Akum

Was interesting late in Q4 when Pedo had to go off because of the blood rule and Spencer had to come back on. They could both hardly run to get off and on the field respectively. Whatever is said about their skill, they both left nothing out on the ground, they gave it absolutely everything they had.

Bail is a really intelligent runner, as well as being a good runner in the athletic sense of combining pace and endurance. He ran to exactly the right place with exactly the right timing and at top speed past Dawes, and just trusted that Dawes would somehow get it to him. It was a quality running goal which was so well done (by al concerned) that it was made to look easy. If Bail hadn't run the right place, Dawes would have looked stupid for not trying to grab it. Bail also found a lot of space inside 50 for his other goal. But he should have had 4 this week, and should have had 4 against the Saints. He is really talented in term of getting himself into such good places. He just really needs to work on his disposal though; otherwise he's just another runner.

I wonder whether he's just developed too much of a defensive mindset and he can't break out of it. I remember that game when scores were even with less than a minute to go and he just grabbed the moment and went third man up at a bounce and hit it through for a point to win the game. He was often in the right place at the right time in his first couple of years, but Neeld put him so far back in his shell mentally he's too scared to take any initiative. In which case he's best to stay at Casey until he's got his initiative back,and he's again trying to make things happen rather than slow things down.

Yeah, seemed that Malthouse decided to tag Tyson and Vince with Carazzo and Curnow, they just had no breathing space. Other coaches seem to believe that Tyson and Vince are our most dangerous mids. He also seemed happy to leave Murphy on Jones, maybe expecting Murphy to pull something out sooner or later but it didn't happen. What helped us was the likes of Cross, Viney, Matt Jones and especially Bail stepping up. As has been said by a number of posters, it was a great team win with everyone contributing.

This. It struck me how much they played like we have been in the other games, while we played more like the sides against us have played. Because we could go direct to dangerous tall forwards, where they couldn't. We were far better structurally in this game than in the others. In Rounds 1 & 3 we had the stats and more scoring shots but lost, for the same reason; Round 4 it was reversed. Having at least two forward targets has to make a huge difference. And I thought we used the ball really well forward of centre. But I wonder how much of that was Dawes and maybe Frawley staying forward, even when Carlton ere overpossessing it in the middle of the ground. So there was much less of the nobody-there-to-kick-to-so-have-to-go-sideways-or-back than there has been before.

Was Bail's first serious concussion. The coward got off scott free. Pure dog act.

Wow, that's "heavy traffic" even for that part of town! Or did you go around the block a few times??

I reckon it's the best chance of getting him back to his best by the end of the season.

The reason I'd drop Trengove instead of, say, Bail or Byrnes, is because playing as a HFF is doing Trengove more harm than good. We simply don't need him as a flanker. If he's going to be any use to us in future, it's as the high-quality on-baller we got him to be. He's more likely to get his mojo back as Casey's premier mid, than to play game after game in the seniors as a so-so flanker. At his best, he's one of those rare and valuable types who's good both inside & outside, but I agree with whoever said that he hasn't been the same player since the sling tackle. I think the same of dropping Toumpas and to some extent Michie. They're better to get in game time as leading mids for Casey, than as flankers or bench-warmers in the seniors, which is no use to us and no use to them. Trengove and Toumpas were both high picks as premium mids, and that's what we need them to become in the next year or two. If they're only ever going to be flankers, that's not what we need, and I'd bring them back only when they've ripped up 2 or 3 games for Casey. I have faith in their character and quality as men and as footballers that they'll make it eventually. But Roos et al have to find the best path for them.

And the only meaningful comparison between Wines & Toumpas is when they're playing in teams of equal quality. Until then, it's just hot air.

