34 minutes ago, Deestar9 said:

Can’t understand why you bring that up…we won. 

Huh? So if we win, we shouldn’t point out anything we could have done better? What happened to the concept of continual improvement? I am sure that particular play would have been discussed by the coaches in the review. Or maybe it shouldn’t have been… after all, we won.

11 hours ago, Winners at last said:

Hey, does anyone know why Kozzy was so angry with Newns after he kicked the winning goal? He was ropeable ... I'm guessing, but perhaps Newns had been continually holding/scragging him? 

It was the reaction of a man and a team that are scragged pretty well all year, if you don't mind maggots.

14 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

...I reckon a game like that, with that result, will spark something in our players. A reminder of the thrill of playing these big games, when they don't end in disappointment like they did the previous week. Maybe they'll spark a change in ball movement, or a change in how we defend, but at the least a change in belief....

...I still think too many are expecting us to be blowing everyone, even top 8 sides, out of the water. We weren't doing that last year and we shouldn't be expecting it this year. I rate this win, and I rate our chances to knock Brisbane off again this Friday and confirm our top 4 spot.

That's what I am hoping as well - that this win really magnetises the team. 

On paper we have all the pieces (except for an answer to our i50 and forward conundrum), but sometimes you need the intangibles - like a thrilling last gasp win like we did against the Blues. Last year we got it with Maxy's after the siren kick against the Cats. This could very well do the same thing.

Agree with the later statement, although I think we have been generally underwhelming against the in-form sides of the comp, such as the Cats, Swans and Pies x 2. Perhaps it's quite fitting that the Cats and Swans sit above us right now. 

But you're only as good as your last game, and that is especially so in the finals - so I hope we use our momentum and belief from the Blues and put the Lions away, then do what we need to do in the finals.

58 minutes ago, Demonised said:

I'm thinking that all this is a ruse and that Goody has a Cunning Plan which will be unveiled in two weeks, taking all opposition teams by surprise having been lulled into a false sense of security and they will all be blown away and we'll have back to back flags.

.

I love a good conspiracy 😌 in fact I hunt for them!!!

3 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Yep.

Our kick outs is now way too predictable when Steven May kicks out to the point where you'll notice now opposition teams are already set up in numbers on the left side of the ground because that's out go too point.

I thought by now we would have rectified this..

Rectified this? That's a bit arrogant. This assumes that you are certain that there is a problem. Wouldn't this show up in repeat opposition i50 entries if there was a problem? On Saturday night, however, this was not the case. Carlton had 48 i50, which was lower than our opponent's 2022 i50 average of 54.4.

Another statistic that may refute your conclusions. We used the same strategy for kick-outs last year. In 2021, we finished second to the Bulldogs in i50 Team/Opponent Average Difference (6.8). We are second again this year. This time to Geelong with an even higher figure of 8.6. This strategy clearly benefits us more than our opponents, in my opinion and I assume Goody's as well..

Edited August 15, 20222 yr by djr

I could not make the game live this week but watched it for a second time last night.

We were not quite as clean as we were against the Magpies but Carlton's pressure was excellent and it was a much better MFC performance than I thought on the night.

Cripps was incredible and Silvani did a great job as a second ruckman. The Blues key defenders were tough to get through.

I know we are consistent in the way we play but I think we need to tinker a bit. In particular, I would like to see us try to hit a loose player inside 50 rather than always kicking to Brown who is outnumbered.

Brown tried hard and competed but he is out with his timing. I think we will struggle to win the flag if he can't find marking form in September.

Oliver was undisciplined in the last quarter and needs a rocket. (The down fields were both soft but giving away a shot at goal for a tummy punch was terrible play.)

Spargo's lack of size and speed means he struggles at times. I wouldn't be surprise if he gets left out for Harmes or Smith.

We need to kick the ball to Jackson inside 50 more often.

 

8 minutes ago, djr said:

Rectified this? That's a bit arrogant. This assumes that you are certain that there is a problem. Wouldn't this show up in repeat opposition i50 entries if there was a problem? On Saturday night, however, this was not the case. Carlton had 48 i50, which was lower than our opponent's 2022 i50 average of 54.4.

Another statistic that may refute your conclusions. We used the same strategy for kick-outs last year. In 2021, we finished second to the Bulldogs in i50 Team/Opponent Average Difference (6.8). We are second again this year. This time to Geelong with an even higher figure of 8.6. This strategy clearly benefits us more than our opponents, in my opinion and I assume Goody's as well..

