Ready for tomorrow.
Well, poo!
Tired of losing to this mob, always play poorly against them.
Lesson learned, I hope. Should have gone on with it when 3gls up but rested on our laurels. Undisciplined. Too many very easy goals conceded.
Absolutely disgusted!!!!!
16pts up 6 min to go and lose to a crap team. Inexcusable!!!!!!
Walker has Weitering bluffed! Owies has too many brain fades!!
I want Docherty back 😩
We had to lose a close one at some Point.
Although you could tell we were fatigued we really stopped after getting 16 points up and then couldn’t rematch them. Lesson learned.
Never confident against Adelaide, they seem to have it over us.
Old Carlton came to visit - lowered our colours to a lesser team & relied on individual brilliance & too many passengers & bringing in Pitto only weakened TDK (selection table stuff-up) & just too bloody 'cruisy.' Very, very, very undisciplined performance.
Our mids worry me and our small forwards aren't doing the job. Crows' small forwards hurt us.
Any loss to a non-finals team is a bad loss.
Kicked ourselves of of it but the MC didn't help.
Getting thin down back with Saad, McGovern and of course Docherty now all missing in coming weeks (and beyond) .
Getting thin down back with Saad, McGovern and of course Docherty now all missing in coming weeks (and beyond) .
What happened to McG
Old Carlton came to visit - lowered our colours to a lesser team & relied on individual brilliance & too many passengers & bringing in Pitto only weakened TDK.
Personally I think Pitto was the better of the two today, TDK was soundly beaten again by O'Brien who seems to be TDK's bogeyman.
I think if we hadn't had Pitto we would have lost by a lot more.
Walker has Weitering bluffed! Owies has too many brain fades!!
Walker, O'Brien and Keays have days out against us, they have the confidence now so it's likely they will always be a bogey side going forward.
Owies might have had a brain fade in the last but before that he was OK, our problem was the 3rd quarter when we burnt many opportunities. We've had 8 more shots at goal and lost by 2 pts, we should have been 3 or 4 goals up at 3/4 time not level, 3-7 to 5-1 with many of those 7 gettable.
A few passengers today
A few passengers today
I said in the pre-game, I had to assume we had a lot of injuries because some players just weren't deserving / earning a spot. We've been clinging to a couple of blokes who just aren't delivering to AFL standards.
Fantasia is now a huge mistake, he might be useful on the track but on game day it's passed him by.
Ollie Hollands is struggling, the kid has got what it takes but he needs time away to regain some confidence.
Fans will jump on the selection of Pitto, but we would have been smashed if not for him today. TDK is having his best season but he's erratic and O'Brien is his bogey man. O'Brien showed today what the new ruck rule means, TDK can't jump over a bloke his size and as a result with O'Brien offering a stiff arm TDK can't get close to the ball. He tries to jump so high he lands off balance and then he is out of the ground contest. TDK would be better to surrender the tap and become a mid.
The commentary from Brown and King was spot on today, as many of us have been saying our MC needs to find a way for us to score some easy goals, at this rate we'll be run into the ground before the mid-season break.
You can't live on the razor's edge and expect never to be cut!
Whilst I’m not a fan at all, I don’t think that Pitto was the problem today. We let ourselves down with missed tackles, poor decisions at critical moments and of course, missed shots at goal.
We badly missed Fogarty’s pressure forward of centre and we’re now struggling to cover the cumulative loss of Saad, Cerra, Docherty, Motlop and Martin.
Fantasia, Owies and O Hollands struggled with the bigger bodies and missed critical tackles and our small forwards were rarely at the fall of the ball.
Cripps & Acres made some very poor decisions and of course Owies could have sealed it at the end, but it wasn’t to be. Lots to work on.
Fantasia gives us nothing. I know we have injuries to most of our half forwards but why not play a running type like Binns. It gives us more flexibility.
Fantasia is supposed to be a specialist small forward. Why isn't he applying pressure? Why he is nowhere to be seen when the ball hits the deck?
Fantasia gives us nothing.
He plays with no confidence, like he is clinging on to his career by his fingernails.
If we had Martin and SoJ or Motlop in F50 Fantasia might be some use as the small forward, but he's not a player who can be roving while Durdin and Owies contest, it's just not going to work. We need Fantasia playing like Cottrell and he is miles off.
Then drop him. No passengers.
Personally I think Pitto was the better of the two today, TDK was soundly beaten again by O'Brien who seems to be TDK's bogeyman.
I think if we hadn't had Pitto we would have lost by a lot more.
I reckon if we had an extra runner we'd have won. Wouldn't that have been handy late.
Fantasia gives us nothing. I know we have injuries to most of our half forwards but why not play a running type like Binns. It gives us more flexibility.
Fantasia is supposed to be a specialist small forward. Why isn't he applying pressure? Why he is nowhere to be seen when the ball hits the deck?
Thinking he is still getting the feel of the game after a long time out. Think he will be good for us, just not now. I think he needs to find that touch in the twos.
Everything about that loss was nauseating. From the predictability of it all, to the haircuts on the Adelaide players, to the unbridled joy in the Foxtel commentary box.
Crows wanted it a bit more when it mattered and their kids stood up and they did the one per centers well.
We lacked run at the end and that scruffy dude Berry with his scruffy mate Soligo just had more run in the legs.
Cerra was a big loss for us and the Pitto/TDK twin ruck approach was ineffective. Harry and Charlie looked good at times but failed to dominate against what would would have to be the worst KP defenders in the comp in Butts and Keane.
Walker and Keays messed with us as usual and the Crows are officially now our monkey team who we can't get off our backs. Good teams rebound so I expect more effort vs GWS and a few changes in both teams due to injuries.
Important players are hurt EB, not confident taking on GWS
Personally I think Pitto was the better of the two today, TDK was soundly beaten again by O'Brien who seems to be TDK's bogeyman.
I think if we hadn't had Pitto we would have lost by a lot more.
If we hadn't had Pitto, we would have had Cerra.
Important players are hurt EB, not confident taking on GWS
Prof, Watched GWS play Stkilda and they just fell in with injuries to key players in Taylor and Coniglio so Im hoping their injuries balance up ours. Given the game is at Marvel I think we will rebound ok but if it had been at their home ground/s then I wouldnt be so confident.
We need to start winning clearances, our small forwards are average and I've no confidence in our small defenders with Saad missing
Lacked run in the end - playing two rucks not suiting the demands of system as need more runners up and down the ground. The amount of marks we gave up in our D50 due to lack of pressure or covering was comical. Lost it on selection table.
Important players are hurt EB, not confident taking on GWS
They'll have Taylor and Coniglio out next week. Taylor will be a big miss with our talls up forward
One thing, the last few years, we have easily played our best footy with half the side out. Don't know why but it keeps happening. Maybe we switch on alot more.
Tired of losing to this mob, always play poorly against them.
Ill cop a loss, just not against what you know. Ben Farken Keys again. A bigger hack you will not find and yet dines out on us...again.
