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 Fri Mar 29, 2024 10:17 pm

All times are UTC + 10 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 227 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 9:45 am 
Offline
Craig Bradley

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:36 am
Posts: 7781
Jonosc1 wrote:
Just watched the press conference. Can anyone remember a coach refer more to playing our way. We need to be able to play, and score when we can’t or are not allowed to play our way.


I agree with your point. But most young coaches tend to be pretty repetitive. Ratts used to drive me bonkers with his 'we came to play' or 'we didn't come to play'.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 9:47 am 
Offline
Craig Bradley

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 9:36 am
Posts: 7781
club29 wrote:
We didn't get value for our elite pressure on the scoreboard. The forward press did not bear fruit as it should. Well played to Collingwood for absorbing the onslaught and then cashing in once we were cooked. The extra ruck is not worth it if we are trying the relentless pressure game.


While I agree with your point, it's interesting that Collingwood played an extra ruckman as well (who didn't do much).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 9:53 am 
Offline
Stephen Kernahan
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 11:53 am
Posts: 16661
Location: Left Cuckistan
I got a mini-excavator bogged today (and had to get the thing winched out) because I was in a rush and trying to get a job in the yard finished in time to watch this shit. I guess my decision making was pretty much on point for the team today so I won't be too harsh. cauliflower.

_________________
The only way for some people to understand is for them to be on the receiving end

Left wing moralists
In self serving denial
They shit me no end


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 10:36 am 
Offline
Adrian Gallagher
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:26 am
Posts: 88
Stefchook wrote:
SackedByMack wrote:
I really don't see what Dow brings to the table. Everyone keeps saying how quick he is but you'd never know it from watching yesterdays game. Not strong enough to tackle and not good enough by hand or foot.


I no longer think strength is the issue, it's the want to tackle and apply pressure. He needs reprogramming, so he no longer sees defensive pressure as optional.

I thought we had brought back Jordan Russell...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 10:55 am 
Offline
Wayne Johnston

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 11:52 am
Posts: 8928
Location: Nth Fitzroy
Stefchook wrote:
club29 wrote:
We didn't get value for our elite pressure on the scoreboard. The forward press did not bear fruit as it should. Well played to Collingwood for absorbing the onslaught and then cashing in once we were cooked. The extra ruck is not worth it if we are trying the relentless pressure game.


While I agree with your point, it's interesting that Collingwood played an extra ruckman as well (who didn't do much).


We had an extra tall player. H, Caz, Pitt and TDK is too many and over the course of the day left us short of run / energy pressure wise.
We got overrun because we used up all our tickets banging our head against a brick wall for 3 quarters . Credit to Collingwood. Most other teams would have conceded goals in the 3rd when we were tightening the screws. They were incredibly hard to score against after half time.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 11:04 am 
Offline
Craig Bradley

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 12:38 pm
Posts: 7640
43 to 40 inside 50s in Carltons favour
13 scores from 43 entries shows the quality of entries into 50 and the dysfunctionality of our forward line
Tidy both of those up and work harder around the ball game is a lot closer

Need to get these right

Inconsistency over 4 quarters is killing us


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 12:06 pm 
Offline
Robert Walls

Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 1:40 pm
Posts: 3280
In some respects this reminded me most of the St. Kilda loss. Another team we always struggle to match-up with, and we looked 'off' from the first bounce. Like the 9-day break and all the back-and-forth had left us a little flat. Players were getting stuck over the ball and unable to pick it up cleanly off the deck all day. Partially this was Collingwood's pressure, but even early we just couldn't be clean where we have been pretty clean the last month.

I appreciate everyone's frustration with this loss, as I am also frustrated in a way I have not been this season. We've actually been okay for seven weeks - basically since the Saints loss. We followed that up with our best win of the season vs. The Dogs. Then a pulsating narrow loss against the top-of-table Port. A solid win against North. The Hawks game... we played very well in that game for a period before being overwhelmed by an opponent that got on a roll. The Eagles loss - we played really well that day and it didn't work out against one of the better teams in the comp. We then out-played Freo for three quarters and snatched a game in shit conditions before easily accounting for Gold Coast in different shit conditions, and despite extreme inaccuracy.

