1 hour ago, Skuit said:

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?

Mentally weak! Its the only possible explaination and it has been allowed in a soft cosy enviorement.They are not fair dinkum IMO.

1 hour ago, jackaub said:

Mentally weak! Its the only possible explaination and it has been allowed in a soft cosy enviorement.They are not fair dinkum IMO.

That's fine if that's your conclusion. But can you show me your workings? Why do you think our players are weaker mentally than those of other teams?

Success in football is all about taking opportunities when they arise because they may not come back again soon in a tough and unforgiving competition. This season we are chasing the relatively modest expectation of just making finals after our near miss last season. In our quest we looked at one stage of making top four but now we are in danger of blowing even a token finals appearance. Whilst we are a stronger and a better side on paper losing games we should be winning on a regular basis has undone all the good work. This has been a consistent flaw and shows a lack of mental toughness and character and puts us at risk of backsliding next season. 

I made it through a half of Saturday's game, before finding better things to do. Incidentally, that is longer than most of the players lasted, as they seemed to think the job was done 10 minutes in.

The two really concerning aspects of our performances over the past six weeks are (1) the lack of effort and intensity and (2) the lack of game sense our players and coaches exhibit.

On point 1, and hindsight is a wonderful thing, we should have looked at resting Hunt & Petracca for the GWS game. Both are well down on form and impact, and a long season has clearly got to them. A week off, with three winnable games to come may have been a better option. Other players have certainly gotten ahead of themselves, and need a sharp kick up the backside.

On point 2, I'm not sure how we got our game plan so badly wrong on Saturday after failing in similar conditions a week ago. Slow the game down into wind, and move the ball quickly with the wind. It's not that difficult. Goodwin's insistence on keeping Watts & McDonald in the forward line as the game slips away is doing my head in. 

There is no excuse for missing finals this year. This group just doesn't want it badly enough.

20 hours ago, rpfc said:

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.

rfpc, why do you think our coaching staff got it so wrong? 

It wouldn't be so bad if they had not failed in similar circumstances one week earlier.

Do they not research conditions at different grounds, look at footage of games or send a scout to watch games at an oval we are scheduled to play on? 

Is it because, (except for Macca) most of our coaches are rookies.   I'm struggling to find reasons why coaches aren't tweaking our game plan and structures for different conditions. 

Baffling.

1 minute ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

rfpc, why do you think our coaching staff got it so wrong? 

It wouldn't be so bad if the coaching failed in similar circumstances one week earlier.

Do they not research conditions at different grounds, look at footage of games or send a scout to watch games at an oval we are scheduled to play on? 

Is it because, (except for Macca) most of our coaches are rookies.   I'm struggling to find reasons why coaches aren't tweaking our game plan and structures for different conditions. 

Baffling.

As I said in the Jack Watts thread - there is some shielding from the wind on the grandstand side but you don't take that gamble against a great midfield because when you turn it over you will get smashed with the wind assisting in opening up the ground right down the middle.

The fact that Goodwin said 'we butchered the ball' is the most frustrating part of this.

Of course we did, Simon, both teams did while trying to kick through a 20 knot breeze. You didn't prepare properly and arrogantly thought that you could instruct them to come up a narrow region of the ground against the wind. You screwed up.

My fears were well and truly realised.

We were beaten in the pressure stakes, particularly in the first quarter.

Again way to many turnovers.

And 12 scoring shots from 55 inside 50s? Woeful. This was partly  a function of how poor our entries were but also our forwards lack of intensity, particulaly watts and garlett. So disappointing.

Again though the thing that stands out is how poor our disposal often is, an issue exacerbated by the wind. Again. Crap kicks are even worse in wet and/or windy conditions. And elite kicks stand out. Look at gws -their skills were so much better. For us it was like a butchers convention.

Whoever we draft or trade in has to have terrific disposal skills.

The only positive was that we avoided a blow out. To limit them to 97 points after conceding 8 goals in the first q was a pretty good effort. And might end up being important given % might well be critical for top 8 spots

The most annoying aspect  for mine is we had the 'practice' run only a week before. We got to see first hand how it all goes, ..i.e  instructions  ( if the right ones ) v execution...= results etc.  Then on Sat..someone pushed the the 'Repeat' button.

mind boggling stupidity really

8 hours ago, Skuit said:

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.

The answer you seek is in Gawn's post match interview with Burgo.

Leadership!

Gawn confirmed that it wasn't until quarter time the coaches actually got to tell them what the main issue is. 

Quote

“We actually started off not too bad, but the next 15 minutes of that first quarter, we stopped going to the footy, which is where you win the ball. They had five or six numbers to our two or three, and it’s a numbers game footy sometimes.

FFS! How can that be?? WTF were the leaders on the field actually doing during that 15 minutes of total domination by the Giants? Should we be relying on our runners to come out and deliver the basic game plan instructions because not one of our leaders could apply themselves to actually analyse why it was happening and make a further effort to actually rally the troops? 

