There's absolutely no doubt the first half was diabolical. It was. Roos even used that word himself.

What annoys me is one half was diabolical, the second half was OK (the coach said 'good' - but I'll stick with 'OK') - and in some people's mind, that averages out to diabolical. In case I haven't made it apparent, I get very frustrated with people who seem to default to looking at things from the worst possible angle.

I don't disagree, but I go every week, and to me that was our worst performance of the year (keep in mind I wasn't in the country and have never watched that West Coast game, so I'm probably wrong). We were pathetic in that first half, and in the last 10 minutes of the match when it was there to be won, we made so many idiotic errors.

This was only the first time Roos said we played like we didn't care, which is just going back to the Neeld days. If there is one thing we have done well this year, is play with intensity. In that first half we played like we couldn't care less if we won or lost. Even guys like Jones and Vince, who have been wonderful all year, played terribly.

It was a scary reminder of what this team is still capable of producing.

Yes we came back into the game, when last year we would have lost by 10+ goals, but we never ever should have been this far behind against the Dogs.

That our opposition wasn't much chop and were missing their 2 better tall forwards, their best midfielder and their Brownload medallist and we still got smashed in the clearances and conceeded plenty of dumb goals, only made it worse, especially when we won the ruck comprehensively.

All I'll say is I'm glad I'll be in Tassie for the Freo game and won't see a second of it.

They will obliterate us.

All I'll say is I'm glad I'll be in Tassie for the Freo game and won't see a second of it.

They will obliterate us.

And I'm glad I'll be in Thailand for the Port game and won't see a second of it. I'll probably be too drunk to even check the scores.

he needs to realise we can't do that,

we have teeth, and jobs.

And a clear moral obligation not to be a outright [censored]

And I'm glad I'll be in Thailand for the Port game and won't see a second of it. I'll probably be too drunk to even check the scores.

Send me your number and I'll text u goal by goal updates so you don't miss out on the fun!

I don't disagree, but I go every week, and to me that was our worst performance of the year (keep in mind I wasn't in the country and have never watched that West Coast game, so I'm probably wrong).

That our opposition wasn't much chop and were missing their 2 better tall forwards, their best midfielder and their Brownload medallist and we still got smashed in the clearances and conceeded plenty of dumb goals, only made it worse, especially when we won the ruck comprehensively.

We aren't much chop...

And I watched that WCE game - it is the singular reason we haven't got 40K members.

We aren't much chop...

And I watched that WCE game - it is the singular reason we haven't got 40K members.

alas....a lack of success will do that every time

I think youve missed my gist.

Jack has amazing talent but seems affraid to own it., Nik Nat isnt

JW needs to

Nik Nat has amazing athletic ability with a limited tank

He has absolutley 0 positional sense and footy smarts

Watts uses the ball well and is a good decision maker 9 times out of 10.

Agree with you that he needs continual physical development but IMO he has come on a hell of a lot this season and I believe the penny has dropped

We aren't much chop...

And I watched that WCE game - it is the singular reason we haven't got 40K members.

It was six points, so half a chop, you are correct re the membership though, the steady incline stopped dead for a week or two after the West Coast game

Strangely Paul disagrees with you. Thought it was unacceptable . He thought it diabolical. Half way through 2nd qtr we were 6 goals down from all but one way traffic.

It's not so much the outcome...a 6 pt loss that worries many, its the wavering appetite for the game some of our players are showing.

(typos)

Paul says what he needs to say to motivate the group. What he says publicly, what he says privately to the group, and what he thinks to himself, are three separate messages that a master coach like him would never confuse.

I've coached people to national championship titles in another sport. I know that what I would describe as a "diabolical" or "unacceptable" performance from them was a very, very small diversion away from perfection (which is required to be the best). What Roos is currently calling "diabolical" would have been described by last years coach as "fairly competitive".

We are not that far away.

I don't disagree, but I go every week, and to me that was our worst performance of the year (keep in mind I wasn't in the country and have never watched that West Coast game, so I'm probably wrong). We were pathetic in that first half, and in the last 10 minutes of the match when it was there to be won, we made so many idiotic errors.

This was only the first time Roos said we played like we didn't care, which is just going back to the Neeld days. If there is one thing we have done well this year, is play with intensity. In that first half we played like we couldn't care less if we won or lost. Even guys like Jones and Vince, who have been wonderful all year, played terribly.

It was a scary reminder of what this team is still capable of producing.

Yes we came back into the game, when last year we would have lost by 10+ goals, but we never ever should have been this far behind against the Dogs.

That our opposition wasn't much chop and were missing their 2 better tall forwards, their best midfielder and their Brownload medallist and we still got smashed in the clearances and conceeded plenty of dumb goals, only made it worse, especially when we won the ruck comprehensively.

Interestingly when we played the Saints they were without some of their better mids and they beat us in the clearances as well.

Paul says what he needs to say to motivate the group. What he says publicly, what he says privately to the group, and what he thinks to himself, are three separate messages that a master coach like him would never confuse.

I've coached people to national championship titles in another sport. I know that what I would describe as a "diabolical" or "unacceptable" performance from them was a very, very small diversion away from perfection (which is required to be the best). What Roos is currently calling "diabolical" would have been described by last years coach as "fairly competitive".

We are not that far away.

Appreciate your words but my limited exposure and interaction with Roos suggests a man very guarded of what he says knowing the power or force they can convey.

Hes often proffered the notion of "it is what it is " He also described that first half (his wording) as diabolical. Im sure he thought long and hard about that and meant it. As such I believe him.

Paul says what he needs to say to motivate the group. What he says publicly, what he says privately to the group, and what he thinks to himself, are three separate messages that a master coach like him would never confuse.

