Classic Dees.

Newspaper articles all saying the intention is to go deep into finals.

Come out later in the day and get pantsed.

Some things never change, absolutely no game plan again.

The sad sacks are on the warpath

Came up against a premiership midfield without half of ours and struggled.

The most frustrating part though was we had most of our backline and refused to counter attack. 
 

And it wasn’t just that we didn’t go fast but that we didn’t go move it around ball movement either. Just do nothing then bomb.

At times when Rivers took it on and mixed it up we scored.

Our forward line out the back plan requires counter attack. Otherwise our forwards just run out of position.

Our midfield would’ve had to dominate for this plan to work and it never was going to.

The dogs are not a good forward pressure team. And sure they had the exits sealed but we had to move the ball around to be any chance of playing well. 

Definitely need to keep perspective. 
If Melbourne ran a midfield of Petracca, Oliver, Viney and Brayshaw all game and the Bulldogs were running with their equivalents of AVB, Jones and Sparrow (Petracca aside) I’d be concerned with only a 40 point win. To be fair 60 points would’ve better reflected the game.

Yes it would’ve been good to see better stopping ability from those second and even third stringers, and Langdon’s butchery was frustrating. But one team was taking that pretty seriously personnel wise and the other seems to be (hopefully by choice) nursing through to round 1.

Edited March 8, 20214 yr by Lampers

8 minutes ago, Pickett2Jackson said:

Anyone still think T Mac isnt finished?

Mitch Brown and Petty are better options up forward than him.

How was the delivery today? Bit early to go the crow on that today.

5 minutes ago, Demon17 said:

Didn't see the game.  But with Oliver, Brayshaw, Viney out and 9 new  players in  would the result have been different and were there ANY positives?

And just looking at the stats, the team went missing for the 3rd 1/4 and kept pace for the other 3.

So nothing has changed about the loss of concentrtaion and teams winning with 2o minutes of good footy as previous years.
is that what happened? I'd be interested to know because all the TALK so far has been "..we need to play 4  1/4's..." Maybe we can't?

Was disappointed to hear BBB mention 'learnings' at 3qtr time....

I would expect the likes of Jordon and Sparrow to perform better when surrounded by the likes of Oliver, Viney, Brayshaw and other regular senior players.

3 minutes ago, waynewussell said:

I think the selection, or non selection was flawed. Brayshaw & Oliver should have played. Our selection just exposed too many young blokes at once, which condemns them to a hiding.

I don’t agree. Our backline was mostly in place. Our forwards were what we have. The young midfielders are all 3rd year guys, physically they should be ready to compete. If Oliver needed a rest then he needed a rest. And there’s no evidence that Brayshaw first up for a half would’ve done anything more than Jordon or Sparrow.

if this were a game out at ballarat or casey people wouldn't care. it was a practice match at marvel and people act like our season is over.

oliver brayshaw viney hibberd melksham salem pickett brown weids all walk up 22 and all not playing.

a decent hit out against a near full strength dogs side.

people need to calm the farm.

If there was ever a clear sign that Oliver runs our midfield it was today. Take him out and we don't get first use. 

There were a lot of really ordinary performances. Outside of May and Lever, I'm not sure there was anyone to write home about.

That said, Chandler showed some good signs early, ANB tried hard, Jones was relatively clean except for that brain fade off the ground and Fritsch had 6 scoring shots again.

Our forwardline hasn't improved at all though, nor has our delivery to it. I know it's difficult because they would have planned for Weideman and Brown, but our forward entries are high, long and hopeful (like 2019-2020). McDonald and Jackson aren't natural forwards and aren't particularly good marks. I'd have Chandler in the forwardline with Kozzie though.

I liked that they've given Hunt a licence to run off half back, but I felt Hunt and Langdon delivered the ball inside too many times. Both of them are classic, high up and under kickers. Langdon probably had his worst game for the club too, which didn't help.

Oliver, Viney and Brayshaw walk into that team. I wouldn't have Sparrow near by best 22. What is it he offers this group? He doesn't break away from packs, he's not a good kick and he's not a great blanket player either. Jordon has a bit to work on too, if he's going to get a game consistently. 

It'll be interesting to see how we respond in Round 1. I know it's just one practice game, but I think we're in big trouble here.

5 minutes ago, drysdale demon said:

The sad sacks are on the warpath

Maybe, but I was hoping for more effort than 

Its the lack of depth todays game revealed worries me as well as the fact several senior players seem all at sea.

Props to May , Lever, Gawn, Fritter and Nibbler.

Not enough though.

Didn't help their cause... AVB, Harmes, Hunt, Spargo & Baker.

4 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Came up against a premiership midfield without half of ours and struggled.