So we've been up for a while, even if we haven't got the results we wanted. Looking across the competition, that's par for the course outside of maybe the Eagles (and their are question marks over their ability to win on the road), Port (who are very good, but have had some narrow wins lately), The Cats (who are on a genuine roll), The Tigers (also on a roll, but also having some narrow wins) and Brisbane (inaccuracy is harming their chances). Everyone else in the comp, bar North and Adelaide are 'thereabouts'. Teams who can win on their day. We fit into this category.

Speaking specifically about this game, it's interesting... We have had a settled back seven for 90% of the season. We made a change to it and they played as poorly as they have since the first quarter of the Melbourne game. We have mostly eliminated mistakes from kick-outs and handling errors in the backline this year, but we made all of them yesterday. Gifting goals from shit kick-ins and loose handballs under pressure...
Jones did okay on Cox (who the Pies actually used well for a change). Weitering took care of Mihocek, but I also think Mihocek drew Weitering out of the hole, which is why Plowman was forced to play Stephenson looser than he'd like. Plow seemed to be playing off his man so that he could drop into the space in front of Cox because Weitering was elsewhere. This allowed Stephenson the room he needed, and the Pies were good enough to get it to him. Williamson tries to do too much sometimes. Docherty was pretty good. Simmo fairly anonymous and Polson made no difference at all. If he's going to be a running defender, surely he has to run and then hit targets?

I think Pittonet's output has dropped since they picked De Koning. Pitto was anonymous all day, except for the period late in the second where we got on top in the centre, and he attended a couple of those centre-bounces. I'd drop Pittonet except I'm not sure you'd want to ruck De Koning all day. I'm not sure he's up to it yet. De Koning was good, but it'd be nice if he took a couple of those marks inside forward 50, and not just the ones further afield. Also, I think Casboult plays better when he get a run in the ruck. It can get him off his opponent and allows him to crash into blokes a bit and just get involved. Hes been down for a month, I reckon. Also just about the length of time De Koning has been in the team...

We base a huge amount of our game on locking the ball in the forward 50 and trying to generate scoring shots from pressure. This is a good strategy when it pays off, and honestly, depending on the umpires. If you have a trigger-happy umpire you can get some cheap shots at goal. We were unlucky against West Coast - we generated so much pressure in the forward 50, laying tackle after tackle and it all went unrewarded. Same yesterday in the 3rd Q, except I think that Collingwood actually didn't infringe and their reciprocal pressure was maybe even better than ours. Every time we shoved the ball out the next possession was under-the-pump, even when we retreated to 60 meters out where the defenders were zoned. That's great discipline from Collingwood. None of their forwards wandered off to let their man get a kick. So we generated very little from our pressure - except in the first quarter: Walsh's goal was from forward-line pressure. As an aside we've done this a lot this year. There have been long periods of play, especially in the third quarter, where we lock the ball in and spend huge amounts of energy and effort for little return. The Melbourne game comes to mind again. Even with Betts (who is not the player he was, and we cannot expect him to be), we lack natural forwards in this regard. Blokes with x-factor. Charlie Curnow has it, Fisher has a bit of it... maybe Cunningham. Guys who can turn a half-chance into a goal.

Interestingly we must have had an instruction to not just attack the goals. I have a feeling that Collingwood generate lots of scoring from the backline, so we were trying very hard not to just score points and hand the ball over. They highlighted how little of the ball Maynard and Moore had at half-time, so we'd clearly worked on getting them out of the game. And in not just having a ping at the goals in the third, we were continuing to try and avoid handing the ball over. Unfortunately, as we became more desperate and kept on banging the ball forward, we started to do just that. Collingwood was much more disciplined in getting an extra tall into the hole so that our tall forwards were outnumbered. Then they took intercept marks, and started chains of possession. And our small forwards drifted up the ground trying to get involved and so Maynard and Quaynor started to get the footy in space.

I don't rate Cripps as highly as a lot of people do, and I think he's struggling. I'm not for giving him a rest or putting the cue in the rack. He's a professional footballer, and a well-paid one as well. I strained my voice bellowing in disgust at Martin when he [REDACTED] up passing it to Cripps. Not just for the poor execution, but the target. And I left the room to get a drink when Cripps took the mark late in the game. I knew what was going to happen. With Martin (50/50), Cripps (hopeless), Dow (historically bad), Casboult (better from far out), Murphy (who is still good on the run) and McKay (50/50) in the side... There's just too little confidence they'll actually kick the goals when they get opportunities.

