Redleg …….. Spencer probably would have made no diff, giving GAWN a bit of a break may have been nice,we had nothing to lose.

DISPOSAL if the key to success , this will occur for some players!!!!!!!

What was the purpose of yesterday's game, was it to win or was it to continue with the blooding of young players?

I doubt the side picked yesterday was expected to win but I also doubt the club would have imagined that they would have been so comprehensively beaten.

 

5 minutes ago, Dante said:

What was the purpose of yesterday's game, was it to win or was it to continue with the blooding of young players?

I doubt the side picked yesterday was expected to win but I also doubt the club would have imagined that they would have been so comprehensively beaten.

 

For the last few weeks Roos has continually spoken about looking for signs that players were tiring etc, said he hadn't seen any although he made a point of resting Oliver, think coaching staff had a fear of the team, with so many young players in it, hitting a wall, unfortunately probably didn't see the team hitting the wall so hard

1 hour ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Once a game is over 100 point differential, the score becomes irrelevent. It's a surrender. 

Yesterday was as bad as 186 from US. and yes the 148 point loss to Essendrug ( The game i walked out on 5 minutes into the last and didn't return to the 'G for 3 years) so yes we all know how Bad it was. 

Yesterday was Mark Neeld Football. The Players should be totally ashamed, but they won't be. 

I don't care about Geelongs output. They may well have backed off

You seem to think I am talking about effort, I'm not, as I said I am talking about the footy we are playing. It is better. 

4 minutes ago, Chris said:

You seem to think I am talking about effort, I'm not, as I said I am talking about the footy we are playing. It is better. 

Sporadically at best Chris

The Soft Underbelly is still there

8 hours ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

The most horrifying thing about yesterday was it was pretty much our best 22.

i could sort of accept yesterday if we had 8-10 of our best 22 out, but we had our likely 2017 Rd 1 side ( minus M Jones and possibly Bugg and Harmes).

Next year it's unlikely we won't have the dream injury run that we did this year.

CP5 addresses this well earlier but this some pretty weak thinking.

Wasn't yesterday's 22 close to the same 22 we beat Hawthorn with, too?

The issue isn't ability, which your post suggests. 

17 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

For the last few weeks Roos has continually spoken about looking for signs that players were tiring etc, said he hadn't seen any although he made a point of resting Oliver, think coaching staff had a fear of the team, with so many young players in it, hitting a wall, unfortunately probably didn't see the team hitting the wall so hard

It wasn't the younger players that hit the wall it was the more senior payers, Brayshaw was close to our best, Hunt played well, Stretch played an acceptable game, Oscar was ok in the backline, Salem was good, Tracc was ok, but Jones and Viney were terrible.

Tyson played one of the worst games he's played for the club, his disposal was dreadful, Bernie was forgettable, Garlett was lucky he got two goals, Matt Jones, Jetta and Watts were ordinary.

We went in short when we should have gone in big and that's why I asked the question, did we go in to win?

 

2 minutes ago, Dante said:

It wasn't the younger players that hit the wall it was the more senior payers, Brayshaw was close to our best, Hunt played well, Stretch played an acceptable game, Oscar was ok in the backline, Salem was good, Tracc was ok, but Jones and Viney were terrible.

Tyson played one of the worst games he's played for the club, his disposal was dreadful, Bernie was forgettable, Garlett was lucky he got two goals, Matt Jones, Jetta and Watts were ordinary.

We went in short when we should have gone in big and that's why I asked the question, did we go in to win?

 

The whole team hit the wall, I have 2 players, Roos said the same thing, who looked like they had the energy both physically and mentally to run out the game, Brayshaw and Salem, both of who have missed big chunks of footy this year, missing out on the physical and mental battering the rest have had

25 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

The whole team hit the wall, I have 2 players, Roos said the same thing, who looked like they had the energy both physically and mentally to run out the game, Brayshaw and Salem, both of who have missed big chunks of footy this year, missing out on the physical and mental battering the rest have had

The point is, if you have a team that's about to hit the wall, you change things.  We had players at Casey who were capable of playing down at Geelong yesterday, like Trenners and Grimes and Pedo and Spence and Kennedy and Michie and ANB. If we were really trying to have a dip yesterday we would have made changes and rested some of the players that have looked cooked for a few weeks.

Weed was a waste of time out there yesterday, as was Hogan and Jones and Viney needed a rest. We have had many opportunities to rest younger players but we have continued to play them.

for those that don't get Titus O'Reily's  scribblings I offer the following  (apologies if posted elsewhere )

Sums it up well for mine

Geelong (155) v Melbourne (44)

Paul Roos was meant to have fixed all this but like someone on their last day at work, not a lot of work got done.

I’ve always been a bit perplexed about the lack of criticism of Roos time at Melbourne.

Given the injection of raw talent, some improvement was always going to be there but the question is, has it been enough?

Settling for being just happy because Melbourne aren’t as bad as they once were, seems to me to be a very Melbourne thing to do.

For me, this season has been a failure. The loss to Essendon is still inexcusable and the game against Carlton, with a potential finals spot on the line, makes you wonder if any of the core issues have been fixed.

Add this game, which was a shameful display and you have to wonder if things have really changed as much as people make out.

Am I a hard marker? You bet after decades of this slop.

Still Paul, job done with nothing much for Simon Goodwin to do than collect the premiership cup for the next few years.

Geelong on the other hand looked like the Harlem Globetrotters in this. Calling this a glorified training run for them is probably insulting to how hard they actually train.

