rpfc

Yeah, I am not surprised by this result. For those that are struggling to see how 22 blokes can be so dominated by another 22 blokes - it is not just a coach. It's inertia. The feeling that attempting something will be met by failure so the attempt is affected or not even bothered with. You won't run past a contest to receive a handball because you know, you just know, that your teammate won't get the ball and you are more worried about making sure your man doesn't get the footy. So you don't attack. And then, when the ball comes out of the contest, only one team is setup to win it. And they do, and they win the next one too. You don't run. You don't trust your teammate to get the ball in a one-on-one, so you get in and 'help' and the other team has an immediate advantage with a release player created. You become inert. And you get thumped.

I had to put the stats out didn't I? Never effing learn. What a massive letdown.

2013 has seen a remarkable level of ineptitude from this club - staggering really. I have highlighted a few key stats - ahead of the median AFL teams in green, behind the median AFL teams in red. Under Neeld, compared to the median AFL team(s), we managed: 23 Contested Possessions LESS 29 Uncontested Possessions LESS 12 Inside 50s LESS 5 Clearances LESS 7 Marks LESS Under Neeld our opponents, compared to the median AFL team(s), managed: 5 Contested Possessions MORE 46 Uncontested Possessions MORE 8 Inside 50s MORE 3 Clearances MORE 14 Marks MORE Under Craig (and leaving aside the Geelong game which skewed every stat up or down), compared to the median AFL team(s), we are managing: 16 Contested Possessions LESS 1 Uncontested Possessions MORE 5 Inside 50s LESS 4 Clearances LESS 13 Marks MORE Under Craig our opponents, compared to the median AFL team(s), managed: 9 Contested Possessions MORE 7 Uncontested Possessions MORE 2 Inside 50s MORE 3 Clearances MORE 11 Marks LESS Our net improvement under Craig from the first 11 rounds has been: +3 Contested Possessions compared to our direct opponent. +70 Uncontested Possessions compared to our direct opponent. +14 Inside 50s compared to our direct opponent. -1 Clearances compared to our direct opponent. +45 Marks compared to our direct opponent. It's a staggering improvement, and while we are still some way off the pace of other clubs, the key determinators or run and spread in the modern game: Uncontested Possessions, Marks and Inside 50s have all shot up dramatically under Craig.

This is the part I don't follow: You say we were patheitc under Neeld as you still regard us as non-competitive. And that is fine. But then you say that Neeld could have brought about this improvement that we are seeing. He didn't. He had 33 games to show some sort of consistency of performance and didn't get what Craig has been able to get in his 5 games. We are still losers, and Craig may not be the man for the job - he may be simply getting 75% out of this group, but it is better than whatever percentage Neeld was getting out of them. He was a failure, and I didn't need the juxtaposition of the perfomances of late to prove that, but it has been quite a exclamation mark.

lol Exactly. Who replaced Moloney in the midfield rotation? And how did he do? Then you can do your flawed maths.

Further to what alias has said - I have plenty of chats to older Canberra footy fans who claim that prior to the Raiders rocking up - the local AFL league was better attended and more closely followed than the local rugby league offering. You put a club in and suddenly the area is a convert as it makes ties to the area and makes the changes that alias alluded to like grounds being built to house your only national club and so forth. We were always going to put a second club in Sydney. I don't understand the animosity to it being set up. Should the Swans be taken back to rot at Albert Park? Because your equivalents back in the 80s probably argued for it...

I really don't follow your reasoning, jumbo. Do you feel that this would have happened with Neeld anyway? Do you feel it would have happened with any other caretaker? Or do you reject that it is happening?

lol

Of those 12 reasons, I dismissed in my head about all but 2 or 3 of them. Selwood diving in a tackle is The Bloated One's fault?

Is this as sinister as it is made out? It was essentially just giving them a head start with regard to PR - their absolution will not arrive, the penalties would not be mitigated by that press conference way back when. Convince me this is sinister.

People go on holidays. People also have health issues - they also go on holidays. They can still be functioning members of society - fancy that.

His wallet was probably doping too.

Depends when they wear off? Looking at his team - he has got a few good months of extra strength and muscle twitch.

Good thing he took those peptides. Help him carry his wallet.

That's an ironic sentiment of misleading stats as you brought up the number of wins without mentioning that Neeld had 11 games for his one win and Craig 5. We are all very smitten with winning. It's quite important. But so is form, and many are just pointing out how it has changed for the better. There is no need to be snarky or imply that posters don't care about winning because there are improvements to be seen in a loss.

1899 Cleveland Spiders. Lost 134 games of baseball in one season.

Actually, we can't do them both at the same time. We need a head of the FD to be a part of the player search don't we? He's the one doing the contracts...

Everyone thinks that Ross is THE coach to get. And yet, another bloke won a flag the year before Roos won his, the bloke you are talking down. Eade has a very good record, but he didn't win a flag.

We can walk and chew gum at the same time.

Now hang on a second... It's not true. And that's a fact.

Good luck, jcb. I am pretty sure that Free Agents can be signed up until the Grand Final so for those teams that have 'player signings' left you can use that on a kid to meet your quota of two young keepers. There is no need to get that done before the trade deadline.

No-one is saying we are 'killing it.' Objective reality says we have improved. You can dismiss reality if you want to. But you would be tilting at windmills.

You should have stopped at 'finals series.' The Chicago Bulls we ain't.

Yes, I remember the coaching argument well. I think conceding that in light of recent events seems a tad trite and pointless at the minute... I just don't like talking to people 'in the know' who dismiss an 18 year old because of minor personality issues and/or mistakes.

I said it after Rd 1 - he should not have played. I would nod with approval if we do not play Pick 2 for a few rounds next year (Hogan is ready to go so is a different story).