Casey Demons v Coburg - VFL Round 12

[bing181 9,194]

1 hour ago, monoccular said:

I suspect it will take more list changes NB quick and skilled outsiders and yet another pre season.

Not just one.

A lot of this under-performing under pressure WILL sort itself out ... but not overnight. We still have the majority of our list and most of our key players under 100 games (including even Gawn), and it's just not enough, on so many levels.

What we need, more anything else, is time, and with it, experience.

[Satyriconhome 10,731]

6 hours ago, Redleg said:

I disagree with your suggestion that we will learn from it and then the problem is fixed.

We have a deficiency in skill which is highlighted against the better teams. You don't just "learn from it" and suddenly become skillful. That is ridiculous to suggest.

If I spoke to Goodwin I am pretty confident he would acknowledge a lack of" great users of the ball and pace."

Do we find loose targets and hit them inside the F50 when we play good sides? Obviously not often enough to win. That is the problem. We know that is the problem as we have seen it so many times over the last couple of years. 

What do we do to fix the problem? We don't just rely on learning from it, we bring in players with the required skill set or develop our own who have them,but might not be getting a game.

To say the answer is to " learn from it" is to use your words "twaddle".

So your answer is to constantly turn over the list and team until we have players that have those attributes

We have good ball users, it is upto them to learn to use those skills under pressure

On Friday we played in a game that had finals like pressure, we had 3 players who have experimced that before

We failed in our execution into the 50, but we were getting it in there

As Goodwin said he prefers the problem of bombing it in against not getting it in there

 

[DV8 2,271]

10 hours ago, RalphiusMaximus said:

Not THAT interesting. 

Profile. 

Yep, I see.

[DV8 2,271]

7 hours ago, dimmy said:

I am sorry ,but your suggestion of making Tmac a CHB goes against one of the tenets of our current improvement.

The combination of Hogan and him is our strength at the moment.

The game on Friday night has been hailed as one of the best of the season because of its intensity and pressure. There is a vast differnece in playing in that environment and a game against a lower VFL side.

The weakness from us on Friday was twofold :

• Bombing into fwd line especially in first half. DId the I50 stats good ,but only provided and a launching pad for PA
• Not paying the umpires the required amount.

When you get a serious injury to a key player, and you find it hard to replace the injured player, you use the talent available to best suit needs.

TMc is having greatest effect in multiple roles, in the past 12 months, and it was me that called for him to leave the defence,,,,, and go forward as a follower.

So your not telling me anything, dimmy.

 

Now because of circumstance, we may need him to return to where he once roamed, to help us out with his newfound skills, and further self-belief and maturity.

We do have bit players, who can do other of his roles.

But that CHB position is critical to our whole game-plan.

Now you say he and Hogan are our strength at the moment but hogan is playing high up he ground and has don little deep recently. But he has starred when going on ball, ov erthe past 6 weeks.

Also TMc, has starred when on the Wing, and roaming far and wide, and then pushing back hard, into our F50.

 

So now. throw in the Weide, into your scheme. Hogan, TMc and Weide.   Where do you start TMc now?

And who do you play at CHB?

[bing181 9,194]

6 hours ago, bing181 said:

Not just one.

A lot of this under-performing under pressure WILL sort itself out ... but not overnight. We still have the majority of our list and most of our key players under 100 games (including even Gawn), and it's just not enough, on so many levels.

What we need, more anything else, is time, and with it, experience.

More THAN anything else ... 

(not sure why I can't edit/correct my own post, but there you god ...)

[Ethan Tremblay 30,826]

1 hour ago, bing181 said:

More THAN anything else ... 

(not sure why I can't edit/correct my own post, but there you god ...)

You’ve got a 2 hour window to edit your post. 

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

8 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

So your answer is to constantly turn over the list and team until we have players that have those attributes

 

No, that is your gross misinterpretation and exaggeration and is a reason why so many posters find you infuriating. 

Do you understand that a club can acquire players whilst retaining others? 

That is all posters are saying. That we need to add some balance. 

It's really easy to understand. 

Edited June 24, 2018 by stevethemanjordan

[DV8 2,271]

7 hours ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

You’ve got a 2 hour window to edit your post. 

not enough time. when in and out, or tired and wake fresh up next day.

[DV8 2,271]

... is there some Germanic Saxon in this image ? could be a tough goodun?

[The Chazz 4,077]

15 hours ago, bing181 said:

Not just one.

A lot of this under-performing under pressure WILL sort itself out ... but not overnight. We still have the majority of our list and most of our key players under 100 games (including even Gawn), and it's just not enough, on so many levels.

What we need, more anything else, is time, and with it, experience.

You just needed to look at the team we played last Friday to realise just how young our team is, especially the ones we are going to rely on to get us to a flag.

