Skuit

I understand the frustration, but the supporters provide the primary unifying element to the ship of Theseus which is a football club. The current team is not the team of a few years ago; so it's really just your memory which is littered with these types of losses which you and other fans perceive we just can't seem to stop. But the current team did exactly that last year - vs. West Coast, Collingwood and Carlton - after suffering from some tight final quarter defeats against Freo and Hawthorn earlier in the year. We also came back from deficits similar to the one Geelong overhauled yesterday on numerous occasions - with football being a sport of momentum. We've had some bad luck this year, but these things can go either way for all teams. No one would argue that the Salem goal after the siren vs the Bombers a few years ago was the result of a well-drilled team which was cool-headed at the finish. We got lucky in an unnatural game environment and immediately forgot every mistake at the death. More mature teams like those of Hawthorn and Geelong in recent years are of course more likely to prevail in this atmosphere with greater experience of it. We're not yet a mature team.

Some of these recollections may be slightly off the mark . . . 2012 - Hawthorn v Geelong Hawkins, who scores a bag of six or seven for the day, kicks a winning goal after the siren after the Cats run it the length of the field from the kick-in following a low percentage snap by Rioli with less than a minute to go. But it's only crap us and our crap players who do that crap in close ones.

It is brutal. But posters saying the club always goes to water in tight ones is over the top. One of the losses our ruckman missed a shot from close range for the win. The Saints wasn't really a close one. But in the genuine close one vs. Port we were reamed by the umps. Yesterday we did indeed lose composure in the final minutes. But so did the Cats. Watch the last two minutes of every thriller this year and all teams make poor decisions and fundamental skill errors at the manic death. And there will always be coaching and positional hindsights. Meanwhile, umpiring standards go out the window. One team comes out on top. Mostly through some form of luck.

I just can't work out what JKH brings to the team. Or what they're expecting him to develop into.

I like it how you reverted to your old persona when discussing the former regime. Made me feel extra nostalgic.

Try one of the backpacker hostels if you're hoping to get lucky.

Nice scooter Nathan. I like your parka Clayton, it really suits you. Jack, are they a new pair of Chelseas? Wonderful.

What was your answer for Part one binman?

The quiz that over 90% of first-year students fail! Can you nail the answer they couldn't? Click here to see. Part one: You're running at full (albeit at your own limited) speed toward the ball. You notice that a capable teammate will arrive there ahead of you yet is running in the opposite direction of your goals, with no options ahead on the pivot but an opposition player player closing in on both your defensive and attacking sides, roughly equidistant and approximately eight metres from the where the ball currently is. If you apply a shepherd outside of the five-metre radius of the ball, you may be penalised for a closely-watched 'block'. Q: What do you do? A: sheperd the guy on the right anyway. B. sheperd the guy on the left anyway. C. go for the ball. D. try to create an overlap in space. Part two: The average reading speed for more complex written material such as the equation above is about 100 words per minute. The above question consists of roughly 100 words. Meanwhile, a series of humans are travelling at an average speed of 14 kilometers per hour from four separate directions toward the effectively random bounce of an oval-shaped football which is approximately eight metres away at present. Q: What is your available reaction time in answering this quiz as a comparative ratio to the central participant in Part one in determining what to do?

And there's reasonable wisdom in the contention that a gazillion points doesn't necessarily translate to a gazillion goals if a team had kicked straight, in that the ball is returned to the middle and there's less forward repeat points. But on this occasion I was so confident in our clearance ability against Freo and forward movement that I think if we'd kicked straight we could have put on 30. Looking at the replay - I would say that at least 12 of the points were high-percentage shots or very easily missed open opportunities (not counting the high number of dropped marks in the fifty where he had clear hands to the ball in front position), whereas we didn't really score any low percentage goals. Got over the line after nearly mucking a few up and got given a couple of soft freebies (balanced in part by the Petracca review error an instance or two the other way). But if you take two thirds of those misses and add a quarter of the longer-shots that's an extra 12 goals right there alone. The conditions were bad but this was a complete annihilation in the centre - with all due respect for the poor opposition. In other circumstances, the clear equivalent of a 100-point win. We were effectively unlucky.

My precise thoughts exactly Redleg.

You've shown another side to yourself here Picket. I was expecting a series of 2s and 3s. In fact, I think you were too gentle on some. Melksham a point for each effective disposal?

Why would you come into the changes thread following the match against Freo to complain about current form and state we would miss the finals based on previous matches during the season? And not even refer to team selection whatsoever?

We may not have had the chance to be dumb if we didn't do it. It is what it is. Soon we'll move on.

The least annoying Razor match I can recall. No crowd to play to.

Not sure if anyone else here has played footy in the tropics? It's truly horrible if you're not accustomed to it. And it's not like wet weather footy where you're bent down with a heavy ball and you adjust to that type of wetness. The ball moves at pace and slips right through the hands when you think you've done everything right. On top of that, it feels like you can't ever get in enough oxygen. I know it's not the wet-season, but that's the slipperiest I can recall it for one of our matches up there. Never mind the comparative humidity figures or Uncle Bitters rolling around in the dry grass - the proof was there in the vision and the post-match comments. Oliver, Salem and Fritsch were simply outstanding in their control of the ball tonight. Stretch was clean too.

Gosh, you blokes are being a bit harsh on J. Smith. Sent forward where he hasn't played before and competed. Sure he didn't completely gel. 'The ball was like a bar of soap tonight' - Max Gawn. The reason he was sent forward was that in the slippery conditions we needed extra focus on the deck. Hogan and Tmac don't have the burst or agility to trap it in. Smith's second efforts were notable. Seven tackles. Tackles inside-50 aren't just an individual thing. Pressure leads pressure and everyone has to work together at once. We doubled our inside-50 tackle count from last week.

And I agree with this. But lets make our incremental upgrades incrementally.

And Hogan kept getting in his way.

I agree. But not all cogs will always fully contribute at once. The improved balance allows our important ones to though.

No change. This is the right balance.

These aren't votes but it's so pleasing to see Oliver, Brayshaw, Salem and Petracca all feature in here together. 125 possessions - 65 contested between them. Not one of them has reached 60 games yet.

Now you're even writing in some ancient language.

I think it best we both just agree to 'Lismore'. On an another note, the actual Lismore prevented me from seeing the drawn 2010 AFL grand final until the final five minutes - which were admittedly pretty exciting after a three-hour [censored]-around. On an another another note, the town also saved me from viewing 186 until after the fact. Go Lizzie! My e-zine is by paid subscription only. P.s.: it's still Thursday night where I am at the present.