Have fun with this thread. Hopefully we can do enough to confound the critics.
I only post when we lose.
No way that should've been 5 goals. Should've been very close. Just our 3rd qtr with shocking use going into the 50 and finishing at goal cost us a very close game as that qtr was otherwise close in general play. Point after point after point when we had momentum for alot of the 3rtd qtr, not to mention the butchering going into the 50. We match them in general play ok.
I only post when we lose.
You're not Robinson Crusoe ;)
We always get more when we lose.
Funny game that....I'm not sure how I feel about it.
First half was really good... but quite a few players drifted out of it after the break.
The misses in the 3rd quarter sucked the energy out of us. SOJ was quiet in the 2nd half and had a few mates who disappeared in the 2nd half like O'Shea, Cunningham, Lamb. Ed was good all night and is now a consistently reliable performer and capped off a good night with a great goal. We are on the right track..just need an injection of a few class players and more games into the youngsters and we will get there.
You're not Robinson Crusoe ;)
We always get more when we lose.
Funny game that....I'm not sure how I feel about it.
First half was really good... but quite a few players drifted out of it after the break.
Not sure we even drifted so much. We just stuffed up when we had big opportunities to lead through the 3rd qtr. We just kept kicking points while they kicked goals.
Bad kicking for goal and some silly errors ie Daisy had a poor 3rd quarter cost us the game, I thought we competed well and showed effort but we just dont have the skill
level at the crucial times of the game..
Wright and Kerridge missing those goals just cost us momentum and the chance to put pressure on Sydney.....
I know we weren't meant to win, but I feel extremely dispirited. So sick of losing. And why do commentators always come across as biased against us?
On the players, well done to Jones and Curnow.
I'm sure he will turn out a good player, and I know we had worse tonight, but man O'Brien is soft as butter. We just can't carry blokes like that.
Bad kicking for goal and some silly errors ie Daisy had a poor 3rd quarter cost us the game, I thought we competed well and showed effort but we just dont have the skill
level at the crucial times of the game..
Wright and Kerridge missing those goals just cost us momentum and the chance to put pressure on Sydney.....
We're only better use, as distinct from dumb use, better finishing and stronger bodies away from being a decent side. 3rd qtr killed us. Matched them in general play but killed with use and finishing. Cost us a real close finish,.
Not sure we even drifted so much. We just stuffed up when we had big opportunities to lead through the 3rd qtr. We just kept kicking points while they kicked goals.
I'd like to see a breakdown of some of the stats between the first and second half for some players.
Jack was great to half time but didn't seem to impact much in the second half...I think there might have been a few others like that.
Some of Kerridge and Thomas' disposal was diabolical
I know we weren't meant to win, but I feel extremely dispirited. So sick of losing. And why do commentators always come across as biased against us?
On the players, well done to Jones and Curnow.
I'm sure he will turn out a good player, and I know we had worse tonight, but man O'Brien is soft as butter. We just can't carry blokes like that.
OBrien had a moment where he didnt want to attack the ball and Cameron Ling highlighted his lack of effort and I reckon the coaches will be pointing that out this week.
A lot of players have that moment but its the good ones that learn from it so we will see how Obrien goes in the future...
We were very game tonight but a very disappointing way to lose, ie skill errors, mistakes, lapses in concentration and missed chances. I feel rather pissed orf tbh. >:(
Not sure what to do with Kerridge... Runs strongly all game, competes well and knocks up getting the pill.... But the decision making and kicking isn't AFL standard.
Yep, remember that moment clearly, O'Brien pulled out of the contest and avoided all contact. Hopefully will lrarn from that.
I'd like to see a breakdown of some of the stats between the first and second half for some players.
Jack was great to half time but didn't seem to impact much in the second half...I think there might have been a few others like that.
Some of Kerridge and Thomas' disposal was diabolical
3 goals each in the last qtr and to me we matched them in the 3rd in general play but that finishing and that disposal you spoke about cost us big time. No way that was a 5 goal game.
Some though did fade. Good thing with SOS though we found a role for him. Mids who can go forward and kick goals are really handy. Kerr looks a player, really leads well. Has good body strength in the VFL but at AFL level couldn't match Grundy in that dept as expected at his age. Love his ability to lead. That bullet pass from Jones and lightning lead from Kerr that resulted in our first goal I haven't seen seen the days of Houlihan bulletting in to Fev on the lead.
