POSTGAME: Rd 09 vs Carlton

[gregdemon 624]

20 hours ago, The heart beats true said:

Clarrie is coming from a mile back, and we have no Gus. Sparrow hasn’t taken the step the club needs him too, and we are still fiddling with the balance of outside kickers and grunt.

Our midfield got absolutely spanked early, and have honestly had a pretty middling year.

No Gus    such a blow  I hate Mynard      Just hope Gus is in a happy place what he is doing   we love him

[gregdemon 624]

17 hours ago, Go Lordie said:

Fair dinkum you blokes. The umpires do NOT have a set against the Dees. The umpires do NOT try to swing games in favour of the other teams. If they did, they would be out of a job. Full stop. They do occasionally make errors - split second decision, partially obscured view, all of that - but can we please stop this mindless bleating as though we are some sort of perfect team that never makes mistakes? Don't forget, the more F'ing and B'ing you blokes do only drags our game down and deters people from becoming umpires. Stop it. Just make sensible, analytical statements about our players, coach and game plans and the opposition players, coach and game plans. Talk about what you saw, not what you imagine. When you blame the umpires, it only makes you look like a nuff-nuff. 

Yeah my mate son is an VFL umpire trying to make AFL     they could not care who wins just try to make right calls in a difficult job..    They cop heaps of scrutiny off their  bosses and reviews every week     

[Scoop Junior 3,513]

2 hours ago, Satan said:

What a joke

The Match Review Officer graded the incident as careless conduct, low impact and high contact, drawing a $3750 fine ($2500 with an early plea).

Newman's teammate Lachie Cowan was also fined $3125 for striking Neal-Bullen in the second quarter, with that incident graded as careless conduct, low impact and body contact. Cowan can accept a $1875 fine with an early plea.

There is very little if any difference between Pickett’s incident versus Adelaide and Newman’s incident last night. Both were low impact but both stuck out the arm and made contact to the head. One is graded as medium under the nebulous “potential to cause injury” clause and the other is graded low. I really don’t see any difference in force between the incidents.

You don’t want to think different players are judged differently (depending on prior conduct or the team they represent) but for those that think that is the case, this is about as compelling a piece of evidence as there is to support their position.

[binman 43,717]

58 minutes ago, At the break of Gawn said:

I definitely didn’t see it coming either. I thought we’d expose their defence. It was revealed before the game that Voss sat Weitering down for a chat mid week about his role and Carlton’s defensive woes. It certainly paid off for them. Maybe Goody should sit out midfield down and do the same thing…

Not sure why our mids are copping it so bad.

The top rated player from either team was tracc. Yes he played forward too, but still played through the middle. 

Crazy metres gained.

Our next highest rated was jack (3rd behind cirpps). Nibbla, who had some time on bsll,  next (4th for us and both teams)

Clarry, who was terrific in the first half, but faded was still our 8th highest rated player.

And Max was 6th.

The blues are the best clearance team in the AFL.

They only had 2 more clearances in total.

And only scored 5 more points from clearances (-18 from centre bounces and +13 from around the ground stoppages).

All while Max had his lowest rating in a match since being sick with the flu in the OR.

Edited May 10 by binman

[jules7 792]

33 minutes ago, Scoop Junior said:

There is very little if any difference between Pickett’s incident versus Adelaide and Newman’s incident last night. Both were low impact but both stuck out the arm and made contact to the head. One is graded as medium under the nebulous “potential to cause injury” clause and the other is graded low. I really don’t see any difference in force between the incidents.

You don’t want to think different players are judged differently (depending on prior conduct or the team they represent) but for those that think that is the case, this is about as compelling a piece of evidence as there is to support their position.

It’s unbelievable, different rules for preferential clubs and players, and nothing will be done about it. It’s incredibly frustrating and so unprofessional. I wish I wasn’t so passionate about my team. 

[Clintosaurus 7,859]

32 minutes ago, jules7 said:

It’s unbelievable, different rules for preferential clubs and players, and nothing will be done about it. It’s incredibly frustrating and so unprofessional. I wish I wasn’t so passionate about my team. 

HQ answer to nobody. Can and do effectively whatever they like.

[Wells 11 5,422]

10 hours ago, binman said:

Not sure why our mids are copping it so bad.

The top rated player from either team was tracc. Yes he played forward too, but still played through the middle. 

Crazy metres gained.