We really got exposed on spread from a contest, they were good at, we were terrible. Their coast to coast ball movement was effortless compared to ours. They were cleaner for longer but some of the stuff we allowed to occur was criminal (eg that goal they kicked from a boundary line take away where we should have killed the contest. We really should have banked another 4 points, oh well ces't la vie.
Do i need to say it?
You do NOT need 2 rucks.
It seems a few others are starting to come on board.
I thought Pitto was better ruck today, but he still only played bang on 50% game time.
TDK was exactly 75% game time.
So for 75% of the match, we had 1 ruck on the bench. That is 1 mid for 75% game time we lost.
Which would've helped with our run....
I reckon if we had an extra runner we'd have won. Wouldn't that have been handy late.
We lacked run at the end
Lacked run in the end - playing two rucks not suiting the demands of system as need more runners up and down the ground.
A few passengers today
Yes many. Walsh despite being rusty had 34 and 13 tackles, what a beast. The selection of Pitto was baffling, we needed another runner.
Round of applause to Sam "Mr Professional" Walsh coming back from a big lay off.
34 touches, 13 tackles, 8 clearances, 611m gained. all game high (for both clubs) and there was daylight between 2nd.
About the only thing he did wrong was not find a target in the dying seconds.
Fantasia and Durdin, choose 1, drop 1. Experiment is over.
Pitto being picked over Cincotta was a terrible move. Pitto did very well, better than TDK, but still shouldn't have played.
Cincotta would've been handy both in the middle and as coverage for when Saad went down. Yes, hindsight is 20-20, but i said it before the game too.
8 more scoring shots, losing by 2 points. We were due. We needed a reality check. Better against a nobody team than a team we will be fighting for a position with in the 8 (or 4).
Injuries seem to be mounting up now.
Kemp, with possible concussion.
Saad, with a hamstring
Gov, with a hamstring.
Running out of fit players to cover these blokes.
Personally I think Pitto was the better of the two today, TDK was soundly beaten again by O'Brien who seems to be TDK's bogeyman.
I think if we hadn't had Pitto we would have lost by a lot more.
I would have liked to see TDK go at it all day with OBrien. TDK and Pitto never really settled in to work him over. I personally Never want to see the two of them play together again, just my view.
Prof, Watched GWS play Stkilda and they just fell in with injuries to key players in Taylor and Coniglio so Im hoping their injuries balance up ours. Given the game is at Marvel I think we will rebound ok but if it had been at their home ground/s then I wouldnt be so confident.
GWS will eat us alive on that deck.
So I'm a glass half full type.
We execute better (not remarkably mind you) and we win. Owies at the end could have won it with nothing more than some composure. I think the message from the bench about how long was left was lacking with a few minutes to go because we seemed to think there was no time left even though there was plenty.
We'll learn from that but we shouldn't have to. We fell for the same old stuff. Ben keays reserves 3 or 4 goals and we let rankine go head to head with cripps like idiots at stoppages.
So I'm a glass half full type.
We execute better (not remarkably mind you) and we win. Owies at the end could have won it with nothing more than some composure. I think the message from the bench about how long was left was lacking with a few minutes to go because we seemed to think there was no time left even though there was plenty.
We'll learn from that but we shouldn't have to. We fell for the same old stuff. Ben keays reserves 3 or 4 goals and we let rankine go head to head with cripps like idiots at stoppages.
I think we lack leg speed. We rely on scoring for TO a little to much me thinks. We dont have enough line breakers. Adelaide move it quick to space by hand and we couldn't do anything about it, Freo did the same last week. Adelaide, like Freo, forced us to kick to contests. Vossy and co need to go to work and come up with the counter plan.
I think we need to try TDK back, Pitto ruck. Gov, Kemp or Young don't look to be the second key back. One of them plays as the 3rd, which ever is fit apparently. We can't play H, Charlie and TDK fwd at the same time. Badly miss a third hybrid fwd like SOS or Martin. No wonder the interest in the kid from Sydney.
No Fogarty, No Carlton.
No Fogarty, No Carlton.
We definitely missed his defence pressure fwd of centre, their mids and defenders just walked through us.
Don't forget Owies kicked a goal and wasn't paid
We were ordinary when it mattered and allowed the Adelaide forwards far too much space.
Walker seems to have Weitering beaten between the ears.
Pitto was our best ruck. Tom was useless on the ball and delivered little as a forward. he had to have a down game, but I really hate it to be against Adelaide, whom I despise!
Our midfield work was terrible; Adelaide just walked it out. We probably got as many centre clearances in the end, but ours were ordinary and under pressure. No such thing the other way.
Fantasia has to go back to the VFL: he was very ordinary today and provided us with nothing. We were killed on the ground in our forward line. Corey Durdin wasn't a lot better, but he was down as well. Three tackles this week, which wasn't enough.
Matt Owies: robbed of a goal in the 3rd quarter and then has the worst brain fade in history in the last few minutes. Either of those, and it is game over. But he had only 9 possessions, double Fantasia's number.
Ollie H didn't have a great game. He needs to discover his run again. Elijah was also off the pace today, but he did do some very nice things. He'll probably survive. Carroll may not: almost invisible. :(
Next game is the start of the losing streak. Thank the gods it is earlier than last season. We are not top 4 contenders just yet. We had this one in the bag and in a way, I am glad we lost this opportunity. We are not top 4 material by any measure. Close only wins by the majority of games. Eventually you lose a few close game
s by the rules of Karma. Our next 4 weeks could have us win not a single game. Back into the battlers group still struggling to get into the top 8. Voss needs to do some serious talking and motivating. A bad period could have us lose our next 5. At a guess we will be lucky to get 3 wins in the next 5 games. More likely to be 2. Maybe 1. Not doom and gloom, but we had this one game in the bag against a side that struggled to play any side so far this season. We need much more work between the ears. Better game day selection of players. Less need for Walsh to carry the entire squad. He is only playing his first game this season if I am correct? We need to learn how to keep a lead on the scoreboard. We need to learn how to defend better. We still need to work on endurance and how to find speed by foot when the going gets tough. Not happy with the result at all. Glad we lost if we learn from the experience. Adelaide of all sides. Really? GWS by 5 goals next game.
No VFL/AFL team has ever gone through the season undefeated.
Someday one will. It may even be a Carlton side.
That team will be a great team.
We’re not yet a great team, we’re not even our best team… not by a long shot, with quite a number of our players out, or injured during the game.
Our forward line was missing Fogarty, Motlop, Martin, Cunningham all of who are in the mix for our best side.
Our defence was missing Marchbank, then Saad and McGovern
Cerra goes out of the midfield, and we’re a bit depleted.
The first loss of the season always stings.
It stings even more when it’s a team we thought we would account for easily.
But Adelaide did a number on us last year and did their homework well. We were out coached on the day. There were elements of the Fremantle approach in some passages yesterday as we struggled to move the ball out of defence.
So naturally there is a bit of disappointment, even anger and we’re looking for reasons.