We are 17th for end to end goals. It’s a problem. Repeat defensive inside 50’s is only one part of the equation. The other part is the ability to setup goals starting from defensive ball movement. 

Many parts of our game that worked perfectly last year, are not working as well this year due to opposition tactics to limit some of our strengths. 

The arrogance I am seeing is our FD not reacting when our oppo comes up with successful tactics. 
 

Edited August 15, 20222 yr by 1964_2

2 minutes ago, 1964_2 said:

We are 17th for end to end goals. It’s a problem. Repeat defensive inside 50’s is only one part of the equation. The other part is the ability to setup goals starting from defensive ball movement. 

Many parts of our game that worked perfectly last year, are not working as well this year due to opposition tactics to limit some of our strengths. 

The arrogance I am seeing is our FD not reacting when our oppo comes up with successful tactics. 
 

You're referring to something entirely different. Please tell me where our kick-out strategy has failed us. There is no proof. How many end-to-end goals are scored from kick-outs each week? There aren't many. If that is your metric for concluding that our kick-out strategy has failed, you may need to look elsewhere for a problem.

1 minute ago, djr said:

You're referring to something entirely different. Please tell me where our kick-out strategy has failed us. There is no proof. How many end-to-end goals are scored from kick-outs each week? There aren't many. If that is your metric for concluding that our kick-out strategy has failed, you may need to look elsewhere for a problem.

Am referring to lack of end to end goals, as evidence of defensive / conservative ball movement from the backline. 

which I believe is occurring from both kick-in’s and defensive turnovers. 

Sure I may not have the direct stats to show why kick-in’s are not working, but I certainly know it’s more than just the amount of defensive repeat inside 50’s. 

both conservative kick-ins and conservative def 50 turnovers (eg long down the line) lead to more likelihood of poor forward 50 connection - which is a clearly identified issue from both the club and supporters. 
 

 ! 

Edited August 15, 20222 yr by Mr Steve
Wrong Thread

15 minutes ago, djr said:

You're referring to something entirely different. Please tell me where our kick-out strategy has failed us. There is no proof. How many end-to-end goals are scored from kick-outs each week? There aren't many. If that is your metric for concluding that our kick-out strategy has failed, you may need to look elsewhere for a problem.

Sure maybe more aggressive defensive ball movement would lead to more oppo goals, than the benefit we can create from it. But you don’t know if you don’t try? 

And I guess that’s the problem. It’s now likely too late in the year to try and change anything too much. 
 

We stole a win. 

But we're nowhere near the team we were this time last year. The evidence is everywhere. 

And I think the most telling thing was that we were matched through the midfield which was an embarrassment if you ask me. 

They had no Hewitt, Kennedy and Cerra. 

And we have two generational mids plus Viney and Brayshaw. 

It's positive that we've been able to hang on, thanks in large to our 10-0 start. But we'll be going out in straight sets if we continue to play the way we are. 

There's no denying that. 

2 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

For 11 weeks Collingwood was applauded for their skill in winning close games, including here on Demonland, and including in response to our loss last week.

We win a close one and we "lucked in" because an opposition player made a mistake.

FFS.

Chill out man ...

1 hour ago, 1964_2 said:

We are 17th for end to end goals. It’s a problem. Repeat defensive inside 50’s is only one part of the equation. The other part is the ability to setup goals starting from defensive ball movement. 

Many parts of our game that worked perfectly last year, are not working as well this year due to opposition tactics to limit some of our strengths. 

The arrogance I am seeing is our FD not reacting when our oppo comes up with successful tactics. 
 

End-to-end goals are the least common and least important way to score goals.

We correctly prioritise goals from stoppages and turnover, as does every single other club in the competition.

20 minutes ago, JimmyGadson said:

We stole a win. 

But we're nowhere near the team we were this time last year. The evidence is everywhere. 

And I think the most telling thing was that we were matched through the midfield which was an embarrassment if you ask me. 

They had no Hewitt, Kennedy and Cerra. 

And we have two generational mids plus Viney and Brayshaw. 

It's positive that we've been able to hang on, thanks in large to our 10-0 start. But we'll be going out in straight sets if we continue to play the way we are. 

