I posted it a week or 2 ago, but it warrants repeating.
Cripps is having an absolutely terrible year. He (or the club) is too stubborn to put him on the sidelines to recover. Possession wise, its his worst year apart from the shortened covid/quarantine year, and his debut year when he played 3 games.
Last night was a perfect example of our issues. He was too sick that he had to be quarantined from the playing list....but was good enough to play the most physically demanding game in the world. Yeah, nah.
.....and you could make a case for about 5 others, all top end talent, that fall into that category.
Now, i understand the want to play these guys. However, you simply need to look at the result in the last 2 weeks to realise that there is no benefit to doing so. Only downsides.
Rest Cripps, rest Charlie, rest Weiters, rest Saad, rest Acres...... What is going to happen? We end up losing by 50 points? Well that is happening anyway. At least we have a reason - we played a bunch of kids. Last night, we played our oldest side for 81 years! Let that sink in. No Carlton team that has run out in the last 81 years and been as old as that mob last night.
What did we get from it? A bunch of old, unfit, sick, injured blokes putting in half-ar$ed efforts. Play the kids. I don't expect them to do much better, but at least there is a double benefit to doing so. You rest the blokes who need to recover and you give some kids a shot at the big time who may actually suprise.
For this week... Lemmey - Curnow HOF - Weiters Lucas - Acres Ben - Cripps Carroll - Saad
It did bear repeating, K, and is absolutely correct. And how does it effect morale when blokes who are not up to it take the field, and fail?
I don't know why folks are still banging on about the 'Old Carlton' way of sacking coaches. The club hasn't sacked Vossy, and don't look like doing it any time soon. We have not seen a knee jerk reaction. So we can put away that gripe, it's the past.
Wouldn't it be ironic if the very time we need to seek another senior coach we don't do so because of how it would look or because we've done it before! Isn't the process of assessing the performance of a senior coach valid? What we've NOT done in the past is properly assess potential and best replacements (if needed)?
Bottom line: 11th and falling. Go to water once the opposition challenge/change. Above the shoulders. Midfield / forward line connection has been an issue for years. Sub par on-field leadership. How often are the leaders the first to fold when the going gets tough? Continue to gift games to blokes not performing or not up to it, regardless of reputation. Playing sentimental faves?
The list is over hyped, it's slow, full of poor kicking players and reliant on too few having to play blinders every game for us to win. A disinterested TDK and a sick Cripps meant we were doomed last night...the gap between our best players and the rest is like the Grand Canyon. Players like Cerra who are meant to be bridging that gap don't....
Yes agree EB.
And mentally they are not up to it. The minute pressure comes on any level they melt.
Its the same reason we manage to score when the game is done.
Vossy says all the right things, so how come it doesn't translate to results?
The experts seem to agree that our game-plan is restrictive and lacks embracing the modern game. Sure, cherry picking certain KPIs can make it seem all is well at PP; that we're on the right track, 'we just need to do it for longer' as Vossy says - so how come for a very long time do we not do it for longer? Once the opposition bring pressure and change, we fold. Above the shoulders? Yep. Not mentally strong. How come?
Our players present as being vulnerable to high expectation (pressure) and strong persistence come game day - a mentally conditional group. How come? These are not recent issues. This has been an on-going issue for some years now. How come? I do not believe this is indicative of the players as people.
Some ponderances for consideration:
The Board. I'd like Patty Kinnersly to understand that our players are not solely billboards for social issues or her social causes, as important and worthy as they may be. She needs to understand 'warrior energy/positive masculinity' and get in behind those realities and support them, wholeheartedly. The club psychologist also needs to understand this. Greg Williams. He's failed the football department and the senior coach. The buck stops with him and he should be accountable.
Football Department. Brad Lloyd, this has happened, and been happening on his watch for some time. He's failed.
Vossy. Gee I feel for him. So many mixed messages, especially from above. His players need to become warriors (a vital expression of positive masculinity) when on the field of play. Understanding and embracing this (warrior energy) will strengthen their spirit and mental resolve. Some are warriors naturally, many aren't. Those that aren't need to be taught; to be led. There's way too much 'nice' on our field of play.
Saad goes down and only Boyd, Cincotta, Weiters and Young go in to remonstrate with any vigour... one snap-shop sums up so much, Cincotta taking on about eight blokes, on his own. Good on ya Cinc, good on ya Boydy for getting into a bloke twice your size... good on you Youngy for sticking up for your team mate. Most of our other players were just trying to break things up, how nice.