Had we snuck over the line that would have largely disappeared.
We’d be looking for heroes, not villains.
But we weren’t awful…except some of our finishing.
The effort seemed to be there.
So many moments…Owies had two that could have changed the game
Had Owies not tripped over his own feet (or the Adelaide players feet) near the end it may have been a different story.
Had the goal Owies kicked been counted (An umpire should never say "I believe it was touched". They either saw the touch or they didn’t. So the soft call when it’s inconclusive must always be a goal)…different story
Just on the two- ruck situation. It’s not as cut and dried as some believe. The replacement of a ruck/tall with a small mid-field running player has to be viewed in terms of plusses and minuses.
The gain of the running player must be seem in terms of the cost of what you lose by omitting the tall/ruck. There may be an advantage…but the gap may not be as huge as we may think. Pittonet gave us a bit especially early on…but yes, it may have cost us later in the game.
Playing two wasn’t the issue, as much as playing a ruck to replace Cerra was.
With Saad and McGovern going down a lot of our drive disappeared as rotations were affected. Williams also seemed to be struggling at stages and may have had to stay on because of the injuries.
In that situation a second ruck may have cost us and Cincotta would have been handy when Saad was injured.
But looking at the bigger picture…This was Pittonet’s first game of the year. and he wasn’t too bad considering. More than anything he needs a bit of game time. (He only got half a game yesterday) Does that affect TDK’s performance. You can look at it that way, based on this game, but making judgements based on one game is fraught with danger. You would have to believe that there is a bit of a plan regarding the ruck situation going forward, and managing that will be a bit tricky. The more Tom and Marc play together the better the understanding they’ll develop. Whether they’ll be given that opportunity is up to the coaches.
@Lods Nice summation. RE the Owies no goal call, I haven't seen the vision as I was at the game so not sure how clear cut it is. My guess is if it was clear cut, the ARC would have reversed the call and paid the goal. Even so, swings and roundabouts, we were on the right end of a missed touched call last week, the reverse this week perhaps.
Take a Cerra and a Saad out of any side and your going to struggle, especially an in game loss like Saad (at least Cerra we had time to plan for it, I personally wouldnt have picked a Ruckman to come in).
What disappoints me most is getting beaten by something you know (and has happened before). Walker fair enough, great footballer and a beautiful set shot for goal. But Ben Keays? Gimme a spell, he was given far too much latitude...again.
I sat behind the goals and their ball movement out of defence seemed effortless, too much so for my liking in fact.
To often yesterday our blokes were a little too happy to sit off and wait for the TO that didn't come. In game adjustment was non existent (to my eye at least).
Speed is a concern for us and next weeks match up is not a good one in that regard and I think we will get exposed again. It will be interesting to see what the coaching staff do to combat the orange tsunami.
Weitering will do better on Hogan than the more physical Walker and I'd expect TDK to do better vs Briggs who isnt at the same level as O'Brien.
Toby Greene will be the main problem, played on our old mate Liam Stocker vs the Saints who did a decent job on him but he doesn't play too many average games and might be due for a big one..
Weitering will do better on Hogan than the more physical Walker and I'd expect TDK to do better vs Briggs who isnt at the same level as O'Brien.
Toby Greene will be the main problem, played on our old mate Liam Stocker vs the Saints who did a decent job on him but he doesn't play too many average games and might be due for a big one..
Who's taking Toby, Williams or Newman are probably front runners, maybe someone like Cottrell could also give him some time. I think it was Newman / Cincotta last time we played them that shared the duty, they kept Green scoreless but he still had a heap of influence.
I would have liked to see TDK go at it all day with OBrien. TDK and Pitto never really settled in to work him over. I personally Never want to see the two of them play together again, just my view.
It's untenable for these guys to go solo for a whole season and be right to go for the finals, they need to share the load at times with the target of being fresh and ready for finals.
It's as much about managing players through the season as it is about specific game day tactics.
Just on the two- ruck situation. It’s not as cut and dried as some believe. The replacement of a ruck/tall with a small mid-field running player has to be viewed in terms of plusses and minuses.
The gain of the running player must be seem in terms of the cost of what you lose by omitting the tall/ruck. There may be an advantage…but the gap may not be as huge as we may think. Pittonet gave us a bit especially early on…but yes, it may have cost us later in the game.
This is always the debate, and it is clearly not as difficult as some are trying to make out.
TDK rucks for 75% game time when sole ruck. He played 75% game time when he has a backup ruck. He doesnt play more or less, just the position he played.
Harry didn't get a chance to ruck and as a result, went missing for large parts of the game. Despite kicking more goals than normal, he had less influence on the game than more recent efforts. This is a knock on for playing that second ruck.
I've already shown that a ruck took up a spot on the bench for 3/4's of the game. That 75% game time is a full time mid....on light duties - eg Walsh had 76% first game back, Cripps, Hewett, 79%, 80%.
Pitto was off the ground a full quarter more than anyone else (besides injured/subbed players) and TDK was actually next for least amount of game time.
It puts more on the shoulders of others as a result, and the benefit we get from it is not worth it.
Pitto had 6 clearances, only beaten by Walsh (8 ) and Cripps (7). He even kicked a goal. Put Cerra back in the side and he'd get the same amount of clearances (if not more), more possessions and is more likely to kick a goal most weeks as well.
So what benefit did we get from Pitto? A few extra hitouts to advantage....most likely leading to clearances.....which could've been equalled by having another pure midfielder in the team.
So what were the disadvantages....more gametime required by others, less run and pressure around the ball.....which is our strength.
Its nothing against Pitto, same could be said for TDK. Either play Pitto for the whole game, or play TDK for the whole game. No point playing both.
There were 97 ruck contests yesterday.
Including the ball hitting the deck and getting a clearance, each one of them probably takes about 10 seconds on average to work itself out. That equates to just over 16 minutes of game time. What benefit are we getting from the 2 rucks for the remaining 104 minutes of game time? Especially since they one of them are on the bench for 76minutes of that time.
The numbers just don't stack up.
The biggest plus is 'wearing the ruck down'. Which i get and i agree with.
However, our midfield is so good, we can go in there with Jack Silvagni, Harry McKay, Lewis Young, and still draw level (or better) with the clearances. So how much benefit is 'wearing the ruck down' really giving us?
All teams in top four even top six play with one ruck with a relieving ruck. TDK plays 75% of the game with Harry winning some hit outs and clearances that frees up his game.
Disrupted our form by changing formation that took away our run in transition. It was lost by the selection committee.
No fault of Pitto btw...but can't afford to take away our run in transition.
As much as we'd like this year to be 17, based on what we have delivered so far this year, it aint so. Media comparisons of us with Rottingwood of last year -- come from behind narrow wins -- hasn't helped, in fact its probably fuelled unrealistic expectations. All season I've been worried about how we win.
It's been great that we've been winning, but it's the way we've been winning - just. Willed over the line. And if Charles doesn't pop up with a 2-4 goal burst of brilliance, we're rooted. That's what concerns this little black duck more than anything. Too nice, still? Can't kill off a side when in front... why? Got ahead of ourselves?
