Post Match Discussion - Round 5

[hemingway 7,631]

HYPERBOLE

REALITY

Usually the threads are high jacked as a result of adjectives or the language used rather than the content of the thread. And clearly, personal asides based on posters view of the personality of other posters and their biases more often than not get in the way. Most accept differing views or opinions, but how those views are expressed become the point of argument. Although I suppose for many posters that is the point of interest! I think that most of us would have accepted at the start of the season, indeed even after the Richmond match, that we will not have a good idea of the progress of the team until second half of season. Even end of season, as views seem to differ almost from week to week based on match results. Unfortunately, this is going to be influenced by injuries as much as form.

[Bossdog 2,002]

Sir Why You Little, on 04 May 2015 - 11:42 AM, said:

whilst the young puppy dogs can beat the Swans up there....

They were thumped by Hawthorn by 70pts two weeks ago.....Just saying.....

[jackaub 1,402]

Who thrashed him?

Mundy

[Adam The God 30,421]

Watching Freo play yesterday makes me wonder whether the game has moved on again whilst we are still playing catch up to the last trend. Our contested football was okay yesterday, but Freo murdered us with their run and spread. The number of uncontested possessions that the Pearces in particular had was phenomenal. We looked slow and disinterested in comparison.

Roos has filled the team with guys like Michie, Cross and Tyson who work hard around the stoppages but who move like treacle. When the opposition has players the calibre of Mundy and Fyfe who can get the ball out to the runners in space, we had no chance.

Roos had a poor day yesterday too. His initial matchups were poor and the decision to play McKenzie as sub was mind boggling. The guy has no place in the team if he is not tagging the opposition's number one playmaker, ie Fyfe. Bail and M.Jones would have been more selections than McKenzie and Michie, although Viv would have been unlucky to have been dropped. Still, we needed run, and he doesn't provide any.

Lumumba is not coming close to justifying his pay packet, and watching him trail 5 metres behind Fyfe time and time again was embarrassing. Pedersen was better value than Jamar yesterday, and should be kept in the side. Tyson, Jones and Vandenberg do not defend well enough. Newton needs a spell at Casey. Brayshaw showed more heart than most of his teammates combined. Ditto Hogan, although I hate to see him chasing kicks on the half back line. JHK needs to work on doing the basics well before bringing out the party tricks. Garlett needs to do more than kick goals, although he is a vast improvement on what we've had previously.

I'd disagree that we're playing an outdated game style. Roos understands you have to win the uncontested possession, just as much as the contested. In fact, we won both against Adelaide and from memory we won the uncontested possession last week as well. Our problem was our midfielders didn't give us first use. That's where you can get run and spread, and therefore uncontested possession.

I think with regards to foot-speed, we are still severely hamstrung by a lack of it. We get murdered on the outside by teams with fast spread and quick feet (ala GWS). I know Sandilands is a giant, but Jamar and Pedersen actually did alright on him for most of the day. It was the way our midfielders were positioned at stoppages that constantly left us wanting. There was a moment on the wing in I think the third term, where a Freo bloke stood by himself on the outside of the stoppage (I think it was Fyfe or Pearce) and sure enough it was an easy handball out to them. Completely uncontested.

I would say though that Roos was outcoached yesterday. As you say, the decision to play McKenzie as sub was staggering. And why in hell did we not tag Fyfe?

Our tackling was also pathetic yesterday. We laid 58. The previous two week's we managed 84 (v. Adelaide) and 99 (v. Richmond) respectively. That's the benchmark we should aspire to every week.

Just watched the replay and can confirm that Grimes WASN'T on Ballantyne apart from briefly at the start of the last quarter. Ballantyne didn't play as a stay at home small forward, and Garland had him for a majority of the first 3 quarters when Ballantyne was in their forward 50. Howe had Mayne until he went forward, and Grimes picked him up on occasions. Grimes was also on Neale when he kicked his goal in the last.

So for anyone to say that Grimes held Ballantyne to 9 possessions is totally false.

I thought Salem played on Ballantyne before going off.

When Freo have it they attack along the flanks, but when they other side has possession they close up the midfield. It's not news, commentators have been talking about it for a while, using terms like "breathe-in-breathe-out". I wondered what they were talking about until seeing it yesterday. It's a bit like the old Collingwood strategy, but also closes up the corridor effectively so that a defender making an interception looking for a fast break through the corridor finds it unexpectedly congested and hard to spot a target. That's how they strangle sides.

