I really don't like the time of this one, but ...
Well, a good attempt, we made a Prelim, and overall a positive season end.
Two games I was concerned with and that was Melbourne and Brisbane at Gabba.
Just to show that top four is crucial - this team will learn the profile is very young.
Have no problem with our team selection, we didn't lose it at the match committee table, just ran out of petrol and were beaten by a better side. It will just make us hungrier. Top 4 finish is a must.
The players that came in certainly did their job. Well done Harry, Martin, Boyd. Marchbank, who many queried, also did a fine job. Finally building some depth and a healthy list post-bye.
Disappointing of course. In the end though it was a hard fought long road and it showed. GF from outside the 4 is elusive for good reason.
Well done to the club for a season that will go down as a ripper.
My edit.
Shout out to Ollie Hollands 🇳🇱 one of the youngest out there. Learning will be immense.
Unfortunately other than Sam Walsh who is one of the best players I have ever seen... Crippa, Hewett and Cerra got beaten up and bashed.. but that's ok as it was Brisbane at the Gabba. Top four 2024 boys .
Gutted but very proud of the boys. We have plenty to work with for the future.
Dear Mr Cornes.
Can you repeat your gross underestimation of Walshy please?
I thought not!
Well done Walshy. You're a superstar 👏🏼
Coleman a deserved BOG.
Good ladder result. Obviously need to work on body strength. Inject some speed by foot, and class by disposal. Much work for Voss, but something to show that you can only work with the stock you have. We went far further with a squad that would never beat Brisbane. If we didn’t start as we did it would have been a humiliation. We have some needs and Voss needs to see where he can find what he needs. Great result for the season, but not a flag winning unit just yet. Keep shopping for better stock and develop some of the youth. Well done for the seasons result. Now is time to build on a better 2024.
16 pts flattered us. So much learning will come from 3 finals against quality opponents.
Ran out of steam in the end...Get on us for 2024 ;)
It took us 3q to kick the same score as we kicked in the 1st. Once Brisbane asserted themselves, we really had no answers. They monstered us around the ball and beat us on the outside as well. Oh well. Super season that was bound to run out of steam sooner or later. I'm surprised we got as far as we did.
16 pts flattered us. So much learning will come from 3 finals against quality opponents.
16pts was a sign of a good fight.
Ran out of steam in the end...Get on us for 2024 ;)
My membership is already paid. After so very very long, the future looks bright. Cleaning out the dead wood and overifluencers was pivotal. Oh and it turns out going with a tenacious, straight talking, humble and trusting coach was a master-stroke.
Charlie Curnow again very poor against a very average defender.
We held BrisVegas to a losing score but our inability to kick big scores for the past few weeks came back to haunt us. Our defensive game, and our defensive group is top notch. Our offensive game and mids to forwards connection, and forward line group, need work. We need more reward for effort.
As silly as it might seem, I'd rather lose a preliminary final than a grand final.
The boys will have learned so much from the back end of this season and especially our finals exposure.
Charlie Curnow again very poor against a very average defender.
Charles had a very disappointing finals series.
If Brisbane end up winning the premiership, we can console ourselves we were beaten by the best team in the competition. Not sure Collingwood would have wanted to play us, and I do not fear them. The Lions at the Gabba is a fortress.
Charles had a very disappointing finals series.
Charlie Curnow again very poor against a very average defender.
He certainly had a finals series he'd rather forget. The contrast between his h/a form and finals form is marked, and hopefully a fatigue related aberration.
I thought Gov and Walsh were probably our best tonight. Plenty of players had tiny moments here and there, but many of our stars were down I thought.
Terrible after the first 20 min.
If Brisbane end up winning the premiership, we can console ourselves we were beaten by the best team in the competition. Not sure Collingwood would have wanted to play us, and I do not fear them. The Lions at the Gabba is a fortress.
I'd say Brisbane would have to start the GF as favourites, even if it's slight.
He certainly had a finals series he'd rather forget. The contrast between his h/a form and finals form is marked, and hopefully a fatigue related aberration.
I thought Gov and Walsh were probably our best tonight. Plenty of players had tiny moments here and there, but many of our stars were down I thought.
Yep top four to avoid this type of contest to paly in GF and chance of winning it. I think we could have rattled Collingwood
We are definitely going in the right direction.
16pts was a sign of a good fight.
Absolutely. This team doesn't lose belief. What a seismic turnaround. That deafening CLICK q2 v GC is something hard to explain. But it happened and the rest will breed promise and hunger for more.
Charlie Curnow again very poor against a very average defender.
Choked
Terrible after the first 20 min.
Outmuscled, outrun, outplayed and outgunned by a clearly superior opponent. No disgrace in that performance IMO. They have real hardness and real skill. I'm tipping them for the flag.
Choked
Yeah he did - but he is in mid 20s and played against the best defensive systems in the systems week after week.
Ball movement needs to improve a little bit more
I'm guessing there must be a whistle thief prowling around the corridors of AFL HQ. Some of the missed frees......
On Charlie.
He was double tagged and scragged in the finals. Also absorbed the heat without H for multiple h/a games.
Terrible after the first 20 min.
We lost by 16.
H had a complete gimme free he didn’t get in the last Quarter push in the back that was so obvious I assume that umpire will not umpire again / if he’d kicked that we’d have had momentum.
Not sure how that result equates to we only played a good first 20 mins?
Choked
Being beaten doesn’t mean choked. Charlie is a big game player, just didnt get it done Today. It happens.
His final series was without his co forward H or Jack Martin. He is only human.
Separately why was Fogs subbed out? Thought he was exceptional.
...........................
Separately why was Fogs subbed out? Thought he was exceptional.
If I were to speculate, I'd say the fact that we were being smashed and out hunted around the ball forced their hand, and they thought another big body at the coalface was a better choice. It make sense IMO.
Unless of course Fogarty was injured, but i didn't notice anything.
Better team won but they had to work at it. We ran out of steam mentally after they started coming close but happy with the year. We are two years behind Brisbane in development but we know what it takes now.
Still don’t know why we constantly bomb the ball up forward instead of having another string to our bow by running it closer looking for leads. A few got found out thought Cincotta was poor but been a good find and needed a bit more class than Fogarty maybe Owies but never know. Our tactic of Doc being an extra mid from the forward line failed as we kept kicking it to his man Coleman who used it well. 16 points flattered our last three quarters of play but a year of improvement and we are earning respect not ridicule anymore
We lost by 16.
H had a complete gimme free he didn’t get in the last Quarter push in the back that was so obvious I assume that umpire will not umpire again / if he’d kicked that we’d have had momentum.
Not sure how that result equates to we only played a good first 20 mins?
What was our score after 30 min compared to the end
Being beaten doesn’t mean choked. Charlie is a big game player, just didnt get it done Today. It happens.
His final series was without his co forward H or Jack Martin. He is only human.
Separately why was Fogs subbed out? Thought he was exceptional.
Stupid sub. Cripps should have been subbed.
If we make the finals in 2024 you expect a better finals series from Cripps and Charlie Curnow
What was our score after 30 min compared to the end
We lost by 16 points to a team that-
1. Had no significant injuries
2. Had a week off
3. Had a relatively easy run to the end
4. Home ground advantage
MBB. Has a point. We played almost one great quarter, then scored 4 goals in 3 quarters. We might have tried hard but we’re smashed every position on the park. We were lucky it was a close result. We could have lost by 6 or more goals. They are by far a better unit than we are.
MBB. Has a point. We played almost one great quarter, then scored 4 goals in 3 quarters. We might have tried hard but we’re smashed every position on the park. We were lucky it was a close result. We could have lost by 6 or more goals. They are by far a better unit than we are.
Yeah, but we didn’t 🤷🏻♀️
MBB. Has a point. We played almost one great quarter, then scored 4 goals in 3 quarters. We might have tried hard but we’re smashed every position on the park. We were lucky it was a close result. We could have lost by 6 or more goals. They are by far a better unit than we are.
Yes of course they are, they finished second. We scraped in after capitulating halfway thru the season. And have done damn well, our first quarter was a (wonderful) aberration but was never really sustainable at a ground we haven’t won at for 10? Years.
We did damn well. Should be proud. I am. Learning experience that will hold us in good stead for the future!!
MBB. Has a point. We played almost one great quarter, then scored 4 goals in 3 quarters. We might have tried hard but we’re smashed every position on the park. We were lucky it was a close result. We could have lost by 6 or more goals. They are by far a better unit than we are.
Not so sure. More a case that we were cooked and banged up after such a hard run. Not hard for the other side to look alot better in that situation.
Yes of course they are, they finished second. We scraped in after capitulating halfway thru the season. And have done damn well, our first quarter was a (wonderful) aberration but was never really sustainable at a ground we haven’t won at for 10? Years.
We did damn well. Should be proud. I am. Learning experience that will hold us in good stead for the future!!
That is almost 100% true wise one. However you don’t win a flag by ground advantage or past records. I am most certainly proud of our end result. I am just saying we need to work on so many things next season. If we don’t then we may just be similar to sides that fight to be in the top 8. We got there through miraculous pressure and effort. That is taxing. We need more class and speed. Plus a genuine ruck. On a good day we wouldn’t have caught Brisbane sleeping at the wheel. Don’t get me wrong. We didn’t get spanked. We should have. Look at the US open result. Two great players. One got completely smashed in the final in straight sets. We did well and need to build to a better result next season. A few players need to be moved on. I think we finally have the coach to get us a result.
Well done Baggers! Proud of the lot of ‘em!
Frustrated as well though, of course. Hard to know what to say. Probably should have been more vigilant with regard to the opposition’s 5-6 goal run-on interstate which has been our Achilles heel for years now.
Coleman cut us up in the second q but I guess that’s what separates the top few sides from the rest - a lesser name player will often step up catching coaches and tacticians unawares.
Such a stupid sized ground. No wonder Brisbane are unbeatable at the ‘Gabba but useless at the G. I fear for next week’s outcome.
I think Voss and the players have demonstrated a pretty good understanding of damage limitation, of grit and determination, of defensive structures and staying in the contest when things aren't going your way, but I think today's game has given us an idea of the gap that still exists between us and the best.
I think Voss and the players have demonstrated a pretty good understanding of damage limitation, of grit and determination, of defensive structures and staying in the contest when things aren't going your way, but I think today's game has given us an idea of the gap that still exists between us and the best.
There isn't a gap, we were completely buggered and banged up after a very long run. Any side would look good then. If we finished 6th, hence got a much softer run through we'd be playing next week. Sydney and Melbourne were always going to be brutal, contested games. Not so much the other way. Last week for GWS, v Port, was near bruise free in the context of a final.
There isn't a gap, we were completely buggered and banged up after a very long run. Any side would look good then. If we finished 6th, hence got a much softer run through we'd be playing next week. Sydney and Melbourne were always going to be brutal, contested games. Not so much the other way. Last week for GWS, v Port, was near bruise free in the context of a final.
So if we had to play GWS in or the Saints it would have ended any different. We lost against GWS if I remember. It wasn’t about the run in. Eventually you lose to a better squad. Pick 6 players from the Brisbane squad you would swap for our squad. If the result is Nill, then we lost by being too tired or just by bad luck. We did well to get the result we finished with.
There really isn't a gap.
This is already a premiership capable side...
Our best players are in their prime.
Another year for our young players like Hollands and Motlop
Injured players like Williams and Silvagni thereabouts and available
Plenty of competition for spots and versatility to throw players around when needed.
Some good solid finals experience behind us, when just about all players stood up at one stage or another.
Get that top 4 spot next year, and don't have to travel.
Home and hosed ;) ;D
There really isn't a gap.
This is already a premiership capable side...
Our best players are in their prime.
Another year for our young players like Hollands and Motlop
Injured players like Williams and Silvagni thereabouts and available
Plenty of competition for spots and versatility to throw players around when needed.
Some good solid finals experience behind us, when just about all players stood up at one stage or another.
Get that top 4 spot next year, and don't have to travel.
Home and hosed ;) ;D
Sounds easy.
Let’s go! BLUES 2024!!!
I wanted us to turn up ready to play, have a red hot go and not give up. I am happy with the effort. I think we lack a bit of leg speed, our two midfielders with a bit of pace, Dow and Fisher are out of favour and probably leaving the Club, our small forwards need to be more dangerous and both kick more goals and set up more goals, and our disposal and decision-making coming out of defence needs to improve.
We have finished third which is a remarkable effort considering where we were mid season but we really should have finished top four so we don't have to play interstate finals. We have never won an interstate final so we should do everything we can to avoid them.
Brisbane's midfield got on top, Lachie Neal was sensational, their defence rebounded brilliantly and their forwards were always dangerous.
We are now a side you can follow and it is good we are disappointed with finishing third. Improve our list, improve our skills and improve our team's connectivity. That's the challenge for 2024.
There really isn't a gap.
This is already a premiership capable side...
Our best players are in their prime.
Another year for our young players like Hollands and Motlop
Injured players like Williams and Silvagni thereabouts and available
Plenty of competition for spots and versatility to throw players around when needed.
Some good solid finals experience behind us, when just about all players stood up at one stage or another.
Get that top 4 spot next year, and don't have to travel.
Home and hosed ;) ;D
No gap then. We must have the equal best squad. How did we get beaten up in 3 quarters of football. Sure e did well to limit the damage. However we might have only limited the damage. Same squad and the same result at the MCG in my opinion. We need a couple of skilled small forwards. Another mid with genuine speed. Another speedster defender and a ruck with strength. We are not closer to a flag before we address these issues. We either develop the stock we have or find a few new guys that have physical capabilities. We looked far weaker than our opponent tonight. They look physically bigger in body mass. Just an observation. As an average over most positions.
What size is the Gabba? Looks close to the MCG?
I think in hindsight, if they were all fit, Motlop over Owies was a mistake, we needed a small forward with enough pace to impact the overlap run, and Motlop just doesn't have it, or if he has it he doesn't use it. Early on, we also missed smalls at the fall of the ball, lots and lots of opportunities cleaned up by the Lions, I thought it was stupidity Martin and Motlop flying with Harry and Charlie and the Lions just sweeping the pill away, we could have been ten goals up at quarter time with sensible fundamentals of roving to Harry and Charlie, 9 out of 10 times the ball is coming to ground if they don't mark it, and we were hardly there at the fall.
Our lack of leg speed exposed our midfield, although I doubt we were 100% fit, but then at this time of year who is.
I though Harry and Charlie were OK, they both worked hard but our delivery to them wasn't the best. We still continue to put the footy on the heads of team-mates too much.
Subbing Fogarty for Kennedy was probably a concession that we got selection wrong, but maybe Kennedy was also a concession about the fitness of some of the players we took into the game.
I was a bit surprised by how much we panicked with the footy, missing too many targets by hand or foot, even when clear.
What size is the Gabba? Looks close to the MCG?
I think normally the Gabba is the shortest ground in the AFL, but I heard Voss say there was extra space on the ground tonight so I don't know what that means.
We've played hard games apart from one against GWS for many weeks.
Brisbane were rested and primed.
Several of our players have injuries that will likely see them in hospital in the coming week.
Our only chance was to hit them hard early, they were able to absorb that and then hit back...we rolled the dice and then ran out of steam.
It was never about attitude, effort and ability...it was always about coping physically...and eventually we reached the tipping point.
Ability wise this team is as good as any in the competition.
You know we had them worried. They brought out the knuckle and tunnelling in the second quarter. We stood up to it ok, but conceded too many goals in the second.
I think if we could change anything in that game would be the ability to endure in that adversity and not concede.
Never mind. The windiw is open. 2024 is a year we can feel good about winning a flag.
Through the lens of a side that was 4-1-8 not that long ago, we have gotten far more out of this season that anyone could ever have imagined. Sets up a fantastic pillar for 2024 and beyond.
The learning we have to absorb is the difference when we take the game on. First 20 minutes and most of the last quarter, we ran hard together, and dared to win. In the middle bit, we were stodgy and reactionary, and totally got our comeuppance. And any time we come up against sides with fast-running half-backs who set up play, we are in trouble (Coleman and McKenna completely owned us tonight), we need some harder working half-forwards who do not let this happen.
But we have certainly proved we are there or thereabouts, and I can't help thinking that if that game is at the MCG, we turn the tables.
Disappointed, but wrapped that we are relevant once again.......
