Talking Carlton Index Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington Lochie O'Brien Kerryn Harrington CFC Home CFC Membership CFC Shop CFC Fixture Blueseum
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 8:54 pm

All times are UTC + 10 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 177 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2020 10:53 am 
Offline
Geoff Southby
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 1:55 pm
Posts: 5461
billc3 wrote:
17th Premiership wrote:
I hope we played hard and as we wanted to play in the first half and then experimented a bit more in the 2nd half.
The commentators all noted how little Neale had of the ball early I think with E Curnow on him. Then Neale fires up in the 2nd half, I think Curnow no longer on him (but I'm not sure if that's true).
So, it was definitely dispiritiing in the 2nd half but hopefully part of the plan was to use the practice matches to try a few things that we won't be able to do once next Thursday rolls around.
Hopefully.
That's the way I saw it.
Post match 'reading between the lines' coaches were very happy with first half.. Tried some things on in the second

Sent from my CPH1979 using Tapatalk


Assuming both of you are correct with your optimism, I only have one question.
If the marketing department of the club and the powers to be are pushing so hard to hit 70k members. Why would the coaches then let the team get a 70 plus point turnaround/flogging in the second half, when winning or even coming close to winning would generate more sales to hit that target before round 1?
Not to mention supporter morale and attendance to the round 1 game.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2020 11:23 am 
Offline
Harry Vallence

Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 1:39 pm
Posts: 1002
Sidefx wrote:
billc3 wrote:
17th Premiership wrote:
I hope we played hard and as we wanted to play in the first half and then experimented a bit more in the 2nd half.
The commentators all noted how little Neale had of the ball early I think with E Curnow on him. Then Neale fires up in the 2nd half, I think Curnow no longer on him (but I'm not sure if that's true).
So, it was definitely dispiritiing in the 2nd half but hopefully part of the plan was to use the practice matches to try a few things that we won't be able to do once next Thursday rolls around.
Hopefully.
That's the way I saw it.
Post match 'reading between the lines' coaches were very happy with first half.. Tried some things on in the second

Sent from my CPH1979 using Tapatalk


Assuming both of you are correct with your optimism, I only have one question.
If the marketing department of the club and the powers to be are pushing so hard to hit 70k members. Why would the coaches then let the team get a 70 plus point turnaround/flogging in the second half, when winning or even coming close to winning would generate more sales to hit that target before round 1?
Not to mention supporter morale and attendance to the round 1 game.


Because the coaches are only wanting to look at the season proper, the praccy matches allow you look at possibilities during the season for players in different positions.

What it did show is that if we have a poor run of injury, we don't have a lot of coverage in reserve.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2020 11:30 am 
Offline
Geoff Southby
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 1:55 pm
Posts: 5461
Steve_C7 wrote:
Sidefx wrote:
billc3 wrote:
17th Premiership wrote:
I hope we played hard and as we wanted to play in the first half and then experimented a bit more in the 2nd half.
The commentators all noted how little Neale had of the ball early I think with E Curnow on him. Then Neale fires up in the 2nd half, I think Curnow no longer on him (but I'm not sure if that's true).
So, it was definitely dispiritiing in the 2nd half but hopefully part of the plan was to use the practice matches to try a few things that we won't be able to do once next Thursday rolls around.
Hopefully.
That's the way I saw it.
Post match 'reading between the lines' coaches were very happy with first half.. Tried some things on in the second

Sent from my CPH1979 using Tapatalk


Assuming both of you are correct with your optimism, I only have one question.
If the marketing department of the club and the powers to be are pushing so hard to hit 70k members. Why would the coaches then let the team get a 70 plus point turnaround/flogging in the second half, when winning or even coming close to winning would generate more sales to hit that target before round 1?
Not to mention supporter morale and attendance to the round 1 game.


Because the coaches are only wanting to look at the season proper, the praccy matches allow you look at possibilities during the season for players in different positions.

What it did show is that if we have a poor run of injury, we don't have a lot of coverage in reserve.


I agree the coaches are looking to the season proper. But a 10+ goal turnaround is a bit rich for any testing.

And I also agree if we have any injury (especially 1 in particular), we're screwed.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2020 11:34 am 
Offline
Geoff Southby
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2007 9:09 pm
Posts: 5826
What are the new things we tried which allowed Brisbane to get on top? I was at the ground and I haven’t watched the replay. To be honest, I didn’t spot many radical changes or guys playing in unfamiliar positions. Polson was brought on early in the last quarter, but Brisbane had been on top for over a quarter by then. I don’t know how it looked on TV, but I thought we looked gone by 3/4 time and what happened in the last quarter was very predictable.

