titan_uranus

By now Morton should be a better player than he is. I don't think there's much scope to argue differently. He was drafted on the back of skills and work rate. He was always going to be hampered by his lack of strength, and that still is a factor. But by now I expected a better return from Cale. His kicking is just not that good, and he will still now and again look soft. I don't think he adds much to the side at the moment. I also can't work out what kind of player he is. A winger? A half back? A half forward? To me, when you have a player with no real position to play, that's saying they're not really good enough to play anywhere.

Ridiculous argument. Palmer was terrible last year when there was no way he could know where he was going, if he's going at all.

He's not a fan of his predictable tendency to look for the handpass option every time he gets the ball. Frankly, I'm with him. McKenzie needs to develop some confidence in his kicking so that the opposition doesn't know that every time he picks it up he's going to hand it off to the nearest recipient. He does a lot right, McKenzie, and we have bigger worries than him, but he absolutely needs to learn to kick the ball.

Agree. It seems as though I will never understand how people can get so upset about us not taking Darling when every other club except Collingwood, who didn't get the chance, also chose to pass up on him. These things happen. We have no idea what Cook will be like because he was not intended, like Darling, to have any impact in his first year. He may end up being five times better than Darling. He also may end up never playing a game. But to pass judgment at this stage is silly. Remember Rhys Palmer? Dominated his first year, now is a fringe player at best, in a side decimated with injuries.

I had a discussion with a mate yesterday about whether or not Richmond had improved this year. There is a growing feeling amongst Tigers supporters that they haven't improved on last year, and maybe have gone backwards. Got me thinking: have we improved on last year? I think it's a valid question. There is far, far more to it than win/loss ratio. Currently we have 7.5 wins. We should be able to win the last three, but they are three of the worst four sides of the competition, so does that mean anything? We've beaten Brisbane, Gold Coast, Adelaide, Fremantle, Richmond and Port Adelaide, who all aren't much chop. And Essendon, who should make finals this year. If we win the last three, we add second wins to Richmond, Gold Coast and Port. Again, nothing special. Now, some would say we weren't going to be beating any of the good sides this year, and that's fair enough, and it might be sufficient to have us beating the crap sides this year. Others would argue that we've been too far behind the good sides and we should have been closer, without necessarily making finals (or even improving upon the win/loss ratio of last year). At this moment of the year, I'm not too sure if I can equivocally say we've improved. I don't think our midfield has developed as it should have this year, and I don't think our forward line has been as good as our talent would suggest. That's not to say I'm worried about our path forward, as I still think the talent is on our list, and a new coach with a bit of leadership might get something out of our senior players (and let's not forget we've missed Grimes and Bail for long periods this year, as well as Jamar, Scully, and various others). But I'm quite interested to note what Demonlanders think. I can probably guess how this is going to turn out actually... RPFC's KPI thread might say more than anything else.

From what I picked up from SEN 6 - Frawley 5 - Howe 4 - Trengove 3 - MacDonald 2 - Garland 1 - Bartram (solely for his job on Kerr. His kicking is inexcusably bad)

The good Our defence in general (stood up even though they were swamped by inside 50s) Frawley Trengove The third quarter The bad The second quarter The fourth quarter The ugly Sylvia Davey Bartram's kicking MacDonald's kicking Jones' kicking Morton Going loose in defence from the opening bounce (WHY!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!)

Wakelin on SEN: Our two most disappointing players today were Davey and Sylvia. Davey, when challenged, never lifts, and displays awful body language. Sylvia is lazy and selfish. We need leadership, and we're not getting it. Same old stories. Malthouse: we challenged West Coast by going one on one on their defenders and moving the ball quickly. When we sucked, we put numbers behind the ball, let their defenders roam free across half back, and tried to too often go sideways/backwards to free up space, which led to turnovers and easy West Coast goals.

Jones turns it over. Again. Leads to a Cox goal. I know people love Jones, but this idea that many hold that he has improved his disposal is a clear case of rose coloured glasses. People see his endeavour and effort, which is lacking in too many of our other players, sure (and for that he gets credit), but, like Bartram, Jones is still a liability with the ball. He doesn't know his limitations and continually tries to do things he's not capable of. Turnovers kill us every week and unfortunately Jones is a culprit of many of them.

Bartram is now in the awful category. He has just missed a third goal, and that one was an absolute monty apparently. He's doing well on Kerr but he is just useless with the ball in hand.

It seems to me that we have far too many of the following two types of players: the player with obvious talent but no work-rate (e.g. Sylvia, Bennell, Jurrah, Davey) and the player with the enormous work-rate but lacking in ability (e.g. Bartram, Jones, McKenzie, MacDonald). Consequently we lack in the players who combine ability with effort. Trengove stands out in this department. Watts alongside.

Trengove takes a big mark and kicks a goal after the siren. Three quarter time: WCE 13.9.87 Melb 8.7. 55 Malthouse: we moved the ball quicker that quarter and went one on one in front of the ball, making West Coasts's defenders accountable and putting far more pressure on. But their forward line is superior and when they go forward they look like they'll score.

Now Howe misses another shot on goal. Unbelievable.

We now have two players behind the ball. Malthouse has absolutely no idea why we would try to do that given we'd gone one on one and done pretty well.

Frawley apparently dominating on Kennedy.

And now goes for glory and ignores Dunn who's on his own. And misses. Selfish. Doesn't look good when you're in the gun as a senior player.

Disgusting selfishness from Sylvia who ignored Dunn then took the shot himself, and missed. Dunn was about 15 metres out. Now Bartram misses a shot on goal. Again. His kicking is deplorable. Of course, they then go coast to coast and score a goal.

I don't get why we now no longer have the loose man in defence. This suggests we have recognised it's not working. Which begs the question: why in hell did we use it in the first place? It just makes NO sense. e25's argument might make sense but by now we should be looking to wins, not to development. I think the coaches honestly think it's a strategy that will help us in that it gives us numbers behind the ball and that suits our gameplan of running of half back. Fighting back a bit here though. 4 of the last 5 goals.

Malthouse now wondering why we have spare numbers on the opposite wing to where the ball is. 90 metres away, making no space that is relevant, and allowing West Coast to have extra numbers at the contest. Goal to Kerr meanwhile. 27 to 8.

Malthouse thinks we've been 'fantastic': good pressure but terrible finishing (e.g. Morton and Bartram. They should have been goals and we should be in front). Also noted that West Coast's defence has had more of the ball than their midfield (i.e. their loose man is chopping off our forward movements as we break down at half forward).

Bartram misses everything. 13 inside 50s for 1.2 They've had 9 for 3.2 This is playing out a bit like last week. And I just do not understand our fascination with a man behind the ball. It's killing us as we try to go forward. Ridiculous. Also kicking efficiency is running at 51%. Skills just not where they should be.

We're breaking down at half-forward (again). Bombing a little indiscriminately. Cale Morton just decided to dribble a shot along the ground from 30 metres, without taking a drop punt. Malthouse hates the fact that we're allowing West Coast to have a loose man wherever they want (moving between their defence and at the contest). He says we can't win if we keep this up.

FIrst goal to Howe. Sounds like, the loose man aside, we're doing OK.

Oh dear, Wakelin seems to have suggested we have a loose man in defence already. It's giving West Coast a plus one at the contest, not just sitting back like our loose man does. Pathetic strategy, something I was hoping would disappear after Bailey.

Yep. In all circumstances except those relating to Collingwood (or himself).