Just an ask..

i wonder if some of the lads actually became a little surprised that they WERE getting clearances, that they WERE getting inside 50's , in fact WERE in the game. Might have caught them napping mentally as to the last and most important bit..The Scoreboard ??

i.e Unfamiliar territory....might take getting used to !!

Was the first solid hit out for the year for both teams. Both sides showed many signs of rust/cobwebs, and will be better for the run.

For me there were very few highlights. I thought the Jamar/Tyson combination was fantastic - a combination that we are desperate for. Further on Tyson, he looks ready to take the next step that we hope he can take. I still think an indication of the type of footy club we'll be over the next 5-10 years will be shown by the level that Dom gets to. Potential Top 10 player of the league, we will know if we're on the right track if we can help get him there.

Of the noobs, I thought Newton, The Prince and Frost were clear standouts. We know what we'll get week in week out with Jeffy, and while Vanders was good in the half he played, I'll hold off on the premature jubilation as shown by some here. (I remember doing the same thing with Magner after his first NAB game, that didn't end well).

I think the biggest highlight for me was that, yes, we made some silly mistakes (so did Freo), but many of our mistakes were made when we were taking a risk/taking the game on.

Lowlights? I don't actually have any. First game since late August/early September last year, a number of young players or players that are young to the club. I went in expecting a rusty performance, and that's exactly what I got. We played competitive footy for two quarters, dominant footy for 1 quarter, and were outclassed in one quarter.

I'm more than satisfied. The big dance starts in a few weeks, plenty of time to work on some areas before then, and there's no better place to do that than in PRACTICE games.

Was the first solid hit out for the year for both teams. Both sides showed many signs of rust/cobwebs, and will be better for the run.

For me there were very few highlights. I thought the Jamar/Tyson combination was fantastic - a combination that we are desperate for. Further on Tyson, he looks ready to take the next step that we hope he can take. I still think an indication of the type of footy club we'll be over the next 5-10 years will be shown by the level that Dom gets to. Potential Top 10 player of the league, we will know if we're on the right track if we can help get him there.

Of the noobs, I thought Newton, The Prince and Frost were clear standouts. We know what we'll get week in week out with Jeffy, and while Vanders was good in the half he played, I'll hold off on the premature jubilation as shown by some here. (I remember doing the same thing with Magner after his first NAB game, that didn't end well).

I think the biggest highlight for me was that, yes, we made some silly mistakes (so did Freo), but many of our mistakes were made when we were taking a risk/taking the game on.

Lowlights? I don't actually have any. First game since late August/early September last year, a number of young players or players that are young to the club. I went in expecting a rusty performance, and that's exactly what I got. We played competitive footy for two quarters, dominant footy for 1 quarter, and were outclassed in one quarter.

I'm more than satisfied. The big dance starts in a few weeks, plenty of time to work on some areas before then, and there's no better place to do that than in PRACTICE games.

Agree with most of that Billy

I know stat's can tell you anything you wish but Freo kicked 50% more goals than us.

Yes they are are a top four side and we are a bottom four side.

Overall I thought we performed better than we would have last year

Vanders was good in the half he played, I'll hold off on the premature jubilation as shown by some here. (I remember doing the same thing with Magner after his first NAB game, that didn't end well).

I'm jubilating all over the place.

We were goal-less for 2 quarters.

We let them kick 6 in a row.

We had 2 shots to take the lead in the final quarter and butchered both

Also, it's PRACTICE, not PRACTISE.

Thanks.

My observations:
• Tom McDonald is still a liability with ball in hand and is not in our best 22 IMO.
• Garland had a poor game but he clearly needs to get some games under his belt and will get better.
• Grimes made the same mistakes as last year and will need to improve significantly to make it into best 22.
• Frost looks fantastic with his pace and must play. But a backline of him and McDonald lacks the skill required.
• Newton looks a good get, as does Vandenberg.
• JHK is behind Kent and Garlett and probably Bail and so I don’t see him in our best side.
• We would be crazy to play two ruckmen given Dawes and Hogan are both poor when the ball hits the deck. Dawes may even need to become the second ruck unless Pedersen or Fitzy can improve.

My best 22 ATM is:
Jetta, Frost, Garland
Salem, Dunn, Howe
Vince, Cross, Lumumba
Bail, Hogan, Kent
Garlett, Dawes*, Watts
Jamar, N. Jones, Tyson
Viney, Newton, Vandenberg
TBD
* Pedersen for Round 1.

Also, it's PRACTICE, not PRACTISE.

Thanks.

So not much to complain about today jr?

So not much to complain about today jr?

Luvin' Friday, OD

My observations:

• Tom McDonald is still a liability with ball in hand and is not in our best 22 IMO.

• Garland had a poor game but he clearly needs to get some games under his belt and will get better.

• Grimes made the same mistakes as last year and will need to improve significantly to make it into best 22.

• Frost looks fantastic with his pace and must play. But a backline of him and McDonald lacks the skill required.

• Newton looks a good get, as does Vandenberg.