So, a disappointing day at the office. I'm not as despondent as some folks, but I will admit to basically composing this post in the pre-dawn hours when I was laying in bed unable to sleep and all I could think about was the footy. I think it will be an interesting match-up with GWS.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 12:22 pm 
Offline
Craig Bradley

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 12:38 pm
Posts: 7640
Good measured post Blue Champion


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 12:28 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence

Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 1:03 pm
Posts: 1807
Location: Brisbane, QLD
frank dardew wrote:
Good measured post Blue Champion

+1

The sky isn't falling...yet. Last season we wouldn't have even been particularly upset with a loss like this...show's there's some upside but still a long way to go.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 12:30 pm 
Offline
Geoff Southby
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 11:38 am
Posts: 5743
Location: home
Now that I'm calmer, The 4th Quarter was the real disappointment yesterday. The 3rd we played pretty well and largely controlled i thought but failed to capitalise on it. if we carried that momentum into the last we may have had a shot and broken down the Pies defence. The 4th was diabolical, especially given the stakes.

Despite our "highlights" in our backline and forward line. The midfield is where we lost this game and got owned by a 2nd string Pies midfield. We continued to leave the corridor open for the pies to launch off half back after doing our normal bomb it to Moore forward strategy.

Surely we can get one of our forwards to lead if we want to go top of goal square to take the oppositions key intercepter away from the contest. If they don't follow we have a target to hit up, if they do, go to the top of the square with one key target and smalls at their feet.

_________________
The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help.

Ronald Reagan


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 12:44 pm 
Offline
Craig Bradley

Joined: Wed Oct 12, 2005 9:21 pm
Posts: 7749
killpies wrote:
Now that I'm calmer, The 4th Quarter was the real disappointment yesterday. The 3rd we played pretty well and largely controlled i thought but failed to capitalise on it. if we carried that momentum into the last we may have had a shot and broken down the Pies defence. The 4th was diabolical, especially given the stakes.

Despite our "highlights" in our backline and forward line. The midfield is where we lost this game and got owned by a 2nd string Pies midfield. We continued to leave the corridor open for the pies to launch off half back after doing our normal bomb it to Moore forward strategy.

Surely we can get one of our forwards to lead if we want to go top of goal square to take the oppositions key intercepter away from the contest. If they don't follow we have a target to hit up, if they do, go to the top of the square with one key target and smalls at their feet.


Unfortunately the 4th qtr was a case of shitting out pants playing for such big stakes. Disappointing but can only help development playing under such cut throat conditions. It was our biggest game since the 2013 EF/SF's. Physically good for it, mentally not ready. I'm just happy being in the running for a finals spot this far into the season. Just hope we've learnt something for Thursday night, although a 4 day break makes it tough. A win there and we are still into it up to our ears, especially with Sydney and Adelaide to follow. We weren't going to win the last 5 anyway and was counting/hoping we won 3 of them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 1:54 pm 
Offline
Bert Deacon

Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2015 3:51 pm
Posts: 546
i only gave us a chance because of the 4 key players coll had missing,but the common thread here is once a side starts to run with quick ball movement we are DONE, why do you think rich have been beating us ,saints,hawks , cats played 8mins of footy and should have won also. For me this all starts from our stupid u12 game plan of bombing the ball long into our f50 and so so we don't mark the ball and we just watch the opposition run it out. Teague needs different game plan /style for 21.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 2:04 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko

Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:03 am
Posts: 22935
Location: Bondi Beach
bluechampion wrote:
In some respects this reminded me most of the St. Kilda loss. Another team we always struggle to match-up with, and we looked 'off' from the first bounce. Like the 9-day break and all the back-and-forth had left us a little flat. Players were getting stuck over the ball and unable to pick it up cleanly off the deck all day. Partially this was Collingwood's pressure, but even early we just couldn't be clean where we have been pretty clean the last month.

I appreciate everyone's frustration with this loss, as I am also frustrated in a way I have not been this season. We've actually been okay for seven weeks - basically since the Saints loss. We followed that up with our best win of the season vs. The Dogs. Then a pulsating narrow loss against the top-of-table Port. A solid win against North. The Hawks game... we played very well in that game for a period before being overwhelmed by an opponent that got on a roll. The Eagles loss - we played really well that day and it didn't work out against one of the better teams in the comp. We then out-played Freo for three quarters and snatched a game in shit conditions before easily accounting for Gold Coast in different shit conditions, and despite extreme inaccuracy.

