2 hours ago, Whispering_Jack said:

The answer is plain and clear. Total domination in the hit outs but destroyed in the clearances. It’s all good when you’re winning in the ruck and that advantage is taken by your team but from the beginning their midfield dominated ours and we couldn’t withstand the pressure. We had to change tack from early in the second quarter when it was starting to hurt us everywhere but on the scoreboard. A slight adjustment at that time and we win the game. 

I totally agree with this. 

 

I think the rain helped the Lions. I mentioned this in another thread but having the ball thrown up in the center rather than a bounce, makes the tap areas more predictable. 

 

If the bounce occurs then there is a less predictable factor and the areas where Gawn can tap to increases. This lets the mids to move to better areas for the tap and less likely to be sat upon by the Lions mids. 

 

But we still got smashed in the center which is something we need to work on. hopefully this can be turned around as Port might be with out Scott Lycett, so Gawn should dominate, but port has a decent midfield with some strong bodies in there. They will be trying to copy what the lions did. 

6 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

 

Tomlinson? He was a free agent.

And you're writing him off after, what, five games?

Not disappointed with the trade itself, as I know he cost us nothing (except salary cap). I meant I'm disappointed with how that trade has worked out (free agency transaction whatever you want to name it). I had high hopes, and to have him already out of the team after 5 games is definitely not what I think we expected or wanted. 

Not writing him off, never did. Just said I was disappointed that he showed basically nothing this season and has been dropped. I expected more. 

My 2 cents:

Bad kicking for goal cost us the game.  Lousy umpiring made it worse and without that we may

Frisch 50m penalty.  Maybe I need to see it again, but as I heard it, the umpire say give it back now and Frisch did immediately  Now maybe he had ignored the umpire earlier, but what is the point of saying give it back now, if when the player does just that, you ping the player?

Mark on the goal line.  This is a knotty one and may have killed us (Does one at the match have an idea of how free we were on that flank?).   The umps have to follow the rules and can't makes guesses like "a point or no point will not affect the result of the game, hence call it a mark and allow play on". 

On the other hand what if a full forward had taken that mark and turned around immediately and kicked a goal.  If it was then reviewed and the mark paid, would he have to then kick at goal again?  I bet , no and the goal would be allowed.  If so, it is yet another inconsistency in the rules.

If you are looking for arguments to do away with score reviews, this would add to the non-inconsiderable pile.

54 minutes ago, Jaded said:

Don’t disagree. We played well. But frankly if the Lions kick straight in quarter 2/3 we lose by a lot more. We were lucky their poor kicking kept us in it, as much as our poor kicking kept us out of it. 
Our backline did a superb job yesterday. One of the better defensive performances I’ve seen from them. Lever starting to come into his own as well.

My issue last night is how many times we went for short kicks when we kept getting smothered and how often we went for the handball option under pressure when we knew full well that the Lions midfield would eat that up. We still panic way too much under pressure and this has to be fixed. You don’t make, let alone win finals, if you can’t play under pressure. 

Both sides missed plenty of shots on goals & I’d say ours were easier shots missed , lions midfield played better at times but we had plenty of opportunities & our field kicking let us down, Oliver kicking concerning as it dosent punish the opposition enough & inc brayshaw. Lions were cleaner when counted & we continue to mess up  ours. 

1 minute ago, sue said:

 

Frisch 50m penalty.  Maybe I need to see it again, but as I heard it, the umpire say give it back now and Frisch did immediately  Now maybe he had ignored the umpire earlier, but what is the point of saying give it back now, if when the player does just that, you ping the player?

 

Fritsch did well in the first bit to hold up the play a little but he let it go on way too long.

I was yelling at the screen telling him to give the ball back and he just kept milking it.

It was the right call and very undisciplined play.

7 minutes ago, Action Jackson said:

Fritsch did well in the first bit to hold up the play a little but he let it go on way too long.

I was yelling at the screen telling him to give the ball back and he just kept milking it.

It was the right call and very undisciplined play.

He can have a spell for mine. Not based on that brain fart last night, but rather his input over the last 4 weeks. 

A lot love this bloke, but I can't understand the hype. Occasionally he takes a nice overhead mark, but his kicking at goal has been horrid this year. The other issue I have with him are that he continually leads to deep pockets. This is the cause of his poor kicking accuracy, as he is often taking shots on acute angles. That said, we have seen him blow shots from directly in front too. 

My third issue is his lack of forward pressure and his inability to get front and centre. Perhaps the latter is not his assigned role, but given his height, he ain't designed to be clunking the 'long ones to the top of the square'. One thing Brisbane were very good at least night was reading the ball off the pack and getting front and centre. We currently have no player doing this. Kozzie is way off it and Fritta thinks he can mark everything. 