There's no denying that. 

Of course there is.

The way that we've been playing has seen us go 3-3 against finalists since the bye. Obviously not 6-0, which means we're not a certainty to win a final, but also not 0-6, which means unlike this post we're not a certainty to lose any/all finals we play.

3 hours ago, old55 said:

McKay 7 marks (season average 5.8), 4 contested marks (season average 2.2) and 3 goals (season average 2.4) was in danger of getting away from May.  The over the top goal was definitely May's fault, he's the goalkeeper, how does his man get 25 metres goalside of him?

The thing about Curnow - he IS brilliant and often makes those plays. The luck was on our side.

IMO a better match up would have been the reverse of what we went for.

I don't know that May has the agility to go with Curnow. I thought Petty was superb on him.

May has to find an extra gear before finals, because his form has been mediocre at best since Melksham punched him. 

25 minutes ago, JimmyGadson said:

They had no Hewitt, Kennedy and Cerra. 

And we have two generational mids plus Viney and Brayshaw. 

 

They tagged Oliver with Setterfield and then used Docherty as their 3rd mid. Whilst Petracca was relegated to our 4th mid due to his awful defensive running and our desire for more forward line talent. Walsh was used the same way for them but to open space.

With Oliver heavily restricted and undoing most of his good work with poor discipline it became a midfield game of Cripps v Gus and Docherty v Viney/Sparrow. Just breaking even in that situation isn’t a surprise.

And to make it worse Gus kicked it like he was playing for Carlton.

We don’t ever switch or run the ball out the fat side which means we get no benefit from Salem, Hunt and Rivers being on top. We rarely used Langdon or JJ in space with quick movement and we don’t get much from Pickett, Spargo, ANB or the medium forwards ability to spread and kick the ball either. 

26 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

I don't know that May has the agility to go with Curnow. I thought Petty was superb on him.

May has to find an extra gear before finals, because his form has been mediocre at best since Melksham punched him. 

I thought May was pretty good actually.

Was named in the best in the afl.com.au match report and second-best on ground by Matthew Lloyd on radio.

Which I accept mean nothing really, but I'll be keen to see the coaches' votes later today.

51 minutes ago, JimmyGadson said:

We stole a win. 

But we're nowhere near the team we were this time last year. The evidence is everywhere. 

And I think the most telling thing was that we were matched through the midfield which was an embarrassment if you ask me. 

They had no Hewitt, Kennedy and Cerra. 

And we have two generational mids plus Viney and Brayshaw. 

It's positive that we've been able to hang on, thanks in large to our 10-0 start. But we'll be going out in straight sets if we continue to play the way we are. 

There's no denying that. 

Said to an ex VFL  playing mate once after his side had a good win when undermanned, How much would you have won by if you'd had player XY & z. His reply, there's no guarantee they'd play any better than those that played in their place. It's irrelevant who they had missing.

3 hours ago, old55 said:

McKay 7 marks (season average 5.8), 4 contested marks (season average 2.2) and 3 goals (season average 2.4) was in danger of getting away from May.  The over the top goal was definitely May's fault, he's the goalkeeper, how does his man get 25 metres goalside of him?

The thing about Curnow - he IS brilliant and often makes those plays. The luck was on our side.

IMO a better match up would have been the reverse of what we went for.

May gambled off McKay because he read the kick that went to Curnow as going long and saw a chance to intercept. It was a brilliant Cripps kick from awful midfield defending that beat Petty. Once Curnow had the ball he would’ve had McKay 1 on 1 with massive amounts of space anyway, May or Petty would’ve been just about stuffed regardless.

May gambled off McKay and got the gamble right about 5 times that led to easy intercept possessions. The one time he gambled incorrectly looked a lot worse than it was.

Curnow does kick some crazy snaps but of his 4 behinds I think, 1 was a pass that sailed 60 and never threatened, 1 was a down field free, 2 were low percentage shots well defended.

May is a power athlete so he took the powerful McKay. Curnow has great athleticism but he’s more of the endurance athlete and Petty matches up well there. May has the strength to work McKay off the drop, Petty has the height to negate Curnow’s leap.

In general Petty gave up 1 goal, May gave up 2. You’d take that every day of the week. 

Kudos to Melksham and Hunt for their games against the Blues. Both maligned and both missed a premiership medal and have had to fight for their spot.

