Post match Discussion "Fire away"

[Mardo 46]

On 4/2/2016 at 1:50 PM, olisik said:

Joke of a decision not to play Dunn. Seriously  15 [...] marks to Daniher and they decide to leave our most experienced tall defender out for Lamumba 

Agreed - can't understand why he was not even on the interchange.

[old dee 22,852]

16 minutes ago, Redleg said:

I have recovered. I am not furious anymore, now I am just bloody angry.

Calm down Mr. Leg I suggest a banana daiquiri slipped slowly while considering your good health.

[Mazer Rackham 14,969]

16 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Apparently Matthew Lloyd and Terry Wallace have criticised Jesse's poor body language on field.  Bernie Vince has come to his defence saying the delivery was poor. 

Nonetheless, whatever one thinks of Lloyd and Wallace I think it is a good thing that the media stop treating Jesse like some sort of demigod and remind him he has a long way to go.  Then maybe the primadonna antics will stop - if for no other reason that it is poor teamwork by Jesse.

[TL;DNR = if he's going to behave like a star, he has to produce like a star.]

"The delivery was poor". When you have three defenders surrounding a motionless forward who wants the ball to land in his lap, then "good" delivery is not something that's possible.

Compare with (shudder) Daniher. Ran all over the place and made our defenders work for it. And got some birthday presents due to the confusion that created. (I accept that it shouldn't have been confusing.)

Compare with JRiewoldt on Fri night. He has (finally) been told by Hardwick not to roam far and wide like a pretend midfielder, but to stay close to goal. And he did. And he led out of goal. And he got the pill, and kicked crucial goals. They probably should have won. Point is, he gave his midfielders something to work with, and made life tough for the defenders.

If our guy wants to be a bigger and heavier Howe, of marginal usefulness, then he will be more trouble than he's worth. Especially if he has to be treated with kid gloves, which is how it's shaping up. His future price tag is going to [censored] up the management of the salary cap as it is, so he's got to produce accordingly. Otherwise we're better off without him.

It's a team sport. If you can't hack that, play tennis.

[Willmoy1947 3,773]

There should never have to be a soul search like this one, this weekend, EVER

[Mardo 46]

On 4/2/2016 at 1:50 PM, olisik said:

Joke of a decision not to play Dunn. Seriously  15 [...] marks to Daniher and they decide to leave our most experienced tall defender out for Lamumba 

Agreed - can't understand why he was not even on the interchange.

So many points to raise for the game just gone _ frustrating to see some 'in play' decisions made that would have gotten a junior footy player roasted by the coach.

So far as player changes :

Can't understand why Dunn was not played; not even interchange ?? ( as others have commented here )  He would have halted Daniher's flight.  

Hogan needs to be trialed at half forward or forward flank ; even if he is officially FF. He needs to get more of the ball from the center to stop the 'tag' and also to prove his worth by putting some of his big body into the competition for the ball.

Obvious players also need to flipped to VFL just to get the message across. 

Fearless head down & push through play by Ben Kennedy - Roosy can get the whole team to watch his game and just try to emulate that commitment to the ball. 

OTHER POINTs : I compare missing set shots in front of goal like shooting a '20' in darts OR hoops in Basketball. You practice, practice and you practice and then you practice some more and then you kick your own ass when you miss and then you practice until it is not an option to have continual 'shocka' kicks in front of goal. What is happening in this game where EVERY WEEK this happens and it is becoming so common it is deplorable. Really puts me off watching so called 'Professional Football.'

ALSO : Last quarter against the Dons - Not only continually kicking the ball to  3 on 1 comps , but also kicking ( twice blatantly ) to a no advantage comp down the side of the ground where the SUN IS IN YOUR EYES on the receiving end. I just could not believe this play. Just was really poor decision making for a defence exit option. Just made me angry....er 

Small rant - there where multiple frustrating points - I don't want to get started.

[jnrmac 18,954]

Also getting sick of Roos saying "they did this" or "they didn't do that". His press conference was nearly as bad as Mark Neeld's first one.

It's "us" Paul. We're in it together. You can head off into the sunset with your "moolions" but we are stuck here in the twilight zone forever.

"they were tired". Wow. 