So we've been up for a while, even if we haven't got the results we wanted. Looking across the competition, that's par for the course outside of maybe the Eagles (and their are question marks over their ability to win on the road), Port (who are very good, but have had some narrow wins lately), The Cats (who are on a genuine roll), The Tigers (also on a roll, but also having some narrow wins) and Brisbane (inaccuracy is harming their chances). Everyone else in the comp, bar North and Adelaide are 'thereabouts'. Teams who can win on their day. We fit into this category.

Speaking specifically about this game, it's interesting... We have had a settled back seven for 90% of the season. We made a change to it and they played as poorly as they have since the first quarter of the Melbourne game. We have mostly eliminated mistakes from kick-outs and handling errors in the backline this year, but we made all of them yesterday. Gifting goals from shit kick-ins and loose handballs under pressure...
Jones did okay on Cox (who the Pies actually used well for a change). Weitering took care of Mihocek, but I also think Mihocek drew Weitering out of the hole, which is why Plowman was forced to play Stephenson looser than he'd like. Plow seemed to be playing off his man so that he could drop into the space in front of Cox because Weitering was elsewhere. This allowed Stephenson the room he needed, and the Pies were good enough to get it to him. Williamson tries to do too much sometimes. Docherty was pretty good. Simmo fairly anonymous and Polson made no difference at all. If he's going to be a running defender, surely he has to run and then hit targets?

I think Pittonet's output has dropped since they picked De Koning. Pitto was anonymous all day, except for the period late in the second where we got on top in the centre, and he attended a couple of those centre-bounces. I'd drop Pittonet except I'm not sure you'd want to ruck De Koning all day. I'm not sure he's up to it yet. De Koning was good, but it'd be nice if he took a couple of those marks inside forward 50, and not just the ones further afield. Also, I think Casboult plays better when he get a run in the ruck. It can get him off his opponent and allows him to crash into blokes a bit and just get involved. Hes been down for a month, I reckon. Also just about the length of time De Koning has been in the team...

We base a huge amount of our game on locking the ball in the forward 50 and trying to generate scoring shots from pressure. This is a good strategy when it pays off, and honestly, depending on the umpires. If you have a trigger-happy umpire you can get some cheap shots at goal. We were unlucky against West Coast - we generated so much pressure in the forward 50, laying tackle after tackle and it all went unrewarded. Same yesterday in the 3rd Q, except I think that Collingwood actually didn't infringe and their reciprocal pressure was maybe even better than ours. Every time we shoved the ball out the next possession was under-the-pump, even when we retreated to 60 meters out where the defenders were zoned. That's great discipline from Collingwood. None of their forwards wandered off to let their man get a kick. So we generated very little from our pressure - except in the first quarter: Walsh's goal was from forward-line pressure. As an aside we've done this a lot this year. There have been long periods of play, especially in the third quarter, where we lock the ball in and spend huge amounts of energy and effort for little return. The Melbourne game comes to mind again. Even with Betts (who is not the player he was, and we cannot expect him to be), we lack natural forwards in this regard. Blokes with x-factor. Charlie Curnow has it, Fisher has a bit of it... maybe Cunningham. Guys who can turn a half-chance into a goal.

Interestingly we must have had an instruction to not just attack the goals. I have a feeling that Collingwood generate lots of scoring from the backline, so we were trying very hard not to just score points and hand the ball over. They highlighted how little of the ball Maynard and Moore had at half-time, so we'd clearly worked on getting them out of the game. And in not just having a ping at the goals in the third, we were continuing to try and avoid handing the ball over. Unfortunately, as we became more desperate and kept on banging the ball forward, we started to do just that. Collingwood was much more disciplined in getting an extra tall into the hole so that our tall forwards were outnumbered. Then they took intercept marks, and started chains of possession. And our small forwards drifted up the ground trying to get involved and so Maynard and Quaynor started to get the footy in space.

I don't rate Cripps as highly as a lot of people do, and I think he's struggling. I'm not for giving him a rest or putting the cue in the rack. He's a professional footballer, and a well-paid one as well. I strained my voice bellowing in disgust at Martin when he [REDACTED] up passing it to Cripps. Not just for the poor execution, but the target. And I left the room to get a drink when Cripps took the mark late in the game. I knew what was going to happen. With Martin (50/50), Cripps (hopeless), Dow (historically bad), Casboult (better from far out), Murphy (who is still good on the run) and McKay (50/50) in the side... There's just too little confidence they'll actually kick the goals when they get opportunities.

