Post Match Discussion - Round 1

[iv'a worn smith 1,979]

1 minute ago, Demon77 said:

From the 5 talking points article.

Pre-game, Melbourne coach Simon Goodwin said Angus Brayshaw and Dom Tyson had simply been overlooked for selection, such is the strength of the Dees' depth.

So glad we can simply overlook those 2.

I hate to raise it again, but there is some talk around that they were overlooked because of the part they played in the the non-'boot camp' issue.  Apparently T Mac on the outer as well.

But if there is any truth in this rumour, it doesn't say much about putting the 'team' first.

[Chris 2,892]

1 hour ago, GawnWithTheWind said:

Didn't anyone else notice we just couldn't will ourselves to get infront?

Late in the third and the whole fourth quarter, we kicked confident goals to bring it back to under 6 points. However, any forward entry or shot on goal when it was to put us in front, we choked.

Oliver, Melksham, Trac and then Gawn all choked when we needed them to step up.

No idea how to improve that... maybe some more of Mrs Roos meditation classes.

That would come down to needing to learn how to win. Getting yourself from not being very good to being just behind is the easy bit, taking the next step and learning how to win is the hard bit and is all in your head. 

[sisso 2,555]

I thought we were pretty ordinary for most of the day and didn't deserve to win (would have been stoked if Gawny had kicked straight of course!)

Sure we had  a ton of forward entries but whats the point when they are blindly bombed to a pack of players just inside the 50, and the Cats are then allowed to rebound it out with ease? Geelong played a more effective attacking game and killed us on the spread. Menzel gave Jetta a bath, he could have easily kicked 6, we didnt have a match up for him at all.

I hope we can play a lot better than that as the season progresses, more system, less panic ball....

[Stevienic23 1,183]

Geez we missed a lot of tackles, especially inside our own 50. Anybody else notice how easy Geelong got the ball out of our 50 from their kick ins.

[chook fowler 19,263]

Selwood and Ablett cruelled us pure and simple. Even though Oliver and Trac are developing we don’t have anyone near their ability.

[Redleg 40,218]

2 minutes ago, chook fowler said:

Selwood and Ablett cruelled us pure and simple. Even though Oliver and Trac are developing we don’t have anyone near their ability.

No we don't, but you don't send a 2nd gamer to play on them. 

[martin 727]

If Goodwin believes that Maynard is ahead of Brayshaw or Tyson then I have completely lost faith. Maynard is not in our best 30 and has limited prospects. 

[chook fowler 19,263]

25 minutes ago, Redleg said:

No we don't, but you don't send a 2nd gamer to play on them. 

I, too, thought Goodwins coaching was very ordinary

[John Crow Batty 8,786]

We seriously owned them in the second half. Selwood and Ablett were ineffective. Very poor forward structure offensively and defensive  killed us. Even when we scored points they cleared out with too many easy uncontested marks from kick outs 40-50 metres out. 

Edited March 26, 2018 by america de cali

[waynewussell 4,873]

Point of clarification... feel free to enlighten this genuine inquisitor...

16. DISPOSAL FROM MARK OR FREE KICK

16.1 STANDING THE MARK AND TEN-METRE PROTECTED AREA

16.1.1 Standing the Mark
When a Player is awarded a Mark or Free Kick or is Kicking into play after a Behind has been scored, one Player from the opposing Team may stand at the position on the Playing Surface where the Mark or Free Kick was awarded or where the field Umpire otherwise directs the Player to stand. The position on the Playing Surface where the opposing Player stands is known as “the mark”.

16.1.2 Protected Area
The Protected Area is a corridor which extends from 5 metres either side of the mark to 5 metres either side of, and a 5-metre radius behind, the Player with the football, as illustrated in Diagram 2. No Player shall enter and remain in the Protected Area unless the field Umpire calls “Play On” or the Player is accompanying or following within 5 metres of their opponent.

[Dr. Gonzo 23,723]

14 hours ago, Mono said:

Much of the comment is hysterical.

We lost because of 20 pathetic minutes, not individual players.

1st quarter - excellent

2nd qtr - 1st 10 mins - good

2nd qtr - last 20 min - pathetic (go home stuff)

3rd & 4th qtr - good

Not going to beat many teams unless good (or better) for whole game.

We really dominated the last quarter jut couldn't put the score on the board. We kept bombing it up to their loose man making it easy to repel. General play though it felt like we were all over them, Gawn kicks that goal, Hogan and Petracca make the most of their 50/50 shots, Oliver converts from 30 out (I thought both the kick he marked and his kick at goal were touched though I haven't seen a replay) and we're singing a different song today.

One game does not a season make, let's hang off a bit and see how the next few weeks unfold before slagging off all and sundry and sinking the boot in to the club (this is not aimed at you @Mono just posters in general).

[tiers 2,810]

Goodwin lamented our poor defence in the first half allowing 20 scoring shots from 24 inside 50s. No argument - poor set ups and coaching in our defence was apparent early on in Q1 and nothing was done to arrest it.

