Wiseblood

Awesome stuff @Demon77. The big positive is Hogan moving freely and training without problems, meaning he'll be right for Saturday night and ready to kick a bag of goals.

We did happen to spend most of that third quarter with guys like Hannan, Maynard and Salem taking all of the centre bounces for the term. The moment we went back to the norm Oliver won the first two clearances and we kicked a couple of goals. The fade outs, I agree, are a worrying theme if we include last season's, but the JLT game against the Saints shouldn't be included in that given we experimented for parts of that third term.

Misson made absolutely no mention of this in his weekly injury report. Nothing story.

They need to keep him away from the half back flank and use his speed as a weapon on the wing. Switch the ball, kick it out in front of him and watch him go.

@Webber - I love a good post that is well thought out and brings together some good debate, even if I don't necessarily agree with a large amount of what you've said. It's been discussed in depth already, but I'll reserve my judgement until we've at least gotten to Round 6. If we hit that point and we're 2-4, or something like that, then we're most certainly in trouble. At the moment I don't see trouble brewing at all. While there are some issues with the gameplan (marking, defense, too much handball) there are some real positives with it as well (hitting the scoreboard, inside 50's, tackling etc) that goes with it as well. I think we would have learned plenty from this game and we can put plenty of that into practice in the coming months. If we can change a few things, as we did in some respects in the second half on Sunday, then we'll be fine.

No he isn't. What are you basing this on? One game?

Zach Merrett is an absolute gun and deserves to be there. Curnow, however, does not. Oliver missing out is a joke.

Couldn't agree more, praha. Perfectly summed up. Our use of handball wasn't an issue in helping us get the ball forward - we had enough of it to get far more entries than Geelong did, we just didn't have the support from our small and medium forwards. Fix that up and, generally, it won't be an issue.

I think he's learned his lesson, OD. Let's hope it's the making of him as a footballer.

He did this stuff with the Hawks. It's nothing new, other than the fact that he had a gun side around him where doing that stuff didn't matter as much. It wasn't great, but one decision doesn't make a game.

I think Bugg brings something different to our side, OD. He's a pest, plays his role well and can hit the scoreboard (although sometimes not in the right column!) During our best period of footy last year I thought it was no coincidence that he was influential for us up forward. Is there a spot for him in the side? Maybe. I think he'll get a look in sooner rather than later.

He did, and spent time there at GWS, but that's beside the point. He's been turned into a defensive forward for us and there would have been zero chance of him playing there had he been picked.

Why would we play Bugg, a bloke who spent last year down forward, on Menzel? Very strange.

I was clearly just joking with you, mate. We all know where your feelings are at re: Weideman. It was just a fun little dig, nothing more.

Can team's carry a shutdown player these days? 10 years ago you could, but I don't think you can play a pure shutdown style player anymore. I'm not even sure many clubs do it on a regular basis either. Putting Maynard in the guts to run with someone like Ablett looks like a decent experiment on paper, but a bloke in his second game got beaten by a two time Brownlow Medallist, which is hardly surprising. It didn't work and I'm not sure how often we'll go back to it this season.

I would have preferred Sam Weideman to be honest, OD.

Had we won yesterday you'd be declaring us dead certs to win the flag.

I'd agree with that, too. Our smaller and medium sized forwards allowed the ball to be rebounded out of our own forward 50 with too much ease yesterday. A portion of our game plan is on getting it forward and keeping it there. If we allow teams to get it out too easily then our defensive structures fall down.

I thought he was down for a bit and he had a few trainers around him before he got up... ? I was watching from the opposite part of the ground so my memory may be a little fuzzy, but I recall trainers going to him when he hit the deck.

They stunk it up only for a half to be fair. I know they missed a few gettable shots in the second half but they only kicked two goals. We tightened the screws really well after half time which we needed to as we were deplorable in the first half.

I agree with this, and I think @Clint Bizkit also hit the nail on the head re: being able to lock the ball in our forward line as well. They were able to run the ball out for too easily yesterday, so when we did get the footy in our hands and get it forward they were able to sling shot it out with relative ease. This needs to be worked on in a big way, especially when the momentum is out of our hands a little.

They aren't to be taken lightly but, seriously, we should have them covered without too many problems if we're going to be a finals side. The Saints are just an average side and it showed on the weekend. We are better across the ground than them and if we bring our 'A' game then we'll put them away.

I agree DeeZee. In the first half especially they kept them super quiet. I thought Harmes and Melksham were two who improved in the second half, but not doubt the others had off days and that hurt us big time.

Very true rjay. What I think this correlates with is our Plan B as I was mentioning before. In the first term we kicked 6 goals and looked a million bucks. We only added 7 more for the game, although we missed a raft of gettable shots. When Geelong changed their gameplan we didn't have a Plan B of our own to counteract this, and only when we came out after half time did we make a few changes that helped. However, our efficiency going forward still didn't improve and I think that was a combination of not having enough composure and the Cats defending super well. I think we'll improve it in the coming weeks.

I agree that it was great of Clarry to stick up for him, but I didn't think there was anything malicious in what Selwood did. He turned his back a little and certainly him, but I don't think he did it to hurt him. Clarry giving Selwood a bit of a push and shove was enough. I also agree that Salem had been terrific up until that point. He struggled mightily after that for obvious reasons.