Everyone has pretty much summed it up well. We made great progress from where we were. We found system and belief in each other. Big tick. G&D will get you only so far, however. My key observations in no particular order:
1 Reward for effort. We continue to bomb it in to the forward line and hope the tall forwards will do the rest. We rarely lower the eyes and deliver the ball low and to a leading forward.
2. We have few players that can deliver 1) above. We need more skilled, pacey players in the midfield. Players that can change direction and break lines. And hit the scoreboard
3. Need a classy small forward or 2. Owies, Motlop etc won't win you a flag.
4. Another rebounding defender with pace. Otherwise backline in good shape.
5. Whilst I'm doing my wish list, try and find a young "needle mover". He might not be the most consistent player on your list but he is dynamic. Think DeGoey. Without him, the Pies lose the other night IMO.
That's it, not too much to ask now is it?
No point some complaining about Charlie or H in finals of all of a sudden it is OK to tunnel and take the legs out of KPPs.
We are lucky we still have Charlie for 2024 after last night!
Only saw the first quarter and was frustrated by the delivery into F50: too many long bombs onto blokes' heads, smalls flying against talls and not on the deck doing their job. Motlop is evasive but too slow and dropping Owies was a mistake IMO as he creates space. Should have been eight up at quarter time. Then the dam broke. If we'd pinched it next week could have potentially been embarassing.
So if we had to play GWS in or the Saints it would have ended any different. We lost against GWS if I remember. It wasn’t about the run in. Eventually you lose to a better squad. Pick 6 players from the Brisbane squad you would swap for our squad. If the result is Nill, then we lost by being too tired or just by bad luck. We did well to get the result we finished with.
GWS was a dead rubber where we went through the motions last round. Just ignore that one. We played 2 of the hardest contested sides in brutal games to get to the PF and got pretty banged up. Then had to follow that with a trip to the Gabba. I'd have been happier playing the Saints and Port, hitting a Melbourne PF in much better shape. I reckon then we beat the Pies. We lost away at the Gabba banged up and cooked, by just 16pts. So, no, there's no.real gap. Easy to.look superior when the other sidebis knackered.
Just the way it works out sometimes.
Well done boys you did me proud.
Let’s enjoy the next few weeks then reassess
The club will regret the it's slow start to the season, cost it a top four spot, and ultimately a GF slot.
Even so, if opponents are allowed to take legs and hit lower backs without consequences we have a problem. Cripps, TDK, McGovern, Charlie and H are all lucky to be serious injury free. They all copped lower back hits or tunneling from players not even facing the footy, it's a miracle Charlie isn't an ACL or broken ankle today.
Lions have had five finals series in a row this is Dane Zorkos first GF at age 34.
They were desperate and hungry to get over the line. Other than Melbourne this is the hardest game to win in the 2023 season.
Top two is the only solution to avoid these fixtures. We were completely smashed in clearances and stoppages.
To become a true premiership contender we will need to improve the structure/movement of our forwards and particularly how the ball is delivered into the forward 50 m area. Long high kicks into the area are a gift for backs to set up and defender against.
No wonder Charlie C. had a bad finals series given the way we were delivering the ball.
With a less cluttered up forward line, Charlie and co may even get some effective leads in! :) :)
We also would benefit from another mid size marking straight kicking forward, imo.
cheers Ab
Just a couple of takeaways from Voss's press conference....not necessarily things he emphasised, but impressions I gained
A lot of supporters are naturally disappointed this morning, but happy and satisfied with how far we've come given the position we were in.
That satisfaction can't be the same for the player.
They can't be satisfied with the effort...it has to make them hurt and want more.
Naturally they'll be hurting and disappointed but that level of hurt has to really burn, otherwise we could see another sluggish start to the year.
Secondly our age profile... check out the ages
https://www.draftguru.com.au/lists/2023/carlton
Some of our very good players are surprisingly young....many under 24, and many locked away for a few years at least.
It's hard to be too critical of a player when he's only 19-22 with years of development left in him
Silvagni talked about building a list for sustained success.
He got the ball rolling, but it was a bit of a roller coaster ride, now though....
That's what we have.
So many terrific summaries here, so many good reads.
2023 achievements:
One of the best ever VFL/AFL mid-season turnarounds.
Relevant and a bona fide flag contender again - bravo CFC.
Winning culture and palpable 'spirit.'
To take the next step:
Mindful that our 2024 draw will be harder.
Mids to forwards connections/delivery in heat must improve, again.
Forward line must kick higher scores against top opposition.
Finish h/a season top 4.
To become a true premiership contender we will need to improve the structure/movement of our forwards and particularly how the ball is delivered into the forward 50 m area. Long high kicks into the area are a gift for backs to set up and defender against.
No wonder Charlie C. had a bad finals series given the way we were delivering the ball.
With a less cluttered up forward line, Charlie and co may even get some effective leads in! :) :)
We also would benefit from another mid size marking straight kicking forward, imo.
cheers Ab
I would like to add in a class small forward who pressures and kicks goals. We are slightly below par here imo. Not sure what we have will improve.
I would like to add in a class small forward who pressures and kicks goals. We are slightly below par here imo. Not sure what we have will improve.
Maybe, but...
Motlop is only 19
I'd back him to be some sort of player by the time he's 22
Maybe, but...
Motlop is only 19
I'd back him to be some sort of player by the time he's 22
Durdin is also only 21.
I would like to add in a class small forward who pressures and kicks goals. We are slightly below par here imo. Not sure what we have will improve.
Motlop lacks the blistering speed that we associate with dominant small forwards but IIRC he has shown he can be a player - more so than Eddie Betts, who developed into a top player but who was gifted quite a few games in his early career.
I really hope you guys are right about Motlop. If he got near being Eddie B quality I'd be rapt!
I like Motlop, he has improved and as I keep saying that run in the twos where he spent time further up the ground in a midfield role helped his game.
He isnt that definitive crumbing type small though and that's what I think Cookie wants..
Motlop lacks the blistering speed that we associate with dominant small forwards but IIRC he has shown he can be a player - more so than Eddie Betts, who developed into a top player but who was gifted quite a few games in his early career.
100%. Motlop, Kemp, Boyd, Dekoning, Hollands are all looking very good for their age and im comfortable we have a capable young group that once they get a few more seasons under their belt will improve us further.
On the year as a whole, Charlie for whatever reason couldn't play to his high standard in any of the 3 finals. No doubt all our finals opposition coaches put a hell of a lot of work into stopping him and maybe we just thought he would replicate his H/A form. Hopefully Charlie and our forward coaches learn from this and are better equipped when it comes around next year.
Considering how bagged up we were to key players i was happy to just win the first final but to get into a Prelim and play away where they haven't lost all year this group can be proud and will get some invaluable lessons playing so deep into a final series which 'should' propel us further and faster then we would have if we were outed in the elimination final.
Be proud fellow blues, finally we have a team ready and believing and will be in the flag window IMO for the next 5-6 years. Exciting times ahead.
I like Motlop, he has improved and as I keep saying that run in the twos where he spent time further up the ground in a midfield role helped his game.
He isnt that definitive crumbing type small though and that's what I think Cookie wants..
He kicked 24 goals from 20 games this year. At the same age in 2006 Betts kicked 20 goals from 21 games.
Eddie's break out year was 2009 when he kicked 38 goals.
I can’t believe Cerra is 23, seems so much older to me.
I heard the interview with Voss. Made some comments that can’t be argued. Especially the fact that Brisbane have been in finals for a few years and working towards a flag opportunity. These opportunities take time. I hope as supporters we don’t assume a potential flag next season. If might take time to get to the ultimate opportunity. GWS is a good example. They had a chance on the big stage and lost. This season they fell short in a preliminary final by 1 point. Sydney had an ultimate opportunity and failed. Then to be eliminated in the first final. Melbourne going out in straight sets 2 years in a row. It takes minimal injuries and everything falling in place at the right moment. For now any players with potential surgeries should do what needs to be done. Take a break, and then plan how to change and improve before next season. While the club looks at better development of the youth and what needs to come to the club with other players.
16pts was a sign of a good fight.
Spot on! They were made to earn their score, we defended with heart, spirit and determination. That cannot be faulted at all. Cameron's shanks made it look better than what it should have been on the scoreboard, but we had some near misses as well, which could have made the game much closer or even a most impossible win! But really, the better team won. They were far too good for three quarters around the middle of the ground and with their ball use on the outside, the 'Gabba is a very large ground, they haven't lose there all year and deserve their spot in the GF. They've been knocking on the door for a few years and it is clearly their time now, ours will come. You've generally got to have the experience of finals before you win one. In closing, speaking of large grounds, so is the MCG, why they struggle there so much, I don't know...
So if we had to play GWS in or the Saints it would have ended any different. We lost against GWS if I remember. It wasn’t about the run in. Eventually you lose to a better squad. Pick 6 players from the Brisbane squad you would swap for our squad. If the result is Nill, then we lost by being too tired or just by bad luck. We did well to get the result we finished with.
We also beat GWS as well and lost to them as they had more to play for than us at the time.
Speaking of Cameron, I think Saad must have been getting to him. He was very prickly and had a couple of goes at at him, quite heatedly.
They were far too good for three quarters around the middle of the ground and with their ball use on the outside, the 'Gabba is a very large ground …
20m shorter than the G and 20m narrower.
i have said it all year until we change our game plan /style we will not go far,our fullbacks kick in how many fu....k n games long to the wing only to see opposition run it back and the long bombs to fwd 50 /line and you watch opposition run it out with quick ball movement ,over to the coaches and preseason
20m shorter than the G and 20m narrower.
I've tried looking on the internet, and I find conflicting dimensions given for both the MCG and the Gabba.,
This article would have yo be correct.
https://www.theage.com.au/interactive/2020/mcg-v-gabba/
To have a realistic chance at being in the top 2 next year changes have to be made to the forward line personnel, beginning with the forwards coach. As has already been mentioned, how were Motlop and Martin allowed to compete for marks with Charlie resulting in their opponents clearing the ball out of our forward line with no opposition?
I see Owies, Durdin and Fogarty as being hard at the ball but too easily covered and not having the skills to impact a game.
I am most disappointed with Cuningham. He has shown he has the skills to carve up a defence but once again has gone missing after a few cameo performances.
To have a realistic chance at being in the top 2 next year changes have to be made to the forward line personnel, beginning with the forwards coach. As has already been mentioned, how were Motlop and Martin allowed to compete for marks with Charlie resulting in their opponents clearing the ball out of our forward line with no opposition?
I see Owies, Durdin and Fogarty as being hard at the ball but too easily covered and not having the skills to impact a game.
......................................
It's hard to know if the issue is time / evolution or whether change is actually required. I suspect the former. We have two Coleman medallists, a 3rd tall which could most likely be either Silvagni, Kennedy, or Jack Martin, and then a bunch of smalls (Durdin, Owies, Fogarty, Motlop) who are either young or low draft picks or rookies. The smalls have all shown glimpses, and need to be persisted with IMO. Ash Hansen is highly regarded in footy circles, if we believe what is written.
We sit 5th on % in 2023, 9th in points for, 4th in points against. Interestingly the Crows are 1st in points for. Voss has achieved one of his prime objectives which is that we are are hard to play against. Not sure where to from here.
We sit 5th on % in 2023, 9th in points for, 4th in points against. Interestingly the Crows are 1st in points for. Voss has achieved one of his prime objectives which is that we are are hard to play against. Not sure where to from here.
Williams will be back, that is more run, and more options. Cunningham surely won't do himself a stupid pre-season injury again. Owies will be better for missing out this week. Hopefully Motlop will be fitter after another pre-season, if you not going to be quick you must be able to endure.
Hollands will be better, stronger harder to shake and harder to tackle.
McKay and Charlie need consistent games together.
Hopefully we won't have Doc, Cripps and Acres carrying injuries into games, and Pitto and TDK get a pre-season together.
He kicked 24 goals from 20 games this year. At the same age in 2006 Betts kicked 20 goals from 21 games.
Eddie's break out year was 2009 when he kicked 38 goals.
I think Motlop has a bit more upside/variety to his game than just being a specialist forward pocket , Id equate him more to a promising Jack Martin type than say a specialist small goalkicker like Eddie was. Motlop could be run through the middle and is capable of getting 20 possies a game imo and I wouldnt be consigning him to be a stay at home small crumbing forward which I think is what Cookie is asking for. 24 goals is a very good effort given how we started the season and while I dont expect him to reach Eddies numbers in goals kicked I think he can be a more versatile player like I said and thats how I would be judging him rather than goals kicked.
Motlop is a young star.
Very intelligent teenager and our classiest small forward by far. Needs some help there Owies not the answer.... Cunners not sure - has the class but goes missing too much.
Corey Durdin is the one we missed the most. Genuine pace, kicks goals, applies forward pressure. Very much missed, and was one of our best against Sydney last year which was one of our best wins for the year.
Struggled this year for whatever reason.
20m shorter than the G and 20m narrower.
Ball swings more at the Gabba though....lol.
The main lesson is not to lose 8 from 9 games. That could well have been flag costing. Such a long way back from there and at some stage you hit a wall for one reason or another. Win 3 of those 8 and, om face value at least, we are top 4. Can be other variables but one can see the point. Top 4, into the finals much fresher mentally, physically and it is a different game.
Still, it is great to see the want, desire and culture come back to the club. If anything that might start something big. As long as we don't go into next year thinking we only have to turn up to succeed. A few sides have done that before, like Geelong in 2006 and Richmond in 2016 for example. Soon woke them up!
Corey Durdin is the one we missed the most. Genuine pace, kicks goals, applies forward pressure. Very much missed, and was one of our best against Sydney last year which was one of our best wins for the year.
Struggled this year for whatever reason.
Our early season struggles to move the ball forward and his shoulder injury as we got momentum going didn't help. Shows how remarkable Charlie's season was.
Ball swings more at the Gabba though....lol.
Yep, while I also saw conflicting information on the dimensions of the Gabba during my google search, it's known during the cricket season that the square boundaries are very long. Narrower in width than the MCG I can buy and may answer Brisbane's struggles at the big 'G, but not to the extent of being as narrow as GMHBA or Adelaide Oval.
Just saw a stat re Curnow.
He may have had a lean finals but....he's the only player ever to kick a goal in 26/26 games
Lots of 25/25 (Ablett, Franklin and others) and 24/24 (Hudson, Dunstall....) but only Charlie has the 26/26
(Having the extra gather round helped) ;)
Just saw a stat re Curnow.
He may have had a lean finals but....he's the only player ever to kick a goal in 26/26 games
Lots of 25/25 (Ablett, Franklin and others) and 24/24 (Hudson, Dunstall....) but only Charlie has the 26/26
That's outstanding, although it must be said that the four others played in better teams and played in lesser games during those years.
I managed to watch the most game on my laptop in between checking out of hotels, transiting to and from Airports and catching planes home. I missed all of the 2nd qtr. I'll have to watch the game again on a proper TV to judge properly but to me, our first qtr shows why we can match it with all the contenders. Our last two quarters show why you need to finish top 4 to make the big dance.
We need a massive preseason and load up again ensuring we learn from:
- The horror run of 8 losses from rnds 5 to 13.
- The brilliant run of wins against contenders.
- The 3 unbelievable finals we played.
I thought our two youngest in Motts and Hollands were fantastic last night, for such young heads and bodies, they had a serious crack.
I'm proud of my club again, thank you CFC.
Go Blues and bring on 2024.
I managed to watch the most game on my laptop in between checking out of hotels, transiting to and from Airports and catching planes home. I missed all of the 2nd qtr. I'll have to watch the game again on a proper TV to judge properly but to me, our first qtr shows why we can match it with all the contenders. Our last two quarters show why you need to finish top 4 to make the big dance.
We need a massive preseason and load up again ensuring we learn from:
- The horror run of 8 losses from rnds 5 to 13.
- The brilliant run of wins against contenders.
- The 3 unbelievable finals we played.
I thought our two youngest in Motts and Hollands were fantastic last night, for such young heads and bodies, they had a serious crack.
I'm proud of my club again, thank you CFC.
Go Blues and bring on 2024.
I thought Hollands struggled on Jarrod Berry, I like Hollands as he has a crack but Berry is a big unit and doubled our mans possessions and we didnt do our rookie wingman any favours and maybe should have played Cuningham.
I thought Hollands struggled on Jarrod Berry, I like Hollands as he has a crack but Berry is a big unit and doubled our mans possessions and we didnt do our rookie wingman any favours and maybe should have played Cuningham.