We've been worked out by other clubs. The Giants put the screws on us after 5 minutes but we couldn't react as quickly when they put the the pressure on us.

I defended the coaches last week getting it right IMO and players desire costing us in the final quarter.

Soundly outcoached on Saturday. Whatever about not starting a loose defender but when they got that run on change needed to be made to stem the tide. Also couldn't understand why wr continued against the wind to play quick footy when the game needed to be slown down to a stoppage battle 

On 05/08/2017 at 4:40 PM, Pates said:

Got to win the next two for that to be the case, and that's very far from a certainty. One week at a time, we've got to find a way to win next week, seems to me the players have lost some confidence. 

...not to say the supporters too.

Mutual loss of trust.  Must correct urgently.

4 minutes ago, monoccular said:

...not to say the supporters too.

Mutual loss of trust.  Must correct urgently.

Exactly what was said last week

This group appears to struggle with expectation

And yes i know they are slightly younger than other sides

They need serious psyc counselling

 

Just now, jackaub said:

Exactly what was said last week

This group appears to struggle with expectation

And yes i know they are slightly younger than other sides

They need serious psyc counselling

 

Telling also is the fact that we started to play better or at least break even straight after they kicked the first two goals of the third quarter. Effectively the door was slammed shut then and the pressure was off so we played a little more freely. 

Posted 42 minutes ago

2 hours ago, rpfc said:

The wind in Manuka usually pushes the ball to the 'Kingston' side pocket and that it did on Saturday. When you are defending that end like we were in the first, you station your loose man favouring that side.

But we didn't have one. GWS - 6 goals up in the second started with one... !

You also 'attack' up that wing going into the wind because you won't get punished when you turn the ball over.

The only aspect of this that is very much Manuka-driven in the belligerent arrogance of Goodwin and co. to direct us to play up the 'grandstand' side presumably because there is a small protection from the wind and we can execute our skills oh-so-well... If we were playing a shite team, I could understand it, but we were not and it was demoralising to watch as I have played, coached, and watched dozens of games at Manuka and have never instructed a team to open up the ground for the opposition the way we did for GWS in that first quarter against the wind.

 

 

From the Jack Watts thread and a pretty good summary. 

We either had dumb players or dumb coaches, but essentially we played dumb football.  Another aspect of GWS's play was that they went long, very long with the wind (even mongrel kicks) and then applied maniac pressure when the ball inevietably hit the ground; resulting in a rushed kick into the wind.  

Now this is not rocket science; as the following morning I had my U10's playing in similar gale force conditions and instructed them to kick the ball long with the wind, informing them that marking a ball in those conditions was not likely, and therefore we had to follow the long kick up with numbers at the contest.  If the opposition got it, we then had to force them to rush a kick into the wind, with our defenders playing in front (our last line being 5 metres in front).  When we were going into the wind we kicked to the dead side of the ground, and pushed numbers to the contest daring them to switch into the open side were a fumble (likely in the conditions) could be exploited by our pace.  The kids implemented this easily and we went on to comfortably beat a top 2 side doing this.

After the Hobart experience, how cold the Dee's not have learnt and adapted just 7 days later. 

 

 

 

GWS 29 shots from 53 i50s, Melb 14 shots from 55 i50s

FMD

58 minutes ago, Pennant St Dee said:

I defended the coaches last week getting it right IMO and players desire costing us in the final quarter.

Soundly outcoached on Saturday. Whatever about not starting a loose defender but when they got that run on change needed to be made to stem the tide. Also couldn't understand why wr continued against the wind to play quick footy when the game needed to be slown down to a stoppage battle 

Bizarre to say the least 'Pennant'.

2 hours ago, Pennant St Dee said:

I defended the coaches last week getting it right IMO and players desire costing us in the final quarter.

Soundly outcoached on Saturday. Whatever about not starting a loose defender but when they got that run on change needed to be made to stem the tide. Also couldn't understand why wr continued against the wind to play quick footy when the game needed to be slown down to a stoppage battle 

Spot on.  I think our start lulled us into a false sense of security.  When they kicked a couple out of their bums and got it back to level, it was almost as if we thought "we've got to keep attacking and get back in front here",  instead of locking it down, taking our medicine and understanding that a 2 goal deficit against the wind would be a good result.  Just kept playing quick footy instead of slowing it down. 

Also, re: the tackle count.  I'm not surprised that teams have higher numbers against us.  Partly it's because we want it to be contested, but most of it is because our game style invites pressure.  Opposition coaches would be saying "they love 1 metre handballs out of congestion, but if we put pressure on them, they'll stay in congestion and we'll turn it over".  Exactly what GWS did for most of the first half.  And that's St Kilda's game plan, so let's hope we can find some spread this week or else the same thing will happen all over again.