Gator

As someone who hasn't seen the game I'm guessing that our new structures and gameplan went out the window ? We've been trying to attack from turnovers up the ground closer to our goal and not from near the opposition's goal, but I'm assuming that last year's fare was once again on offer ?

Hogan is a gun centre-half-forward in the making, but for some reason they're playing him close to goal.

Looking back, there were warning signings when we scraped over the line against a severely undermanned Dogs in the NAB practice match. Of the Dogs squad of 25 just 7 played round 1 against Freo. Conversely, 20 of our players went on to play round 1.

Sorry, I didn't watch him at all.

I only saw 2 and a half quarters, but fwiw... Petracca played high half-forward/mid. Unlike Hells I did see him attend at least two centre square ball-ups. Over the ground I'd say he was 70/30 forward. His day finished at around the 20 minute mark of the third quarter. I left at 3/4 time, but I don't believe he played the last. He did get contested possessions in tight, he wasn't rushed, and I saw one contested mark. In that limited showing I couldn't say he stood out as a "class above", but he was composed with the footy (didn't rush) and on a couple of occasions he used his strength to get through traffic, brush off tackles and then kick into the forward-line. When he had time he accurately spotted passes, but on a couple of those aggressive runs through the centre he wasn't quite able to pinpoint a player. To get through unscathed and show some of his trademark attributes was a positive outcome. I suspect he'd play another 3 games at Casey before being available for selection. As HB says, Trengove did look a "class above". His first half was quite prolific. He kicked beautifully, took plenty of marks and was tackling hard right in the thick of things. His tank looked really good and he covered the deck well. We know he's not a speedster, but his speed of movement was fine. He capped off the day with two goals from marks. The first (in the first) was when he made space at CHF 40 metres out and the second (in the second) was a lovely mark deep near goal when his timing ensured he took the mark at the back of a pack. I'm not physio or fitness expert, but I can honestly say that he looked fit enough to me to play next week. I know he won't, but assuming his body/foot pulls up well I can't see why he couldn't play AFL in 2 weeks. He was running as hard in the third as he was in the first. I agree with the rest of HB's summation and I was really only interested in the two mentioned above, but I must say that I really like the Kings. They are similar and both did some really classy things for talls. Down the track I'm pretty excited what both can become. I know Max is in his third year but I hope (think) they'll persist. Callum Sinclair is a valuable player who originated from Port Melbourne and it's taken him years to get to where he has. He's now 26. I did think Dunn played quite well and really don't understand why he wasn't in the side against Essendon. Hawthorn listed players included Tim O'Brien, Lovell, Brand, Pittonet, Hardwick, Miles, Stewart, Willsmore and Langford (his famous Dad was watching). Casey had quite a bit more top-up talent.

Not thread worthy.

So if we're not that bad then the effort was sh11house ?

I don't care who you're playing, if you lose the possession count by 128 and have had 71 less marks (read that again) then your effort has been abysmal.

Btw, Every time the players are asked, "You have the chance to win two games in a row, is this big for you and the club", I cringe at the response. The answer is always, "absolutely, we haven't done it during my time here". It's akin to Queen's Birthday being labelled "our Grand Final". If I hear that again I'll spew. Try this response... Every game is important and every game delivers 4 points, whether it's two wins in a row or 10. We expect to win every game and treat each on their merits. We certainly don't reach for the calculator in the week leading up to each game and we'll let others analyse the record books.

Cheers, but you sometimes share a link if my memory serves me correctly ?

Do you have any more ?

I appreciate that the modern game is all about rolling structures and that player's roles change within games, however, did anyone hear Tom McDonald's recent interview on the club website ? He spoke of not being the only player taking Daniher and that other players would have their turns manning him up, including Nev Jetta. In what world does a defence or gameplan allow your smallest back to take the opposition's tallest ? I haven't seen the game and maybe Jetta never had that turn and perhaps McDonald was just deflecting the question, but I thought it a strange response. Especially when the player in question was pivotal to the result a year earlier.

I thought I agreed... Very incisive post, as usual.

That explains them having 128 more disposals, 71 more marks and 16 more tackles ? The only thing that explains those discrepancies is effort, talent and structures/gameplan. While some of our talent may be overrated, no-one will convince me that Essendon had more, so I'm left with effort and gameplan. Our gameplan is a work in progress, but it was sound enough to beat a very talented young side in GWS. This leaves me with effort. Why our effort was abysmal in round 2 of the season is mystifying. So I'm left blaming both the players and coaching group. Someone needs to show leadership this week.

If you don't like someone I'm not sure you have a tonne of respect. There's usually a reason a collective group doesn't like someone. The Bulldogs players didn't like McCartney. How do you think they're responding to Beveridge, who they do like ?

Look, I've heard enough to know that the players (in the main) don't like Roos, but love Goodwin. How much difference does this make on GameDay and, more generally, 2016 ? I have no idea. But I suspect it makes "some" difference.

I didn't notice him do much, but I was mainly there for Trengove and Petracca.

I've been waiting for a post like this. I haven't seen the game and doubt I can put myself through the replay, but I'm guessing there was a real lack of on-field leadership. Who marshaled the troops, who helped setup at the stoppages, who was our Hodge, Mitchell or Selwood ? Who was vocal ? Btw, I don't expect you to know these things, but this is an aspect of the club that needs to be addressed. It's great when everybody is up and about, but that won't always happen and it's the good sides that have leaders to get things back on terms. Obviously we hit the front, but looking at the disparity of possessions we weren't likely to prevail.

All midfield and usually starting in the centre square.

Dees. I have no doubt he'll sign a new contract. I'll let you and others worry about the alternative.

Well said. Lynch is a gun, but it's worth noting that Hogan is the superior player at the same age. Hogan will work it out.

Just a cry for help from the OP. You'll be right, buddy. Here's a cuddle.

A minor thing, but there was no bandage on Petracca's knee, which I liked. He has been wearing one at training.

Trengove's kicking was very good. His fitness surprised me. If I didn't know his history I'd say he looked fit enough to pay next week. Clearly he won't, but he's not far away. I could see him coming in very soon. I did see him sprint in the third close to the boundary on the member's side and his speed was fine. He certainly didn't look "slow". It was markedly different to when he looked embarrassingly slow a couple of years back.

Did Bernie forget to mention Sorrento at 3/4 time ?