Cunners was a witches hat for the 2 finals, he had to get dropped. If Charlie wasn't Charlie and dual Coleman medalist, he probably should have joined him. Not laying blame here, its a team game not 1 player here or there. I just loved Ollie's approach to the finals.
That's outstanding, although it must be said that the four others played in better teams and played in lesser games during those years.
There were quite a few players with the 25/25 and 24/24 I just picked a few of the best.
Matty Lloyd, Old Daicos, Quinlan, Nick Riewoldt Pav and others all had goal each game seasons...
Jezza had a 24/25 season in 1970.
I've seen some vision today of Charlie in some contests over the finals and gee, some of the tunneling tactics used against him were quite dangerous.
Cunners was a witches hat for the 2 finals, he had to get dropped. If Charlie wasn't Charlie and dual Coleman medalist, he probably should have joined him. Not laying blame here, its a team game not 1 player here or there. I just loved Ollie's approach to the finals.
I thought Berry was influential and that was the problem, home and away game its fine to leave the matchup continue for Hollands to get experience but not in a do or die prelim...
I thought Weiters struggled a bit.
Kemp being dropped meant that he had to be accountable, he was led to the ball and gave up at least 3 goals including 1 to McInerny.
Boyd played a ripper game to be fair but our tall defenders all had a man, none were able to be the 3rd man up.
Good ladder result. Obviously need to work on body strength. Inject some speed by foot, and class by disposal. Much work for Voss, but something to show that you can only work with the stock you have. We went far further with a squad that would never beat Brisbane. If we didn’t start as we did it would have been a humiliation. We have some needs and Voss needs to see where he can find what he needs. Great result for the season, but not a flag winning unit just yet. Keep shopping for better stock and develop some of the youth. Well done for the seasons result. Now is time to build on a better 2024.
People have been saying our list is fine and we just need to go to the draft this year.
However ......... you are 100% correct here Mantis, we are not the finished product yet and still need another 2 or 3 hard runners with good leg speed.
Charlie Curnow again very poor against a very average defender.
He doesn't have any second efforts and never has, if the ball doesn't bounce back into his arms he just stops and lets everyone & anyone else grab it.
Furthermore, whilst he has been a terrific goal-kicker from us, his finals series has been deplorable. During this off-season, it is imperative that he stops listening to all the media hype and learns that reputations are made in finals, not beating up the little kids in the playground.
I thought Weiters struggled a bit.
Kemp being dropped meant that he had to be accountable, he was led to the ball and gave up at least 3 goals including 1 to McInerny.
Boyd played a ripper game to be fair but our tall defenders all had a man, none were able to be the 3rd man up.
McInerney was a pain when he played forward, Weitering had to cover Daniher and the Brisbane ruckman was just too tall for everyone else and poor Jacob cant play on them all. This is where Young probably has a role when in form and I hope the coaches can get him back to his best as having that extra tall defender is a bonus.
McGovern and Boyd both played well, the latter surprised me and the former played a very good finals series and remained very disciplined and has found his niche down back.
Outmuscled, outrun, outplayed and outgunned by a clearly superior opponent. No disgrace in that performance IMO. They have real hardness and real skill. I'm tipping them for the flag.
Agreed !!
Fans underestimate the toll playing the Swans and Melbourne consecutively took on the squad, Top 4 with a week off is a huge advantage, and teams only have a chance from the bottom half of the eight if one of the top teams has some bad luck.
If the team has a problem it was the start to the season, not the finals effort.
I thought Berry was influential and that was the problem, home and away game its fine to leave the matchup continue for Hollands to get experience but not in a do or die prelim...
Not disputing Berry's influence, just commenting on Ollies application for a first year in a big final. I have to watch it again in full. Ill also add this comment re Charlie, it looked to me like he wasn't prepared to work hard enough to get to contests or make one. I recall one passage of play where Weiters burst from the backline and busted a boiler to hit up Charlie, the kick fell short despite his best efforts. Charlie appeared to be barely ambling along to get to it. Perhaps some harder work (running harder earlier in the piece) would have resulted in the kick hitting its intended target. Effort doesn't take talent. Not sure whether the pressure or the occasion(s) got to him or not, but he has work to do in this space. I'd rather he rips finals appart that win Coleman's.
It crapS me to tears when a bloke like McKenna - who has cut us up previously - does so again. It reeks of poor planning.
We have issues across half forward that need addressing. When he was 'on' Martin was that man, but yesterday our half fowards just didn't get it done and Coleman and McKenna ripped us a new one. We've got a group of these blokes eg Martin Fisher Cunners Owies so I can see why we'd be chasing Eli Hollands, its part of the ground that we need to find a player for. Pace, class and ability to take a mark. They're always a bit up and down but a bloke like (gag) Rohan who could kick six on a good day, and stops the half backs running wild might be what we need.
It crapS me to tears when a bloke like McKenna - who has cut us up previously - does so again. It reeks of poor planning.
We have issues across half forward that need addressing. When he was 'on' Martin was that man, but yesterday our half fowards just didn't get it done and Coleman and McKenna ripped us a new one. We've got a group of these blokes eg Martin Fisher Cunners Owies so I can see why we'd be chasing Eli Hollands, its part of the ground that we need to find a player for. Pace, class and ability to take a mark. They're always a bit up and down but a bloke like (gag) Rohan who could kick six on a good day, and stops the half backs running wild might be what we need.
Yep, another 2-3 of them !!
Zac Williams is going to be a definite starter if he stays fit.
Re CC. Agree second efforts were poor. Only he would know what was going on between his ears, but he didn't rise to the finals challenge. Hopefully he has what it takes to learn from it. The talent is there, but finals are a different game and as one post said, you are playing against the best and you don't get to beat up on the less talented kids in the playground.
Zac Williams is going to be a definite starter if he stays fit.
Unknown quantity imho and I'd be making him earn his spot.
Cincotta earned his place in the team and even Boyd deserves to start ahead of him initially after performing well in the prelim.
Managed to stay awake to half time, they hit the lead and Mr Sandman visited. Internet at the hotel was no good, but was excited when we went from 3 goals to 5 in the first quarter in no time. Seemed like we came out hard and Lions didn't, but they settled towards the end of the first. Brisbane were back in the second, started playing their game and we didn't help ourselves but endeavour was there.
Commentators were saying how load our supporters were - well done, Thry.
As for the second half, no idea, but the score suggests we didn't give up. I was pleasantly surprised that we were less than 3 goals from the grannie.
It took half a season to get going, but what a ride when they did. Expectation from all will be high next season. It will be awesome if they deliver.
Well, at the start of the season I was hoping that we'd make the eight and perhaps even win a final. Those hopes had all but evaporated by round 13 but we came back. Making a preliminary final certainly exceeded my expectations.
Mid-way through the first quarter and I was daring to dream. It wasn't sustainable; too many banged up players, too many players whose form had dropped away, and too many players who struggled on the day, not to mention the home ground advantage enjoyed by the Lions.
Most of the usual suspects stood up, as did some of the lesser lights, but we were missing a couple of quality players on the day. They may well have been out there, but didn't quite realise it.
Despite the disappointment of the loss, it was a great effort by the players and Vossy and his assistants to get that far. In some ways, the loss to the Lions in round 8 was a turning point in our season. Coming back from the slump that followed was admirable but I think that loss sowed the seeds for our loss on Saturday.
Top four and home finals next season and it will be a different story.
If nothing else, Walsh must go close to winning the Gary Ayres without playing in the GF!
inject pace into midfield and hbf mean breakaway speed wat is needed ,said this many many times
Fagan chnaged the way the the big O was rucking and we did not know how to stop or take avantage of what he was doing. We also let Coleman run around loose because we had a +1 at stoppages and it was not working.
Very proud of how the club got themselves pf the canvas and ened up playing in a prelim.
Looking ofrward to next year. GO those Baggers
Fans underestimate the toll playing the Swans and Melbourne consecutively took on the squad, Top 4 with a week off is a huge advantage, and teams only have a chance from the bottom half of the eight if one of the top teams has some bad luck.
We essentially played half a dozen finals before the finals. Every week was do or die.
Unknown quantity imho and I'd be making him earn his spot.
Cincotta earned his place in the team and even Boyd deserves to start ahead of him initially after performing well in the prelim.
Ill predict Zac will struggle to get into the side in 2024. Salaries and reputations count for nothing with Vossy.
Fans underestimate the toll playing the Swans and Melbourne consecutively took on the squad, Top 4 with a week off is a huge advantage, and teams only have a chance from the bottom half of the eight if one of the top teams has some bad luck.
If the team has a problem it was the start to the season, not the finals effort.
Could be argued that those 8 losses in 9 games cost us a flag. As MBB said, we were playing sudden death matches to many weeks, then had to front up to two of the hardest, contested going in the finals. Hence we are banged up and cooked by the PF. Not only that, we had to do it in Brisbane too.
Ill predict Zac will struggle to get into the side in 2024. Salaries and reputations count for nothing with Vossy.
That's true, but Zac is the sort of player that Vossy likes. If he gets back to full fitness and plays his best footy, Zac's in the 22.
Could be argued that those 8 losses in 9 games cost us a flag. As MBB said, we were playing sudden death matches to many weeks, then had to front up to two of the hardest, contested going in the finals. Hence we are banged up and cooked by the PF. Not only that, we had to do it in Brisbane too.
That's the way I see it. The loss to Brisbane at Marvel screwed our season.
Ill predict Zac will struggle to get into the side in 2024. Salaries and reputations count for nothing with Vossy.
I agree but big contracts always create an obligation imho to play those players ahead of Joe average when positions are tight and there isn't much between the players on form and ability.
Never seen ZW play an outstanding game to be honest either for us or GWS so it will be interesting to see what he can bring and what all the hype on him is about.
People complain we lack outside pace, and elite disposal.
Zac Williams has both, and is a tough player when he is on. He is like Boyd but with much more capability.
His problems stems from a lack of consistency and thats down to his body letting him down.
He is like Mcgovern. All the ability, and without the opportunity and capability.
If we can get him right, he would play a similar role to that guy Coleman who cut us to pieces on saturday.
He is arguably the best field kick in the side.
People complain we lack outside pace, and elite disposal.
Zac Williams has both, and is a tough player when he is on. He is like Boyd but with much more capability.
His problems stems from a lack of consistency and thats down to his body letting him down.
He is like Mcgovern. All the ability, and without the opportunity and capability.
If we can get him right, he would play a similar role to that guy Coleman who cut us to pieces on saturday.
He is arguably the best field kick in the side.
Yes!
If we have learnt anything this year, it is that seemingly injury-prone players can stay fit and make valuable contributions.
If we can nail Zac’s fitness regime and he has an ounce of luck, he could make a real difference next season.
Best field kick in the side? Sorry, I'd need some convincing on that issue.
IMO, the minute Zac Williams is injury free and match fit, he comes straight in.
Best field kick in the side? Sorry, I'd need some convincing on that issue.
We don't have a lot of elite kicks, McGovern is clearly one, Boyd when he is on, I'd rate Williams and Hollands up there with Boyd but I'm not sure Williams takes as much risk as Boyd does.
Hollands for a 1st year has all the potential to be elite, Ryan Houlihan like elite, and we have Charlie and McKay in front of him!
A big improver this year has been Newman, still gets some wrong but cuts the opposition apart quite often when he gets it right.
Weiters is generally a good kick and a good decision maker, but probably doesn't get enough of the footy far enough up the field to make the most of it.
Binns coming through looks above average, LoB despite being maligned by some fans is an above average kick but fans only seem to remember the clangers.
For KPFs Charlie and McKay are above average field kicking, but of course they are usually in the wrong place to use it and that is the way we need it to stay.
If it was measured as a degree of difficulty like olympic diving, then I'd have McGovern, Boyd, Charlie on about par.
I wonder how much of our kicking problems are historical, I think under Bolts we had a too much defence don't make a mistake focus, but you can't get better at stuff like penetrating kicks by not trying!
McG may be a great kick but his use onto F50 can be diabolical. If he bombs long into F50 on our KFs heads' again I'd damn near sack him.
Weiters is generally a good kick
That used to be the case but he has many more mis-kicks these days.
That used to be the case but he has many more mis-kicks these days.
Tend to agree and he can get a bit lazy on his left foot and grub them along the ground...
That used to be the case but he has many more mis-kicks these days.
Many more?
I don't really agree, perception is a funny thing.
For example, we say McGovern is elite, most would agree. Yet Weitering averages more kicks than McGovern (10.2 / 8.7), has a higher kick efficiency (75% / 71%) and a very similar clanger rate (2.1 / 1.9). Are you surprised?
Even so, I think McGovern remains my better of the two but Weitering isn't bad like you may think.
I suspect the where and when influences perception, and when things go wrong on the last line it's probably a nightmare for fans!
I have more memories of McGovern opening up the opposition for a score, yet the elimination final kick from Weiters to Hollands is as good if not better than any.
That's true, but Zac is the sort of player that Vossy likes.
What? A lazy prick who likes bruise free footy? Doubt it.
What? A lazy prick who likes bruise free footy? Doubt it.
Weren't many fans outraged because Williams got suspended for a midfield hip and shoulder during pre-season?
Weren't many fans outraged because Williams got suspended for a midfield hip and shoulder during pre-season?
Probably tripped over into the player and filled his shorts in the aftermath. The quicker we offload this goat the better.
Don't trust me, just watch:
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=Zac+williams%2C+skills+and+highlights#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:43dd525d,vid:02TOOZdo5aA,st:0
Those are the highlights. Even some of his mongrels are at worst hitting teamates. He bites off difficult kicks, and hits targets. You know, against brisbane we moaned about high lofty looping kicks. This guy goes the worm burner, or kick to advantage.
Zac Williams is a definite starter when fit.
Much like Martin that got continuity. He is renown finals performer at the Giants.
6 tackles + 10 clearances in a prelim https://www.afl.com.au/afl/matches/1956#player-stats
Was one of the best against Brisbane in semi final https://www.afl.com.au/afl/matches/1954#player-stats
His history at Giants proves he is a big game player. Just needs to get his body right and give us some of his best.
Watching AFL360. Saw Charlie was only targeted 1,1 and 4 times over the 3 weeks. Then they possible showed why. He was asking for the ball or running to wrong spots. Leading back into space and asking the kicker to kick it to him over the top sounded ok, except he was asking for it to kicked 60m to him. Other times he was asking them to kick it to impossible spots. Explains why he was often out of position. He'll learn alot about from finals series and develop more nous. If he develops that real nous and he'll near kick 100.
Probably tripped over into the player and filled his shorts in the aftermath. The quicker we offload this goat the better.
Seriously flying solo here G2C.
Seriously flying solo here G2C.
I'm not sold on ZW either and understand GTCs concerns , Zac needs to earn his spot and isn't an automatic imo.
The midfield role was a fail so he has force someone out down back and prove himself. Having a big contract doesnt mean you automatically oust blue collar workers like Cincotta, Boyd etc who had to work to get their spots.
Don't trust me, just watch:
Those are the highlights. Even some of his mongrels are at worst hitting teamates. He bites off difficult kicks, and hits targets. You know, against brisbane we moaned about high lofty looping kicks. This guy goes the worm burner, or kick to advantage.
Pretty hard to argue with that!
I'm not sold on ZW either and understand GTCs concerns , Zac needs to earn his spot and isn't an automatic imo.
The midfield role was a fail so he has force someone out down back and prove himself. Having a big contract doesnt mean you automatically oust blue collar workers like Cincotta, Boyd etc who had to work to get their spots.
I understand your concerns, to a point.
I seriously don’t understand the level of vitriol expressed by some.
ZW’s issues have been injury and subsequently fitness related not skill related, let alone questioning his ticker…
ZW’s issues have been injury and subsequently fitness related not skill related, let alone questioning his ticker…
Agreed, Williams is fine, much like Marchbank he just needs a run of luck, he has already had enough bad luck for a lifetime.
Instead of throwing rocks at him fans should be lifting him up, the same applies to the whole team.
We(the fans) can carry the team to a flag, and we can trample the naysayers in the process!
I understand your concerns, to a point.
I seriously don’t understand the level of vitriol expressed by some.