[old dee 22,852]

5 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Also getting sick of Roos saying "they did this" or "they didn't do that". His press conference was nearly as bad as Mark Neeld's first one.

It's "us" Paul. We're in it together. You can head off into the sunset with your "moolions" but we are stuck here in the twilight zone forever.

"they were tired". Wow. 

jnr I am more annoyed with "we did not pick the right team"!

So we are paying the FD $millions and they don't know who to pick?

Blind Freddy could see not playing one of frost or Dunn was an error on Thursday night.

[Gator 16,892]

As someone who hasn't seen the game I'm guessing that our new structures and gameplan went out the window ?

We've been trying to attack from turnovers up the ground closer to our goal and not from near the opposition's goal, but I'm assuming that last year's fare was once again on offer ?

[Demon Dynasty 15,421]

19 hours ago, Brownie said:

I just signed up here to say you hit the nail on the head.

i thought Roos was the right guy to build their belief and to teach them to be ruthless but it still doesn't seem to be working.

it wasn't a selection problem on Saturday. we had the talent on the field to demolish a second tier team and we just fell apart again.

Roos has talked about the fragility in the past but it's still here in spades.

what do we do now?

Welcome to D'land Brownie

It's a great question. All we can do is keep supporting when needed (aka fronting up to games like Sat). Cheer if they do well and voice our disapproval and views on here and to fellow supporters IRL if they stink it up and discuss/pontificate. And the end of the day what we say will result in diddly squat on the field of course. We all know that. Most of what happens on here is pure venting and letting out our joy or in most cases as a demon supporter...frustrations. Oh, there's also some good fund raising stuff and player support that goes on so some of what happens does have an impact at club level to some degree!

Having said that, you don't need to be Einstein to see we are still fragile but i think Roos has made significant steps to try and rectify it. Will he finally be capable of getting us to a level where we will win games we are expected to win on form? I have no idea. Maybe this wont take place for another 2 to 3 years under Goody. Maybe not even under Goody.

As to why Saturday occurred i can think of a number of reasons but the 3 main ones for me are;

1. Our leaders and top line players aren't quite up to the level of some other club's top liners at this stage. Jones, Vince and to a lessor degree Viney (due to his short time in the game) are very solid but not what you would call regular potential match winners or match turners. Occasionally we might see a stellar game from one of them that is the diff between winning/losing a tight one. But we rarely see it from all 3 at once or on a regular basis from even one of them. Mind you the AFL obviously has a limited number of game changers otherwise everyone would have them. A few clubs have the odd one here or there that make the diff and the top clubs have multiple players at this level. I guess i'm referring to A graders and above (ie., champions). On their day some of our top liners perform at an A grade level as mentioned but not on a regular basis. Some perform solidly week to week (Jones/Vince/Viney) but aren't quite at the level Roos would be wanting or expecting at some point. That's not to say this may not be just around the corner?!!!

2. As Steve the Pants Man has put forward in another Post (see "Analysing Yesterday's Game"), i think we truly lack balance. We are heavily weighted to inside ball extraction and don't do so well once it's on the outside with quick run/carry or transition (disposal by foot and to a lessor degree by hand). I think our skill levels by hand getting the ball away from congestion has improved though. But it's what happens after we get the ball away that is really hurting us. On Saturday this was also our inability to catch/tackle our opponents who used the ball better and spread better once they got hold of it. The outside issue needs some serious work. Even coming off HB where we have some run (TMac / Lumumba) but where the ability to hit targets is generally below par vs the rest of the comp. In addition when a player does decide to take the game on and runs it out off HB like the 2 mentioned they often find themselves in a horrible situation at the end of their run. I see this problem as 2 fold. Backmen (and mid fielders) need to be able to recognise when to play on (fast) and when to slow things down. I don't think TMac or Lumumba understand this aspect. They tend to just run and gun most of the time rather than assess and then decide what's best based on what's happening up the field and around them. They also tend to overdo the run, getting themselves into a fix but also we lack hard workers up the field presenting them with multiple lead options when they see them running a la Hawks. We do this but it doesn't happen often anough and long enough for the entire match. I often see players standing around with hands on hips who could be offering this option if they lead as they appear exhausted. Maybe this is a fitness issue in general, or maybe it only applies to some in the group who haven't attained elite levels of fitness yet (eg., Kent).