Our next highest rated was jack (3rd behind cirpps). Nibbla, who had some time on bsll,  next (4th for us and both teams)

Clarry, who was terrific in the first half, but faded was still our 8th highest rated player.

And Max was 6th.

The blues are the best clearance team in the AFL.

They only had 2 more clearances in total.

And only scored 5 more points from clearances (-18 from centre bounces and +13 from around the ground stoppages).

All while Max had his lowest rating in a match since being sick with the flu in the OR.

I think the perception is there because of the number of centre  clearance goals they got … was it 5 on the night? Almost half there goals? killed our momentum. 

[Young Angus 802]

Big take away from all this is don't let the other team get a 6 goal head start, then all the other [censored] doesn't matter nearly as much.  

Still livid at the umps and the whole system, it's a shocker and it needs to be consistent, if it isn't consistent across the board then it's corrupt.  

Without that slow start we would have nailed the Blues though, bit of a shame that but hey one point ain't bad it's nice to know we can still bring it and switch it around that much.

[leave it to deever 17,517]

15 hours ago, At the break of Gawn said:

Although I loved the move of Trac going forward and almost winning the game, I think one thing we’re glossing over is why were we so bad at winning contest in the forward half for the first 2 qtrs?
 

One of main reasons Goody throws Trac forward is when we’re getting smashed at contest in our forward line. Weitering, McGovern, Kemp and Cincotta dominated our forwards. If we’re going to make a tilt at this year’s flag, then Roo, Petty, Turner, Fritsch and Chandler need to be better at contest and one-on-ones.

Yea Petty was that vital link against the cats. It was disappointing that he fell back into that rut. Mind you he wasn't alone. All our fwds were off. Even Kozzie seemed to panic a fair bit. Mind you our midfield wasn't delivering the ball to them all on a platter like Carlton's were at times. Even with so many players down we almost won so that's the big positive . That we don't rely on sole players. But can we  address why we have come out sound asleep for a few games now? Fix our starts and we are a tough nut to crack. 

[leave it to deever 17,517]

He's travelling ok this year ( he has been probably our biggest tackler) but Jack Viney is having a significant lesser amount of disposals this year to last. In his all but his first game he has averaged around twenty possies a game. In his last eight games last year that was around six to seven higher. Is he playing a more defensive role this year? He doesn't seem to be impacting games quotes so much. Yes his flick to Caleb was classic Viney and he's his usual tackling machine self, but in general play, he hasn't been someone who looks like teams have to worry about. Add in Oliver who has been hot and cold ( playing injured at times) and I'm not sure we have the luxury of playing Tracca up fwd. Which after five goals is surely a must. Maybe Salo will be back soon and or Rivers goes to the guts. Is Woey ready for a promotion or young Brown a chance? It was encouraging to see Sparrow play another solid game.  

[Redleg 41,409]

15 hours ago, jules7 said:

It’s unbelievable, different rules for preferential clubs and players, and nothing will be done about it. It’s incredibly frustrating and so unprofessional. I wish I wasn’t so passionate about my team. 

One of the best was Hewett also Carlton of course, being shown striking to the head with the right arm but charged with doing it with the left arm. 

Even though they had the power to amend the charge, they let him off on that technicality.

It is nothing less than a joke.

I just cannot have any respect for that body.

Imagine in a Court of law that you get off, because you stab someone with the knife in the other hand.

[binman 43,717]

5 hours ago, Wells 11 said:

I think the perception is there because of the number of centre  clearance goals they got … was it 5 on the night? Almost half there goals? killed our momentum. 

Yes, no doubt.

But frankly that's just silly.

For one thing we scored 2 goals ourselves from centre bounces, so the difference was only 3 goals.

But of most significance, the mids are only one factor in influencing whether an opponent scores a goal from a centre clearance.

And a pretty small one at that.

The coaches, particularly the mid coach (McQualter for us) develops the plan, system and structures for each match. The players follow that plan.

Both teams had very aggressive sets up, hence 7 goals in total from centre clearances (I doubt there will be many matches all season with so many cc goals).

By way of contrast the tigers had 10 centre clearances against us and the cats 8. And both teams only scored one point from those clearances.

Once the ball leaves the centre it's on the defenders to stop the opponents scoring.

No coincidence when asked what happened in the presser (the first question he got) a frustrated goody noted our defence and kicks inside 50 were poor in the first - and did not mention the mids.

And goody was spot on.

We gave up some marks we rarely allow, the defenders looked a little confused at times and tmac and may were both off early.

