4 hours ago, picket fence said:

If my aunty had some yarbles she would be my uncle, she would have made a good uncle , but not quite the same.

Close but no cigar. Similar to footy, bounce and angles.

The better you are the less chance of mistakes being made. And taking your chances is something this club does not do!

Max Gawn should have kicked truly round 1 he didn't coz he wasn't good enough.

Footy is littered with the coulda, shoulda, woulda stories

Not interested in these . No one wants to see or know about the labour pains, we just wanta see the baby.

We HAVE NOT LEARNT AT ALL FROM LAST ROUND LAST YEAR

Its called Mental difficiency and lack of skill. No more than that!

You obviously don't have the capacity for critical thinking, please don't quote me again.

3 hours ago, jnrmac said:

You keep bringing that up. But in rd 1 we let geelong score 80 pts in the first half. 20 shots in goal from 24 entries. We let the Swans score 7 in a row on Sunday! With 2 men down. The second game against geelong we didn't know how to ice the clock and lost the game.

That is a finals side. Pfft. Some people aren't intelligent enough to understand the type of football you need to play in finals. Nuances my rear.

Yeah and in round 1 we kept the Cats to 17 points in the second half, last week we kept the Swans to 1 goal in the 1st quarter and 0 in the last and against the Cats in Geelong we had a run of 5 goals in a row and would've won if the sireb went 10 seconds earlier.

Every team has had bad losses/games this year, it's not something that's unique to our team.

If 2 kicks across the season went the other way (Gawn goal Tuohy miss) we would be 3rd on the ladder and playing for 2nd spot tomorrow and Goodwin would be being lauded by all and sundry. Does that mean we would be any better than we are right now? No of course not but the discussion around Goodwin and the club would be completely different because the media is full of hot air and the general public are idiots.

On 8/17/2018 at 5:53 AM, Gorgoroth said:

Yeah he was, but tbh I think the point he wanted to make was that no one, players or coaches, grab the game by the scruff of the neck and drag it with them over the line, hence his calls for sometimes make it 1v1 all over the ground and challenge each player to beat his opponent. Dermie said we have the talent for that to be effective and I agree.

Dunstall also made the point now is the time for the coach to stop deflecting the heat from the media away from the team and challenge them, front on, here it is. Take it if you want it.

Agree with this sentiment as well. It seems the most obvious move, but as soon as a side gets two goals in a row, where the momentum is clearly against us, we should be reverting to man on man. I would back just about every player in our 22 to win a 1v1, with the exception of JKH.

We need to revert to this set up a lot more regularly if we want to dig our heels in when the going gets tough.

4 hours ago, rjay said:

That's the important thing for all to understand...it's not about average age it's about where players sit on the age scale.

It's also about games played, and just as importantly, games played *together*.

Re the former, worth remembering that Max Gawn has played less than 100 games. Apart from Grundy, most other decent rucks in the competition are all around/over 200 games. (McEvoy, Goldstein, Ryder are the ones leading the ratings)

5 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

eg In the all important 25 to 30 age range we have a decent group of players with a fair amount of experience:

 

1 hour ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

ou've moved the goal posts from our 26-29 year olds being 'way off' those of other teams, to their 25 to 30 ish players being around the mark or higher than ours. 

 

No 'Lucifer', you changed the goal posts.

Lets not quibble about a year or so...we don't have the quality of other clubs in that age bracket, the prime years for an AFL footballer. Only a fan with rose coloured glasses would say different.

...and that added to games played (lack of experience) is the major reason we struggle to put away quality opposition.

16 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

the discussion around Goodwin and the club would be completely different because the media is full of hot air and the general public are idiots.

Not quite idiots, but it would take a page or so on behavioural economics, cognitive biases and heuristics to explore further, with a few quotes from Daniel Kahneman thrown in for good measure. We like to think of ourselves as thinking machines who feel, but in reality we're feeling machines who think. So we spend our lives making up stories to explain what we feel, where the easier those stories are to make up, the more we're convinced that they correspond with what happened. In short, w'ere not idiots, but we are predictably irrational.