3. Mental scares are still there for some. And some just haven't learned the level it takes to win regular at AFL level....yet. Maybe some or a number of them aren't able to get there and will need to be moved on.

There is also an old saying.... Attitudes are contagious - Is yours worth catching?

Our new key forward needs to clean his up....quick smart!

Given where we've come from i don't think we can argue that Roos isn't the right person for the job. We can only hope he's instilled an elite level program for all present players and anyone who is yet to begin going forward. Maybe we are at a point where Roos has those structures in place throughout the club and all we need now is the existing player group to attain their best to show the improvement on the field. Then we just keep improving as we roll through the new recruits each season. Slowly turning ourselves from the ugly duckling (pre Roos era) to a beautiful Swan!! Even if it's a black swan that looks and quacks a little like the other white one up north but maybe isn't quite as effective for a while. It would be a decent base to go forward on i reckon.

Edited April 4, 2016 by Rusty Nails

[Skuit 9,169]

13 minutes ago, ProDee said:

As someone who hasn't seen the game I'm guessing that our new structures and gameplan went out the window ?

We've been trying to attack from turnovers up the ground closer to our goal and not from near the opposition's goal, but I'm assuming that last year's fare was once again on offer ?

Basically. We didn't win clean ball out of the middle and the Dons held onto possession. Equaled more chasing. So then less forward defensive pressure and spread from advantage. The boys looked tired as well. 

[jnrmac 18,954]

1 hour ago, old dee said:

jnr I am more annoyed with "we did not pick the right team"!

So we are paying the FD $millions and they don't know who to pick?

Blind Freddy could see not playing one of frost or Dunn was an error on Thursday night.

I agree. They may not have noticed that Mr Porn Mo kicked 5 goals straight last time he played us to win the game. 'Nah, he won't do that again. Lets go with the small fwd line Jade, waddya reckon?' 'Sounds good boss'

[Gator 16,892]

7 minutes ago, Skuit said:

Basically. We didn't win clean ball out of the middle and the Dons held onto possession. Equaled more chasing. So then less forward defensive pressure and spread from advantage. The boys looked tired as well. 

Where were we attacking from ?  Attacks start from turnovers.  We were either regaining possession/s close to their goal, near the middle of the ground, or our attacking half.

Last year it was predominantly in the opposition's half of the ground.  I'm guessing it was the same on the weekend.  Hawthorn regain possession far closer to their own goal, which is what we're aspiring to do.

I get that they had 128 more disposals, so perhaps you're saying it was problematic.  Thanks.

[Deecisive 1,651]

We were counting our win before we played the game, we thought we could be cute and now worry about it, that somewhere along the line we would kick into action and beat them. but we didn't.   We have a proud history of loosing games that we are favourites in over the last 5 years or so.

The age had a picture of the essendon banner "Red band black and damn proud" surrounded by a load of supporters. I suggest they get a copy of this an blow it up and put it up on the wall to remind them you never take any opponent lightly,

[Skuit 9,169]

19 minutes ago, ProDee said:

Where were we attacking from ?  Attacks start from turnovers.  We were either regaining possession/s close to their goal, near the middle of the ground, or our attacking half.

Last year it was predominantly in the opposition's half of the ground.  I'm guessing it was the same on the weekend.  Hawthorn regain possession far closer to their own goal, which is what we're aspiring to do.

I get that they had 128 more disposals, so perhaps you're saying it was problematic.  Thanks.

Sorry. I was basically attempting to say that the issues from the center and high opposition possession made it difficult to determine if there was a reversion in our game plan or if it just wasn't possible to get the high energy forward press and defensive pressure going after chasing so much and being moved out of position all day. We were slower on turnovers and so generally attacking from deeper in defense, which then also contributes to the bombing it in as the entry kick is being triggered further from the goals. Well, at least that's how I remember it. I lost interest fairly early.

[Skuit 9,169]

19 minutes ago, ProDee said:

Where were we attacking from ?  Attacks start from turnovers.  We were either regaining possession/s close to their goal, near the middle of the ground, or our attacking half.

Last year it was predominantly in the opposition's half of the ground.  I'm guessing it was the same on the weekend.  Hawthorn regain possession far closer to their own goal, which is what we're aspiring to do.