The most frustrating part though was we had most of our backline and refused to counter attack. 
 

And it wasn’t just that we didn’t go fast but that we didn’t go move it around ball movement either. Just do nothing then bomb.

At times when Rivers took it on and mixed it up we scored.

Our forward line out the back plan requires counter attack. Otherwise our forwards just run out of position.

Our midfield would’ve had to dominate for this plan to work and it never was going to.

The dogs are not a good forward pressure team. And sure they had the exits sealed but we had to move the ball around to be any chance of playing well. 

Yes I have only seen 2 training sessions this year but watching the game I noticed that we were not switching play or moving the ball in any way that resembled the what I have witnessed. I know we were missing  perhaps 10 first pick players but I thought in a preseason match you would keep trying to play to the system you train? 

1 minute ago, olisik said:

Classic Dees.

Newspaper articles all saying the intention is to go deep into finals.

Come out later in the day and get pantsed.

Some things never change, absolutely no game plan again.

Most obvious characteristic of the game, keeping 'uncertain youth' onfield with limited support where the gameplan and teamed execution of Footy101 was obviously not emphasised or understood. The missed tackles, the missed passing, the pack marking attempts, the spatial supports and run throughs, the long bombs, the wasted spaces, the manning up and opposition coverage - all a repeat of the Goodwin years.

A bad day made worse by the similarities of mediocrity and once the team was selected, a result we all expected. Sure, some of our players were requiring 'management' but not all. Lever and May were great. Sadly, our year is off to a bad start without change in game orientation. The Bulldogs clearly displayed the kinds of team supports that we need to execute.

13 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Yep. Every Player on the list should have the desire and ability to lay good tackles that stick. 
spots were up for grabs today, and i didn’t see a lot of Competition for them

that is the Concern i take from today

We were being smashed in the first quarter, regardless of the score 

Yep and do you know where it started ?? Caleb Daniels run out of the backiline. Guess who he was on... Spargo! Enough said!

2 minutes ago, Earl Hood said:

Yes I have only seen 2 training sessions this year but watching the game I noticed that we were not switching play or moving the ball in any way that resembled the what I have witnessed. I know we were missing  perhaps 10 first pick players but I thought in a preseason match you would keep trying to play to the system you train? 

Correct summation I too have seen this

Nice to see our coaches' counter measures implemented when the Dogs laughed at us in the 3rd qtr.  Decisions and skills very average. The Dogs were never in trouble. But we will still accept 2 qtr game efforts like that. So it is what it is............still.

 

11 minutes ago, Demon17 said:

And just looking at the stats, the team went missing for the 3rd 1/4 and kept pace for the other 3.

So nothing has changed about the loss of concentrtaion and teams winning with 2o minutes of good footy as previous years.
is that what happened? I'd be interested to know because all the TALK so far has been "..we need to play 4  1/4's..." Maybe we can't?

Don't worry, we will learn from this.

?

We got smashed in the middle, but I can handle that as it was a second string midfield all day, against one of the best in the comp.

What concerned me more was our complete inability to move the ball with any consistency. Just like previous years, we make it look like bloody hard work with no easy kick/mark/kick/mark or spread from the contest. Our best passages are occasional fast rebounds from defence, which don't look sustainable.

Thank god for May and Lever, otherwise that would have comfortably been 10+ goals.

Edited March 8, 20214 yr by Forest Demon

At half time I thought they had more to worry about than us - a forward line that was being beaten by our backs, and a backline that wasn’t great against our forwards.

in the second half as I watched us fall off tackles and miss targets I’ve changed my mind.

not slitting wrists given so many players out, but god I hope May is ok for round 1, the guys who were out can come back in (only chandler and Bowery worth a second thought for round 1 IMO), and hope we do much much better at stoppages so we can get the opportunities to try a kick a winning score. 
can’t really understand our odds for round 1 - although Walters being out evens things up a bit (assuming May can play)

7 minutes ago, picket fence said:

Yep and do you know where it started ?? Caleb Daniels run out of the backiline. Guess who he was on... Spargo! Enough said!

No he wasn't.......

2 minutes ago, Brenno said:

No he wasn't.......

For most of the 1st quarter he was his direct opponent

 

Edited March 8, 20214 yr by picket fence

AS FD says one can forgive the centre clearance play but our inability to run and spread was disappointing to say the least.

Tom Mac AVB and probably Hunt are not the future.

Plus was that other than one shot Fritsch nailed the gettable goals. Had two shots from the boundary which were never likely.

Jones was solid and Trac was average at best.

Anyway too early for panic but there wasn't much to excite in that hit out.

Had the Dogs kicked straight in the first half you could probably add another four goals to the loss