Carlton Supporters Club

Is it tenable to think Cripps, Setterfield, Fisher and SPS can all be dominant at the same time, or is it natural for some to be quiet when another is having a good day?

I think a good example is actually Boak, Rockliff and Ebert having good days in the absence of the injured Wines and departed Wingard, when Wines returns will Boak or Rockliff fade?

Is it tenable?
Ask...
Voss, Lappin, Akermanis and Power

How many of them ever had a bad game....ever.

Is that more about how they were managed, rather than all being good in the same role on the same day?

There is only so many clearances per game, so many possessions to be distributed, and if you are well coached you are all playing to only one set of tactics.

Fwiw, I also thought Fisher was down, I mentioned as much in post game thread, I thought he was physically intimidated. Which to me is just a further example of our list being out of balance, it's also possibly a bit of a consequence of rucking a Phillips, McKay or Casboult type ahead of Kreuzer, Lobbe or Kerr.

We don't just lack attacking aggression, we lack defensive aggression as well, we don't have an enforcer and we don't have a guardian either!

GWS have been awesome so far, now they get Mumford back!

A lot of fans have lambasted sMurph, labelled him soft for being crunched under the ball, but who let their direct opponent have a free run at that contest? Good teams do not allow that to happen!

Is it tenable to think Cripps, Setterfield, Fisher and SPS can all be dominant at the same time, or is it natural for some to be quiet when another is having a good day?

I think a good example is actually Boak, Rockliff and Ebert having good days in the absence of the injured Wines and departed Wingard, when Wines returns will Boak or Rockliff fade?

The stats say they have to fade, because the average number of possessions do not continue to rise without cap! Despite building a formidable midfield, perhaps twice the depth of our own, Collingwood do not have twice as many possessions.

The point about those players is not about possessions and clearances, its about the other things you mentioned.

They all put in defensive pressure, tackled, harrassed, stood up for teammates or simply gobbed off and inspired teammates.

Our problem is clearances and was last season too,

Our problem is clearances and was last season too, without Wines we should have dominated Port...we all know Rockliff is a hack in comparison to Cripps or Wines and to allow him to dominate
was inexcusable and poor planning from the box...he had 44 possies the week before and we just let him run around on his own until Settefield went onto him but it was all too late.
We do it all the time and I pointed out the Mitchell farce last season where he was allowed to run around and get 40 easy possies and 3 Brownlow votes...
We have the talent now, we just dont have the brains in the box to use it or any planning ability.....you look at Philips left to fight it out with Lycett and Ryder after what they did to a much better player in Gawn.
Do we do any scouting or planning for games?....do we actually know who the opposition are or just rock up on the day and hope for the best.
Hinkley tagged Fisher...he did his homework.....he also started with Ebert at FF on Jones knowing our man has struggled with that tactic before......

The coaching box is where the problem is......

The coaching box is where the problem is......

That may well be, but i don't buy it.

Why?
Wayne Brittain - wasn't good enough because he never played the game.
Denis Pagan - was the sole problem at the club
Brett Ratten - Was a caretaker coach only and couldn't take us to the next level
Mick Malthouse - was too old and stubborn
Brendan Bolton - too inexperienced

How many coaches do we need to go through before we realise its not the coaches.
Personally i've been saying that since we ditched Ratts and got Mick....its not the coach.

In this case, i think its a little different. Unlike the previous 5 coaches, we have the majority of our club in order now.

Now, we have 2 of the youngest, highly regarded coaches in our group (Bolton and Barker) throw in Teague for 3. We also have a senior assistant/mentor (Walls) with an almost unparalleled history in there helping out as well.

Perhaps, just perhaps, its not about the coaches.

I think Fish deserves a little latitude given he missed half a year with a broken leg. Still seems to be going at it 100%, which is great, and I suspect is only a game away from recapturing some form (not that I think he's been that bad, comparatively speaking).

We have a young, inexperienced list that has been competitive in both games this season.  Nothing the coach could do would have changed the result; the players simply need to learn how to win again.  When that happens, hopefully on Saturday, the juggernaut will be released 

There is the other side of the coin in regards to an inexperienced list. The coach must learn about his players too. He must learn how each will react in any given circumstances. He must learn who can be relied upon in any given circumstance to carry out his wishes.

We often think of the coach controlling the 'team'. But the team is made up of individuals that need to be understood.

Bolton is doing his best trying to understand the individuals and working out what makes each player tick and how each will react.

Imagine if Rocket Eade never gave Brian Lake a spray. By his own admissions, Lake played better after getting a spray.

Which of our players are similar?
Which are the opposite?
Which are players that you just let play?
Which are the players you need to spell things out too?

All of this is oft overlooked in regards to a young and inexperienced list...