R2: Collingwood v Carlton (pre-match / final teams p24)

grrofunger · **Posted:** Mon Apr 01, 2013 7:39 pm

It's rattens fault our development over the past 5 years has been so poor and gotten us to this point

blueboy23 · **Posted:** Mon Apr 01, 2013 8:00 pm

a key forward is what we lack, think everyone knows that, common sense.
just don't no where we are going to get one from,
draft?
F/A?
trade week?
maybe watson starts playing back with jamison whilst henderson goes forward?
waite is good for 10/12 games per year, can't rely on him,
hampson, casboult, rowe, mitchell?? not sure if any of theses boys will make it,
hampson can't kick, and its called football, bit ironic,
casboult see above,
rowe who knows
mitchell has played one game in 3 years
white don't think so
QSTICK may have been pretty handy?
massive hole to fill

Synbad · **Posted:** Mon Apr 01, 2013 8:03 pm

Bigredisback wrote:

Synbad wrote:

Hes been fit.. its no excuse
26 he should be coming into his own as a ruckman
we just signed him up for 3 years.........

the lunacy of it all.....

Assuming Warnock was signed as insurance nothing more

Three year insurance??

In case Hammer can not make it in 3 years perhaps

SurreyBlue · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 8:32 am **Posts:** 10575

But Ratten improved our side every year except last year. I don't understand the complete logic. Ratten took over what we said was a basket case from Pagan and turned into a finals team!
I've never said Ratten was perfect, far from that. I have been outspoken a few times with some of his decisions but to blame him alone is just plain wrong. Everyone blames Ratten but I am yet to see a valid point of why?
CFC had development coaches, CFC have recruiting managers, CFC have a football manager & CEO's who oversee different area's, yet your all pointing the finger at ONE man?
Drafting had nothing to do with Ratten.
Fevola's trade had nothing to do with Ratten. It's well documented he didn't want to trade him, so how was it we traded him?
If Malthouse fails, I wonder if the same people will be pointing the finger at Malthouse for not achieving with a list full of top 10 picks hitting there prime right now!!!!
Interesting year ahead and reading in here me thinks.

Synbad · **Posted:** Mon Apr 01, 2013 8:14 pm

aboynamedsue wrote:

Blue Vain wrote:

Yes, but based on what? Surely you must be basing that opinion on some data or facts or information or something. What is it?

I feel like we've had this discussion before BV. I don't intend to go over it all again, but it would be rude of me to ignore your questions....

Suffice to say that when I see Carlton play I do not see a side with a settled backline or quality forwards who consistently stand up in big games. I do not see a midfield that consistently strikes the right balance between attack and defence, or has shown a capacity to consistently work through adversity when the going gets really tough. I do not see a well balanced list with depth in most positions. I do not see a well-drilled team that is as disciplined and focused as the better sides. I do not see a side that really knows how to deliver the game style its coach wants it to play.

I was saying these things before the 2012 season started, so please stop talking about our injuries.

As I've said before, I am quite hopeful that this time next year (ie. after 2 pre-seasons and at least 22 AFL games under MM, and an active trade/FA week) we will be a stronger team (and club). But I see 2013 as the classic one step backwards to go two steps forward. I've said this before, but it reminds me a little of what Parkin had to do in 1991.

I would dearly love to be wrong, but I think we need to brace ourselves for more short term pain. However, at some point it should start to 'click' under MM. There's every chance we'll be 0-5, but then be 6-6. With decent luck re: injuries and close games (although it must be said that we are not off to a good start in either regard), we should press for a spot in the finals from there....but I cannot see us finishing above the likes of Haw, Syd, Coll, Geel and the WA clubs in 2013. History shows us that you have to finish top 4 to win the flag and there's only so many spots. I just don't think we're better than those clubs. Plus you have the likes of Adel, Ess, Rich & NM pushing up. I fear that at least some of these clubs have gone past us.

I agree with this in every regard.... Except to say that sometimes mysterious things can happen.

I actually dont think we have planned very well towards 2013....

Drafting
Drilling
Development

Has all been average.