So what happened between the 20ish minute mark of the 2nd term and 3/4 time?

Did our centre square personnel change? Kreuzer, Murphy & Ed Curnow spent time out of there, but that was the case at times in the first half too.

It looked to me like Brisbane simply went up a gear about 10 minutes before halftime and we couldn’t go with them. We really struggled to score from that point and our defence was gradually worn down until the floodgates opened in the final term.

I accept it may have been a fitness thing - eg. Brisbane maybe at a different stage in its training cycle (loads etc), and/or higher player rotations during the game by Brisbane allowed them to finish quarters better (while we wanted to teach our players to endure etc) - but I’m unconvinced by the “we were experimenting” argument as a get out for what was a poor performance after the first 45 minutes. If anything, the lack of experimentation was noticeable when things started to turn pear shaped (eg. did SOJ or Betts go into the middle at any stage? why not try Setterfield and Fisher in different roles?).

If our performance wasn’t the result of player management, then I think we need to face some harsh realities about what the game taught us. We are supposed to learn things from these practice matches after all.

_________________
It's never as good as it looks and it's never as bad as it seems.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2020 12:02 pm 
Offline
Robert Walls

Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 10:27 am
Posts: 3581
Roughly, from what I saw

Curnow stopped the hard tag on Neale
The centre square starting comprising combos like Dow, Fisher and Martin Vs Neale, Zorko and Berry.
Cripps was sent for periods at FF and spent more time on the bench.
Murphy, I'm not even sure where he went but not used in the centre much at all
The intensity also dropped right off.
We used 2 less rotations off the bench for the entire match. What happened after 3/4 time was predicted, by me, because fatigue in comparison to the Lions was setting in, which is why the intensity also dropped in my opinion.
We gave our second string guys a go in the middle, against Brisbane's best and they could no compete. They have a lot of work to do.

I don't understand why Setterfield wasn't given a go a few times in the centre... That was odd.

For me it just showed our next tier haven't yet developed enough, which is a concern. But if we play our best players in the right positions, like the last 11 round last year and the first half against Brisbane, we will be an OK team.

Luke Power has a lot of work to do.


Last edited by toddkurnski on Tue Mar 10, 2020 12:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2020 12:02 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko

Joined: Sat May 14, 2005 2:15 pm
Posts: 20207
Location: North of the border
aboynamedsue wrote:
What are the new things we tried which allowed Brisbane to get on top? I was at the ground and I haven’t watched the replay. To be honest, I didn’t spot many radical changes or guys playing in unfamiliar positions. Polson was brought on early in the last quarter, but Brisbane had been on top for over a quarter by then. I don’t know how it looked on TV, but I thought we looked gone by 3/4 time and what happened in the last quarter was very predictable.

So what happened between the 20ish minute mark of the 2nd term and 3/4 time?

Did our centre square personnel change? Kreuzer, Murphy & Ed Curnow spent time out of there, but that was the case at times in the first half too.

It looked to me like Brisbane simply went up a gear about 10 minutes before halftime and we couldn’t go with them. We really struggled to score from that point and our defence was gradually worn down until the floodgates opened in the final term.

I accept it may have been a fitness thing - eg. Brisbane maybe at a different stage in its training cycle (loads etc), and/or higher player rotations during the game by Brisbane allowed them to finish quarters better (while we wanted to teach our players to endure etc) - but I’m unconvinced by the “we were experimenting” argument as a get out for what was a poor performance after the first 45 minutes. If anything, the lack of experimentation was noticeable when things started to turn pear shaped (eg. did SOJ or Betts go into the middle at any stage? why not try Setterfield and Fisher in different roles?).

If our performance wasn’t the result of player management, then I think we need to face some harsh realities about what the game taught us. We are supposed to learn things from these practice matches after all.


they got 2-3 questionable decisions that went their way late in the 3rd quarter - then they fluked the kick off the ground and a minute later simpson was penalised in the goal square and they pulled up stumps. If you watch the next couple of minutes on replay you will see Levi being held back exactly the same as what Simpson did and no penalty

It was pretty clear to me - Marchbank went down - Mcgovern was off - Murphy was off and Plowman rolled his ankle -you even saw The Doc shirk a contest the message must have been sent bruise free footy fellars

_________________
If you allow the Government to change the Laws in an emergency
They will create an Emergency to change the Laws


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2020 1:28 pm 
Online
Rod Ashman

Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:22 am
Posts: 2434
TBH the seasons half together with our performance against Freo has left me worried.
My hope above that we were trying things etc... is a hope that would mean things are better than they might appear.
And Teague last year convinced me that he is a strategic coach so it does make sense that he would use the opportunity to try some things.
But optimism is what keeps me watching this team for 25yrs of dismal performance following my first 25yrs of consistent success.
I think everyone realises that our potential is great - the value question is whether we can reach that potential.
Most people were writing off the Tigers altogether three years ago - I thought they’d never make it without going back to the drawing board. And now we’re talking about a likely Tigers dynasty!
And GWS is now performing at the highest level after years of showing signs but not delivering.
I feel like we have put together the right players and coaches, and now we need to see it gel.
But mostly hope at this stage.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2020 5:24 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:35 am
Posts: 17517
toddkurnski wrote:
Roughly, from what I saw

Curnow stopped the hard tag on Neale
The centre square starting comprising combos like Dow, Fisher and Martin Vs Neale, Zorko and Berry.
Cripps was sent for periods at FF and spent more time on the bench.
Murphy, I'm not even sure where he went but not used in the centre much at all
The intensity also dropped right off.
We used 2 less rotations off the bench for the entire match. What happened after 3/4 time was predicted, by me, because fatigue in comparison to the Lions was setting in, which is why the intensity also dropped in my opinion.
We gave our second string guys a go in the middle, against Brisbane's best and they could no compete. They have a lot of work to do.


Correct. The first half was our best team in their preferred positions.
After that we gave opportunities, dropped tags, rested players etc.
As for new things we tried, one I noticed was pushing Simmo to start defensive side of the wing and run Fish in off the back of the square at a centre bounce. Simmo then ran to put the block on and then resumed the half back role.
Yes there was a drop in intensity and we fell away badly in the last 5 minutes but if the players understand what we were trying too achieve and retain confidence in our best footy, I'm still quietly confident about Thursday week.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2020 5:29 pm 
Online
Rod Ashman

Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 5:16 pm
Posts: 2744
Location: addis ababa, Ethiopia
If the second half was all about experiment then we have learned not to do that again. It would have helped if some of our 'experiments' actually improved our performance.
I think it is less about serious experimentation and more about game time and loads...(eg rest Cripps at ff and give fish a run in the middle)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2020 5:57 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko

Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:03 am
Posts: 22924
Location: Bondi Beach
I wasn't at the game, but I did watch the game 3 and a bit times now (its been raining) to find some set ups that led to success and failure.

I keep going back to the first half for success, when everyone was 'on', and committed to the contest. There was always someone there for the handball receive. Clockwork.

Sydney Blue keeps referring to umpire frees, and that was obvious too...in Brizzy's favour.

Red time is when the goals were kicked against us in the first half.
Take red time goals and we win.

Winning- losing is not the point.
Did we show anything? Bloody oath we did: good and bad.

It wasn't Setterfield who didnt want to go into the centre bounce.
The set ups were obviously designed by the MC to see what happens.

I think the bounce went their way in the 3rd Q and all of the last. That's all.

The only thing I'm worried about is depth if injuries occu to our experienced mids.
Maybe Dow Setters Fish do step up...but they need strong bodies around them to block and bash.

I too feel there wasn't much experimentation and I know from the past Teague will make moves towin games.
He didn't in this case and that mus say something.

The tag by Curnow on Neale made a huge difference, when it was on.
Cripps in the midfield made a huge difference....and Dow complimented.
Levi in the ruck unusually saw us lose nearly every centre ball up. Wont happen again.

I'm confident we have some fire power and personnel to win games...without Charlie and Harry.

I know nothing that transpired in the Recerves game other than like the seniors it was a game of 2 halves.
Is SPS ready? Cunners? Willo?

Its anyone's guess who will be selected. I trust Russell more than anything.

I hope DeKoning is selected and played from the bench for cameos. He will surprise.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2020 6:05 pm 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 10:35 am
Posts: 17517
Arnhem blues wrote:
If the second half was all about experiment then we have learned not to do that again. It would have helped if some of our 'experiments' actually improved our performance.


Giving midfield time to youngsters is looking to the future. It was never going to improve the performance. Dow, Fish and Martin wont have the same output as Cripps, Murphy and Curnow but they need game time against quality opposition. It also gives them a taste of what's required when you're not relying on the big dogs to carry the load.
That's what practice games are for.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2020 6:07 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:00 pm
Posts: 24282
Location: Kaloyasena
Blue Vain wrote:
Arnhem blues wrote:
If the second half was all about experiment then we have learned not to do that again. It would have helped if some of our 'experiments' actually improved our performance.