I can understand this, but I have a hunch it's not too far away. I wonder if Roos, remembering their great fast attacking ball movement in that game in 2010, made the assumption that that they could do it naturally and it was something he didn't need to teach them. He didn't realise how much that was knocked out of them in the past 2 years. The JKH goal was interesting. The ball rolled to Bail in traffic deep in defence, he charged through a gap and ran hard and direct. Dunn had only about a metre break on an opponent, but Bail kicked it well to Dunn's advantage (I had to replay it a couple of times to be sure it was Bail) and Dunn was good enough to mark it. He saw JKH charging through the middle, again with only a small break on an opponent, and kicked it in front of him, so he could run on and goal. A hard smart run, two intelligent (tho' not necessarily pinpoint) kicks and a goal. Sure, the WCE foot was well off the pedal at that stage, but it showed that hard running and intelligent disposal is not beyond them - even guys like Bail. I suppose the question has always been - even in 2010 - can they ever be capable of doing this under pressure? If we can't hurt the opposition when we've got the ball, we're going to struggle, no matter how many possessions or clearances we win. And if Roos can't get them to unlearn kicking-to-stationary-contests and relearn attacking ball movement, nobody can.

Too many of them don't seem to be able to hit someone who's running, either by hand or by foot. Handballs should never go behind someone who's just started to run hard into space, but far too many do. And they're all momentum killers, because instead of us breaking away down the ground, it gives the other team the chance to do it. It's like they're more comfortable, especially when under pressure, handpassing to someone who's stationary and flatfooted than to someone who's trying to break away hard. And they also seem to prefer to hit a stationary target by foot, even if it means neglecting any number of positive earlier leads. If someone's leading and has a space in front of them, it's not a difficult kick just to put it to their advantage. These are basic skills for other teams - to put it to where a running teammate is going, not to where they've been or where they are - that seem to be beyond us. And if they can't hit running targets (especially under pressure), they soon stop trying to provide running targets. So it's back to witches' hats and a smashing. Maybe Roos, recalling their great attacking ball movement from 2010, thought it was something he didn't have to teach them. And perhaps they need to unlearn the "kicking-to-contests" crap of the past 2 years.

Swapping [favourite] fringe players for [least favourite] fringe players isn't going to help. They panic (collectively) under pressure and make mistakes, and they're afraid (collectively) to take risks so they go around in circles. That's across the whole team, not one or two (or three or four) individuals. It's a mindset thing, but it's proving to be much harder to shift than was expected. This is a big test for Roos. It's totally unfamiliar ground for him - when he took charge of a demoralised Swans team, the demoralisation was superficial and easily shifted; this time it's deeply entrenched. There's also no Casey form to show him who's demanding to be brought in, so it's all guesswork. Apart from any 1st-22 players coming back from injury this week (probably Viney and maybe Gawn & McKenzie, but the others aren't ready), the only other ones that should come in are those who have done OK in the past under pressure. Which doesn't leave much - Clisby maybe, with Evans & Blease a long way back.

... and when someone did take risks, they were hammered (even if it actually worked). That was the killer.

West Coast are going to smash any side that can't match up to their strengths. Mobile tall forwards, fast tall defenders, and they just get first use of the ball so much through their rucks. The Dogs had Minson, but they were similarly mismatched last week. The problem was that we both didn't move the ball forward fast enough (for obvious reasons) and we panicked and made stupid errors. You can't coach against that. This was a bad match-up for us early in the year. We'll get better as the year goes on. But if we're this bad against them in Round 22 (hopefully with a semblance of a forward line by then), we're stuffed.

Pedo will be needed down back. It will be a disaster to go in one tall defender short against WCE. Seems there's some talk about going small and fast in the forward line. But that's what the Bulldogs tried, with better "small & fast" players than we can muster, and they got blown away. Admittedly that was at home, and Eagles may not be as comfortable on MCG, but they had no trouble countering small fast forwards. Another option would be to go small and tough - I'm thinking Terlich, Clisby, Viney, M. Jones, Cross (who will surely tag Hurn), even Jetta or Tapscott. Many of these guys have played as defenders, and they'll know what it is that defenders hate their forwards to do against them. So that's how they should play - man-on-man, stick close, niggle & harrass, go in hard, tackle unnecessarily often - in other words, play their defenders as defenders would, not as forwards would. Remember that game we won against Essendon in 2011 (was it?) where we had a massive number of forward-50 tackles? So aim to kick into the spaces in the forward-50 - not to contests, but away from contests, and make their defenders have to turn and run - play the game at ground level as much as possible, and push our best contested ball winners forward. We also really have to interrupt the flow of ball to their forwards. The mids too will have to collectively be really good defensively, and man up when they have the ball, because they won't be able to rely as much on the half-forwards coming back to help them. If we get smashed in the midfield, we'll lose badly whatever else happens.