Did the pre-season hype get to Fritta? His own Captain tipping him for the Coleman Medal? I don't know, but right now he is an average player that is replaceable. 

Edited July 27, 20204 yr by Leoncelli_36

10 minutes ago, Action Jackson said:

Fritsch did well in the first bit to hold up the play a little but he let it go on way too long.

I was yelling at the screen telling him to give the ball back and he just kept milking it.

It was the right call and very undisciplined play.

Maybe true, but it doesn't answer the question I raised.  What is the point of the umpire demanding X, if when you immediatley do X, you get pinged anyway.  Either ping him instead of again shouting an instruction ( I presume he'd been asked earlier) or give him the chance to respond and then either ping or not depending on his response.

Edited July 27, 20204 yr by sue

Ugh so close. We just butchered easy goals. It hurt when Harley missed his then a minute later Cameron responded for brisbane. Weid to missed easy shots, our midfield didn't take advantage of Gawns ruckwork and fritta giving away that 50 at the end was dumb. 

Again with melbourne so close but yet so far. 

22 minutes ago, Action Jackson said:

Fritsch did well in the first bit to hold up the play a little but he let it go on way too long.

I was yelling at the screen telling him to give the ball back and he just kept milking it.

It was the right call and very undisciplined play.

Pretty sure that's the second time this year he's cost us 50 for that exact thing too.

 

40 minutes ago, Jaded said:

Not disappointed with the trade itself, as I know he cost us nothing (except salary cap). I meant I'm disappointed with how that trade has worked out (free agency transaction whatever you want to name it). I had high hopes, and to have him already out of the team after 5 games is definitely not what I think we expected or wanted. 

Not writing him off, never did. Just said I was disappointed that he showed basically nothing this season and has been dropped. I expected more. 

I honestly thought Tomlinson was stiff initially to be dropped.

I'd be bringing him in this week for Gus who was worst on ground.

2 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

 

There is a reason why two of or recently better players spent so much time on the bench but it isn't obvious to me. 

 

Not sure about harmes but I reckon the answer with gus is that he is not fit enough.

He came off at one point, having not been on long and looked totally cooked.

And many of his disposal errors look fatigue related.

Gus is not quick. If he is not fit enough he will be even slower than he would be if super fit. He would also be more powerful in contests.

13 hours ago, My name is legion said:

And you

But mostly you.

35 minutes ago, sue said:

Frisch 50m penalty.  Maybe I need to see it again, but as I heard it, the umpire say give it back now and Frisch did immediately  Now maybe he had ignored the umpire earlier, but what is the point of saying give it back now, if when the player does just that, you ping the player?

It's the year 2050 and Denmark are playing South Africa in the final of the Australian Rules Football World Cup. The umpires are from Japan and don't speak English. But that doesn't matter as the only noises they make are from their whistles blowing. Everything else they do with hand signals: holding the ball, all clear, etc. The players are accustomed to this and are not fazed in the slightest.

It always amazes me why the umpires need to say one damn word. Maybe "play on" but even that's not needed. "Advantage", maybe.

Player doesn't give ball back? Whistle. Free kick. Player doesn't go back on the mark? Whistle. 50 metres. The players will learn pretty quick smart. This constant advice and coaching to the players is rubbish and doesn't exist in any other sport. Well, we do say our game is unique.

44 minutes ago, Action Jackson said:

Fritsch did well in the first bit to hold up the play a little but he let it go on way too long.

I was yelling at the screen telling him to give the ball back and he just kept milking it.

It was the right call and very undisciplined play.

I've watched the replay a few times now and Sue is on the money. He gave the ball back as soon as the umpires said to give it back.

I agree tt should have been 50 prior to the umpire saying that but Bailey did almost the exact thing earlier and got away with it. Ironic that he gets the 50. 

Poor communication by the umpire.

Dunno if this has been discussed.  But the hit to Jetta's head.  Seemed to me the Lions player was not going for the ball but chose to bump with his elbow raised.   No comment from the commentators. Any comments anywhere?

20 minutes ago, binman said:

Not sure about harmes but I reckon the answer with gus is that he is not fit enough.

He came off at one point, having not been on long and looked totally cooked.

And many of his disposal errors look fatigue related.

Gus is not quick. If he is not fit enough he will be even slower than he would be if super fit. He would also be more powerful in contests.

Was that when he went to help Oliver chase down Cameron?  He came across from the middle to the flank, made up a lot of ground but couldn't quite reach Cameron.  It was a gut busting run so he didn't look unfit in that run.

Edited July 27, 20204 yr by Lucifer's Hero

2 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

A few days ago I posted this in the 'Teams' thread:

Fagan is a smart coach and neurtralizing Max's dominance will be his #1 goal.  They are a very smart mid-field and will rove to Max's taps.  Also, Lions is one of the teams last year that used the strategy: "match them on the inside, beat them on the outside".  So if roving to Max doesn't work they will try and stop us getting the ball out.  So we win the clearances but forced to turn the ball over.  If it gets into McCluggage's hands they are off to the races.