Giving midfield time to youngsters is looking to the future. It was never going to improve the performance. Dow, Fish and Martin wont have the same output as Cripps, Murphy and Curnow but they need game time against quality opposition. It also gives them a taste of what's required when you're not relying on the big dogs to carry the load.
That's what practice games are for.



Dow, Fisher and others were given ample taste of it in the first half of the 2019 season.


We already know from that, thAt they are not able to win it out of the centre (yet) against bigger body mids.


I agree that they should be given minutes in the middle but individually not together.

_________________
"Hence you will not say that Greeks fight like heroes but that heroes fight like Greeks"?

Winston Churchill


Last edited by AGRO on Tue Mar 10, 2020 6:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2020 6:09 pm 
Online
Rod Ashman

Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2011 5:16 pm
Posts: 2744
Location: addis ababa, Ethiopia
Blue Vain wrote:
Arnhem blues wrote:
If the second half was all about experiment then we have learned not to do that again. It would have helped if some of our 'experiments' actually improved our performance.


Giving midfield time to youngsters is looking to the future. It was never going to improve the performance. Dow, Fish and Martin wont have the same output as Cripps, Murphy and Curnow but they need game time against quality opposition. It also gives them a taste of what's required when you're not relying on the big dogs to carry the load.
That's what practice games are for.


Yep agree with that. Was more commenting on the idea that we were trialling new things to see if they worked.
I have no problem with using praccy matches to build game time and experience.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2020 10:13 pm 
Offline
Mike Fitzpatrick
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:41 pm
Posts: 4538
Steve_C7 wrote:
Sidefx wrote:
billc3 wrote:
17th Premiership wrote:
I hope we played hard and as we wanted to play in the first half and then experimented a bit more in the 2nd half.
The commentators all noted how little Neale had of the ball early I think with E Curnow on him. Then Neale fires up in the 2nd half, I think Curnow no longer on him (but I'm not sure if that's true).
So, it was definitely dispiritiing in the 2nd half but hopefully part of the plan was to use the practice matches to try a few things that we won't be able to do once next Thursday rolls around.
Hopefully.
That's the way I saw it.
Post match 'reading between the lines' coaches were very happy with first half.. Tried some things on in the second

Sent from my CPH1979 using Tapatalk


Assuming both of you are correct with your optimism, I only have one question.
If the marketing department of the club and the powers to be are pushing so hard to hit 70k members. Why would the coaches then let the team get a 70 plus point turnaround/flogging in the second half, when winning or even coming close to winning would generate more sales to hit that target before round 1?
Not to mention supporter morale and attendance to the round 1 game.


Because the coaches are only wanting to look at the season proper, the praccy matches allow you look at possibilities during the season for players in different positions.

What it did show is that if we have a poor run of injury, we don't have a lot of coverage in reserve.


Agree here SC7

Sidefx
My reference was to the coaches comments, but there were plenty of weird plays which I hope would be trialling.
Just some...
Polson on Cameron... (why not drop a loose in defence)
Long kick out to SOJ (on two?)
Eddie handball to running Newnes (didn't work and I doubt Newnes will be our go to Tuohy)
TDK in the ruck (worked well)
Murphy rested...
Handballing, overlapping in defence (not running overlap like the first half, short 'traingle' drill like)
..
I'm sure there's more, they're a few I noticed...


Go Blues

_________________
“Every single element of the Club has to be the best in the league, meticulously and methodically, and only by doing this will we be elite and challenge for number 17.”
Greg Lee


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2020 10:14 am 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko

Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:03 am
Posts: 22924
Location: Bondi Beach
billc3 wrote:
Steve_C7 wrote:
Sidefx wrote:
billc3 wrote:
17th Premiership wrote:
I hope we played hard and as we wanted to play in the first half and then experimented a bit more in the 2nd half.
The commentators all noted how little Neale had of the ball early I think with E Curnow on him. Then Neale fires up in the 2nd half, I think Curnow no longer on him (but I'm not sure if that's true).
So, it was definitely dispiritiing in the 2nd half but hopefully part of the plan was to use the practice matches to try a few things that we won't be able to do once next Thursday rolls around.
Hopefully.
That's the way I saw it.
Post match 'reading between the lines' coaches were very happy with first half.. Tried some things on in the second

Sent from my CPH1979 using Tapatalk


Assuming both of you are correct with your optimism, I only have one question.
If the marketing department of the club and the powers to be are pushing so hard to hit 70k members. Why would the coaches then let the team get a 70 plus point turnaround/flogging in the second half, when winning or even coming close to winning would generate more sales to hit that target before round 1?
Not to mention supporter morale and attendance to the round 1 game.


