POSTGAME: Rd 08 vs Brisbane

[sue 8,429]

16 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

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.

Seems to me that King wasn't pointing to the deliberate elbow to the head and the need for a penalty for that, just the general head is sacrosanct issue.

[nosoupforme 3,085]

11 hours ago, A F said:

May is super overrated at the moment IMO.

Often gets outmarked too easily and usually kicks it to a contest or a howler turnover like the one that pinged straight back for Brisbane's first goal.

I reckon we need to be far more creative with his kicking and look to really gain territory. 

Yes!  However not just with his kicking.  Favours the left  HBF to Gawn and it is so predictable. May can be creative and at times he has so much space that he can run the extra 25 metres or so and kick it well over their heads where we could be ready to pounce on the loose. ball at times.

He is playing ok and just doing  what he has to. Sometimes he must present himself and take on the game and lead by example.

After all he was a captain of an AFL team.

 

Edited July 27, 2020 by nosoupforme

[Lucifers Hero 37,007]

25 minutes ago, deanox said:

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".

I think that was part of the neutralise Max tactics:  If they don't win Max's taps, their mids deliberately wait for ours to take possession from the taps and immediately tackle to force the ball free.  Set play:  they nominate the tackler and the others set up in a position to receive or move the ball forward to the outside.  Our mids were poorly set up or slow to block the exits.

I feel it is a deliberate strategy and not just the conditions making us fumbly. 

I think part of the problem is our mids set up in attacking positions and moving forward expecting us to win the ball from Max's taps.  When we don't we are not in a position to defend.  Ball gets out and they are off. 

Would have liked to have seen us man up the spare they had outside the stoppages or have our mids sit goal side of their mids at times and block the exits.  Especially in the second quarter when they were walking it out of the middle. 

Edited July 27, 2020 by Lucifer's Hero

[sue 8,429]

2 minutes ago, DeePressed said:

...

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??

 

 

It is frustrating to see our players stand where they were until the ball is given back.  As soon as they get a free they should run backwards as fast as they can, giving themselves space as well as being able to play on quickly once they have received the ball - instead they then have to trot back giving the opponents time to set up.  How hard is that? Don't they learn that in junior footy?

[Young Blood 1,985]

It was a pretty clear cut game.

+

Viney was outstanding. He has been terrific all, has gone up another level like Trac. His ball use and composure now added to his game

Backline performed well again considering the conditions. 

Despite how untidy we were most of the night we stayed in the game and even took control for patches by playing it in our front half

Forward line structure good again just didn't capitalize

-

As mentioned above, at stoppages we were able to win the ball first but so often lost possession and they feasted on the loose ball

They were so much cleaner with their ball use all over the ground especially in tight

After such an even team effort last week I thought a lot of players didn't contribute enough especially late. The gap between our best and worst was noticable. Viney, Trac, Clayton, Gawn, Langdon all felt like the only players really contributing to gutting out a win.

Harmes had an absolute shocker. Very keen to see him have a spell and give someone else a go at the role

[Lucifers Hero 37,007]

8 minutes ago, sue said:

Seems to me that King wasn't pointing to the deliberate elbow to the head and the need for a penalty for that, just the general head is sacrosanct issue.

King may not have talked about the elbow directly but he was pretty clear on how dangerous it was and that the AFL has 'lost control' and need to fix.

Listen to the video in the article and there was a bit of discussion on how many weeks he McStay should/will get.

[sue 8,429]

15 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

King may not have talked about the elbow directly but he was pretty clear on how dangerous it was and that the AFL has 'lost control' and need to fix.

Listen to the video in the article and there was a bit of discussion on how many weeks he McStay should/will get.

thanks - being an old fogie, I prefer to read quickly rather than watch slow videos, so I didn't see that.

[DemonOX 8,530]

3 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

 

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? 

This is a worry Lucifer as it seems to happen fairly regularly after matches we lose. 
 

I want Goodwin to succeed but if he can’t mange to to counter moves made during the match then there is not much hope I’m afraid. 
 

Also what is Richardson’s part in all this. 

[Lucifers Hero 37,007]

2 minutes ago, sue said:

thanks - being an old fogie, I prefer to read quickly rather than watch slow videos, so I didn't see that.

I do to! 

As an aside, its really frustrating when an article heading promises something interesting only to find it is a podcast.  It was ok when they listed the topics and when they start on the timeline.  Now most don't show that to force us to listen.  I choose to not listen. Too boring.

