POSTGAME: Rd 09 vs Carlton

[The heart beats true 18,128]

Thinking back on that game it seemed very even, with the only really discernible difference in the sides being Carlton’s extraordinary accuracy around goal - especially early.

If you take a look at the stats they are frighteningly close.

The reality is we are very evenly matched with them currently. I’m not sure either team is in top form. I’d have both sides in the 4-6 bracket on the ladder - which is exactly where they are.

It’ll be the team that can find, and maintain, another gear later in the year that will make it to the GF. 

[binman 42,986]

By the by, I've been critical of the blues defence this season.

But credit where it is due - they were excellent defensively last night, particularly in the first half, won some critical one on one battles and were a huge factor in the win - perhaps the biggest.

[binman 42,986]

29 minutes ago, leave it to deever said:

Did the five day break bite us on the backside.

Interesting that a lot of the players who had big games last week were flat.

Kozzie, Langdon, Lever, Fritta, Lever,  Petty and Oliver in particular.

That's quite a list.

Voss noted on his presser that they were really focused on a fast start to try and exploit the 5 day break factor.

Fatigue may have impacted some individual players more than others (fritter is usually much better one on one for example) but I think the impact was more mental than physical. Not switched on early and we paid the price.

Wevl had clearly planned to be ready and the way we dominated the last quarter and a half, and crazy good pressure numbers tells me fatigue wasn't an issue.

In fact it appeared to be more of an issue for the blues, who were paddling in the last.

We had set ourselves for a win and you could tell from goodys presser he was very frustrated we didn't get the job done.

Edited May 10 by binman

[demon3165 2,719]

3 minutes ago, binman said:

Voss noted on his presser that they were really focused on a fast start to try and exploit the 5 day break factor.

It may have impacted individual plsyers (fritter is usually much better one on one) but I think the impact was more mental than physical.

They had clearly planned to be ready and the way we dominated the last quartet and a half, and crazy good pressure numbers tells me fatigue wasn't an issue.

In fact it appeared to be more of an issue for the blues, who were paddling in the last.

We had set ourselves for a win and you could tell from goodys presser he was very frustrated we didn't get the job done.

I will go the other way if the 5 day break affected us why did we run all over them, they kicked 4 goal 3 and we kicked 8 goals 9 after half time so I don't think that was the real problem.

[Mel Bourne 4,515]

3 minutes ago, binman said:

Voss noted on his presser that they were really focused on a fast start to try and exploit the 5 day break factor.

Fatigue may have impacted some individual players more than others (fritter is usually much better one on one for example) but I think the impact was more mental than physical. Not switched on early and we paid the price.

Wevl had clearly planned to be ready and the way we dominated the last quarter and a half, and crazy good pressure numbers tells me fatigue wasn't an issue.

In fact it appeared to be more of an issue for the blues, who were paddling in the last.

We had set ourselves for a win and you could tell from goodys presser he was very frustrated we didn't get the job done.

5-day break or not, Voss and every other coach in the league will be aiming to exploit the Demons’ far-too-often slow starts to matches in general, as these have been a common occurrence since ‘22. 
 

[binman 42,986]

2 minutes ago, Mel Bourne said:

5-day break or not, Voss and every other coach in the league will be aiming to exploit the Demons’ far-too-often slow starts to matches in general, as these have been a common occurrence since ‘22. 
 

Fair call.

Kicking 5 straight is certainly a good start.

[Dee Zephyr 19,267]

37 minutes ago, The heart beats true said:

Thinking back on that game it seemed very even, with the only really discernible difference in the sides being Carlton’s extraordinary accuracy around goal - especially early.

Yep, Blues 2.8 against Cats at quarter time, 8.2 against us at halftime 

[Young Angus 798]

First quarter an anomaly but not a huge surprise either unfortunately.  Thought Billings and Taj were really good, among others but those guys deserve a shout out.

Could see Melksham on the bench thinking "if I was on I'd be kicking clutch goals here there and everywhere" reckon we needed him last night, if not just for some inspiration in that first quarter.

Trac was amazing though, Max too, we're lucky to have those guys.  That dangerous tackle BS at the end was such BS I hope that guy cops a fine, they should start banning people for that nonsense, basically won the game for them at that point.

Edited May 10 by Young Angus

[Adam The God 30,261]

1 hour ago, binman said:

Goody DID adapt our game plan for the wet weather.

Goody gets bagged all the time for  not 'adapting' to the conditions when it rains.

Wet weather footy is traditionally territory first, get it forward and deep inside 50.

Which is exactly what we did. So, on this occasion we did adapt (though we did keep trying high risk quick handballs, many of which came unstuck).

The numbers reflected that, winning the inside 50 count and the territory battle as evidenced by the anomalous (this season) time in forward half numbers:

Quarter	For	Against
1	53%	47%
2	50%	50%
3	51%	49%
4	76%	24%
Match	59%	41%

And there's the rub.

A key reason goody doesn't like to make big changes to method week to week is we are a system based team.