ZW’s issues have been injury and subsequently fitness related not skill related, let alone questioning his ticker…
I never really watched many GWS games unless they were vs us so I dont have much of a sample size to work with apart from the few times he has turned out for us and thats been in the main underwhelming. There is more scrutiny on him and the bar is higher because of the money he is on and the expectations that come with that, thats just how it works in pro sport.
He seems a nice enough bloke and has done it tough in his early years and lost his sister so I wish him well but he isnt an automatic selection and given his injury history needs some runs on the board in the twos' much like Marchbank had to go through, then earn his way into the team and I think it would be better for him doing it that way.
Watched a fair bit of the Giants back then and he was a gun. Fit and firing he could have made the difference last week.
Watched a fair bit of the Giants back then and he was a gun. Fit and firing he could have made the difference last week.
Fair enough....Where would you play him and who would he replace?.....
We seriously lack back-half run - Williams can provide that in spades.....
Williams has been in the system 11 seasons and played 136 games. If people aren't convinced about him given that extensive body of work, then even an additional 100 games won't make a jot of difference. He has played some great footy, has a nice bag of tricks and would be ahead of Marchbank and Cincotta at a minimum.
I never really watched many GWS games unless they were vs us so I dont have much of a sample size to work with apart from the few times he has turned out for us and thats been in the main underwhelming. There is more scrutiny on him and the bar is higher because of the money he is on and the expectations that come with that, thats just how it works in pro sport.
He seems a nice enough bloke and has done it tough in his early years and lost his sister so I wish him well but he isnt an automatic selection and given his injury history needs some runs on the board in the twos' much like Marchbank had to go through, then earn his way into the team and I think it would be better for him doing it that way.
I disagree, once hes on the list hes on the list.
Then its performance, preferably on the field, attitude to training, playing and rehab then performance off the field.
No one is guaranteed a game in theory, though i agree that a "big name" will get more opportunity typically.
ZW played some good footy for us... off hb.
Williams has been in the system 11 seasons and played 136 games. If people aren't convinced about him given that extensive body of work, then even an additional 100 games won't make a jot of difference. He has played some great footy, has a nice bag of tricks and would be ahead of Marchbank and Cincotta at a minimum.
An in form and fit Williams can have at least the same level of impact as Martin.
For me the high pace of modern footy means you have to accept blokes not being available 24x7, we'd like 24x7 like it was back in the 70s and 80s, but it's never going to happen. It's too easy for someone like Maclure to wind up fans about players not being fit or durable, but the modern players would run Maclure at his best into the ground inside a 1/4 of footy and then he'd break down or end up suspended. Even modern rucks now move far more than the KPPS of the 70s and 80s, a player like TDK would leave the old time players in the dust, even some of the mids!
I heard comments on one of the TV footy shows about how the Carlton players supposedly looked satisfied and not showing that they took the loss bad after the PF whereas the GWS were all upset and crying. I had some intel from the inner sanctum passed onto me earlier this morning, the players were absolutely shattered in the rooms after the game. They were all absolutely gassed after the game, to a man they gave everything they had and absolutely zero left in the tank. As for the fast start, apparently Vossy got them super amped and fired up pre game. He actually thought after the game he may have got them too pumped too early.
We don't listen to the media too much, 90% of what they say is garbage invented to fill a void.
Many were predicting our 2024 demise about 3 minutes after the final siren, apparently we can't come back from this, what they are really saying is that they are barracking for some off-season chaos to give them something to talk about!
I heard comments on one of the TV footy shows about how the Carlton players supposedly looked satisfied and not showing that they took the loss bad after the PF whereas the GWS were all upset and crying. I had some intel from the inner sanctum passed onto me earlier this morning, the players were absolutely shattered in the rooms after the game. They were all absolutely gassed after the game, to a man they gave everything they had and absolutely zero left in the tank. As for the fast start, apparently Vossy got them super amped and fired up pre game. He actually thought after the game he may have got them too pumped too early.
My only criticism on the prelim was that the boys should have come over and applauded the 14k of us who made the trek up and cheered the boys off the field even though we lost.
I felt worse the next day reflecting on how we had a built a good lead and let it go in a quarter.
Anyone that has played semi professional sports in a knock out situation whether in a cup game or final after a loss it's devastating I would have though the media with their back ground would understand that. No professional sports team celebrates losses.... they may have been relieved they made it this far to prove a point to themselves but they are in no way shape or form happy with losing no professional sports team is.
I heard comments on one of the TV footy shows about how the Carlton players supposedly looked satisfied and not showing that they took the loss bad after the PF whereas the GWS were all upset and crying. I had some intel from the inner sanctum passed onto me earlier this morning, the players were absolutely shattered in the rooms after the game. They were all absolutely gassed after the game, to a man they gave everything they had and absolutely zero left in the tank. As for the fast start, apparently Vossy got them super amped and fired up pre game. He actually thought after the game he may have got them too pumped too early.
My concern at the time was that our arousal level was too high and not sustainable. If we had jagged another goal and kept Brisbane goalless in the first quarter, the result may have been different. Once they got their first goal, and the first of the second quarter, the writing was on the wall. It is a credit to our blokes that they fought it out and always had a sniff.
As for looking satisfied, what planet are those commentators from?
How naive are those media people! The emotional reaction being beaten by a point compared to a team who was playing catch up by about 4 goals through the final quarter is totally different! I'm sure Adam Saad's message was fairly simple.... leave the ground with your head held high, remember where we've come from this year , don't forget today...and acknowledge the fans in the crowd.
How naive are those media people! The emotional reaction being beaten by a point compared to a team who was playing catch up by about 4 goals through the final quarter is totally different! I'm sure Adam Saad's message was fairly simple.... leave the ground with your head held high, remember where we've come from this year , don't forget today...and acknowledge the fans in the crowd.
You respect your effort, you hold your head high, shoulders back and you respect the winners by shaking their hand and congratulating them on the win, you do not point fingers at anyone, and you learn from your opponent for the next season. This puts you in a right frame of mind to move forward.
The media demanding self-deprecation just exposing themselves as mental midgets and morons.
How naive are those media people! The emotional reaction being beaten by a point compared to a team who was playing catch up by about 4 goals through the final quarter is totally different! I'm sure Adam Saad's message was fairly simple.... leave the ground with your head held high, remember where we've come from this year , don't forget today...and acknowledge the fans in the crowd.
And don't drop to the ground, lie down, and wallow per Dees.
As for media - planet Orbit 🌌
Bit late to the party, but been on an extended road trip/holiday since last Thursday evening to see this match.
Haven't read through all of this, so apologies if this has been said by others or if others feel the opposite.
1. I thought we lost it at the selection table.
a) Marchbank over Kemp was the wrong call. Play them both if you have too, but Marchbank can not emulate Kemps marking ability...and i think we missed a lot of that down back.
Kemps ability to make a ball, be it an intercept, a contested mark or even just a switch across the ground, is reliable and its ability to kill a contest cannot be underestimated. Marchbank, who i am a fan of, didn't play terribly, but he wasn't able to kill a contest in the same way. Sure a good spoil or two, but that doesn't kill the contest, it just prolongs the contest to a ground ball. A definitive mark kills the contest.
b) Too many talls. 2 rucks and 2 key forwards meant we didn't have the same amount of run that got us up and going and started the streak. All 4 of those guys had their moments, but largely they were all middle of the road players on the day who we needed more from.
2. Following on from the above, when the ball hit the deck, they were just better. They were able to get to the ball, make the extra handball, get to the outside and clear the ball away or snap at goal. We were usually a step behind. Having more smalls with pace (Owies, Cuningham) is what made the difference mid year, and what hurt us when we didn't have them in the prelim.
Team balance.
3. You don't win too many games by scoring just 1 goal in almost 90 minutes of football. From late in the 1st to almost halfway through the last, we managed just 1 goal. The fact we got as close as we did was largely down to the start of the game, which was brilliant, but was never going to be enough.
All that aside....
Very proud of the year from our boys.....and our club as a whole. Certainly not perfect, plenty to improve upon, but we got more right this year, than any other year this century.
Also very proud of our supporter base. The 2 finals in Melbourne and even the final in Brisbane, we were loud and the equal of the opposition (at worst) despite being the away side in 2 of them. The Gabba MC kept pumping up the crowd with Brisbanes '19th man' (a ripoff from overseas, most notably the NFLs Seattle Seahawks 12th man) and while it got the crowd going, we equalled the noise which is something that actually shocked the locals - i doubt they'd ever heard that before.
All in all a good experience for myself, the club and the playing group.
I thought Motlop over Owies was a mistake, we lost a hard deep running team orientated small forward who creates space, and ended up with Martin, Motlop flying against Charlie or McKay and taking opponents to the contest.
That first 5 or 10 minutes was the confirmation for me, when we had F50 entry after F50 entry and not a crumb to be found! We could easily have been another 3 to 5 goals up at the end of the 1st Qtr!
Marchbank was one of our better players on the day. I was surprised that Kemp was omitted and Cincotta stayed in the side but not at all surprised by Marchy's selection. Cincotta's form had really tapered off towards the end of the season and Kemp could have done his job while providing some extra marking/spoiling grunt.
The two ruck combination worked really well and made life difficult for McInerney, and Daniher and Hipwood when they rucked. Pitto might be a bit of a plodder but the King provides plenty of run and energy around the ball. Harry was good but Charlie was well off the boil and allowed Andrews to do as he liked. It wasn't lack of run that cost us, it was our inability to clunk marks and/or bring the ball to ground, and to make Brisbane's defence accountable.
Owies and Cuningham both lost form towards the end of the season and didn't deserve a place in the team. Yes, in form they could have made a difference, but they were both under-performing in terms of possessions, tackling, applying pressure and hitting the scoreboard.
We were too banged up and fired all of our bullets in the first quarter; hopefully a learning experience for the coaches, players and fitness staff.
LP.... I thought that Martin and Motlop flying for the ball instead of being ready for the ground contest was very poor and surely must have been against team instructions? Really selfish stuff. Not capitalising on our early territory and possession dominance really cost us, should have been at least three goals further ahead at quarter time. At least.
We were beaten at the contest which was what all the experts said was our weakness. We struggle to find other ways to score when the stoppages don't go our way.
When I speak to people about the preliminary final, the fans are very quick to start pointing fingers at blokes who have been periphery players all season, but not one person has mentioned the moments that matter.
We are up by 5 goals. Second quarter, first ruck contest, Pittonet goes up against Mcinerny, free kick blown, ball in Cripps hand and he either misses the whistle (I heard it from row D in the forward pocket) and he bombs it long without looking.
Now Im not going to castrate a bloke for making an error, but when you hear Fly Mccrae talking about managing the moments in games, that was one that caused a 50 metre penalty from a ruck contest, and gave Mcinerny the first goal of the second quarter. Thing is, with our team, our opponents tend to score in waves of 2 and 3 when we make that sort of mistake, which is a team issue that we have to get better at as it points to mentality not ability. Cripps would want that moment back again, but nothing wrong with that.
We are up by 5 goals. Second quarter, first ruck contest, Pittonet goes up against Mcinerny, free kick blown, ball in Cripps hand and he either misses the whistle (I heard it from row D in the forward pocket) and he bombs it long without looking.
I don't have a problem with that, pretty much everyone I was around at first thought it was a free kick to Pitto for McInerney blocking, including some of the players around the contest that moved off in the wrong direction. So Cripps probably thought he was in a play on to advantage scenario.
I thought that and some moments in the GF made a mockery of the stand and advantage rules, when they go wrong as subjective as they are they can become game changing and I doubt that was ever the intent!
In the GF we saw players back off the mark and be penalised 50m, then moments later another player does the very same and it's called as outside 5m. We saw player's more than once swap on the mark, and that's been a 50m pretty much all season but it wasn't on GF day. Outside 5m can be outside 3m or 2m depending on who is the umpire, at one stage Hill came into man the mark from 20m away and stopped less than 2m short of the original mark and was called as outside 5m. How can a player or coach predict that change in umpire behaviour?
If we are going to have such rules that are inherently subjective, perhaps it's time to have a faint grid / dot grid marked out that can be visible to umpires and players without being obvious on the broadcast!
I don't have a problem with that, pretty much everyone I was around at first thought it was a free kick to Pitto for McInerney blocking, including some of the players around the contest that moved off in the wrong direction. So Cripps probably thought he was in a play on to advantage scenario.
I thought that and some moments in the GF made a mockery of the stand and advantage rules, when they go wrong as subjective as they are they can become game changing and I doubt that was ever the intent!
In the GF we saw players back off the mark and be penalised 50m, then moments later another player does the very same and it's called as outside 5m. We saw player's more than once swap on the mark, and that's been a 50m pretty much all season but it wasn't on GF day. Outside 5m can be outside 3m or 2m depending on who is the umpire, at one stage Hill came into man the mark from 20m away and stopped less than 2m short of the original mark and was called as outside 5m. How can a player or coach predict that change in umpire behaviour?
If we are going to have such rules that are inherently subjective, perhaps it's time to have a faint grid / dot grid marked out that can be visible to umpires and players without being obvious on the broadcast!
The point being, that the risk vs reward there was far too great. Having a quick look, and seeing which way it was blown or stopping may have been the difference between a run on and not. Im not going to castrate him for thinking it was our free kick, but it is about managing the moments. The penalty there was enormous.
The point being, that the risk vs reward there was far too great. Having a quick look, and seeing which way it was blown or stopping may have been the difference between a run on and not. Im not going to castrate him for thinking it was our free kick, but it is about managing the moments. The penalty there was enormous.
Good point Thry.
That rule is applied relatively leniently but Crippa kicked well after the whistle.
In a cutthroat contest, gifting goals to the opposition must be avoided. No doubt that will have been discussed during the review.
Our season recovery came off the back of taking risks and backing ourselves in, and now fans want safety!
Newman expressed it the best when after one game BT tried to get Newman to concede he was nervous about repeating mistakes, or trying to embarrass Newman into a concession of a mistake, but Newman told BT not a chance he'd stop taking the risks that saw our season switch around.
It's pretty easy to make retrospective judgements, but if Voss wants them to take the game on, then given what happened in the 2nd half of the season I'd say they should take the game on!
Leave the harrumphs, hand wringing and regrets to the fans.
Walsh obviously did well enough again as he just won the AFLCA Player of the Finals. First Gary Ayres Award winner whose team didn’t proceed to a Grand Final. Grand Finals have double points.
Sam Walsh (23 votes)
Keidean Coleman (20.5)
Bobby Hill (19)
Tom Green (17)
Jack Crisp (16)
Walsh obviously did well enough again as he just won the AFLCA Player of the Finals.
Well-deserved!
Marchbank was one of our better players on the day. I was surprised that Kemp was omitted and Cincotta stayed in the side but not at all surprised by Marchy's selection. Cincotta's form had really tapered off towards the end of the season and Kemp could have done his job while providing some extra marking/spoiling grunt.
As i said, i am a fan of Marchbank, but i would've played Kemp who has simply played better up to this point.
Cincotta and kemp play a different role IMO.
Whereas Marchbank and Kemp play the same role.
The two ruck combination worked really well and made life difficult for McDonald, and Daniher and Hipwood when they rucked. Pitto might be a bit of a plodder but the King provides plenty of run and energy around the ball. Harry was good but Charlie was well off the boil and allowed Andrews to do as he liked. It wasn't lack of run that cost us, it was our inability to clunk marks and/or bring the ball to ground, and to make Brisbane's defence accountable.
It made life difficult, sure, but did it really work well?
Team A vs Team B
38 vs 33 Hitouts
14 vs 7 Hitouts to advantage
14 vs 18 Disposals
2 vs 4 marks
1 vs 2 contested marks
6 vs 6 clearances
11 vs 13 pressure acts
3 vs 1 shots at goal
2 vs 0 goals
280 vs 306 meters gained
3 vs 3 tackles
104 vs 90 fantasy points
106 vs 169 Minutes played
Pretty consistent yeah?
Team A = McInerney
Team B = Pittonet + De Koning
An extra hour of game time from our 2 blokes matched McInerney on his own. They were well beaten, especially if you wanna throw in Joe Danihers efforts as backup ruck.
Take one of our rucks out and put Jack Silvagni in, and those numbers look a lot different and more in our favour IMO.
Owies and Cuningham both lost form towards the end of the season and didn't deserve a place in the team. Yes, in form they could have made a difference, but they were both under-performing in terms of possessions, tackling, applying pressure and hitting the scoreboard.
We were too banged up and fired all of our bullets in the first quarter; hopefully a learning experience for the coaches, players and fitness staff.
