14 minutes ago, waynewussell said:

This should read "GWS are good but we had our chances to win the game". 

GWS were a top 4 team in 2024, lost to the two eventual GF teams by a goal or less, and are coming off a game where they doubled Collingwood's score!

I completely agree. GWS have the bye this week, and then play another 5 rounds on the road before there next home game, so they were going all out in that last quarter to win. On the balance of everything, I'm excited for what the year will bring, and that I think we will get stronger as the year goes on and the game plan solidifies and the young players gain more experience. 

It will be a good cross section to see how we perform at Marvel next week in 'perfect' conditions. I'm bullish on Jefferson taking a few nice grabs in the dry conditions.

17 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Petty's game in defence yesterday was elite in my eyes.

Had we won i feel like he would have won a lot of kudos in the media for that performance. 

100% agree.

Which begs the question, why did we move him?!?!

14 minutes ago, waynewussell said:

This should read "GWS are good but we had our chances to win the game". 

GWS were a top 4 team in 2024, lost to the two eventual GF teams by a goal or less, and are coming off a game where they doubled Collingwood's score!

And GWS choked in the finals last year.  They coughed it up from a strong position

So if had have had a decent forward line yesterday we win by 5 goals (in my view)

Our midfield & defence played well but the players in those areas of the ground can't do it all

Our forwards do not like leading into the hot spot.  We are no threat to the opposition in that area

As a result, we often have difficult shots from near the boundary line

The AJ one at the end of the game is a case in point.  AJ could have presented in the hot spot area but chose to head towards the boundary line

Watch where Hogan positions himself.  He's rarely anywhere near the boundary line

1 hour ago, Macca said:

And you've screamed at your own supporters a 1000 times about not turning up to games

All based on a stupid myth and an  idiotic perception.  

Fact is our forward line hasn't worked for quite some time now and yesterday was a good example of that 

Whoa, knives out hey @Macca?

What’s my (now ancient) history of criticising supporters who withhold attendance from games as a protest got to do with the forward line?

I asked you why you think the forward line was the (sole) reason we lost. I gave you three other factors, the biggest IMO being how we slowed to a walk in time on in all four quarters (but most notably the third and fourth). Our forward line has been an issue for 4 years, no one’s disputing that, but I walked away from yesterday thinking a few other issues were more significant than forward half inefficiency. 

6 minutes ago, Macca said:

And GWS choked in the finals last year.  They coughed it up from a strong position

So if had have had a decent forward line yesterday we win by 5 goals (in my view)

Our midfield & defence played well but the players in those areas of the ground can't do it all

Our forwards do not like leading into the hot spot.  We are no threat to the opposition in that area

As a result, we often have difficult shots from near the boundary line

The AJ one at the end of the game is a case in point.  AJ could have presented in the hot spot area but chose to head towards the boundary line

Watch where Hogan positions himself.  He's rarely anywhere near the boundary line

What was the alternative to 3 talls yesterday considering Pickett, Spargo and Melksham are all short term outs. I would of liked top see AJ off for Langford at 3/4 time but can see the thought behind Howes off and Rivers back. It may just be that Rivers is a HBFlanker and not a mid. I also thought the big 4 needed to be at the centre bounces for the last 15 minutes. Anyhoo we'll likely beat North and GC and forget about this soon enough.

Edited March 17Mar 17 by Roost it far

52 minutes ago, DistrACTION Jackson said:

I do find it funny when people think bringing in a player who has had some cameos at VFL level would impact the result of an AFL match.

This is me when people talk about Billings and Melksham. 

6 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

Whoa, knives out hey @Macca?

What’s my (now ancient) history of criticising supporters who withhold attendance from games as a protest got to do with the forward line?

I asked you why you think the forward line was the (sole) reason we lost. I gave you three other factors, the biggest IMO being how we slowed to a walk in time on in all four quarters (but most notably the third and fourth). Our forward line has been an issue for 4 years, no one’s disputing that, but I walked away from yesterday thinking a few other issues were more significant than forward half inefficiency. 

Well you threw the first barb, I just reteliated.  The reason I'm repeating myself is that people (a) don't like what I've got to say and (b) keep quoting me for a more detailed explanation

And if you don't believe our forward line is by far our biggest issue, then what is it then?

The midfield and defence was good and has been consistently good

Where as the forward line continually let's us down.  And that's not even an opinion, it's a clear observation

We obviously view the sport differently 

 

2 hours ago, ManDee said:

I thought Langford was disappointing. Looked slow, overwhelmed and out of his comfort zone. I have concerns about big junior players that dominate until they reach the big league where most players are big and fast. Hope I'm wrong.

XL looks class 👌 

This had occurred to me as well. But i think its hard to render any judgement as his role may have been a defensive one and not get sucked into the contest, which makes it really difficult to impose yourself on the game. 

