18 hours ago, Fat Tony said:

It was a costly mistake (again) not starting TMac as a loose man into the wind IMO. 

Agree. Tmac was very good when he went back ... Not sure if goody is stubborn or niave. Didn't coach to the conditions at all

All aboard the Gawn Train last stop September. 

45 minutes ago, bandicoot said:

119 tackles is in the top 5 for a side in AFL history. GWS came to play and no one was going to get in their way

Teams seem to frequently have high tackle numbers against us. My view is this is because we are predominantly inside and one paced. 

Very few positives to come out of yesterday. The only ones for me were Maynard's debut and Gawn showing glimpses of his old form back. Sadly our midfield was all at sea yesterday and last week. That is why we lost, we struggled for effective clearances and our spread was non existent. They made us look like a slow second rate team. 

I was disappointed that Goodwin didn't try something different after half time. Salem, Hunt or Garlett on the wing to give us some pace and run would have been great. Instead he put Tom in the backline, even when we had the wind advantage so we lost our only effective forward. It was a dumb strategy. 

I've decided to take a year off football from next season. Unless we win our first 6 games.

The most disappointing aspect for me was how much better they were setup against the wind in the first half than we were. GWS always had an extra back, and we belatedly manned them up in the second but we didn't have a designated loose in the first half - other than our attacking flankers coming from the other side of the square.

GWS also came down the dead side of the ground when they had the ball and if they turned it over it would be with zero open space to work in. We, on the other hand tried to attack to 'alive' side of the ground which meant when they pressured us the had the entire ground, fueled by the wind to punish us.

it was naïveté, or poor planning, or ignorance from Goodwin and co. and that is the most depressing part of it; this is how most games are played at Manuka when there is a breeze. You don't open up the other side of the ground when you are against the breeze.

I'm a bit over this 'tiring' argument which pops up when we play bog ordinary footy at the back end of the season. We used it last year and now posters are wheeling it out again.

Strewth, imagine if we make finals! Eliminated immediately because we'd just be too tired.

Ffs.

 

9 minutes ago, McQueen said:

I'm a bit over this 'tiring' argument which pops up when we play bog ordinary footy at the back end of the season. We used it last year and now posters are wheeling it out again.

Strewth, imagine if we make finals! Eliminated immediately because we'd just be too tired.

Ffs.

 

Pathetic mental attitude...

All season we have had quite a few players talk to the media after a win.

I understand they have obligations but we need to walk it before we talk it.

All year a few players have fronted up on shows talking about our brand of footy and how good we are.

The last two weeks have exposed us as nowhere near good enough and relegated us to where we truly belong.

The club has done well in many respects but it needs to drastically raise expectations and lower pride.

The end of the season is the time to gloat. We win 3 or 4 in a row and its high fives and talk of top 4.

Swans win 3 or 4 and then go and double it.

 

 

20 minutes ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

I've decided to take a year off football from next season. Unless we win our first 6 games.

Understand where you are coming from.

Im pretty sure membership may drop depending on how we finish this year.

I'm conflicted about our improvement (perhaps 12 wins) and the shite we served up over the last 14 days.

 

4 hours ago, big_red_fire_engine said:

Teams seem to frequently have high tackle numbers against us. My view is this is because we are predominantly inside and one paced. 

We were the most tackled team last year and are currently the 2nd-most this year. We've also made the 2nd-most tackles. Compare with the Bombers, who have received some 300 less hits, and laid 200 less, and that's a lot of extra body contact for our young team. While there are no bump stats, the tackle for/against counts are indicative of our inside contested game-style which would similarly see us atop a bump or body-contact ladder.

Throw in several other elements of our offensive and defensive set-ups and we're playing the most taxing style of footy in the league. But no, the kids aren't sore or tired - just bloated on bathwater.

Agree with comments about the wind. The way GWS just neutralised the game in the second quarter completely killed the game. We had no answers whatsoever, exactly the same as the week before.