Because the coaches are only wanting to look at the season proper, the praccy matches allow you look at possibilities during the season for players in different positions.

What it did show is that if we have a poor run of injury, we don't have a lot of coverage in reserve.


Agree here SC7

Sidefx
My reference was to the coaches comments, but there were plenty of weird plays which I hope would be trialling.
Just some...
Polson on Cameron... (why not drop a loose in defence)
Long kick out to SOJ (on two?)
Eddie handball to running Newnes (didn't work and I doubt Newnes will be our go to Tuohy)
TDK in the ruck (worked well)
Murphy rested...
Handballing, overlapping in defence (not running overlap like the first half, short 'traingle' drill like)
..
I'm sure there's more, they're a few I noticed...


Go Blues


Thanks for sharing your observation billc.
There's plenty more to look for. Will do.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2020 4:01 pm 
Offline
Geoff Southby
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 1:55 pm
Posts: 5461
billc3 wrote:
Steve_C7 wrote:
Sidefx wrote:
billc3 wrote:
17th Premiership wrote:
I hope we played hard and as we wanted to play in the first half and then experimented a bit more in the 2nd half.
The commentators all noted how little Neale had of the ball early I think with E Curnow on him. Then Neale fires up in the 2nd half, I think Curnow no longer on him (but I'm not sure if that's true).
So, it was definitely dispiritiing in the 2nd half but hopefully part of the plan was to use the practice matches to try a few things that we won't be able to do once next Thursday rolls around.
Hopefully.
That's the way I saw it.
Post match 'reading between the lines' coaches were very happy with first half.. Tried some things on in the second

Sent from my CPH1979 using Tapatalk


Assuming both of you are correct with your optimism, I only have one question.
If the marketing department of the club and the powers to be are pushing so hard to hit 70k members. Why would the coaches then let the team get a 70 plus point turnaround/flogging in the second half, when winning or even coming close to winning would generate more sales to hit that target before round 1?
Not to mention supporter morale and attendance to the round 1 game.


Because the coaches are only wanting to look at the season proper, the praccy matches allow you look at possibilities during the season for players in different positions.

What it did show is that if we have a poor run of injury, we don't have a lot of coverage in reserve.


Agree here SC7

Sidefx
My reference was to the coaches comments, but there were plenty of weird plays which I hope would be trialling.
Just some...
Polson on Cameron... (why not drop a loose in defence)
Long kick out to SOJ (on two?)
Eddie handball to running Newnes (didn't work and I doubt Newnes will be our go to Tuohy)
TDK in the ruck (worked well)
Murphy rested...
Handballing, overlapping in defence (not running overlap like the first half, short 'traingle' drill like)
..
I'm sure there's more, they're a few I noticed...


Go Blues


While I see where you are going with this, none of those would attribute to such a large turnaround. And we do these plays in the regular season anyway.
Except putting Polson on anyone. :)
Even Teague in his interview with 3AW didn't use any excuses of trialling different things. He attributed it to the Lions stepping it up and us not being able to keep up with them.
https://www.carltonfc.com.au/news/57442 ... on-verdict
Let's hope he is playing coaching games with the media and we come out firing for a win in round 1.
As it has been stated, hope is all we have now the confidence has been knocked the hell out of us.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 13, 2020 6:47 am 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 10:56 am
Posts: 19501
Location: Progreso, Yucatan, MEXICO
AGRO wrote:
Blue Vain wrote:
Arnhem blues wrote:
If the second half was all about experiment then we have learned not to do that again. It would have helped if some of our 'experiments' actually improved our performance.


Giving midfield time to youngsters is looking to the future. It was never going to improve the performance. Dow, Fish and Martin wont have the same output as Cripps, Murphy and Curnow but they need game time against quality opposition. It also gives them a taste of what's required when you're not relying on the big dogs to carry the load.
That's what practice games are for.



Dow, Fisher and others were given ample taste of it in the first half of the 2019 season.


We already know from that, thAt they are not able to win it out of the centre (yet) against bigger body mids.


I agree that they should be given minutes in the middle but individually not together.

I think they need more than an individual minute. They need multiple minutes.

_________________
Let slip the Blues of war (with apologies to William Shakespeare) (and Sir Francis Bacon, just in case)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 177 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

All times are UTC + 10 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 33mcconville and 54 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group