56 minutes ago, Hogan2014 said:

We need perspective also ... Comparing the 2 teams Port had ave of 47 vs 30 games lowest in the afl that's around 2 more seasons of experience .. We continue to lack exp players & the up & down results are to be expected.

The positives are when we are winning this year we look great & you can see improvement will continue 

 

 

Having more games experience does not excuse the ineptitude and total lack of intensity from some of our players. I can accept it when we are play reasonably well and are out played but we did not even come close to playing even half decent football. 

No we shouldn't be disappointed, 5 and 5 is a pretty good indication of where we are at and where the coaching staff believe we are at.

The selection decisions shows that we are picking for the future - O Mac before Dunn, Hunt before Grimes, the persistence with Wagner and Harmes when they could have been left out - may as well get games into them now even though it may cost us a game or two. Whilst it would be nice to see us play a final I'm pretty sure we would get smashed.

May as well finish 10th,11th or 12th (Richmond will be 9th) get an earlier draft pick and by finals time next year these guys will have played 35 to 50 games, then we will have something to sing about.

 

 

3 hours ago, beelzebub said:

To the author of the OP...and anyone who thinks likewise

I'll throw a question back at you 

The opposite of disappointed is satisfied.

Should we be satisfied ? Im not. Far from it

While I get the point your making, I don't think it is that black and white. I stress that I was not at all happy with our performance against Port, however looking at where we are compared to recent history... I don't think we should ever be satisfied but surely we have done all right so far this year.

After 10 rounds last year our average losing margin from 8 losses was 48.5 points.

This year after 5 losses the average is 27 points. 

I know we haven't played too many of the top teams as yet but I still find this an encouraging comparison. I don't think defense in the back half is the biggest issue. it's the defensive effort inside our 50 that is the biggest concern. Seeing our guys jogging back to defense on Saturday was frustrating. There didn't seem to be the urgency the situation required. Every easy goal increases the confidence of the opposition and momentum just takes over.

We are better than last year but still a little off the pace. The game against Hawthorn will provide a realistic measure of our progress. Last year we lost by 105 points. Anything inside 50 has to be seen as a marked improvement. I'm still optimistic about our chances. I'm not convinced Hawthorn are as unbeatable as last year. Who knows? With a little accuracy and some cool heads, I think we will go a lot closer than many think.

 

Go Dees!

43 minutes ago, Dee Crepit said:

No we shouldn't be disappointed, 5 and 5 is a pretty good indication of where we are at and where the coaching staff believe we are at.

The selection decisions shows that we are picking for the future - O Mac before Dunn, Hunt before Grimes, the persistence with Wagner and Harmes when they could have been left out - may as well get games into them now even though it may cost us a game or two. Whilst it would be nice to see us play a final I'm pretty sure we would get smashed.

May as well finish 10th,11th or 12th (Richmond will be 9th) get an earlier draft pick and by finals time next year these guys will have played 35 to 50 games, then we will have something to sing about.

 

 

we've given our first rounder to GCS in the next draft, unless you're thinking an earlier 2nd round?

Welcome to DL btw.

Edited May 30, 20169 yr by 1 red eye 1 blue eye

I think we are still on track to win 10 this season which is what I expected. 

Talking Footy asked in the W files "Why do we keep on getting sucked in by the Demons"?

The media keeps pumping us up, I don't know why considering we only won 7 last year. We are in the position we should be. 

Never though we would make finals this season but next season is a different story. 

10 hours ago, jnrmac said:

Have said it for a while but our defence is a mess. We haven't fixed it. The players either can't do what they are supposed to do or they haven't bought into it.

Interesting that Beveridge can get his team playing a system in a summer, so can Brendan Bolton, so can Alan Richardson. We struggle after 3 years.

Under our 'plan' you have to win contested ball, deliver to a team mate and have run and spread. It breaks down when we don't win the contest. The defensive system looks a shambles when it doesn't work as can be readily seen in our poor losses. When guys like Jetta are continually having to run back and defend against the likes of Reiwoldt etc something is very wrong.

We are short on talent in our back half. The McDonalds have endeavour but poor skills, Wagner does a lot of good things but also a lot of bad, Hunt tries hard and is growing, Garland is past it for me, Dunn seems to not be playing to instructions hence he is not getting a game, Salem has skills but has been shown up in a lot of one-on-one contests. Too much is being left to too few. We are short in the footy smarts department in our defence and it will be found out in the next 4 weeks 

2 major issues Jnr

A multi-method defence is too much to ask of so many young rookies still just learning "how to play". If we insist on playing rookies down back don't play moving zones/diamonds/blah blah. KISS principle pls unless playing a more seasoned line up in defence. Then by all means go for it.

When we have beaten solid mid fields in the past we have done so by rolling our 3 major King pins through their for the bulk of their TOG during matches. Jones, Vince & Viney. Add Clarry to these 3 plus some cameos from fringe mids and we start getting more clearances/first use and tend to win or go much closer to winning even against serious opposition mids. For some reason after round 1 or 2 (or was it from the get go this season?) we have decided to use Vince in a bigger role across HB and kicking in. It is no coincidence IMO that our mid field dominance has wained as a result (along with Clarry's omissions when they have hit us).

