Players played their guts out till the end. It was a tough slog. No one threw the towel in.
Our bottom 6 VFL players were carried, and we still only lost by 16 points at a ground every team struggles to win.

I'm not quite as doomsday as Keogh. In fact, we rarely are on the same page but I can't argue with some of his points here. When we need our leaders to step up, they don't do it often enough when momentum goes against us.
Good leaders don't just show their mettle when times are good. It's when the tide is against you that they influence outcomes.

There's lots of comments about our bottom 6 and the performance of Evans, White etc. They're rookies. They're on minimum wages. They are not expected to win us games. They are there to supplement the list and to fill a minor role when required or to develop their deficiencies in the VFL. FWIW, I thought Evans was better than a number of higher credentialed players. He played on Blakey who had his lowest possession tally for the year. Evans did a job and did it well. White had a shocker but he has come a long way in a short time.

The fact is Warner and Heeney took the game away from us. It wasn't White or Evans playing on them, And they didn't just have "their moments". They both made solid contributions where our midfielders had plenty of opportunities to limit their outcomes and couldn't/wouldn't do it.
In the first quarter where we had some clearance ascendancy, it wasn't due to our ground level mids. Of our 9 clearances for the quarter, 8 of them came from Pitto and Harry. It's a pattern that our mids drop off too much and it has a severely detrimental impact on our outcomes. Collingwood second half, Adelaide belting, Sydney loss.

I wasn't at the game so I unfortunately can't give a more accurate assessment of the match ups out of screen but clubs are too often using the captains lack of accountability to beat us. The smart teams are realising you don't tag Cripps. You take away our inside/outside conduit (Walsh) and let your best player burn Cripps going the other way.
Heeney went to Cripps in the third quarter and won first possessions. He'd then drift forward and release a half forward to the midfield and do damage ahead of the ball.
In the last quarter we tried to limit Heeney with Hewett but Heeney once again went to Cripps creating a 2 on 1. It left a Sydney mid free so George had to drop off.
Crippa attended 96% of centre bounces Friday and had 1 centre clearance. It's not sustainable. in fact it's piss poor.
When he's being beaten we need to push him forward and give Lord or someone else the opportunity. He needs to be accountable and recognise his deficiencies. Don't wait for the runner to come out and do what's right for the team.
I felt for Cerra and Hewett. They bust their guts both ways for no reward.
We need to change it up more when we're being exposed. Crippa AND the coaches need to recognise he isn't superman.

So I wouldn't drop Evans. He did his job. He made mistakes but our million dollar a year full forward dropped a sitter in the middle of the ground in the last 4 minutes when the game was there to be won. Not to mention spraying a set shot from 30m, into the pie stand. Walsh again coughed up a defensive 50 stoppage goal and had minimal influence. The captain called Harry out from a ruck contest on the wing when Harry was there and proceeded to give away the free kick. Then failed to show any accountability for the game.
The lesser credentialed players are the easy target.

Good teams have good leadership. Being good in 2 phases of the game and totally disregarding the other isn't leadership.

Players played their guts out till the end. It was a tough slog. No one threw the towel in.
Our bottom 6 VFL players were carried, and we still only lost by 16 points at a ground every team struggles to win.

Well said BV

I've mentioned this before, why does Cripps ruck when he does not need to? He does his best work on the ground, why risk injury? I can understand near the goals as he can grab and kick a goal but he should do no ruck work anywhere else on the ground.

Also, Elijah was struggling, I would like to see him play out of the goal square, he's very good one on one plus he knows where the goals are - mix it up.

We are very predictable.


anywhere else on the gori

And on the note of injuries, remember they had Papley, Gulden, McDonald and Mills missing.

Well said BV

I've mentioned this before, why does Cripps ruck when he does not need to? He does his best work on the ground, why risk injury? I can understand near the goals as he can grab and kick a goal but he should do no ruck work anywhere else on the ground.

Also, Elijah was struggling, I would like to see him play out of the goal square, he's very good one on one plus he knows where the goals are - mix it up.

We are very predictable.


anywhere else on the gori

And on the note of injuries, remember they had Papley, Gulden, McDonald and Mills missing.

Cripps spent the best part of the first quarter getting his ankle restrapped
He was hobbling around on one leg for the best part of the game and could hardly run. but still managed to slip forward and contribute 2 goals. But hell he should have done a better job at tagging Heeney

Sometimes I wonder if posters actually watch the same game or suffer from tall poppy syndrome

We lost this game because we failed to capitalise when the game was in our favour . We had 20 inside 50 to 9 in the first quarter and only put a 1 goal gap on them .
We had four forwards who only contributed 1 goal between them on the back of 54 forward 50 entries.
The issue is not leadership its lack of talent beyond the selected 4 or 5
This is list management
Crippa should have been able to sit the game out in the forward half - But White Durdin Motlop we no going to fill the void left in the midfield . If we had kept Kennedy or Cunningham or Carroll maybe this could have happened but Austin in his Wisdom let them all go.

Don't be sooky Syd. If you post crap, some times it gets called out. And saying I called him "shit" is another lie.

As for tall poppy syndrome, I'm as supportive of the players as anyone. But I'm sick of losing. And I was highlighting the inadequacies of the leaders, not just Cripps. Including the coaches who should have tried other options.
If you have a player attending 96% of centre bounces for 1 centre clearance whilst his opponent cuts us to pieces, strategic changes should be tried. You don't just leave the player there because he's won 2 Brownlows. Personally, I thought he would have been great value in the forward 50 where we were struggling.

I don't understand the conjecture. Heeney and Warner were unanimously voted the best 2 players on ground by both coaches. With Grundy just behind them. We knew from past experience they could tear us a new one and they did.
Yes if we played better or kicked the ball better or our mids played better, they would have had less opportunities or we could have kicked a winning score. But we didn't.
That's the unfortunate reality.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to today's game.

The point made and proved in a few examples by Saba is that Heeney and Warner were the symptom of the underlying problem: skill errors.

He's not saying if mids did this or did that we would win. He's pointing out a major issue we have with this team, whether mids play well or tight or whatever. Houston, we have a problem with our skills, and problem will continue whilst we continue to butcher the ball.

Those 2 players earned the coaches votes, I have no issue with that, but we would have quelled their influence, and result if we were better with our skills, alone. ie Turnover killed us. We literally gave the ball to Heeney and Warner.

Sure, if we played better and marked those two better (crippa), we would have given ourselves a better chance to win, but if we can't execute, our skills are going to continue to hurt us. The point Saba is making is not a Heeney or Warner issue. Skills is a huge issue he is highlighting. That's what the stats show too. Some of our players can't hit targets. It hurts us.