Our wins seemed to have lacked authority. And so much has depended on our classy individuals. At our best we see an attitude of 'hunting'... everyone hunting, but that's evaporated. We seem reactive, lacking fierceness and relentless, consistent pressure. Still with the lapses. We let other sides in... and that's consistent. We accept that other sides will have their time but this seems to serve as an excuse (for failure to win stronger). It's as if we're willing to coast for 3 quarters then come home with a wet sail and another meritorious narrow win.
And we wondered how we would deal with the expectations attached to what we should achieve in 2024, well, we can see it rather clearly.
Personnel. Yes, we have injuries but we had injuries in games and our best missing when we were flying last year and found a way to win, and win well. If there is a mitigation it would be our forward line, a 2 star reliance. Too many small forwards just not delivering. Specifically, Fantasia & small Durds. And let's not get started on our glaring need for a third taller forward. Despite the injuries I hope our selection this week is not conservative... a shake-up is needed. Fingers crossed there are a few shining lights in today's Magoos. And those who suggest TDK might be a worthwhile experiment in defense... I agree.
We were turning the ball over far too often coming out of defence. This went on for the whole game and imo was a major factor in our loss. Pleased though with the return of Sammy but looks like Saad will be missing for a while.
Most of the key points covered by the knowledgeable supporters on this forum.
My main takeaways from the game:
1. Lack of leg speed/line breakers means the ball often gets to the forward line slowly or from a kick under pressure meaning we rely on CC or H to take a big pack grab against multiple defenders who have peeled off their man to support. Very predictable to the opposition.
2. As Kingy & Lyon noted, we work too hard for our goals because of 1) above and we don't lower the eyes/and or forwards not leading to space. Compare our forward entries to the open spaces that Adelaide's forwards operated in.
3. Our small forwards not up to scratch especially Fantasia. Must be dropped.
4. Defence off today due to injuries, matches and lack of pressure from midfield. Refer 1) lack of leg speed required to chase some of Adelaide's line breakers.
Why do small forwards always get the blame?
Personnel. Yes, we have injuries but we had injuries in games and our best missing when we were flying last year and found a way to win, and win well. If there is a mitigation it would be our forward line, a 2 star reliance. Too many small forwards just not delivering. Specifically, Fantasia & small Durds. And let's not get started on our glaring need for a third taller forward. Despite the injuries I hope our selection this week is not conservative... a shake-up is needed. Fingers crossed there are a few shining lights in today's Magoos. And those who suggest TDK might be a worthwhile experiment in defense... I agree.
We really need a mobile third marking option in the forward line, because banging it long to McKay and Curnow remains ultra predictable, and good teams can dry up our scoring very easily. Martin kind of covered that last year, but Owies and the other smalls are not quite up to it or strong enough overhead. I mean someone like a Fritsch, Hayward, Henry, Zac Bailey.
Maybe once we a full compliment of defenders available, we should try Brodie Kemp there?
We scored 98 points.
Pittonet gave us a bit especially early on…but yes, it may have cost us later in the game.
Only because of injuries, but that can happen for any position on the ground.
Fans seem oblivious to the risk of a single point of failure, which is the one ruck scenario, at least with Mids you have multiple points of failure so it's much easier to cover the loss of one.
If anything perhaps when we brought in Pitto we picked the wrong Sub, because we lost one HBF and it basically smashed our structure. Then we had a bunch of slower Mid types trying to become lockdown HBFs, or forcing mismatches on players like Rankine and Keays with slower heavier bodies, it's happened twice now, the Crows are making our MC look silly. The Crows almost scored at will despite a pretty equal battle between Weiters and Walker.
(btw., Williams best game for us I suspect, he tried to cover them all and never stopped working.)
On TDK solo, it's bizarre that fans want us to take TDK solo into a game against an opponent who has basically dominated him more than once, it's like they have no memory of the past.
Was BigH used in the centre at all yesterday, I don't recall seeing it?
(Perhaps BigH getting ironed out the week before put the wind up the MC, there is that risk again, a season impacting risk not just one game!)
Why do small forwards always get the blame?
Not total blame, just part of the reason we are not playing as well as we are capable off.
The ball comes into the forward line and is brought to the ground often enough for the small forwards to create opportunities - they are not taking them.
Not total blame, just part of the reason we are not playing as well as we are capable off.
The ball comes into the forward line and is brought to the ground often enough for the small forwards to create opportunities - they are not taking them.
Some of that is decision making by the Mids or HBFs, about where they kick the footy, and also coaching tactics.
We tend to play a game to get the SFs goal side of the footy rather than front and square.
Finally, it's easy to ask where are they, but for example you also do not want SFs getting in the way like Fantasia on BigH!
Why do small forwards always get the blame?
I'm not blaming forwards and have spent a lot of time pointing out the good that is often missed by them.
However, when we have 3 of them who had 4 tackles between them, and were lower half of the pressure acts each.....you gotta start asking some questions.
Edit: Durdin had 3 himself.
Only because of injuries, but that can happen for any position on the ground.
Fans seem oblivious to the risk of a single point of failure, which is the one ruck scenario, at least with Mids you have multiple points of failure so it's much easier to cover the loss of one.
We literally won game(s?) last year without a recognised ruck.
You, among others, have pointed out how pointless some ruck stats are.
You, amonth others, have pointed out that the around the ground work is more important than what happens in the ruck.
So why are you, among others, so fixated on the need for a second ruck in the side?
For the record, Harry did not attend a single ruck contest.
We won or broke even with every stat bar one.
Marks inside 50
We had 3 more inside 50s for 8 more scoring shots.
Adelaide forwards beat our defenders (who played very loose) and were extremely accurate.
I'm not blaming forwards and have spent a lot of time pointing out the good that is often missed by them.
However, when we have 3 of them who had 2 tackles between them, and were lower half of the pressure acts each.....you gotta start asking some questions.
If Motlop, Martin, Cunningham or Fogarty were available then they would be playing but they're not.
Our defenders didn't pay them enough respect. Weitering was giving Walker way too much space, if Adelaide were a better team hevwould have kicked 7 or 8.
We literally won game(s?) last year without a recognised ruck.
You, among others, have pointed out how pointless some ruck stats are.
You, amonth others, have pointed out that the around the ground work is more important than what happens in the ruck.
So why are you, among others, so fixated on the need for a second ruck in the side?
For the record, Harry did not attend a single ruck contest.
Beyond the ruck Pitto had 6 clearances yesterday and kicked a goal and 5 score involvements, and without winning much in terms of other ruck stats when he went to the centre he either slowed the Crows or swung momentum our way. Because Pitto is suited to opposing O'Brien.
If Pitto's not there and TDK continued to get smashed we'd have been forced into moving BigH into the ruck, early in the game BigH was out only effective F50 player.