[Elegt 872]

1 hour ago, Leoncelli_36 said:

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. 

He's not that good and criminally overrated on here

[Dee*ceiving 876]

15 hours ago, spalding said:

They missed a few goals as well. Impact were crap for both teams - I thought we had a good run in the last quarter.

Even Gerard Healy, who apparently hates us according to this site thinks we are that close to a top team. 

we are still deep in this season. 

Gerard Healy loves us, gives us a good rub every time. 

[titan_uranus 22,343]

1 hour ago, Leoncelli_36 said:

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. 

Replaceable with whom? TMac?

Fritsch is our leading goalkicker this year with 10, averaging 1.43 per game. I don't agree he is easily replaceable.

Instead, I want to know why he keeps leading to the pockets. Is that what he's been instructed to do? Or is it because he finds he can't get space unless he goes there?

2 hours 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. 

The key reason why calling it a trade is misleading is that we didn't give anything up for him (other than salary, but we do that for any player we take, whether from the draft, trade or FA).

I too had high hopes, and I would like to see him come back into the side (maybe even this week) and improve on his failings from earlier this year.

But there remains enough time this season, let alone into the future, for Tomlinson to cement a spot in our 22 (particularly when the non-Langdon wing is being manned by Jones/Brayshaw).

1 hour 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?

Should be weeks.

Healy's comment that Jetta "leads with his head" is classic old school footy player rubbish. In that instance Jetta was just going for the ball. McStay doesn't, should have tackled, but chose to bump. In choosing to bump the onus was on McStay to avoid Jetta's head. He failed. On the guidelines, it was careless/high/high which is 2 weeks. If a medical report suggests Jetta was more seriously injured, and high becomes severe, it's a third week I believe.

[Leoncelli_36 2,264]

Just now, titan_uranus said:

Replaceable with whom? TMac?

Fritsch is our leading goalkicker this year with 10, averaging 1.43 per game. I don't agree he is easily replaceable.

Instead, I want to know why he keeps leading to the pockets. Is that what he's been instructed to do? Or is it because he finds he can't get space unless he goes there?

The key reason why calling it a trade is misleading is that we didn't give anything up for him (other than salary, but we do that for any player we take, whether from the draft, trade or FA).

I too had high hopes, and I would like to see him come back into the side (maybe even this week) and improve on his failings from earlier this year.

But there remains enough time this season, let alone into the future, for Tomlinson to cement a spot in our 22 (particularly when the non-Langdon wing is being manned by Jones/Brayshaw).

Should be weeks.

Healy's comment that Jetta "leads with his head" is classic old school footy player rubbish. In that instance Jetta was just going for the ball. McStay doesn't, should have tackled, but chose to bump. In choosing to bump the onus was on McStay to avoid Jetta's head. He failed. On the guidelines, it was careless/high/high which is 2 weeks. If a medical report suggests Jetta was more seriously injured, and high becomes severe, it's a third week I believe.

Yep, Tmac. Maybe Tomlinson worth a shot. He is not desperate enough and the fact he is leading our goal kicking with 1.43 goals a game speaks volumes of how dysfunctional the forward line has been, rather than how terrific he has been. His set shots are abysmal. 

It's his lack of accountability that annoys me. He doesn't have an impact once the ball is on the ground. I'd almost go with Nibbler over him at the moment. That's how poor I see his performances at the moment. 

[The Swimming Dee 1,852]

We are so close to being a very good football team in my opinion. If we had taken our chances last night we would have beaten a serious contender. We finished within 1 kick despite not playing our best. I really feel that we are on the verge of being a top 3 team...the question is though, will it be this year or next year (I think the latter)?

[Dr. Gonzo 22,415]

7 hours ago, bing181 said:

Delusional. 

Rubbish, if we had beaten Geelong and Lions (which we should have) we would be equal 2nd playing for equal 1st this Thursday

[Dr. Gonzo 22,415]

5 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 ?. 

We also need to figure out how to protect Max. In the Hawks game they were constantly trying to block him out of marking contests. Last night there were a few occasions early where Max was sat under the ball waiting to take a mark and a Lions player just smashed into him as hard as he could. It was in the context of attempting a mark but it was rough play that was borderline worthy of a free kick. They had made a pretense of going for the mark but their aim was really to smash into Max and hurt him while he was prone.