I fear that we have cut too many corners and continue on cuttting them underestimating what needs to be done to be a top side.

Synbad · **Posted:** Mon Apr 01, 2013 8:20 pm

SurreyBlue wrote:

But Ratten improved our side every year except last year. I don't understand the complete logic. Ratten took over what we said was a basket case from Pagan and turned into a finals team!
I've never said Ratten was perfect, far from that. I have been outspoken a few times with some of his decisions but to blame him alone is just plain wrong. Everyone blames Ratten but I am yet to see a valid point of why?
CFC had development coaches, CFC have recruiting managers, CFC have a football manager & CEO's who oversee different area's, yet your all pointing the finger at ONE man?
Drafting had nothing to do with Ratten.
Fevola's trade had nothing to do with Ratten. It's well documented he didn't want to trade him, so how was it we traded him?
If Malthouse fails, I wonder if the same people will be pointing the finger at Malthouse for not achieving with a list full of top 10 picks hitting there prime right now!!!!
Interesting year ahead and reading in here me thinks.

So he coached us for five years and six games....AND
five years after Fev leaves we have no forward
WE have no settled rucks
We have a weird feel to our defence
We cant find an obvious captain...
We have few players to consistently play at high levels.
We have a team of players with fragility sewn all over them.
And he had a swag of early picks and the best player in the comp at the time at his disposal

and Ratts was good? :lol:

cimm1979 · **Posted:** Mon Apr 01, 2013 11:08 pm

Given MM's statements tonight I am very curious to see how we play Sunday. How do we incorporate a defensive style if we throw it out the window at the very first test?. What message does that send to the players? But is it better to try to win (however unlikely) even if it stunts your development?

MM is not a big tag man, but Pendlebury and Swan could be very dangerous and, if Saturday night is anything to go by, are incredibly important to the Pies chances.

I think his musings indicate he expects more defensive work from all players but I'd be surprised if he lets Pendles and Swan carve us up for a 1/2 before acting, but should he?

Judd and to a lesser extent Murph are fairly weak defensively and that might account for them being quiet for the first half and Murph (although he had a shadow) for the whole game. Judd became a player when the game style changed after half time, was it the defensive style restricting him or juddy just out of touch?

Fasolo, Thomas, Shaw and Krakouer all available.

Could be ugly.

Blue Sombrero · **Posted:** Tue Apr 02, 2013 3:08 am

No chance based on the past two weeks and most of last year.
We will need to come out fast and play footy at high intensity for four quarters and so far we haven't shown we can do that for a very long time.
Since last time we beat Collingwood.

GWS · **Posted:** Tue Apr 02, 2013 7:18 am

There's no reason you can't play attacking and defensive football at the same time.

How about running your arse off both ways and laying some @#$%&! tackles.

When we lay 80 tackles in a game we miraculously seem to win.

When we lay 40 we strangely seem to lose.

All regardless of whether we're going around the boundary or up the guts.

I don't have the figures but it wouldn't surprise me if we had the largest spread on tackles made of any club over the last couple of years.

Some games we turn up and some games we don't.

I'm not too fussed about "gameplans". If we just run like buggery all day and lay as many tackles as humanly possible we'll win more than we lose.

Actually make that some quarters we turn up and some we don't.

AGRO · **Posted:** Tue Apr 02, 2013 8:56 am

GWS wrote:

Actually make that some quarters we turn up and some we don't.

Don't know how it can be measured but I think that we are by far the flakiest most mentally fragile list/team in the competition and have been since 2002 and it is now deeply and culturally ingrained in the whole psyche of the club as well.

teknodeejay · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:30 pm **Posts:** 2897

They should watch yesterday's game and take a leaf out of Geelong's book. A club that for all purposes should be on the decline but 5 goals down they stick it right up the Hawks. They made a lot of mistakes, but they also backed each other and were prepared to tackle and get defend and sacrifice for the guy in a better position.

Guys like Stokes, Christensen, Hunt, Duncan and Smedts were excellent.

The way that Carlton are adopting a boundary line gameplan is all wrong in my view. Bombs to unproven or inadequate tall man setups along the wing. We just don't have the cattle to make the most of that.

