9 hours ago, Macca said:

10 kicks (not bad) 4 Goals (good) 9 Tackles (good) 3 Marks (below par)

Not a bad day out for a forward (one forward)

But combined numbers for 3 different tall forwards? 

I doubt we'll be going in with that combo again.  Turner for Jeffo or AJ or maybe Turner & Jeffo (or AJ) misses out

 

And only one multiple goal scorer on the day and that was a debutante.

Too early to judge yet but after 7 seasons and 1 match i'm still waiting for the footy dept & Simon to solve our forward line woes.

Fritta has to be on notice this week surely.  That was a terrible first up game from such an experienced forward.

Edited March 16Mar 16 by Demon Dynasty

They should have played keepings off once Johnno had the opportunity to take a shot. last 120 second strategies are key to getting the biccies.

11 minutes ago, Demon Dynasty said:

And only one multiple goal scorer on the day and that was a debutante.

Petracca also kicked two goals.

13 hours ago, Macca said:

They smashed us on the counter-attack.  Where as we had to work hard for scores

A runner or 2 short in the conditions (it had to be AJ or Jeffo, not both) 

Other than that, we played quite well but just came up short

I agree with this. No reflection on either Johnson or Jefferson, but instead of removing Howes, I would have had Langford on quite early in place of , I think, Jefferson. Johnson was a little helpful in the ruck

9 hours ago, Docs Demons said:

My 2 bobs worth. Skills, skills and more skills are lacking. Not sure what we did over summer but again our lack of skillful players let us down. They had Green, Greene, Coniglio, Whitfield & Callaghan all that find space and deliver in spades. We had Lindsay and not much else especially by foot. Salem played OK but those dinky little kicks that go higher than long put us under pressure. He needs to put some oomph into his kicks even those shorter ones.

Great effort by the guys and stiff to lose it but our skills still letting us down. Special mention to TMac. Played a great game.

I actually thought we kicked ok most of the day.

3 minutes ago, RickyJ45 said:

They should have played keepings off once Johnno had the opportunity to take a shot. last 120 second strategies are key to getting the biccies.

Agree. What’s frustrating is the first training run at Gosch’s I attended this preseason I was watching a 20 minutes match sim, eagerly looking for signs of our new game plan. Instead it was 20 minutes of negative congested play confined mainly to one side of the ground. I was very unimpressed until I later found out Goody was simulating the last minutes of a close match and how to kill the play etc. So we train for yesterday’s scenario, 3 points up, 2 minutes to go, we have possession and a shot at goal, what to do? DO NOT take the low percentage shot and cough up possession. The rookie AJ is not to blame, where were our on-field leaders? 

Quite prophetic that on our Jim Stynes green day, we were beaten by two Green(e)s.

9 hours ago, Adam The God said:

I reckon it's between Fritta and Jeffo for that other forward spot. 

I disagree with the notion that we need to play 3 talls forward of the ball. Turner and JVR will be fine. The third tall/medium is either Jeffo or Fritta.

If Fritta isn't kicking snags I don't think he offers enough.

And to be clear, I think he's going through a rough patch and is definitely in our best 23. But he needs to start turning it on soon.

Fritsch needs to be dropped on his pusillanemous and paltry tackling and none existent second efforts

Edited March 16Mar 16 by picket fence

2 hours ago, bing181 said:

No, but plenty were expecting JVR, Turner and one of Jeffo or AJ, which amounts to the same thing.

Between rotations and giving Max a chop out in the ruck, only 2 of those would be forward most of the time.

Notwithstanding his 2 goals, I still think playing Jefferson in those conditions was a mistake. Johnson does bring his bollocking, rucking skills 

2 minutes ago, Farmer said:

Notwithstanding his 2 goals, I still think playing Jefferson in those conditions was a mistake. Johnson does bring his bollocking, rucking skills 

I actually thought that as a debut game he had a good one. I watched him pretty closely and thought he made good leads and on enough occasions got himself into good positions to mark. Whilst he didn't mark he helped bring the ball to ground and fought hard at ground level.  I'd play him for the next 6 weeks at least to see what he can learn. He looked better than I expected against a formidable backline.