I've coached people to national championship titles in another sport. I know that what I would describe as a "diabolical" or "unacceptable" performance from them was a very, very small diversion away from perfection (which is required to be the best). What Roos is currently calling "diabolical" would have been described by last years coach as "fairly competitive".

We are not that far away.

You are wrong there chap, Roos produces the same message no matter the forum, I asked the players about his 3/4 time address against Norths, basically it was what he said at his post game presser, 360 etc.....he loves consistency

Interestingly when we played the Saints they were without some of their better mids and they beat us in the clearances as well.

You can almost forgive 1st game under Paul Roos, plus no Jamar and Fitzy going off early with a concussion.

Sunday was just bad, especially given Jamar was dominating in the ruck.

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.

Binman, if that guy was calling you sweetheart? then i was sitting right behind you. You describe exactly what I witnessed when my head was not in my hands!

Has this been posted? Makes me angry. 3 game changers..

http://www.afl.com.au/video/2014-07-01/holding-the-ball-explained

Has this been posted? Makes me angry. 3 game changers..

http://www.afl.com.au/video/2014-07-01/holding-the-ball-explained

It's annoying to say the least, particularly the Bail decision which had deeper ramifications.

It defies belief how often the umpires are getting incorrect disposal wrong. Players are just dropping the ball now because they are confident they will get away with it. Meanwhile 4 steps is apparently a rough guide for prior opportunity (news to me), but still players who win the ball and within half a second are piled on top of are then caught with "no genuine attempt" given as the explanation.

The whole thing is a mess that seems to get worse each week, and the fans just have to accept it. It's little wonder foreigners have no idea what's going on when watching our game.

Binman, if that guy was calling you sweetheart? then i was sitting right behind you. You describe exactly what I witnessed when my head was not in my hands!

yep he was calling me sweetheart which I found very amusing. Watch the footy sweetheart was one of his phrases along with a few other creative ways to use it. Also said something about who my puppet was. Couldn't work that one out. As my mate said (my puppet?) isn't waiting for the evidence the right time to make a call? I made the error of engaging with a moron. No winners there

Has this been posted? Makes me angry. 3 game changers..

http://www.afl.com.au/video/2014-07-01/holding-the-ball-explained

well good they have admitted they were wrong but cad you quite rightly say big game changers. The bail goal came at a crucial time in terms of the bulldogs getting momentum, obviously cost us that goal but also another when dunn elected not to run it over in the last. The Murphy one followed on the heels of the bullies getting a holding the ball call in the middle of the ground and if paid Barry would have had a shot from 50. The dunn one was probably less important as I think we got the ball but there was only 90 seconds left and it would have allowed us to set up properly. In a six point game appealing. To be balanced however it must be said the free that gifted jamar a goal was very sticky touch wood and should not have been paid

It's annoying to say the least, particularly the Bail decision which had deeper ramifications.

It defies belief how often the umpires are getting incorrect disposal wrong. Players are just dropping the ball now because they are confident they will get away with it. Meanwhile 4 steps is apparently a rough guide for prior opportunity (news to me), but still players who win the ball and within half a second are piled on top of are then caught with "no genuine attempt" given as the explanation.

The whole thing is a mess that seems to get worse each week, and the fans just have to accept it. It's little wonder foreigners have no idea what's going on when watching our game.

...or like Dom Tyson, tackled as soon as he got the ball and given against him for holding the ball.

Your spot on 'P-man', the whole thing is a mess.

Has this been posted? Makes me angry. 3 game changers..

http://www.afl.com.au/video/2014-07-01/holding-the-ball-explained

The worst part is that there could have been at least 2 more 4th quarter decisions thrown in there. Pederson's in the back decision and Dawes' tackle where the guy just casually rolls it along the ground for the next guy to come in and pick it up.

If any doggie supporters even suggest they won fair and square they will be automatically sent this very link.

well good they have admitted they were wrong but cad you quite rightly say big game changers. The bail goal came at a crucial time in terms of the bulldogs getting momentum, obviously cost us that goal but also another when dunn elected not to run it over in the last. The Murphy one followed on the heels of the bullies getting a holding the ball call in the middle of the ground and if paid Barry would have had a shot from 50. The dunn one was probably less important as I think we got the ball but there was only 90 seconds left and it would have allowed us to set up properly. In a six point game appealing. To be balanced however it must be said the free that gifted jamar a goal was very sticky touch wood and should not have been paid

But to be extra fair, Jamar's free kick was right in front of us and I actually thought the free was for Pederson being smashed in the head on the tackle that followed immediately after. Either way, it would have been a goal.

Has this been posted? Makes me angry. 3 game changers..

http://www.afl.com.au/video/2014-07-01/holding-the-ball-explained

Makes me angry as well. Its pathetic they get critical decisions wrong.

Has this been posted? Makes me angry. 3 game changers..

http://www.afl.com.au/video/2014-07-01/holding-the-ball-explained

Disgusting.

Two obvious holding the ball decisions in the final two minutes - not sure how much clearer the Crameri one could have been, plus just an error on the Murphy one.

Umpiring is ruining the game right now. More than fixturing. It has to be fixed.

There's absolutely no doubt the first half was diabolical. It was. Roos even used that word himself.

What annoys me is one half was diabolical, the second half was OK (the coach said 'good' - but I'll stick with 'OK') - and in some people's mind, that averages out to diabolical. In case I haven't made it apparent, I get very frustrated with people who seem to default to looking at things from the worst possible angle.

Fair enough, Nash. I thought we played one really good quarter and one okay quarter. Very hard to take a lot positive from it, except that the margin was still only a goal at the end of it all.