Jacks move was a success...not surprising he faded in the 2nd half as his tank isn't up to scratch yet. However, now we know he can play a different role, his pre-season will be geared towards that and we'll see him coming out as twice the player he is currently. His genes will ensure it.
"O'Shea" is fast becoming "O'Sh*t". Will make some complete bonehead decisions each and every single week that hurt us on the scoreboard.
Kerridge has surprised me this year. Lifted his game to a level that might earn him another contract. We lack mature midfielders who have the body/size and the endurance to compete for a full 4 quarters. Never going to be a star, but if he is the type of player you can have as your 'bottom 6' then you will be going ok.
Another week, another game, another loss.
Starting to feel numb.
Jacks move was a success...not surprising he faded in the 2nd half as his tank isn't up to scratch yet. However, now we know he can play a different role, his pre-season will be geared towards that and we'll see him coming out as twice the player he is currently. His genes will ensure it.
"O'Shea" is fast becoming "O'Sh*t". Will make some complete bonehead decisions each and every single week that hurt us on the scoreboard.
Kerridge has surprised me this year. Lifted his game to a level that might earn him another contract. We lack mature midfielders who have the body/size and the endurance to compete for a full 4 quarters. Never going to be a star, but if he is the type of player you can have as your 'bottom 6' then you will be going ok.
Another week, another game, another loss.
Starting to feel numb.
Kerridge butchered the football at times and cost us plenty....when I read he went at 79% DE I couldnt believe it, he was horrendous by foot IMO...
No way would I re-sign him....
3 goals each in the last qtr and to me we matched them in the 3rd in general play but that finishing and that disposal you spoke about cost us big time. No way that was a 5 goal game.
Thought we dominated most of the 3rd quarter and they just punished us for our mistakes.
At least it was a decent jumper ... radical and different but not too bad
I can't really tell if Swans were genuinely trying and we matched them, or whether they were just in 1st gear most of the night and only pulled their finger out when they needed to. Either way, they won't be scaring any of the top teams based on last night's performance. Looked ordinary in my book.
Jones- I've never been a fan, but he was ok last night. Actually tried to mark a few. Progress.
Daisy - has been good this year, but stunk it up last night.
Dow - this kid is all class. Love him.
SPS - does some nice things, then disappears.
Plowman - has had an ordinary season. He's better than what he's showing this year. Last night's game and the previous week show signs of life.
Simpson - if ever there was a textbook example of how a player can besmirch their own fine reputation by playing past their use by date, this is it. He stunk it up bad last night. His claims to fame have always been courage, guts and determination, and when he was younger also a bit of pace. He's never been skilful, and now that he's older and slower, it's really starting to show. A plea from your No1 fan - please give it up now. And when you play so badly, you have no business slagging off your team mates.
Wright - the TV is useful for showing work close to the ball, and in this respect we see just how smart Wright is. Smart tap ons, keeps his feet, good decisions etc. It's a shame about that miss on goal, but he's a very good footballer, and I love him.
I thought Sinclair had the better of Krooz.
Jack was not bad.
O'Shea, another in the burgeoning category of honest triers, ordinary players.
I can only assume the mattress (as Brettie referred to it) around Cripps' leg was for napping purposes - he, like us, probably anticipated another night he wishes he could just dream away.
There was a handful of neat passages of play, in amongst a whole bunch of trash. Our skills are deplorable. Bolton came from a club where players had brilliant kicking skills. We're waiting Brendan.
One more thing - that jumper looked like stonewash denim. Awful.
Strange game. Watching it live, I thought the effort was there, we certainly cracked in but in the end we were too messy with the footy. They seemed much cleaner with the footy and in particular, marking overhead. The Heeney is a freak overhead for his size, as is Parker. Sinclair shaded Kruze by kicking a few goals. I wonder if 2 rucks could have worked Sinclair over more.
Agree with Pauly on Simmo, times up.
Liked the look of SOS’s new role, lets see how it goes.
At the end of the day, polish and experience got Syd over the line, thought our boys took it up to them though.