We've been much better since Hunt came into the back six at Bowey's expense and Brayshaw pushed further up the field. Hunt's ability to lock down on smaller agile forwards is very important to our defense, but his pace and agility rebounding is important. He doesn't get as much ball these days, but he makes it count and has learnt to lower his eyes with shorter passes too instead of always blazing away. He basically won us the game in the last few minutes, with three inside 50s leading to two goals. His ability to break the lines with great sidestep and pace before sending it forward was match winning. He has to stay in the 22 now for the remainder of the season.

Melksham has clearly worked on his defensive pressure like the coaches wanted, and though it's still not outstanding due to lack of pace, he's putting in the effort and getting some rewards. Was an odd sight seeing him become the best marking forward on the ground when McKay and Curnow were playing! Credit to him for always staying involved, keeping his eyes on the ball in every marking contest, and making the most of his opportunities. We need goal kickers, and he's proving he can be one right when we need it most heading into finals with TMac unlikely to return this year.

Honourable mention to Petty also for winning the battle with the current Coleman medal leader. Curnow had a few shots at goal, but some were from unrelated downfield free kicks, and most weren't from high percentage positions. Petty wore him like a glove and comfortably beat him. Great effort and still surprising to see a 21 year old do such a good job in a tall defender role against some of the leagues best players.

4 hours ago, 1964_2 said:

PS. Stat from Kingy:- we are 17th for moving the ball from one end of the ground to the other. Too predictable / conservative coming out of defence? 

 

Damning stat when we have some very good break away players.

People enjoy the win ... never know how many more games we have this season ... my son and l were leaving the G with a few minutes to go as he had a lightning premiership the next day but we kept on eye on the screen ... we just made it through the turnstiles when kozzie kicked it ... l ran straight back in jumping up and down with my son and was accosted by security for not checking bags and scanning .. he obviously wasn't a dees fan! One to remember just behind the after the siren goal from max to seal the mcclelland trophy

Edited August 15, 20222 yr by Demons1858

2 minutes ago, 1964_2 said:

Sure maybe more aggressive defensive ball movement would lead to more oppo goals, than the benefit we can create from it. But you don’t know if you don’t try? 

And I guess that’s the problem. It’s now likely too late in the year to try and change anything too much. 
 

Yes, connecting to the forward line is an issue, and it was a problem last year right up until the finals. We are tracking similarly to last year. Due to TMac's absence, we are forced to play only one tall and two mediums in the forward line this year. Goody is experimenting. Melky is playing as a defensive forward and Angus is playing midfield. LJ is spending more time in the ruck and Max is spending more time in the forward half. BBB is there solely to create a contest and to take the opposition's leading back. Trac is also playing more forward than he did last year. Many of these changes have been made in the hope of improving the connection between backs and forwards. Regardless of the results, there has been an improvement over the last few weeks.

1 hour ago, DeeSpencer said:

They tagged Oliver with Setterfield and then used Docherty as their 3rd mid. Whilst Petracca was relegated to our 4th mid due to his awful defensive running and our desire for more forward line talent. Walsh was used the same way for them but to open space.

With Oliver heavily restricted and undoing most of his good work with poor discipline it became a midfield game of Cripps v Gus and Docherty v Viney/Sparrow. Just breaking even in that situation isn’t a surprise.

And to make it worse Gus kicked it like he was playing for Carlton.

We don’t ever switch or run the ball out the fat side which means we get no benefit from Salem, Hunt and Rivers being on top. We rarely used Langdon or JJ in space with quick movement and we don’t get much from Pickett, Spargo, ANB or the medium forwards ability to spread and kick the ball either. 

On the night I felt like Cripps, Docherty & Setterfield gave our mids a real touch up. 

Cripps is covering the ground very well.

 

Edited August 15, 20222 yr by BW511

4 hours ago, 1964_2 said:

Ok, maybe we just haven’t different expectations of what good coaching involves. 

For mine it’s a pretty basic instruction to not kick down the line to an out-number, when we are behind with a couple of minutes on the clock. 

And no, Jake did not automatically know that the out-number would be there. Listen to his SEN interview this morning, and he says “we just have to find wherever it is that we have extra numbers” 

 

Look at the vision in first crack last night. Lever was already communicating to his teammates to head into the corridor if we won possession as we had a 3 on 1.