You're obsessed with some of this ruck stuff, you've gone the early crow with SoJ and other secondary ruck options and now you're committed to it, it's leaving you blind to the wider picture. Yesterday the ruck stats had Pitto and TDK equal, but nobody on the planet could watch that game and think Pitto and TDK had the same influence.
I must admit I had a bit of a laugh when Cerra was replaced by Pittonet.
I thought to myself "Kruddler's head will explode" :)) :))
But I also have to admit I thought it was a bit of a strange selection, and that Cincotta would have been a better option.
It puts more on the shoulders of others as a result, and the benefit we get from it is not worth it.
Pitto had 6 clearances, only beaten by Walsh (8 ) and Cripps (7). He even kicked a goal. Put Cerra back in the side and he'd get the same amount of clearances (if not more), more possessions and is more likely to kick a goal most weeks as well.
So what benefit did we get from Pitto? A few extra hitouts to advantage....most likely leading to clearances.....which could've been equalled by having another pure midfielder in the team.
So what were the disadvantages....more gametime required by others, less run and pressure around the ball.....which is our strength.
I guess my issue with this, as it has always been with this debate is....
What are you replacing the ruckman with?
It's not going to be someone of the standard of Cerra.
It's going to be a fringe AFL player from the VFL who is not necessarily going to give you the same output as Pittonet produced in half a game yesterday.
Now Cincotta would probably have been a better option once Cerra was out, maybe even give Binns a chance...but who else? (we'll pop over to the VFL now to have a look) ;) :D
Most likely that extra player would have had minimal impact.
(I'm not sure why Pittonet only played half a game on the ground- managed, slight injury...watch this space. He could have rested either forward or back.)
I can see all the benefits of one ruck.
But I can also see the benefit in a long season in alternating them on some occasions and on others sharing the load and developing an understanding and combination.
Crows had more one percenters and more uncontested possession which probably indicates they worked a bit harder for each other.
We won the clearances which probably shows you thats a tad overrated as a stat but no doubt their accuracy up forward kept them in the game and we frittered away a few chances.
re: Small forwards......Martin and Motlop being out has affected how we operate and Im sure they would have been more effective than Fantasia and Durdin who dont impact enough either getting the ball or being able to kick goals.
No need to panic as we have the answers to a few of our problems its just they are injured or the usual MC selection mistakes that get made every now and then. Not sure why we played two ruckman when Adelaide only run one in Obrien and a very novice part timer in Gollant.....
Fans like to gloss over that in the last few weeks we've also been using Kennedy alongside Cripps in the ruck, but that's a shock tactic, you get away with it once or twice but not more often, it ends once the opposition are alerted to it.
Of course it's only an option against select opponents and midfields.
The ruck had nothing to do with our loss yesterday, it's just fans clinging to something to blame, and a bit of opportunistic rock throwing.
Subjectively we seemed worse when TDK was on the ball, for reasons I've already outlined, and he is the more mobile option for those of you purely focussed on chains of play. But O'Brien is in his head now, and it's likely TDK will never truly better him, all we can do is find ways for TDK to break even or become useful in other areas when we oppose O'Brien. We have to make O'Brien chase TDK, at the moment O'Brien basically ignores TDK.
Crows had more one percenters and more uncontested possession which probably indicates they worked a bit harder for each other.
We won the clearances which probably shows you thats a tad overrated as a stat but no doubt their accuracy up forward kept them in the game and we frittered away a few chances.
Watched the replay today, Crows were clean with the footy, we looked liked we'd greased up before going out on the ground.
It made the difference, they were clean, they had time and space, we wasted a lot of effort and found ourselves under pressure all the time due to an attack of the fumbles.
Another thing, we disposed of the footy far too often to stationary targets, Crows moved as a group, relentless. Some of that may be because injuries are forcing us into using players outside of their normal roles.
Finally, Marvel doesn't suit us, the surface is too fast and it's maximises the pace deficiency between our on ball crew and the opposition. Play the Crows at The G and we probably win by 6 goals.
Fans like to gloss over that in the last few weeks we've also been using Kennedy alongside Cripps in the ruck, but that's a shock tactic, you get away with it once or twice but not more often, it ends once the opposition are alerted to it.
Of course it's only an option against select opponents and midfields.
The ruck had nothing to do with our loss yesterday, it's just fans clinging to something to blame, and a bit of opportunistic rock throwing.
Subjectively we seemed worse when TDK was on the ball, for reasons I've already outlined, and he is the more mobile option for those of you purely focussed on chains of play. But O'Brien is in his head now, and it's likely TDK will never truly better him, all we can do is find ways for TDK to break even or become useful in other areas when we oppose O'Brien.
Playing Pittonet left us a runner short vs a very pacy and youthful Crows team.....Berry really burnt us when he came on and I think there is merit in suggestring TDK probably operates better alone vs some opponents with part time help rather than combining with Pittonet. As I said I found it strange we went with two rucks vs a one ruck Adelaide.....vs the Bombers with Draper and Goldstein it makes sense but the Crows?
Playing Pittonet left us a runner short vs a very pacy and youthful Crows team.....Berry really burnt us when he came on and I think there is merit in suggestring TDK probably operates better alone vs some opponents with part time help rather than combining with Pittonet. As I said I found it strange we went with two rucks vs a one ruck Adelaide.....vs the Bombers with Draper and Goldstein it makes sense but the Crows?
It all looked fine to me while Saad was still out there, we looked pretty good when Pitto came into the ruck and gave us some momentum, even if Cerra is in the loss of Saad isn't covered by Carroll, and Carroll in the Mid doesn't free us a running HBF. When Pitto came in we needed Cowans or Cincotta as a sub.
The last few games he has played, Kemp looks better when he can get up the ground but he was bogged in D50, is that our own doing of a opposition tactic?
Early on we used the ball horribly and it kept the Crows in the game.
Finally, let's not blame the MC for the poor ball use on the day, at times our uncontested possessions looked like an episode of the Keystone Cops.
I must have missed something
Thought Cincotta would have been a better option to replace Cerra rather than Pittonet but....
Wasn't picked.
Not Playing VFL
Not on the injury list.
Ill cop a loss, just not against what you know. Ben Farken Keys again. A bigger hack you will not find and yet dines out on us...again.
Yep. Was sitting next to an Adelaide supporter and said the same thing to me. Just loves playing against us.
Had a bad feeling going into the game and had a Carlton supporter, say to me while walking to the ground, we got this.
That just about sealed it for me that this was not going to be a good day.
We need to start winning clearances, our small forwards are average and I've no confidence in our small defenders with Saad missing
Won plenty of clearances out of the center, only problem was that as we got going and tried to handball to an outside runner some Adelaide player got a hand to it and chopped it off. I saw Ranking do it a few times. I'd have him in my team any day of the week. Head and shoulders above anyone else on our team for that role other than Martin and he's never on the park much.
I must have missed something
Thought Cincotta would have been a better option to replace Cerra rather than Pittonet but....
Wasn't picked.
Not Playing VFL
Not on the injury list.