[Watts the matter 1,235]

9 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Rubbish, if we had beaten Geelong and Lions (which we should have) we would be equal 2nd playing for equal 1st this Thursday

That's football, as easy as saying if Carlton beat us. There is a lot of close games.

The simple fact is we would not get anywhere near west coast when they are up and running.

[Binmans PA 26,049]

4 hours 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. 

But this is the thing. They might have kicked straighter in the second and third terms, as could we. I'd argue we got the ball to much better spots to convert and [censored] the bed. Whereas, they were often shooting from acute angles and from distance.

RE: the smothers though, that's the sign of a side that is on top of their defensive game. It did my head in how often we'd be smothered.

4 hours ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Agree. Sometimes Gawn would be better off with a 15 metre punch to our advantage.  Players could run into the footy. The Lions like Lyons, Neale and Zorko just camped in the clearance contest and won it repeatedly.  

This only works if our players are set up to defend on the outside. If Max was to smash it forward, but one of their half backs is waiting there, you may as well give them the clearance to start with. But I agree we need to use this as a weapon at the right times.

4 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

A touch of humour there, MR.

I would agree but Tigers, Pies and Hawks have successfully used the same tactic over recent years.  They openly talk about it in tv interviews.  And I think Freo did it very well in 2017 or 2018. 

Roving to Max and/or creating a loose ball from his taps has been happening for several years.

It had sense of the Geelong game - not anticipating what tactics they might use and having a counter plan before the game.  Not sure we had a counter plan last night except for Oliver and Viney to bullock their way out.  Couldn't tell if we ever tried to match-up with their extra around the contest or to make him accountable.  Hard to tell on tv.

I agree mate, but I think Goodwin's philosophy is to back in our guys to do more damage. This is very Geelong circa Mark Thompson and Hawthorn circa 2013-2015.

I think if we can start winning these types of games, the players belief and confidence to always get back in the game will become a weapon for us and backing in our guys might be the best way of going about it.

Completely agree that we needed to tweak the extra at the stoppage, but we had the extra behind the ball, which enabled us to set up stronger defensively. It's a hard one.

4 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

Honestly A F?

May was one of our best last night. No idea what your problem is with him based on that performance.

Not sure we should be blaming him solely for that first kick out - looked like a set play gone wrong.

He was okay, I don't think he was terrible, but he gets outmarked too easily at times and for a guy who can be a beautiful, penetrating kick, I think he plays it too safe sometimes and then takes the gamble at the wrong moments.

Not saying he's horrible, but I'd say I disagree with those pumping him up. He's just going at this stage IMO. 

I'm hoping more games together with Lever and Hibberd will enable them to gel even more. I remember Hibberd 1v1 in 2017 and he just wouldn't be beaten. That to me is what I would hope May can bring on the bigger blokes, plus more attacking with his kicking.

[Binmans PA 26,049]

2 hours ago, nosoupforme said:

Yes!  However not just with his kicking.  Favours the left  HBF to Gawn and it is so predictable. May can be creative and at times he has so much space that he can run the extra 25 metres or so and kick it well over their heads where we could be ready to pounce on the loose. ball at times.

He is playing ok and just doing  what he has to. Sometimes he must present himself and take on the game and lead by example.

After all he was a captain of an AFL team.

 

Pretty much my exact thoughts.

I'm surprised we don't use a cluster up the ground, whilst still maintaining our defensive zone inside 50. 

It's not something I'd try every time, but if we can clear the ball to the middle of the ground and at the very least hold it up, that's a massive win and takes the pressure off our backs.

Anyway, doesn't seem like we're interested in that sort of play and maybe it's too easy to counter if you do it too often.

2 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

I think that was part of the neutralise Max tactics:  If they don't win Max's taps, their mids deliberately wait for ours to take possession from the taps and immediately tackle to force the ball free.  Set play:  they nominate the tackler and the others set up in a position to receive or move the ball forward to the outside.  Our mids were poorly set up or slow to block the exits.

I feel it is a deliberate strategy and not just the conditions making us fumbly. 

I think part of the problem is our mids set up in attacking positions and moving forward expecting us to win the ball from Max's taps.  When we don't we are not in a position to defend.  Ball gets out and they are off. 

Would have liked to have seen us man up the spare they had outside the stoppages or have our mids sit goal side of their mids at times and block the exits.  Especially in the second quarter when they were walking it out of the middle. 

