What was different about this match was we lost despite the fact that many of us DID go in hard, the intensity was up. Tackles were around 70, contested possessions were higher than Freo, forward entries higher, shots at goal more etc, etc...
As distinct from the Ess & Syd games, we did not whimp out. We caused turnovers & goals from good tackling, including Yarran & Hampson.
But this just more clearly reveals the other problems (CONS) we have been worried about: EVERYONE needs to contribute and we have not yet improved our strategies for bringing the ball in to our forward line, since last year.
CONSContribution: Wallsy's bottom six problem refers to the bottom 6 on any given day, not just specific 6 players he mentioned. Yesterday, I would say most of our players put in. Some did not. Some did but not for the whole game: I thought Fev, Stevens, Wiggins, Cloke, Simpson, Hadley were our weakest, as regards effort. SImmo put in in bursts.
Strategy: I don't think the problem is Fev. It wouldn't matter who we had in there if we keep bringing it in like we are now, we will struggle to kick high scores. I think we do/did have a plan but it is not robust enough or not drilled well enough. Early on in the season, we had Fev & Cloke/Kruezer bringing the ball to ground where Betts, Garlett, Robinson, Houlihan were crumbing & with Murphy, Judd, Gibbs streaming through 50 and kick a goal or 2 each.
Now, we bring the ball slowly up the wings & then look for a pinpoint pass to a leading (or stationary) Fev. No speed into F50, no multi-directional leads, no crumbers, (Murphy, Judd, Gibbs still holding up their end of the bargain).
My wife, who just waltzed in & out during the telecast (very annoying..), says to me: "why is our forward line so busy and theirs is so clear?? Every time they get the ball, they kick a goal!"