I get that they had 128 more disposals, so perhaps you're saying it was problematic.  Thanks.

Sorry. I was basically attempting to say that the issues from the center and high opposition possession made it difficult to determine if there was a reversion in our game plan or if it just wasn't possible to get the high energy forward press and defensive pressure going after chasing so much and being moved out of position all day. We were slower on turnovers and so generally attacking from deeper in defense, which then also contributes to the bombing it in as the entry kick is being triggered further from the goals. Well, at least that's how I remember it. I lost interest fairly early.

[CHF 2,601]

Taking a look or two at the replays is a difficult thing to do but trying to look for the problems and causes is an interesting thing to do. You do not need the brain power of a rocket surgeon to identify them.

Roos says that some of the players looked tired and others were 'big headed".  If the players were tired in the second round of matches then the club has major problems. It is the fault of the conditioning staff and coaches to send out players that are tried. If the players, any of them, are bigheaed going out thinking all they have to do is turn up to get the 4 points then that is the fault of the coaching staff. (I bet the club cringe looking at the articles on the website with talk of two in a row).

If we made bad decisions at selection that is the fault of the match committee. 

Being second to the ball, hanging back to let others do the work and finger pointing during the game sits squarely with the players and the on-field leadership.

Allowing the same situation such as Hogan not leading and allowing himself to double and triple teamed from the first quarter and through the game is the fault of unimaginative and inflexible gameday coaching. The defensive coach should be asked to explain how Daniher can end up in a marking contest with Nathan Jones, Jetta and Garland and told it will not happen again if he values his job. 

If this all happens again this week we are going to be reduced to a rabble.

Norf's midfield will carve us up, their forwards will mark every thing in sight and they will kick 20/25 goals. What to do? clear out the forward 50 and try to get Hogan one on one leave him space to lead into. The delivery last week was so slow that there was no room for any movement once the ball floated in. The rest of the forwards play in the middle and jam it up to try to cut down Norf's midfield effectiveness. The midfield need to run and run hard in numbers with both the ball in hand and when chasing the ball. Against the Drug Cheats we had no numbers at the ball or in support of the player with the ball. Defence, Get to your man and play him all day. Last week the defence spent as much time finger pointing and discussing who goes where and to whom as they did playing footy. absolute rubbish.

Across the board the club needs to lift from last week. the players, the coaching staff, all the support staff, They need to understand all the work they have done over the last 6/7 months is on the line. It will all be for nothing if they drop their heads and play deeply unintelligent football as they did last week.

We have played one and a half good quarters of football out of 8 so far. Half the first quarter and all the last quarter in the first round. Just not good enough and not enough to give the supporters any hope.

[praha 10,278]

4 hours ago, stuie said:

True, because we provide spirit every second week and we're due this week.

 

Every second week suggests consistency. 

There's nothing consistent about this team. It is completely and utterly random. Like the creation of life in the universe.

Dare I say Melbourne is less like intelligent life and more like a black hole, sucking in anything and everything that gets close to it.

 

[Demon Dynasty 15,421]

3 hours ago, willmoy said:

There should never have to be a soul search like this one, this weekend, EVER

Probably happens at least once or twice every year with the MFC i'm afraid Willmoy. I was going through another groundhog day today when listening to Dermy on SEN. Almost every year for the last 4 to 5 years i think i've listened to him being questioned on where we went so wrong after losing what should have been a very winnable game of footy. The only difference in his asseement this time around was he said he sat up till 2am Sunday morning (like a numbnut...his description) assessing the Hulk for the entire game.

When a season goes by and we finally aren't doing a sould search (or 2 or 3) this might mean we have finally turned the corner

Edited April 4, 2016 by Rusty Nails

[bing181 8,165]

1 hour ago, Deecisive said:

We were counting our win before we played the game, we thought we could be cute and now worry about it, that somewhere along the line we would kick into action and beat them ...

As happened with Port in the NAB, and GWS in Round 1. The players must have thought that they could coast all game, do enough to stay in touch, then run over them in the 4th. Trouble is, it's a bit late to suddenly start playing like you mean it against a team with their tails up and everything to play for.

