binman

Didn't see this when i posted something very similar. The other interesting question is why goody didnt put lever on hawkins to combat the use of hawkins up the ground to isolate lever. My guess is because that is actually the mismatch they wanted and goody didnt.

So they used their kpd as a decoy. Ok lets say that is right. Why did that create a mismatch for lever and nev? They're both defenders and they both ended up on players that the coaching staff would have expected them to at the very leadt break even with.one wad a first gamer and the other wad a player the cats shopped because of his lack of intedity.

Agree with all comments above. Lever did have some bad moments but that happens but pretty hard to defend perfect kicks to your forwards advantage. As i have previously posted i don't reckon Goodwin did him any favours either, The two factors you note raise two serious concerns. One our game plan is entirely dependent on manic pressure and as Webber has pointed out it is near impossible to maintain such pressure (for a whole game let alone across a season). If it drops of at all we get exposed. How often do we give up bags of goals in short periods (which is exacerbated by the kicking issue)? Two we have a lot of very average kicks, a handful of really good kicks and one, maybe two elite kicks (salem and Lewis - though both miss their fair share of targets. Fritta looks promising)

The other issue is geelong elected to isolate lever. They could have instead dragged lever up the ground and isolated tmac's younger brother one out against the much stronger hawkins. This would have stiil had the effect of limiting levers intercept role. But they chose to isolate lever against much smaller opponents than hawkins. Presumably because they thought this option would create more goals. What does that say about scotts rating of both players one on one ability?

Yes. Lever for one. Out marked badly on at least two occasions. By smaller players. Missed spoils. Dropped marks. As i have said already if tmac's younger brother had played half as bad as lever did jnrmac would have been lambasted him. As it is he can't even bring himself to acknowledge he played well ir even thst he did his job. Has to give him backhandeders like saying hawkins dragged him out of the game and was effectively a decoy. Strange.

Good post webber. Agree with most of your concerns but not your conclusion. Barring major injuries i think we will comfortably make the 8. Agree we are rubbish in the air. For me, of perhaps more concern is our woeful kicking (which of course exacerbates the marking issue). In all seriousness not wanting to open up the jack watts debate (wanted to keep him but respect and understand the decision and have moved on) but we will seriously miss his kicking skills, particularly his delivery inside 50. That said fritsch looks to have pretty good foot skills

Cost me a bit too. On top of a similar margin and resulting punting loss with the women's (backed them to make the gf). Gender equity at the dees - they disappoint in equal measure.

Reasonable point but really we should have been 4 goals up after the first quarter and had a chance to stretch it out to 3 goals early in the second before we had our customary 20 minute brain fade. You lose very few games when you dominate the contested ball the way we did.

Agree with all of this PD. No question he is a gun and like rance, when he gets to his mid twenties he'll be strong enough to go man on man with any player in the league so that weakness will be addressed. He, like Rance, will still play the intercept role though. Out of interest whats your view on Goody's response to how the Cats isolated Lever and dulled his influence, something most clubs will look to do as they will with Rance and McGovern. Mine is he was slow to react.

But if we win it could be Name 3 bad things

Agree. To an extent. As buck says our defensive efforts all over the ground were poor in the first half, partic in our forward line which enabled the cats to sweep the ball forward quickly. Sure the defensive unit, with one obvious exception, were down but as i said a bizzillion times last year stats like one on one marks and scoring to inside 50s ratio are largely a function of the pressure applied (or lack thereof as the case may be) by our mids and forwards, which is true of all sides, but even more so for us with our aggressive high press. No better example than the first half on sunday. Jetta and lever were exposed in the air because of a lack of pressure on the kick inside 50. Which touches on where i slightly disagree with you praha. I agree that kicking the ball in quickly to our forwards can be effective and is clearly a key strategy. However players still need to assess when it is the right option and too often get this wrong. This occurred a number of times on sunday where we kicked to an out number, were outmarked and the spare ran it out. The other issue for us is critical. We have too many woeful kicks who dont have the basic skill of putting the ball to a forwards advantage. Drives me nuts. Footy 101 and it must do Hogan's head in. Geelong won that game because they could execute that basic skill.