So, a disappointing day at the office. I'm not as despondent as some folks, but I will admit to basically composing this post in the pre-dawn hours when I was laying in bed unable to sleep and all I could think about was the footy. I think it will be an interesting match-up with GWS.


Enjoyable read.

First time I read this I thought you were at the ground, and could see what the problem was with Plowman. Then I realised you did saay "I think..." and " "it seems..."

Making excuses for Plow me thinks.

Any backman who can see the ball coming into their area and doesn't have touch with his opponent is either [ not doing his job ] or [ doesn't respect his opponent ] or [ not a good backman ] or [ can't play against certain types ] or [ not interested ] or [following the coaches instructions to get some votes in the B N F ].

Plow
Levi
Cripps
Doch
Murph

all senior players
all leaders
all let us down badly

Crippas worst game of the year in his worst year for the club
Doch hasn't been the same since he got tagged (did well against a tired GCS)
Levi was plain lazy
Plow was playing Russian Roulette on the last line
Murph was gutless in the contest, again.

Am I wrong?
Was it all Teague's fault for allowing it to happen and not mixing things up?

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 2:04 pm 
Offline
Bruce Doull
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 12:06 pm
Posts: 33653
Location: Half back flank
I like your positivity Jim. But I've got a nasty feeling GWS mids will carve us up...compare it to the Collingwood midfield yesterday.

_________________
#DonTheStash


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 2:11 pm 
Offline
Harry Vallence

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 8:50 am
Posts: 1150
We were good for 3 qtrs and then we were poor in the last, beaten by a better team on the day. We had a few down, a few more down than they did. Defence keep them to 6 goals in 3 and a bit qtrs. Not too bad.

Heard Craig Jennings on SEN today, saying pies played really well. Blues should not be too despondant.

our only bad game this year is vs hawks (and first qtr vs tigers and dees). At all other times competitive.

_________________
Go Blues


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 2:19 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko

Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:03 am
Posts: 22935
Location: Bondi Beach
sticksaftersiren87 wrote:
We were good for 3 qtrs and then we were poor in the last, beaten by a better team on the day. We had a few down, a few more down than they did. Defence keep them to 6 goals in 3 and a bit qtrs. Not too bad.

Heard Craig Jennings on SEN today, saying pies played really well. Blues should not be too despondant.

our only bad game this year is vs hawks (and first qtr vs tigers and dees). At all other times competitive.



You make me feel a little better now Sticks :thumbsup:

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 2:28 pm 
Offline
John James
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2019 10:02 pm
Posts: 647
bluechampion wrote:
In some respects this reminded me most of the St. Kilda loss. Another team we always struggle to match-up with, and we looked 'off' from the first bounce. Like the 9-day break and all the back-and-forth had left us a little flat. Players were getting stuck over the ball and unable to pick it up cleanly off the deck all day. Partially this was Collingwood's pressure, but even early we just couldn't be clean where we have been pretty clean the last month.

I appreciate everyone's frustration with this loss, as I am also frustrated in a way I have not been this season. We've actually been okay for seven weeks - basically since the Saints loss. We followed that up with our best win of the season vs. The Dogs. Then a pulsating narrow loss against the top-of-table Port. A solid win against North. The Hawks game... we played very well in that game for a period before being overwhelmed by an opponent that got on a roll. The Eagles loss - we played really well that day and it didn't work out against one of the better teams in the comp. We then out-played Freo for three quarters and snatched a game in shit conditions before easily accounting for Gold Coast in different shit conditions, and despite extreme inaccuracy.

So we've been up for a while, even if we haven't got the results we wanted. Looking across the competition, that's par for the course outside of maybe the Eagles (and their are question marks over their ability to win on the road), Port (who are very good, but have had some narrow wins lately), The Cats (who are on a genuine roll), The Tigers (also on a roll, but also having some narrow wins) and Brisbane (inaccuracy is harming their chances). Everyone else in the comp, bar North and Adelaide are 'thereabouts'. Teams who can win on their day. We fit into this category.