If they play like this in finals, they should win it all. Unfortunately, they’ll face teams who know how to win games that mean something.

Just as our preparation for next season was not very good, Geelong's preparation for their next game against Hawthorn would not be at all satisfactory.

In fact i think they will not win another game this year.......  only my opinion.

On 8/28/2016 at 1:00 AM, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

Someone on this page might be a little bit tipsy...

FWIW Hogan is young, inexperienced, and struggles to cope with being out of form as it's happened to him so few times in his life. He's passionate; and in its youth, it comes across as cantankerous. The determined, stoic type will come with age and experience.

I'd also wager that he's playing injured which is adding to his lack of mobility and frustration. He could barely walk when off the ground during the stkilda match and hasn't looked dangerous since.

yes he was  and he was a bit [censored] off   , and i do hope you are right 

5 hours ago, beelzebub said:

for those that don't get Titus O'Reily's  scribblings I offer the following  (apologies if posted elsewhere )

Sums it up well for mine

Geelong (155) v Melbourne (44)

Paul Roos was meant to have fixed all this but like someone on their last day at work, not a lot of work got done.

I’ve always been a bit perplexed about the lack of criticism of Roos time at Melbourne.

Given the injection of raw talent, some improvement was always going to be there but the question is, has it been enough?

Settling for being just happy because Melbourne aren’t as bad as they once were, seems to me to be a very Melbourne thing to do.

For me, this season has been a failure. The loss to Essendon is still inexcusable and the game against Carlton, with a potential finals spot on the line, makes you wonder if any of the core issues have been fixed.

Add this game, which was a shameful display and you have to wonder if things have really changed as much as people make out.

Am I a hard marker? You bet after decades of this slop.

Still Paul, job done with nothing much for Simon Goodwin to do than collect the premiership cup for the next few years.

Geelong on the other hand looked like the Harlem Globetrotters in this. Calling this a glorified training run for them is probably insulting to how hard they actually train.

If they play like this in finals, they should win it all. Unfortunately, they’ll face teams who know how to win games that mean something.

I like O'Reilly. He's funny, but he's also a bloody whinger when it comes to his Melbourne supporting. Stick to comedy Titus and steer clear of Melbourne biases, because all you do is [censored] on the club.

On 28 August 2016 at 7:58 AM, Dante said:

The point is, if you have a team that's about to hit the wall, you change things.  We had players at Casey who were capable of playing down at Geelong yesterday, like ... Michie and ANB....

How did that go the week before? We have two players that were dropped when we lost to lowly Carlton, but somehow they're potential saviours against the team that will probably play-off for the premiership? We HAD players that we'd brought in from Casey: Matt Jones and Harmes? What difference did they make???

We had 2 players who did well, both of whom had missed a large chunk of footy through injury/illness, Salem and Brayshaw. Coincidence?

19 hours ago, beelzebub said:

you have to wonder if things have really changed as much as people make out.

Can't help but feel I disagree...

 

2013 Quarter Statistics

Quarter	W	D	L	For	Against	%
1st	7	1	14	52.49 (361)	87.80 (602)	59.97
2nd	2	0	20	52.58 (370)	105.81 (711)	52.04
3rd	6	0	16	50.50 (350)	102.87 (699)	50.07
4th	5	0	17	55.44 (374)	99.85 (679)	55.08
Total	20	1	67	209.201 (1455)	393.333 (2691)	54.07

2013 Losses

Round	Opposition	For	Against	Margin	Ground
Round 2	Essendon	5.6 (36)	28.16 (184)	148	Melbourne Cricket Ground
Round 18	North Melbourne	4.4 (28)	22.18 (150)	122	Etihad Stadium
Round 10	Hawthorn	6.12 (48)	21.17 (143)	95	Melbourne Cricket Ground
Round 21	Fremantle	5.8 (38)	20.13 (133)	95	Melbourne Cricket Ground
Round 3	West Coast	13.5 (83)	27.15 (177)	94	Melbourne Cricket Ground
Round 9	Fremantle	6.4 (40)	19.16 (130)	90	Patersons Stadium
Round 11	Collingwood	5.9 (39)	17.20 (122)	83	Melbourne Cricket Ground
Round 1	Port Adelaide	8.6 (54)	19.19 (133)	79	Melbourne Cricket Ground
Round 16	Geelong	4.6 (30)	13.20 (98)	68	Simonds Stadium
Round 22	Adelaide	7.10 (52)	18.12 (120)	68	AAMI Stadium
Round 6	Carlton	8.12 (60)	18.13 (121)	61	Melbourne Cricket Ground
Round 7	Gold Coast	7.12 (54)	16.18 (114)	60	Melbourne Cricket Ground
Round 19	GWS Giants	12.15 (87)	19.10 (124)	37	Skoda Stadium
Round 13	St Kilda	10.9 (69)	16.8 (104)	35	Melbourne Cricket Ground
Round 8	Richmond	11.6 (72)	15.16 (106)	34	Melbourne Cricket Ground
Round 15	Sydney	13.7 (85)	16.20 (116)	31	Melbourne Cricket Ground
Round 5	Brisbane Lions	14.10 (94)	17.20 (122)	28	Gabba
Round 23	Western Bulldogs	13.9 (87)	16.11 (107)	20	Etihad Stadium
Round 17	Brisbane Lions	11.9 (75)	13.16 (94)	19	TIO Stadium
Round 20	Gold Coast	10.17 (77)	13.12 (90)	13	Metricon Stadium
Average margin:				64.0