[Ron Burgundy 8,584]

I reckon we're going to be okay this year.

That said, I absolutely loathed our performance on Sat.

Really hated it.

 

[Binmans PA 26,053]

7 hours ago, S_T said:

How the media spin things and whether the supporters are optimistic or pessimistic, none of that should really matter.  It's how the football department internally review and process things.  They can't allow the players to get ahead of themselves.

We had a solid preseason but an objective view of the NAB games was that although we won them all, we were not all that good, let alone "terrific".

We won Round 1, BUT we were out played in many areas, made too many mistakes, GWS was far from at their best.  Basically we got away with one after playing one good quarter.

I look forward to the day that I don't typically fear losing games we should win.

 

This is essentially what I said earlier in this thread. It's staggering to think the club was still putting spin on everything having delivered for only one quarter. Surely, internally Roos and co were displeased? Surely. Happy to get away with the 4 points in round 1, but aware that unless we played at least one bloody good quarter of football against the cheats, we'd lose. 

7 hours ago, ProDee said:

Looking back, there were warning signings when we scraped over the line against a severely undermanned Dogs in the NAB practice match.

Of the Dogs squad of 25 just 7 played round 1 against Freo.

Conversely, 20 of our players went on to play round 1.

Spot on. When you go back and examine all four wins, even the three against undermanned sides, we barely managed two quarters in each game. I'd argued we pretty much played one quarter of good footy last week (as S_T also points out).

There are worrying signs pointing towards a few potential blowouts this year unless we become more consistent (which we've shown no sign of doing), namely both those Hawthorn games. I'm talking 100 point beltings.

So disappointing. A week ago I was saying that I hope we'd have a season without 100 point beltings, but when you can switch off like we did against Essendon (where the margin frankly flattered us), then you're bound to lose a couple of games by a long, long way to far better opposition.

6 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Apparently Matthew Lloyd and Terry Wallace have criticised Jesse's poor body language on field.  Bernie Vince has come to his defence saying the delivery was poor. 

Nonetheless, whatever one thinks of Lloyd and Wallace I think it is a good thing that the media stop treating Jesse like some sort of demigod and remind him he has a long way to go.  Then maybe the primadonna antics will stop - if for no other reason that it is poor teamwork by Jesse.

The frustrating thing is what the hell are the coaches for, if not to bring his body language into line? I'm sorry, but we saw this on occasion last year too and it still hasn't been addressed. Earn your money, FD.

Edited April 4, 2016 by AdamFarr

[dee-luded 2,958]

On 03/04/2016 at 0:51 PM, Sir Why You Little said:

What a Blight on The Coaches & Leadership group to allow that mind set to fester

a win by 15 goals was possible yesterday, but that requires Sustained Hard Work...

yep sack em all & start again..   fancy anyone ever getting overconfident ?    particularly youngsters.   get rid of 'em.

[Binmans PA 26,053]

5 hours ago, Ted Fidge said:

[TL;DNR = if he's going to behave like a star, he has to produce like a star.]

"The delivery was poor". When you have three defenders surrounding a motionless forward who wants the ball to land in his lap, then "good" delivery is not something that's possible.

Compare with (shudder) Daniher. Ran all over the place and made our defenders work for it. And got some birthday presents due to the confusion that created. (I accept that it shouldn't have been confusing.)

Compare with JRiewoldt on Fri night. He has (finally) been told by Hardwick not to roam far and wide like a pretend midfielder, but to stay close to goal. And he did. And he led out of goal. And he got the pill, and kicked crucial goals. They probably should have won. Point is, he gave his midfielders something to work with, and made life tough for the defenders.

If our guy wants to be a bigger and heavier Howe, of marginal usefulness, then he will be more trouble than he's worth. Especially if he has to be treated with kid gloves, which is how it's shaping up. His future price tag is going to [censored] up the management of the salary cap as it is, so he's got to produce accordingly. Otherwise we're better off without him.

It's a team sport. If you can't hack that, play tennis.

Not excusing Jesse. He has to get better, but Daniher has played 50 games and Jesse has played 22. We do need some perspective here. I just hope the FD are pointing out these things and aren't afraid to tell him that he needs to work a lot harder if he's going to fulfil his incredible potential.

