What they're saying down at Royal Parade

[JTR 2,910]

https://www.carltonsc.com/index.php?topic=5505.0

"I think we can beat Melbourne, more on the law of averages, they are due for a loss and just fell in for a win vs the Swans IMO.
Brown and McDonald wont present the same problems as Bruce and Naughton plus Oliver is only half the player the Bont is and Cripps owes us a big one. Blues by 16 points, not because we are great but more because Melbourne are getting ahead of themselves, due for a loss and we can defend them better IMO"

[Smokey 4,391]

Hilarious that more than one person in that thread believe they defend better than us

[whatwhat say what 23,862]

i think they are more arguing that they can defend us 'more easily' than they could footscray

i can sort of understand where they're coming but at the same time lolololol

could we drop this? sure...

will we? hope not!

[Ted Lasso 19,586]

Carlton can't defend, it's the entire reason they're not going anywhere as a club. if you watched talking points with Adem Yze, they're exactly the type of team he's talking about. they look great when it's all going their way, but they can't defend when it's not. the dogs cruised for 3 quarters then put the foot down and the Blues had no chance. 

we're a better team than the dogs and they're in for a rude shock on Sunday imo.

[Dee Zephyr 19,311]

I’ve seen nothing so far to suggest we are getting ahead of ourselves personally. I saw a team refusing to lose last Saturday night.

[640MD 3,568]

Just finished reading stuff on talkingcarlton 

best they could come up with was

its about time we had a loss and we are Melbourne and quite likely to fall in a heap.  Because we take them easy or are just plain cocky. 
there was definitely a low expectation of how they would perform 

 

oh and they called the bombers 

the effundruggs. Thought that was ok

[Demon_spurs 1,984]

I love these threads thank you JTR.

[640MD 3,568]

Couple of times they pointed out we had a poor game against the swans and were very lucky to win, 

I think that’s underestimating Sydney by a huge amount.   They played well,

[Deemania since 56 6,810]

32 minutes ago, JTR said:

https://www.carltonsc.com/index.php?topic=5505.0

"I think we can beat Melbourne, more on the law of averages, they are due for a loss and just fell in for a win vs the Swans IMO.
Brown and McDonald wont present the same problems as Bruce and Naughton plus Oliver is only half the player the Bont is and Cripps owes us a big one. Blues by 16 points, not because we are great but more because Melbourne are getting ahead of themselves, due for a loss and we can defend them better IMO"

This edifice of irrational logic insists that misinformation is the key to all that rues the Blues. 

[spalding 1,128]

7 minutes ago, 640MD said:

Couple of times they pointed out we had a poor game against the swans and were very lucky to win, 

I think that’s underestimating Sydney by a huge amount.   They played well,

Agreed.

I heard Craig Jennings on SEN talking about how you stop Melbourne - start with Gawn, tag Pickett, man up defensively on lever and try and limit Petracca from the stoppage. Swans got 4 out of 4 of those and still lost! 

[binman 44,833]

9 minutes ago, 640MD said:

Couple of times they pointed out we had a poor game against the swans and were very lucky to win, 

I think that’s underestimating Sydney by a huge amount.   They played well,

Too right they did.

I am definitely guilty of underestimating them.

That said i reckon if we had taken our chances in the second (tracc  kozzie, maxy) we might have broken them.

[binman 44,833]

Just now, spalding said:

Agreed.

I heard Craig Jennings on SEN talking about how you stop Melbourne - start with Gawn, tag Pickett, man up defensively on lever and try and limit Petracca from the stoppage. Swans got 4 out of 4 of those and still lost! 

How long ago was that spalding?

I sometimes listen to that bit on catch up (he's on every Thursday). I don't reallt know why, but he annoys me. But it is quite I getting segment.

Leppa does a similar segment on Tuesdays which I prefer.

Daisy was on today doing some analysis and was teriific

[chookrat 4,268]

12 minutes ago, 640MD said:

Couple of times they pointed out we had a poor game against the swans and were very lucky to win, 

I think that’s underestimating Sydney by a huge amount.   They played well,

Imo, that we haven't played great footy all year, with the exception of the Richmond game, is precisely the reason we should beat Carlton. They need alot to go right, while if we can keep going and make some small improvements then we should comfortably account for them.

[Demon_spurs 1,984]

Boy reading some of their comments they are more flattering about our team, than we are

[Nasher 33,686]

If we were going to come unstuck against a garbage team, it would have been the hapless North. That was the textbook “Melbourne will get complacent and lose” game.

Carlton aren’t bad enough to take lightly, but they definitely aren’t good enough to beat us. It’s cute that they’re confident though. Good on them.

[Megatron 886]

Apparently we are imposters at the top of the ladder ?

[bobby1554 1,275]

12 minutes ago, spalding said:

Agreed.

I heard Craig Jennings on SEN talking about how you stop Melbourne - start with Gawn, tag Pickett, man up defensively on lever and try and limit Petracca from the stoppage. Swans got 4 out of 4 of those and still lost! 