I thought we worked around this well to get one of our earlier goals. I think it was Garlett. Tyson held it up well, went wide to ? and then they passed into the forward 50 and we scored. There just simply wasn't enough of this sort of thoughtful play. That's how you beat Freo. You also have to get the ball and we didn't.

Edited May 4, 2015 by AdamFarr

[Adam The God 30,421]

Listen to his after match presser BR, he continually says we can't compete with Freo and he's said that (about the top teams) on numerous occasions partly in an effort to manage supporter expectations. On one hand it might be good but I think it's questionable because the players hear it as well. Compare that to T Mc's response. I understand the "internal v external" message differential but I haven't heard Beverage or Hinkley (when he initially took over PA) continually say their teams can't compete.

Personally I'd rather hear Roos say that we can beat anyone if we play to our potential. I know it's stretching the envelope but at least I know he believes in the team and what he's doing.

I want McDonald's message not Roos.

I agree with this. I was thinking about it on the way home yesterday. He appears very detached to me. As if he is still in the media. Whenever he has the chance to belittle our past (we don't need to know this, it's happened, we were hopeless, let's move on) he does so. It's almost like a defence mechanism he's putting in place because he's fearful of the media sneering at him. I love a lot of what Roosy says, but there are some mixed or negative messages he's sending out in there as well.

to your point - the dogs certainly don't have the talent of Sydney - but they brought the effort for the full game....

It's a close one this. I'd take the Doggies young midfield over any other in the league right now. In a year or two they're gonna be unstoppable. It's all about consistency for them.

Edited May 4, 2015 by AdamFarr

[48 Year Now 97]

I would love be observe a post match review and see if what is being picked up by the coaches and relayed to the players are the same repetive weaknesses and issues we constantly talk about on forums like these. And stemming from the reviews what happens on an individual basis. Does Dom Tyson get some individual coaching on his kicking style or a reanactment of when he should have passed to Jamar. Similarly does Garlett get shown on the ground in a simulated environment that he only had to stop or do a side step to get around his opponent to be clear to kick that goal. Finally I hoped and hoped Watts had the fitness and confidence to say to Roos...i want Fyfe this week.

[Ted Lasso 19,549]

I think the doggies are on basically the path Roos wants to take us on, he's building the basis of the plan on contest, defense and aggression, which is very similar to what i feel Mcartney was doing at the dogs, so when he left they were pretty good in that area and now Beveridge has added the attacking side of things to the plan and they look fantastic

i think we're doing the same thing, Roos is setting the core values of the team and what we want to build around as a foundation and Goodwin will bring more attacking flair to layer on top of it.

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

I think the doggies are on basically the path Roos wants to take us on, he's building the basis of the plan on contest, defense and aggression, which is very similar to what i feel Mcartney was doing at the dogs, so when he left they were pretty good in that area and now Beveridge has added the attacking side of things to the plan and they look fantastic

i think we're doing the same thing, Roos is setting the core values of the team and what we want to build around as a foundation and Goodwin will bring more attacking flair to layer on top of it.

yes but as we all know, it's pointless if your midfield gets pantsed in the way ours has twice this year

do we have the midfield cattle going forward?

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

to be fair today we were missing Dawes, Jetta, Viney, Kent, Frost, Trengove and Petracca, if you count the loss of salem that's 8

So as i stated, that's 3 or 4 of our regular preferred 22 that are out C&B. At this stage i would say it's a little too early to put Frost up there as a top 22 shoe in until we've seen a decent slab of his performances over the remainder of this season. Not saying he hasn't been servicable either, just saying it's early days. But yes i would have him in above others at Casey at this point, Pedo the exception only because of experience and ability to impact the contest over 4 quarters (better tank).

So maybe we are talking 5 regulars right now. But whether it's 4 or 5 it's the same principle in that once we lose 3 to 4ish we quickly drop into another VERY ordinary pool at Casey which i feel impacts our performances. So we are looking at at least 2 more goes at the draft i feel in order to replace the chaff at the bottom of the list with some really decent, hard nosed but skilled (by FOOT and hand) footballers who have some toe and know how to play the game. And i say 2 goes as i feel we will need to replace our present bottom 5 to 6 that might be considered regulars at the moment and then add another 5 to 6 for depth at Casey to cover ourselves for "outs" every week. And that's just to become a competitive unit on a regular weekly basis aiming somewhere from 14th to 9th. Sorry 10th, how could i forget the Toiges have a moritorium on 9th.