Speaking specifically about this game, it's interesting... We have had a settled back seven for 90% of the season. We made a change to it and they played as poorly as they have since the first quarter of the Melbourne game. We have mostly eliminated mistakes from kick-outs and handling errors in the backline this year, but we made all of them yesterday. Gifting goals from shit kick-ins and loose handballs under pressure...
Jones did okay on Cox (who the Pies actually used well for a change). Weitering took care of Mihocek, but I also think Mihocek drew Weitering out of the hole, which is why Plowman was forced to play Stephenson looser than he'd like. Plow seemed to be playing off his man so that he could drop into the space in front of Cox because Weitering was elsewhere. This allowed Stephenson the room he needed, and the Pies were good enough to get it to him. Williamson tries to do too much sometimes. Docherty was pretty good. Simmo fairly anonymous and Polson made no difference at all. If he's going to be a running defender, surely he has to run and then hit targets?

I think Pittonet's output has dropped since they picked De Koning. Pitto was anonymous all day, except for the period late in the second where we got on top in the centre, and he attended a couple of those centre-bounces. I'd drop Pittonet except I'm not sure you'd want to ruck De Koning all day. I'm not sure he's up to it yet. De Koning was good, but it'd be nice if he took a couple of those marks inside forward 50, and not just the ones further afield. Also, I think Casboult plays better when he get a run in the ruck. It can get him off his opponent and allows him to crash into blokes a bit and just get involved. Hes been down for a month, I reckon. Also just about the length of time De Koning has been in the team...

We base a huge amount of our game on locking the ball in the forward 50 and trying to generate scoring shots from pressure. This is a good strategy when it pays off, and honestly, depending on the umpires. If you have a trigger-happy umpire you can get some cheap shots at goal. We were unlucky against West Coast - we generated so much pressure in the forward 50, laying tackle after tackle and it all went unrewarded. Same yesterday in the 3rd Q, except I think that Collingwood actually didn't infringe and their reciprocal pressure was maybe even better than ours. Every time we shoved the ball out the next possession was under-the-pump, even when we retreated to 60 meters out where the defenders were zoned. That's great discipline from Collingwood. None of their forwards wandered off to let their man get a kick. So we generated very little from our pressure - except in the first quarter: Walsh's goal was from forward-line pressure. As an aside we've done this a lot this year. There have been long periods of play, especially in the third quarter, where we lock the ball in and spend huge amounts of energy and effort for little return. The Melbourne game comes to mind again. Even with Betts (who is not the player he was, and we cannot expect him to be), we lack natural forwards in this regard. Blokes with x-factor. Charlie Curnow has it, Fisher has a bit of it... maybe Cunningham. Guys who can turn a half-chance into a goal.

Interestingly we must have had an instruction to not just attack the goals. I have a feeling that Collingwood generate lots of scoring from the backline, so we were trying very hard not to just score points and hand the ball over. They highlighted how little of the ball Maynard and Moore had at half-time, so we'd clearly worked on getting them out of the game. And in not just having a ping at the goals in the third, we were continuing to try and avoid handing the ball over. Unfortunately, as we became more desperate and kept on banging the ball forward, we started to do just that. Collingwood was much more disciplined in getting an extra tall into the hole so that our tall forwards were outnumbered. Then they took intercept marks, and started chains of possession. And our small forwards drifted up the ground trying to get involved and so Maynard and Quaynor started to get the footy in space.

I don't rate Cripps as highly as a lot of people do, and I think he's struggling. I'm not for giving him a rest or putting the cue in the rack. He's a professional footballer, and a well-paid one as well. I strained my voice bellowing in disgust at Martin when he [REDACTED] up passing it to Cripps. Not just for the poor execution, but the target. And I left the room to get a drink when Cripps took the mark late in the game. I knew what was going to happen. With Martin (50/50), Cripps (hopeless), Dow (historically bad), Casboult (better from far out), Murphy (who is still good on the run) and McKay (50/50) in the side... There's just too little confidence they'll actually kick the goals when they get opportunities.

So, a disappointing day at the office. I'm not as despondent as some folks, but I will admit to basically composing this post in the pre-dawn hours when I was laying in bed unable to sleep and all I could think about was the footy. I think it will be an interesting match-up with GWS.


