4 hours ago, binman said:

No, not in terms of where they are at as players but as i say Smith is an important out. Not as big an out as Andrews would be but we cannot mark the ball or bring it ground in our forward line and Smith was 100% locked in out best 22 and looked terrific in the preseason before his injury. And who knows might have a had a break out season and been a total gun. 

But how about comparing Lever to Andrews? That works does it not?

Yeah Lever is fair enough.

Smith is overrated on his output so far, not even convinced he'd be getting a game if fit.

 

The Lions’ run and spread was bloody impressive in the last quarter and a half. And their pace. We simply couldn’t keep up in the end. We looked ‘heavy’, like in the pre-lim debacle. The Lions were gliding across the ground. The sooner we get Burgess (or someone of his ilk), the better.

Gawn’s injury looked nasty at the time (happened right in front of us, with the Brisbane sun in our eyes). No doubt this hurt our ability to win stoppages and clearances (the key to our game). This didn’t change even when he was back on the field (why the risk?). The sooner Preuss comes in, the better. I’d really like to see us play two ruckmen - for good - with the big German given the licence to clean up blokes and intimidate, on top of his normal ruck/forward duties. I’m thinking a Jimmy/Strawbs-like combination from the class of 87-88, one of our best teams of the last 50-odd years.

I admit he is one of my favourites, but I’m finding criticism of Clarry’s game last night hard to fathom. With the game slipping away, he was one of the few consistently winning the ball in close and in the air, and generally trying his guts out.  Even Brisbane fans around us recognised his efforts. He, like Gawn, needs more support - both around the ball, and ahead of the ball.

More Dees’ supporters than I expected were at the game and in good voice. We had the Lions’ fans - who were mostly a friendly bunch (despite, or perhaps because of, our seating in front of a large bar area) - worried there for a while. That was before their jovial and, in the end, slightly annoying chants of ‘Hippy’ drowned us all out.

10 hours ago, pineapple dee said:

My first seven steps precisely. I have a step 8.........Crack cocaine.

Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit amphetamines.

1 hour ago, Ben E said:

The Lions’ run and spread was bloody impressive in the last quarter and a half. And their pace. We simply couldn’t keep up in the end. We looked ‘heavy’, like in the pre-lim debacle. The Lions were gliding across the ground. The sooner we get Burgess (or someone of his ilk), the better.

More of a pre-limb final for us going up against their outside run!

Edited July 1, 20195 yr by John Demonic

Ok, so we've seen Salem get off his non-hit, but no mention of Hipwood's deliberate attack of the head at Petty. Can anyone shed any light? Not even looked at? Move along nothing to see? 2 separate actions, seconds apart, both at Petty's head. Strangely enough, right before Hipwood cut loose with multiple goals.

On 6/30/2019 at 6:20 PM, Lucifer's Hero said:

Anyone know what the 3/4 time spat between May and Frost was about.  Commentators made it sound like May went to town on Frost a bit too long.

Don't know exactly what it was about, buy I don't mind it at all.  Was super impressed with Steve May's game and I thought that on the whole Frosty played a pretty good game as well.  I was sitting behind the goals, so got to see alot of the work back there.  One thing that really stood out was how much Frosty was getting scragged holding the man by his opponent, but only once was a free kick played.

Getting back to the stouch between May and Frosty, I thought it showed good intensity and compeditive desire from both of them and great leadership from May to make a point of whatever it was that was the issue at hand.  I can only see good things comming from having a quality experienced backman working with Frost to help iron out the wrinkles in his game.  I noticed this dynamic between them in a preseason training clip on the club website as well.  I see it more as a robust discussion and our players calling themselves in areas they need to lift than anything more sinister.  Done in the right way at the right time, it has to be so much more effective for a team mate to be having that blunt honest conversation than for the coach to have exactly the same conversation.  Being their on ground level right next to them also provides experienced players like May a vantage point and perspective that the coach can never have as well.

8 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Yeah Lever is fair enough.

Smith is overrated on his output so far, not even convinced he'd be getting a game if fit.

 

Ok let's leave Smith out of the discussion. I forgot about jetts.  An absolute key player for us as evidenced by the fact that small and medium forwards have destroyed us this year.

When he did play was clearly injured  and has been out now for what 7-8 weeks.

So if you do count Smith in our best 22 we had 6 of our best 22 out against the lions, nearly a third (and 3 of them are easliy in our top 10).

