Post Match Discussion - Round 15

[beelzebub 22,724]

That pretty much says it all bb

Does really and Im surprised that many of the affected ( players ) cant see that Mack truck looming.

I can only imagine the FD's magicians and conjurers are busy working on plans and schemes to lure the unloved and disaffected to their new home

[binman 39,591]

We've come a long, long way when a 6 point loss can be described as "diabolical".

Spot on Nasher. Some pretty sertious over reaction in this thread - but each to their own.

My take?

Negatives:

• Apart from a bright first 5-6 minutes (which we failed to convert into goals) we were woeful in the first half, on a par with how poor we were against the bombers. Poor decision making, rubbish kicks and poor set ups and stoppages
• I was surprised to red during the week that we were 18th in clearances. Not for long though. They smashed us at stoppages in the first half which is a real worry. It was obvious watching it and i saw the stats and half time and they reflected how badly we got beaten in this area (can't remember the numbers but is was a huge differential)
• I thought Roos was out coached in the first half and the the doggies had it on their terms
• The forward line took a while to adjust to no Frawley
• If Dawes was a keeper he would be called iron gloves
• The bail decision was the worst decision i have seen this year. No small feat given the standard of umpiring this year. Made more annoying by the fat that when i bellowed my disgust two even louder bulldogs fan yelled i didn't know what i was talking about and that had been a rule for years. Morons. The same two btw who screamed at the throwing decision (a t the far end of the ground) in front of our goals. A decision that was subsequently proven correct by a crystal clear replay on the score board - and when i pointed that out the response was along the lines of 'nothing like waiting for the evidence to make a call'. Moron
• The bail decision got into the head of Dunn who cost us a goal for not rushing it through
• When we got the lead we should have moved heaven and earth to ensure they couldn't clear the ball from the next bounce. They cleared it and that goal was the real winner

Positives:

• I'll give more positives later but one that stuck out for me was that we were 37 points down in stoppage time of the 2nd quarter. 37. And we headed them and should have won. In the last 5-10 years year that would have translated to a 10 goal loss. Like the game against Essendon we showed terrific resilience to force our way back. The loss is gutting but that is progress. The losses will sit in the bank and can be drawn on in the future as can the fact that we can fight and get back on terms. We lost that game in the second quarter not the last.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

A couple of weeks ago an 18 yr old drafted this year was being hailed as a champion because he coolly slotted a winning goal...the name escapes me just at the moment, just for the record by the way, some media had Macrae being well held by Nicholson....notice you have decided to leave out Liberatore why?

So on the basis of one game by Salem and one game by Mcrae, you are hailing one and writing the other one off; you're a good judge aren't you.

I haven't said Salem is a dud, or not up to it, I think he will be a very good player for us and if you think Liberatore isn't then you haven't got a clue.

[Satyriconhome 10,091]

So on the basis of one game by Salem and one game by Mcrae, you are hailing one and writing the other one off; you're a good judge aren't you.

I haven't said Salem is a dud, or not up to it, I think he will be a very good player for us and if you think Liberatore isn't then you haven't got a clue.

No I'm not, never write anybody off, showing how all this bleating about drafting etc., is just that, bleating.....I prefer to judge a player when his AFL career is over, not in the first year or two.............I'll give you one example, to go off topic slightly, Judd, brilliant career but he should have retired last year

Edited June 30, 2014 by Satyriconhome

[mrtwister 650]

It is no coincidence that as soon as Roos starts implementing an attack plan, the same old errors come to the fore. When we were solely defensive and ultra-conservative (up until the Pies) our turnovers were limited and not so costly.

Now that we are layering our attack onto our defence it's back to the abattoir, butchers everywhere.

Consider it two steps back after taking three steps forward.

If it's a case of people trying to do things beyond their skill set, it can be fixed by better decision making, which is easily done with Roos' playing your role model.

If it's a case of players simply not up to executing the basics of accurate disposals then not much will change until those players are moved on for those that ARE able to do it.

We will probably know which it is in another 3-4 weeks. No improvement means it is probably the latter.