As for the Syd supporters, I have 3 words for you:
Learn the Rules
Oh well, ticked the box, been saying for years I wanted to go to the SCG to watch a game, mission accomplished.
I wish we'd have had a decent crack at getting Heeney. Ive been a massive fan since his rookie year. Maybe he wasn't gettable, but I don't remember any scuttlebutt about any other interest and I reckon the swans would have resigned him for unders.
Kerridge butchered the football at times and cost us plenty....when I read he went at 79% DE I couldnt believe it, he was horrendous by foot IMO...
No way would I re-sign him....
If they count every disposal in DE then that'd include the 2m handpasses where it's hard not to hit the target.
Pity he butchers the ball so much as he works so hard. Thought he was generally ok last night, keot Hannebury quiet, but unlike some, when he butchers the ball he really butchers it where it hurts. He does a good job but it's negated by his ball use.
I'd give him another contract on the basis of bodies being too skinny still.
I can't really tell if Swans were genuinely trying and we matched them, or whether they were just in 1st gear most of the night and only pulled their finger out when they needed to. Either way, they won't be scaring any of the top teams based on last night's performance. Looked ordinary in my book.
Jones- I've never been a fan, but he was ok last night. Actually tried to mark a few. Progress.
Daisy - has been good this year, but stunk it up last night.
Dow - this kid is all class. Love him.
SPS - does some nice things, then disappears.
Plowman - has had an ordinary season. He's better than what he's showing this year. Last night's game and the previous week show signs of life.
Simpson - if ever there was a textbook example of how a player can besmirch their own fine reputation by playing past their use by date, this is it. He stunk it up bad last night. His claims to fame have always been courage, guts and determination, and when he was younger also a bit of pace. He's never been skilful, and now that he's older and slower, it's really starting to show. A plea from your No1 fan - please give it up now. And when you play so badly, you have no business slagging off your team mates.
Wright - the TV is useful for showing work close to the ball, and in this respect we see just how smart Wright is. Smart tap ons, keeps his feet, good decisions etc. It's a shame about that miss on goal, but he's a very good footballer, and I love him.
I thought Sinclair had the better of Krooz.
Jack was not bad.
O'Shea, another in the burgeoning category of honest triers, ordinary players.
I can only assume the mattress (as Brettie referred to it) around Cripps' leg was for napping purposes - he, like us, probably anticipated another night he wishes he could just dream away.
There was a handful of neat passages of play, in amongst a whole bunch of trash. Our skills are deplorable. Bolton came from a club where players had brilliant kicking skills. We're waiting Brendan.
Simmo got votes on the ABC last night. I thought his errors were eye watering early on but that got much better after the 1st qtr.
OBrien had a moment where he didnt want to attack the ball and Cameron Ling highlighted his lack of effort and I reckon the coaches will be pointing that out this week.
A lot of players have that moment but its the good ones that learn from it so we will see how Obrien goes in the future...
I gave O’Brien the benefit of the doubt. If he had continued he would have been knocked out of the contest. By hesitating, he remained involved in the contest. Perhaps I’m being too generous but I guess we’ll learn more as his career progresses.
I thought Simmo's defensive work was reasonable, however his disposal was eyewateringly atrocious, even for him. And he really needs a new string to his bow bringing the ball in from a behind, that little fake to one side, kick to self and get the chopout from a team mate is very predictable. Caught once last night, and I don't know how he gets away with it as often as he does.
I thought Simpson was OK, but not great. Thomas was worse, panic turnovers cost goals several times
With the bye this week we get a chance to regroup and get some players back. That is a huge positive.
All I can say is that we are not that bad, but our turnovers kill us.
Did anyone else think that last goal shouldn’t have counted? You can’t kick around your body without stepping off the line. Oh well.
Would have been interesting if it was the last kick to win a GF.
Have been convinced to stick with Bolts for now, swayed largely by some cool heads on this forum who have reminded us about where we’ve come from and where we’re headed (fingers crossed). As much as the commentators on FTA TV are dills, they were right about our game plan. Chipping it around and playing keepings off is all very well and good but ... then what? There doesn’t seem to be any “then what”. Casboult’s not the answer and we can’t expect Charlie to be 100% available. I wish BB would let them off the leash a bit more. We look so much better moving it on quicker and kicking it long.