The lions had ALL of their best players, indeed they had almost a complete list of 44 players to choose from.

So no surprise we lost.

 

 

11 hours ago, Demonsone said:

We are club full of excuses,,, bottom line tigers & gws have had long in

Look at the 5 clubs with most injuries... tigers, gws still in the top 8 with Swans starting to win more... All 3 have stronger deeper lists along with stronger cultures ... Melb & Saints both hold longest premiership droughts & poor cultures .., enough said 

As per that article, back in May we had lost 89 games of best 22 players. GWS were in second, but way back on 65. That is a huge difference.

Since that time they have had best 22 players come back. Of our outs only May (but only 2 games ago) and Hannan (whi has struggled, as replayers returning from long lay offs usually do) have come back and we have added Hibberd, Garlett and Lewis to that list.

Make no mistake this been a disaster injury and pre season preparation  wise. The worst run in my time following the club. I don't care how much depth you have you don't cover the sort of losses we've had - and you're right we don't have great depth.

Edited July 1, 20195 yr by binman

2 hours ago, binman said:

Ok let's leave Smith out of the discussion. I forgot about jetts.  An absolute key player for us as evidenced by the fact that small and medium forwards have destroyed us this year.

When he did play was clearly injured  and has been out now for what 7-8 weeks.

So if you do count Smith in our best 22 we had 6 of our best 22 out against the lions, nearly a third (and 3 of them are easliy in our top 10).

The lions had ALL of their best players, indeed they had almost a complete list of 44 players to choose from.

So no surprise we lost.

 

 

I hate this "no surprise we lost saying". Not necessarily having a go at you, just that you've given me the opportunity to vent on this.

This was not a game that I am furious we lost because we were clearly the better team etc. But it is a game we had the OPPORTUNITY to win. Regardless of personnel, we had enough chances to kick a score but due to our poor decision making, lack of composure, skill errors etc we stuffed it. Similar to the Crows game. We had the chance to win and didn't. You can look at ave age, ave games played, players from best 22 out injured etc but once the siren blows it's 22 v 22 and you have to play and judge the game on its merits. We were in it up to our ears but missed some key chances in the 3rd quarter to keep pace or put a gap between us and the Lions and we didn't.

It's not like those errors were solely made by the guys replacing our best 22 "outs". Tmac, Petracca, Brayshaw, Barnes, Weideman all made errors at crucial times in the 3rd quarter (in particular).

So yeah we may have had players out due to injury. But to say it's no surprise we lost does my head in because we should be in every game we play, it was a 50/50 game in my eyes regardless of personnel.

30 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I hate this "no surprise we lost saying". Not necessarily having a go at you, just that you've given me the opportunity to vent on this.

This was not a game that I am furious we lost because we were clearly the better team etc. But it is a game we had the OPPORTUNITY to win. Regardless of personnel, we had enough chances to kick a score but due to our poor decision making, lack of composure, skill errors etc we stuffed it. Similar to the Crows game. We had the chance to win and didn't. You can look at ave age, ave games played, players from best 22 out injured etc but once the siren blows it's 22 v 22 and you have to play and judge the game on its merits. We were in it up to our ears but missed some key chances in the 3rd quarter to keep pace or put a gap between us and the Lions and we didn't.

It's not like those errors were solely made by the guys replacing our best 22 "outs". Tmac, Petracca, Brayshaw, Barnes, Weideman all made errors at crucial times in the 3rd quarter (in particular).

So yeah we may have had players out due to injury. But to say it's no surprise we lost does my head in because we should be in every game we play, it was a 50/50 game in my eyes regardless of personnel.

I hear what you are saying but in no universe was that a 50/50 game. 

As for how it played out, yes we were in it but only because the Lions missed any number of easy shots on goals and butchered the ball going inside 50 (perhaps they caught our bug). We, on the other hand, were unusually efficient in the first 2.5 quarters Even trac was kicking set shots. 

As soon as they cleaned up their efficiency and staring slotting goals from all over the shop they dominated and we got the result we deserved. 

3 hours ago, binman said:

I hear what you are saying but in no universe was that a 50/50 game. 

As for how it played out, yes we were in it but only because the Lions missed any number of easy shots on goals and butchered the ball going inside 50 (perhaps they caught our bug). We, on the other hand, were unusually efficient in the first 2.5 quarters Even trac was kicking set shots. 

As soon as they cleaned up their efficiency and staring slotting goals from all over the shop they dominated and we got the result we deserved. 

