POST MATCH DISCUSSION - Round 8

[Brownie 5,969]

14 hours ago, drdrake said:

Garbage, we were lazy one way footballers.  It reminds me of the Dean Bailey era again, when it goes our way we look unbeatable as soon as it gets hard we dont work.  The bulldogs would have had 6 to 8 goals kick inside the goal square getting us out the back.  That is lazy running we didnt run to defend.

Tom McDonald needs to have a good hard look at himself, he was woeful he is number 1 on the lazy list or we need to accept he isnt a smart footballer and needs a job rather than zone.

I was at the gold coast game last week and TMAC''s body language looked really down in the first quarter. he was playing way off his man but put body pressure on his oponent as the game went on.

he's the main pillar of our defence but just seems out of sorts at the moment. its like he's caught a dose of the Frawlies! 

We're lucky that Jetta is playing so well.

Edited May 16, 2016 by Brownie

[GM11 776]

2 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

This is not to say our back line isn’t struggling. As much as Garland was exposed, so too were Hunt and Wagner. But in saying this, I feel our back line are getting no help from our game plan. IMO we are over-pressing in the forward line, particularly late in quarters when the game opens up. Our back line is then getting shown as ordinary because the heat on the ball is lacking and because AFL players are all skilled enough to find a target with an open forward line and no pressure. IMO we should be more willing to flood back late in quarters and allow the opposition an easier midfield transition, so long as we get numbers back into our defensive 50.

 

I think Garland cops a lot that is unwarranted. I question why our defenders run so far forward, if they are incapable of getting back when we turn the ball over.

I'd like to see him go forward at this stage of his career.

The point you make about Salem is a valid one. His stats flatter his impact on the game.

[H_T 3,043]

A good reflection of where we're at. The Bulldogs led by the likes of Liberatore and Hunter were exceptional at pressure acts at stoppages. The Bont was class too in close. we met our match at the stoppages and their midfield is more polished at this stage. Effort was definitely there, we just have to become more experienced, more polished and slick. They're definitely top 4 material and a premiership chance. 

We're still on the wanting consistency path. It will be an interesting build up to the Brisbane game this week. Effort levels will need to be on the rise to confront a Brisbane outfit who were severely stung at home.

[At the break of Gawn 4,460]

1 hour ago, america de cali said:

If Carlton overtake us, no doubt there will be those who insist they had more talent..

Carlton have had a very easy block of games there:

Freo - 18th

Esssndon - 17th

Collingwood - 12th (were 2 and 5 going into it)

Port Adelaide - 10th and that's flattering for them and at Ethiad

The Carlton Premiership dream will end this weekend.

[John Crow Batty 8,860]

8 minutes ago, demon9 said:

Carlton have had a very easy block of games there:

Freo - 18th

Esssndon - 17th

Collingwood - 12th (were 2 and 5 going into it)

Port Adelaide - 10th and that's flattering for them and at Ethiad

The Carlton Premiership dream will end this weekend.

True an easy run but what are our chances of winning four in a row anytime in the near future?  We have only beaten one of  two we have played. Freo, Port and also Carlton could beat us easily with our fickle attitude ATM. Our record against those three sides has been woeful of late. No such thing as an easy run for us. We are our own worst enemies. 

Edited May 16, 2016 by america de cali

[btdemon 482]

4 hours ago, Salems Lot said:

The bibble and bobble of the footy did not go our way but their tackling pressure and ball movement was too good yesterday.  

On another point

What is it with boundary umpires not being able to throw the ball in correctly.  I have seen 3 games this year where their short thrown incompetence has had an impact on the game. Surely a coloured line set in from the boundary would set a datum point for them to reach.  If it doesn't get there; recall and try again.

