Analysing yesterday's game -

[No10 323]

4 minutes ago, AdamFarr said:

Then you get someone else who can play their role consistently. Garland is 28 this month. If he can't find consistency in his game by now (or even two years ago), he never will. Instead, they've given him a leadership position. I can only assume this is to motivate him into an aggressive player that takes the game on more on game day. Either way, it certainly hasn't worked.

Nobody interested in my passage of play, but I totally agree with AFarr.   Garland has been playing for TMacs whole career, why is Bugg the one that knows to cover him?   Why doesn't Garland run?  Seriously, he's in the leadership group and he's standing there not instructing, not making himself an option, not doing anything.  Why doesn't Garland run?

[No10 323]

4 minutes ago, AdamFarr said:

Then you get someone else who can play their role consistently. Garland is 28 this month. If he can't find consistency in his game by now (or even two years ago), he never will. Instead, they've given him a leadership position. I can only assume this is to motivate him into an aggressive player that takes the game on more on game day. Either way, it certainly hasn't worked.

Nobody interested in my passage of play, but I totally agree with AFarr.   Garland has been playing for TMacs whole career, why is Bugg the one that knows to cover him?   Why doesn't Garland run?  Seriously, he's in the leadership group and he's standing there not instructing, not making himself an option, not doing anything.  Why doesn't Garland run?

[Bring-Back-Powell 13,318]

We were garbage yesterday, but I reckon the Dons would've beaten a few other sides yesterday. They decided to play the perfect game given their current situation and playing list 

[Binmans PA 26,289]

13 minutes ago, No10 said:

Nobody interested in my passage of play, but I totally agree with AFarr.   Garland has been playing for TMacs whole career, why is Bugg the one that knows to cover him?   Why doesn't Garland run?  Seriously, he's in the leadership group and he's standing there not instructing, not making himself an option, not doing anything.  Why doesn't Garland run?

I actually thought your post was brilliant. I have already reached my like quota for the day (100 posts). I think it perfectly illustrates Garland's flaws.

Edited April 3, 2016 by AdamFarr

[Binmans PA 26,289]

11 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

We were garbage yesterday, but I reckon the Dons would've beaten a few other sides yesterday. They decided to play the perfect game given their current situation and playing list 

They played well, but Redleg's right. Roos'/coaches box refusal to man up loose players makes us so predictable and not in a good way.

[Satyriconhome 9,986]

21 minutes ago, AdamFarr said:

Then you get someone else who can play their role consistently. Garland is 28 this month. If he can't find consistency in his game by now (or even two years ago), he never will. Instead, they've given him a leadership position. I can only assume this is to motivate him into an aggressive player that takes the game on more on game day. Either way, it certainly hasn't worked.

Agreed but do you know the answer, who do we replace with?   We have been moving the deckchairs for the last 7 years

[Binmans PA 26,289]

27 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

I agree. Next week might show us whether we are capable of matching with the best, but I'm confident we already know this.

If we win next week, the better test will be the week after against Collingwood. Better yet, the next real test is either Round 6 vs St Kilda (especially if we snag a win or two vs North, Collingwood and Richmond) or Round 9 vs Brisbane.

Yeah, good post, TU. The test is consistency. Can we find it? That's what this season has always been about. We've already failed it once. I hope we can find it come the bye.

[WhyAlwaysMe 237]

1 hour ago, P-man said:

We have additions to contribute to the speed (Stretch), power (Petracca) and disposal skills (Trengove). An underdone Brayshaw didn't help and Salem's role needs to be looked at. He's too good a player to be all but absent yesterday.

Once we get our full compliment together on the field, we can put together a decent side. I haven't lost faith in the list build on the back of yesterday. Certainly the effort and cohesion was lacking badly.

yesterday was the best team we have put on the park in 10 years

[Bombay Airconditioning 5,941]

1 minute ago, WhyAlwaysMe said:

yesterday was the best team we have put on the park in 10 years

Agreed.

Lets do an exercise, Hawks currently lead the Eagles. If the Eagles can't beat them today they never will. 

And this is being generous....

take out 

Rough : Hogan

Hodge : Jones

Hill : Garlett

Shiels : Vince

We are a fucken rabble make no mistake.

[Skuit 9,290]

18 minutes ago, No10 said:

Nobody interested in my passage of play, but I totally agree with AFarr.   Garland has been playing for TMacs whole career, why is Bugg the one that knows to cover him?   Why doesn't Garland run?  Seriously, he's in the leadership group and he's standing there not instructing, not making himself an option, not doing anything.  Why doesn't Garland run?

I was interested in your pictures No. 10. Sometimes though you just get fatigued saying the same thing over and over again and being labelled a biased uniformed hater.

[Binmans PA 26,289]

7 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

Agreed but do you know the answer, who do we replace with?   We have been moving the deckchairs for the last 7 years

Roos has had three draft periods now to address this. I know the midfield issue was more pressing, but the bloke is being paid $1.5 million a year. The buck stops with him on this.

I haven't been very critical of Roosy throughout the journey. I think he's done a lot of good for our club, but this is his responsibility. If Garland can't get the job done, play Frost. I was told that's why we recruited him. To play full back. It was obviously someone else's idea to play him as a defensive forward or they don't think he's ready. I'd say to Frost, "keep it very simple, stick to your assigned man when in transition and allow Tommy Mac to rebound". Frost has some attributes that could make him a really, really good defender, namely his height and his speed. But he needs simple instruction and some work experience down back, followed by constructive feedback on how he goes about it. I'd play him on Petrie this week.

[John Crow Batty 8,272]

The more I look at the result and  the stats makes me think something smells bad and dodgy.

[Skuit 9,290]

3 minutes ago, america de cali said:

The more I look at the result and  the stats makes me think something smells bad and dodgy.