Yeah my tip is young to be the sub on last weeks form (flynn). Motlop starts, and HOF comes in if weiters doesn't get up. Corey durdin would have to come in of cripps doesn't get up....
If Crippa doesn't come up I'd like to see Cooper Lord given the gig. HOF insurance for Weiters?
We play Port Melbourne on Saturday night at their crappy ground, under the lights. We're on TV and might have Pitto available. I hope we have Will Hayes available, as he provides so much experience and drive. I think Flynn Riley will play: no Young for a 2nd ruck. Lemmey will be the key forward, so I hope he does more than last week.
I hope Riley plays. Was quite impressed with him earlier in the year but he's been kept out by Pitto and HOK
I don't feel at all pessimistic about this game. In recent years we've seldom put two 'stinkers' in back-to-back. This'll be a real good test of character, especially considering all the troubling media attention (deserved) that we're experiencing of late.
I was at the game and haven't watched the replay.....and won't, once was enough.
I had a few suspicions at the ground, and have only just looked into them now
1. Corey Durdin. 75% game time. 7 touches. 0 goals. 0 behinds. 0 tackles. 0 clearances. 0 goal assists. 2 turnovers. 2 clangers. Why are we playing him? What does he give us? He was useless yesterday.
2. Jesse Motlop. 29% game time. 10 touches 1 goal 1 behind. 1 tackle. 2 clearances. 0 goal assists. 0 turnovers. 1 clanger Why are we not playing him more? Specifically, in the middle. Every man and his dog has seen him play great footy this year and its no coincidence that his best games are when he is run through the middle. It works. He plays well. Then next week, we stick him in a pocket and wonder why he doesn't perform as well. Put him where the ball is!
3. Weitering. Not sure how much they showed on TV, but weitering was down, looking like he was shot for a good few minutes before they stopped the game and helped him hop/limp off. He was in A LOT of pain rocking back and forth and hitting the ground. Why we decided to risk him and bring him back i don't understand. Once they did he was next to useless in the contests. He got a couple of good spoil in contests he went too, but he hung out the back in twice as many contests giving them the outnumber. He wasn't trying to be a 'sweeper' either as there was other carlton players behind the contest doing that job already. He became a liability and put his own health at risk further. Whatever it was, he reinjured it in the 3rd quarter up on the wing and hobbled all the way back to the goal square. Stupid for playing him injured. We've learned nothing from last year.
4. Why didn't we play Lemmey? Was the perfect week to play him. You can guarantee that he would've given his all to 'prove his worth' and not rolled over like so many others did. His size would've helped us with Weiters as well allowing Gov to switch back, or go back himself. But no. Only reason you can justify not playing him is if we've marked his cards and that he will be out the door at seasons end. Charlie clearly wasn't fit and Lemmey could've given us something different.
5. Doc and Saad.....and Haynes. They are on the wrong side of 30. Still got some good footy left, but that is getting few and far between. I think all of them are relatively lucky we don't have a kid coming through taking their spot. Might be a changing of the guard in the off-season if we can't recapture some legitimate form in 2025.
6. Cripps. 2025 version isn't fit to tie 2024 versions shoelaces. He won the brownlow with the biggest tally in history and this year he's lucky to make the bests. He is currently averages his 2nd lowest possession tally since wearing the #9 at carlton. Only covid 2020 has been worse. (Note: he started in #16 in his first season and averaged 9, then switched to #9 and dominated).
I found myself nodding as I read this thoughtful contribution, K.
We have had a habit over the Voss duration of playing injured blokes. Not saying it's Vossy's doing. But you're right, Weiters, Crippa and Acres need resting... Don't ask them if they're okay to play because players will just about always say yes.
Sometimes it is really important for leaders who are injured to admit to themselves and their team mates that they're not up to it; that they can't play through the injury and give their best.
Totally agree (and have said it before) we must stop playing sentimental favourites - Fantasia and Durdin in particular.
Ollie Hollands is being beaten up down back - let him run and be creative. Cowan is ready to replace him.
We disagree on Lemmey. Still isn't imposing himself enough. However, HOF is ready and a must. He's played forward and not looked out of place.
He'd be happy with half that