Some of them were underperforming sure.
What form did Boyd have?
Kennedy?
Hollands?
Not everyone will deliver every week, but you pick a TEAM. The team who got us there was broken up for the prelim, and it showed.
Nobody will ever know if we won or not with some of the changes i suggested, but i voiced my concern the night we won against Melbourne that we didn't need Harry in the side and that Marchbank should go out too.
Ultimately, Lions were too good on the run and spread and we couldn't go with them. Had we been smaller.....
You can't argue with 'what-ifs'.
And yep, you can only guess on whether different players or structures would have made a difference.
That's just a personal theory.
The end result was pretty much what most of us expected, that it would be a "bridge just a little too far"
In fact the first quarter I suspect exceeded everyone's expectations.
Play that kind of football for a more sustained period and there is no coming back for the opposition.
Our season recovery came off the back of taking risks and backing ourselves in, and now fans want safety!
Newman expressed it the best when after one game BT tried to get Newman to concede he was nervous about repeating mistakes, or trying to embarrass Newman into a concession of a mistake, but Newman told BT not a chance he'd stop taking the risks that saw our season switch around.
It's pretty easy to make retrospective judgements, but if Voss wants them to take the game on, then given what happened in the 2nd half of the season I'd say they should take the game on!
Leave the harrumphs, hand wringing and regrets to the fans.
No, I want players to know that we need multiple modes to win the game, and understanding that situations don't have an automatic good bad result. We kept going long and quick in the preliminary final. It wasn't on that frequently but we did it anyway, and it contributed to not being able to arrest momentum.
The one thing I learned from the grand final is that you need to be able to play catch up when it counts, slow to arrest momentum, fast when you have momentum, and above all else be able to go through those gears, recognising WHEN to do it. The moment is one of few that sticks in my mind.
I'm not hanging anything on anyone here but simply talking facts.
No, I want players to know that we need multiple modes to win the game, and understanding that situations don't have an automatic good bad result. We kept going long and quick in the preliminary final. It wasn't on that frequently but we did it anyway, and it contributed to not being able to arrest momentum.
The one thing I learned from the grand final is that you need to be able to play catch up when it counts, slow to arrest momentum, fast when you have momentum, and above all else be able to go through those gears, recognising WHEN to do it. The moment is one of few that sticks in my mind.
I'm not hanging anything on anyone here but simply talking facts.
I’m sure that’s the way we’re headed Thry … and that’s what got us over the line in a few close games.
The team will learn from that and Crippa will continue to push the envelope, when appropriate.
1. I thought we lost it at the selection table.
Correct !!!
We are up by 5 goals. Second quarter, first ruck contest, Pittonet goes up against Mcinerny, free kick blown, ball in Cripps hand and he either misses the whistle (I heard it from row D in the forward pocket) and he bombs it long without looking.
If he thought it was a free kick to Pittonet he should have quickly looked back & checked before kicking. There is no way known he didn't hear the whilstle, the umpire was only metres away.
Poor leadership, totally irresponsible & lacking in game awareness.
That was a game-changing moment that never should have happened.
If he thought it was a free kick to Pittonet he should have quickly looked back & checked before kicking. There is no way known he didn't hear the whilstle, the umpire was only metres away.
Poor leadership, totally irresponsible & lacking in game awareness.
That was a game-changing moment that never should have happened.
Moment Management is the current buzz term, its the new black. Coll did this better than every other club.
That was a game-changing moment that never should have happened.
Not really, I think it has been somewhat over-dramaticised by Carlton social media.
Stuff like that happens multiple times per round, maybe even more than once per game, and the problem as a "moment to manage" it is really an issue of umpiring consistency as much as player behaviour, sometimes they call it a penalty and other times they don't, the chance of a free is arbitrary!
We saw Cripps get belted high multiple times throughout the finals series, yet I recall him only receiving one free kick for his pain. If fans want to pile on some aspect of the finals that cost us, pile on that by asking more and more public questions about why the 195cm Mid cannot get free kicks for being hit in the head inside stoppages!
Imagine if we had gone with one ruckman. It doesn't matter which one because McInerney would have given either one a touch up. Playing two rucks curbed his influence. Playing one ruckman is virtually conceding the ruck contests, allowing McInerney to do as he likes around the ground, and giving Brisbane's midfielders a boost.
Playing one ruckman would mean rucking McKay, a role he hates and is poor at. It also means taking McKay, our only truly competitive tall forward on the day, away from the forward line. That would leave Charlie being double-teamed by Andrews and Gardiner ... or we could have had a cooked ruckman "resting" in the forward lne. That would work well - not, particularly if it was Pitto. Meanwhile, Daniher would be enjoying little opposition when he gives McInerney a breather and comes up against Harry.
So, we concede an advantage in the ruck and weaken our forward line to bring in a player to add some zip. Who would that be? Cuningham finished the season as if he'd had no pre-season. Fisher did OK when brought back as a loose man in defence but forgot about the defensive part of the role. Paddy Dow gets a few clearances but doesn't do much else. Binns is worth considering but it would be tough to debut in a prelim. Then there's O'Brien and Honey ... wait!
Another option is to bring in Jack Silvagni, despite his lack of match fitness. He'd provide more of a contest than Harry and maybe get the odd clearance but he certainly wouldn't have the Big O and Daniher quaking in their boots ... and the first ruck would still have to do the bulk of the work against a dominant opponent. The Silvagni as a ruck option should be sealed and labelled "for emergency use only".
I would have played Kemp in place of Cincotta. Yes, they have different roles but Kemp is quick and agile enough to perform Cincotta's role. The latter's form dropped off as the season progressed. That's perfectly understandable, but doesn't help when the opposition is running away from him. Marchbank was one of our better players on the day and I don't understand the criticism of his selection. It's a bit like the "supporters" who continually criticised Plowman and who were called out by Weitering in his season review.
Jordan Boyd did his job on the day too and his inclusion was a logical response to Brisbane's forward structure.
We didn't lose the game at the selection table, we lost it in our slump when we gave up the chance of home finals.
It's a bit like the "supporters" who continually criticised Plowman and who were called out by Weitering in his season review.
You can't let the naysayers get the better of you, the fans who do this are typically ball watchers. They see a lost contest and the effects of that but they are blind to the root cause.
For example, some were bagging Weiters after the prelim final because Daniher got some easy footy inside F50, but the fans ignore the events up the field that leaves Daniher with 40m of open space in front of him and a ball carrier delivering the pill without immediate pressure.
PS; I've heard a grab of audio from Harry that described sMurph and Plowman as the two players who made him feel most welcome and get quickly settled into the club making sure his needs and concerns were meet. Oddly, two players who copped a heap of stick from fans came across to Harry as the most inclusive to a new player team wise!
Not really, I think it has been somewhat over-dramaticised by Carlton social media.
Stuff like that happens multiple times per round, maybe even more than once per game, and the problem as a "moment to manage" it is really an issue of umpiring consistency as much as player behaviour, sometimes they call it a penalty and other times they don't, the chance of a free is arbitrary!
We saw Cripps get belted high multiple times throughout the finals series, yet I recall him only receiving one free kick for his pain. If fans want to pile on some aspect of the finals that cost us, pile on that by asking more and more public questions about why the 195cm Mid cannot get free kicks for being hit in the head inside stoppages!
No one mentioned it until I brought it up.
Why wasn't Plowman playing this year?
No one mentioned it until I brought it up.
Many of the events that fans complain about like the Cripps 50m are not all on the players, four umpires has not improved consistency, and after the GWS / Filth game you can't even claim it's improved the accuracy either.
While the umpiring remains so highly variable, I see it as unreasonable to expect any better from the players!
Why wasn't Plowman playing this year?
We started off going down the now horribly failed Young route.
Then as the AFL team hit the skids by Rnd 7 Plowman was already carrying / managing an injury, so I doubt was ever really in considerations when Kemp got the call up.
Why wasn't Plowman playing this year?
Because he had slowed down, his form had fallen away and he had been overtaken by younger, better players?
As Weiter's said, that doesn't detract from a 145 game career that included a top 3 finish in the B&F, a leadership role, the nickname of Mr Reliable, and the respect of his teammates.
He got kicked out by better players. Yes.
That's what happens when you're the worst team and want to become the best team.
Everyone who said Plowman wasn't good enough were proven correct.
It's relative though.
It wasn't that he wasn't good enough.
It's that other players were better.
No-one would argue that Kemp isn't good enough.
Yet he's currently not a first 23 selection... (which should change the next time we play) ;)
I doubt the real life MC is as cut and dry as fans want to suggest.
If I listened to fans and ignore the MC then I would know better. sMurph was a spud, Gibbs NBG, Cottrell a hack, Tuohy a panic merchant, Betts a sellout, Pitto a slug, TDK a moneypit. Martin, Marchbank and McGovern chandeliers. Boyd and Fogarty scared of shadows. Harry a coach killer.
But luckily I don't listen to fans! ;D
I'd say all players at Plowman's level have a decent career and then get relegated to the 2's, delisted, retire etc. And there's no shame in that. There were plenty of players that got moved on before he did. Only players at the Cripps, Dangerfield, Pendlebury etc. level get to bow out on their own terms. Nobody ever suggested he was a gun A grader. But he definitely played good footy for us and deserves to be remembered and discussed fondly. He placed top 10 in the B+F on four occasions, playing alongside Docherty, Liam Jones, Kade Simpson, Weitering, Adam Saad. He wasn't surrounded by mugs, and more than held his own.
I think when a fan fails to give credit and recognition where it is due probably says more about the fan than the player.
For me it is that fan culture that must change for the club to quickly progress.
Go back and watch the replay of the Prelim, you can see the footage of Carlton fans turning in to Yertle the Turtle when the game tightens, sphincters too tight it seems.
Whether fans like it or not, that has an effect of players, the fans wear some of the blame.
Contrast that the the Filth fans starting the "Collingwood" chant when the game gets tight, they lift the players rather than stomp on them! As horrible as it is to admit, the Filth now have it all over us in this regard, but it never use to be this way. Back in the 70s, 80s and 90s, before our MC stupidly sold away our home, we use to be the intimidating crowd, at PP or The G!
He got kicked out by better players. Yes.
That's what happens when you're the worst team and want to become the best team.
Everyone who said Plowman wasn't good enough were proven correct.
His last 2 afl games were vs adelaide where we got stitched up and he was targeted to score through.
He was too small for a tall, too tall for a small, didn't really play tall, but defended well enough as he was a smart footballer with limited athletic capacity.
Hes also at the wrong age and Kemp and Cowan have gone past him.
I doubt the real life MC is as cut and dry as fans want to suggest.
If I listened to fans and ignore the MC then I would know better. sMurph was a spud, Gibbs NBG, Cottrell a hack, Tuohy a panic merchant, Betts a sellout, Pitto a slug, TDK a moneypit. Martin, Marchbank and McGovern chandeliers. Boyd and Fogarty scared of shadows. Harry a coach killer.
But luckily I don't listen to fans! ;D
Why are you on here then?
I doubt the real life MC is as cut and dry as fans want to suggest.
If I listened to fans and ignore the MC then I would know better. sMurph was a spud, Gibbs NBG, Cottrell a hack, Tuohy a panic merchant, Betts a sellout, Pitto a slug, TDK a moneypit. Martin, Marchbank and McGovern chandeliers. Boyd and Fogarty scared of shadows. Harry a coach killer.
But luckily I don't listen to fans! ;D
Martin, Marchbank and Gov are chandeliers. So is Cunningham.
He got kicked out by better players. Yes.
That's what happens when you're the worst team and want to become the best team.
Everyone who said Plowman wasn't good enough were proven correct.
Not really.
That argument could be used to support the notion that folk who said Wayne Carey wasn't good enough were eventually proved correct.
Plowman's role was made more difficult by the type of footy we played over six of his eight seasons with us. He was unfairly blamed for losing the odd contest on the last line of defence when the errors were being committed by teammates up the ground.
He retired because his body is no longer up to the demands of AFL, not because he wasn't good enough.
Imagine if we had gone with one ruckman. It doesn't matter which one because McInerney would have given either one a touch up. Playing two rucks curbed his influence. Playing one ruckman is virtually conceding the ruck contests, allowing McInerney to do as he likes around the ground, and giving Brisbane's midfielders a boost.
Playing one ruckman would mean rucking McKay, a role he hates and is poor at. It also means taking McKay, our only truly competitive tall forward on the day, away from the forward line. That would leave Charlie being double-teamed by Andrews and Gardiner ... or we could have had a cooked ruckman "resting" in the forward lne. That would work well - not, particularly if it was Pitto. Meanwhile, Daniher would be enjoying little opposition when he gives McInerney a breather and comes up against Harry.
So, we concede an advantage in the ruck and weaken our forward line to bring in a player to add some zip. Who would that be? Cuningham finished the season as if he'd had no pre-season. Fisher did OK when brought back as a loose man in defence but forgot about the defensive part of the role. Paddy Dow gets a few clearances but doesn't do much else. Binns is worth considering but it would be tough to debut in a prelim. Then there's O'Brien and Honey ... wait!
Another option is to bring in Jack Silvagni, despite his lack of match fitness. He'd provide more of a contest than Harry and maybe get the odd clearance but he certainly wouldn't have the Big O and Daniher quaking in their boots ... and the first ruck would still have to do the bulk of the work against a dominant opponent. The Silvagni as a ruck option should be sealed and labelled "for emergency use only".
I would have played Kemp in place of Cincotta. Yes, they have different roles but Kemp is quick and agile enough to perform Cincotta's role. The latter's form dropped off as the season progressed. That's perfectly understandable, but doesn't help when the opposition is running away from him. Marchbank was one of our better players on the day and I don't understand the criticism of his selection. It's a bit like the "supporters" who continually criticised Plowman and who were called out by Weitering in his season review.
Jordan Boyd did his job on the day too and his inclusion was a logical response to Brisbane's forward structure.
We didn't lose the game at the selection table, we lost it in our slump when we gave up the chance of home finals.
You know the problem with everything you just wrote?
Its based on trying to stop Brisbane. It makes us reactionary. Nobody has been able to stop Brisbane all year.
You know what? How many teams have been able to stop us when we play who we want?
The moment you spend all your time worrying about stopping the opposition, you lose focus on what you want to do.
So i disagree.
Pick a team to win.
Do not pick a team to try and stop the opposition, let them try and stop you!
You know the problem with everything you just wrote?
Its based on trying to stop Brisbane. It makes us reactionary. Nobody has been able to stop Brisbane all year.
You know what? How many teams have been able to stop us when we play who we want?
The moment you spend all your time worrying about stopping the opposition, you lose focus on what you want to do.
So i disagree.
Pick a team to win.
Do not pick a team to try and stop the opposition, let them try and stop you!
Collingwood went into the GF with two ruckmen. Together, they got the better of McInerney and that was a significant factor in the final result.
We had the right idea but our ruckmen weren’t quite good enough to make it work.
I think that’s put an end to the argument that you can’t play two ruckmen and two key forwards.
Imagine if we had gone with one ruckman. It doesn't matter which one because McInerney would have given either one a touch up. Playing two rucks curbed his influence. Playing one ruckman is virtually conceding the ruck contests, allowing McInerney to do as he likes around the ground, and giving Brisbane's midfielders a boost.
Playing one ruckman would mean rucking McKay, a role he hates and is poor at. It also means taking McKay, our only truly competitive tall forward on the day, away from the forward line. That would leave Charlie being double-teamed by Andrews and Gardiner ... or we could have had a cooked ruckman "resting" in the forward lne. That would work well - not, particularly if it was Pitto. Meanwhile, Daniher would be enjoying little opposition when he gives McInerney a breather and comes up against Harry.
So, we concede an advantage in the ruck and weaken our forward line to bring in a player to add some zip. Who would that be? Cuningham finished the season as if he'd had no pre-season. Fisher did OK when brought back as a loose man in defence but forgot about the defensive part of the role. Paddy Dow gets a few clearances but doesn't do much else. Binns is worth considering but it would be tough to debut in a prelim. Then there's O'Brien and Honey ... wait!
Another option is to bring in Jack Silvagni, despite his lack of match fitness. He'd provide more of a contest than Harry and maybe get the odd clearance but he certainly wouldn't have the Big O and Daniher quaking in their boots ... and the first ruck would still have to do the bulk of the work against a dominant opponent. The Silvagni as a ruck option should be sealed and labelled "for emergency use only".