 

2 hours ago, bing181 said:

No, but plenty were expecting JVR, Turner and one of Jeffo or AJ, which amounts to the same thing

Ah yes, but when you factor in a damp day, would the masses gave gone into the match with 3 rookie tall forwards?  I don't think so

We were effectively a man (or 2) down yesterday and were far too top heavy up forward on a damp day.  The selectors got it wrong

AJ, Jeffo & JVR had 10 kicks & 3 marks between them.  On top of that JVR is attempting marks with one arm only (Watts-like)

So JVR is still unproven and we add 2 rookie tall forwards against a good side? On a damp day?  Makes no sense

Billings and/or Langford should have been in the 22 as on a damp day, medium/tall up forward would have been the smarter play

By the way, I was saying the above before the game, so it's not a hindsight comment. 

Feel like we're playing one short with Fritsch if he's not kicking goals. Drop him for Turner. 

1 minute ago, Macca said:

Ah yes, but when you factor in a damp day, would the masses gave gone into the match with 3 rookie tall forwards?  I don't think so

We were effectively a man (or 2) down yesterday and were far too top heavy up forward on a damp day.  The selectors got it wrong

AJ, Jeffo & JVR had 10 kicks & 3 marks between them.  On top of that JVR is attempting marks with one arm only (Watts-like)

So JVR is still unproven and we add 2 rookie tall forwards against a good side? On a damp day?  Makes no sense

Billings and/or Langford should have been in the 22 as on a damp day, medium/tall up forward would have been the smarter play

By the way, I was saying the above before the game, so it's not a hindsight comment. 

I don't think you can say we lost that game because we played 3 tall forwards. Who do you suggest we play as a replacement. Others have suggested Billings. He's a winger and he's vanilla at best, he doesn't change the forward structure. Until Pickett, Spargo and Melksham are back I'm not sure we have another option.

39 minutes ago, Demon Dynasty said:

And only one multiple goal scorer on the day and that was a debutante.

Too early to judge yet but after 7 seasons and 1 match i'm still waiting for the footy dept & Simon to solve our forward line woes.

Fritta has to be on notice this week surely.  That was a terrible first up game from such an experienced forward.

Fritsch at least got involved and picked up a dozen touches.  Right now, Fritsch is way ahead of the 3 tall forwards

JVR, Jeffo & AJ (as a collective) did very little ... a combined 10 kicks & 3 marks is low impact

On a damp day you play 2 of the 3 only (remembering that all 3 are unproven forwards) and play another runner

 

3 minutes ago, Roost it far said:

I don't think you can say we lost that game because we played 3 tall forwards. Who do you suggest we play as a replacement. Others have suggested Billings. He's a winger and he's vanilla at best, he doesn't change the forward structure. Until Pickett, Spargo and Melksham are back I'm not sure we have another option.

Billings is not vanilla at all.  He's not great in front of goal but as another mid/runner he is quite capable of accumulating around 20 possessions.  Our 3 tall forwards accumulated 10 kicks & 3 marks for the day

And Langford is another who could have been used instead (not necessarily up forward, more so as a mid)

We lost the game at selection as we picked the wrong sort of team.  It had to be AJ or Jeffo, not both

Do we play all 3 unproven tall forwards together again?  Ongoing?

Is that what you are advocating?

Interesting reading all the rear vision experts on poor selection decisions when we came within two minutes of knocking off a team who doubled Collingwood's score one week ago! A team that is equal 2nd favourite for the flag! I'd say the team selection was outstanding, given the injuries and availability. The first gamers, with the exception of Langford (limited time), were all contributors! The comeback kings were ... back! Macca did a pretty good job in May's absence. I could go on, but a loss like this will build belief and, as the group get more games together, build cohesion!

3 hours ago, Go Ds said:

Despite everything they only conceded 11 goals, yes? I'd guess even a lot of premiership sides have more than that kicked against them per game. Melbourne were far from perfect today. But they can improve a fair bit I reckon.

With our current forward line woes I can't see us being a threat for the flag.  We might make the finals

Yesterday we had a chance to beat a good team but once again, the lack of marking power and quality up forward cost us

Our midfield strength and backline will always make us competitive but we keep losing games because of a dysfunctional forward line

3 tall forwards not impacting is a recipe for disaster

With regard to JVR and, to a lesser extent, Jeffo running under the ball, the wind factor kicking to the city end meant the ball carried further than it normally does: a lot further! If you were at the ground you would have noticed that the rain was sweeping in at 45degrees toward that goal. After half time only 3 goals were kicked at the Punt Rd end (one of which was Jeffo's excellent conversion from his set shot), compared to 8 at the City end. 

