misses were Viney and Garland. We lost Fitzy.

They were missing Hayes, Montagna, Jack Steven, Schneider.... Dal and Milne out since last yr, plus one down on their list because of Saad. Please, we were no worse off than them.

Loosing 2 talls (when you don't have many to start with) during a game is not given much weight in your analysis. McDonald is not mentioned.

But even if you can maintain we were no worse off than them, remember we only lost by a few goals. It wasn't a 10 goal thrashing. Two weak teams played a close match. Sad we lost but not too surprising.

[rjay 25,061]

Meh. Rodan and Gillies are gone. Byrnes will go after this year. Pedersen the next. None cost significant draft picks and there wasn't a whole lot of eligible quality free agents around.

We are and will continue to pay for the Prendergast drafting from 2008 until 2011, add in Morton and Maric under Cameron in 2007. And that complete failure of Bailey to provide sustainable development (hampered by resources) and Neeld to provide any kind of development at all to the majority of the list. When you're down you got to get talent in and develop them. We didn't. So we are still down. Hopefully Roos can make something out of Watts, Tyson, Fitzy, Spencer, Gawn, Trengove, Terlich, Matt Jones, McDonald, Howe, Blease, Strauss, Michie - those mid level guys who are around the mark but need to be consistent performers.

Salvage something from that lot and start some proper development and Hogan, Toumpas, Viney, JKH, Kent, Salem will be the cream.

Pretty much agree with most of what you say here 'master'.

- Only thing that grated with me was how long Roos persisted with Howe out of the goal square. It makes no sense why Howe was so useless at FF, but he should have been moved up the ground midway thru the second qtr, not late in the third.

Basically it's because he is not a FF, he is not big enough to play the role and opposition clubs can deal with him when he is in a position where he has little room to move. Howe is a high half/wingman.

[John Crow Batty 8,878]

Overall I see more positives. Bad kicking and bad luck with injured talls gave them the edge. The game was a lot closer than many here suggest. Clearly it is frustrating that we cannot get or keep a decent tall forward on the park.

[Adzman 2,154]

I won't cover off the negatives, because I think this thread has nailed it. What I thought needed a shout out was the effort by Daniel Cross in the middle. Game high 11 tackles, didn't find heaps of footy but used it well when he had it despite being under duress.

I didn't think Bail was terrible. Ran hard, found some footy and was a useful link man when we where running.

That glimmer of hope for a 5-6 win season has all but gone. What matters now is how we go about closing the gap between us and your Hawthorn types.

[sue 9,126]

Now Sue you and I usually agree but not on this point.

Let me start by saying I am rapt we have Roos as a Coach and I am confident he will turn us around over time. He will change the list and culture and game. However, it was abundantly clear to me sitting 75 metres away, how incapacitated Tom was.He was telling a trainer on the ground he could barely run. Everyone at that ground knew he was injured.

It was a mistake to leave him on one of the hardest runners and best marks in the game after his injury. Tom should have gone to FF or the FP and otherwise the bench.

Just because he is Roos does not mean he cannot be criticized. I think if asked he might even agree.

As for hindsight, Coaches act in the minute, when they get it wrong you can always bring up hindsight as an excuse.

BTW, after watching the Tigers Nab cup game my son and I wrote off Pedersen finally and for good. Unfortunately due to injuries, the Coach made another mistake and didn't do the same .

Well Redleg, you had the advantage of being at the game. Not clear how bad he was on TV until much later. I'm not going to defend Roos religiously all year, but it may be that the medical advice was he'd run it out so was left on longer than an uninformed spectator would expect. After all you don't have to be a star coach to realise an injured player should be moved/taken off. It would be surprising if an experienced coach like Roos would make such an elementary mistake. Surprising, but of course not impossible.

[dee-luded 2,959]

Got to say, considering how strongly I've expressed my doubts about him, Dunn was very good tonight.

& took a mark with Reiwoldt bewaring down crashing into him. much improved. good to see

[jnrmac 20,154]

Maybe I was the only one watching Georgiou. He kept Maistre pretty quiet in the first half, playing as a lock-down defender, and played that role competently all night, until he went off either cramped or injured in the last. He didn't (can't?) kick long, but he always found space and hit his targets reliably. Barring injury, he'll play every game.

Ah yes a role player. Exactly what Roos likes.

[jazza 1,323]

Well Redleg, you had the advantage of being at the game. Not clear how bad he was on TV until much later. I'm not going to defend Roos religiously all year, but it may be that the medical advice was he'd run it out so was left on longer than an uninformed spectator would expect. After all you don't have to be a star coach to realise an injured player should be moved/taken off. It would be surprising if an experienced coach like Roos would make such an elementary mistake. Surprising, but of course not impossible.

watching this unfold,i came to the conclusion that a corkie doesnt normally get worse,{unless its cooled down}and PR was probably looking to keep the tall option open as long as possible.dunny also had a minor corkie,.

he was probably hoping that the game would be still won and played 95% in the midfeild and mac could have at least played a minor roll and give the coach another option in midfield if he stayed out there long enough.

also mentioned elsewhere,kept the oppo less than 90 points,that was what we got him for{pr}werent as far out of this game as others have suggested.

Edited March 23, 2014 by jazza

[jnrmac 20,154]

We kicked 10 points in a row.

Won't win too many games with that accuracy. Even though three I think were posters, we had a number where a player from 50m ish kicks the ball to the goal line and it is easily rushed through.

FMD its a schoolboy error. If you can't make the distance kick it 30m and create a contest. I know they are only footballers but aaaarrrggghhh.

[Axis of Bob 11,839]

I had a reaction that I haven't had for a while. At the end I thought "Damn, we should have won that game".

And we should have. Over the majority of the game we were the best team. We controlled the ball and gave ourselves opportunities. We were, unfortunately, unable to convert this ascendency into a score. The good thing is that the issues are not long term ones:

1- We had nobody to kick to. This meant that we either had to bomb to midgets, or find a short target. Unfortunately we did neither successfully. Of our goals, only Byrnes' was a result of a pass inside 50, while the rest we running from outside 50 (or a turnover for Toumpas' goal). There's no coincidence that our most productive periods were when Fitzy was playing.

2- We missed a lot of shots for goal. A lot!

These can both be fixed in the short/medium term. Kicking 6.15 is an aberration for any AFL team and will be better next week (especially when Vince kicks 1.4!). And we have a promising list of tall forwards, who are unfortunately injured. If you have one of those forwards play then we'd probably be talking about a win.

I wasn't sure how to feel last night. I was shitty about losing the game, but I at least know that we are a much better team now. Unfortunately the footy gods conspired to make us lose. But we were the better team.

[jnrmac 20,154]

How is it we only had 75 interchanges?

I though when you are a man down players need more rests not less?