And so it came to pass:  Max, our #1 weapon was neutralised.

That is not a new strategy.  Other teams have used it many times:  Pies, Tigers, (last generation) Hawks etc 

Goodwin said they were better than us at getting the '''loose ball' out at stoppages.   Given that it was obvious what their midfield tactics would be why did we not have a counter strategy from the get go? 

They had an extra around the stoppages so even if we got the ball they ring-fenced us in so the ball fell into dispute.  We didn't counter it.  Viney and Oliver were mighty in trying to bulldoze there way out but were beaten by weight of numbers and smarts.

Not our best coaching effort. 

 

To see Max's 'Hitout' work 'wasted' is heartbreaking ?. 

So true Lucifer . We just seem to be so dumb and reactive on and off the field.

This was a double whammy too. Maxs other great attribute are the grabs he takes around the gound. After so much rain we would have known that his marking power would be reduced as well but we didn't seem to have plans to address this either.

When you watch the last 90 seconds when we lost possession and couldn't even man up to try and turn it over, we seem so one dimensional on and off the field.

Edited July 27, 20204 yr by Brownie

1 minute ago, sue said:

Dunno if this has been discussed.  But the hit to Jetta's head.  Seemed to me the Lions player was not going for the ball but chose to bump with his elbow raised.   No comment from the commentators. Any comments anywhere?

King agrees with you Demon was millimetres from a wheelchair.

The video there in clearly shows McStay didn't go for the ball and crunched Jetta's with his hip and his elbow.  Jetta wasn't leading with his head as Healy said, he was trying to dodge the Lion players.

It was a sad sight to see Jetta walking down the race a bit wobbly and had to lean against the wall to stay steady.

McStay should get weeks.

6 minutes ago, sue said:

Dunno if this has been discussed.  But the hit to Jetta's head.  Seemed to me the Lions player was not going for the ball but chose to bump with his elbow raised.   No comment from the commentators. Any comments anywhere?

I totally agree, tucked his elbow in ready for impact with Jettas head. 

Head ducked or not, you can't do that.

The commentators just said Jetta (a veteran player) needs to change his game.

Why? He was going in to collect the ball. Why are we not protecting players going for the ball? It's the same for a lot of the htb decisions now. You're better off holding off to tackle and be rewarded.

 

Because we all love punishment, I’ve watched Frittagate several times. He was told at least twice to give the ball back problem was, in the first instant the Lions player actually pushed Fritta back to the ground. It was after the second time he handed the ball back.

10 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Was that when he went to help Oliver chase down Cameron?  He came across from the middle to the flank, made up a lot of ground but couldn't quite reach Cameron.  It was a gut busting run.

You might be right actually. So perhaps not great evidence of being unfit. I'd be dead after that run. Even when i was his age.

I might be wrong about his fitness but sometimes the simplest answer is the right one.

I actually think he has been pretty good this year.

But wasn't ladt night that is for sure. No chance he us dropped.

3 hours ago, Whispering_Jack said:

The answer is plain and clear. Total domination in the hit outs but destroyed in the clearances. It’s all good when you’re winning in the ruck and that advantage is taken by your team but from the beginning their midfield dominated ours and we couldn’t withstand the pressure. We had to change tack from early in the second quarter when it was starting to hurt us everywhere but on the scoreboard. A slight adjustment at that time and we win the game. 

I thought that last night, rather than the problem being "Brisbane sharked Max", our problem was "Despite our mids often have first hands on the ball, we struggled to take clean possession in the greasy conditions and fumbled quite often, at which point Brisbane won the clearance".

 

 

9 minutes ago, Brownie said:

I totally agree, tucked his elbow in ready for impact with Jettas head. 

Head ducked or not, you can't do that.

The commentators just said Jetta (a veteran player) needs to change his game.

Why? He was going in to collect the ball. Why are we not protecting players going for the ball? It's the same for a lot of the htb decisions now. You're better off holding off to tackle and be rewarded.

 

Someone said that commentator hates Melbourne.  Seems like proof.

Not a great one to watch and I wasn't that impressed with Brisbane's physicality in terms of the unnecessary things like sitting or falling on players in vulnerable positions as well as some other off ball acts. You could see our guys getting frustrated at times but overall I thought we handled it pretty well. 

We need to counter when a team decides to ruck from Maxy and not their own ruckman. Happened against Carlton and several times during Cats/Tigers games. This should come from on field leaders Gawn/Viney as well as from the coaches box. 

It seems to affect our structure and spread and it takes a quarter or 2 to sort it out. 

I'd also like our boys to take a few extra steps back when kicking from a mark/free. How many were touched or smothered??