9 minutes ago, bing181 said:

Not quite idiots, but it would take a page or so on behavioural economics, cognitive biases and heuristics to explore further, with a few quotes from Daniel Kahneman thrown in for good measure. We like to think of ourselves as thinking machines who feel, but in reality we're feeling machines who think. So we spend our lives making up stories to explain what we feel, where the easier those stories are to make up, the more we're convinced that they correspond with what happened. In short, w'ere not idiots, but we are predictably irrational.

Actually we're atomic machines that feel we think.

Edited August 18, 20186 yr by Chook

10 minutes ago, bing181 said:

Not quite idiots, but it would take a page or so on behavioural economics, cognitive biases and heuristics to explore further, with a few quotes from Daniel Kahneman thrown in for good measure. We like to think of ourselves as thinking machines who feel, but in reality we're feeling machines who think. So we spend our lives making up stories to explain what we feel, where the easier those stories are to make up, the more we're convinced that they correspond with what happened. In short, w'ere not idiots, but we are predictably irrational.

Ie allowing our emotions cloud our judgement

9 minutes ago, rjay said:

..and that added to games played (lack of experience) is the major reason we struggle to put away quality opposition.

Q.E.D.

20 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Ie allowing our emotions cloud our judgement

More like mistaking emotions for judgement (reason).

In reality, emotions are a necessary component of decision-making. People who for whatever reason (brain damage/accidents) don't have access to their emotions are almost incapable of making even the simplest decision (what will I have for breakfast).

It has to be said though, that all this irrationality is there for a reason. We made it to the top of the evolutionary tree not because we make better decisions, but because we got very good at making decisions efficiently (time/energy). But efficiency doesn't always equal accuracy and the corner-cutting that our brains are programmed to do comes at a price.

Go Dees.

Edited August 18, 20186 yr by bing181

4 hours ago, MSFebey said:

Wowsers, is that true? Thats terrible, training drill stuff and witches hats.

"I didn't like our first half much at all. I think our ability to defend in the first half wasn't to the level that we certainly trained all summer," Goodwin said. 

"Ultimately when they have 20 scoring shots from 24 inside 50s, that's the game in a nutshell. 

"They had 80 points to half-time. We were really disappointed with that first half. We just didn't defend the way we would have liked."

We had 14-9 i50s in the last and scored 1g 7b. Geelong were without Dangerfield and lost Harry Taylor in the first quarter.

We butchered that game and some numpties say 'if only'.....(yawn)

We are not up to finals footy although they could change that 'narrative' with 2 wins in the next 2 weeks. It's up to them. Somehow I doubt it. The record to date says we choke. 

We lack experience, simple as that. Goody talks that we need to learn. Either that starts tomorrow ,next week or next year. Do not know

58 minutes ago, dimmy said:

We lack experience, simple as that. Goody talks that we need to learn. Either that starts tomorrow ,next week or next year. Do not know

Our best players are 21 to 26, but it is more than just experience and I rate our list as good as any. The players try their guys out and have nowhere to hide if they don’t as every kick, disposal, step and heartbeat is measured.  So it is not lack of effort.  If we don’t make finals we need a full review as per Geelong in 2006, Richmond 2016, Collingwood last year to work out why the club under-delivered and learn from it.  What we don’t need is to sack the coach (note none of the three reviews above sacked the coach).  If we do win 1 of the last 2 though but lose the first final should the club still do the review, because I think we still would have underdelivered if we don’t win a final or two.

2 hours ago, jnrmac said:

"I didn't like our first half much at all. I think our ability to defend in the first half wasn't to the level that we certainly trained all summer," Goodwin said. 

"Ultimately when they have 20 scoring shots from 24 inside 50s, that's the game in a nutshell. 

"They had 80 points to half-time. We were really disappointed with that first half. We just didn't defend the way we would have liked."