Just wanted to highlight... Since returning from Injury Watts has not touched the  ball a lot or impacted in his last 3 games.. Prior to his injury he's played well.. what's frustrating to see for a player who's never played finals & played in very poor sides . I can't see any apitite for the contest . I don't see any hard tackling or pressure acts as a Senior player we're is his leadrship? Surely the coaches can't accept this . I don't want him to be the whipping boy  but ffs opportunity to play finals!! need to see the hunger & aggression..

5 hours ago, big_red_fire_engine said:

Teams seem to frequently have high tackle numbers against us. My view is this is because we are predominantly inside and one paced. 

Agree. I don't think Tigers are much but, on a closer look noticed their small forward line ( like GWS yesterday ) loaded with pace, couple of stars in the middle, ( like GWS who of course  have more stars ) outside mids who can run and carry ( like GWS again who have more) and all of them have fair disposal.

When Garlett and Hunt, our only 2 quicks, have 9 possessions between them, it goes part of the way to explaining the result.

We need spread, with pace and good disposal, or we won't improve. End of story.

6 hours ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

During his presser Goodwin stated he wasn't in a position to comment about the Mumford incident on Gawn. Anyone know what the incident was? 

Yep, Momma thought he wouldn't be able to stop before he got to the boundary so he stuck his shoulder deliberately into  Gawn's head....to slow himself down

2 hours ago, Skuit said:

We were the most tackled team last year and are currently the 2nd-most this year. We've also made the 2nd-most tackles. Compare with the Bombers, who have received some 300 less hits, and laid 200 less, and that's a lot of extra body contact for our young team. While there are no bump stats, the tackle for/against counts are indicative of our inside contested game-style which would similarly see us atop a bump or body-contact ladder.

Throw in several other elements of our offensive and defensive set-ups and we're playing the most taxing style of footy in the league. But no, the kids aren't sore or tired - just bloated on bathwater.

Thats one extra tackle per player per game.

ONE.

Straw clutching.

6 hours ago, McQueen said:

I'm a bit over this 'tiring' argument which pops up when we play bog ordinary footy at the back end of the season. We used it last year and now posters are wheeling it out again.

Strewth, imagine if we make finals! Eliminated immediately because we'd just be too tired.

Ffs.

 

Give them the week off training?

1 hour ago, Hogan2014 said:

Just wanted to highlight... Since returning from Injury Watts has not touched the  ball a lot or impacted in his last 3 games.. Prior to his injury he's played well.. what's frustrating to see for a player who's never played finals & played in very poor sides . I can't see any apitite for the contest . I don't see any hard tackling or pressure acts as a Senior player we're is his leadrship? Surely the coaches can't accept this . I don't want him to be the whipping boy  but ffs opportunity to play finals!! need to see the hunger & aggression..

Going off that, the pattern after two 0 goal games and  a 1 is then a 3. 

43 minutes ago, loges said:

Give them the week off training?

This is the fallacy.

We've had some of our most capable players in Jones, Gawn, Watts, Hogan, Vince, Lewis et al all out injured or suspended at one time or another.

They've had a spell. Given they're 'senior' players it just [censored] with my head that you'd fall out of 'touch' that quickly. During my career (obviously at a lower level) I've never had a problem getting back amongst it.

It's just excuse after excuse.

2 minutes ago, McQueen said:

This is the fallacy.

We've had some of our most capable players in Jones, Gawn, Watts, Hogan, Vince, Lewis et al all out injured or suspended at one time or another.

They've had a spell. Given they're 'senior' players it just [censored] with my head that you'd fall out of 'touch' that quickly. During my career (obviously at a lower level) I've never had a problem getting back amongst it.

It's just excuse after excuse.

Bike .... riding ...

9 hours ago, Jaded said:

 They made us look like a slow second rate team. 

 

Which we are.

