7 minutes ago, McQueen said:

Can anyone give an indication of how much time Petracca played in the guts/on ball for? I only noticed a few occasions but I'm wondering if it was cause for his sub performance - playing a different role.

Cheers

He had 75% game time Steve beyond that I have no idea.

6 hours ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

We need 3 talls because Watts plays in the ruck. Whenever watts goes in the middle that leaves hogan alone and he cant do it alone. Dawes only use is that Adelaide had to stand someone next to him.

I know people thing its batshit crazy to play Spencer and Gawn together but I look at our forwardline and think to myself "Is putting a 2m Spencer in at FF really going to hurt us that much?" Cant be any worse than Dawes. Nobody has ever faulted Spencer's effort and he'll provide us a reliable contest when forward so why not? Get Hogan to CHF where he becomes a real threat rather than sitting him in the square. Free watts up to stay out of the ruck (despite him being servicable there recently). Watts and Hogan are gaining chemistry every week and I would look capatalise on that. 

Spencer wouldn't be able to handball out of a pack, over his head, to Watts running into an open goal, that's for sure.

Hunt had a good game and is an incredibly exciting talent.  But at present he doesn't get it much/enough.  We mostly played 6 backs, 5 forwards (sometimes 7 and 4) and with Hunt coming off the side of the square behind the wing at the centre bounces - and there were a lot of them.  Hunt had next to zero impact in this role.  A lot of the time Gawn hit it to the opposite side of the square that Hunt started on.  This is not a criticism of Hunt - it was a mystifying set-up.

Just now, Undeeterred said:

Spencer wouldn't be able to handball out of a pack, over his head, to Watts running into an open goal, that's for sure.

Probably not but Hogan did that and unless I was completely messing up I was saying drop Dawes not Hogan. 

29 minutes ago, old dee said:

He had 75% game time Steve beyond that I have no idea.

Petracca did not play any time in the middle which was surprising given he had no impact early and we needed him in the game. His pace against such a fast line-up was put into question and he seemed to be often way under the ball for the clearance down the line - which meant there was no chance for him to go the fly.

We struggled at clearances early in each quarter when VB was off but as soon as he went into the midfield he applied a more aggressive approach than Tyson and we started keeping Sloane and the Crouch boys in check - Scott Thompson got a bit of it but was largely ineffective. But the bigger issue is that we rarely seem to get a clearance without having to go backwards, which means that we are already facing a wall of opponents to get through and with no genuine marking option across half forward, we struggle to penetrate.

 

 

11 minutes ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

Probably not but Hogan did that and unless I was completely messing up I was saying drop Dawes not Hogan. 

Hogan handballed it to Dawes who hit Garlett running into goal.

Hogan did another one similar. 

1 minute ago, Gorgoroth said:

Hogan handballed it to Dawes who hit Garlett running into goal.

Hogan did another one similar. 

Actually yeah you are right but that handball was much more rudimentary and I think Spence could handle that one. The Hogan one not so much. 

6 minutes ago, Gorgoroth said:

Hogan handballed it to Dawes who hit Garlett running into goal.

Hogan did another one similar. 

And not a lot more for the whole game G

1 minute ago, old dee said:

And not a lot more for the whole game G

He did get a chest mark in the 3rd qtr and a handball off to the player running past... I remeber because of the loud bronx cheer... Other than that I'm out of ideas 

Just now, ArtificialWisdom said:

He did get a chest mark in the 3rd qtr and a handball off to the player running past... I remeber because of the loud bronx cheer... Other than that I'm out of ideas 

Ok he was good for two minutes in 100.

Reminds me of an old Jack Dyer comment.

"Stand still son it will hit you a couple of times each match".

3 hours ago, old dee said:

Preferences LDC.

If a mark was going to save your life would you pick Dawes or Dunn?

A garbage bin.

59 minutes ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

Probably not but Hogan did that and unless I was completely messing up I was saying drop Dawes not Hogan. 

 

47 minutes ago, Gorgoroth said:

Hogan handballed it to Dawes who hit Garlett running into goal.

Hogan did another one similar. 

 

43 minutes ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

Actually yeah you are right but that handball was much more rudimentary and I think Spence could handle that one. The Hogan one not so much. 

Yep, you're absolutely right. It was Hogan over his head to Watts, and Dawes over the top to Garlett.

My mistake, and bad recollection.

Still think Spencer gives us absolutely nothing up forward.

8 hours ago, mdemonski2 said:

dunn not injured though. He played against Richmond in vfl yesterday 

My bad.