As for Finals appearances i hate to think how far away that's going to be. Maybe 2017 if we get everything right at the recruiting table.

As for Trengove i would say he is highly unlikely to impact on this list going forward for various reasons. Just my opinion. And Petracca would no doubt add a little X factor into a fairly ordinary list but at the same time he would still be an unknown quantity being a rookie in his 1st season. I guess we will never know on that until next season which is a real tragedy for this young bloke.

Edited May 4, 2015 by Rusty Nails

[daisycutter 29,743]

That's just crap.

We were smashed in the middle from the first bounce and our two best clearance players were in there.

The only criticsm I have is that I would have gone with a second ruckman - Spencer - in the hope that he could tire out Sandi a bit more - but other than that what was Roos meant to do.

He tried Howe as a forward in the last term, what massive change were you looking for.

He had a terrible mismatch in the third term when Fyfe was on Michie, but it was only that term and he was trying something after Vince and Lumumba hadn't worked and Salem was off by then.

In terms of styles, he could have gone more man-to-man defensively, but that would have exposed the fact that we were missing the pace and run of Viney, Frost and Jetta.

That's just crap.

We were smashed in the middle from the first bounce and our two best clearance players were in there.

The only criticsm I have is that I would have gone with a second ruckman - Spencer - in the hope that he could tire out Sandi a bit more - but other than that what was Roos meant to do.

He tried Howe as a forward in the last term, what massive change were you looking for.

He had a terrible mismatch in the third term when Fyfe was on Michie, but it was only that term and he was trying something after Vince and Lumumba hadn't worked and Salem was off by then.

In terms of styles, he could have gone more man-to-man defensively, but that would have exposed the fact that we were missing the pace and run of Viney, Frost and Jetta.

a lot of that is quite true

but playing a very loose zone type defense with players often 20+ metres away from their opponent is a huge difference from being more accountable for your direct opponent and applying little contested possession pressure. it only played to freo's strengths

At least a man-to-man approach would have put some pressure on their superior skills

Yes we got smashed at centre bounces and here again our strategy in at least containing it was very poor tactically

i thought roos got pantsed tactically. players didn't help either

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

Everyone is useless in a resting ruck role against the Freo monsters.

Howe, not really sure where he is at, looks lazy or disinterested. Watts is a basketballer playing footy.

Freo are unreal, that midfield was just having a laugh today.

We looked sore all over the ground. We have a lot of young blokes who do need weeks off but no one to fill the void.

Tommy Mac the best defender in the game year to date. Dunn was good today.

Jamar didn't do too bad in a relative sense i reckon Cards but i hear where you're coming from. Sandy had something like 25 hit outs (15 or so to advantage) and the Russian roughly 15 with about 7 (or 9) to advantage if my memory serves me correctly. Im trying to recall the stats from Champion i saw today in the Sun so pls forgive if a little loose.

I didn't see the match Card so could be way off here but i assume that most of the time Clarke was in the middle we more than likely had Pedo in there against him. When i have witnessed Pedo into the ruck in past matches, whether it be under Neeld or Roos, i have noticed our output from the centre is just pitiful and the oppositions goes up a about 2 or 3 gears and we end up getting scored against from the middle even more easily than usual. Pedo is a horrid ruck option and the stats indicate this also in this match >> Clarke 16 hit outs (9 to advantage) and Pedo 7 hit outs (0 to advantage!). This is not Pedo's fault, i blame this on whoever feels he is an option here. He just isn't and the results will always be disastrous whenever it's tried. I would rather Dawes in here vs Pedo if we don't have another genuine ruck option.

I think Freo are one of the best drilled side out there Card and it shows in the numbers. We scored 0.1 from stopages and they had approx 7.4 or thereabouts. Many seemed to bag our disposal efficiency too but it wasn't that bad (compartively to previous weeks) @ approx 74%. Our average from the previous 4 rounds (all players who have played so far/average) was 64.4%. It appears we just turned it over a little too often with key clangers and the Dockers took full advantage of this also scoring about 6 goals from turnovers.

