DLC wrote:
keogh wrote:
DLC wrote:
Jez1966 wrote:
keogh wrote:
DLC wrote:
kingkerna wrote:
If you criticise it you don't understand it.
Succinct and spot on.
We used tempo footy beautifully against Collingwood to
1Protect the LEAD we had
2 We did for the last 2 minutes or so of the quarters not at the 20 minute mark
This is planB if plan A doesnt work which is moving the ball from the backline with hand and foot.
the chip shit should be plan C
We dont have the cattle to exexcute breaking zones because are foot skills and smarts and run are not good enough
That was a joke on Sat
We were 19 points downIt reminded me of a boxer about to get knocked out.
The knockout punch occured in the third because Geelong knew it was all over at the half. So did we.
W should have lost that game by 100 points if geelong kicked straight
Straight kicking for goal by us helped as well.
38 shots to 17 is a more accurate summation of the game not the 57 point margin.
We must recruit skilled players in the next 2 drafts because I reckon we havent improved that much.
Keogh if it was in the last quarter I would agree with you that it would be a joke however we were approaching half time and they did not want the lead to blow out.
By the way who started the Tempo on Saturday night, it was the captain so he must of felt being out there and not in the stand that we had to slow the game up or we could be going into half time 6-7 goals down.
Agree Jez, Keogh, would you have preferred us to have gone in at half time 50 points down and game over? Geelong were always going to come hard in the third and especially so given that we were still in the game, something that wouldn't have been the case had we not played tempo footy.
Sure we could have started with only a few minutes left on the clock. But that would have been closing the gate after the horse had bolted. I could just imagine the comments that would be written on this site had that happened like 'Why didn't Ratts do something to stop Geelong's momentum?' Well he did do something and it worked.
I guess as an alternative we could have picked a fight (a reknowned tactic for teams lacking skill and smarts) because as you noted above 'we don't have the cattle to execute breaking zones because our foot skills and smarts and run are not good enough' but that would have just fired Geelong up and looked truly pathetic and desperate and possibly resulted in reports (which we just don't need).
So Geelong didn't kick straight and if they had the margin would have been greater. So what. Bad kicking is bad footy, it can lose you games. Essendon* didn't kick straight in the 1999 Preliminary Final if they had we wouldn't have been talking about one of our greatest (and most satisfying wins).
We were well and truly smashed because some of our players dont work hard enough when we dont have the ball.If its not one in all in your flower these days. We have too many passengers.
The last 10 minutes of the half was a reaction to that. geelong were so dominant we had to do it didnt we
. What about addressing the issues that cause the problem in the first place.
Why is there 3 geelong jumpers hanging onto Judd nearly every time he is in a pack. Where is the support in a navy blue top. No where to be seen.
That tactic used properly is extremley effective when used at the right time.
I thought the idea was to win a game of football the best way you can not play kick to kick when your 3 goals down.
And it didnt work. Geelong came out and fired because we basically said to them . We cant win. How can you support that theory is beyond comprehension. We conceded defeat.
Collingwood took the game up to geelong
We didnt
And its because we
1 Have too many soft players
2 A game plan that needs another attacking option
3 Poor kicking
As for bad kicking being no big deal I bet you wouldnt be saying that if the score was
25 8 168
9 8 62
A lot of Geelong's shots were easy misses.
Dont you want the club to address the problems that still exist( we have been shit for 3 weeks) or think that Juddy, and a host of number one picks will bring us to that one day in september.
Think that and your dreaming...
Keogh, yes I do want the club to address the problems we have and I believe they will given time. We're young, we're learning and played a team who are way ahead of us in the development game. It took Thompson 7 seasons to get Geelong to the point they are today and you're expecting our team to have all the answers now
I don't believe being blown away on the scoreboard by half time does anything to further a teams development. You didn't answer the question - 'would you would you have preferred us to have gone in at half time 50 points down and game over?'
I don't believe we conceded defeat by taking that approach. We were taking control of a situation that very quickly could have been out of control. Geelong didn't come out and fire because we basically said to them we can't win. They were always going to come out hard in the third quarter and put the foot down. You have heard of the term the 'Premiership Quarter' to describe the 3rd term where games are won or lost. They had something to prove to themselves and their supporters (that the Collingwood game was just a blip) we just happened to be playing them the week after.
I would rather us try and score than play kick to kick and stop them from scoring unless we were in front and its 2min to go on the clock.
If you think we would be 50 points down at the half then what does that say about your view of the teams deficincies.
So the answer is I would rather have a real crack in kicking forwards than sideways
No doubt things take time
Hampson will take time to develop
So will kreuzer
So will Jacobs if promoted
So long as they are well coached and they do the right things they will develop with a structure from the coaching department when it comes to the ruck division.
Same goes for the defence which has come on heaps
The problem I have is the same problems that have been at the club for a few years arnt being improved on the field.
1 kicking skills and Hughes can share the blame with others on that one
2 The number of guys who refuse to put any real defensive pressure on the opposition and do the one percenters for the team
Collingwood did it and the only guy who didnt buckle was Ablett. Even Selwood was turning over the ball because that was opposition pressure does to any team. It puts doubts into a players head.
You dont put pressure on the opposition by playing kick to kick.
Its ironic that today I bumped into one of the Geelong coaches who said to me that they walked into the rooms at the half knowing the game was won. Unfair to name him but thats official
Pretty pathetic ha
You say the problems take time to fix
Well how long do you give
Stevens
Scotland
Carrazzo
Russell
Houlihan
the opportunity to show how to put on a block a sheperd to dive into a pack to take a hit to chase and gut run to cause turnovers.
You can start adding Murphy to that list as well.
You can partially blame poor onfield leadership for that one except maybe Judd
As I said we need attack option B but we are partially restricted by soft acts from senior guys who have been doing it for years.
They have had enough time.
Login
Register
FAQ
]