5 minutes ago, Undeeterred said:

Yep, you're absolutely right. It was Hogan over his head to Watts, and Dawes over the top to Garlett.

My mistake, and bad recollection.

Still think Spencer gives us absolutely nothing up forward.

Spencer as an individual probably wouldnt add much, maybe a goal if he gets a mark or a free kick (we would need a bit of luck). But Hogan up the ground will get us 3/4 more marks 60-70m out which will hopefully turn into scoring opportunities. That and Watts who has developed some chemestry with Hogan and that leaves them both forward together for longer periods with Spence in the ruck instead. Them together is more dangerous than Hogan and Dawes.

That said It is Darwin this week so the possibility of it being slipery means it may be worth holding off on the second ruckman and give Dawes another chance. If they do play dawes again I want to see him left as the deeper forward, take away the pressure of marking and tell him just to make a contest. In the CHF role we need marks not a contest. FF a mark is less imortant so much as a contest for the crumbers to impact on. 

 

4 hours ago, jnrmac said:

You have contradicted yourself beautifully

No I haven't.

12 hours ago, poita said:

Full credit to the team for their excellent fight back in the second quarter, after a poor first term. That said, we were really poor for three quarters (15 goals to 7) and the margin flattered us.

You rival BBP for the most pessimistic poster on here, and that's no mean feat.

The only period of the game during which we were poor was the first 9 minutes of the third quarter. Outside of that we were, at worst, competitive and at best dominant. Against the form side in the competition and a genuine premiership threat.

The margin flattered Adelaide, not us. 

I'd love to see Hunt and Blease race one another. Seems that it comes easier for Hunt and he takes bigger strides. 

8 hours ago, Deespicable said:

Petracca did not play any time in the middle which was surprising given he had no impact early and we needed him in the game. His pace against such a fast line-up was put into question and he seemed to be often way under the ball for the clearance down the line - which meant there was no chance for him to go the fly.

We struggled at clearances early in each quarter when VB was off but as soon as he went into the midfield he applied a more aggressive approach than Tyson and we started keeping Sloane and the Crouch boys in check - Scott Thompson got a bit of it but was largely ineffective. But the bigger issue is that we rarely seem to get a clearance without having to go backwards, which means that we are already facing a wall of opponents to get through and with no genuine marking option across half forward, we struggle to penetrate.

 

 

Watch the last quarter again.

10 hours ago, old dee said:

But is he good enough at this point for AFL jnr?

Of coourse he is.

9 hours ago, McQueen said:

Can anyone give an indication of how much time Petracca played in the guts/on ball for? I only noticed a few occasions but I'm wondering if it was cause for his sub performance - playing a different role.

Cheers

Tracc started the last quarter in the middle and mostly finished the game there from memory. Wasn't doing much else during the game and Roos tried somethnig different.

Is it true that we've had eight goal quarters in two games we've lost this year, against North and now Adelaide?

15 hours ago, ArtificialWisdom said:

That said It is Darwin this week so the possibility of it being slipery means it may be worth holding off on the second ruckman and give Dawes another chance. If they do play dawes again I want to see him left as the deeper forward, take away the pressure of marking and tell him just to make a contest. In the CHF role we need marks not a contest. FF a mark is less imortant so much as a contest for the crumbers to impact on. 

 

I think he's got that instruction down pat already

20 minutes ago, Demonised said:

Is it true that we've had eight goal quarters in two games we've lost this year, against North and now Adelaide?

I'm pretty sure the North game was 9 goals, so yeah. Shows more the inconsistency across a full game, most other teams if they had an 8+ goal quarter that would be enough to get them over the line. 

55 minutes ago, Wells 11 said:

I think he's got that instruction down pat already

When he is getting side stepped by Jacobs then I have to start questioning that.

I went to the game on Sunday (in poor company it must be said) but have haven't felt like posting until now.

I'm "Bitter and disappointed" . Talk about snatching defeat from the jaws of victory! I actually feel worse about this loss than the Essendrug fiasco. Why?? Here was the moment to show we were a fair dinkum improver and a threat to anyone! The moment was lost because we stayed in the sheds for an extra 10 minutes at half time.

I would have thrown myself in front of a herd of stomping alpacas were it not for a couple of highlights. ie Jeffy's return and the absolute excitement of Josh Hunt bravely taking the game on.

Unfortunately though I'm over being titillated by moments of joy and the promise of improvement - I want [censored] success!!