Akum

Happy to watch it again. But do I really have to listen???

Watch the replay - the moment of impact was a split second after Murphy actually kicked the ball. Jones was about 5m away & not going to get anywhere near Murphy. There were a number of similar occasions in the game - player running with ball being chased by opponent - where the shepherding player just put their body in the way of the chasing player & blocked them, and sometimes even tried to cushion the impact. Goodes, who had had a few minor scuffles during the game (e.g. with Hogan after Howe marked over him) and had been crunched in a few hard tackles, chose to accelerate, jump off the ground and hit Jones front-on, late and high. It was an unnecessary high hit that resulted in Jones being concussed and being subbed off. It's the sort of head hit that the AFL was trying to stamp out not so long ago. If that was "careless" and "medium impact", I'd not ever want to see what "reckless" and "high impact" to the head looks like. Many players have had careers cut short because of "fair bumps" of this nature. Being in the health field, I hate this sort of injury, especially as on this occasion it was totally avoidable from the health point of view. I like the Dogs, and I like Goodes as a player, and if my favourite Melbourne player did what Goodes did, I'd say exactly the same - the MRP need to come down hard every time on this sort of incident. And Douglas hits a GWS player (Callan Ward) & gets 4 weeks (down to 2 by some magic formula), while this is 2 down to 1. Seems that some heads are more "sacrosanct" than others. The MRP is just a bad sitcom, week after week. They continually fail the "common sense" test.

His reading of the play and anticipation is also excellent. At times he seemed to just will himself to be first to the ball to not let it get past him.

Did you get this sentence from Eurovision?

At least it's now possible to see the skill set he brings and what he could contribute to the team. At this stage in his career he probably won't get it right every game, and he WILL make mistakes! But would be great if he can reproduce that performance at least a few more times this season. If he does get it together, he adds another facet to our midfield that we don't have otherwise.

Always been a huge Leon Cameron fan. Loved him as a player and he's as smart a coach as he was a player. But let's face it, GWS had so many high draft picks that they couldn't lose. They were always going to be a fearsome team at some stage. It was a matter of when, not if. It's like someone who's inherited a trillion dollars telling everyone the secret of how to make money.

Yep, almost identical. Cheap shot on someone too far away from the play to be expecting it. Did Douglas get weeks?

It depends whether we need extra on-ballers (Viney & Tyson, assuming they're 100%) or defensive forwards. I don't know Port's team all that well, but if they like to attack off half-back, we need good defensive forwards to shut their game down. Isn't that what we did twice last year and nearly knocked them off both times? The dilemma is that if defensive forwards are what we need against Port, then Bail & M. Jones are our best defensive forwards because of their pace. They're nowhere near as good midfielders as Viney & Tyson, but better defensive forwards. So it wouldn't surprise me if, for this particular game, it's no change.

He missed those shots to the nearside for the same reason - got too close to the man on the mark & was cramped for room. I thought the second Bulldog on the mark (to stop Howe from running around) was allowed to get much too close. Have to check that on the replay.

This is the point. He has strengths, he has limitations, like every player. But sub does seem to suit him, as it brings his strengths to the fore & reduces the effect of his limitations. He was at most or all of the centre bounces in the last qtr, so Roos would seem to have faith in his ability at stoppages.

Adds such a lot to the midfield, and brings others into the game. So a first year player has imperfections. Big deal! It's his effectiveness that's the thing.

Ridiculous comment. If he'd done that to Nathan Jones, you'd call it differently. All he had to do was retard him. Not concuss him. A "bump" that causes concussion - in 2015 - is never "fair". "Lack of awareness" makes no difference. And whether or not you like the player makes no difference. If the Match Review Committee has any consistency & integrity, he'll go. And there's the problem ...

Strange that in the Scorps we have Jamar, Gawn, Pedersen & Fitz. And in the Dees, Spencer alone. Scorps overloaded with rucks. Dees very much undermanned against the most physical team in the past decade. And even at the Scorps, they refuse to play Jack Watts at CHF. Strange.

This. The fact that we were still in touch with Freo until the last 20mins despite their massive dominance in possession is a big problem for them. When we had possession, we were much more direct and got much more value for it. Can't understand some saying the score flattered us when we kicked only 1 goal 10 in the last half, and missed some very gettable goals.