I was having a think about this situation this morning and I realised that it is generally the same problems with each loss!

That to me says that we are inconsistent with the plan. We used to find new ways to lose every week and not be able to know what to try and fix first!

We should be disappointed because we now know we can do better, and we've had opportunities slip.

Comparisons to Carlton are silly, they had only 3 players under 26 make a major impact on their game against Geelong. (Docherty, Cripps and Weitering - definitely a great little group, noting 'little').

We were the opposite, with only Jones, Vince and Jetta being 26 or older and having a real effect on the game (plus Watts at 25 if you'd like to include).

But we should still be disappointed, because we could be outright crushing opponents if we held our form and our workrate for whole games consistently.

Ah well.

In some ways the whole we have to learn defence before attack is a classic Roos Ruse!

The reason is that those 10 youngsters with virtually no experience have had little chance to get acquainted with Roos defensive game plan or systems.

It was stated to buy time from supporters and the media while trying to get the list under control.

If Roos wanted to be consistent he wouldn't have brought in first gamers like Wagner, Hunt, Petracca and Oliver all into the same team simultaneously. Add to that Harmes, Michie, OMac, ANB, Frost, Stretch, etc who only played a couple of games.

The learning defence first mantra doesn't really stack up! Otherwise those that had a chance to learn it would have been selected first.

Edited May 30, 20169 yr by dee-tox

14 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Right now we have NO DEFENCE

That is a huge worry. In 12 weeks Roos walks

 

I was at Treager park. For the whole game there were 2 or 3 Port Players behind our Full backs.The whole game! We made it so easy for them.Mr bolt at his best could run back fast enough to contest. Why are we defending so far forward when we are getting smashed at cotested ball? I just dont understand. It is so obvious when you at the game. In fact you could predict who was going to run forward and kick a goal some minutes before it happened because of the set up. We played very very dumb football on Saturday and it was difficult to watch. The Hawks will murder us if we give them that space.

What I don't get, is that we spent two years under Roos getting our defence right first, and this year we are more attacking.

Well what happened to the defence?

11 hours ago, Dee Crepit said:

No we shouldn't be disappointed, 5 and 5 is a pretty good indication of where we are at and where the coaching staff believe we are at.

The selection decisions shows that we are picking for the future - O Mac before Dunn, Hunt before Grimes, the persistence with Wagner and Harmes when they could have been left out - may as well get games into them now even though it may cost us a game or two. Whilst it would be nice to see us play a final I'm pretty sure we would get smashed.

May as well finish 10th,11th or 12th (Richmond will be 9th) get an earlier draft pick and by finals time next year these guys will have played 35 to 50 games, then we will have something to sing about.

 

 

That makes a lot of sense to me - surprised that so few posters have made this point.  I suspect the selection panel may take a step back from that for fear of the effect on the younger players of playing in too many losses.  I doubt they will do so for fear of Demonland posters getting upset though.

It's all well and good supposedly trotting out the " for the future" ideal. Good ( read successful ) teams don't do it with wholesale disregard for the likely outcome. You still need to be functional, capable of performing the plan. Good sense suggests incremental change to line ups.

Here again the selectors are fcukibg it up.

Poor selection is nibbling our ability to play effectively. Roos has even admitted it's been wrong and on a number of occasions.

Oh btw...I'm still disappointed 

8 hours ago, jackaub said:

I was at Treager park. For the whole game there were 2 or 3 Port Players behind our Full backs.The whole game! We made it so easy for them.Mr bolt at his best could run back fast enough to contest. Why are we defending so far forward when we are getting smashed at cotested ball? I just dont understand. It is so obvious when you at the game. In fact you could predict who was going to run forward and kick a goal some minutes before it happened because of the set up. We played very very dumb football on Saturday and it was difficult to watch. The Hawks will murder us if we give them that space.

That does seem like a structural problem however that should mean we outnumber them 18 v 16 in our forward half. If we apply enough pressure to them and lock the ball in our forward line then they wouldn't be able to cheat out the back and we win. We dominated the first quarter and wasted too many opportunities. Kick 5 or 6 goals in the first quarter which we probably should have and they don't get the luxury of 2 or 3 loose men out the back.

7 hours ago, beelzebub said:

It's all well and good supposedly trotting out the " for the future" ideal. Good ( read successful ) teams don't do it with wholesale disregard for the likely outcome. You still need to be functional, capable of performing the plan. Good sense suggests incremental change to line ups.

Here again the selectors are fcukibg it up.

Poor selection is nibbling our ability to play effectively. Roos has even admitted it's been wrong and on a number of occasions.

Oh btw...I'm still disappointed 

Which personnel changes do you think would have seen us win the game on the weekend?

22 hours ago, beelzebub said:

To the author of the OP...and anyone who thinks likewise

I'll throw a question back at you 

The opposite of disappointed is satisfied.