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. They may have been inefficient scoring wise but we were inefficient I50 conversion wise. We had enough opportunities to win. Eg TMacs dropped chest mark doesn't count on the scoreboard but was definitely a scoring opportunity gone begging.

I think the I50s were 63-59 their way.

15 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

 

Edited July 2, 20195 yr by Skin Deeamond

Good to see we are not the only ones who think we are below afl standard in skills. 

From an SEN article:

 

McGuane – a two-time Collingwood best and fairest, premiership player and All-Australian – says the Demons' skill execution and decision making is "horrendous" and "not AFL standard".

 

Couldnt agree more. Would love to know what the hell we are doing about it cause it’s been happening since rd 1 FFS. 

I know some on here are going on about  our injuries and pre season etc but that DOES NOT affect the skills and of the players on the field  

Ironically if we can limit the skill errors we could actually be a good team. 

Edited July 2, 20195 yr by DemonOX

7 minutes ago, DemonOX said:

Good to see we are not the only ones who think we are below afl standard in skills. 

From an SEN article:

McGuane – a two-time Collingwood best and fairest, premiership player and All-Australian – says the Demons' skill execution and decision making is "horrendous" and "not AFL standard".

 

Couldnt agree more. Would love to know what the hell we are doing about it cause it’s been happening since rd 1 FFS. 

If we can limit the skill errors we could actually be a good team. 

I am genuinely interested to know from others. Do Clubs do some sort of skills matrix on our own players and keep tabs on the work going in to correcting areas of weakness. It would be relatively easy to do and monitor with all the resources at the Club. 

So a skill of Vineys would be

Extracting from a pack                                 excellent        limited practice required

Kicking on the run opposite feet                 average           one session per week until certain level of improvement.

 

 

 

23 hours ago, DemonOX said:

Injuries are path of the course and yes we have had our fair share but they are no excuse for players continually missing a handball target, kicking to the opposition, dropping a chest mark under no pressure, hand balling to a player who has 2 or 3 opposition players on his tail and playing on at all cost with nothing to go to. 

Thats just dumb football and we are head of the class in that department. 

Talking dumb football, now you've got me started on Angus' crazy overhead bandpasses that either went to the opposition, no-one, the ground, or a contest. When did that become something worth persisting with?

1 minute ago, pitmaster said:

Talking dumb football, now you've got me started on Angus' crazy overhead bandpasses that either went to the opposition, no-one, the ground, or a contest. When did that become something worth persisting with?

Well considering we can’t hit a handball target when looking at our own players maybe the coach said try the “no look” handball and see what happens!!

Its obviously working well and no need for any change. 

9 minutes ago, Sorry kids said:

I am genuinely interested to know from others. Do Clubs do some sort of skills matrix on our own players and keep tabs on the work going in to correcting areas of weakness. It would be relatively easy to do and monitor with all the resources at the Club. 

So a skill of Vineys would be

Extracting from a pack                                 excellent        limited practice required

Kicking on the run opposite feet                 average           one session per week until certain level of improvement.

 

 

 

I think they would. And it would be easy against us just pressure us and u will get the ball back. 

1 hour ago, DemonOX said:

I think they would. And it would be easy against us just pressure us and u will get the ball back. 

Oh yes, playing against us would be easy for an experienced side. I was thinking from our point of view with our own players.

This is another case of unrealistic expectations. I’m not meaning to sound rude here, but a bit of belief and encouragement from the supporter base goes a long way. There were positives today definitely. For those that think this was another step backwards I fear you drink a bit to much from the pessimistic glass. If it wasn’t for Hipwood taking the game by the neck, it definitely could of been a different result. But he is becoming a star, in a very good Brisbane team, that we played in Brisbane. 

I haven’t read the whole thread so I suspect this has been brought up before ..... but.....

Max kept doing his backward tap outs, and Zorko and Neil kept clearing it.

Wouldn’t it have been sensible for Max to try to whack it away from the centre, away from the two guys who were tearing us apart!!??

I know the coaching mantra is against the tactic of hitting the ball randomly, since it might go straight to the opposition, and leave you opened up, but...... every centre bounce, you just KNEW Bris would get the clearance with Max trying his dinky backwards tap outs.

Edited July 2, 20195 yr by Jumping Jack Clennett
Typo

I know one thing, Adelaide played against Geelong and realised how they lost, they got sucked in to contest like bees to a honeypot... sound familiar??