Like a conspiracy of some sort?

[P-man 13,224]

19 minutes ago, WhyAlwaysMe said:

yesterday was the best team we have put on the park in 10 years

Arguably, but I'm pointing out where some of the deficiencies Steve points out can be addressed by absentees. 

Even Hunt is a wildcard. He's greased lightning. Just needs to get his kicking sorted.

[CBDees 3,162]

Round 1

Suns beat Bombers

Geeong beat Premiers

Dogs beat Dockers

Dees beat Giants

Round 2

Suns beat Dockers

Giants beat Geelong

Bombers beat us

Hawks beat Eagles

in other words

we beat GWS who beat Geelong who beat the Hawks who beat the Eagles

and

we were beaten by the Bombers (who were beaten by the Suns who beat the Dockers who lost to the Dogs)

Question

Are things really that bad or would you rather be Freo?

 

[WhyAlwaysMe 237]

1 minute ago, CBDees said:

Round 1

Suns beat Bombers

Geeong beat Premiers

Dogs beat Dockers

Dees beat Giants

Round 2

Suns beat Dockers

Giants beat Geelong

Bombers beat us

Hawks beat Eagles

in other words

we beat GWS who beat Geelong who beat the Hawks who beat the Eagles

and

we were beaten by the Bombers (who were beaten by the Suns who beat the Dockers who lost to the Dogs)

Question

Are things really that bad or would you rather be Freo?

 

are you Abbott or Costello ?

[Ethan Tremblay 28,468]

7 minutes ago, WhyAlwaysMe said:

are you Abbott or Costello ?

Definitely not Shorten.

[Bombay Airconditioning 5,941]

11 minutes ago, CBDees said:

Round 1

Suns beat Bombers

Geeong beat Premiers

Dogs beat Dockers

Dees beat Giants

Round 2

Suns beat Dockers

Giants beat Geelong

Bombers beat us

Hawks beat Eagles

in other words

we beat GWS who beat Geelong who beat the Hawks who beat the Eagles

and

we were beaten by the Bombers (who were beaten by the Suns who beat the Dockers who lost to the Dogs)

Question

Are things really that bad or would you rather be Freo?

 

And Carlton might lose again but are putting in another good showing.

[John Crow Batty 8,272]

33 minutes ago, Skuit said:

Like a conspiracy of some sort?

I dare not say what I truly think.  The way we came out and played, surrendering so much possession to a game but semi VFL side tests my rationale of what is possible in an untainted way.

Edited April 3, 2016 by america de cali

[hells bells 2,022]

I put this in the "Starting as Favourites" but could easily have gone here too

The issue is that the playing group as a whole are basically lazy.  There seems to be an attitude of doing just enough. 

A powerful side yesterday wouldn't have taken Essendon lightly but would have aimed for and worked hard for a 10 goal plus win.  We don't do that, we don't ever do that. 

I reckon it's also why we have bad starts to the game.  It's almost like we wait to see what the opposition is going to do before we judge how much effort we're going to put in. 

Its the same reason we never put away any teams.  We get to 4-5 goals up and then just go into cruise mode.

It is purely attitude - we are not professional enough to have the same mindset for every match - we don't know how to be ruthless.  Until it changes, we will remain perennial strugglers.

[Fitz Fitzpatrick 886]

5 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Agree with everything you just said Steve. I too was worried after the doggies game and knew right after that match we were always going to get exposed badly for our lack of speed on the outside. But you spoke up about this exact issue back then and got absolutely howled down for it because it was a 'practise match'.

Your also wasting your time on Garland.. Been saying it for years what a liability he is to our team.. but apparently he has good leadership blah blah blah.....

DD and Steve are always a good read on here. They call the footy as they see it, both good and bad. And don't sugar coat it. 

Edited April 3, 2016 by Munga

[Fitz Fitzpatrick 886]

3 hours ago, Moneider96 said:

If Hogan is gone (whether it be this year or the next), I would prefer it if he just left now. It's not like he's part of our long-term future. I know I'm in the minority here.

I want it done this year. We need to get back in to the first round. The list isn't even close to ready for a climb up the ladder. If it's not built properly the club will end up doing a nth and be destined as also rans

[Fitz Fitzpatrick 886]

3 hours ago, Mondê said:

At the end of the day we are still a youthful squad prone to the occasional off day. Yes I am disappointed by the performance of the team yesterday but in all honesty we were due for a lapse, and I was not the slightest bit surprised by what was dished up yesterday.

We threw everything at the NAB challenge, in which we scrapped our way to a couple of wins against mediocre opposition. Someone earlier mentioned the alarm bells going off in the Bulldogs match, I couldn't agree more. They were severely depleted and taught us a lesson about intensity all over the park in that first half. I'm going to see how the next month pans out before I hit the panic button, but my hopes for anything more than 9 wins this season are relatively low given the state of our list.

The nab performances disguised some big issues. its not all doom and gloom but we are still a bottom 4 side. What will kill us is our percentage will take the odd clobbering this season which will keep us in the bottom 4

[titan_uranus 22,566]

19 minutes ago, america de cali said:

I dare not say what I truly think.  The way we came out and played, surrendering so much possession to a game but semi VFL side tests my rationale of what is possible in an untainted way.

Or do you "dare not say" because you know it's ridiculous?

We don't need to resort to conspiracy theories to explain what is going on. It's the same problem we've had for years.

[old55 21,399]

1 hour ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Did you read anything else I wrote on either side of that particular section on Garland or?

 

 

Yeah I read it but it wasn't special enough to warrant a new thread, particularly when your claimed reason was no player potting.  Post game thread would've been fine, plenty of non player potting posts in there eg praha, baghdad bob.