Getting smashed in clearances doesn't help either.

AGRO · **Posted:** Tue Apr 02, 2013 9:18 am

teknodeejay wrote:

They should watch yesterday's game and take a leaf out of Geelong's book. A club that for all purposes should be on the decline but 5 goals down they stick it right up the Hawks. They made a lot of mistakes, but they also backed each other and were prepared to tackle and get defend and sacrifice for the guy in a better position.

Guys like Stokes, Christensen, Hunt, Duncan and Smedts were excellent.

The way that Carlton are adopting a boundary line gameplan is all wrong in my view. Bombs to unproven or inadequate tall man setups along the wing. We just don't have the cattle to make the most of that.

Getting smashed in clearances doesn't help either.

Apart from Stokes the rest of them aren't from the old guard of Geelong players - recruitment and development are the key - how did young Jordan Murdoch go by the way. :wink:

kennyhunter · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:35 pm **Posts:** 2432

Think Synners is being a tad harsh on Hammer but agree with his call on Warnock.

He's the best tap ruckman at the club who has played well in some crunch games.

The problem is - as MM said last night - he can't play fwd.

Because we haven't got a decent fwd, we keep trying to turn players into fwds when they're not - or aren't ready.

206 just has to be played as a ruckman. That's his strength.

Kruezer ain't a fwd either.

As MM said, we just have to keep experimenting and trying players - shame we have to do it "on the run" but that's our lot.

And hope like hell Mitchell comes on.

As Synners said, if only we could merge Causbolt and Hammer into one player ... though kicking for goal would still be shoddy :cry:

teknodeejay · **Joined:** Mon Feb 28, 2005 2:30 pm **Posts:** 2897

AGRO wrote:

Apart from Stokes the rest of them aren't from the old guard of Geelong players - recruitment and development are the key - how did young Jordan Murdoch go by the way. :wink:

Well that's what I'm saying. The guys they've recruited have gotten on board with their culture and mentality to replace those who have left.

They'd still be up the creek without Selwood and Chapman and Pods had good days. But if was just those three and no one else Hawthorn would have won.

As for Murdoch I was at the game and he didn't look like he had done much throughout the game. Looking at his stats it confirms he was one of the bottom players although equal highest tackle count in the game, so even when he wasn't getting the pill, he was contributing to the "selfless" gameplan.

missnaut · **Posted:** Tue Apr 02, 2013 11:41 am

Betts, Hampson to miss blockbuster

http://www.carltonfc.com.au/news/2013-0 ... lockbuster

The Rhino · **Joined:** Tue Feb 08, 2011 3:20 pm **Posts:** 6923

I suppose Rowe comes in for Hampson. Good tie-in for the Peter Mac cup I guess.

No idea who you'd bring in for Betts. Pity Collins is injured. Wonder if you bring in Laidler, and see if lightning strikes twice with Duigan up forward...

missnaut · **Posted:** Tue Apr 02, 2013 11:53 am

Hopefully Betts' jaw isn't too bad given that he played the rest of the match on Thursday.

Synbad · **Posted:** Tue Apr 02, 2013 12:04 pm

The Rhino wrote:

I suppose Rowe comes in for Hampson. Good tie-in for the Peter Mac cup I guess.

No idea who you'd bring in for Betts. Pity Collins is injured. Wonder if you bring in Laidler, and see if lightning strikes twice with Duigan up forward...

would not surprise me if Dylan Buckley came in this week

Rexy · **Joined:** Fri Aug 15, 2008 6:46 am **Posts:** 28227

missnaut wrote:

Betts, Hampson to miss blockbuster

http://www.carltonfc.com.au/news/2013-0 ... lockbuster

gee brave effort by Eddie to keep playing - we'll miss him bigtime

Rowe and Bucks the replacements for mine

camel · **Posted:** Tue Apr 02, 2013 12:12 pm

Would be nice if Troy Menzel was ready. Introducing a new kid via a blockbuster is Mick's style.

R2: Collingwood v Carlton (pre-match / final teams p24)

Who is online