I think this is what he means about instilling confidence. Possession football is based on the low-risk options of kicking backwards and sideways to unmarked teammates. But moving forwards purposefully, rather than backwards or sideways, means taking risks. To take risks needs confidence and enterprise and courage. It also needs structure and co-ordination to increase the chance of the risk coming off. It's a work in progress, and it's why Roos keeps talking so much about confidence, and "they're actually better than they think they are" (the direct opposite to many Demonlanders). He's trying to build the courage for them to take the game on and attack more, even in the absence of tall forwards. It's the only way we'll improve.

Good point. The game plan is based on soccer. It's not only about keeping possession, but also about creating an opening and then attacking quickly in a co-ordinated way. The "keeping possession" part is just the foundation. Bombing to tall forwards should be just one option to attack. But other much more effective options include hitting someone on a lead, or running it through the corridor, or switching and then moving it quickly, or creating a stoppage deep in attack. We have an ideal opportunity over the next few weeks to develop other attacking options that don't rely on tall forwards. But this relies on co-ordination. We have very few players who can reliably pinpoint someone on a fast lead - Watts can do it; Toumpas is great at it; Strauss can do it but needs to get the ball in the right position; and now we have Vince and possibly Tyson, and in future Salem. So when we move it around, we aim to get the ball in the hands of one of these in a dangerous position. And the most important part is that the forwards need to anticipate and to run to the right spaces even before the ball gets to them. If we have 2 or 3 forwards running to different spaces (not to the same space as they tend to do at the moment), it's even better. Co-ordination is also important when the play is switched quickly. Dunn is great at this, as is Strauss. But at the moment, it seems that the forwards get caught flat-footed when this happens, so there is nobody upfield making space for the 2nd, 3rd & 4th possession (the last being the kick on goal) so the switch is wasted and it goes sideways again. So when Dunn gets the ball and looks to the "fat side", those downfield know who runs and to where, and who blocks the runner's opponent, and get the timing right. At the moment, they're having to make everything up on the spot. That's not such a bad thing, because set plays can get unpredictable, and are harder to carry out once the other team susses them out. But the ideal is a combination. Getting back to soccer again, this has been the basic game plan for 30 or 40 years, and everyone knows what the other team is trying to do and strives to stop them, but defences can still get caught out of position and sometimes even the most obvious moves just can't be stopped. Which is why it's a damn good game plan.

But when Tyson and also Vince (I think it was Vince) were both blindside-tackled in the third, they managed to "sort of" connect with foot or hand, but got pinged anyway. In that situation, it seems you're usually pinged the moment you're tackled, whether you get a foot or hand to it or not. The Saints got a big psychological lift from those tackles, as we would have if the free was paid against Gilbert, as it should have been. Maybe it's only paid when you can't see the tackler coming. Gilbert knew Matt Jones was there & thought he could outrun him, but got caught. Common sense would suggest that if you try to take on the tackler and lose, you should get less latitude than if you get blindsided and don't see the tackler until they hit you. But what has common sense to do with umpiring??

Maybe we should put our fastest players in the forward line, and kick it ow and hard into spaces for them to run on to. Not just Blease, but Clisby, Evans, Nicho ... who else? Hunt?

Agree on all counts. McKenzie playing offensively would have been handy on Saturday. The one we need to tag is Hurn. He sets them up so well.

OD, maybe it's just a matter of picking the right teams to pray against. God surely wouldn't support the Weagles, would he? They've got away with far too much already. Or maybe we just need to find the right god for football matters. Lordweaver, any advice? Or should we leave the supernatural well alone? BBO, is it time to sacrifice a virgin or two?

Maybe that's our problem! It explains the missed shots, the umpiring howlers, the injuries, Pedersen & Byrnes ... Should never try to pray when we're playing the Saints! And since when does God back the Demons anyway?

Nah, needs more Eeyore!!

No, you've got a point. Just a small example, if one of our players was trying to get up off the grass, they made a point of pushing him back down, at times repeatedly. Don't know why it's not done more often. We're horrible at that sort of stuff - always have been, always will be. When we try to go hard at it, something goes wrong (best example: Trengove & sling tackle).