4 hours ago, jnrmac said:

Also getting sick of Roos saying "they did this" or "they didn't do that". His press conference was nearly as bad as Mark Neeld's first one.

It's "us" Paul. We're in it together. You can head off into the sunset with your "moolions" but we are stuck here in the twilight zone forever.

"they were tired". Wow. 

Pretty hard to build a strong culture when you're not in it together. 

3 hours ago, ProDee said:

As someone who hasn't seen the game I'm guessing that our new structures and gameplan went out the window ?

We've been trying to attack from turnovers up the ground closer to our goal and not from near the opposition's goal, but I'm assuming that last year's fare was once again on offer ?

We were implementing the forward press from our kick outs, but that was about it. We just simply didn't work hard enough to get into space or cover the opposite side of the ground. You really could see every Essendon switch coming and we were just constantly 10 or so metres behind our opponents.

We did create one or two goals from the press though, but then we seemed to put the cue in the rack each time. As if it'd all fall into place after that.

Because our blokes weren't working hard enough, it meant that we saw Neeld-like football. We'd take a mark. Go back a few paces, assess our options and then because we'd taken too long to dispose of it, we'd kick to contests, often 2 or 3 Bombers v 1 Demon.

3 hours ago, ProDee said:

Where were we attacking from ?  Attacks start from turnovers.  We were either regaining possession/s close to their goal, near the middle of the ground, or our attacking half.

Last year it was predominantly in the opposition's half of the ground.  I'm guessing it was the same on the weekend.  Hawthorn regain possession far closer to their own goal, which is what we're aspiring to do.

I get that they had 128 more disposals, so perhaps you're saying it was problematic.  Thanks.

We weren't attacking. We went sideways from stoppages. We went long to contests from full back. We would lose possession often too close to our goal. It was an absolutely limp and tepid performance. One of the worst under Roos. Our defence managed to repel some opposition attacks, but as I mentioned, it basically came straight back because we'd kick to contests where we were outnumbered.

[jnrmac 18,954]

12 hours ago, dee-luded said:

yep sack em all & start again..   fancy anyone ever getting overconfident ?    particularly youngsters.   get rid of 'em.

Thats why we have a coaching department. But its run by a consultant who says 'they' a lot. 

[Dr. Gonzo 22,415]

On 4/3/2016 at 11:21 AM, waynewussell said:

well, I like to read these threads after a win or a loss. I like to get the view from other perspectives. Quite often I am staggered by how far removed from reality some 'supporters' find themselves after an upset. This chatter about Roos and Goodwin having different game plans is hilarious! The suggestion that Roos only won a premiership at Sydney because of one mark is very similar in tone to the description of Hogan's dummy-spit when things don't go his way. The reality is, we didn't play well in a game we were expected to win. That's it! That's all of it! We were, however, ahead and looking likely to win half way through the final stanza. The analysis of why we struggled and why Essendon prevailed is enlightening. The Bombers got up for a game that was earmarked as a line in the sand moment. Our blokes couldn't counter the wave of emotion and intent. Viney doesn't suddenly become a lesser Viney! Oliver doesn't suddenly become an unworthy Rising Star! Gawn doesn't suddenly return to the VFL scrap heap! Roos doesn't suddenly become Mark Neeld! After a fine start to the 2016 season we got set back on our heels. The way we respond will tell us something of our future direction.

I was furious watching the game on Saturday, absolutely furious. Moreso than I have been watching a game of footy for some time. It was worse than 186 or 148 because in those games I was just kinda numb to what was going on as it was an utter capitulation. This was different. If the Melbourne players had have tried with just a fraction more effort than they showed we would have won by 5 goals no problem.

What is worrisome is the team seems incapable of setting things back on course after a poor start. Quarter time/half time/ 3/4 time all offered a chance to reset and go again but each quarter we came out with more of the same. When we did get a couple in a row and hit the lead in the 2nd and 4th quarters the players again seemed to revert to cruise control and think it would just happen again.

It reminds of our start to last year in a way - beat GC in round 1, capitulate to GWS in round 2. Lets see how they back up this week, if they can bring the effort to North and take the game up to them I'll be happy win, lose or draw and it will set up our next month off footy. If they bring the same tired, lazy attitudes it's gonna be another long year.