But much worse was his comment that

"We had a lot of inside 50s and weren't really able to lock that ball in there for a period of time. They rebounded the ball 49 times from our 64 entries for the game – that's a lot.

That's not a lot - it's bloody ginormous. Same old same old long kicks that land on Jesse's head with two to three opponents and a simple defensive punch to the front and centre position that we vacated and allowed them to set up and clear.

It's time to move Jesse from the goal square ALL game and force our team to look for shorter leading targets within 50m arc to retain the ball and ensure a shot at the goals rather than inviting the opposition to practice sling shot rebound footy from our inept entries.

29 scoring shots from 64 inside 50s, 23 more than them, says it all. Can only be due to poor coaching, poor setups or poor directions. Don't blame the players.

Notice how effective Jesse was when he was free to roam. Not that many touches but each one counted.

And how good was Pedo's pass to Maxie who somehow broke free. UnMelbourne like but heartening.

[tiers 2,810]

Re: waynewussel post.

No Player shall enter and remain in the Protected Area. Wonder how this applies to a player who just runs through but does not remain?

The 50m penalty for this so called offence is grossly offensive in itself. A simple warning and reset, if required, should be enough for incidental and non-deliberate misjudgements of 5m clearance that do not compromise the player with the ball or for minor infringements over the mark when it is clear that the player on the mark is attempting to comply.

This is the rule that everyone either hates or will come to hate in time. Change the inflexible and at times arbitrary interpretation now for the good of the game.

Retain only for deliberate or cynical contraventions eg. Sheedy's team in the 80s that caused the rule to be changed from 15m to 50m for deliberate and cynical time wasting.

Although 15m was enough to break our hearts in 1987.

[hemingway 7,615]

1 hour ago, sisso said:

I thought we were pretty ordinary for most of the day and didn't deserve to win (would have been stoked if Gawny had kicked straight of course!)

Sure we had  a ton of forward entries but whats the point when they are blindly bombed to a pack of players just inside the 50, and the Cats are then allowed to rebound it out with ease? Geelong played a more effective attacking game and killed us on the spread. Menzel gave Jetta a bath, he could have easily kicked 6, we didnt have a match up for him at all.

I hope we can play a lot better than that as the season progresses, more system, less panic ball....

Agreed.

We seemed to have no structure up forward and poor organization. Players not knowing where to run or in the wrong place. Not helped as you say by players down field bombing the ball down forward almost without looking. Compared to the Cats in that first half, we looked second rate.  

Again, as you say we lacked system as much down back as down forward.

In that second half we were badly out marked down back, with our defenders not having the height, spring, and also being caught out of position.  

Yet we very nearly stole the match. 

 

[monoccular 17,328]

15 hours ago, waynewussell said:

I went to the game. My summary... it was ours to lose! Great contest... so much better to watch than several other round 1 games. All of the critics here need to take a breath and think what they would be writing if Max kicked the goal. I didn't see a Demon player who didn't contribute in some way. There has been so much stupid stuff written here that I don't have time to make the corrections. Our 2018 campaign is off to a healthy start with a lot to look forward to. Fritsch proved he is more than a goalsneak... Lever had the same sort of influence that gained him a reputation at Adelaide...Max, Ollie & Trac were superb. Bernie showed why he is a favoured son on many occasions... none better than when he rode the bump that left a Cat sprawled in his wake... Hogan was creative and hit the scoreboard in his normal manner. Harmes, Hunt and Hannon lifted in the second half to bring us back into contention. Wagner is all bustle and bash... what he lacks in finesse and finish is made up for in fearless attack on opposition bodies. ANB continues to bob op with deft touches... Jones got us going in the first quarter (those that thought he was ordinary need to watch the replay)... Pederson continues to be a wonderful contributor who is now showing that he is a cool head in a crisis (that kick to Max instead of shooting for goal was centimetre perfect!... Mind you, I have seen Pedo score from that position). Neville was playing hurt and may miss next week. I would expect Brayshaw and Tyson to come in to contention... but I certainly wouldn't be making more than one or two changes. Congratulations to the coaching panel for preparing such a fit and motivated team for the beginning of 2018.

Much as I hate losing again, there are many positives about the game.

Coming back from 29down at half rime (yes, we let them get too many easy goals late in Q2) the fight back was good ....... in years past it would have been the harbinger of a shellacking.

Max played a great game and of course it was gutting that he missed that shot.

I was skeptical about playing both Vince and Lewis - bitterly disappointed at Lewis’ shocking display of non leadership that gifted them a vital goal - he has been around long enough to know that the maggot won’t change his decision?

But I thought that Vince’s courageous attack early in Q4 could have been a game changer.  Pity the team couldn’t finish off the good work.

 

[Hot as Hell 466]

34 minutes ago, hemingway said:

Yet we very nearly stole the match. 

 

Your comment is on the money hemingway.

Even had some of those final quarter points been goals and we won instead of lost, we would have "stolen the match" from Geelong.