In the hour or so leading in to the match, I was concerned about the age demographic, especially in the top 5-10 of both teams.  We've nearly got the right mix, but I think we are still 12 months away from winning games like the Port one (and Geelong earlier this year).

[Satyriconhome 10,731]

6 hours ago, stevethemanjordan said:

No, that is your gross misinterpretation and exaggeration and is a reason why so many posters find you infuriating. 

Do you understand that a club can acquire players whilst retaining others? 

That is all posters are saying. That we need to add some balance. 

It's really easy to understand. 

I get that misinterpretation, misquoted, paraphrased all the time, interesting no?

I interpreted the post that way

[DV8 2,271]

1 hour ago, The Chazz said:

You just needed to look at the team we played last Friday to realise just how young our team is, especially the ones we are going to rely on to get us to a flag.

In the hour or so leading in to the match, I was concerned about the age demographic, especially in the top 5-10 of both teams.  We've nearly got the right mix, but I think we are still 12 months away from winning games like the Port one (and Geelong earlier this year).

I agree sort of, that I don't think we're a year away from beating the 'big' teams.

But we are from doing it consistently.

 

But we do really need to tough hard speed.

[Redleg 40,843]

14 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

So your answer is to constantly turn over the list and team until we have players that have those attributes

We have good ball users, it is upto them to learn to use those skills under pressure

On Friday we played in a game that had finals like pressure, we had 3 players who have experimced that before

We failed in our execution into the 50, but we were getting it in there

As Goodwin said he prefers the problem of bombing it in against not getting it in there

 

Lists are constantly being turned over every year and I spoke about finding more skilled players, not sacking the whole list.

Your comment that we had only 3 players in a finals like pressure game, who have played in finals is actually misleading. We have played in several games of finals like pressure recently, including QB and Anzac game, not to mention the last game last year and several others and most of the players playing friday also played in those games.

We may have some good ball users, but we also play plenty who aren't. If the Recruiters take your lead we will never look for or get any.

I also said we can hopefully develop our own improved ball use.

I don't think blind loyalty in a club helps anyone when discussing the state of a club's list. You seem unwilling to concede that we need some more players with high skills and extra pace.  I would have thought that was obvious. 

[old dee 23,781]

7 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Lists are constantly being turned over every year and I spoke about finding more skilled players, not sacking the whole list.

Your comment that we had only 3 players in a finals like pressure game, who have played in finals is actually misleading. We have played in several games of finals like pressure recently, including QB and Anzac game, not to mention the last game last year and several others and most of the players playing friday also played in those games.

We may have some good ball users, but we also play plenty who aren't. If the Recruiters take your lead we will never look for or get any.

I also said we can hopefully develop our own improved ball use.

I don't think blind loyalty in a club helps anyone when discussing the state of a club's list. You seem unwilling to concede that we need some more players with high skills and extra pace.  I would have thought that was obvious. 

Spot on Mr. Leg. IMO our last four that make up the 22 most weeks are not good enough, against the bottom sides they play ok but are found wanting every time we play a top eight side. Changes are need again at the end of 2018 as this list wont make a GF let alone win one.

[buck_nekkid 5,847]

28 minutes ago, old dee said:

Spot on Mr. Leg. IMO our last four that make up the 22 most weeks are not good enough, against the bottom sides they play ok but are found wanting every time we play a top eight side. Changes are need again at the end of 2018 as this list wont make a GF let alone win one.

This is an interesting point - what if our 'bottom 4' were significantly improved?  I think all teams are carrying about this many 'workers', if you like.  Do we use these 4 spots for development of future stars (means we bring in Weeds at the expense of Smith), or do we stopgap with the best available?  All teams are looking for the magic / perfect 22, but there is a need to get games into some, and to get others to play a role to support the 'matchwinners'.  The Tigers bottom 4 were made to look good by the team plan - they have premiership medals and 12 months earlier you couldn't trade them for a bag of chips.

We will continuously need to adjust our list, and develop the assets that we have.  At the moment our gameplan calls for more outside speed and finesse to cap off the great development around the contest.  If we cant see it developing from within (Baker?? a fair way to go) - then recruiting it in seems like good policy.

We have to get more games into some of the young ones on the list and see that they can play the plan.  If they can't, then they don't suit this team.  Think JW4, a really high quality player, but just not the player for our plan.  It is all about the team and the plan.  That's what will get us a flag.

[mauriesy 7,261]

On 6/24/2018 at 1:05 PM, Satyriconhome said:

He did nothing with them, no impact whatsoever, an accumulator, he is the latest messiah on here, get him in all will change

That's irrelevant to what you said.

You said he "wilted under pressure" when in fact his output in the last two losing games has been the same as all the other games he's played this season i.e he averages 29 possessions a game.