Which is probably the reason Longmire said we are the best side in it at the moment.

[Cheesy D. Pun 1,765]

36 minutes ago, Patches O’houlihan said:

Carlton can't defend, it's the entire reason they're not going anywhere as a club. if you watched talking points with Adem Yze, they're exactly the type of team he's talking about. they look great when it's all going their way, but they can't defend when it's not. the dogs cruised for 3 quarters then put the foot down and the Blues had no chance. 

we're a better team than the dogs and they're in for a rude shock on Sunday imo.

I don't know about this one. When all of their mids are in, they are very difficult to stop. 

They have issues behind the ball but that midfield is clearly the best/deepest in the comp and I'm nowhere near as confident as you that we're a better team. 

More balanced maybe, but midfield strength is fair indicator of overall success.

I genuinely hope you're analysis is more accurate than mine.

Edited May 13, 2021 by Cheesy D. Pun

[BDA 23,048]

Big shout out to Mantis. It appears he/she has actually watched us play unlike most of the numpties posting in that thread -

“They zone as well as any side does, covering the opposition moves forward or on a rebound. They leave minimal opportunities to have players float forward free in space. They tackle with intensity. They apply pressure with numbers. They make every opportunity for their opponents become a contested possession. Due to the fact that they have a huge work rate. Not lazy. Not left second guessing. The only weak link in their armour is the clearance figures. Which at the moment doesn’t hurt them. They find a way to put on the press and create a turnover and get the ball on their terms eventually. If we played like they do. If we were 8 wins from 8 games. We would be bragging about being flag favourites. Fact is that we are so far behind them, that we are not even in the same league as they are. It will take a miracle for us to even show a competitive contest against the Dees. Which won’t last long enough if it does happen. The end result will be ugly on the scoreboard.

We lack awareness under pressure. We lose our direct opponent too often when the heat is on. We zone space very poorly. We don’t stay accountable for what out opponent is doing or where he is running. We don’t run hard both ways. We don’t stand on the mark in a free kick. We float away and let them play on which allows them to gain ground and put pressure on our players up the ground. We finger point and blame others for our own mistakes. We do spoil and the one percentage plays, but not often enough. Not for 4 quarters.

The Dees coach summed up their last game. They lack some polish with clearance work. However, if they have the grit and determination to win every contest, they will eventually create a turnover and play the next passage on their terms.  They are confident they can and will win every game, and thus play accordingly. In my eyes they only have one lazy player. One that I have seen so far. What a problem they have at the moment. Can we swap players lists, coaches, board etc? lol. Good luck to us. We could win this one by 100 points. Haha haha.”

[binman 44,833]

17 minutes ago, Nasher said:

If we were going to come unstuck against a garbage team, it would have been the hapless North. That was the textbook “Melbourne will get complacent and lose” game.

Carlton aren’t bad enough to take lightly, but they definitely aren’t good enough to beat us. It’s cute that they’re confident though. Good on them.

They're good enough.

And I think they will if we dont bring our benchmark level of  pressure 

[Ted Lasso 19,586]

2 minutes ago, Cheesy D. Pun said:

I don't know about this one. When all of their mids are in, they are very difficult to stop. 

They have issues behind the ball but that midfield is clearly the best/deepest in the comp and I'm nowhere near as confident as you that we're a better team. 

More balanced maybe, but midfield strength is fair indicator of overall success.

I genuinely hope you're analysis is more accurate than mine.

I understand what you mean. personally i rate the Power as a better side than the dogs as well. i think their backline is going to hold them back, they're a very good side, but i don't think their backline will hold up against the better sides often enough. 

I also think we've got a heap of room to improve as well which is a big positive, we're not doing well in the midfield, so if we get that right we'll improve quite a big. 

 

[Cheesy D. Pun 1,765]

25 minutes ago, Nasher said:

If we were going to come unstuck against a garbage team, it would have been the hapless North. That was the textbook “Melbourne will get complacent and lose” game.

Carlton aren’t bad enough to take lightly, but they definitely aren’t good enough to beat us. It’s cute that they’re confident though. Good on them.

This needs one those cringy smile reacts. I so want to go with you, but I just can't bring myself to that level of confidence.

Edited May 13, 2021 by Cheesy D. Pun

[spalding 1,128]

21 minutes ago, binman said:

How long ago was that spalding?

I sometimes listen to that bit on catch up (he's on every Thursday). I don't reallt know why, but he annoys me. But it is quite I getting segment.

Leppa does a similar segment on Tuesdays which I prefer.

Daisy was on today doing some analysis and was teriific

Was around 11.30am today I think 

[Big Demon 197]

They have lost to some good sides, Tigers, Port and Brisbane but also looked ordinary versus a poor Collingwood side. They really aren't too good.

 

[binman 44,833]

Ta. I rarely listen to sen live. Just King, leppa ans sometimes Jennings on catch up

But was driving. I caught the second half of that, so must have in tbe first half. Will listen to the rest.

Jeez they have a lot of ads live. cant stand it