To be fair to the defenders, the blues were getting high quality centre clearances, their marking was brilliant early and perhaps the match ups weren't quite right.

And the blues took every chance.

On average, even with the clean exits and good looks, they kick 2.3 or 3.2 not 5 straight from their centre clearances (the blues were plus 22.5 on x score - brilliant, but anomalous, kicking for goal).

But our back 7 would be the first to put their hand up and agree they were poor In the first half.

And let's not let the forwards off the hook.

We were forced to play our most in form and damaging mid for big chunks of time as a forward, which obviously impacted our ability to stop the blues winning centre clearances or doing so ourselves.

The mids did a good job on the night, as they have all season.

Edited May 11 by binman

[Brownie 5,986]

42 minutes ago, Redleg said:

One of the best was Hewett also Carlton of course, being shown striking to the head with the right arm but charged with doing it with the left arm. 

Even though they had the power to amend the charge, they let him off on that technicality.

It is nothing less than a joke.

I just cannot have any respect for that body.

Imagine in a Court of law that you get off, because you stab someone with the knife in the other hand.

You're kidding. That was the reason for the charge being dropped to a fine?

[Redleg 41,409]

2 minutes ago, Brownie said:

You're kidding. That was the reason for the charge being dropped to a fine?

No let off completely.

[greenwaves 489]

On 10/05/2024 at 01:57, Go Lordie said:

Fair dinkum you blokes. The umpires do NOT have a set against the Dees. The umpires do NOT try to swing games in favour of the other teams. If they did, they would be out of a job. Full stop. They do occasionally make errors - split second decision, partially obscured view, all of that - but can we please stop this mindless bleating as though we are some sort of perfect team that never makes mistakes? 

Finally, an intelligent comment about the umpires. The people who complain about umpires also make mistakes at work but then demand that the umpires be perfect.

[Demonsone 2,043]

Like the cats comeback & ours the umpiring BS can’t be accepted and say but why did you allow the opposition team to have a 38 & 48 point lead, the same could be said why did the blues @ port blow their huge leads??? Momentum shifts will occur & yeah poor umpiring decisions can impact the results!

[TassieDevil 144]

35 minutes ago, greenwaves said:

Finally, an intelligent comment about the umpires. The people who complain about umpires also make mistakes at work but then demand that the umpires be perfect.

Let's face it they just aren't very good at the job. No sense of the game and often out of position when making decisions.  We need to entice ex-top juniors with dodgy knees who can read a game to take up the dark art.

[Jjrogan 1,439]

32 minutes ago, TassieDevil said:

Let's face it they just aren't very good at the job. No sense of the game and often out of position when making decisions.  We need to entice ex-top juniors with dodgy knees who can read a game to take up the dark art.

Where's the metric for that?  A few research studies say they get it right over 90 percent of the time. Every single sport fan complains about it's umpires.  It's so tiresome.  Best thing of the week was a separate thread for it. Can we do it every week?  People should be welcome to vent. 

But has umpiring actually got worse globally or has everyone in the past 20 years become more ready to be outraged and upset.  Actually that's an easy one to answer.  Nevermind. 

Edited May 11 by Jjrogan

[At the break of Gawn 4,460]

1 hour ago, binman said:

The mids did a good job on the night, as they have all season.

This just simply isn’t true. Cripps and Walsh both had 34 and 35 disposals and kicked 2.1 between them. If Cerra had run out the game he also would have had 30+. To blame the defenders on the 5 centre clearances is also extremely short sighted and black and white thinking. Our defenders rely heavily on the pressure up the ground and Carlton had numerous exits at the front of the stoppage which allowed them easy looks. Do you think the Dogs in 2021 blame all of Melbourne’s centre clearance goals on their defence? No they blame it on their mids who allowed clean exit from the centre square.

Let’s also analyse your “mids are having a good season comment” by looking at our 3 prime mids.

Viney: Averaging 21 disposals a game - very average for a full time mid and clearly down on form. Don’t throw me pressure stats, I’m talking about pure ball in hand stuff.

Oliver - Averaging 25 disposals compared to his usual 29 and only 4 clearances compared to his usual 9.

Petracca- Matching his usual career average but has struggled with a tag. If he didn’t go forward he probably would have finished sub 20 disposals for the match.