He was an emergency.
I thought he HAD to be picked as our 24th player (instead of Pittonet) because you couldn't include Pittonet.
....and yes, i did crack it when i heard.
In the end, i don't know what happened to Cincotta, so maybe he had a late injury?
Going back to who should've played instead of Pitto.....play Carroll as the 22 and bring in a different sub. I think Cowan was the 3rd option from our emergencies and if Cincotta wasn't available, then Cowan should've been it. Would've been perfect in the end since we lost a HBF.
Pretty disappointing result all round. How it ended was how it looked like it was going to end all day. The goal call in the third quarter was wrong but didn't cost us the game. Owies missing running into an open goal and the mix up down back when the ball bounced between two players and led to a goal were the killers. There were a number of times when we got in one another's way and missing set shots thirty meters out didn't help. I thought we were the better team except when they got the ball and we weren't able to stop them. Their ball movement was quite slick at times. I am not sure the umpires did us any favours, maybe after last week they wanted to be hypercritical or us to demonstrate they are not bias towards us. In the end we failed to do the simple things well when it counted.
I believe you need 30 players on your list you can rely on to win a flag. At the start of the year I thought we had 33 and after the first game I thought Carroll made 34. With Silvagni and Docherty out we have 32. For next week's game, Cerra, Fogarty, Motlop, McGovern, Martin, Cuningham and Saad are unavailable with doubts on Marchbank, Cincotta and Big Durdin. Young is likely to come into the side if Marchbank is unavailable and Cowan, who I have at 35, could come in if Cincotta is unavailable. We are starting to get down into the young guys of Binns, Moir and Lemmey.
We are starting to get down into the young guys of Binns, Moir and Lemmey.
Moir was injured late in the VFL game.
Looked a bit upset.
Yep. Was sitting next to an Adelaide supporter and said the same thing to me. Just loves playing against us.
Had a bad feeling going into the game and had a Carlton supporter, say to me while walking to the ground, we got this.
That just about sealed it for me that this was not going to be a good day.
Crows are our Achilles heel.
bringing in Pitto only weakened TDK (selection table stuff-up)
Replacing Cerra (a strong both-ways midfielder) with Pitto was dumb - not that Pitto played badly but it upset team balance.
It also reduced TDK's opportunity to influence the game and kept McKay from having a run on the ball, thereby lessening his opportunity to influence the game.
allowed the Adelaide forwards far too much space.
Walker seems to have Weitering beaten between the ears.
Credit the Cows' game plan and the lack of pressure on kickers from our midfielders (without Cerra).
Weitering consistently zoned off Walker by a ridiculously wide margin (and lacked the closing speed to even get to the contests) in the hope of being in charge of the defence but the unpressured Cows easily bypassed him with precise kicking to position. Walker is not a great overhead mark and the faster Kemp would have been a much better match up.
The two Ruck option is not just a matter of replacing a tall for a more mobile mid/forward/defender.
It's a little more complicated than that.
There are a number of other variables that come into play.
There is a flow on effect for multiple other positions.
The roles played by TDK, Harry, even Kennedy change to some extent.
Of course that can have an impact on performance
Initially that can be unsettling to a side.
If it's to be persisted with it's something that would take time to fine tune.
The alternative is to scrap it completely and consign one ruck to a season of VFL
Given all that.
And also given the understanding that a ruck on the bench reduced mid-field rotations, which was further complicated by injuries.
Pittonet played 50% of the game.
TDK played 75%
Was there a difference in our effectiveness or style of play in the lengthy times when one ruck was off the ground?
For much of the game we did play only one ruck.
Replacing Cerra (a strong both-ways midfielder) with Pitto was dumb - not that Pitto played badly but it upset team balance.
It also reduced TDK's opportunity to influence the game and kept McKay from having a run on the ball, thereby lessening his opportunity to influence the game.
Spot on!
The two Ruck option is not just a matter of replacing a tall for a more mobile mid/forward/defender.
It's a little more complicated than that.
There are a number of other variables that come into play.
There is a flow on effect for multiple other positions.
The roles played by TDK, Harry, even Kennedy change to some extent.
Of course that can have an impact on performance
Initially that can be unsettling to a side.
If it's to be persisted with it's something that would take time to fine tune.
The alternative is to scrap it completely and consign one ruck to a season of VFL
Given all that.
And also given the understanding that a ruck on the bench reduced mid-field rotations, which was further complicated by injuries.
Pittonet played 50% of the game.
TDK played 75%
Was there a difference in our effectiveness or style of play in the lengthy times when one ruck was off the ground?
For much of the game we did play only one ruck.
Firstly, given the injuries we had, and still only played 2 rucks for a half and 3/4's of a game, it showed how little we used 2 rucks at once.
There was a ruck off the ground for 3/4's of the game.
The question should be, watching the game, can you tell if/when we had 2 rucks on the ground?
There didn't appear to be any on-field benefit to having 2 rucks. Its hard to quantify how much it hurt us by having 2 rucks.
But, what is clear is that we took up a large part of the game, 3'4s to be exact, with a ruck on the pine. That time would've been better suited to a smaller (mid/flanker type) as that 50%* game time would've been better off sharing between 10 other mid/flanker types. (*50% rather than 75% because TDK would still have 75% game time, so we only gain Pittonets time on the bench).
What I learned at the footy on Saturday:
1. Sam Walsh is an absolute star. He looked sharp in the warm up, started the game well and got better as the game wore on. Brent Harvey worked with Sam's cohort prior to the draft and, although there was a lot of talent, he always felt that Sam's work ethic would make him the best of the bunch. He's not wrong!
2. Jacob Weitering conceded the ball to Tex Walker on too many occasions. I'm not sure why but Weiters didn't go with him or gave up on the contest.
3. I no longer have any understanding of the rules of the game or how the game is officiated.
3. I know a lot of Carlton supporters think that Nathan Williamson is always against us but Andrew Adair took it to a whole new level.
4. There may be games where it makes sense to have Pittonet and De Koning in the 22. Playing the Crows isn't one of them.
5. Not many supporters, or at least those in my row, can watch a quarter of footy without having to get up for a slash, drink or what passes for food.
6. Don't count your chickens before the fat lady sings.
7. When you're travelling on an unfamiliar train line, check whether you need to change trains ::)
I really don't know how we lost that game. We should have won comfortably but poor kicking for goal let us down and unbelievable accuracy from the Crows got them over the line.
7. When you're travelling on an unfamiliar train line, check whether you need to change trains ::)
Hurstbridge / Mernda ??
Kicking for goal was simply atrocious, 14.14 to 16.4 cannot be tolerated.
Durdin & Fantasia are always passengers, Acres has gone backwards, Boyd is grossly over-rated, Owies is inconsistent & Williams was a complete lost cause.
We are kidding ourselves if we think 50/50 players are going to take us to the promised land. Our best is very good but we have to play at that level every week for the full 100-minutes.
Extremely disappointed ..... make that embarrassed, by that performance.