 

6 hours ago, ding said:

Thats one extra tackle per player per game.

ONE.

Straw clutching.

Tackles aren't evenly distributed Ding. That's our midfield receiving and laying a bunch of extra tackles per game. Plus the other stuff - bumps and body contact. We're an inside contested team. We also rely on heavy two-way running with our zone and high press, frantic defensive pressure, and a running offense with movement by hand. Our team is tired. Why is that so hard to believe for people than some idea about not having the ticker/hubris/or psychological damage?

We've had the most taxing back-half fixture I can recall. I would be tired just flying to six territories across six-seven weeks without actually playing football on top. The injuries which have come as a result have had a trickle-down effect on work-loads etc. If you need someone to blame, question perhaps whether our game-plan is sustainable. But to think it's simply a problem with leadership/drive etc. is just not understanding the professional athletic environment and the strain that these not yet fully developed bodies are under.

5 hours ago, McQueen said:

This is the fallacy.

We've had some of our most capable players in Jones, Gawn, Watts, Hogan, Vince, Lewis et al all out injured or suspended at one time or another.

They've had a spell. Given they're 'senior' players it just [censored] with my head that you'd fall out of 'touch' that quickly. During my career (obviously at a lower level) I've never had a problem getting back amongst it.

It's just excuse after excuse.

McQueen - but why? Why should our players be having difficulty returning to form compared to those from other teams. The logical answer isn't a lack of desire etc. It's looking at the way we play football and what impact that could be having.

12 minutes ago, Skuit said:

Tackles aren't evenly distributed Ding. That's our midfield receiving and laying a bunch of extra tackles per game. Plus the other stuff - bumps and body contact. We're an inside contested team. We also rely on heavy two-way running with our zone and high press, frantic defensive pressure, and a running offense with movement by hand. Our team is tired. Why is that so hard to believe for people than some idea about not having the ticker/hubris/or psychological damage?

We've had the most taxing back-half fixture I can recall. I would be tired just flying to six territories across six-seven weeks without actually playing football on top. The injuries which have come as a result have had a trickle-down effect on work-loads etc. If you need someone to blame, question perhaps whether our game-plan is sustainable. But to think it's simply a problem with leadership/drive etc. is just not understanding the professional athletic environment and the strain that these not yet fully developed bodies are under.

Yeah i get the point you are trying to make Skuit, and i dont doubt you are a passionate Dees supporter, but it just smacks of excuse-making. We have not played a SINGLE game more than any other team this year... and other sides have laid and taken more tackles/bumps and are further up the ladder than we are.  Im just sick to [censored] death of needing to grasp at straws for excuses. We need to reach finals this year. Reason and excuses look the same otherwise.

41 minutes ago, ding said:

Yeah i get the point you are trying to make Skuit, and i dont doubt you are a passionate Dees supporter, but it just smacks of excuse-making. We have not played a SINGLE game more than any other team this year... and other sides have laid and taken more tackles/bumps and are further up the ladder than we are.  Im just sick to [censored] death of needing to grasp at straws for excuses. We need to reach finals this year. Reason and excuses look the same otherwise.

That's not really true except for Geelong being the closet to our combined differential (although quite a long way off) and also showing some similar signs of fatigue. But it's been a pretty brutal season for us supporters as well, with a lot of hard hits along the way, and I really don't have the energy left myself to argue the point.

It's certainly frustrating. Going through the same thing over and over again as an MFC fan. But we are definitely psychologically damaged as a supporter-base (although with every damn right to be). And I am a passionate Dee-man, but I'm usually also a fairly hard task-master as well, and I'm not looking to make excuses - rather, I'm just trying to understand.  And I find it far easier to make sense of the concept that the fixture and our game-style has run us into the ground rather than some idea about these kids being mentally weak.

I have no doubt that we have an aspirational group of players. They just can't get up atm. Can we work out the reason for that currently without relying on the answers based on the scars of our past?