You recorded it on vhs?

We move heaven and earth and pay top dollar to get lever. And rightfully so. We get him in to play a specific role. The rance like interceptor. His weakness is evident - he is not great one on one, not that surprising given he is so young and will get much stronger (though not a great look being out muscled and out read by menzel, who i guess is pretty strong but is also shorter). How is it then that in his very first game our coach allows the opposition to isolate him one on one and force him away from his intercept role? He was a liability in that first half. And i blame goodwin. Out coached. And the error wasn't not selecting frost (though that may have been an error i guess). It was not doing what he eventually did in the second half of having a spare back or trying something else to free lever up, like swinging him up forward or to the wing. By the by did i detect an ever so quiet mcc bronx cheer when lever finally made a big spoil in the 3rd q?

Yes, we definetley showed a lcak of composure. I think just at critically is we had got 10 points up early in the second. if we had got the next goal it would have gone out to a 3 goal lead and the cats would have been under big pressure. Instead we gave up quick goals, including that gift from Lewis, (which i don't think he has got sufficient criticism for in the press. Unforgivable from a leader). Easy to say kick another to stretch the Cats but the really good teams find that goal (often driven by a leader) and then hold form and don't leak easy goals. Which is one reason why the best teams win when they are at their best.

Golly was pretty harsh but jones was poor yesterday, particularly in the second q. He makes too many bad decisions, which often are not picked up in the stats. A good example was his stupid decision to kick to hannan at the top of the goal square in the 2nd q from just outside 50. .Bombs it to a two on one contest, which unsurprisingly hannan loses, and the ball gets swept out of our 50. He had time and some space and made the wrong call. He should of kept on running, got inside 50, and had a shot at goal. His kick to hannan was not a clanger or turmover and would have contributed positively to his DE stat. But it was a poor choice and resulted in a turnover and a wasted forward entry

He was, wasn't we. Which makes jnrmac's assertion that he was 'terrible' quite strange. But not surprising given it hard to see with those confirmation bias goggles on. Lever had a stinker. Just imagine jnrmac's assessment if tmac's younger brother had played half as badly

I wonder if maynard was one of the players not wanting to go to the commando camp?

Threads that ask my biggest fears

G'day punters. Super tricky day at Rosehill tomorrow, a bit more straight forward at Mornington Best bet (and my best of the Autumn thus far): Gailo Chop- a ratings special if ever there was one. At 115 a full 6 points (and therefore 6 lengths) clear of the next best. Loves rain affected going with 3 wins and second from 5 starts on the slow and 3 from 3 in the heavy. 6 from 12 at the distance is not too shabby either. Has Zahra on board who is in hot form. Best value: Peribsen Best long shot: Ball of Muscle (with apologies to Fragonard) And if you want o make some some small change can't go wrong backing Kah in Adelaide for the jockey challenge. not sure what she is tomorrow as they don't put the market up until the morning, but i doubt will be much over 1.50. But she will win easing down. if she is much longer than 1.50 then good value

Yep, spot on. Goody has said he will pick his fittest side. And why not? You have near a full list at this time of year and players always blow up in the first few rounds. Tyson not fully fit or gus after surgery. Logical to leave them out. Maynard and wagner on the other hand have had perfect ore seasons and both are cherry ripe. And the coach loves both wagner and maynard. By the by i really rate wagner and agree he might surprise some if he can get a run of games together. He's a really good kick who when down on confidence makes some bad mistakes. Will be damaging if he gets a good block of games

Let me be the first to say i got it completel6 wrong on Tyson.

I think you've nailed it grey wolf - very lucidly too i must say. Agree with all your comments, particularly those about Tyson, Melk and Brayshaw. They are locks. I think Goody likes maynards'grunt and in some ways i see him as Viney's placeholder. The one comment i'd make is that Goody also really likes how Bugg goes about things so feel as if it is him or Hannan (who Goody also really likes - as do i)

Makes the 2.35 i spruiked (and took) a couple of weeks ago seem pretty good

If it's snowing we get frost

I'm in. My tipping name is The Phoenix