As others have said, skills are just diabolical. Actually unbelievably bad considering we’re supposed to be watching men who’ve been playing football their whole lives and who make a decent living from it. Ugh. And when we make those howlers, what’s with BB’s habit of covering his mouth and letting loose with what I assume is language that would make a sailor blush? Reminds me of Alan Joyce and his handkerchief when he was at Hawthorn. And that worries me!
Last night I think I saw another reason why some teams can’t seem to get up off the mat and others don’t need to rebuild. We have only one genuine superstar on our list. Other teams can simply use their middle tier players as cannon fodder and instruct them to forget about winning the footy and stop Cripps at all costs. They tag team him and, in the end, break him. Career is cut short and the club never really reaps the benefit of having said superstar on the park long enough around which to build a dynasty. Struggling club goes back to the drawing board to find the next big thing while the successful clubs don’t need to - it’s death by a thousand cuts for Carlton.
If the rebuild works out, and this current crop of youngsters become the top shelf 100-150 gamers that you need to be a good team, then they will be the ones who will be the core senior group that will allow future talented youngsters to play in the magoos for a couple of seasons, just like the Swans, Hawks etc.
Unfortunately, it also means that this crop of kids will be the sacrificial lambs, who don't have the benefit of playing in the 2's, and have been thrown to the wolves, as it were.
Hopefully, they will (like Murphy) be remembered accordingly.
Did anyone else think that last goal shouldn’t have counted? You can’t kick around your body without stepping off the line. Oh well.
Would have been interesting if it was the last kick to win a GF.
My take from memory ....
He stood with his back to the posts.
Side on to the man on the mark.
The minute he took a step forward he had gone off his line and it was play on.
As it was after the siren the goal shouldn't count.
The umpire told him and then totally ignored his own advice to the player.
However I'd have to see it again if he made the kick without taking a step (pretty difficult but not impossible) it would be OK
Should not have been a goal, he played on after the siren
Should not have been a goal, he played on after the siren
Yep
Just had a look at it and he takes a step...play on!
With the bye this week we get a chance to regroup and get some players back. That is a huge positive.
All I can say is that we are not that bad, but our turnovers kill us.
We should get back Marchbank, Casboult, Kennedy and Pickett after the bye. I'd be bringing them all straight in if they're fit. Out for me would go Cuningham, Lamb, O'Shea and Thomas. That would reduce our turnovers by about 50%, reduce the number of our players who have no influence on the game, improve ball movement and should increase our scoring
We should get back Marchbank, Casboult, Kennedy and Pickett after the bye. I'd be bringing them all straight in if they're fit. Out for me would go Cuningham, Lamb, O'Shea and Thomas. That would reduce our turnovers by about 50%, reduce the number of our players who have no influence on the game, improve ball movement and should increase our scoring
Casboult might come straight back in but I reckon the other three should get some VFL time to get some match fitness...Marchbank and Kennedy need to prove their fitness in match conditions, both seem injury prone
and need easing back in IMO...
We should get back Marchbank, Casboult, Kennedy and Pickett after the bye. I'd be bringing them all straight in if they're fit. Out for me would go Cuningham, Lamb, O'Shea and Thomas. That would reduce our turnovers by about 50%, reduce the number of our players who have no influence on the game, improve ball movement and should increase our scoring
Wow, so dropping Thomas after being in our best 2 or 3 for every game this year after one bad game. You are a very hard task master.
I was at the Geelong game, it was just as bad
Thomas has had a great year but last night, especially the 3rd qtr, won't be adding to his year.
Probably is a harsh call, he gives 100% every time and apparently gives great advice out on the field to the kids. I just wish he would use the ball better, and he looks to have panicked a bit in recent games. Maybe getting some better players back around him will help with that
If they count every disposal in DE then that'd include the 2m handpasses where it's hard not to hit the target.
Pity he butchers the ball so much as he works so hard. Thought he was generally ok last night, keot Hannebury quiet, but unlike some, when he butchers the ball he really butchers it where it hurts. He does a good job but it's negated by his ball use.
I'd give him another contract on the basis of bodies being too skinny still.
x 2
If you drop Thomas for 1 game of shocking disposal then Simpson has to go too.
