...

Two Sheds, I haven't written anything to you up until now because I had nothing to say that other posters hadn't. I have been watching this thread like a hawk and with a degree of nervousness. I am delighted and relieved that things have gone your way in this battle. I wish you all the best. Regards, Barry.

Completely agree. I called that Strauss would spend some time at Casey, and it seems a few posters didn't feel it was warranted. I think he needs a couple of weeks to get the panic out of his game. As I've said before, just a very short term thing. Strauss will be a very good player for us.

How do ya like me NOW?!

Sylvia in for Strauss but with plans for Strauss to return soon. Leave Newton in. He made good contests today and led at the ball carrier. Our smaller mids and forwards crumbed from him reasonably well. Martin doesn't do that.

That is the first time I have felt nervous at a game since the Jordan MacMahon kick last year. It was great. So proud of the team. They (and Dean Bailey) have delivered exactly what I've (and others) been spouting off about for a week - a Q1 win, in touch at half time, and leading forwards presenting to the ball carrier. We had way less of the cyclical handballing this week and I believe it was a result of players presenting. Also, we seemed more confident to kick to one-on-ones this week when we had to. Still maintained possession where possible by kicking to players on their own, but just far less hesitation to kick to contests where the better option wasn't there. While I feel like sitting here and listing how great each and every player was, I'll limit my rant to one player. This player wasn't the best on ground, but he was one of them. Rohan Bail. It's hard to believe it was his first game today (bar ten seconds last year). Hard at the ball, read the play well and disposed of the ball well. Outstanding.

Are you Garry Lyon? Uncanny!

I liked how he dissected the things that have gone wrong so far and then went on to address what he'd try to do about it. I think he'd make a great gameday coach because he has a bit of aggression and arrogance about him on top of his knowledge of the game. I'm not saying Bailey doesn't, and I'm on the fence about Bailey's abilities (we'll know by the end of the season). Inspiring article though. I'm going along today, and now have something to think about. I'll be watching Shaw and Maxwell and seeing how we combat their input. It's disheartening to read that Garry believes Cameron Bruce will need to earn Shaw's respect. I recall a day at the MCG (which seems like an eternity ago) where Brad Green and Cameron Bruce almost completely shut down Nathan Buckley and Scott Burns, getting plenty of it themselves, and us beating Collingwood. Ahh... the good(ish) old days. Hope to see some of it today.

I thought we'd win 8 earlier this year. I have revised to 3 or 4 not after one game, but after the preseason performances, the one game, the horrible way we played that one game, the key player injuries we have, and the fact that the coach is still managing to raise the term 'competitive' on the back of a dead-time couple of goals. The AFL site ladder allows for the inclusion of Q1 Q2 Q3 and Q4 wins. I'm looking forward to following that stat for all teams. It's too early to see a significant pattern yet, but I'll bet the bottom 8 will be littered with teams almost completely devoid of Q1&2 wins, but with a reasonable amount of Q3&4 wins. These are the teams whose coaches will be saying 'I was happy with the way the boys fought it out at the end, it's just a shame we didn't manage to play that way early on'. A crock. Tomorrow I would be really happy to see us within a couple of goals at half time and then get run over the top of and lose by ten goals. I would not be happy to be 12 goals down at 3 quarter time and then kick the last 4 to lose by 8 goals. I know I'm harping on about this, but until the coach comes out and admits that's the crux of the year, he won't have my trust in his ability or honesty. I wish him luck for tomorrow, because I wouldn't want his job tomorrow.

Good article. I hope the coaches extract their heads from their backsides and take notice. Especially Bailey and Mahoney.

Classic Calabrese B. I knew he'd spout that rubbish too. The key indicator for us this year will be how many Q1s and Q2s we win. Q3 and Q4 are only important indicators if you're still in the game, and as many have said in this thread and others, Hawthorn just switched off once they were 11 goals up. We are currently 0/2 for Q1 and Q2 wins. As far as I'm concerned, I don't want to hear a single word out of Bailey's mouth about competetiveness or winning quarters in the twilight of a drubbing.

