I must admit, I've rarely seen the ball move as much off the pitch for so long on a test pitch, no matter what sort of ball they were using. About the only one I recall was Melbourne a few years back when a certain Victorian quick skittled England cheaply twice. That was considered to be an aberration, but at least it didn't swing as much or bounce as unreliably.
I always thought the ideal pitch was one that gave the new ball bowlers some assistance and the spinner a little help on day 4 or 5. Haven't seen many of those anywhere in the world in recent years. Indian pitches wouldn't be day 5 pitches in Australia during their 1st session. The ones delivered in Sri Lanka; they wouldn't be Aussie pitches after 2 weeks! I know teams have always prepared pitches that favour the home side, but never to the degree that happens now. For most of history this crap would be called blatant pitch doctoring. And some people, like us, haven't followed suit very often. When India won here not long ago, we prepare flatter pitches to the test would last until the 5th day, as it would provide Cricket Australia with more money. Took away every advantage we had.
With modern batting techniques, having dodgy pitches is lethal.
"Carlton rank last for kicking efficiency, disposal efficiency, overall kick rating and kick rating for kicks going into the forward 50. They are second worst in kick rating for shots at goal."
Recruitment or Game Plan?
Good question, and definitely something to do a LOT of work on.
Not many runs to be had over in the West Indies: this pitch isn't making things any easier, even without the pink Dukes ball. Not much to be garnered, to be honest, because conditions are designed to help their bowlers. Maybe they should realize their bowlers don't need a nightmare deck.
Now that I've calmed down and let the anger, frustration and disappoint dissipate, I'm not that disappointed with the result. Why? Because Brisbane have few injuries (unlike us), they have a system that our VFL boys are only learning and their team structure was far superior to ours. Look at their line-up and they have so much more experience that we do. Coleman, Doedee, McKenna and Robertson, for example. The only one we can claim to have that sort of experience is Acres, and he isn't fit. So, to get within 4 goals, and to restrict this mob to less than 100 points isn't the bad sort of loss we've seen from the seniors in recent weeks.
Does that mean I like it? Not in the least, but earlier this season (and especially last year) we would have been pounded, as we were by Southport.
What did I like? [1] Ethan Phillips: I understand that Phillips has his issues, but he had 18 marks today and 26 disposals. He may not be as physical as I'd like a key defender to be, but has to be better value than Frankie Evans, Flynn Young or Will White (whom I like). Probably better value that Corey Durdin or Lachie Fogarty. So, why didn't we select him? I don't know. [2] Billy Wilson and Jordan Boyd had very solid games and must be in line to play next week. Wilson had 23 possessions and a goal. Boyd had 19 possessions. [3] Flynn Riley probably had slightly the better of 2 listed ruckmen with 5 clearances to boot. I would be seriously considering him for a rookie spot.
We play Melbourne on Saturday 19th July at the MCG at 19:35. At least it isn't another damned Thursday night game. We might get a player or two back, but there is no certainty of this.
We had 1 person in the top 6 possessions getters: George Hewett, who put a few very quiet weeks behind him to get 9 clearances and 3 tackles. 7th in possessions was Cripps, who had 26; 6 tackles and 9 clearances. Those sort of numbers are elite!
On the other hand, Charlie Curnow had 14 possessions and 6 marks, but couldn't kick a goal. Ashton Moir had 3 points from 9 possessions. Cameron for them had 9 possessions but he got 3 goals!
Finally our line-up is available: CARLTON B:B. Wilson (35), E. Phillips (55), M. Duffy (41) HB:H. Charleson (28), J. Boyd (37), R. Monahan (34) C:B. Acres (13), J. Binns (25), L. Camporeale (21) HF:W. White (38), D. Hogg (70), L. Nelson (57) F: H. O'Keeffe (40), H. Lemmey (31), F. Evans (44) R: F. Riley (56), B. Camporeale (16), H. Ramshaw (51) Int: O. Warburton (78), C. Vickery (59), A. Stevens (77), P. Dozzi (53),D. Grainger-Barras (61) 23rd Player: O. Warburton (78) Em: K. Ferronato (50), O. Badr (62), S. Phipps-Parsons (69), N. King (63), J. Polkinghorne (76), T. Logan (68), Z. Harding (60)
IN: B. Acres, F. Evans, H. O'Keeffe, A. Stevens OUT: C. Durdin, F. Young (AFL), L. Young (ankle), W. Hayes (unavailable)
BRISBANE LIONS B: L. Lloyd (19), D. Joyce (41), Z. Zakostelsky (21) HB: T. Doedee (12), K. Coleman (18), L. Beecken (17) C: B. Reville (38), J. Tunstill (29), J. Creighton (57) HF: S. Marshall (20), W. McLachlan (28), D. Craven (45) F: C. McKenna (26), T. Gallop (22), B. Ryan (24) R: H. Smith (25), D. Robertson (2), R. Torrent (36) INT: S. Brain (34), M. Owen (47), T. Abberley (48), F. McFadyen (58), C. McCarthy (65) 23rd Player: M. Owen (47) EMG: T. Meekin (52), C. Offermans (56), W. Greenaway (59), R. Gilder (60), J. Fazldeen (65), D. Lloyd (67)
IN: S. Brain, K. Coleman, T. Doedee, T. Gallop, F. McFadyen, M. Owen, H. Smith OUT: J. Manly (personal), C. Murray (Allies), J. Fazldeen, R. Gilder, W. Greenaway, T. Meekin, B. Thomas (omitted) NEW: Matthew Owen, 17, 179cm, Brisbane Lions Academy/Redland-Victoria Point
My comments: [1] We're still a very short team, but having Skull back is a big improvement. [2] We'll miss Will Hayes again, but he probably has racing commitments. [3] Brisbane have a LOT of AFL listed players available. We haven't had that many for so long, although we did give it a sniff in the first couple of rounds. [4] If we win, it will be a huge win. Not like, though. They have so much talent available that we just don't. [5] Interesting to see how Grainer-Barras pulls up.