• JHK is behind Kent and Garlett and probably Bail and so I don’t see him in our best side.

• We would be crazy to play two ruckmen given Dawes and Hogan are both poor when the ball hits the deck. Dawes may even need to become the second ruck unless Pedersen or Fitzy can improve.

My best 22 ATM is:

Jetta, Frost, Garland

Salem, Dunn, Howe

Vince, Cross, Lumumba

Bail, Hogan, Kent

Garlett, Dawes*, Watts

Jamar, N. Jones, Tyson

Viney, Newton, Vandenberg

TBD

* Pedersen for Round 1.

Was there another McDonald running around last night that I'm not aware of???

EDIT: That is to say that he played really well last night and is critical to our set up. I'm honestly beginning to think I watched a different game based on the McDonald criticism on this site.

My observations:

• Tom McDonald is still a liability with ball in hand and is not in our best 22 IMO.

• Garland had a poor game but he clearly needs to get some games under his belt and will get better.

• Grimes made the same mistakes as last year and will need to improve significantly to make it into best 22.

• Frost looks fantastic with his pace and must play. But a backline of him and McDonald lacks the skill required.

• Newton looks a good get, as does Vandenberg.

• JHK is behind Kent and Garlett and probably Bail and so I don’t see him in our best side.

• We would be crazy to play two ruckmen given Dawes and Hogan are both poor when the ball hits the deck. Dawes may even need to become the second ruck unless Pedersen or Fitzy can improve.

My best 22 ATM is:

Jetta, Frost, Garland

Salem, Dunn, Howe

Vince, Cross, Lumumba

Bail, Hogan, Kent

Garlett, Dawes*, Watts

Jamar, N. Jones, Tyson

Viney, Newton, Vandenberg

TBD

* Pedersen for Round 1.

There is no way in the world that, barring injury, Tommy Mac won't play every game.

I thought that rather than appearing disinterested or lazy, Dunn was really feeling the effects of the conditions more than most (or was he possibly ill?)... he looked very uncomfortable, was perspiring profusely and was having trouble gripping the ball as a result. I think we'll see a different Lynden Dunn next week.

That struck me too. I sweat profusely at the slightest exertion so I'm familiar with the symptoms. It makes you feel really down.

We were goal-less for 2 quarters.

We let them kick 6 in a row.

We had 2 shots to take the lead in the final quarter and butchered both

Port have no chance for the flag this year then because they had a goalless quarter and one where they only kicked 1 (plus a misjudged poster).

Port have no chance for the flag this year then because they had a goalless quarter and one where they only kicked 1 (plus a misjudged poster).

Sue, I realise that Fremantle is a port, but they are called the Dockers, as opposed to Port Melbourne.

Just an ask..

i wonder if some of the lads actually became a little surprised that they WERE getting clearances, that they WERE getting inside 50's

That isn't a ridiculous suggestion.

That was our biggest failing in the game, while we went forward enthusiatically, we still looked all over the shop in our process. Roos has refered to it a number of times. He is satisfied with our improvement in our defensive efforts last season but knows that we need to attack more intently. This season we will be about getting the combination right.

We were trying it last night, it wasn't coming off a lot of the time but the intent was there.

I was just rapt to see our boys really lift our inside game. If we can become consistent in that area then we should mostly avoid blowouts and give ourselves a chance in most games.

This is the type of game which can be viewed from a "glass half full" or a "glass half empty" approach; and you could be justified in mounting your argument.

Thanks Ungarieboy for a pretty fair assessment.

Dunn, Grimes, McKenzie and Garland have come in for some severe criticism from many, particularly in the match day thread. But Walters, Ballantyne and Mayne played no major part in the game. I know Walters got a bit of it in the second but once was from a terrible turnover up the field that led to a situation where no defender could stop. That was his only goal. As the commentators said, Ballantyne and Walters are close to the two best small forwards in the game and those players of ours that are being maligned did the job. I suppose many would prefer to see those four get multiple possessions but not stop their opponents. I'll probably never be able to judge how they went tonight because I'll never really know who they were on or what their role was but I'm betting Roos thinks they did a lot better than most here.

I was disappointed that we played so many big forwards in the first half and reckon this just about cost us the game (and I realize that is not really important). In the second quarter when the big forwards tired and the ball became slippery we were inept in applying any defensive pressure in the forward 50. Roos tactics seemed very strange to me. I get that he might have been wanting to look at the talls but he stated his primary goal was to practice the game plan which revolves around contests.

And for all those lamenting the skill errors you should listen to what Roos said before the game. If they are still happening in R5 then get worried. It's hard to think of a player who didn't butcher the ball once or twice, except perhaps Jordie who ran at 100%!

Sue, I realise that Fremantle is a port, but they are called the Dockers, as opposed to Port Melbourne.

Sorry mo64, all West (of Vic) Australians look the same to me.

Can people now finally realise that players don't really improve that much over a pre-season, despite how good they may look at training.

Thanks Ungarieboy for a pretty fair assessment.