Completely agree. I actually think we can afford to be more attacking from forward fifty stoppage and occasionally from centre square stoppages, but everywhere else, we need to lock down.

To be fair though, the times where we were horribly out of position that I recall were during stoppages inside our forward fifty. If you're going to attack from stoppage, your defenders need to be set up well behind the ball, which for most of the night we were. 

It's a hard adjustment to make around stoppages, because if you're not attacking with your stoppage set ups to your own dominant ruckman, you may as well pack it in to a degree. I've almost argued against myself there...

[Dwight Schrute 16,751]

We are a better team now than we were in 2018. 

[Binmans PA 26,049]

7 minutes ago, Patches O’houlihan said:

We are a better team now than we were in 2018. 

I'd argue our defence and team defence is way better than 2018, but our ball movement isn't as fluid forward of centre in 2020 as it was in 2018 IMO.

[Lucifers Hero 37,007]

39 minutes ago, A F said:

Completely agree. I actually think we can afford to be more attacking from forward fifty stoppage and occasionally from centre square stoppages, but everywhere else, we need to lock down.

To be fair though, the times where we were horribly out of position that I recall were during stoppages inside our forward fifty. If you're going to attack from stoppage, your defenders need to be set up well behind the ball, which for most of the night we were. 

It's a hard adjustment to make around stoppages, because if you're not attacking with your stoppage set ups to your own dominant ruckman, you may as well pack it in to a degree. I've almost argued against myself there...

Yeah, it is tricky as to when to attack from stoppages.

My thinking is that since it is a tactic that is often employed against us, especially by the better teams, I would expect coaches to have a set play plan to counter. 

Also, given that our capt and vice are in the thick of the stoppages they should be aware of what is happening and take it upon themselves to change the dynamics of the stoppages.  Sometimes they need defensive set up options.

Edited July 27, 2020 by Lucifer's Hero

[Bring-Back-Powell 13,150]

With respect to the Hannan - Fristch debacle, I absolutely blame Fristch more than Hannan on that one.

Hannan's kick was terrible however a Lions kick in from deep in the back pocket would've been kicked to a Max Gawn contest 60 mtrs out from goal and who know what would've happened. It was the best part of the ground to make a mistake/give away a free.

Instead Fritsch carried on like a "smart alec" as Barret labelled him, and was warned numerous times to give the ball back, only for him to then lie on the pill. Can't defend the indefensible there.

I don't know if Goodwin delivers good old fashioned cooks after the game but Fristch deserves one right there.

The Lever point review was frustrating as hell, but technically the goal umpire did the right thing as it was a close call. But common sense suggested it should not have been called back for such an irrelevant score of 1 point.

Good performance by the lads to keep a top 2 side goal-less in the last quarter, but ultimately these honorable losses are going to cost us finals. There will no good will from supporters or media if we drop another thriller to Port this week. Infact it will be season over as we can't go 7-2 after Port. 

[Bring-Back-Powell 13,150]

48 minutes ago, Patches O’houlihan said:

We are a better team now than we were in 2018. 

Massive call there. Massive.

Or are you just referring to personnel rather than actual performances?

We're certainly better than the shambles of 2019 though.

[Dee*ceiving 876]

17 hours ago, D4Life said:

I think Jetta may have concussed himself tonight, burrowing in head first. To brave for his own good.

His kick out that led to C Cameron goal also hurt us!

Should be given a couple of weeks off!

Agree, he looked wobbly walking down the race to the rooms. I reckon i saw him lean on the wall for a brief moment to steady himself. That was after the knee to the head, i was surprised he came back on after that, doubly so after the shoulder/elbow (from McStay?) sometime later. Has struggled this year Jet but could be forgiven the stinker in this one following those hits.  

17 hours ago, DubDee said:

Gees Harmes was poor tonight, especially late. fumbles and poor decisions.  expected a lot better from him

Agree. Harmes was fumbly all night. Looked out of sorts. Likewise Hannan. He's been pretty clean with his hands this yeay but not last night. 

2 strengths i saw from Brisbane though that looked more polished than the other teams we have played so far: 

1. They are very slick moving the ball with speed through the middle of the ground by hand or foot. Often have a release man to hit and they fumbled far less than us 

2. They were right on our hammers defensively at all times. We did well to move the ball offensively a number of times considering how little space we had to work. The definitely controlled the clearances by ensuring they quickly enveloped the first to possess the ball