AFL Rd 17 2025 Carlton vs Collingwood What an awful game. I would love to see the glee on the Collingwood supporters’ faces turn to ashes, but it won’t be at our hands. Team: D- Why, when we lost so badly? Well, for 3 quarters we weren’t that far out of things. We outscored Collingwood in the last and should have outscored them by a lot more (but we can’t hit targets).
Votes: [3] Zac Williams [2] Oliver Hollands [2] Lachie Cowan [1] Marc Pittonet [1] Patrick Cripps [1] Adam Cerra [1] Jacob Weitering [1] Nick Haynes [1] Jesse Motlop [0.5] Charlie Curnow [0.5] Sam Docherty [0.5] Cooper Lord [0.5] Flynn Young
Explanations: [3] Zac Williams: Until he got injured, Williams was easily our best player, kicking three goals and being involved in some of the best centre clearances we’ve had in years. His kicks hit targets and set up scoring opportunities. [2] Oliver Hollands: Ollie’s run and carry was one of the few highlights for us. 22 possessions. [2] Lachie Cowan: Like Ollie, Lachie never gave up, ran hand and did a decent job. 20 possessions in his first game back. [1] Marc Pittonet: Pitto tried his guts out and was easily our most effective ruck on the night. [1] Patrick Cripps: 25 disposals would seem to be a good reward, but Crippa was much quieter than usual, even with 9 clearances. [1] Adam Cerra: Like the Captain, Adam got his hands on the ball, but his disposal lacked the penetration it often has. 28 possessions and 6 clearances. [1] Jacob Weitering: Not his best night, but he stood up in the last quarter. [1] Nick Haynes: Not his best game, but he was a great trier. [1] Jesse Motlop: Not enough of the ball, but 2 goals in the circumstances was reasonable. He looked dangerous, which none of our other small forwards really did. [0.5] Charlie Curnow: Normally a game where Charlie gets 18 possessions, 9 marks and 4 scoring shots would be a match-winning effort, but not this night. 4 straight points didn’t help. Charlie’s disposal was not up to his normal standard, nor was the disposal to him. Still, the effort was there this time; now to get some results! [0.5] Sam Docherty: Doc got the ball a fair bit (22 possessions), but he always seemed to be under pressure. [0.5] Cooper Lord: Cooper didn’t have one of his best nights and his kicking, usually a strength, was off target. Still, he didn’t give up and got 18 possessions. [0.5] Flynn Young: Flynn was only on a one quarter, but got 6 possessions, 2 of which were brilliant, 2 of which were helicopters. Still, he was an improvement over the output of some of his more storied teammates.
Honourable Mentions: George Hewett: George didn’t have a great night, but he did get 18 possessions, 7 tackles and 4 clearances. Blake Acres: Blake started well, but his disposal and decision making were dreadful. Still, 20 possessions was reasonable. Matthew Carroll: Matt didn’t have a great night, but he kept going. Ashton Moir: While Ashton didn’t have a great game, he did show that he has a future; a couple of nice clearances, an excellent goal and a couple of excellent marks suggests he is heading in the right direction.
Not on TC this week; instead our game starts at 12:05 at Carlton on Friday. I read some time ago that the game was going to be around 16:00, but that appears no longer the case. To get Brissie back to Brissie sooner?
Voting is as usual: you have 15 votes to award pretty much as you will, with the following provisos: [1] 15 votes in total, no more, no less. [2] No more than 10 votes for any one player (even Sam Walsh or Patrick Cripps) [3] Three players at least must get a mention. [4] A grade for the game, A+ (what I want to see) to F-.