That's hit the nail on the head. The problem is not that players WANT to handball in ever increasingly small circles until they get crunched, it's that they have no choice, because our forwards don't present options. Jones today, ran out of the back pocket onto the half back flank on the Olympic stand side, looked up, and all that was in front of him was two Melbourne forwards running away from him and toward the boundary line, and they were a good 60m from him. So Jones, realising he couldn't kick the ball that far, then gets into trouble and gets tackled, and the Melbourne crowd goes crook at him for trying to do too much. It's [censored]. Not Jones' fault at all. The point about where our forwards line up is spot on. They are all up towards the 50m arc when the centre bounce is happening. It is simply impossible in that situation to lead and present yourself as an option to the midfield when you are already standing in the place you should be leading to. So it seems the plan there is to kick the ball over our forwards' heads (and I'm not trying to be sarcastic, I think this really is the plan) and have them double back towards goals, gather the ball off the ground while running at full tilt with an opponent up their clacker, steady, not get tackled, and kick the goal. When the ball is coming out of our backline, the plan for our forwards seems to be that they try to sneakily double back and take an uncontested mark by having run their opponent under the ball first. It simply does not work. We wind up with these bloody up and under kicks to clear the opposition player, which most of the time end up being pure widow-makers. It is a ridiculous plan. Most Dees supporters sitting around me spent most of the day rubbishing Miller. OK, so he's dropping sitter-marks and kicking poorly. I don't argue that point. Thing is though, he is the only bloke who EVER presents himself to the ball carrier as a target. At least he sometimes gives that contest. I'd like him to do it more (by starting deeper forward and running at his team mate who is looking to dispose of the ball). Miller always gives a good contest in that situation, and it is the job of Petterd and the other small forwards to crumb. They don't do that. In Petterd's defense, he did present a couple of times later in the game, but these episodes were minor punctuations on a game dominated by him doing otherwise. So I believe without shuffling a single player, without bringing in any of our injured players, and before the return to form of an under-done Bate... all the players need do is present to the bloody ball carrier instead of trying to get cheapo uncontested kicks out the back of the opposition defense. If we start doing that (which requires our forwards to start deeper, read the play, and run at the ball carrier) we will improve immensely and immediately. Suddenly, the 'you have it, no you have, no you have it' handballing in the midfield will be much less frequent; people will start to see that we do have some skills; and we will start entering our inside 50 with intent. Add Sylvia, Jurrah, Morton and company, and things start to look quite ok. In summary: Coach - lift your game. Positives today: Great pie at half time. Jordie McKenzie with 11 tackles - 4 of them awarded with frees and a general showing of the famous bloodnut aggression. Trengove with equal highest possession count and a very cool head under pressure. Scully for his ability to win one-on-one contests - this kid has a real football brain, he's not just an athlete. Rivers was very good. I completely disagree with other posters synopses of Warnock - considering the amount of inside 50s, he did a very serviceable job. Strauss was excellent - he started the game magnificently with great pace, good reading of the play, and beautiful spearing passes; unfortunately he made two big blues and dropped his head after that; I'm not concerned about him though, he'll be a ripper. Cam Bruce was pretty good today and led with experience - it's hard to shine when you're getting reamed by 10 goals at half time. Beamer is better than his effort today, so I'm looking forward to his next game. Come on Dees, we're not as far off as we think. --> Coach... LIFT. You're making it too complicated. You're forgetting major principles. Do like the midfield set ups though with the mix of kids and experienced players. GO DEES. We'll roll Collingwood next week

I'm looking forward to going to a football game that I want us to win. It's been a while. Today is the first day that we'll see where the side is truly at, and what needs to be worked on. Go Dees.

How can you say that after the Scott Thompson episode?

That was funny. As if those two logs could catch up with Scully to bring their size to bear Must be intimidating for him though.

Yeh I caught that. Not impressed. Freudian slip? We have heard that the old cud-chewer, Neil Craig has been in his ear before we drafted Trengove. Wonder what was said. I agree with other posters that it's all a bit paranoid, but the kid needs to learn quickly what not to say in front of the public.

I was at Casey today. We need someone big-bodied as a focal point in our forward line. I'm with you. Frawley as a leading full forward. Smash and crash.