Even so, 1 or 2 big tackles, chase downs and pressure acts do attract ones focus and frankly i only noticed him on occasion, jogging around the field. It wasn't a great start but definitely a mulligan. I suspect he may be spending a fair bit of time at Casey this year. 

Everyone blaming the forward line. Not sure if you noticed, but when it wasn't pouring with rain it was still wet. Not really conducive to our talls taking 10 marks and kicking 8 goals each. I thought our movement of the ball to our forwards was better than last year. Also, GWS stacked our forward 50, just like they did against Collingwood the week before and then try to run the ball out via handball, which for the most part we defended pretty well. Hard to pin point teammates or take pack marks when there's 35 players inside the 50.

20 minutes ago, Macca said:

And GWS choked in the finals last year.  They coughed it up from a strong position

So if had have had a decent forward line yesterday we win by 5 goals (in my view)

Our midfield & defence played well but the players in those areas of the ground can't do it all

Our forwards do not like leading into the hot spot.  We are no threat to the opposition in that area

As a result, we often have difficult shots from near the boundary line

The AJ one at the end of the game is a case in point.  AJ could have presented in the hot spot area but chose to head towards the boundary line

Watch where Hogan positions himself.  He's rarely anywhere near the boundary line

I agree and just dont get this. With our stoppage dominance, particularly out of centre bounces surely, surely someone is smart enough to lead up on a 45 towards the 50 arc. 

Heck, even if its to take their KPD #1 out of the goal square. I just dont get why there is a bunch of forwards who sit on top of the goal square. i cant even remember the last time we took a contested mark in that area. why not spreadout into the f50 and create a one-on-one. So often we see our midfielders win a clearance to then kick it deep inside f50. 

1 hour ago, Damo said:

 Those enjoying Aj'S forceful attack in the forward line and wanting Fritch dropped need to understand the balance needed up forward.

Having natural talent is more valuable than simply putting in a lot of effort.

I too wish Fritta would put in better efforts but we need to keep playing skilled footballers. He is very talanted when on song.

Agree, Damo - to an extent. I'm a huge Fritter fan, but he was poor last year and very poor again yesterday. We desperately needed him to step up yesterday and deliver - and he didn't. If he had we probably win.

In my opinion Champion data's player ratings is by far the best tool to assess a players performance in a particular game.

Yes it has it limitations and weaknesses (eg it assesses the scoreboard impact of each direct action but not indirect action meaning it disadvantages key position and role players), and in of itself its not the be all and end all.

But it provides a consistent way of measuring and analysing performance levels that mitigates confirmation bias and the eye test/vibe based approach so many pundits seem enamored with.

It's also partic useful when comparing players playing similar role. So, for example this is Fritter's ratings for the match compared to our other half forwards:

Player	Q1	Q2	Q2	Q4	Total
Bayley Fritsch	0.8	−1.8	3.5	1.9	4.4
Tom Sparrow	0.3	1.9	9.0	3.1	14.3
Kade Chandler	0.5	6.7	2.5	2.5	12.2
Jack Henderson	3.9	3.1	1.6	1.4	10.1
Harry Sharp	0.7	2.5	−0.4	1.6	4.4

Edited March 17Mar 17 by binman

1 hour ago, Robbie57 said:

Waiting to come on he looked like a deer in the headlights but what really struck was the vision of him jogging when he should have been trying flat out to put some pressure on. I really hope someone in the leadership group points that out to him. That said he was on a hiding to nothing when brought into the game late. 

Yeah I thought he would be outrunning most out there due to his fresh legs but he looked awful slow. It was actually quite disappointing.

Looked good with ball in hand but let's hope he can learn to be a 2 way runner.

3 hours ago, Macca said:

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

I agree. Turner is no established certainty. But we definitely missed him.

While Jvr and Jeffo are good prospects they are your classic run and leap and not really the type to stand in the middle of a pack and hold marks.

Turner is really the only option we have that we can use. We could rob our backline again with maybe May since we did well without him there, but that's about it.

Edited March 17Mar 17 by leave it to deever

8 minutes ago, GS_1905 said:

I agree and just dont get this. With our stoppage dominance, particularly out of centre bounces surely, surely someone is smart enough to lead up on a 45 towards the 50 arc. 

Heck, even if its to take their KPD #1 out of the goal square. I just dont get why there is a bunch of forwards who sit on top of the goal square. i cant even remember the last time we took a contested mark in that area. why not spreadout into the f50 and create a one-on-one. So often we see our midfielders win a clearance to then kick it deep inside f50. 

Spot on

4 hours ago, Dee Viney Intervention said:

Bittersweet day at the G yesterday. Pre game I honestly thought they would be too good for us but post game disappointed to lose. There are quite a lot of green shoots and positives to come out of the game. Great to have Clarrie and Trac back and the performance and contribution of the debutants. 
 It’s only a very small sample size but some problems still exist and frustratingly so.

1/I think we still overuse the ball too much in the wet. 