As a team we’ve also only won contested possessions 4 times and clearances 5 which used to be our one wood. For a team that supposed to be focused on “contest and defence” our contest work, especially in the middle, has been lacking all year. I can absolutely guarantee you that Goody would not be happy with our midfield to date. I know our forwards were poor on Thursday night, but to give our midfield a pass is just crazy when they’re posting record low numbers. What makes it even more disappointing is that Gawn is having an almighty year but our mids haven’t capitalised at all. None of our mids except for Petracca (mainly on his score involvements) would be in the conversation for AA this year.

Edited May 11 by At the break of Gawn

[BDA 22,868]

2 hours ago, greenwaves said:

Finally, an intelligent comment about the umpires. The people who complain about umpires also make mistakes at work but then demand that the umpires be perfect.

Not perfect just competent 

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, BDA said:

Not perfect just competent 

And CONSISTENT. Not a huge ask

[sue 9,126]

2 hours ago, Demonsone said:

Like the cats comeback & ours the umpiring BS can’t be accepted and say but why did you allow the opposition team to have a 38 & 48 point lead, the same could be said why did the blues @ port blow their huge leads??? Momentum shifts will occur & yeah poor umpiring decisions can impact the results!

Whatever you think of the standard and difficulty of umpiring, to deny the above is simply foolish. 

The umpires are amateurs in a professional multi-zillion $ sport.  Too easily influnced by crowds and the latest direction from HQ (well, for a week or two anyway).  At least make them real pros.

Perhaps some supporters who imagine their teams are hard done by the umpires aren't as one-eyed/brainless as some 'more rational than thou' people are claiming.  If big crowds influence umpires (which I think is undeniable, though not 100% of the time of course) then over time those paranoid supporters of smaller teams would have some confirmation of their suspicions. 

Edited May 11 by sue

[D4Life 2,510]

10 minutes ago, sue said:

Whatever you think of the standard and difficulty of umpiring, to deny the above is simply foolish. 

The umpires are amateurs in a professional multi-zillion $ sport.  Too easily influnced by crowds and the latest direction from HQ (well, for a week or two anyway).  At least make them real pros.

Perhaps some supporters who imagine their teams are hard done by the umpires aren't as one-eyed/brainless as some 'more rational than thou' people are claiming.  If big crowds influence umpires (which I think is undeniable, though not 100% of the time of course) then over time those paranoid supporters of smaller teams would have some confirmation of their suspicions. 

Agree umpires are influenced by home crowds, particularly interstate and at Geelong where typically home team fans 95% plus of the crowd!

Umpires make errors, are blindsided at times, thought Blues got away with 2-3 one handed throws that led to goals in the first! We did get a bonus goal when McGovern? Wasn’t paid an obvious mark.

while typically I don’t think umpires try to disadvantage particular teams, when Umpire#22 appeared at the start of the game, I did think this won’t be good for the Demons, and he didn’t disappoint, seemingly biased against us as always!

 

[Demonsone 2,043]

1 hour ago, sue said:

Whatever you think of the standard and difficulty of umpiring, to deny the above is simply foolish. 

The umpires are amateurs in a professional multi-zillion $ sport.  Too easily influnced by crowds and the latest direction from HQ (well, for a week or two anyway).  At least make them real pros.

Perhaps some supporters who imagine their teams are hard done by the umpires aren't as one-eyed/brainless as some 'more rational than thou' people are claiming.  If big crowds influence umpires (which I think is undeniable, though not 100% of the time of course) then over time those paranoid supporters of smaller teams would have some confirmation of their suspicions. 

Either use the review system properly or don’t .. May wasn’t as there is a 3rd vision which wasn’t & JVR decision is BS,  not isolated to Dees games it’s widespread 

[Ollie fan 3,468]

1 hour ago, D4Life said:

Agree umpires are influenced by home crowds, particularly interstate and at Geelong where typically home team fans 95% plus of the crowd!

Umpires make errors, are blindsided at times, thought Blues got away with 2-3 one handed throws that led to goals in the first! We did get a bonus goal when McGovern? Wasn’t paid an obvious mark.

while typically I don’t think umpires try to disadvantage particular teams, when Umpire#22 appeared at the start of the game, I did think this won’t be good for the Demons, and he didn’t disappoint, seemingly biased against us as always!

 

Don't agree that he marked it - another split second , and maybe yes, but it was ok not to pay it. And in the first quarter Petty held on to one in the forward pocket for longer- not paid - and the spoil was over the shoulder - not paid. I don't actually complain about either decision.

 

 As i have  said in another thread, the problem is not the umpires: it's the rules.