We could do with an outside player who accumulates that many, if that is the word you wish to use instead of "he gets it a lot".

And no one on here has said he's a "messiah". More exaggeration from you. He would just add class, not change the side completely.

[Deemania since 56 6,609]

On 6/24/2018 at 8:47 AM, Elwood 3184 said:

Casey had 69 inside 50s to 30 and won by 77 points.

On Friday night Melbourne had 68 inside 50s to 39 and lost by 10 points.

 

When Melbourne was down on its knees in the early part of this decade these figures by teams opposed to us would result in 100-point defeats.

 

How is this possible?

Basically, the ridiculous efforts of the umpires to be seen, 'in- charge', developing celebrity umpiring status and plain, ordinary bias that favoured Port Adelaide at the expense of dominant and skilful Demon football. Violations on the interpretation of rules ran amok as the only means of assuring a Port win, in graduated stages across a whole game. I look to the MFC to make an official complaint about this recurring tendency as a measure of the AFL corruption. End of statement.

[Deemania since 56 6,609]

On 6/24/2018 at 11:31 AM, TeamPlayedFine39 said:

He’s showing some encouraging signs with the move down back and it’s great to see/hear that Nev has taken him under his wing.  Would have to be the best possible role model for any young small defender.

Absolutely. Now, play him in the back deep, alongside the fullback and Nev. Have a 'when possible' tall to assist OMac move in - even a resting ruck, and we are near impenetrable. 

[Satyriconhome 10,731]

5 hours ago, Redleg said:

Lists are constantly being turned over every year and I spoke about finding more skilled players, not sacking the whole list.

Your comment that we had only 3 players in a finals like pressure game, who have played in finals is actually misleading. We have played in several games of finals like pressure recently, including QB and Anzac game, not to mention the last game last year and several others and most of the players playing friday also played in those games.

We may have some good ball users, but we also play plenty who aren't. If the Recruiters take your lead we will never look for or get any.

I also said we can hopefully develop our own improved ball use.

I don't think blind loyalty in a club helps anyone when discussing the state of a club's list. You seem unwilling to concede that we need some more players with high skills and extra pace.  I would have thought that was obvious. 

That last bit is your opinion, I don't agree with it, it's not wrong, I just don't agree with it

Blind loyalty has nothing to do with it

I think we have those players developing

Gaff is not the answer

[Redleg 40,843]

12 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

That last bit is your opinion, I don't agree with it, it's not wrong, I just don't agree with it

Blind loyalty has nothing to do with it

I think we have those players developing

Gaff is not the answer

Who do you see as our developing mids and half backs with pace and good disposal skills?

As I have said before I am not as in love with Gaff as others and think he will probably stay anyway.

Edited June 25, 2018 by Redleg

[binman 42,683]

There are facts and there are opinions. And sometimes they intersect.

It is my opinion  we need some more players with foot speed and better rhan average foot skills.

It is also a fact we need more speed and excellent kicking skills (and a player who makes good decisions wouldnt go astray). One only needs to analyse our losses for the proof.

Take the port game. If we had even two players who could hit a short target, kick rhe ball to a forward's advantage, weight the ball properly and kick the goals that shouldnot be missed (hello anb and trac) we wim that game and remain in the top 4.

Of course gaff is no silver bullets. But he may well have got us over the line in the port and cats game given how badly we neefed someone who doesn't butcher the ball going inside 50.

[Satyriconhome 10,731]

5 hours ago, Redleg said:

Who do you see as our developing mids and half backs with pace and good disposal skills?

As I have said before I am not as in love with Gaff as others and think he will probably stay anyway.

We have 44 players who can develop, doesn't matter the name or age, we may lose a couple at the end of the season, but that will be the decision of the FD who have the best handle on platers abilities

A case in point being Dion Johnstone, had a think about him, moved him to defence, like having a new player

[What 18,810]

18 hours ago, Satyriconhome said:

That last bit is your opinion, I don't agree with it, it's not wrong, I just don't agree with it

Blind loyalty has nothing to do with it

I think we have those players developing

Gaff is not the answer

Would bet you said the exact same thing about Lever last season when he was rumoured to be coming to us.

You really dont like any player thats not already wearing the Red and Blue.  Open your mind, chap.  Its a big world out there.

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

12 minutes ago, Satyriconhome said:

We have 44 players who can develop, doesn't matter the name or age, we may lose a couple at the end of the season, but that will be the decision of the FD who have the best handle on platers abilities

A case in point being Dion Johnstone, had a think about him, moved him to defence, like having a new player

Haha cute. 

I guess the trade period and free agency are pointless then hey Sat-man? 

[jumbo returns 6,740]

stevethemanjordan = prodee

Getting t - shirts done, boys?