When Freo have it they attack along the flanks, but when they other side has possession they close up the midfield. It's not news, commentators have been talking about it for a while, using terms like "breathe-in-breathe-out". I wondered what they were talking about until seeing it yesterday. It's a bit like the old Collingwood strategy, but also closes up the corridor effectively so that a defender making an interception looking for a fast break through the corridor finds it unexpectedly congested and hard to spot a target. That's how they strangle sides. It's completely against what footballers have been trained to do since Auskick, which is to attack through the corridor and defend along the flanks. If a side persists in trying to do that all day, it's exactly what Freo expect them to do and it plays right into their hands. The plan relies on their opponent playing & setting up in an entirely predictable way. They got 10.4 in the second half, while we got 1.10. With all our deficiencies, and for all their absolute domination in possessions (esp uncontested), they only had slightly more scoring shots than last year's 16th side. They did not like physical pressure, and they didn't like it when we played them one-on-one, because they're the situations their game plan tries to avoid. Once a smart strategic coach of a good team works this out, it will be interesting to see if it stands up when they find themselves unexpectedly under pressure and the other team anticipates what they're going to do. On the other hand, if, like Collingwood in 2010 or whenever it was, if no coach can work it out, they'll go close to the flag this year.

Great point. Come to think about it, the Doggies supporters I see most days (I live & work in the western suburbs) were saying much the same after their Hawthorn match as we are now. And as I've tried t say, although it's an 11-goal loss, I think we weren't far from giving this game a real shake, desire playing right into their hands tactically for the whole game. So far our biggest problem seems to be that during times when we're dominant, we miss the opportunities at critical times to put on scoreboard pressure. That's something that should improve the next season or two.

OK, 20 scoring shots to 28. Easily the closest we've got to Freo in the past few years - in 2013 it was something like 10 to 33. Last quarter we each had about a dozen i50s. They got 7.2, we got 0.6. 5 goals down at 3/4 time, and that's including 2 or 3 absolute charity goals to them, and some horrible misses by us. We absolutely dominated the first 10 mins of the last quarter with 3 or 4 shots on goal. They wouldn't want to be in that position against Hawks or Port. I thought Freo were very wasteful. They certainly didn't like the physical pressure we applied in the 2nd & 3rd quarters especially. Even with their huge possession advantage, if we could have capitalised on that time of dominance, it could have been much closer.

Agree. And he only had 73% game time, nearly 20% less than many of the other mids in the game. If he's not fully fit, we shouldn't play him.

The difference between us and Dogs & Saints is they've got great senior leadership in Murphy & Boyd & Morris, and Riewoldt & Montagna & Fisher respectively. We didn't. We had no choice but to import our senior leadership - in fact, straight into the leadership group in most cases. It's not complicated.

The trouble is, chasing tail for 3 quarters like we'd done is far more taxing physically than if you've got the ball and making the running, like Freo were. We made some great attempts in the first 10 mins of the last to try to drag ourselves back into the game, but only got 3 behinds. If they were 3.0 or 2.1 instead of 0.3, we may have been able to put pressure on them. But we were on our last legs, and once they got a goal cos we again set up stupidly at stoppages like we'd done all day, the result was inevitable.

We were 5 goals down at 3/4 time, with Freo's lead inflated by 2 or 3 charity goals. We attacked for the first 10 minutes of the last and got just 3 behinds. Freo attacked down the middle after a turnover and Suban kicked the goal. That's the game right there. Freo have a brilliant game plan, because it's counter-intuitive. It relies on their opposition not planning for it, getting confused, and continuing to play the same way the whole game. We could not have played more into their hands. I can't believe we set up at stoppages exactly the same way the whole game ... again, playing right into their hands. We just kept playing exactly the way they wanted us to play. If we're seriously going to compete with the top teams, we absolutely must have a specific plan about how to counter them. If we go in with just "do the best you can", we are going to get smashed every time. If a smart coach works out how to beat their game plan, then it will be Freo's turn to get absolutely smashed.

Any chance we could dress up the original Hulk as Jamar & line him up against Sandi a.k.a. Andre the Giant?

In other words - that's exactly what you have depth players for!! (loose injurys)

What's your beep test?

Not 426?