:thanks:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 3:02 pm 
Offline
Mike Fitzpatrick
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:42 pm
Posts: 4685
not sure of the exact stats this season... but it feels like we've been smashed in 3rd & 4th qtrs all year long. typically you look at coaching. being out manoeuvred in the box and not responding to the adjustments the other coach is making after HT. it's a theme.

our team is so plodding. plowman, casboult, pitto, harry, tdk, weiters, jones ... the mix there is too top heavy.

i've always loved casboult ... but he needs to make way for tdk, who is going to be a star. he'll have a better career and do more for us than all the promise and potential kruez offered.

plowman needs to not play a grade for us again. he's a little too pea-hearted, a little too slow, a little not a good kick, a little reads the play poorly and can't man up.


poulson was pretty good, showed some composure, some pace and some efficiency. he needs to play down back in that pocket in the aaron joseph role. eddie is still a gun. tdk will be a star. cripps looks cooked ... and that docherty error really boiled my piss. when your leader shits the bed and gifts them their first goal in that manner.

what hope is there?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 3:39 pm 
Offline
Robert Walls

Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 1:40 pm
Posts: 3280
bondiblue wrote:
bluechampion wrote:
In some respects this reminded me most of the St. Kilda loss. Another team we always struggle to match-up with, and we looked 'off' from the first bounce. Like the 9-day break and all the back-and-forth had left us a little flat. Players were getting stuck over the ball and unable to pick it up cleanly off the deck all day. Partially this was Collingwood's pressure, but even early we just couldn't be clean where we have been pretty clean the last month.

I appreciate everyone's frustration with this loss, as I am also frustrated in a way I have not been this season. We've actually been okay for seven weeks - basically since the Saints loss. We followed that up with our best win of the season vs. The Dogs. Then a pulsating narrow loss against the top-of-table Port. A solid win against North. The Hawks game... we played very well in that game for a period before being overwhelmed by an opponent that got on a roll. The Eagles loss - we played really well that day and it didn't work out against one of the better teams in the comp. We then out-played Freo for three quarters and snatched a game in shit conditions before easily accounting for Gold Coast in different shit conditions, and despite extreme inaccuracy.

So we've been up for a while, even if we haven't got the results we wanted. Looking across the competition, that's par for the course outside of maybe the Eagles (and their are question marks over their ability to win on the road), Port (who are very good, but have had some narrow wins lately), The Cats (who are on a genuine roll), The Tigers (also on a roll, but also having some narrow wins) and Brisbane (inaccuracy is harming their chances). Everyone else in the comp, bar North and Adelaide are 'thereabouts'. Teams who can win on their day. We fit into this category.

Speaking specifically about this game, it's interesting... We have had a settled back seven for 90% of the season. We made a change to it and they played as poorly as they have since the first quarter of the Melbourne game. We have mostly eliminated mistakes from kick-outs and handling errors in the backline this year, but we made all of them yesterday. Gifting goals from shit kick-ins and loose handballs under pressure...
Jones did okay on Cox (who the Pies actually used well for a change). Weitering took care of Mihocek, but I also think Mihocek drew Weitering out of the hole, which is why Plowman was forced to play Stephenson looser than he'd like. Plow seemed to be playing off his man so that he could drop into the space in front of Cox because Weitering was elsewhere. This allowed Stephenson the room he needed, and the Pies were good enough to get it to him. Williamson tries to do too much sometimes. Docherty was pretty good. Simmo fairly anonymous and Polson made no difference at all. If he's going to be a running defender, surely he has to run and then hit targets?

I think Pittonet's output has dropped since they picked De Koning. Pitto was anonymous all day, except for the period late in the second where we got on top in the centre, and he attended a couple of those centre-bounces. I'd drop Pittonet except I'm not sure you'd want to ruck De Koning all day. I'm not sure he's up to it yet. De Koning was good, but it'd be nice if he took a couple of those marks inside forward 50, and not just the ones further afield. Also, I think Casboult plays better when he get a run in the ruck. It can get him off his opponent and allows him to crash into blokes a bit and just get involved. Hes been down for a month, I reckon. Also just about the length of time De Koning has been in the team...