Where we did seem to fall down was our tackling numbers compared to previous weeks. We've been averaging 80+ tackles a match so far (not every match ...but that's the overall player average until last week) whereas this match we only managed 58. Although we matched the Dockers on the day (59) it's still down a massive 24ish tackles vs the previous weeks' average.

If you look at the first half vs the 2nd it's also a very interesting split showing the Dockers are a mile ahead of us tank/running wise (outside?) it would seem and/or just use the ball more effectively once they do have it. They had 100 more uncontested possessions! They had 5 more scoring shots in the first half which is enough but not disastrous. And we almost matched them in the conversion rate (55.6% vs 57.1%) by a small margin leaving us down only 20 points. However, as we all know, the 2nd half result was shizenhauzin. A 9.1% conversion rate. Probably an indication of the quality of the opponent and their pressure. We also had roughly only 15 tackles inside our own 50 vs about 29 for Freo. That's a massive gap and shows we just aren't able to put enough pressure in our 50 and keep the ball in for long enough periods...nor convert later in the game against quality opposition when we do get it in there.

Edited May 4, 2015 by Rusty Nails

[Wunders 397]

a lot of that is quite true

but playing a very loose zone type defense with players often 20+ metres away from their opponent is a huge difference from being more accountable for your direct opponent and applying little contested possession pressure. it only played to freo's strengths

At least a man-to-man approach would have put some pressure on their superior skills

Yes we got smashed at centre bounces and here again our strategy in at least containing it was very poor tactically

i thought roos got pantsed tactically. players didn't help either

I am still suprised that Roos wanted to play 1 lose in defense & let it continue for the whole match. I really enjoy watching us playing 1v1 hard footy! I'm sure there was a reason for it in the first quarter (e.g. they had 7 defenders), but i felt that they controlled the game as a result.

Hopefully back to 1v1 next week Go Dees!

[Gator 17,479]

...I'll let people debate day to day matters. Heavens ProDee seems to think I've run out of ideas while he's busy posting the same thing 18 times in yet another Jack Watts bashing thread. Talk about a vacant space, he's obviously working on the theory that if he says it enough he must be right. At least he's convinced himself.

I've posted in two threads on the first page. There's much I could say, but I generally can't be bothered and don't have the time.

Watts has been a hobby horse for years, so I can't help myself. And yes, I've been "convinced" for years. Some see things quicker than others.

As for Roos' realism ? I agree with you to an extent. There's that fine line between understanding and enunciating what's going on and rationalising your way to failure. Afterall, we become our thoughts and the players pick up on his public pronouncements. I reckon Roos sees himself as an educator and likes teaching the media as much as his own players. He'd do well to hold back a bit.

That said, as BRFE has already stated, for the last 3 years Harwicke embarrassingly carries on how they can beat anybody, and they're nothing but a disappointment.

Edited May 4, 2015 by ProDee

[Adam The God 30,421]

I said before the season that Tyson was our most important player in 2015. The fact that he's been deplorable is telling. We get murdered at the stoppages and it's hard to fathom what's wrong with Dom. He's far better than what he's producing.

Put Mundy, Fyfe and Barlow in our team and we win the game. If you can't compete around the heat of the contest you're an also-ran.

Suspect Tyson is playing injured, but still, that's no excuse. Hoping he'll come good soon.

[Adam The God 30,421]

[Pedersen] was nowhere near as useful as Dawes today. I can't believe I have read that. Pedo was serviceable and did ok, but Dawes creates more if a contest and gets in better positions. We missed him today

Pedersen doesn't get past a jog when he chases. He sauntered through three or four times right in front of us on the MCC wing yesterday. Infuriating. Reminded me of the Neeld days.

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

yes but as we all know, it's pointless if your midfield gets pantsed in the way ours has twice this year

do we have the midfield cattle going forward?

A long way from mashing up anyone outside the bottom 6 i would think curry.

You can dress it up as much as you iike we just don't have a superstar (or 2 haha) in the offing through the mid field at this point. I haven't seen our mid field dominate anyone in the comp over a full season....ever. I would also argue we still don't have one A grader either, let alone a superstar.

Alot better than we were 2 seasons ago though but we all know how bad that was.

[Adam The God 30,421]

yes but as we all know, it's pointless if your midfield gets pantsed in the way ours has twice this year

do we have the midfield cattle going forward?

No one is saying our midfield is complete. We have absolutely no depth, we lack outside skill and pace. That will be added to at the end of this year and the next. I hope.