Should we be satisfied ? Im not. Far from it

Why not be both? I am disappointed about the weekend but am satisfied about the direction of the club. One trumps the other.

25 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

That does seem like a structural problem however that should mean we outnumber them 18 v 16 in our forward half. If we apply enough pressure to them and lock the ball in our forward line then they wouldn't be able to cheat out the back and we win. We dominated the first quarter and wasted too many opportunities. Kick 5 or 6 goals in the first quarter which we probably should have and they don't get the luxury of 2 or 3 loose men out the back.

The players have been out the back every week and if you look at our forward line we get jeffy in particular out the back alot too. We just need to take advantage of the numbers, whenever we bring the required pressure we are in the game. We have brought it 7 times for 5 wins and 2 losses (against north and dogs, both top 4)

On 30/05/2016 at 0:26 PM, hemingway said:

With greater expectations comes greater disappointment.  And this comes week by week depending on the result. The true measure or assessment will be made at season end.

Agreed, mate. This year has been a bit funny for me. I go into the game thinking we'll lose or we should win and then no matter what, I usually end up completely frustrated (white-line-fever-Adam).

However, the major difference between other seasons is that within an hour or two of the disappointment, I am quickly reminded of my own expectations for this season of 10-12 wins. I always thought we'd he up and down and even more so when you consider how young the team's we've put out have been.

We're going to crack 10 and we may go past that, but I'm convinced we'll get to a minimum of ten wins.

I expect finals next year, not this year and I think these are perfectly reasonable expectations.

On 30/05/2016 at 1:25 PM, Dr. Gonzo said:

Supporters latching on to this "diamond defense" idea need to think a bit more analytically - not singling you out but just using this as an example. The diamond defense is implemented at centre bounces. I'd have to watch the game again to be sure but I didn't feel this was our problem on the weekend. The biggest glaring problem was our inability to stop lightning fast transition from a kick-in in our forward line going straight down the other end. Combined with too many missed opportunities in front of goal, playing from behind, our inability to take advantage of Gawn's dominance, our inability to crumb contested marks and our over-possession/poor disposal it was a recipe for disaster. Fix up our disposal/decision making and our accuracy in front of goal and we go close to winning (we were only really blown out in the last 10 minutes remember). I don't think any of this falls onto the "diamond defense".

It's not the Diamond Defence that's leaking goals, it's often the aggressive forward press. Yes, we play a defensive zone, but when we a side slices us up off their half back it's down to getting through the forward press.

15 hours ago, DeeZee said:

What I don't get, is that we spent two years under Roos getting our defence right first, and this year we are more attacking.

Well what happened to the defence?

We used the first two years to stockpile draft picks, assess the remaining players on the list and introduce a disciplined culture and game style at the club.

2 minutes ago, AdamFarr said:

We used the first two years to stockpile draft picks, assess the remaining players on the list and introduce a disciplined culture and game style at the club.

Hopefully...

18 hours ago, Chris said:

Why not be both? I am disappointed about the weekend but am satisfied about the direction of the club. One trumps the other.

The direction of the club is one thing, the performance on filed is another.   Im disappointed.  We're losing games we had /or should been winning

If we are not careful  we will start addressing  a home in 9th as a success. 

3 hours ago, beelzebub said:

The direction of the club is one thing, the performance on filed is another.   Im disappointed.  We're losing games we had /or should been winning

If we are not careful  we will start addressing  a home in 9th as a success. 

Realistically, it would not be a bad outcome. It would mean we had won 11 or 12 games for the year which is a massive improvement over last year. Sustainable improvement takes time. In fact, I think I'd rather finish in 9th than get demolished in an elimination final because we were not quite ready for the intensity of finals football.It would leave our boys hungry to take the next step and add some incentive to pre-season training.

It's nice to dream about what might be possible, but we also need to be realistic about what is achievable by a young, inexperienced group.

11 minutes ago, The Reverend said:

Realistically, it would not be a bad outcome. It would mean we had won 11 or 12 games for the year which is a massive improvement over last year. Sustainable improvement takes time. In fact, I think I'd rather finish in 9th than get demolished in an elimination final because we were not quite ready for the intensity of finals football.It would leave our boys hungry to take the next step and add some incentive to pre-season training.

It's nice to dream about what might be possible, but we also need to be realistic about what is achievable by a young, inexperienced group.

Maybe I should have made the context of currently in 9th.  The way we are possibly heading that will be a pipe dream in itself.

I seriously doubt now we will end with 10 wins, if that.  We have 5 and Im not sure where more than 2-3 might come from.

57 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Maybe I should have made the context of currently in 9th.  The way we are possibly heading that will be a pipe dream in itself.

I seriously doubt now we will end with 10 wins, if that.  We have 5 and Im not sure where more than 2-3 might come from.

I reckon we have some improvement in us and we might just surprise a couple of teams in the second half of the year. Having said that, I understand your disappointment. It's a bit like when you think you're going to get a Scalextric set for Christmas and you end up with a Matchbox car. Am I showing my age?

keep the faith BB. 

Go DEES!

 

Edited June 1, 20169 yr by The Reverend
spelling