It' no small thing to suddenly use another method- even if it is one that was previously our primary method, particularly given we are trying to implement and bed down a new system this season.

Another factor was the forecast was for no rain. I doubt they would have planned for it to be so wet, and likely not trained for it. I was shocked when it started raining at the ground an hour before the game.

So they may have had to change their tactics on game day (after possibly training for a different method during the week).

It dried out considerably after half time - there was no rain, or at least not in the last.

And we bounced off half back and spread the ground much more and reverted to the style we have been using tgis season - one more suited to dry weather.

I actually think we played the first 15 minutes of the first quarter with our usual method. We tried to slingshot from the back, and then when they started piling on the scores and some rain arrived, we changed our method and played long and tried to take territory.

[BDA 22,755]

1 hour ago, binman said:

By the by, I've been critical of the blues defence this season.

But credit where it is due - they were excellent defensively last night, particularly in the first half, won some critical one on one battles and were a huge factor in the win - perhaps the biggest.

McGovern made a big difference 

[titan_uranus 25,020]

1 hour ago, dazzledavey36 said:

For like couldn't turn up until the last quarter.

Do you seriously think this?

The middle two quarters were intense and even. If we didn't turn up until three quarter time, do you really think the game would have been as close as it was?

1 hour ago, binman said:

By the by, I've been critical of the blues defence this season.

But credit where it is due - they were excellent defensively last night, particularly in the first half, won some critical one on one battles and were a huge factor in the win - perhaps the biggest.

I have to stop myself from OTT posting about this but ask Carlton supporters for their views on Young and you'll get a strong majority telling you he's a real problem. Williams was struggling defensively too.

Replacing them with McGovern and Kemp was enormous for them structurally.

Daniel Hoyne on radio wanted people to believe it was a system problem, not personnel. In a not-uncommon occurrence, he is wrong. 

[Fat Tony 5,231]

1 hour ago, binman said:

Goody DID adapt our game plan for the wet weather.

Goody gets bagged all the time for  not 'adapting' to the conditions when it rains.

Wet weather footy is traditionally territory first, get it forward and deep inside 50.

Which is exactly what we did. So, on this occasion we did adapt (though we did keep trying high risk quick handballs, many of which came unstuck).

The numbers reflected that, winning the inside 50 count and the territory battle as evidenced by the anomalous (this season) time in forward half numbers:

Quarter	For	Against
1	53%	47%
2	50%	50%
3	51%	49%
4	76%	24%
Match	59%	41%

And there's the rub.

A key reason goody doesn't like to make big changes to method week to week is we are a system based team.

It' no small thing to suddenly use another method- even if it is one that was previously our primary method, particularly given we are trying to implement and bed down a new system this season.

Another factor was the forecast was for no rain. I doubt they would have planned for it to be so wet, and likely not trained for it. I was shocked when it started raining at the ground an hour before the game.

So they may have had to change their tactics on game day (after possibly training for a different method during the week).

It dried out considerably after half time - there was no rain, or at least not in the last.

And we bounced off half back and spread the ground much more and reverted to the style we have been using tgis season - one more suited to dry weather.

Our system works well in dry weather and some of our problems in the wet are due to the slippery ball not favouring some key personnel, like Max, May and Lever. The system is good for dry weather because it automatically adjusts to how the opposition want to play. But wet weather is different. Every team plays the same style in the wet.

That said, we need to particularly look at the method at stoppages in the wet. Having a loose man behind the play is less value in the wet. I don't accept that we cannot alter this from game to game or even mid game. We have enough experienced players to adjust.

 

 

[binman 42,986]

33 minutes ago, Binmans PA said:

I actually think we played the first 15 minutes of the first quarter with our usual method. We tried to slingshot from the back, and then when they started piling on the scores and some rain arrived, we changed our method and played long and tried to take territory.

So when the rain arrived we adapted.

 

[binman 42,986]

2 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

Our system works well in dry weather and some of our problems in the wet are due to the slippery ball not favouring some key personnel, like Max, May and Lever. The system is good for dry weather because it automatically adjusts to how the opposition want to play. But wet weather is different. Every team plays the same style in the wet.

That said, we need to particularly look at the method at stoppages in the wet. Having a loose man behind the play is less value in the wet. I don't accept that we cannot alter this from game to game or even mid game. We have enough experienced players to adjust.

 

 

I have to check on the replay, but I think we might have evened up at stoppages after half time.

Can anyone confirm or refute that?

Edited May 10 by binman

[Pennant St Dee 13,185]

1 hour ago, binman said:

By the by, I've been critical of the blues defence this season.

But credit where it is due - they were excellent defensively last night, particularly in the first half, won some critical one on one battles and were a huge factor in the win - perhaps the biggest.

McGovern and Kemp coming back in helped as did unaccountable Williams going out

[picket fence 17,170]

I thought Billings and Taj W were pretty good last night!

[binman 42,986]

34 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

Do you seriously think this?

The middle two quarters were intense and even. If we didn't turn up until three quarter time, do you really think the game would have been as close as it was?

