Abyssal

Perhaps the overwhelming emphasis over the last 10 years has been a blinkered attitude towards crash and bang efforts to win the Contested ball and then jam it into F50 to get a stoppage.

Considering we’re getting slaughtered by highly suspect Umpiring and also carrying the inept Van Rooyen, Fritsch and Melksham we’re doing rather well.

I think it is more a case of us regularly getting the ball into a very, very congested F50. No only does it make it much more difficult to get quality possessions/ shots at goal, we get burnt on the counter attack when the opposition win the ball and transition it into an open forward line. While we’re focused on just getting the ball into F50, the better clubs/coaches are happy to set us up for this eventuality. Footballs version of “Rope-a-Dope”.

Phil Gibbs + Ted Henrys ?

Can Sparrow carry his bags?

I think the level of his intensity this year is on par with his entire career. And yes, it has been pathetic this year.

Play on

I respectfully say I’m staggered by your statement. IMHO it’s been Van Rooyens LACK of mobility that has seen him glued to goal square and behind his opponent in all his five games this season. He hasn’t seemed interested in offering a lead and the only mobility I’ve seen from him is when he jogs to the Centre to relieve Max in the ruck after a goal. The other knock on him, IMO, is he the opposite of agile. Petty, on the other hand, whilst not quick, does get mobile and certainly isn’t stationary close to goal. Our most mobile tall forward, by the length of the Flemington straight, is Dan Turner.

I noticed Jackson in the Centre square together with Darcy, who rucked, at least once v StK.

Good idea. Get Jacko to teach Van Rooyen how to lead.

Joke all you like and post silly 😆s. I suppose that’s all you’ve got because you can’t argue with :- Fullarton 2 for 2, Van Rooyen 0 for 5 Ps. Clearly Fullarton isn’t the answer but neither is Van Rooyen the way he was playing. Unless Van Rooyen can change his ways and get mobile, particularly in leading up to the ball and giving options, I don’t think he makes it.

Whilst there’s NO doubt Fullarton has had very little of the ball there’s also NO denying the following fact. Van Rooyen Played 5 Lost 5 Fullarton Played 2 Won 2

As I have already ask you, does resting players justify the those remaining on the ground to 1. Put the que in the rack and 2. Butcher the ball and hitting their opponents on the chest with 25m kicks? Also, what example does it set Lindsay, Langford, Windsor, Tholstrup ? BTW, Richmond had less of a break than we did. What we served up in the last quarter was no better than that in our 4 straight losses this year and numerous losses late last year.

Nank, IMO, had bugger all to do with it. Solely to do with our own easing off. I’m happy we won. But that last quarter was at best, concerning and at worst, pathetic. Considering our very poor record in Final quarters this season as well as being 2nd last on the ladder I would have thought it would have somewhat redeeming if we put our foot on their throats in the last quarter. And to those who have issue with us easing up in the last qtr and cruising to a win, what do you say about the example being set to Lindsay, Windsor, Tholstrup and Langford by senior players putting the que in the rack?

Have you ever heard of the old saying “Don’t flirt with your form”?

Why should Gawn being off the ground result in the our players slacking off their efforts? Also what has Gawn sitting on the bench to do with some pathetic Melbourne turnovers hitting Richmond players on the chest?

Yes, it’s what I saw on the live Fox coverage. (I’ve just the checked the replay on the IQ box and unfortunately the game cut off with 2.5 minutes remaining. There was absolutely no emotion shown by Gawn when he engaged with Goodwin which appeared to leave him, Goodwin, perplexed. Maybe nothing to read into it but it didn’t look right. I took a couple of screen shot photos but can’t seem to upload them here.

Fullarton is considerably more agile than the Lumbering Van Rooyen. That alone makes our Forward line more functional. He also, IMO, gives Max a better chop out.

After the final siren, players celebrating, Gawn and Goodwin meet, NO sweet embrace, Max deadpan even scowlish, turns to Langford then smiles, Goodwin looking somewhat confused. Strange PS. Great win today. We keep winning, no problems for Goodwin. However, lose one of the next two then todays win doesn’t mean much.

Van Rooyen , was a Buy, now a Sell. I think we all missed seeing him as what he really is , “lumbering” , “moving in a slow, heavy, awkward way”.

Good changes. Whilst they mightn’t give us the Win we all hope for, they do give me a feeling of optimism. The reason is, it’s the first time I can recall Goodwin making a blunt statement at selection. In doing so he has also simultaneously shown he has some creativity as well as potentially will now no longer play his favourites. At least that’s a start.

Get on his bike and offer some LEADS

Just to clarify, my comment was a reaction to the original poster who has made many,many excuses in this thread, all firmly denying that our woeful efforts this season were anything to do with Goodwin or the players. According to him/her it was all to do with players needing more time to adjust to the “supposedly” “new” “game-plan”. Only now has that person suggested that “we’re not good enough”. Hence my post. IMO our current state of demise is due to 1. The attitude of our senior players. 2. The lack of depth in the List. 3. Goodwin. Also, the origin goes back to the Off Season immediately after the flag. Finally, as I have previously said here, I believe the time to act on Goodwin could/should have been after the unacceptable and inept performance of the North loss.

In other words, We’re just not good enough.