I would have played Kemp in place of Cincotta. Yes, they have different roles but Kemp is quick and agile enough to perform Cincotta's role. The latter's form dropped off as the season progressed. That's perfectly understandable, but doesn't help when the opposition is running away from him. Marchbank was one of our better players on the day and I don't understand the criticism of his selection. It's a bit like the "supporters" who continually criticised Plowman and who were called out by Weitering in his season review.
Jordan Boyd did his job on the day too and his inclusion was a logical response to Brisbane's forward structure.
We didn't lose the game at the selection table, we lost it in our slump when we gave up the chance of home finals.
A very hard post to fault, except for your point on people questioning Marchbank's spot in the team. He played well in any case and Kemp has some more to come, despite his promise. But Marchbank was very poor in the two finals prior. I like Cincotta too, appears to be playing a defensive role on smaller players, would be nice to release him more, but lots of options there with Saad, Newman, Doc and Boyd to name a few.
Collingwood went into the GF with two ruckmen. Together, they got the better of McInerney and that was a significant factor in the final result.
We had the right idea but our ruckmen weren’t quite good enough to make it work.
I think that’s put an end to the argument that you can’t play two ruckmen and two key forwards.
Collingwood are a different team to us. They have different players with different strengths....and weaknesses.
FYI, we beat Collingwood and we had 2 rucks and 1 key forward. (Harry and jack didnt play, tdk played forward ruck)
I guess that puts an end to the debate of needing 2 rucks and 2 key forwards. 😉
You know what they did....they played to.their strengths and made Brisbane try and beat them. Which is NOT what we did.
Pick a team to win.
Do not pick a team to try and stop the opposition, let them try and stop you!
Isn't it both though in picking a team to win?
In picking a team to win one of the key aspects would be to emphasise your strengths, but also minimise the effectiveness of their key players.
A team would struggle to beat us if they didn't put time into negating the effect of players such as Cripps and Curnow.
If we didn't pay attention to their key movers an opposition side would do some damage.
It has to be a balance.
It's why one side and strategy won't fit every situation and the selection of a side will be 'horses for courses' in terms of all positions.
Isn't it both though in picking a team to win?
In picking a team to win one of the key aspects would be to emphasise your strengths, but also minimise the effectiveness of their key players.
A team would struggle to beat us if they didn't put time into negating the effect of players such as Cripps and Curnow.
If we didn't pay attention to their key movers an opposition side would do some damage.
It has to be a balance.
It's why one side and strategy won't fit every situation and the selection of a side will be 'horses for courses' in terms of all positions.
Yes, of course it's balance, but the original point was, ours was all over the shop and we went away from that balance at the selection table.
We fielding a team unlike what had got us there and we lost our balance at the selection table because we were too focussed on the beating them.
Yes, of course it's balance, but the original point was, ours was all over the shop and we went away from that balance at the selection table.
We fielding a team unlike what had got us there and we lost our balance at the selection table because we were too focussed on the beating them.
We could argue that we lost it at the selection table.
But we could also argue that we lost it because we were banged up (Cripps, Acres Docherty for example) and exhausted.
Most of the selection changes seemed to work or at least not detract dramatically from the team's performance.
We'd played an intense pressure game week after week for a dozen weeks leading into the game.
We ran out of steam playing a rested side on their home ground which has been a bit of fortress for them this season.
Had we maintained that first quarter effort for another quarter the game might well have been out of their reach.
The thing is we're dealing with "what if's" and once a game is over they become "we'll never know's"
Yes, of course it's balance, but the original point was, ours was all over the shop and we went away from that balance at the selection table.
We fielding a team unlike what had got us there and we lost our balance at the selection table because we were too focussed on the beating them.
Weird point. Team balance isn't the reason we lost. I didn't see too many not selected who would have made any difference at all. You could argue Kemp but in exchange for who a forward?
Weird point. Team balance isn't the reason we lost. I didn't see too many not selected who would have made any difference at all. You could argue Kemp but in exchange for who a forward?
I've already gone through the changes i would've made pre-game and post game.
Summary.
We lost run.
We lost what made us get there.
We played into their hands.
Their ruck was never going to win them the game, their smalls were.....and did.
Boyd and Harry were fresh and it showed.
Cincotta and 18 others were off their feet and it showed.
Boyd and Harry were fresh and it showed.
Cincotta and 18 others were off their feet and it showed.
Pittonet - TDK - Charlie - Harry
They were our 4 talls.
None of them got more than 10 possessions.
They totalled 36 between them.
We played them at the expense of some of our smalls.
Blokes like...
Fogarty*, Cottrell, Cincotta, Motlop all got 8 touches or less (*fogarty subbed out with 7 at 3/4 time or so)
were asked to do too much and needed help.
Not playing Owies and Cuningham, and perhaps choosing Harry (or 2 rucks) over Jack, all contributed to being taller and slower and ultimately not being able to keep up the manic pressure that had worked so well for us previously.
Pittonet - TDK - Charlie - Harry
They were our 4 talls.
None of them got more than 10 possessions.
They totalled 36 between them.
We played them at the expense of some of our smalls.
Blokes like...
Fogarty*, Cottrell, Cincotta, Motlop all got 8 touches or less (*fogarty subbed out with 7 at 3/4 time or so)
were asked to do too much and needed help.
Not playing Owies and Cuningham, and perhaps choosing Harry (or 2 rucks) over Jack, all contributed to being taller and slower and ultimately not being able to keep up the manic pressure that had worked so well for us previously.
jack wasn't a factor. Wasn't fit enough and up for selection. We subbed fog for Kennedy because fog was having an ordinary day at the office.
Team balance doesn't cost you the way it did. We had too few that were on and too many off.
jack wasn't a factor. Wasn't fit enough and up for selection. We subbed fog for Kennedy because fog was having an ordinary day at the office.
Team balance doesn't cost you the way it did. We had too few that were on and too many off.
Yep, 3 Leos. We did bloody well to make it to where we did, considering injuries and that virtually every game since mid year was do-or-die.
Cuningham was poor over about the last three-four matches. Probably rust on his behalf, even then, that's another factor as to why he should have been dropped.
McKay played very well, he's not to be faulted for trying hard. That selection certainly wasn't a mistake. de Koning and Pittonet had their moments in the finals series to say the least. Curnow, despite his generally woeful finals series, wasn't going to be dropped either.
As stated, JSOS was nowhere near ready to play. The hill was too big a climb to reach against a much more freshened and finals-hardened team.
Boyd and Harry were fresh and it showed.
Cincotta and 18 others were off their feet and it showed.
Good point. Motlop went missing, as did Fogarty. The game was lost from the second quarter onwards when they got on top around the middle and won the clearances. It must be said and many of us would've noticed this for a while, but we're actually too short, in defence! Young's indifferent season has meant McGovern has played as an undersized KPD. When Kemp was omitted, we were even more one down in a tall down there (of course Kemp isn't really a KPD, but he's more of a third tall than Boyd, not that his selection can be faulted).Their own twin talls in Daniher and Hipwood were given treats by their players.
Yes, of course it's balance, but the original point was, ours was all over the shop and we went away from that balance at the selection table.
We fielding a team unlike what had got us there and we lost our balance at the selection table because we were too focussed on the beating them.
We played a team who finished 2nd and played them on a deck they haven't lost on all year. They were fresher and we were banged up. They are a at the very moment a slightly better team and it showed when it mattered. End of story.
Us arm chair experts think so many games are lost at selection but imo its BS.
jack wasn't a factor. Wasn't fit enough and up for selection. We subbed fog for Kennedy because fog was having an ordinary day at the office.
Team balance doesn't cost you the way it did. We had too few that were on and too many off.
Chicken and egg though.
Did we have an off day because too many were off?
or
Were too many off because they were expected to do more than they had been doing to this point?
We played a team who finished 2nd and played them on a deck they haven't lost on all year. They were fresher and we were banged up. They are a at the very moment a slightly better team and it showed when it mattered. End of story.
Us arm chair experts think so many games are lost at selection but imo its BS.
Don't misunderstand what i mean.
No doubt Brisbane were most likely a bridge too far.
But we were out of it before it started. Had we not got the jump early, it would've been a VERY different result....an absolute smashing.
If we pick our best team, play our best and are beaten by a better team, i can live with that.
I just think that we screwed up at the selection table and it hurt our chances of winning....if we had any chance at all.
.................................
Us arm chair experts think so many games are lost at selection but imo its BS.
I have to agree. The very simple assumption that underpins these discussions is that the MC knows a lot more about our own players, a lot more about opposition players, has a lot more experience, have worked for years in the industry as players and coaches etc. It is therefore very logical to assert that they have a much greater chance of picking the best team to win. There are reasons involved that we simply cannot know. Far too many supporters follow the Max Delbrück principle ; "I don't understand this. It must be wrong." The correct starting point is to assume, quite logically that the MC has picked a better team than we ever could, and to try to understand why they made those choices. Trying to argue from the opposite starting point is an argument from incredulity : "I can't figure out what the MC did, therefore the MC stuffed up."
We played a team who finished 2nd and played them on a deck they haven't lost on all year. They were fresher and we were banged up. They are a at the very moment a slightly better team and it showed when it mattered. End of story.
Us arm chair experts think so many games are lost at selection but imo its BS.
They are a good team and even better at home but the MC are humans who make mistakes like everyone else and have lost us games before but not this time imho. We picked a decent team but given they had the rest and we were banged up it was a tough ask...
Obviously the mc have more Intel than your average punter.
But they are human and make mistakes the same as anyone else. Ive had little issues with them throughout the year apart from the obvious, but the preliminary side was one I was most uncomfortable with all year.
To be fair, we were probably as fit as we'd been all year too making it the toughest team to pick all year.....and with the most at stake.
I don't envy them, but I can criticise them
Jinx eb1
I agree the MC have picked the incorrect horses for courses, but they do so without knowing the full info about our opponents.
We tend to select the names on the sheet based on everyone's best footy and usually after selection night. The MC do so knowing whether or not players are in good, bad or indifferent form, whether or not fringe players have had a rough trot and what impact that may have on them. Notice we all tend to look at the same starting 18, and then tend to differ on the rest with usually only the mix being referenced as ways we've stuffed it but we don't know about the niggles that might only be a knock or a corkie or a muscle strain.
Most of the time we look at who isn't there and their potential performance without any other info.
I'd be curious to know how those of us on the outside can adjudicate when the MC picks the wrong team. Is it when we lose ? When they make selections that we don't agree with ? When some particular player has a bad game ?
Sure the MC are human and can make mistakes, but so are we human, which means we can also make errors, and when that is combined with the fact that we have gaps all over the place when it comes to knowing how to pick a team, I'm flummoxed at how people can be so super confident that they're right. If our MC is that shaky, please apply for a job at the club. We need all the help we can get.
I'd be curious to know how those of us on the outside can adjudicate when the MC picks the wrong team. Is it when we lose ? When they make selections that we don't agree with ? When some particular player has a bad game ?
Sure the MC are human and can make mistakes, but so are we human, which means we can also make errors, and when that is combined with the fact that we have gaps all over the place when it comes to knowing how to pick a team, I'm flummoxed at how people can be so super confident that they're right. If our MC is that shaky, please apply for a job at the club. We need all the help we can get.
If you predict what going to happen based on the team that's picked....and then it happens...is that dumb luck? Coincidence? Perhaps it's people knowing a thing or 2 about football.
This year we have been better than in the past. Less games won or lost at the mc meetings than at anytime in the past. In years gone by, the team selection has been VERY average.
Vossy played his hand early when he basically said we'd be playing 2 rucks and Harry (and Charlie goes without saying) at the press conference after the dees game. That gives the opposition the whole week to plan for that.
At least keep some mystery about it.
Look, everyone has said their piece. I doubt anyone is going to change their minds.
If you predict what going to happen based on the team that's picked....and then it happens...is that dumb luck? Coincidence? Perhaps it's people knowing a thing or 2 about football.
This year we have been better than in the past. Less games won or lost at the mc meetings than at anytime in the past. In years gone by, the team selection has been VERY average.
Vossy played his hand early when he basically said we'd be playing 2 rucks and Harry (and Charlie goes without saying) at the press conference after the dees game. That gives the opposition the whole week to plan for that.
At least keep some mystery about it.
Look, everyone has said their piece. I doubt anyone is going to change their minds.
There's not much to predict. We either win, draw or lose. Given the number of variables in play, how you can possibly say a loss was because the MC picked a team you don't agree with ? Why not 50 other possible reasons that we lost, nothing at all to do with the team selection ? My posts in this space are essentially a plea for a little modesty, a little perspective, and a little humility. I've said it before - if we tested our ideas about team selection with Voss and the MC, we wouldn't last 2 minutes. This has nothing to do with intelligence, and everything to do with lack of experience and lack of access to information. If you need 20 pieces of information to make an informed decision, and we are lucky have two or three, then you can't make the correct decision. This is simply logic IMO.
In 2022, Geelong played 2 rucks and 2 KPF the whole year. Rhys Stanley played 20 games, Blicavs 24. Jeremy Cameron played 24 games, Hawkins 25. That's basically 4 talls the whole season, and the 4 of them played in all 3 finals. History shows 2 rucks and 2 kpf can work. I don't see why this setup is such a bad idea, and I don't see why we can't make it work.
OK, well if its as simplistic as win lose or draw, then there is no point continuing this conversation.
Just like we are not Collingwood.
We are not Geelong.
Team balance, i've been talking about it all year and it relates to OUR team, not anybody elses team. Our players make our team different to every other team.
Geelong wasn't left unbalanced by playing those 4, and there's nothing about playing Pittonet, De Koning, McKay and Charlie Curnow that makes us unbalanced. There's not a single person of note in the CFC who would believe that, not one.
If Collingwood had our 4 players, they would play each and every week.
The whole thing really boils down to expectations.
At the end of the home and away season we had a discussion about expectations.
Many of us said that the effort would prove too much in the end.
With the pressure of getting to finals, our finishing position and the likelihood of interstate travel, coupled with some players carrying injuries it would be..."a bridge too far"
This prediction was made before finals began.
For those people we probably exceeded expectations.
For others there was the line of thinking..."Why can't we go all the way?"
For those people we fell at the second last hurdle.
We failed to meet their hopes and expectations.
They'll be looking for reasons why, perhaps ignoring the most obvious....we just ran out of steam, and came up against a superior opponent on their home deck.
Or maybe it's a combination of a lot of factors, and perhaps selection reasons we're not privy too.
So we can look for reasons why.
Was it selections or exhaustion?
Kruddler is right, we'll stick fast to our own belief as to why we didn't progress further and there really is no point trying to change folk's minds.
Geelong wasn't left unbalanced by playing those 4, and there's nothing about playing Pittonet, De Koning, McKay and Charlie Curnow that makes us unbalanced. There's not a single person of note in the CFC who would believe that, not one.
If Collingwood had our 4 players, they would play each and every week.
You are not even reading what i'm writing anymore.
....and perhaps if not a single person of note in CFC doesn't believe that, then thats why we were watching the GF rather than playing in it.
I've had this discussion all year, trying to point out the unimportance of 2 rucks. Nobody listens.
We manage to beat Freo with zero rucks and despite being going to be 'beaten up' by the big mean Sean Darcy.....we manage to win by 50+ points....in Perth. Only then people start to realise its somewhat possible to play with only 1 ruck.....seeing as we didn't need any rucks.
Fast forward 10+ weeks and people have forgotten all about that. ::) and fallen back into their old critiques like it never happened.
Geelong wasn't left unbalanced by playing those 4, and there's nothing about playing Pittonet, De Koning, McKay and Charlie Curnow that makes us unbalanced. There's not a single person of note in the CFC who would believe that, not one.
If Collingwood had our 4 players, they would play each and every week.
I’m not sure that Pitto and the King would be selected ahead of Cox and Cameron but Collingwood won the premiership with two genuine, lumbering rucks and two key forwards. Admittedly, one of the key forwards was a bit of a decoy because their first choice KPF was injured.
Of course, both of Collingwood’s rucks are a threat when they go forward. Neither managed a goal in the GF, but they demand a decent defender.
The idea that we’re unbalanced with two rucks and two tall forwards doesn’t stack up, particularly since the alternative is two tall forwards, one ruck and a third tall forward/undersized ruck.