I think the "bible and bobble" of the the footy were partly cause by our haphazard disposal, by hand and foot. We seem to have a high risk, move the ball quickly approach to attack. This looks ok when it works but many of the hand-passes are very quick and flukey. There is a real chaos when are moving the ball from CHB through the middle. When it works, it looks great but WB's disposal was as quick but way more accurate. They have a higher skill level that us and the ability to slice us up. Their movement out of centre stoppages was so much slicker. Even Oliver's laser-like hands were a bit off yesterday. Their pressure was also excellent and caused our clearance skills to look ordinary. Viney had to resort to his crazy charging through a brick wall tactic as a means of clearing. While I am in awe of his ability to do this, I also think that he was doing it out of frustration, trying to inspire the team and just get the ball forward. They had us so well covered. This points to the well-drilled nature of the Dogs' stoppage structures.

The Doggies have enormous talent and good skills. They proved by their performance last year that they are a year further down the track than us. 

I was also crying out for Bernie to go in to the centre stoppages. It was pretty plain that our core inside mids were too inexperienced and needed some direction. Aside from Jones, Viney and Tyson, we were relying on , Bugg, Kennedy, Oliver and Petracca. As much as I think Oliver and Petracca will both be guns, Oliver has played 6? games. Petracca 3, one of which was in the forward line. The sooner Trenners is ready, the better. It may be time to give ANB a go as well. I'm still not sure about Newton but would love to be wrong. We are also missing the grunt of AVB.

[nutbean 8,838]

1 hour ago, GM11 said:

I think Garland cops a lot that is unwarranted. I question why our defenders run so far forward, if they are incapable of getting back when we turn the ball over.

 

I think you answered you own question. No one is capable of getting back once you turn the ball over - that's why week in and week out you see that number one cause of goals is turnovers. 

Bullies didn't turn the ball over half as much as we did and therefore weren't burnt as badly as we were. 

Modern football has your backman pressing up, locking it in the front half of the ground and kicking goals ( like Tmac did yesterday) and they simply rely on not turning the ball over.

 

On Garland - he unfortunately still makes the same basic errors - the 50 metres he gave away for waltzing through the 10m protected zone was simple unawareness and i did notice that he got sucked in a few times to being a second Demon into a ground ball contest that the doggies were leading to and i watched as the single bulldog then handpassed over to Garland's unopposed man as he had been sucked into the contest unnecessarily. 

[poita 3,889]

We basically lost because (a) we had too many players who did nothing for the entire game or went missing for long periods (Salem, Gawn, Oliver, Garland, Pedersen, Michie, Hunt, Kennedy, Garlett, Wagner and Harmes, to name a few; and (b) we were unable to stop the Dogs from getting a quick handpass out of a pack. Our tackles always seemed to be around the waist, instead of getting the arms as well.

[bandicoot 1,395]

18 hours ago, Tony Tea said:

No answer to Clarko footy. Again. 

Very good observation. Roos hasn't developed a way to beat the clarkson clones now catching the league. He hasn't moved with the times. 

[bandicoot 1,395]

22 minutes ago, poita said:

We basically lost because (a) we had too many players who did nothing for the entire game or went missing for long periods (Salem, Gawn, Oliver, Garland, Pedersen, Michie, Hunt, Kennedy, Garlett, Wagner and Harmes, to name a few; and (b) we were unable to stop the Dogs from getting a quick handpass out of a pack. Our tackles always seemed to be around the waist, instead of getting the arms as well.

I haven't seen a game where more handballs were given off under pressure and yet still found the target. 

Very frustrating to watch 

Edited May 16, 2016 by bandicoot

[rpfc 28,247]

21 minutes ago, bandicoot said:

Very good observation. Roos hasn't developed a way to beat the clarkson clones now catching the league. He hasn't moved with the times. 

We are one of those clones.

We are not good enough yet. Sticking tackles and getting to blokes quicker than they release the footy isn't a game plan issue, it goes directly to how good your players are at tackling, and the fact that they need to get to the footy first (or not give it up) to not allow a good team to put a string of handballs together to cut us up.