[ILLDieADemon 804]

You can't be serious. Yes they are very good, but put that aside for a moment and just look back on how WE played. It was messy, weak, lazy, stupid football like we have gotten used to in previous years. Yes, we are generally better now, but in two of our 5 games this year we have been absolutely putrid

If someone else had replied to my massage I would have read it but it's Curry and Beer to I won't bother because I know it going to be a garbage comment.

[jnrmac 20,189]

No one is saying our midfield is complete. We have absolutely no depth, we lack outside skill and pace. That will be added to at the end of this year and the next. I hope.

We lack inside class as well. Its not good.

[grazman 7,451]

As for Roos' realism ? I agree with you to an extent. There's that fine line between understanding and enunciating what's going on and rationalising your way to failure. Afterall, we become our thoughts and the players pick up on his public pronouncements. I reckon Roos sees himself as an educator and likes teaching the media as much as his own players. He'd do well to hold back a bit.

Interestingly on 360 tonight they made the point that the media was just as pivotal if not more so than the coach in terms of players self belief. Which is probably why both Hardwick's and Malthouse's comments are so meaningless, the evidence refutes the assertions.

The real positive about having Roos is that he buys the club, and by extension the players, time. A lot of the potentially negative media scrutiny during our development has been averted to some degree by having a coach with both credibility and media gravitas. This year we are starting to hear (albeit periodically) that we are improving and on the right track. I'll take that for now. Obviously the gap between our best (which has improved incrementally) and our worst (not so much) has not closed, though the frequency is lessening.

As for what difference Hinkley or Beveridge coaching the MFC would make... its purely conjecture. There are so many variables in footy and there's no saying that the results with our list would be any different. Roos did point out that BM did three years of development at the Doggies that Beveridge is seeing the benefit of. We've had one under Roos having gone backwards under Neeld.

Edited May 4, 2015 by grazman

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

yes but as we all know, it's pointless if your midfield gets pantsed in the way ours has twice this year

do we have the midfield cattle going forward?

No one is saying our midfield is complete. We have absolutely no depth, we lack outside skill and pace. That will be added to at the end of this year and the next. I hope.

We lack inside class as well. Its not good.

Guys while i agree the midfield is a big issue we have to keep it (Sunday's match) in context in terms of where this list is (STILL) at. As much as it pains me to say that.

We beat the tiges with an average number of games of 80.9 vs 66.5 vs the Fockers where we were totally outblitzed 82 v 126

That's a 64 game turnaround on the previous week and effectively 2 additional seasons of game time experience, engines and know how across the field.

Not saying it's down to this alone. I realise without experience AND talent we are always going to struggle against top 8 sides. Although with enough talent and effort you should be able to perform above expectations as the Doggies have shown us.

[titan_uranus 25,045]

Firstly, Freo are absolutely the real deal and barring a bad run with injuries are certain to finish top two. The media has perpetrated this myth that they dropped away badly last year but they finished 3^rd after the home and away, lost a cracking final away to Sydney in the wet, and had Port on toast the following week – they didn’t kick straight and paid the price. You only had to watch them when we got the ball yesterday to see how well drilled they are. Ross Lyon is just a fantastic coach.

The no. 1 factor for our loss yesterday was the centre clearances. I have never seen us, even in the real dark days, get smashed at the centre bounces like we were yesterday. It was a procession, particularly in the first quarter (no wonder Roosy gave our boys a spray) and the last 20 minutes. Sandilands was obviously a key but Jamar was competitive, however even when he got his hands on it Freo took it away. Not only were they getting the first possession but quite often the takeaways were super clean. Mundy and Fyfe are guns – at one point in the second quarter, Fyfe had 4 clearances, followed by a whole host of players on 1. Give him the Brownlow now. Their midfield depth is fantastic too – Barlow, Neale, Hill, Suban, Pearce.

Our decision making is better than it used to be but still hurts us. Freo’s ability to get back in numbers seemed to stifle our willingness to take a risk and move the ball on at times, particularly in the first quarter. We were stagnant. Jonesy had two or three bad turnovers early with either telegraphed kicks or poor choices and that was a bit unusual for him. Having said that, he wasn’t Robinson Crusoe.

Agree with most of this. I would say that as much as it was Fremantle having players behind the ball, it was our forwards being too deep in defence which stifled us. I know we were being well beaten in the clearances but just having forwards standing around in the defensive 50 doesn't solve that. We then were totally out of structures for the times when we did work hard enough to get the clearance.

