| TalkingCarlton http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/ |
|
| Spine-less http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=29691 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | The Normal One [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 10:54 am ] |
| Post subject: | Spine-less |
No not the players, the actual structure that is core to a top 4 side. So against Richmond we were missing Jamo, Bower, Kreuzer, Henderson, Waite (2.5 quarters), yet managed to hold Jack to 6 goals, Richmond's to 19 scoring shots and we in turn had 34 scoring shots. Bottom line was the final result was flattering to Richmond, but that's not what I wanted to talk about. Lets go through some other sides in the AFL and take out the equivilent players (not necessarily equal in talent, but important to structure): Collingwood - Tarrant, Reid, Jolly, Dawes, Cloke (Brown gone for year anyway) St Kilda - Dawson, Fisher, Gardiner, Reiwoldt, Kozi Geelong - Scarlett, Taylor, Ottens, Mooney, Hawkins Hawthorn - Gilham, Gibson, Hale, Buddy, Roughead Adelaide - Rutten, Davis, Maric, Walker, Tippet Essendon* - Fletcher, Pears, Ryder, Hurley, Hooker I think we need to take a bit of perspective into the actual result. KP players are not easy to replace and in our case our next gen are all too young at this stage. Watson could've played, but IMO the MC chose not to play Watson as we already had White (5 games), Laidler (1), Duigan (0), Yarran (22) down back. Mitchell (FWD) and McCarthy are next year. The other altenatives are injured or underdone like the Mexican who lost his car or Austin. What more did we expect from our MC on the night? |
|
| Author: | Donstuie [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 11:00 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Spine-less |
I agree that a lack of KPP really stung us the other night. But this doesn't change the fact that our ball use, tackling and decision making in the 3rd quarter were atrocious, as was a lack of run and willingness to support each other. Simply put, if not for Judd, we'd have been screwed. |
|
| Author: | jimmae [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 11:39 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Spine-less |
Could have easily brought Watson in and swung White or Thornton forward. He would have been fine given the pace of the game. |
|
| Author: | Stamos [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 12:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Spine-less |
I think in hindsight, they would have played Watson instead of Carrots, who was clearly underdone. |
|
| Author: | TheSwan [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 12:17 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Spine-less |
jimmae wrote: Could have easily brought Watson in and swung White or Thornton forward. He would have been fine given the pace of the game. I have to disagree. I don't think Watson would have been fine at all. Reiwoldt is a superstar, it would not have been the smartest move by the coaching staff to expose Watson one on one with Reiwoldt in his 1st game. Watson is better suited to play next round against another youngster. Better to ease him in to AFL. |
|
| Author: | Pafloyul [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 12:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Spine-less |
It's a mixture, though, isn't it? Structure is overrated if you don't have the players to implement it and if both sides are doing the same thing then it comes down to which players can do it better. It's far too early to say much but Thursday's side as named was kind of bizarre and unique; I'd have to say that it has kind of been culminating for a few good years now. The development of last years draftees can't come quickly enough. |
|
| Author: | Nick [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 12:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Spine-less |
Where's Austin? |
|
| Author: | Noonamah Blue [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 12:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Spine-less |
TheSwan wrote: I don't think Watson would have been fine at all. Reiwoldt is a superstar, it would not have been the smartest move by the coaching staff to expose Watson one on one with Reiwoldt in his 1st game. Watson is better suited to play next round against another youngster. Better to ease him in to AFL. Agreed 100%. Love your Avatar . 