Dunn, Grimes, McKenzie and Garland have come in for some severe criticism from many, particularly in the match day thread. But Walters, Ballantyne and Mayne played no major part in the game. I know Walters got a bit of it in the second but once was from a terrible turnover up the field that led to a situation where no defender could stop. That was his only goal. As the commentators said, Ballantyne and Walters are close to the two best small forwards in the game and those players of ours that are being maligned did the job. I suppose many would prefer to see those four get multiple possessions but not stop their opponents. I'll probably never be able to judge how they went tonight because I'll never really know who they were on or what their role was but I'm betting Roos thinks they did a lot better than most here.

I was disappointed that we played so many big forwards in the first half and reckon this just about cost us the game (and I realize that is not really important). In the second quarter when the big forwards tired and the ball became slippery we were inept in applying any defensive pressure in the forward 50. Roos tactics seemed very strange to me. I get that he might have been wanting to look at the talls but he stated his primary goal was to practice the game plan which revolves around contests.

And for all those lamenting the skill errors you should listen to what Roos said before the game. If they are still happening in R5 then get worried. It's hard to think of a player who didn't butcher the ball once or twice, except perhaps Jordie who ran at 100%!

You can do both! Most supporters, excluding yourself and TDI, realise that your defenders are equally important to your attack as your forwards or mids. Grimes, Garland and McKenzie offer little to nothing when it comes to creativity, and that impacts on our scoring potential.

And why do you think that Mckenzie doesn't seem to be part of our midfield plans, when in your eyes, he's such an effective lockdown player?

...

I was disappointed that we played so many big forwards in the first half and reckon this just about cost us the game (and I realize that is not really important). In the second quarter when the big forwards tired and the ball became slippery we were inept in applying any defensive pressure in the forward 50. Roos tactics seemed very strange to me. I get that he might have been wanting to look at the talls but he stated his primary goal was to practice the game plan which revolves around contests.

...

Agree. Funny tho' how Freo play 3 big forwards and it comes off for them, while we do the same and look top-heavy & lacking in forward pressure, having taken only one F50 mark in a half. That's the risk, but worth a try in NAB Cup. Suppose it's different when one of the 3 is Pav!

Watching the replay, the whole first half the side really went away from what they have been training in terms of kicking into the 50 with purpose, it's okay to kick in high to the talls if you're in trouble or under pressure, but if you have time and space they really need to lower their eyes and hit targets which is something they have really improved over the pre season, it's just a shame they went away from that at times.

Was there another McDonald running around last night that I'm not aware of???

EDIT: That is to say that he played really well last night and is critical to our set up. I'm honestly beginning to think I watched a different game based on the McDonald criticism on this site.

His second half marking was impressive. But his defending (one on one) and decision making is still ordinary. An agressive kick in to Toumpas at half forward was just a mind staggering dumb decision. And it's little things around the packs in terms of using team mates, using his body and providing an option that I see little improvement in. I worry that any improvement he has left in him wont match the improvement of the competition. He's still one of best tall defensive options, but Frost adds something new and Garland, Dunn and McDonald better be on their game.

At some point you have to say we've seen enough of a player and their attributes. With Grimes and McKenzie at the very least, its not worth waiting any more time because by Round 5 there will be more reasons to extend their chances.

I knew Jamar would miss that goal from 5 metres out. It may be that we dont have a better ruck. Jamar has been the same for 10 years. Should we play him anyway?

In any case, Ill bet my bottom dollar on Grimes, Garland and Jamar are picked Round one no matter what. Thats what we do.

How is it that Gawn, after a few ? years at the club, still can not kick ????????????????????????????????

Roosey, a lot of target practice is required ASAP. Footskills at our club are abysmal if not worse. Overall I rate our kicking as a 5.75 out of 10.

This is the AFL, not year 2 at the local primary school. Gawn seems to have a few mates that also have this dreaded strain.

C'mon Dees, fix it up straightaway. Endeavour was good but skills still a long, long way off being anything near acceptable.

Hogan is a monster that is already being talked about at other clubs. He is Neitz reincarnated. Jones is now top 25 in the league.

At some point you have to say we've seen enough of a player and their attributes. With Grimes and McKenzie at the very least, its not worth waiting any more time because by Round 5 there will be more reasons to extend their chances.

I knew Jamar would miss that goal from 5 metres out. It may be that we dont have a better ruck. Jamar has been the same for 10 years. Should we play him anyway?

In any case, Ill bet my bottom dollar on Grimes, Garland and Jamar are picked Round one no matter what. Thats what we do.

Jamar misses a few easy goals forward, but it's not like he's never kicked one over his career. Kicked a harder goal than last nights to win us the game v Adelaide last year. More so he dominated the centre hit outs early and got us in the game which is his primary role. Unless Pedersen does anything in the rest of the NAB series then we should play 2 rucks and develop Gawn and live with some poor forward work from the rucks. It's not like Freo's second ruck did anything forward. Jamar at least drew the free kick that led to his comical miss.

Agree totally on Grimes and maybe on Garland. They have 2 games to prove themselves because we know Howe can play half back, we know Frost is an option and personally I've seen enough from Salem as well.