Listen to his after match presser BR, he continually says we can't compete with Freo and he's said that (about the top teams) on numerous occasions partly in an effort to manage supporter expectations. On one hand it might be good but I think it's questionable because the players hear it as well. Compare that to T Mc's response. I understand the "internal v external" message differential but I haven't heard Beverage or Hinkley (when he initially took over PA) continually say their teams can't compete.

Personally I'd rather hear Roos say that we can beat anyone if we play to our potential. I know it's stretching the envelope but at least I know he believes in the team and what he's doing.

I want McDonald's message not Roos.

I didn't say I saw it coming Goodvibes, I said that Roos told me it was coming so I wasn't surprised.

And what do I really want to say? I want to be able to critique Roos and have a debate about the issue rather than an avalanche of posts telling me I have an agenda or "I'm a bit rich". It seems anything "Roos" is off the table for discussion. I don't go along with that. Some here say Roos was out coached on the weekend and that maybe so but given our team and theirs I find that very difficult to assess and frankly I don't have the knowledge to comment so I don't.

But I don't think it's unreasonable to identify points of different with other coaches in the AFL and discuss them. I posted this some time ago and it hardly got a reply.

http://demonland.com/forums/index.php?/topic/38249-post-match-discussion-round-3/?p=1077083

I'll let people debate day to day matters. Heavens ProDee seems to think I've run out of ideas while he's busy posting the same thing 18 times in yet another Jack Watts bashing thread. Talk about a vacant space, he's obviously working on the theory that if he says it enough he must be right. At least he's convinced himself.

I'm more interested in other issues but all I get is "agenda" accusations with no discussion.

I don't care if people aren't interested in what I'm interested in but it would be good if posters, including you, played the ball. TBH I was surprised by your response but there you go.

You don't help yourself re: people such as me using phrases like 'agenda' when you only post these sorts of views after losses. That thread you've linked to, the same message posted, funnily enough, just after the Adelaide loss. After the Richmond win? Nothing. You also seem to work into your posts elements of 'you all should have listened to me' (e.g. 'I posted this some time ago and it hardly got a reply'), which also doesn't help.

That to one side, I agree more with rjay and ProDee. If Roos went the other way and sounded more like Hardwick and Malthouse, he'd sound just as delusional as they do. And on McDonald's response - the fact that he rejects the notion that they're inherently better than us and says we could have beaten them, doesn't that go against your argument? You say Roos' message must be having a negative impact on the players' mindset, but obviously that's not the case for TMac.

[Adam The God 30,421]

We lack inside class as well. Its not good.

I agree. It's certainly not complete.

Guys while i agree the midfield is a big issue we have to keep it (Sunday's match) in context in terms of where this list is (STILL) at. As much as it pains me to say that.

We beat the tiges with an average number of games of 80.9 vs 66.5 vs the Fockers where we were totally outblitzed 82 v 126

That's a 64 game turnaround on the previous week and effectively 2 additional seasons of game time experience, engines and know how across the field.

Not saying it's down to this alone. I realise without experience AND talent we are always going to struggle against top 8 sides. Although with enough talent and effort you should be able to perform above expectations as the Doggies have shown us.

I thought that's what I was doing. I think it'll take another two years before we'll be really competitive (hopefully) against the top 4 sides.

Edited May 4, 2015 by AdamFarr

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

If someone else had replied to my massage I would have read it but it's Curry and Beer to I won't bother because I know it going to be a garbage comment.

aww diddums

"I think the boys can hang there heads high after that performance considering were we have come from."

ill be on the lookout for more now, and i make no apologies if your precious little feelings get hurt

hang their heads high. fmd hang yours in shame

[Phadraig 760]

I havn't read through all this thread so sorry if someone else mentioned this but I was looking through the stats tonight and the centre clearances for us were 4 to Jones and 2 to Jamar. Fremantle got 18 centre clearances compared to our 6. It is obvious that our midfield is our weakest link by far and I think we should have been a little bit further behind at the end of the first quarter, but I felt we played fairly well after quarter time until 3QT. I wonder if we had kicked a goal or 2 in those 10 or so minutes or so that we had dominated in the last quarter if the game had been different. I don't think we would have won or should have but I think it would have been a lot closer than it was.