I know it's really chic and witty to rubbish posters who express disappointment, but did you ride your high horse to the game today? Because it's not the loss that was concerning, it the fact that the same problems that dogged us over the latter Daniher years are still prominent. This style of game where avoiding contests and maintaining posession are the priorities is A) difficult to master, and B) doesn't stand up in finals footy even when done well. I'm not advocating the 'bomb it long' strategy, but something half way between what other AFL sides do and what we are currently doing would be nice. Our forward line today was a shamozle. Poeple will point to the amount of goals to half time, but the reality is that they were mostly kicked by the midfield. That situatin cannot be sustained for a whole game, let alone a whole season.

That was a pretty depressing performance. I know we're going to take a while to come good, but I can't see how it will happen. Our forward line is shocking. Our onballers win plenty of ball but never have anyone presenting to them so they have to handball backwards over and again until they turn it over. It wasabsolutely no different to watching a Daniher game. There's no way we will beat Hawthorn.

Totally agree. Winning games is a necessary part of our development. Doesn't matter how the wins come or who they are against at this stage. Beating an injury-ravaged Hawthorn (if it is actually possible) will not have the Dees wondering what might have been without the Hawks injuries: it will just be a win. Confidence will grow etc. And it's a very pertinent point that many times clubs have dined on us when we were riddled with injury. Without Jurrah, Bell, Morton and others, we'll still put a good team on the ground - that's testimony to our depth. I badly want us to win, and I don't care if the Hawks lose another 10 players in order for us to do so.

I agree that all of the players you mention will get a run through the middle during parts of the game, but there will be many others rotating through as well. I think they'll need to have at least one experienced on-baller in the centre bounces each time. I expect to see combinations like Moloney, Scully, Grimes and McDonald Trengove Sylvia etc. I wouldn't expect to see Scully Trengove Grimes all attending the same centre bounce yet.

Gold

Just thought of something with respect to the Crows game. After the first 10 minutes, our midfield got even, or even on top of the crows. The crows had Goodwin, Edwards and McLeod who are very experienced and proven to be very high level midfielders. We had Junior Mc and Green. The rest of our midfield was made up of Grimes (12 AFL games), Scully (0 AFL games), Trengove (0 AFL games), Gysberts (0 AFL games) etc. Does anyone else agree that the performance of these youngsters was not just up to expectations, but in fact well surpassed what we should have expected and may even be unprecedented in terms of the possessions gained by Scully and Trengove, who had 50 touches between them? Jamar must get a mention too. And I can't believe how much better he's getting.

Thanks for the report and welcome to the forum.

B RIVERS FRAWLEY STRAUSS (Very tough for the 2nd back pocket spot). HB MacDONALD WARNOCK TRENGOVE C DAVEY SCULLY GRIMES HF MILLER BATE SYLVIA F PETTERD GREEN MARIC Foll JAMAR JONES MOLONEY INT SPENCER BRUCE DUNN McDONALD EMERG: MARTIN CHENEY WONNA MacNAMARA BALE McKENZIE (? eligible now) LOOKING FORWARD: Watts Garland Jurrah Bell Tapscott Gawn Fitzpatrick Gysberts

Adelaide 9.15 (69) d Melbourne 10.7 (67) at Elizabeth, 4.30pm EDT Melbourne's bus was 20 minutes late, and the Demons must have wished it had broken down completely after a nightmare afternoon in Elizabeth. Daniel Bell and Liam Jurrah suffered shoulder injuries, and Kurt Tippet poured salt into the wound with a late goal that robbed Melbourne of even the consolation of a rare win. Tippet was Adelaide's best and kicked five, including the matchwinner as the Crows took the contest 9.15 (69) to 10.7 (67). For the winners, Jon Griffin provided solid service in the ruck, Tyson Edwards was good in midfield and Ben Rutten and Goodwin stood firm in defence. Nathan Bock was a late withdrawal, replaced by Daniel Talia. They're kidding aren't they? They make it sound like we did nothing. I'm sick of reading that [censored]. They obviously had no-one at the game. They are blatantly reporting off a stats sheet handed to them. Sorry, but this kind of reporting is fraudulent and becoming more common. They should not be allowed to report on a game unless they had someone there to watch it. I could have given a better summation from listening to the radio commentary. The AFL website haven't even gone to that length. Thrush upon them all. (That bit for you Dappa Dan).