Collingwood are a good side. They dump a man behind the ball then pressure like crazy and so it doesn't matter how good or not their defenders are they are hard to score against. To counter it you have to move the ball quickly and get someone loose on the outside. We didn't get close to that.

The ball movement is horrible but it's still mainly those without the ball at fault than the guy with it. As the game opened up the backline finally found a bit of movement only for the midfield to run out of puff and the kicks inside to get even worse.

I feel like the current group of players have a limit and that we really need a preseason in to some of them and others to be replaced to step up from our current level.

Hard to feel good about today's performance. Was a step back from last week. Expected more flare and attack up forward. Perhaps have gone too negative - some players need a rest and others at Casey should get their chance.

No excuse to stop learning.

Yes Mr Principle.

maybe

didnt exert all he could me thinks

Maybe thats harsh but he seemed to ebb

He really busted his butt off early as a high half forward. Constant leads. But with Gawn and Pedersen deep he couldn't be rested forward. He's fit but he's not a midfielder

Personally I think it has to be time to put him back to full back. I can't see the forward thing working out for him full time and Dawes and Pedersen are playing well. If we suck up forward it's not due to the talls.

He really busted his butt off early as a high half forward. Constant leads. But with Gawn and Pedersen deep he couldn't be rested forward. He's fit but he's not a midfielder

Personally I think it has to be time to put him back to full back. I can't see the forward thing working out for him full time and Dawes and Pedersen are playing well. If we suck up forward it's not due to the talls.

Frawley can go back to defence when he signs a contract. Otherwise we need to persevere with a different back 6.

Yes Mr Principle.

I won't correct this one, pal.

Frawley can go back to defence when he signs a contract. Otherwise we need to persevere with a different back 6.

Why? Why does the backline have to be the same 7 but the forwards can have a guy who might leave. The forwards are a bigger state of flux than the backs.

Howe or Terlich could play forward, or Terlich could be dropped.

I've just seen enough of Frawley as a forward, I don't think it really works.

I won't correct this one, pal.

Thank god

It's therefore an obvious policy by the umpires to intervene less. The problem however is that we earned a good number more free kicks than 5 out there today. Some of the holding on Dawes and Gawn at marking contests was ridiculously obvious. And Macaffer's holding on Nat Jones would have doubled the count on its own. Once again, the biggest problem facing the watchability of our game is not flooding or stoppages, it is umpiring. I just wonder when the AFL are going to admit to the utter unpredictability of interpretation that we deal with every week. At least to themselves.

Spot on 'Webber', will write more on this when I have more time (posted a bit on it the other day). It's something to do with the AFL idea of continuous play and it's ruining the game. Evans needs to be held to account for this.

Why? Why does the backline have to be the same 7 but the forwards can have a guy who might leave. The forwards are a bigger state of flux than the backs.

Howe or Terlich could play forward, or Terlich could be dropped.

I've just seen enough of Frawley as a forward, I don't think it really works.

We have to find a key back if/when Chip goes.

No point wasting time with him down there.

If he has plans to go back there he can sign a new contract.

Just got back from the game. I have to admit being really disappointed today, and feeling we took a bit of a step back but it came down to 2 things.

1. Class. Our only class player in Tyson was brilliantly tagged out of the game. Even our players who get some of the ball lacked a lot of class a lot of the time. The Pies midfield showed poise, discipline and structure every time a stoppage was held.

2. Wanted: 1 forward line and 1 backline delivery player who can really kick.

And a reminder to our players that you are allowed to kick to the 1st lead up option (stop ignoring great leads from Dawes, Pederson and even Watts) and we are allowed to run through our half back line. The static play through half back was cringeworthy, but credit to the Pies for blocking the leads through the wings and corridor.

We have to find a key back if/when Chip goes.

No point wasting time with him down there.

If he has plans to go back there he can sign a new contract.

Isn't Mr Bean being prepared to go to the back line as chips replacement when he goes?

I'm not sure who the commentator was, maybe mike Sheehan ? Going back earlier in the year where he questioned wether Roosy changes his game plan to suit teams(obviously this happens to some extent every week) but does he instruct us in games like today and perhaps the Sydney game to more so stem the bleeding and not let it be a blow out and then in other games gives the boys a bit more license to take the game on. Having said that we really took it up to the top side last week. Today just seemed a lot different to the way we've played the last 5 to 6 weeks.

Haen't read the thread but how many times did we try to mark on our chests only to have the ball punched away. Frawley x 4. Salem x 2 frustrated me. How could you not learn from the first time???

Meek effort - this was a Roos' speciality....harm minimisation.

A loss like this really irks me as Swan, Cloke, Beams, etc hardly got out of a trot and looked completely disinterested.

That shits me the most.

PS - Does anyone remember Kelly for Geelong pretending to snooze as they were singing the song, after they beat us? That's what I'm talking about.....

Jetta - best game yet and was one of the only players to shepherd

What's a shepherd?