[rjay 24,851]

4 hours ago, nutbean said:

Jogged straight through the 10 metre exclusion zone  - it had no impact but it was dumb - the rule is what the rule is  - It was a 100% correct decision. 

Yep...Col was off with the pixies yesterday. Just went jogging past not a care in the world, a bit like when he jogged to the bench back to the play when the ball was coming at him. Not a care in the world...

[rjay 24,851]

46 minutes ago, poita said:

We basically lost because (a) we had too many players who did nothing for the entire game or went missing for long periods (Salem, Gawn, Oliver, Garland, Pedersen, Michie, Hunt, Kennedy, Garlett, Wagner and Harmes, to name a few; and (b) we were unable to stop the Dogs from getting a quick handpass out of a pack. Our tackles always seemed to be around the waist, instead of getting the arms as well.

Having 3 players in the back half who wouldn't have played 20 games between them doesn't help. We're not sure if any of them is up to the standard yet.

Then you have Garland as a leader who had a poor one (maybe only a depth player at best on current form) along with Pedders who despite some good games really is a VFL level player.

Salem is still a disappointment to me, he's got a lot more to give but he's going to have to pull the finger big time. Needs to stop talking EPL with 'Sat' and start watching a lot more AFL because at the moment he has the skill but not the smarts.

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

No doubt we still have significant holes in our list, in particular strong bodied KPB's, but what is clear so far this year is if we don't turn up with our brains in gear, we get beaten.  Other than a very honourable - and I hate using that word - loss to Roos, we have been beaten by a side which it can be said are on a par with us, or, in the case of Essendon, below par at the moment.

 

Make no mistake, the Dogs are a good side, but beat us well, because they were more skilled and had an intensity at the contest we could not match. As things stand now, we just have to accept the deficiencies in our playing stocks, but to me the greatest challenge that the coaching staff have at the moment is to make sure our boys are switched on when they cross the white line.  While I hate to admit it, Bolton has led the way in motivating players, which have at best, average overall skills.

There is still a lot to like about the Dees, going forward.

[Fat Tony 5,217]

26 minutes ago, rjay said:

Yep...Col was off with the pixies yesterday. Just went jogging past not a care in the world, a bit like when he jogged to the bench back to the play when the ball was coming at him. Not a care in the world...

Garland had just hurt his wrist before coming off.

[Satyriconhome 10,682]

6 hours ago, Petraccattack said:

 

Thats a bit simplistic - the Doggies coaches definitely got the better of ours.  They nullified Gawn superbly with their average ruck brigade.

Agreed the rucks were given s role and coupled with Gawn finally having an off day, they carried it out

Our midfielders were instructed to win the cotested ball   they didn't    the game is that simple

 

 

 

[dpositive 1,663]

21 hours ago, FireInTheBelly said:

Took too long for Gawn to work out they were just jumping into him in the ruck. Last quarter he hardly bothered jumping and was more effective I thought. He'll be better for the game.

Garland isn't up to it anymore. I love him but enough's enough. He could have made a good wingman years back but was stopped by injury and now having to play as a key defender. Not his go.

Hogan needs to sort out his run up. It's all for the cameras and he really has to be above that. He's a nice kick, so ditch the theatrics and kick the bastard.

ANB should have come in instead of Salem. Salem needed to be shown he has to earn it, whilst ANB would've given us another rotation/option through the guts, but also has the legs to go all day, and get forward and kick a goal. Salem wasn't bad, but for his development he had to earn his spot back.

Now for the reason we lost the game. Skills, skills, skills. Demonland has been moaning about the lack of skills for the last 5 years and nothing appears to have changed. In the meantime the dogs appear to be able to dispose of the ball cleanly - without even taking possession. We can't match that. For all the training watchers out there, how often do our lads have a pill in their hands at training? Why does it appear to be a foreign object at times? Oliver is the exception, he's comfortable with it, but even he was down and fumbly today.