Clearly we did not learn a thing from last week's fortutitous win. Our players were only too happy to rejoice & backslap each other for a win we didn't deserve when they should have been harder at it this week to show they deserved the benefit of that brain-fade.
Coach votes
Round 5 votes:
9 - Sam Walsh (CARL)
9 - Izak Rankine (ADEL)
5 - Taylor Walker (ADEL)
3 - Jake Soligo (ADEL)
2 - Ben Keays (ADEL)
1 - Mitchell Hinge (ADEL)
1 - Charlie Curnow (CARL)
Kicking for goal was simply atrocious, 14.14 to 16.4 cannot be tolerated.
In fairness, we did have 5 rushed behinds (they had 0)
So it was essentially 14.9 to 16.4, and we had at least 1 hit the post, and 1 go down as touched when it was a goal. So its not so bad when you dive down into it.
It was more of a case of them not being able to miss more than it was our bad kicking.
In fairness, we did have 5 rushed behinds (they had 0)
So it was essentially 14.9 to 16.4, and we had at least 1 hit the post, and 1 go down as touched when it was a goal. So its not so bad when you dive down into it.
It was more of a case of them not being able to miss more than it was our bad kicking.
And they couldn't miss because so many of their shots on goal were 'easy.' When a side has 20 shots on goal and nails 80% of them, you look at your defence... it wasn't 'luck', it was simply that their shots on goal were 'a walk in the park.' Poor pressure. We gave the 'suckers' an even break and made them look much better than they were.
We literally won game(s?) last year without a recognised ruck.
You, among others, have pointed out how pointless some ruck stats are.
You, amonth others, have pointed out that the around the ground work is more important than what happens in the ruck.
So why are you, among others, so fixated on the need for a second ruck in the side?
For the record, Harry did not attend a single ruck contest.
As many of us have mentioned previously, bringing in a ruckman (Pitto) for a mid (Cerra) was baffling... to be kind. Dumb, to be blunt. This spanks of 'Old Carlton'... sentimental selections (which could also apply to small Durds & Fantasia).
It's not that it's the end of the world, but (as a I banged on about previously) with so many of our recent 'precarious' victories we cannot afford to ignore the signs; the reality, and flirting with form with silly errors at the selection table almost spanks of arrogance.
We are still very much a work in progress with a fair way to go yet.
Just got the impression that we went in just that bit too light talent wise to win another tight one. We did get Sammy back and he played well but others like Cerra were missing. And as others have already said, perhaps it was not the game for Pitto to come in. Weiters was certainly somewhat down on form to add to the woes.
Anyway, we were just not quite good enough on the day to win another tight one. We definitely will need to smarten up for GWS. Hopefully we will but I'm a bit apprehensive at this stage.
I think we need to try TDK back, Pitto ruck. Gov, Kemp or Young don't look to be the second key back. One of them plays as the 3rd, which ever is fit apparently. We can't play H, Charlie and TDK fwd at the same time. Badly miss a third hybrid fwd like SOS or Martin. No wonder the interest in the kid from Sydney.
What interest and which kid
We have become their bunnies. Hate those Crows. They have some ordinary players that we play into for. I mean 16.4 bet they dont do that again.
Some have said that TDK would of got smashed if not for Pitto. We don't need to protect TDK, TDK needs to work out how to play these bigger rucks and some how use the new rules to his advantage.
Adelaide seem to use the Freo model to stifle our ball movement and it worked. I think we will see this from other teams because we don't seem to work out what to do when the opposition starts the kick/ mark game.
Anyway hope the players, ciaching stuff and MC have learnt from this game.
And they couldn't miss because so many of their shots on goal were 'easy.' When a side has 20 shots on goal and nails 80% of them, you look at your defence... it wasn't 'luck', it was simply that their shots on goal were 'a walk in the park.' Poor pressure. We gave the 'suckers' an even break and made them look much better than they were.
Agree completely with this. It is much easier to kick a goal when you are under minimal pressure and the shots are taken in the corridor.
They opened us up like a tin of sardines when going forward. It was embarrassing to watch.
As I said in a previous post, the inability of our midfielders (lack of pace) to put pressure on hurts us on transition especially on the Marvel highway deck.
Our main problem IMO is we're just fumbling too much. Don't know why, but it's incredibly frustrating and looks like it's contagious throughout the team. Fix that and we'll return to form
Hurstbridge / Mernda ??
Yes ... I was staying with my son in Macleod and ended up at Epping ::)
Yes ... I was staying with my son in Macleod and ended up at Epping ::)
Yep, I'm out that way and many a person have made that mistake. You are not alone.
I have thought a lot about the game and, apart from inaccurate kicking for goal, I can’t really explain how we lost.
The team stats tally with my impression of the game with one exception; free kicks!
Although both teams ended up with the same number of frees, we should have had more if the holding the ball rule was applied as I think it is supposed to be. We also missed out on some crucial decisions that robbed us of scoring opportunities and presented the Crows with opportunities. And then there’s the score review debacles.
That said, we didn’t play anywhere near our best footy, but I don’t think we have so far this season.
Perhaps this was the loss we had to have …
They kicked 16-4 which is crazy accurate.
The 2 weeks prior they scored 8-15 and 4-10.
They kicked 16-4 which is crazy accurate.
The 2 weeks prior they scored 8-15 and 4-10.
Yes, but as other posters have mentioned, they had nine shots from directly in front and within 40 metres. That accounted for eight goals and one behind. The ease with which they hit targets and were paid frees directly in front or on slight angles is damning.
At the other end, we scored two behinds from shots taken within 10 metres 🙄
First Crack showed Rankine going into the middle and stood on Cripps. Crows won the ball, Rankine pushed forward and got away from our captain who was right on his tail but too slow to stop him.
Next time Hewett picked him up but then just let Rankine go by himself inside 50.
First Crack showed Rankine going into the middle and stood on Cripps. Crows won the ball, Rankine pushed forward and got away from our captain who was right on his tail but too slow to stop him.
Next time Hewett picked him up but then just let Rankine go by himself inside 50.
I saw stuff live that made me think the game review will be hard to watch for some players this week.
First Crack showed Rankine going into the middle and stood on Cripps. Crows won the ball, Rankine pushed forward and got away from our captain who was right on his tail but too slow to stop him.
Next time Hewett picked him up but then just let Rankine go by himself inside 50.
Sure, its not great and will be harshly judged, but do we actually have anyone that could catch him?
I saw stuff live that made me think the game review will be hard to watch for some players this week.
Good. Sometimes getting the 4 points helps to wallpaper over issues.
We should have won, but didn't - so time to go to work to understand where we fell short.
Sure, its not great and will be harshly judged, but do we actually have anyone that could catch him?
Couldnt catch Berry, Nankervis, Soligo either....
Couldnt catch Berry, Nankervis, Soligo either....
And what, they didn't know these blokes are pacy? They didn't know Keays was going to kick 3 or 4? They didn't know Walker knows a thing or two about playing FF and kicking straight? Shame on them because I'm a dumb ass and I knew all the above.