[Go the Biff 3,212]

• The bail decision was the worst decision i have seen this year. No small feat given the standard of umpiring this year. Made more annoying by the fat that when i bellowed my disgust two even louder bulldogs fan yelled i didn't know what i was talking about and that had been a rule for years. Morons. The same two btw who screamed at the throwing decision (a t the far end of the ground) in front of our goals. A decision that was subsequently proven correct by a crystal clear replay on the score board - and when i pointed that out the response was along the lines of 'nothing like waiting for the evidence to make a call'. Moron

I had a Scragger fan near me who claimed it was a good decision because Bail "had prior opportunity". WTF ?

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

I wasn't suggesting that we pick players from the VFL, not sure where you get that from my post. What I was saying is we should rethink picking players based on their form in the SANFL, Terlich, Georgiou, Tapscott, Toumpass and even Trenners.

Terlich and Georgiou I don't mind as they are more senior players but Toumpas and Trengove I agree with. The interesting thing is they are both painfully slow yet looked quick in the SANFL.

[jumbo returns 6,619]

No I'm not, never write anybody off, showing how all this bleating about drafting etc., is just that, bleating.....I prefer to judge a player when his AFL career is over, not in the first year or two.............I'll give you one example, to go off topic slightly, Judd, brilliant career but he should have retired last year

Magnificent last night....

[Ethan Tremblay 28,833]

No I'm not, never write anybody off, showing how all this bleating about drafting etc., is just that, bleating.....I prefer to judge a player when his AFL career is over, not in the first year or two.............I'll give you one example, to go off topic slightly, Judd, brilliant career but he should have retired last year

How can you say you're going to give an example to support your argument then go off topic and give your opinion on Judd, who, funnily enough, has been great.

Edited June 30, 2014 by Ethan Tremblay

[binman 39,591]

I had a Scragger fan near me who claimed it was a good decision because Bail "had prior opportunity". WTF ?

That's funny, that's what the bloke near me yelled after saying the rule had been in place for years. He also said it happens all the time when i doubt there's been more than 4-5 paid in the last 3 years. Funnily prior tot the call he was yelling for holding the ball which seems to suggest that in his view Bail was under some sort of pressure

[Pirlo 592]

No ffs you and your mates Os and the great bullstish artist HH need to get off that high horse. He is in yr 2, again the supposed senior and middle tier players are the ones who are the leaders.

Look at the top clubs, hawks, cats, swans, pies etc very few 1st and 2nd year players come through and dominate from year 1. They give the young ones time. Give the likes of Toumpas, Salem and Barry time to grow. It is our need for the middle aged and older players who can kick and handball to a teammate that kills us, we will be trading for older players again this off season.

I never said he wouldn't get time, or that I don't want him to have it.

It's just a fact that the 5 players after him have all shown real star power.

Frustration.

[nutbean 8,837]

I never said he wouldn't get time, or that I don't want him to have it.

It's just a fact that the 5 players after him have all shown real star power.

Frustration.

And also the fact 5 players after haven't shown real star power.

Rear vision analysis.

[Satyriconhome 10,091]

Magnificent last night....

How can you say you're going to give an example to support your argument then go off topic and give your opinion on Judd, who, funnily enough, has been great.

Wow, you were watching the game right, he has always been good at forcing the ball forward, but a lot of the time last night the ball did not go anywhere near a Carlton player, just because Bruce goes orgasmic everytime he touches it, doesn't mean every possession is gold, the hard tag went to Murphy, that should tell you something

[Pirlo 592]

And what about Jake Stringer, who was taken just after him and averages less possessions, but who has played more games? Toumpas also came off a double hip surgery before his first pre season. I thin kwe certainly have to give Jimmy time.

Stringer broke his leg in his draft year, and kicked 4.2 yesterday.

[rpfc 27,692]

If we had snagged that game after playing like that this place would have been raving about how we can still win while playing so poorly...

You know we would be.

I am not satisfied with how we played for 40 minutes but the apocalyptic tone is a bit much...

Again, some of you are just wilfully ignorant about where we are coming from.

Our list is still impaired. This is not a 14 game fix...