That’s not to say that Brisbane model - one outstanding ruckman backed up by one of their two tall forwards - isn’t effective. It worked quite well against us, but there were other factors at play. However, it wasn’t effective against Collingwood.
I don’t understand the reasoning behind some of our team selections but I do understand that the reasoning behind those decisions is based on more and much better information than I have, as well as far superior footy understanding and knowledge. Games of footy aren’t lost by the MC. They’re lost because the players aren’t good enough or they’re not at their best, or the gameplan is flawed or not executed well enough.
...........................
....and perhaps if not a single person of note in CFC doesn't believe that, then thats why we were watching the GF rather than playing in it.
Right. So if the club follows some rando on the internet rather than its own team of experts, we would be holding aloft No17 right about now. Got it. Now I understand. Thanks for the clarification.
..........................................................................
I don’t understand the reasoning behind some of our team selections but I do understand that the reasoning behind those decisions is based on more and much better information than I have, as well as far superior footy understanding and knowledge. Games of footy aren’t lost by the MC. They’re lost because the players aren’t good enough or they’re not at their best, or the gameplan is flawed or not executed well enough.
I agree. I also find some MC decisions bizarre, but the starting point has to be that the MC has probably got it right, and we should try to understand why those decisions were made, even if most of the time we can only guess. Far too many think if their team is different to the MC, then the MC must be in error, which IMO, has it completely back to front.
The Freo win was great tactical coaching by Voss, midfield gold, it's not a new tactic, but it's not one any opposition had seen us use before. They have now and it won't be as effective next time.
Also, it takes a heavy toll on the midfield group, and once opposition have seen it they get a heads up at selection like sounding an air raid siren!
Leaving it tactically viable only against select opponents who are playing injured / unfit rucks once every couple of seasons.
The 24x7 grunt option is what happens when the situation is normal, that is the Handbaggers and Filth. For all his foibles, Scott is a great manager of players through the season, he knows what takes a toll on players and how to find ways to get them through the season while managing the load.
PS; Scott tried our Freo tactic against us, when Blicsav and Stanley were limping through the game against us, how did that go for them? It doesn't always have to be a MC selection tactic, sometimes it happens in game out of a necessity.
It's not really possible IMO to continuously come up with new party tricks and tactical moves that keep the opposition guessing. At some point you simply have to be a better team. I've heard many losing coaches say they knew exactly how the opposition would play, but they just weren't able to counter it.
Good point. Motlop went missing, as did Fogarty. The game was lost from the second quarter onwards when they got on top around the middle and won the clearances. It must be said and many of us would've noticed this for a while, but we're actually too short, in defence! Young's indifferent season has meant McGovern has played as an undersized KPD. When Kemp was omitted, we were even more one down in a tall down there (of course Kemp isn't really a KPD, but he's more of a third tall than Boyd, not that his selection can be faulted).Their own twin talls in Daniher and Hipwood were given treats by their players.
Yep.
I see that tall Durds has been given another contract and was an emergency for one of our finals... reckon he and Young will be competing for the same spot during pre season training.
Yep.
I see that tall Durds has been given another contract and was an emergency for one of our finals... reckon he and Young will be competing for the same spot during pre season training.
Reckon tall Durds is like that fire extinguisher you have at home or work you walk past everyday and hope you never have to use....for me he is there to replace one player only in the main and thats Jacob Weitering.
Right. So if the club follows some rando on the internet rather than its own team of experts, we would be holding aloft No17 right about now. Got it. Now I understand. Thanks for the clarification.
In 1 post you go over the top talking about how the MC are a team of experts.
In the very next post you agree that they sometimes you find them completely bizarre. Given they are human and fallible,
Its clear that sometimes they get it wrong.
So apparently they only get it wrong when i don't disagree with them?
......and nowhere did i say we would win the prelim, or the GF. But there is a difference between fighting man to man and fighting one hand behind your back.
In 1 post you go over the top talking about how the MC are a team of experts.
In the very next post you agree that they sometimes you find them completely bizarre. Given they are human and fallible,
Its clear that sometimes they get it wrong.
So apparently they only get it wrong when i don't disagree with them?
......and nowhere did i say we would win the prelim, or the GF. But there is a difference between fighting man to man and fighting one hand behind your back.
My assertion that I don't understand some MC choices is a failing on my part, not the MC's. By the very nature of the industry, we are locked out of the knowledge base and experience base required to understand the decisions made. My feelings about strange selections are a result of this, and not because I can pick when they've stuffed up or because I know things they don't.
I don’t accept your thesis that 2 rucks and 2kpf is unworkable for us. I don’t accept your thesis that you can pick a better team than the MC. I don’t accept your thesis that you can see things the MC cannot. My lack of acceptance of these has absolutely nothing to do with any stupidity, laziness, or confusion on my part. It has nothing to do with not reading your voluminous contributions. I simply don’t agree. Many on here don’t agree, our club doesn’t agree, significant sections of the AFL community don’t agree.
I completely accept that my position is based to a degree on an appeal to authority, and I acknowledge that in order for my position to be true, the process for selecting a team must be relatively free of both corruption and incompetence. And I’m perfectly happy with those limitations.
I think that probably is the crux of the argument here.
It's not that folks don't read and understand points that are being made by others, it's just that they have a different perspective and opinion.
Some will argue team selections stopped us from progressing.
Some will argue the physical toll and high pressure game we played caught up with us in the end.
I'm in the second camp, but it could be one, both or neither.
Maybe we just went as far as we were capable of going given our level of development at the moment.
At this time of the year there are keys to getting it all right.
Every year only one team goes close...this year, as distasteful as it is.... it was Collingwood.
To get it right there are probably three main aspects in play (other than the obvious skill and ability)
Tactical
Physical (fitness and injury)
Attitude and effort.
Blind Freddy could see we were struggling with aspects of the physical, with key movers hampered by injury.
Add to that the physical and mental toll of a run that meant we were playing for our final existence every week after they bye.
And that meant it was always going to be an "effort for the ages" to even get to a Grand Final... but gee, we went close.
It's never a 'one option fits all' with team selection and there are times when different combinations are required.
Yes, We can be the side that everyone stuggles to match up on, but we need to take account of the opposition strengths too, because form is not always consistent, and with 22/3 players in a side there will be days when things just don't click with certain players.
That's when an oppostition can cut you up.
A side doesn't have to be too far off the boil for an upset.
So it's done and dusted...the one thing you can almost put your money on is that the Carlton side that plays the last game of 2024 will have a slightly different look to the Carlton side that took the field against Brisbane...maybe not major, but different.
I'm not claiming to be an oracle.
I'm not suggested i am 100% right, 100% of the time.
That doesn't mean i am incapable of being right.....and i am not alone on this.
As an example...
Plenty on here were calling for Dow to be picked throughout the year.
The public, the media, the supporters.....everyone.....except the MC.
When the MC picked him, he did well...he did so well he kept getting games.
He did so well, that he is now a trade target when previously he was top 3 players to be delisted.
Full disclosure, i was NOT one calling for Dow to be picked, but it appears the wisdom of the masses were correct in giving him a shot.
Myself and EB have been on the same page with this stuff for a while....and a few others seem to be as well.
There is more than 1 way to skin a cat.
For this lions game, perhaps there was nothing we could've done to make a difference......but perhaps there was. We'll never know.
I think i've been pretty clear from the pre-season my thoughts on team selection that are specific to OUR team.
I voiced those reservations ad nauseum, including before the Lions game.
It panned out as i expected. Maybe its coincidence. Maybe its dumb luck. Maybe if the game was played tomorrow it will be different.........maybe it wont.
You, and others, point out that we lost because we tired and busted....and sure thats an excuse/reason/whatever. You know what, our 2 points of view are not opposites.
You all know my stance on Pittonet. I've been pretty vocal on Harry underperforming as well.
You know what i would've done....
Dropped Pittonet and played Jack.
Pitto was tired and busted, more than anyone else out there. Getting some fresh legs, more run, more pressure from his position would've made more difference than most......and he was one of our better talls on the night.
I’m not sure that Pitto and the King would be selected ahead of Cox and Cameron but Collingwood won the premiership with two genuine, lumbering rucks and two key forwards. Admittedly, one of the key forwards was a bit of a decoy because their first choice KPF was injured.
Of course, both of Collingwood’s rucks are a threat when they go forward. Neither managed a goal in the GF, but they demand a decent defender.
The idea that we’re unbalanced with two rucks and two tall forwards doesn’t stack up, particularly since the alternative is two tall forwards, one ruck and a third tall forward/undersized ruck.
That’s not to say that Brisbane model - one outstanding ruckman backed up by one of their two tall forwards - isn’t effective. It worked quite well against us, but there were other factors at play. However, it wasn’t effective against Collingwood.
I don’t understand the reasoning behind some of our team selections but I do understand that the reasoning behind those decisions is based on more and much better information than I have, as well as far superior footy understanding and knowledge. Games of footy aren’t lost by the MC. They’re lost because the players aren’t good enough or they’re not at their best, or the gameplan is flawed or not executed well enough.
I'm not sure brisbane muffed their selections.
There's lots of points being made by lots of people, but brisbane lost the grand final because they too had a few players that failed to put in a good shift. Hipwood was rubbish, and Berry played a very poor ultimately match costing grand final, and simply those two having a bad game vs a good one may have been a bigger factor in winning amd losing than any other factor.
Collingwood didn't have a dud player on the day. That's why they won.
I'm not claiming to be an oracle.
You kind of are... :D
If you predict what going to happen based on the team that's picked....and then it happens...is that dumb luck? Coincidence? Perhaps it's people knowing a thing or 2 about football.
Which kind of suggests that folks who disagree don't know as much about football.
Yet some of those very posters were 'predicting' that we'd struggle to make it through because of the physical toll of the fightback... and injuries.
So in the end they were just as correct.
They obvioulsy know a little bit about football and its demands.
It's not always about being right, or having the last word.
We have to accept that sometimes our analysis won't always be shared by others, because they're seeing different things.
We can look at a player or team, make an observation, and then find stats to justify that observation.
But often we'll look at those stats with a bias, and ignore other aspects or statistics that give a slightly different perspective.
The thing about football is that it's not always the statistical/analytical side that wins through.
Football is just as much about the unpredictable.... the player rising to the occasion, the result against the odds...injuries.
That's the beauty of the game.
It's not really possible IMO to continuously come up with new party tricks and tactical moves that keep the opposition guessing. At some point you simply have to be a better team. I've heard many losing coaches say they knew exactly how the opposition would play, but they just weren't able to counter it.
Yes, in the end it's a contest, I believe Voss told the team as much as part of his you have to win finals more than once talk. A team versus a team, and if you have enough people win and fewer losers on the day you probably win.
There are moments when "New Tactics" work, we see it in a honeymoon period for stand-in or new coaches, and we see it in debut seasons for good players. But it's that 2nd or 3rd season that is the tell, and the 2nd season blues is common among players who are no longer a mystery to opponents. Which by the way is why Walsh remains such an exceptional player, because as you mentioned, they know his tricks but just can't do anything about them!
Part of the MC / Coaching role, is to precisely pick the right moments when you use variations in tactics, and to not overdo them to avoid becoming predictable. Which is also why Malthouse, Pagan and others pass their use-by-date, not because they are incapable, but often because they refuse to change and as such become too predictable. They are very very well study as opponents!
Yep.
I see that tall Durds has been given another contract and was an emergency for one of our finals... reckon he and Young will be competing for the same spot during pre season training.
Hopefully one or even both stand up and be noticed. I made mention of Motlop and Fogarty having disappointing games, but we were killed in the clearances and this was a big reason why they got back into the game, the two lacked opportunities to impact. Obviously Daniher and Hipwood were given too many opportunities for our gun Weitering to deal with.
Reckon tall Durds is like that fire extinguisher you have at home or work you walk past everyday and hope you never have to use....for me he is there to replace one player only in the main and thats Jacob Weitering.
You're probably right Elwood, in any case it's still very important, no matter what the form of him or Young, to have these guys on the list, for the purpose that was badly missing for a lot of the year and what exposed us against Brisbane. We will be too far into the draft to get a developing tall KPD imo, hence tall Durdin is on our list as an insurance policy.
I’m not sure that Pitto and the King would be selected ahead of Cox and Cameron but Collingwood won the premiership with two genuine, lumbering rucks and two key forwards. Admittedly, one of the key forwards was a bit of a decoy because their first choice KPF was injured.
Of course, both of Collingwood’s rucks are a threat when they go forward. Neither managed a goal in the GF, but they demand a decent defender.
The idea that we’re unbalanced with two rucks and two tall forwards doesn’t stack up, particularly since the alternative is two tall forwards, one ruck and a third tall forward/undersized ruck.
That’s not to say that Brisbane model - one outstanding ruckman backed up by one of their two tall forwards - isn’t effective. It worked quite well against us, but there were other factors at play. However, it wasn’t effective against Collingwood.
I don’t understand the reasoning behind some of our team selections but I do understand that the reasoning behind those decisions is based on more and much better information than I have, as well as far superior footy understanding and knowledge. Games of footy aren’t lost by the MC. They’re lost because the players aren’t good enough or they’re not at their best, or the gameplan is flawed or not executed well enough.
Flags have been won in many different ways. 2017 Richmond won with one key forward and a small forward line, then in 2019 they won with Lynch, Riewoldt, Nankervis and Soldo. 2020 they did it with one ruck and a pinch-hitter. 2018 the Eagles won with Vardy, Lycett, Kennedy and Darling, Melbourne won with Gawn, Jackson, McDonald and Brown, 2022, Jackson was very proficient forward. 2022 Geelong went with Stanley, a part-timer ruck in Blicavs and as well as Hawkins and Cameron. Looks like you can win it with many different combinations.
If you go in with an one extra tall, or one extra small probably it isn't going to make alot of difference. Most important thing to me is that at least one ruck can play well around the ground and go forward and kick a goal. Can't have two centre bounce rucks that can't do anything else. That's where you come unbalanced, like essentially being like a player down. If you have one that can take marks around the ground and kick a goal, great, play 2 rucks. If you have just 2 plain centre bounce rucks that can't do much else then you need to pick a pinch hitter. It's why Levi, for all his faults is a very handy footballer. Luke Jackson probably a better version.
Flags have been won in many different ways. 2017 Richmond won with one key forward and a small forward line, then in 2019 they won with Lynch, Riewoldt, Nankervis and Soldo. 2020 they did it with one ruck and a pinch-hitter. 2018 the Eagles won with Vardy, Lycett, Kennedy and Darling, Melbourne won with Gawn, Jackson, McDonald and Brown, 2022, Jackson was very proficient forward. 2022 Geelong went with Stanley, a part-timer ruck in Blicavs and as well as Hawkins and Cameron. Looks like you can win it with many different combinations.
If you go in with an one extra tall, or one extra small probably it isn't going to make alot of difference. Most important thing to me is that at least one ruck can play well around the ground and go forward and kick a goal. Can't have two centre bounce rucks that can't do anything else. That's where you come unbalanced, like essentially being like a player down. If you have one that can take marks around the ground and kick a goal, great, play 2 rucks. If you have just 2 plain centre bounce rucks that can't do much else then you need to pick a pinch hitter. It's why Levi, for all his faults is a very handy footballer. Luke Jackson probably a better version.
I said it before.
In a grand final like the one we saw, Jarrod Berry's 2 50 metre penalty brain fades had more to do with the result than any other factor.
Even so, had Bailey not played advantage in that last minute and a half of bedlam, and Brisbane kicked another goal the result flips, we talk about a brisbane premiership, and how Collingwoods decision to play Billy Frampton as a purely defensive forward cost them the game.
Or, Nathan Murphy's concussion becomes the difference.
The match was won and lost in so many little moments of people switching off at the wrong time, that team balance being "the reason" is completely irrelevant.
The match was won and lost in so many little moments of people switching off at the wrong time, that team balance being "the reason" is completely irrelevant.
In fairness MC can have an impact, if we go back to the Prelim and watch for those little moments, when Martin and Motlop fly and we've nobody crumbing, where was Owies and Cunningham at the fall of the ball?
That's a type of team balance issue, but it's not the only reason for falling at the hurdle.
Retrospectively we can never know definitively if what the MC's did were positives or negatives, all we have are the vents on the day and a bunch of what could have been observations.