I have thought a lot about the game and, apart from inaccurate kicking for goal, I can’t really explain how we lost.
We dropped way too many marks plus our delivery into the forwardline was particularly poor.
And what, they didn't know these blokes are pacy? They didn't know Keays was going to kick 3 or 4? They didn't know Walker knows a thing or two about playing FF and kicking straight? Shame on them because I'm a dumb ass and I knew all the above.
Those in charge were probably counting on us being a better overall team with more football talent and hoping that got the job done.We have often had DeJa Vu defeats over the years where the same opposition players do the same things and we dont seem to change what we do and the results are the same. Losing Cerra, Saad and Mcgovern probably left us with less pace and you only have to be a little bit off in todays game and you can get knocked over by most decent teams.
Walker is a hard matchup given he is mobile, strongly built and needed a bit of double teaming imho...JW is the best in the business so you just have to tip your hat to Walker.
On the other hand Ben Keays is a handy midfielder at best and letting him kick 3-4 goals again was a serious screwup.
Keays is neither quick, a great overhead mark or brilliant kick but seemed to get on the end of forward entries close to goal and often be on his own in the process. One for the Video review crew to check out and find those responsible as who ever had him as an opponent didnt do much homework or didnt carry out instructions properly.
And what, they didn't know these blokes are pacy? They didn't know Keays was going to kick 3 or 4? They didn't know Walker knows a thing or two about playing FF and kicking straight? Shame on them because I'm a dumb ass and I knew all the above.
It wasn't just pace. There was one where Newman stopped running after his man thinking the ball was going out but it didn't and his man ended up setting up a goal.
We lost a bit of focus and didn't respect them as much as we should.
It wasn't just pace. There was one where Newman stopped running after his man thinking the ball was going out but it didn't and his man ended up setting up a goal.
We lost a bit of focus and didn't respect them as much as we should.
Yep, saw that, he just plain gave up the chase.
Yep, saw that, he just plain gave up the chase.
Weitering gave up on Walker 3-4 times and allowed him to take uncontested marks.
Weitering gave up on Walker 3-4 times and allowed him to take uncontested marks.
I was rather surprised (disappointed) by the distance between Weitering and Walker a number of times - very unlike him. First time in a long while (that I remember) that he was badly beaten.
And what, they didn't know these blokes are pacy? They didn't know Keays was going to kick 3 or 4? They didn't know Walker knows a thing or two about playing FF and kicking straight? Shame on them because I'm a dumb ass and I knew all the above.
I agree. Although I don’t think you're a dumb a$$. More of a well informed passionate observer of all things navy blue! 😉
I agree. Although I don’t think you're a dumb a$$. More of a well informed passionate observer of all things navy blue! 😉
Too kind LN, compared to coaches and experts I'm a dumb ass, but I would have planned and would have put in a truckload of work into ensuring Keays and Walker had minimal impact.
Watching the replay, gee we dropped a lot of marks. And we had our chances to to either hold onto to the 16 pt lead or seal it when they came back. Owies stubs a toe, Charlie drops a marks, Zac W dropped spilled the ball which resulted in Mudguts (dead set Fogarty is fatter than me) picking it up and drilling a pass to the top of the square, Adelaide goal.
As Vossy said, we have got a lot right in the dyeing minutes if the first 4 weeks, we farked up the last few minutes this week. C'est la vie.
Too kind LN, compared to coaches and experts I'm a dumb ass, but I would have planned and would have put in a truckload of work into ensuring Keays and Walker had minimal impact.
Watching the replay, gee we dropped a lot of marks. And we had our chances to to either hold onto to the 16 pt lead or seal it when they came back. Owies stubs a toe, Charlie drops a marks, Zac W dropped spilled the ball which resulted in Mudguts (dead set Fogarty is fatter than me) picking it up and drilling a pass to the top of the square, Adelaide goal.
As Vossy said, we have got a lot right in the dyeing minutes if the first 4 weeks, we farked up the last few minutes this week. C'est la vie.
That’s it in a nutshell.
If you drop marks, miss targets and fumble, any coach or game plan will struggle to get you over the line.
It’s certainly not panic stations it’s a learning opportunity.
I just watched the footage of Crouch cleaning up Carroll. Crouch’s attack on the footy was perfect with his body turned to protect his head while gathering the ball. Carroll, on the other hand, led with his head and was always going to get collected.
The free was there but there is an argument that Carroll ducked into it.
Bot should study that footage and learn how to protect himself in that situation.
I just watched the footage of Crouch cleaning up Carroll. Crouch’s attack on the footy was perfect with his body turned to protect his head while gathering the ball. Carroll, on the other hand, led with his head and was always going to get collected.
The free was there but there is an argument that Carroll ducked into it.
Bot should study that footage and learn how to protect himself in that situation.
It wasn't even a free kick.
We have to condition ourselves to there being less contact in the sport. Crouch didn't have to do that.
It wasn't even a free kick.
Nothing malicious in the bump and it was fair under the old rules but the onus is now " duty of care" and I have noticed a few players pulling up short in contests to avoid contacting the opposing player in an effort to look after them and its going to become more common and hopefully doesnt get confused with shirking the contest.
You cant just throw yourself at players anymore and not care about the damage you do, the other rule where players need to adjust is throwing themselves at the ball and taking the feet out from under the other player, the umpires seem red hot on paying that too..
Crouch was intent on cleaning up Carroll then winning the ball. He had the benefit of seeing Carroll going in, as he arrived later, and Carroll wouldnt have known that hit was coming, that being said, if players are not being trained to see that coming, thats on the people instructing them. Not sure that Carroll ducked into it.
We have to condition ourselves to there being less contact in the sport. Crouch didn't have to do that.
That's the way Crouch was taught to go for a ground ball. If Carroll had learnt the same technique, there would have been no head contact.
I agree that the game has to evolve to minimise head knocks but part of that evolution is a return to good technique and the elimination of foolhardy play encouraged by the rules as they are interpreted now. If two players went for the ball as Carroll did, it would have resulted in a head clash.
In fairness to Carroll he wasn't afforded the luxury of the run up Crouch had.
If you look at the slow mo replay Carroll actually was turning his body as he went to pick the ball up before he was smashed.
That's the way Crouch was taught to go for a ground ball. If Carroll had learnt the same technique, there would have been no head contact.
I agree that the game has to evolve to minimise head knocks but part of that evolution is a return to good technique and the elimination of foolhardy play encouraged by the rules as they are interpreted now. If two players went for the ball as Carroll did, it would have resulted in a head clash.
That's the way I teach my 9yo son to go for the ball. Protect yourself by turning your body.
If the other bloke is stupid enough to not do that, then that's on him. He doesn't meant to hurt the opposition by doing that, but protect yourself first, opponent second.
Afls duty of care will get you if you hurt someone else, but that someone else needs to show a duty of care to themselves!
Bot isn't AFL ready and not sure whether he will ever be.