Edited June 30, 2014 by rpfc

[jumbo returns 6,619]

Wow, you were watching the game right, he has always been good at forcing the ball forward, but a lot of the time last night the ball did not go anywhere near a Carlton player, just because Bruce goes orgasmic everytime he touches it, doesn't mean every possession is gold, the hard tag went to Murphy, that should tell you something

Yep, still played a great game.

[Satyriconhome 10,091]

Yep, still played a great game.

Ah yes, but to quote a lot of the posts here, was he the superstar able to drag the team over the line.....er no......I think a lot of what Judd these days is taken as being good because of past glories, have a look at his disposal efficiency from last night, I like to watch the Carlton games closely, they are in a supposedly similar position to us, a messiah like coach, a couple of superstars who were bought in (unfortunately ours retired), lots of high end draft picks......where are they at the moment.....er let's think 4 wins....hence why I am not slashing my wrists like a lot on here

[jnrmac 19,508]

What I'm saying is, you have a choice of picking a ready made player like Wines who has the body to contribute immediately or you pick a player who you believe will be a very good player but needs time. At this point in time the choice of Wines has been vindicated by his outstanding performance on the field whereas the performances of Toumpass haven't shown he will be anywhere the player we hoped he would be.

You can usually tell after a season or so if a player has the goods, look at Macrae, Stringer and Bontempelli, they were all in Footscray's best yesterday and were picked last year and this year, but Toumpass can't get a game with a side that is near the bottom of the ladder and has shown nothing to indicate that he will make it in AFL.

I'm hopeful that he will turn out to be a very good player, but at this time I just don't see in him what the recruiters did. I just get p1ssed off when we make excuses as to why he needs time when other players don't seem to and we do it all the time. Big guys need time, young kids need time, it's always the same excuse on Demonland, just look around and see the type of football other draftees are playing.

Anyway I don't want to go on about this, I've said what I want to say and given my opinion others can make up their own minds.

Not sure why this is a Toumpas thread but Roos has already said publicly Toumpas is like a 1st yr player. He had a double hip operation at the begining of last year.

Best you wait before making comparisons.

[monoccular 16,658]

Out: turnover merchants bail, nicho and terlich.

In: casey performers tappy, jkh and blease.

It appears that Blease hasn't been able to work his way in because he isn't ticking all the boxes, the most important perhaps to Roos being defensive pressure. We laud Roos as out potential saviour, so we need to back him if he says one essential is missing.

What I'm saying is, you have a choice of picking a ready made player like Wines who has the body to contribute immediately or you pick a player who you believe will be a very good player but needs time. At this point in time the choice of Wines has been vindicated by his outstanding performance on the field whereas the performances of Toumpass haven't shown he will be anywhere the player we hoped he would be.

You can usually tell after a season or so if a player has the goods, look at Macrae, Stringer and Bontempelli, they were all in Footscray's best yesterday and were picked last year and this year, but Toumpass can't get a game with a side that is near the bottom of the ladder and has shown nothing to indicate that he will make it in AFL.

I'm hopeful that he will turn out to be a very good player, but at this time I just don't see in him what the recruiters did. I just get p1ssed off when we make excuses as to why he needs time when other players don't seem to and we do it all the time. Big guys need time, young kids need time, it's always the same excuse on Demonland, just look around and see the type of football other draftees are playing.

Anyway I don't want to go on about this, I've said what I want to say and given my opinion others can make up their own minds.

OMG - another Wines vs Toumpas argument.

Yes, Wines has been playing for a year and a half in a successful team surrounded by very good mids: Toump has been thrown into essentially a cesspit and is expected to shine (without a first pre-season).

I know that one cannot make the call, but I just wonder how they would have compared in the other's environment. One cannot ever know.

[Dockett 32 1,213]

Tend to agree with RF , Nathan Jones has been held the past two weeks and this has impacted. He needs to stand up this week and with Vince and Viney get right into the tough stuff at every contest. You take a look at who goes through Sydney's midfield and how they go about it, to get a slight insight as to what Roo's requires and that means no weeks off for anyone. Swans engine room Kennedy, McGlynn, Hannebury,Jack and apologies to others, not a pretty boy amongst them. They just love the challenge of every single contest.