We had 14-9 i50s in the last and scored 1g 7b. Geelong were without Dangerfield and lost Harry Taylor in the first quarter.

We butchered that game and some numpties say 'if only'.....(yawn)

We are not up to finals footy although they could change that 'narrative' with 2 wins in the next 2 weeks. It's up to them. Somehow I doubt it. The record to date says we choke. 

And yet if Gawn kicked straight from 20m out directly in front we bag the 4 points. Game of inches.

On 8/17/2018 at 8:03 AM, MSFebey said:

I also think another issue to the impatience and anxiety of supporters league wide is the success of the Western Bulldogs and Richmond out of nowhere, the "why not us" attitude is very prevalent. But even still, this list should be playing finals. But the above just fuels it to astronomical levels.

 

That’s a very good point.

It’s kinda like that patch in the early 60s when our dominance ended, and all the minnows had a crack at a flag. God knows what happened then, but there would be a feeling amongst many that we are missing our chance.

Incorrectly, in my opinion.

14 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

And yet if Gawn kicked straight from 20m out directly in front we bag the 4 points. Game of inches.

Another way of looking at it. How did we let those two games get to the point where one kick at the death made all the difference? Game of inches, yes. The 6 inches between the ears.

Worth a read 

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/the-questions-the-demons-need-to-answer-20180818-p4zy94.html

On 8/17/2018 at 8:03 AM, samcantstandya said:

I hope making the finals isn't just thw goal. That the playing say we achieved our goal & then go out.

In 1967 we finished 7th, not quite good enough to make the four but a good recovery from the Smith/Barassi debacle. 50 years later we are still 7th. Plus ca change?

14 minutes ago, bush demon said:

In 1967 we finished 7th, not quite good enough to make the four but a good recovery from the Smith/Barassi debacle. 50 years later we are still 7th. Plus ca change?

Plus ça change, plus c'est la f*ckup

38 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Worth a read 

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/the-questions-the-demons-need-to-answer-20180818-p4zy94.html

Interesting observations from other coaches that they are setting up to feed off our strengths, although I think most on here worked this out some time ago. So why are our mids still over committing to the contested ball? Is it just that we have 3 or 4 ball hunters who can’t resist? So the opposition sets up on the outside to intercept our clearances and then take off the other way leaving 2 or 3 of our onballers trailing behind. How many times have I watched that scenario unfold this year.

28 minutes ago, Earl Hood said:

Interesting observations from other coaches that they are setting up to feed off our strengths, although I think most on here worked this out some time ago. So why are our mids still over committing to the contested ball? Is it just that we have 3 or 4 ball hunters who can’t resist? So the opposition sets up on the outside to intercept our clearances and then take off the other way leaving 2 or 3 of our onballers trailing behind. How many times have I watched that scenario unfold this year.

That so many are at the contest...is by design. That they play sparta-football......is by design. That we persist in blatant blitzkrieg....is by design.

Opposition have twigged

4 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

That so many are at the contest...is by design. That they play sparta-football......is by design. That we persist in blatant blitzkrieg....is by design.

Opposition have twigged

Yep, wait on the outside while we crash in with 3 v 1, then they run away. That is a coaching issue.

21 hours ago, beelzebub said:

Now either Goodwin is arrogantly thick as two short planks..

This BB!

buck stops with Goodwin he selects his own assisants and mentors

Im not sure he is the man to go forward with

17 minutes ago, jackaub said:

This BB!

buck stops with Goodwin he selects his own assisants and mentors

Im not sure he is the man to go forward with

Other clubs have been through this issue re game plan with younger coaches.  Port and Williams in 2003. Geelong and bomber Thompson in 2006. Richmond and Hardwick in 2016. Collingwood and Buckley in 2017.  All bright but stubborn younger coaches. I see some similarities.  

16 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

And yet if Gawn kicked straight from 20m out directly in front we bag the 4 points. Game of inches.

Yeah I was referring to you in the ("yawn") bit...