 

Dont agree its skills alone.Except perhaps a new skill needed in throwing the ball

Its the application of the skills.

When you are allowed to run to space and receive get balanced and deliver the skill looks good Ie our players zoning allow too much space and time for opponents to get balanced and find someone. Our players give off and do not shepherd to allow their teammate the time and space to get balanced and composed.

Too many times our players flew for the mark and spoiled each other with noone down , The few times we had someone in front and behind to take the spill we did well, Those contesting can make space by taking an opponent out of the play. 

Create and make space to allow time for skills to be used, when its tight and contested even the dogs were fumbling and not clean, but they were always able to throw it out to their teammate (New skill)

 

 

[angrydee 842]

The doggies just played with more intent and energy, worked harder and ran more.

They slso ducked their heads with great purpose and threw the ball incessantly.

The umpiring was appalling.  But had no effect on the result. 

 

Edited May 16, 2016 by angrydee
spelling

[Ethan Tremblay 30,819]

15 minutes ago, angrydee said:

The doggies just played with more intent and energy, worked harder and ran more.

They slso ducked their heads with great purpose and threw the ball incessantly.

The umpiring was appalling.  But had no effect on the result. 

 

Can't argue with any of this, agree with all. Just to add, I didn't think it was the free kicks that were paid that were the issue, it was the free kicks that were there that weren't paid. Ie the dogs throwing the ball and holding the man.

Edited May 16, 2016 by Ethan Tremblay

[Tim 3,413]

20 hours ago, Fifty-5 said:

Dogs a class above.  Harder inside, better outside and cleaner. Margin flattered us.

Indeed. Some small consolation that we didn't get totally pantsed on the scoreboard, i.e., there was effort maintained till the end despite being outclassed. Not something that we have been accustomed to these last 10 seasons or so.

[Gator 17,261]

We're trying to play a similar game to the Dogs and they've been doing it longer.  They lost to us last year at the G and you can see how much better they are a year down the track, just as we'll be 12 months from now.

They out-pressured us, ran forward better, and also ran harder to defend.  We were given a lesson in how to contest around the stoppages, but also how to attack and defend.  They just did everything that bit better and cleaner.  They were able to spot up targets really well with precise short kicks as they went forward into their 50, but when it was time to go long they did.  It was incredible how quickly they got numbers into our forward 50.  Some of our players uncharacteristically fumbled due to perceived pressure.  Their defenders were closer checking than ours.  We give far much room to opposition forwards.

I reckon our players and coaches will learn a lot from that game.  You could see the Dogs were more confident in what they were trying to execute.  They didn't hesitate and were all on the same page, while we were made to go too slow while options were blocked.  I actually don't think the talent levels are much different, but they have a better system that they've been honing for longer.  Good coach, Beveridge. 

 

[jumbo returns 6,737]

A friend who is quite close to the players told me that Hogan was copping it all day by any Bulldog player that stood next to him, ran past him, or was in his vicinity. Coach's orders apparently.

[Demon Disciple 12,062]

16 minutes ago, jumbo returns said:

A friend who is quite close to the players told me that Hogan was copping it all day by any Bulldog player that stood next to him, ran past him, or was in his vicinity. Coach's orders apparently.

Probably because of the pearler he gave Murphy about Boyd last year!

[Nasher 33,607]

1 hour ago, jumbo returns said:

A friend who is quite close to the players told me that Hogan was copping it all day by any Bulldog player that stood next to him, ran past him, or was in his vicinity. Coach's orders apparently.

It may have worked (you could never say without having been present), but you'd think that tactic has a pretty short shelf-life as Hogan gets more experienced and therefore better at handling the psychological side.

[Lucifers Hero 39,501]

1 hour ago, jumbo returns said:

A friend who is quite close to the players told me that Hogan was copping it all day by any Bulldog player that stood next to him, ran past him, or was in his vicinity. Coach's orders apparently.

And why did his teammates do nothing about it.

No point them telling people aftetwards.