[monoccular 16,658]

Tend to agree with RF , Nathan Jones has been held the past two weeks and this has impacted. He needs to stand up this week and with Vince and Viney get right into the tough stuff at every contest. You take a look at who goes through Sydney's midfield and how they go about it, to get a slight insight as to what Roo's requires and that means no weeks off for anyone. Swans engine room Kennedy, McGlynn, Hannebury,Jack and apologies to others, not a pretty boy amongst them. They just love the challenge of every single contest.

I trust that you are not suggesting that Nathan Jones is a "pretty boy". Even the top players have poorer games, by their standards. It is just that the successful teams have more depth to cover these poorer games; we don't, yet.

[binman 39,591]

Tend to agree with RF , Nathan Jones has been held the past two weeks and this has impacted. He needs to stand up this week and with Vince and Viney get right into the tough stuff at every contest. You take a look at who goes through Sydney's midfield and how they go about it, to get a slight insight as to what Roo's requires and that means no weeks off for anyone. Swans engine room Kennedy, McGlynn, Hannebury,Jack and apologies to others, not a pretty boy amongst them. They just love the challenge of every single contest.

AS Roos has said we need more quality mids - particularly big, strong ones. Its crazy really, if you look at the top sides they have up to 10 players who play through the mid field and most of them are strong clearance winners. We have the 3 you have mentioned and Cross. We need 6 more. Some we already have (Trenners, the toump, Salem, Riley, Michie) but still we probably need at least 3 big bodied mids at he next draft period and ideally, if we can engineer it through trades, a plug and play one in the Tyson mould

[hardtack 10,187]

After the last month I am of the opinion that Paul Roos and the new FD are getting the best that this list has to produce.

The problem is that for a large number of them their best is marginal AFL ability.

We are still two to three draft periods away from having a list that is capable of pushing into the top eight.

We just have too many VFL level talents.

Poor skills cost us the last two games the errors were committed by the regular offenders. They have to be replaced.

I agree with most of this OD, but I would think that top 8 is possible next year if the draft/trading period this year is productive (which I do not doubt it will be with the current coaching group and admin running the club).

The vitriol I see being spat out on the game day threads here never ceases to amaze me, particularly when you see where the current list is now compared to where it was this time 12 months ago. PR is a superb coach and has already shown where he is taking us (in fact, I would argue that we are well ahead of where most would have predicted at the beginning of the year) and it should be obvious even to Blind Freddy and his dog, that we were never going to be contenders this year.

The following is in no way directed towards you OD (I just thought I would vent a little while I am here):

Yesterday was frustrating, yes... but typically in a D'Land game day/post-match discussion, the focus is on the poor one and a half quarters in the first half of the game, and little to do with the gutsy come back. People set themselves up for disappointment by saying that the Western Bulldogs are not up to our standards and as they are without certain players it will be a disgrace if we lose... rubbish! The Western Bulldogs won 8 games to our 2 last year and were a team that was looking to be going places defeating West Coast, Carlton and Adelaide before finally defeating us by 20 points in the last 5 rounds of the season. Just exactly what were we doing at that time? They have had a well balanced list for quite some time and so I was not surprised at all with yesterday's result... the only thing that disappointed my was our lack of effort and appalling skills by hand and foot in the first half.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

Never a truer word said Robbie numerous people decried your early comments on Cook and we know how that turned out.

He is getting to the point of having difficulty hearing the band.

However he is contracted for 2015 so next year will be make or break IMO.

I think at the time we were accused of being impatient because we wanted players that could play now, not maybe in 2 or 3 years down the track. How silly of us wanting players that had shown they were up to it and not just accepting the unknown from the ones we picked who had done nothing.

Such impatience Old, why would you want to start winning games immediately.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

No I'm not, never write anybody off, showing how all this bleating about drafting etc., is just that, bleating.....I prefer to judge a player when his AFL career is over, not in the first year or two.............I'll give you one example, to go off topic slightly, Judd, brilliant career but he should have retired last year

So you think Cook might still make it?