A top 4 side, beat a bottom 4 side.
Not by much though, not sure what people are whinging about.

The non fifty to Dawes, the goal that somehow wasn't advantage, Dawes was held on the ground for twenty plus seconds and kept from contesting the ball with no free

I hope the club ask for a please explain it was close to as one sided as I have seen

Taking nothing away from the pies they deserved to win.

The Pies were the better side but when we were continually held and scragged off the ball it's pretty hard to make a proper assessment. Their pressure was immense but again the umps allowed them to run roughshod over us. No doubt out defenders scrag as well but this was constant and all over the ground. Then to pull out some momentum changing ones like the Vince non-goal and then the Watts holding the ball etc was just demoralising.

Such a frustrating match after last week when we showed so much flare. Our forward line just did not work. Our classiest player was completely shut down. Turnovers still killing us. Basic skill errors everywhere. Hand balling to teammates under pressure over and over. Show some accountability!

Colonwood got an armchair ride from the umpires of course, which clearly shook players confidence. What did Roos do to JKH at 3QTR time? Because it didn't work.

That match was lost at the selection table. We had too many talls, lacked speed and X factor, and our midfielders aren't taking the game on and taking shots at goal. Aimlessly handballing around center half forward 6 times then turning it over is not helping our cause when Colonwood are pressuring us with an extra man in defense. Get our tall forward deep then kick it low and fast to contests, or kick for goal ala Vince's "goal".

Kent in for Salem and McKenzie tagging Pendlebury may have helped our cause today.

Up forward, Gawn is all or nothing. Either takes a grab or the opposition just stroll out of defence. We lacked a crumber (among other things).

Gawn should've been subbed off at half time he was giving us nothing up forward and we were too tall, we needed some fri beds down there and some more run. I don't understand why he wasn't subbed off earlier (or why he wasn't dropped for Dawes) and the. Why Jamar went off instead of Gawn. Someone said Jamar jarred his knee but it looked like he wasn't happy with being given the red vest.

Apparently Jamar grabbed his calf just before he got subbed.. did anyone see it??

Such a frustrating match after last week when we showed so much flare. Our forward line just did not work. Our classiest player was completely shut down. Turnovers still killing us. Basic skill errors everywhere. Hand balling to teammates under pressure over and over. Show some accountability!

Colonwood got an armchair ride from the umpires of course, which clearly shook players confidence. What did Roos do to JKH at 3QTR time? Because it didn't work.

That match was lost at the selection table. We had too many talls, lacked speed and X factor, and our midfielders aren't taking the game on and taking shots at goal. Aimlessly handballing around center half forward 6 times then turning it over is not helping our cause when Colonwood are pressuring us with an extra man in defense. Get our tall forward deep then kick it low and fast to contests, or kick for goal ala Vince's "goal".

Kent in for Salem and McKenzie tagging Pendlebury may have helped our cause today.

I don't think there'll be changes next week....it's not the Roos way.

Bitterly disappointing. Well outclassed by a quality side.

The thing that is probably a mitigating factor is that other than Dawes, our worst players were the youngest; I'm thinking Tyson, Viney, Salem and JKH all got lessons in how gun midfields go about it.

Pedersen, Dunn and Nath Jones all continued their excellent form, and were our clear top 3 for mine.

I thought Garland played his worst game for a long time too. He panicked under pressure at least three or four times.

N Jones, Vince, Pedersen and Cross were our best, I thought. We just overused the ball at every opportunity, made poor decisions with ball in hand and struggled to take marks out in front of ourselves. Most of the players were trying to take chest marks.

We took one, possibly even two steps back this week. It's even more disappointing, given how much our players talked up the game. They never looked like it after the 10ish minute mark of the second quarter.

1. We need more speed outside the contest.

2. We have to find more ways to score.

3. I thought this was one match where Frawley could have played on Cloke ,and Dunn tried up forward.

4. They tagged the right man in Tyson.

5. Umpires were terrible.

Definitely need more pace, and I'd suggest we'd be monitoring someone like Jarred Pickett very closely. Billy Stretch has showed pace and good kicking skills off a hb flank and the wing for Sth Australia, so he would be a handy addition.

Meek effort - this was a Roos' speciality....harm minimisation.

A loss like this really irks me as Swan, Cloke, Beams, etc hardly got out of a trot and looked completely disinterested.

That shits me the most.

PS - Does anyone remember Kelly for Geelong pretending to snooze as they were singing the song, after they beat us? That's what I'm talking about.....

The 'harm minimisation' you speak of held them to 8 goals. It's a defensive basis to a developing game plan. The same one that Sydney and Fremantle use, but with years more familiarity, and a few more stars. Swan has been down on form recently, and Dan Cross played him tight and hard. Cloke was beaten by McDonald, and got some brilliant service in the second half from their midfielders.

To say we were meek is to disrespect the defensive effort that they couldn't match with confidence, speed and polish going inside 50.

Remember last year? Which version do you prefer? I know which one I do.