They deserved the win with a very young team playing according to a "very old" (sorry Scotty) coach's methodical game plan:-  "Run hard, break free, protect each other, lower the eyes and hit a target".

That is a simple to understand game plan most AFL players can execute.

Ours appears a little more complex, fans don't quite know what it is and it seems, neither do the players. "Go in hard, fight for the ball, kick it long" does not quite have the sophistication or the success rate of a premiership strategy. if that is roughly what it is.

Plan B is still a work in progress it seems.

 

Edited March 26, 2018 by Hot as Hell
typos

[Dr. Gonzo 23,723]

36 minutes ago, Hot as Hell said:

Your comment is on the money hemingway.

Even had some of those final quarter points been goals and we won instead of lost, we would have "stolen the match" from Geelong.

They deserved the win with a very young team playing according to a "very old" (sorry Scotty) coach's methodical game plan:-  "Run hard, break free, protect each other, lower the eyes and hit a target".

That is a simple to understand game plan most AFL players can execute.

Ours appears a little more complex, fans don't quite know what it is and it seems, neither do the players. "Go in hard, fight for the ball, kick it long" does not quite have the sophistication or the success rate of a premiership strategy. if that is roughly what it is.

Plan B is still a work in progress it seems.

 

Sorry but this is rubbish. The game was there for the taking, we stuffed our chances and the Cats won. But had we converted one of those last quarter opportunities we would have been deserving victors.

[DubDee 24,435]

We played a great 2nd half, restricting them to 2 goals. But we only kicked 5.11. 

Our defence was so bad in the first half though. 20 scoring shots from 24 inside fifties!! I have never seen that even in the Neeld days. 

Good news is we are more than good enough to win these games. The players just need the belief

[Jaded No More 67,767]

Rawlings is no longer our backline coach and our backline absolutely stunk it up yesterday. Coincidence? 

[Wiseblood 24,637]

14 minutes ago, Jaded said:

Rawlings is no longer our backline coach and our backline absolutely stunk it up yesterday. Coincidence? 

They stunk it up only for a half to be fair.  I know they missed a few gettable shots in the second half but they only kicked two goals.  We tightened the screws really well after half time which we needed to as we were deplorable in the first half.

[Lucifers Hero 38,985]

Re the Salem incident.  He seemed to land on his back - did anyone notice if his head also hit the deck?  He looked out cold and didn't move for quite a few seconds.   With his concussion history he should have been taken off and checked.  Given that he had no touches after the incident suggests his head or his back weren't right.  I wouldn't be surprised if he is out vs Brisbane injured/hurt.

As and aside why didn't a trainer go to him to check him or help him up?  Very odd. Doubly odd that none of his teammates went to his aid either. 

Edited March 26, 2018 by Lucifer's Hero

[Wiseblood 24,637]

5 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Re the Salem incident.  He seemed to land on his back - did anyone notice if his head also hit the deck?  He looked out cold and didn't move for quite a few seconds.   With his concussion history he should have been taken off and checked.  Given that he had no touches after the incident suggests his head or his back weren't right.  I wouldn't be surprised if he is out vs Brisbane injured/hurt.

As and aside why didn't a trainer go to him to check him or help him up?  Very odd. Doubly odd that none of his teammates went to his aid either. 

I thought he was down for a bit and he had a few trainers around him before he got up... ?  I was watching from the opposite part of the ground so my memory may be a little fuzzy, but I recall trainers going to him when he hit the deck.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

11 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

As and aside why didn't a trainer go to him to check him or help him up?  Very odd. Doubly odd that none of his teammates went to his aid either. 

The trainer went to him.

[Lucifers Hero 38,985]

6 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

I thought he was down for a bit and he had a few trainers around him before he got up... ?  I was watching from the opposite part of the ground so my memory may be a little fuzzy, but I recall trainers going to him when he hit the deck.

 

1 minute ago, Clint Bizkit said:

The trainer went to him.

Thank you both.  Faulty memory on my part.

Hope he is ok to play next week.

[Clintosaurus 7,565]

3 hours ago, waynewussell said:

Point of clarification... feel free to enlighten this genuine inquisitor...

16. DISPOSAL FROM MARK OR FREE KICK

16.1 STANDING THE MARK AND TEN-METRE PROTECTED AREA

16.1.1 Standing the Mark
When a Player is awarded a Mark or Free Kick or is Kicking into play after a Behind has been scored, one Player from the opposing Team may stand at the position on the Playing Surface where the Mark or Free Kick was awarded or where the field Umpire otherwise directs the Player to stand. The position on the Playing Surface where the opposing Player stands is known as “the mark”.

16.1.2 Protected Area
The Protected Area is a corridor which extends from 5 metres either side of the mark to 5 metres either side of, and a 5-metre radius behind, the Player with the football, as illustrated in Diagram 2. No Player shall enter and remain in the Protected Area unless the field Umpire calls “Play On” or the Player is accompanying or following within 5 metres of their opponent.

I actually think some of the 6 Cats players jumping up and down as Maxy was running in for his kick would have been in the Protected Area. Imagine if a 50 was awarded?