Managing moments is all the rage with coaches at the moment. I try and watch as many press conferences as I can, and I can't recall a coach saying they lost because they lacked balance. Undoubtedly there are competing parameters that need to be complimentary in some fashion (tall v small, size and strength v pace, endurance v burst power, extractor v distributor etc.), but I'd guess it's one ball among many that coaches need to juggle.
Flags have been won in many different ways. 2017 Richmond won with one key forward and a small forward line, then in 2019 they won with Lynch, Riewoldt, Nankervis and Soldo. 2020 they did it with one ruck and a pinch-hitter. 2018 the Eagles won with Vardy, Lycett, Kennedy and Darling, Melbourne won with Gawn, Jackson, McDonald and Brown, 2022, Jackson was very proficient forward. 2022 Geelong went with Stanley, a part-timer ruck in Blicavs and as well as Hawkins and Cameron. Looks like you can win it with many different combinations.
If you go in with an one extra tall, or one extra small probably it isn't going to make alot of difference. Most important thing to me is that at least one ruck can play well around the ground and go forward and kick a goal. Can't have two centre bounce rucks that can't do anything else. That's where you come unbalanced, like essentially being like a player down. If you have one that can take marks around the ground and kick a goal, great, play 2 rucks. If you have just 2 plain centre bounce rucks that can't do much else then you need to pick a pinch hitter. It's why Levi, for all his faults is a very handy footballer. Luke Jackson probably a better version.
Yes, there's no hard and fast rule about ruck/forward combinations, but your point about not going with two one-dimensional rucks is pretty close to being a rule. I guess the same could be said about going with two very good around the ground rucks when neither can play the support/tall forward role.
Pitto and the King, when they're on, make a formidable combination. They weren't really on against McInerney but Cox and Cameron were on in the GF and limited McInerney's influence.
Levi will be preparing for his third season since we announced his retirement ::)
Flags have been won in many different ways. 2017 Richmond won with one key forward and a small forward line, then in 2019 they won with Lynch, Riewoldt, Nankervis and Soldo. 2020 they did it with one ruck and a pinch-hitter. 2018 the Eagles won with Vardy, Lycett, Kennedy and Darling, Melbourne won with Gawn, Jackson, McDonald and Brown, 2022, Jackson was very proficient forward. 2022 Geelong went with Stanley, a part-timer ruck in Blicavs and as well as Hawkins and Cameron. Looks like you can win it with many different combinations.
Across that timeframe the rules have changed multiple times, as has the way the umpires are directed to interpret them!
A good example is after our game against the Handbaggers early this season, Scott bitched and moaned about his poor poor injured ruck and damaged Mid being beaten up by the high jumping TDK raising his knee and not being penalised. In the following weeks, TDK was almost umpired out of the game, something we should have been whispering in SDKs ear as a reminder about the behaviour of his coach! It was Scott's choice to play an injured/recovering ruck and his premier midfielder in the ruck, why should anyone else be penalised. He put Blicavs and Stanley to the sword to save Cameron, Hawkins and others.
No official rule was changed, but the way the game was played and umpired changed after that weekend! ;)
We'd get no sympathy if we stupidly played Harry or Cripps in the ruck and a Nankervis or Darcy type smashed them up, yet that is what some fans want! To me it's stupidity to put premium players at greater physical risk, and worse still to toy with their form by playing them out of position just to create a spot for some other piecewise players.
That sort of thing makes it very hard to compare seasons and tactics but it does tell us one thing, and that is anyone who thinks they have the right way or the only solution is surely kidding themselves!
I said it before.
In a grand final like the one we saw, Jarrod Berry's 2 50 metre penalty brain fades had more to do with the result than any other factor.
Even so, had Bailey not played advantage in that last minute and a half of bedlam, and Brisbane kicked another goal the result flips, we talk about a brisbane premiership, and how Collingwoods decision to play Billy Frampton as a purely defensive forward cost them the game.
Or, Nathan Murphy's concussion becomes the difference.
The match was won and lost in so many little moments of people switching off at the wrong time, that team balance being "the reason" is completely irrelevant.
Yes, Bonehead Berry's brain fade was as costly as it get. Can even go back to the QF and Maynard's hit on Brayshaw cost Melbourne the game. If it wasn't for the hit putting Brayshaw out of the game the Pies may well have been out week 2.
Yes, Bonehead Berry's brain fade was as costly as it get. Can even go back to the QF and Maynard's hit on Brayshaw cost Melbourne the game. If it wasn't for the hit putting Brayshaw out of the game the Pies may well have been out week 2.
Let's not forget the impact of the umpiring non-decisions that robbed GWS, nothing players can do to manage those moments!
Ultimately, the Filth took their opportunities no matter how they were delivered, they might be lucky but hard work also tends to make you lucky!
Let's not forget the impact of the umpiring non-decisions that robbed GWS, nothing players can do to manage those moments!
Ultimately, the Filth took their opportunities no matter how they were delivered, they might be lucky but hard work also tends to make you lucky!
As the saying goes, the harder you work, the "luckier" you get.
With the Pies, and Carlton, during the 2nd half of the year, they get a sniff, luck or otherwise, they find a way.
I guess the same could be said about going with two very good around the ground rucks when neither can play the support/tall forward role.
Yes, right there you have Melbourne's issue this year.
Yes, there's no hard and fast rule about ruck/forward combinations, but your point about not going with two one-dimensional rucks is pretty close to being a rule. I guess the same could be said about going with two very good around the ground rucks when neither can play the support/tall forward role.
Pitto and the King, when they're on, make a formidable combination. They weren't really on against McInerney but Cox and Cameron were on in the GF and limited McInerney's influence.
Levi will be preparing for his third season since we announced his retirement ::)
Thats what i've been saying all along. This is why it relates to OUR team, and not other teams that play 2 rucks, or 1 ruck or whatever.
This is why i prefer when Jack plays backup ruck because he doesn't have to do much in the actual ruck, but he does a lot more around the ground than any of Pitto and TDK.
I said at the start of the year that all of this is dependent on TDK and IF he can learn to play another role, we are better off. If not, its a luxury we cannot afford.
I don't care if other teams play 1 ruck, or 23 rucks, that doesn't matter to me. What matters to me is OUR rucks and what they can (and can't do) and thats what effects balance.
Another thing (or 2) that works against us in this instance is....
1. Our bigger midfield and its inability to chase....or more to the point, catch anyone outside of a contest. See Cripps and Kennedy
2. Our 3rd (or 4th) taller defenders. Weitering, Kemp, McGovern, Marchbank all playing together (at times) down back mean we are extra tall down there.
Put it all together and we are asking our smaller/quicker mids (and forwards) to simply do too much to run, chase, tackle and pressure.
So yes, team balance is about our team, not other teams because it is about OUR players, and rucks.
Thats what i've been saying all along. This is why it relates to OUR team, and not other teams that play 2 rucks, or 1 ruck or whatever.
This is why i prefer when Jack plays backup ruck because he doesn't have to do much in the actual ruck, but he does a lot more around the ground than any of Pitto and TDK.
I said at the start of the year that all of this is dependent on TDK and IF he can learn to play another role, we are better off. If not, its a luxury we cannot afford.
I don't care if other teams play 1 ruck, or 23 rucks, that doesn't matter to me. What matters to me is OUR rucks and what they can (and can't do) and thats what effects balance.
Another thing (or 2) that works against us in this instance is....
1. Our bigger midfield and its inability to chase....or more to the point, catch anyone outside of a contest. See Cripps and Kennedy
2. Our 3rd (or 4th) taller defenders. Weitering, Kemp, McGovern, Marchbank all playing together (at times) down back mean we are extra tall down there.
Put it all together and we are asking our smaller/quicker mids (and forwards) to simply do too much to run, chase, tackle and pressure.
So yes, team balance is about our team, not other teams because it is about OUR players, and rucks.
Nothing like flogging a dead horse 🙄
I think that most folk agree that playing Jack Silvagni as second ruck does not work. He might get the odd clearance but the opposition second stringers touch him up. McInerney and Daniher would have a picnic, as would Cox and Cameron.
Backing up in the ruck also affects Jack’s output as third tall forward.
Our best ruck combination, until someone else comes along, is Pittonet and De Koning, followed by De Koning and O’Keeffe, then Pittonet and O’Keeffe.
The solution to the lack of foot speed by some of our mids isn’t playing the even slower Silvagni as a second ruck.
Anyway, we won 11 of our last 13, the only team to do so, and I think the MC have got the team balance exactly where it should be.
Nothing like flogging a dead horse 🙄
Just pointing out that you agree with me without realising it.
I think that most folk agree that playing Jack Silvagni as second ruck does not work. He might get the odd clearance but the opposition second stringers touch him up. McInerney and Daniher would have a picnic, as would Cox and Cameron.
Backing up in the ruck also affects Jack’s output as third tall forward.
Our best ruck combination, until someone else comes along, is Pittonet and De Koning, followed by De Koning and O’Keeffe, then Pittonet and O’Keeffe.
The solution to the lack of foot speed by some of our mids isn’t playing the even slower Silvagni as a second ruck.
Anyway, we won 11 of our last 13, the only team to do so, and I think the MC have got the team balance exactly where it should be.
Your comments about us 'suffering' in the ruck by comparison and Jacks output as a forward have both been debunked with stats, but you continue to push it. So be it. I don't expect to change your mind.
I will point out when you agree with the logic behind it.
I will point out when any objections are untrue.
Our best ruck combination, until someone else comes along, is Pittonet and De Koning, followed by De Koning and O’Keeffe, then Pittonet and O’Keeffe.
The solution to the lack of foot speed by some of our mids isn’t playing the even slower Silvagni as a second ruck....
It might not be long before that first combination falls behind the other two. Certainly it gives us better mobility and forward craft than any combination involving Pitto, but we lose his physicality. Not that O'Keeffe is shy of putting his body on the line but he doesn't - yet - have the size to do it effectively against most AFL first rucks.
As to JSOS rucking not being a solution to lack of leg speed, the comparison is not to the other mids but to whoever would be doing the second ruck role if not JSOS. If that were Pitto or Mirkov for example, then JSOS clearly is quicker, not so if it is TDK, Harry McKay or say Dom Akuei (not that he is near firsts level) he was keeping out of that role.
I think it's obvious now that TDK is first choice ruck and will take more responsibility moving forward.
Who will relieve him......interesting question and I don't think the club has the answer. I actually think it's Jack but we will see.
On this ruck debate, too much emphasis is being put on specific traits and not nearly enough on the contrast.
For me it's not how fast TDK might be, or how strong Pitto is, what is important is the fact they are very different which turns out to be complimentary. We aren't out of the contest in any circumstance with that combination, and it makes us harder to play against because we have a tool for every job, which I think puts that combination well ahead of the other options.
Making up jobs for the likes of SoJ or Akuei isn't the way forward, players should have to win a spot for their preferred / primary role before they are considered for 2nd or 3rd tier tasks.
I still can't believe we are talking about selection issues for a guy that didn't play footy in the last 6 weeks and the one time he did he broke down by quarter time.
I think TDK still needs Pittonet to do the monkey work for him early softening up the opposition stronger rucks and does his best work at the back end of games when he is fresher than the opposition.
I wouldn't be calling him No 1 ruck yet when he still needs a baby sitter....
The Pittonet/De Koning combination is still a work in progress.
Stability and game time, working in tandem is what's needed.
The more DeKoning plays, the more responsibility he takes, the better he gets.
The reason I'm uncomfortable with Silvagni as a ruck is that he's basically there as cannon fodder.
Does it give us better results using him in this fashion.
He finished 2022 banged up and spent.
He finished this year injured.
Let's just give him the one job next year and we may see him shine as that third (hopefully goal kicking) third tall.
Let's just give him the one job next year and we may see him shine as that third (hopefully goal kicking) third tall.
This is the reality for SoJ, he needs to do the job he's best at first and get a regular gig doing that, before we look at him as backup for the rucks.
Unfortunately for SoJ people want to lever him into the 22, I suspect it's a name thing, but when you look at our last half of 2023 the thing that brought us more success than anything was having some good crumbers at the feet of Harry and Charlie, not more marking options. It was Cunningham, Fogarty, Boyd, Owies and even Acres at the fall of the ball around the wing and on the HFF that I think made the biggest difference, and what was missing in the PF.
Further as Martin came good, when he is up and about he's as good if not a better 3rd marking option than SoJ, Kemp or others that might get occasional F50 rotations, that is going to limit F50 opportunities for some.
I suspect and I don't think I'm going out on a limb here, that our spine will be Harry, Charlie, Cripps, McGovern and Weiters surrounded by extras, who those extras will be depends on the coaching and MC emphasis.
The Pittonet/De Koning combination is still a work in progress.
Stability and game time, working in tandem is what's needed.
The more DeKoning plays, the more responsibility he takes, the better he gets.
The reason I'm uncomfortable with Silvagni as a ruck is that he's basically there as cannon fodder.
Does it give us better results using him in this fashion.
He finished 2022 banged up and spent.
He finished this year injured.
Let's just give him the one job next year and we may see him shine as that third (hopefully goal kicking) third tall.
Causation and correlation.
Its easy to point to Jack and say he's cannon fodder and we broke him because he got injured in the 1st quarter and never played again.
Reality is, that could've happened to anyone.
Reality is, the week before he was BOG, and kicked 4.
So how banged up was he?
No 2 players are the same. So when comparing them, you list your pros and cons.
We do this with Pitto vs TDK......and we can do this vs Jack as well.
Its clear to all that Pitto + TDK perform better in pure ruckwork than Jack.
However, what half of you have been telling me is that the pure ruckwork side of things means nothing and its what they do around the ground.
So.....when looking at pros and cons around the ground, this is where Jack shines. He simply does more of everything once the ball hits the deck....including clearances when playing as a ruck.
So my contention has always been its better to play 1 pure ruck (to do as much ruckwork as possible - not 50-50) and get someone who is good around the ground (SOS, Cripps, Young, Harry....whoever) to chip in from time to time.
The players mentioned do not get 'beaten up' by playing as a ruck because...
a) They don't actually fly for the contest like pure ruck do, rarely leaving their feet.
b) They don't actually play any more than a quarter of a game in the ruck anyway (and thats spread over 4 quarters)
c) They all play in a position where they constantly get battered and bruised anyway from marking contests and stoppages.
So what is the added stresses that these guys face by playing 6 minutes of ruck a quarter, of which 2 minutes may actually involve a ruck contest??
Again, its all pros and cons.
Pitto + TDK = better tap work.
Pitto or TDK + Jack = better output around the ground.
Its up to you which camp you fall into, but to me its clear that the latter has more influence on the game.
If it was simply about ruckwork, than Sandilands would be undefeated and Mumford wouldn't be far behind.
Our game plan is built on contests and manic pressure. The pressure is applied by the smaller blokes who run, chase, tackle and harrass. The more big blokes we have playing, the less small blokes we have playing and the harder it is to apply that kind of pressure.
Yes, Jack is not a small bloke, but he applies more pressure than our rucks do, and thats what counts.
Causation and correlation.
Its easy to point to Jack and say he's cannon fodder and we broke him because he got injured in the 1st quarter and never played again.
Reality is, that could've happened to anyone.
Reality is, the week before he was BOG, and kicked 4.
So how banged up was he?
Yep
His inury could have happened to anyone but he was pretty 'banged up' at the end of last year.
...and had a sluggish start to this year which saw him play a bit of VFL mid year.
Maybe the break was just what he needed.
Our scoring dried up late in the season, we peaked that night against Collingwood and didn't really play our best since. We won our finals with great defence, guts and determination.
Our scoring dried up late in the season,
True, it's so hard to establish the balance, but we also won more games in the 2nd half of the season.
FWIW, we got Martin back after the mid-season break, but Cerra, Owies, McKay, Durdin, Motlop and Silvagni all missed games, but I'd assert BigH getting injured created structural issues we never really recovered from.
Further, both Cripps and Acres carried injuries into the 2nd half of the season, and while they may have still hit the scoreboard those injuries no doubt change the number of opportunities they generate for those around them. I suppose it is not just about what a player scores, but also the opportunities they create.
Remember the the PF, Martin, Motlop and another fly against BigH early in the game, it was a danger sign, because no opponent is going to outmark BigH and yet 2 of our primary SFs weren't at the fall because they felt compelled to take a speccy. How can any player the size of Motlop or Martin think it's feasible to fly against McKay? It was lack of composure, perhaps something that had developed in the weeks before when McKay was absent.