|
|
| Author: | bluegirl72 [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 1:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Spine-less |
Noonamah Blue wrote: TheSwan wrote: I don't think Watson would have been fine at all. Reiwoldt is a superstar, it would not have been the smartest move by the coaching staff to expose Watson one on one with Reiwoldt in his 1st game. Watson is better suited to play next round against another youngster. Better to ease him in to AFL. Agreed 100%. Love your Avatar . And I love yours!! (close to the edge...tales from topographic oceans...great artwwork on their albums..takes me back.  )oh..and yeah..agree about Janis too. |
|
| Author: | dannyboy [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 1:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Spine-less |
Ratts went for pace, for run, for midfield. For 3 quarters it smashed Richmond except we could not kick straight Watson would have meant 1 less midfielder yet the structure we had meant we won and should have won by more. I have no complaints about that side. The idea is, given who is available pick a side to win. We did. As for the 3rd - they hurt us in close and out structure was appalling but now having watched 2 replays we held them pretty well when they had the scoring end except for the last 5 minutes and they did the same to us in the last except for the last 8 or so minutes. |
|
| Author: | Rexy [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 2:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Spine-less |
dannyboy wrote: Ratts went for pace, for run, for midfield. For 3 quarters it smashed Richmond except we could not kick straight Watson would have meant 1 less midfielder yet the structure we had meant we won and should have won by more. I have no complaints about that side. The idea is, given who is available pick a side to win. We did. As for the 3rd - they hurt us in close and out structure was appalling but now having watched 2 replays we held them pretty well when they had the scoring end except for the last 5 minutes and they did the same to us in the last except for the last 8 or so minutes. I'd have preferred White as a running/defensive substitute than Lucas and given Watson the opportunity as he performed very well in the NAB Challenge games. Lucas seems down on confidence at the moment and a run in the 2's wouldn't hurt. It's all easy in hindsight though. |
|
| Author: | TheSwan [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 2:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Spine-less |
bluegirl72 wrote: Noonamah Blue wrote: TheSwan wrote: I don't think Watson would have been fine at all. Reiwoldt is a superstar, it would not have been the smartest move by the coaching staff to expose Watson one on one with Reiwoldt in his 1st game. Watson is better suited to play next round against another youngster. Better to ease him in to AFL. Agreed 100%. Love your Avatar . And I love yours!! (close to the edge...tales from topographic oceans...great artwwork on their albums..takes me back. )oh..and yeah..agree about Janis too.
|
|
| Author: | jimmae [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 2:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Spine-less |
TheSwan wrote: jimmae wrote: Could have easily brought Watson in and swung White or Thornton forward. He would have been fine given the pace of the game. I have to disagree. I don't think Watson would have been fine at all. Reiwoldt is a superstar, it would not have been the smartest move by the coaching staff to expose Watson one on one with Reiwoldt in his 1st game. Watson is better suited to play next round against another youngster. Better to ease him in to AFL. I wouldn't have played him on Riewoldt... where did I say that? |
|
| Author: | jimmae [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 3:29 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Spine-less |
dannyboy wrote: Ratts went for pace, for run, for midfield. For 3 quarters it smashed Richmond except we could not kick straight Watson would have meant 1 less midfielder yet the structure we had meant we won and should have won by more. I have no complaints about that side. The idea is, given who is available pick a side to win. We did. As for the 3rd - they hurt us in close and out structure was appalling but now having watched 2 replays we held them pretty well when they had the scoring end except for the last 5 minutes and they did the same to us in the last except for the last 8 or so minutes. Are you telling me that Richmond would have had more marks inside 50 if we had a bloke of genuine size reaching over the top for the spoil? They exploited our short KP backmen. Given our line-up, it would have made sense to have Watson as a sub. Our structure wasn't the problem, it was our lack of speed in moving the ball and willingness to spread and provide an option through midfield that continually killed our inside 50s. We were looking for a dominant aerial target, and while one would have helped (Hammer provided this to an extent), we weren't prepared to sit back a little bit to open up leads or space for a run to shoot at goal. The result was fiddly kicks into the pocket, and no one willing to take the game on to get a decent shot off. |
|
| Author: | dannyboy [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 5:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Spine-less |
to quote yourself jimmae - where did I say that? What I said was Ratts obviously had a plan - it worked. Well done. |
|
| Author: | jimmae [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 5:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Spine-less |
dannyboy wrote: to quote yourself jimmae - where did I say that? What I said was Ratts obviously had a plan - it worked. Well done. Absolutely, but it was a bad plan, and it should be abandoned in favour of a new plan in the next round. |
|
| Author: | dannyboy [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 5:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Spine-less |
a bad plan is when you lose a good plan is when you win |
|
| Author: | jimmae [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 5:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Spine-less |
dannyboy wrote: a bad plan is when you lose a good plan is when you win Can I use the phrase "we need a better plan" without the large blinking light at your desk labelled 'Semantics' going off? 
|
|
| Author: | dannyboy [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 6:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Spine-less |
If we had kicked straight and if Waite had not been knocked out it would have been a better plan |
|
| Author: | jimmae [ Sat Mar 26, 2011 7:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Spine-less |
But my plan is simply having an extra tall up forward and a taller defender down back, then the midfield running a bit harder and smarter. It offers additional run through the sub in the third quarter, counters the loss of Waite and give us easier shots on goal. A superior plan, and not that difficult to implement with a little preparation on the part of the players. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC + 10 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|