15 hours ago, BrisbaneDemon said:

Was scary how easy they could transition out of our backline with ease.  Cracking effort, they will be one of the teams to beat this year.

It would have been “scary” to them how we transitioned the ball out of the centre with ease ..often. It maybe difficult on the TV to see the game as a whole but we matched it with them for 3/4 giving me the feeling we could also be “one of the teams to beat”. 

14 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

I’m fairly comfortable saying the biggest difference wasn’t Toby, or accuracy, or our missing players. 

It was fitness.

They ran all four quarters out better than us. I’m sure it was because they played last week. Their last goal occurred mainly because we were gassed (although we shouldn’t have let them through the middle).

We did so much right for so long, but just couldn’t close out quarters. Combined with too many turnovers and them finding goals from Greene and Coniglio at exactly the right moments, meant we just couldn’t get a big enough lead to hold them off. 

We’ve clearly found one in Lindsay. Unbelievable debut. I reckon AJ looks promising, Henderson too, and Jeffo can at least kick straight. 

Real issues though with our small/mid defenders. Really missed McVee, and whilst Bowey played his best game in years, we felt really vulnerable in that area. Plus we of course also conceded a stack from turnover, but many sides will vs GWS this year. 

We showed real grit, a clear desire to want to move the ball, and good pressure. Plenty of reason to believe we can contend this year. But in a season where the fight for the top 8 is going to be brutal, we’ve just let 4 points go begging. 

Good analysis.

I think Gws are serious contenders for a flag this year.

I think we outplayed them with a team of quite a few young and inexperienced players that made a great account of themselves.

Fritta and Jvr had very quiet games and I think together only provided one goal between them so that didn't help.

It was good to see Petty back in the backline but as I've mentioned on a few of my posts our forward line is and has been a real weakness for three years now. It's no secret 

I hope Jeffo can change this.

Is Melksham up and about?

11 hours ago, Demon Dynasty said:

I'd be interested to hear from Bin if he was sitting in his oft usual spot top of the Ponsford (kudos if he did in that weather!) as to whether we are (were) still pushing too high up the ground to try and lock the ball in during red time and got caught again out the back on the rebound!??

If so, something i feel has been an issue for us for quite some time now and we are often paying the penalty as a result with teams coming from behind far too often for the narrow come back win.

That was still playing 21 football.

29 minutes ago, waynewussell said:

Interesting reading all the rear vision experts on poor selection decisions when we came within two minutes of knocking off a team who doubled Collingwood's score one week ago! A team that is equal 2nd favourite for the flag! I'd say the team selection was outstanding, given the injuries and availability. The first gamers, with the exception of Langford (limited time), were all contributors! The comeback kings were ... back! Macca did a pretty good job in May's absence. I could go on, but a loss like this will build belief and, as the group get more games together, build cohesion!

We lost a game we could easily have won but once again, our dysfunctional forward line cost us that victory

Defence 7.0

Midfield 7.5

Forward line 3

We got close but one area of the ground continues to be our Achilles heel

As for building belief, I'd say the players would feel quite deflated right now.  We lost another game we could have won

22 minutes ago, Macca said:

With our current forward line woes I can't see us being a threat for the flag.  We might make the finals

Yesterday we had a chance to beat a good team but once again, the lack of marking power and quality up forward cost us

Our midfield strength and backline will always make us competitive but we keep losing games because of a dysfunctional forward line

3 tall forwards not impacting is a recipe for disaster

They missed Turner, who should play as a lead-up forward rather than a stagnant forward; JVR should have filled that role.

14 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

Really odd take. They were missing Briggs, Hogan, Stringer and Riccardi and we led most of the day.

This wasn’t about personnel. 

I’d usually agree but I think for us the loss of a small forward & defender which are areas we don’t have great depth in were huge outs against GWS who have a dearth of small forwards. Yesterday wasn’t a day for tall forwards . 

10 minutes ago, demon3165 said:

They missed Turner, who should play as a lead-up forward rather than a stagnant forward; JVR should have filled that role.

Re Turner ... unproven as well

And that's why our forward line is dysfunctional

Too many what-if's.  Right now, we don't have one forward who we can absolutely rely on

By contrast, we can rely on on our midfield and defence.  2 out of 3 ain't bad but it's not great either