I have to stop myself from OTT posting about this but ask Carlton supporters for their views on Young and you'll get a strong majority telling you he's a real problem. Williams was struggling defensively too.

Replacing them with McGovern and Kemp was enormous for them structurally.

Daniel Hoyne on radio wanted people to believe it was a system problem, not personnel. In a not-uncommon occurrence, he is wrong. 

Personnel helps that's for sure.

But I agree with hoyne their system is flawed.

I mean they gave up  17 scoring shots in the second half (by way of contrast the cats only had 14 in their second half in their high scoring win over the blues).

They had a 38 point lead halfway through the third quarter and on a slippery night almost got run down.

And a big factor in that was they were all over the place marking tracc. I was sitting at the punt road end (the end we were kickimg to in the last q) and had blues fans around me screaming at them in the last to man tracc up and stop leaving him all alone so often.

It was bizarre. Their structure was all over the place.

Blokes on fire and they were frequently letting him to sit out the back free. And we got ot to him multiple times.

Almost cost them the game.

Edited May 10 by binman

[Pennant St Dee 13,185]

13 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

Our system works well in dry weather and some of our problems in the wet are due to the slippery ball not favouring some key personnel, like Max, May and Lever. The system is good for dry weather because it automatically adjusts to how the opposition want to play. But wet weather is different. Every team plays the same style in the wet.

That said, we need to particularly look at the method at stoppages in the wet. Having a loose man behind the play is less value in the wet. I don't accept that we cannot alter this from game to game or even mid game. We have enough experienced players to adjust.

 

 

A loose man behind the stoppage is not a problem in the wet, most teams try and surge it forward by any means in the wet and by putting more numbers up to the stoppage you run the risk getting caught inside.

Levers second half display also puts your theory to bed he was very good taking intercept marks as he does in the dry.

Hot start where we were beaten at the CBDs Carlton got an unusually high number of goals from Centre clearances last night

[jane02 3,748]

3 hours ago, Docs Demons said:

I'm flat today but very proud of the team for hanging in there and nearly pinching it. Many years ago, after 6 goals to zip we would have lost by 100 points.

Bloody great effort with most of our forwards being in the bottom performers of the team. Trac excepted but to lose by a point and having no or little impact from Kozzie, Chandler, Fritta and JVR, in my mind tells me we are a very, very good team. Forwards will click one day. I hope!! 

I feel the same. Proud of the teams effort in the second half but TBH I tossed and turned last night over those stupid umpiring decisions. What could have and should have been 🤷‍♀️

 

[jane02 3,748]

4 hours ago, Brownie said:

So who reckons Newman will get rubbed out for his elbow to ANBs jaw?

Late, left the ground. 

I reckon he'll get a fine. Because Carlton.

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/live-afl-scores-2024-carlton-blues-vs-melbourne-demons-round-9-updates-stats-video-how-to-stream-watch-news-blog/news-story/53a0904ddc0a2d7d0ca5e4062062263a

Thuggery - throw the book at him but you are right, it probably won’t happen 🤬

[binman 42,986]

1 minute ago, Pennant St Dee said:

A loose man behind the stoppage is not a problem in the wet, most teams try and surge it forward by any means in the wet and by putting more numbers up to the stoppage you run the risk getting caught inside.

Levers second half display also puts your theory to bed he was very good taking intercept marks as he does in the dry.

Hot start where we were beaten at the CBDs Carlton got an unusually high number of goals from Centre clearances last night

Agree with all comments.

An interesting factor re: their centre clearance goals in the first is how aggressive we were with our set up.

We seemed to roll the dice to try and win some clean centre clearances.

If so, we lost that particular craps game.

[No. 31 1,236]

40 minutes ago, BDA said:

McGovern made a big difference 

Yes indeed, Kemp as well. A lot of goals against Geelong & Collingwood came via Young and Williams.

[djr 1,503]

18 minutes ago, picket fence said:

I thought Billings and Taj W were pretty good last night!

I totally agree. I thought Taj made a huge impact in the last quarter. He is definitely in our best 22. He is getting better and better. Billings played the link-man/transition role very well. 

Edited May 10 by djr

[buck_nekkid 5,866]

We started ok, just couldn’t score from our entries like they did.  Didn’t help that Kossie and Frittate short stepped and avoided a number of early contests, and we were lazy in Defence leaving too many fast 1:1 s.

We did our Richmond thing and simply bombed the ball into hf, only for Weitering to mark, uncontested and unpressured.

Was asked ‘can they win it”? At3/4 time. I said they can but they wont….

liked the fight back, hate the start and the loss

[Fritta and Turner 4,421]

Was out for dinner so missed the first quarter and have just watched the replay.  I was expecting some absolute howlers but I thought we played ok - just didnt score.

I thought our defence was a touch selfish and could have given each other more support. 

Fritta has so many half chances that come to nothing.

Gawn doesnt need to get angry but rather get physical.

If you want to keep Weitering out of the game dont kick it to his opponent.