We base a huge amount of our game on locking the ball in the forward 50 and trying to generate scoring shots from pressure. This is a good strategy when it pays off, and honestly, depending on the umpires. If you have a trigger-happy umpire you can get some cheap shots at goal. We were unlucky against West Coast - we generated so much pressure in the forward 50, laying tackle after tackle and it all went unrewarded. Same yesterday in the 3rd Q, except I think that Collingwood actually didn't infringe and their reciprocal pressure was maybe even better than ours. Every time we shoved the ball out the next possession was under-the-pump, even when we retreated to 60 meters out where the defenders were zoned. That's great discipline from Collingwood. None of their forwards wandered off to let their man get a kick. So we generated very little from our pressure - except in the first quarter: Walsh's goal was from forward-line pressure. As an aside we've done this a lot this year. There have been long periods of play, especially in the third quarter, where we lock the ball in and spend huge amounts of energy and effort for little return. The Melbourne game comes to mind again. Even with Betts (who is not the player he was, and we cannot expect him to be), we lack natural forwards in this regard. Blokes with x-factor. Charlie Curnow has it, Fisher has a bit of it... maybe Cunningham. Guys who can turn a half-chance into a goal.

Interestingly we must have had an instruction to not just attack the goals. I have a feeling that Collingwood generate lots of scoring from the backline, so we were trying very hard not to just score points and hand the ball over. They highlighted how little of the ball Maynard and Moore had at half-time, so we'd clearly worked on getting them out of the game. And in not just having a ping at the goals in the third, we were continuing to try and avoid handing the ball over. Unfortunately, as we became more desperate and kept on banging the ball forward, we started to do just that. Collingwood was much more disciplined in getting an extra tall into the hole so that our tall forwards were outnumbered. Then they took intercept marks, and started chains of possession. And our small forwards drifted up the ground trying to get involved and so Maynard and Quaynor started to get the footy in space.

I don't rate Cripps as highly as a lot of people do, and I think he's struggling. I'm not for giving him a rest or putting the cue in the rack. He's a professional footballer, and a well-paid one as well. I strained my voice bellowing in disgust at Martin when he [REDACTED] up passing it to Cripps. Not just for the poor execution, but the target. And I left the room to get a drink when Cripps took the mark late in the game. I knew what was going to happen. With Martin (50/50), Cripps (hopeless), Dow (historically bad), Casboult (better from far out), Murphy (who is still good on the run) and McKay (50/50) in the side... There's just too little confidence they'll actually kick the goals when they get opportunities.

So, a disappointing day at the office. I'm not as despondent as some folks, but I will admit to basically composing this post in the pre-dawn hours when I was laying in bed unable to sleep and all I could think about was the footy. I think it will be an interesting match-up with GWS.


Enjoyable read.

First time I read this I thought you were at the ground, and could see what the problem was with Plowman. Then I realised you did saay "I think..." and " "it seems..."

Making excuses for Plow me thinks.

Any backman who can see the ball coming into their area and doesn't have touch with his opponent is either [ not doing his job ] or [ doesn't respect his opponent ] or [ not a good backman ] or [ can't play against certain types ] or [ not interested ] or [following the coaches instructions to get some votes in the B N F ].

Plow
Levi
Cripps
Doch
Murph

all senior players
all leaders
all let us down badly

Crippas worst game of the year in his worst year for the club
Doch hasn't been the same since he got tagged (did well against a tired GCS)
Levi was plain lazy
Plow was playing Russian Roulette on the last line
Murph was gutless in the contest, again.

Am I wrong?
Was it all Teague's fault for allowing it to happen and not mixing things up?


Well, look, I think Plowman is a solid footballer who tends to be the weakest link. But I'm not saying he's terrible or that he's actually very good and that you just can't see it. I don't have a horse in the Plowman is shithouse race, but I will say that he finishes okay in the B&F which suggests he follows instructions.

But anyone could see that Mihochek was drawing Weitering away from the contest to nullify his strengths and his support. Whether that affected Plowman's positioning is supposition - it might just be that the space Collingwood created by drawing Weiters out meant that Stephenson had room to play in, and that meant he just beat his man on the day.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2020 3:43 pm 
Offline
Alex Jesaulenko

Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2006 11:03 am
Posts: 22935
Location: Bondi Beach
I've waited for someone to say something about other players:

Thomas had 5 shots at goal by half time.
Guess who was on him?


Any Murphy admirers want to say something about Murph's game this week?
He did some things then seemed to die off and avoid the contest, but I might be a bit harsh.

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 227 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next

All times are UTC + 10 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Laguna, lawrence_angwin, Mickstar and 76 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