2/ We concede some very soft goals in “red time”

3/ We concede some very soft goals out the back of a contest

4/ We concede too many coast to coast goals

We showed yesterday that when we go quickly and directly ie first goal of game, first goal of 3rd 1/4, bang - bang in the 3rd 1/4. Obviously goals from the centre clearance allow this due to the 6/6/6 rule but when we hold our forwards back and give them a chance one out we are extremely dangerous and will score, the talent is there. Our ball movement is still too slow and indirect more often than not. We play with way too much width and allow opposition time to get back and defend. 
 Really hope to see us play with more speed on the ball and directly to give our forwards a better chance on a fast deck at Marvel. 
 I still believe in this group there is plenty of upside but there are problems that still exist that by now we should have found solutions for. 

Hope May watches where Macca kicked the ball....

2 minutes ago, leave it to deever said:

I agree. Turner is no established certainty. But we definitely missed him.

How do you miss someone that isn't that good? (Turner)

We've got a soft draw/fixture so we are not out of it

But by jingo's, we'll want to improve up forward if we want to somehow contend

Left field but with Tommy Mac forcing the selectors hand, I'd be tempted to play Steven May forward

At least we'd know he'd provide a decent contest

2 hours ago, Adam The God said:

He was better yesterday with 3 tackles, mind you he was playing higher up the ground.

I think this is to try and "develop" those defensive skills and push for more second and third efforts. He did take a good pack mark down in defense in I think the third quarter. How do you develop those skills if they are not just in your makeup to be aggressive at the ball. He will never be a Jack Viney (no one ever will). However to follow up a missed mark with a second effort is a given and I am sure that Troy will be talking to him about that aspect of his game today.

3 hours ago, Adam The God said:

He was better yesterday with 3 tackles, mind you he was playing higher up the ground.

And that's the problem: forwards getting sucked into the contest. If you watch the replay, and especially the down-the-ground footage, you will see many times GWS backmen standing around the 50-meter mark all alone. The more players you have around the ball, the less run you will have into the forward line as you have to wait for players to get back.

4 hours ago, Redleg said:

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

Who were wearing Orange.

In 2016 we beat GWS by 2 points in Round 1. They went on to be a top 4 finish and home Prelim. We were still languishing in the bottom 6 teams. 

In 2025 GWS beats Melbourne by 1 point. ????????

1 hour ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Petty's game in defence yesterday was elite in my eyes.

Had we won i feel like he would have won a lot of kudos in the media for that performance. 

Looked like he never left the backline. A very assured performance.

Edited March 17Mar 17 by layzie

40 minutes ago, GS_1905 said:

This had occurred to me as well. But i think its hard to render any judgement as his role may have been a defensive one and not get sucked into the contest, which makes it really difficult to impose yourself on the game. 

Even so, 1 or 2 big tackles, chase downs and pressure acts do attract ones focus and frankly i only noticed him on occasion, jogging around the field. It wasn't a great start but definitely a mulligan. I suspect he may be spending a fair bit of time at Casey this year. 

If his role was a defensive one then that's even more damning....

6 minutes ago, fr_ap said:

If his role was a defensive one then that's even more damning....

How's your boy Travalgia doing frappa, look the goods this week compared to Lindsay?

49 minutes ago, HBDee said:

Everyone blaming the forward line. Not sure if you noticed, but when it wasn't pouring with rain it was still wet. Not really conducive to our talls taking 10 marks and kicking 8 goals each. I thought our movement of the ball to our forwards was better than last year. Also, GWS stacked our forward 50, just like they did against Collingwood the week before and then try to run the ball out via handball, which for the most part we defended pretty well. Hard to pin point teammates or take pack marks when there's 35 players inside the 50.

🙈🙈

49 minutes ago, binman said:

Agree, Damo - to an extent. I'm a huge Fritter fan, but he was poor last year and very poor again yesterday. We desperately needed him to step up yesterday and deliver - and he didn't. If he had we probably win.

In my opinion Champion data's player ratings is by far the best tool to assess a players performance in a particular game.

Yes it has it limitations and weaknesses (eg it assesses the scoreboard impact of each direct action but not indirect action meaning it disadvantages key position and role players), and in of itself its not the be all and end all.

But it provides a consistent way of measuring and analysing performance levels that mitigates confirmation bias and the eye test/vibe based approach so many pundits seem enamored with.

It's also partic useful when comparing players playing similar role. So, for example this is Fritter's ratings for the match compared to our other half forwards:

Player	Q1	Q2	Q2	Q4	Total
Bayley Fritsch	0.8	−1.8	3.5	1.9	4.4
Tom Sparrow	0.3	1.9	9.0	3.1	14.3
Kade Chandler	0.5	6.7	2.5	2.5	12.2
Jack Henderson	3.9	3.1	1.6	1.4	10.1
Harry Sharp	0.7	2.5	−0.4	1.6	4.4

Anyone who know anything about football doesn't need champion data to make an assessment of a game that's what eyes are for.