Did anyone else think that last goal shouldn’t have counted? You can’t kick around your body without stepping off the line. Oh well.
Would have been interesting if it was the last kick to win a GF.
I thought exactly the same thing, that was disgraceful!
How would you feel as the opposition if the umpire had coached the player after the siren like that for the final winning goal in a GF?
If the player doesn't know the rules it's not the umpires job to coach him on the field of play!
Thought we dominated most of the 3rd quarter and they just punished us for our mistakes.
X2
Don't forget bad kicking is bad football.
Kerr, Wright and Charlie Curnow stuffed some of the more gettable shots for goal and at times I thought we could have scored but spent too long looking for Men in space.
Jones- I've never been a fan, but he was ok last night. Actually tried to mark a few. Progress. Better than okay IMO
Daisy - has been good this year, but stunk it up last night. Agreed
Dow - this kid is all class. Will be very good
SPS - does some nice things, then disappears. Still too lazy - doesn't even run hard when he has the ball - won't chase hard - often allows his opponent to run freely downfield to make further contributions if he doesn't manage to tackle him when close enough to reach - needs an attitude transplant
Plowman - has had an ordinary season. He's better than what he's showing this year. Last night's game and the previous week show signs of life. Agreed
Simpson - if ever there was a textbook example of how a player can besmirch their own fine reputation by playing past their use by date, this is it. He stunk it up bad last night. Certainly made more than his share of mistakes last night. His claims to fame have always been courage, guts and determination (still are), and when he was younger also a bit of pace. He had obviously lost a couple of yards last year. He's never been skilful (disagree), and now that he's older and slower, it's really starting to show. Still playing well enough to play on if he wants.
Wright - the TV is useful for showing work close to the ball, and in this respect we see just how smart Wright is. Smart tap ons, keeps his feet, good decisions etc. It's a shame about that miss on goal, but he's a very good footballer, and I love him.
I thought Sinclair had the better of Krooz. Not so much in the ruck but certainly in general play.
Jack was not bad. Very good in the 1st half.
O'Shea, another in the burgeoning category of honest triers, ordinary players.
I thought Rowe was more than decent against Buddy.
Lang looks to have what he needs for the future.
Kerridge was one of our better players - despite the horrendous clangers.
No point fans hanging Daisy and Wright for boo-boos last night, prior to last night they've been holding the team together.
Kerridge got plenty of the ball but had another bad disposal week.
Anyone else notice the poke at Simmo by the commentators, I think it was Ling or BT, someone like that. BTs an idiot as proven on the broadcast, but when Simmo kicked to himself they called it like it was, another empty disposal efficiency stat making his figures look better than they really were! Unfortunately it's the truth, even with all those kicks to himself that count as a 100% DE stat Simmo only went at 67%! He's had 16 kicks, about half of them to himself!
SoJ played well, but before people pump up his tyres about a midfield role, how often did SoJ actually start in the center? He was often at stoppages around the ground but not in the centre bounce very often, in fact hardly at all!
The votes on the AFL website must go purely of stats and DE, because there is now way Simmo, Kerridge and Weitering were not in our top 5. Kreuzer and Charlie Yes, Fisher, Ed and Jones should have been.
One more thing - that jumper looked like stonewash denim. Awful.
Too busy by far but that is often the nature of indigenous art - unless you are close enough to see the detail.
However, I was very impressed with the portrayal of the CFC emblem.
I liked the kit I thought it was far better than some of our alternative strips, and I loved the painted boots, there should be more of it!
Too busy by far but that is often the nature of indigenous art - unless you are close enough to see the detail.
However, I was very impressed with the portrayal of the CFC emblem.
I didn't mind the look of the jumper but it could have been less busy. The CFC emblem was very well done; a great representation of a canoe tree and boomerangs!
I didn't mind the look of the jumper but it could have been less busy. The CFC emblem was very well done; a great representation of a canoe tree and boomerangs!
Agreed, if the AFL wants to be recognised as an international game it needs to present itself with an Australian flavour, and these kits as alternatives are as good as any I've seen!
If Liddle is smart he'll come out or get someone at Carlton to come out and promote this as an idea before Sheedy takes the credit!
No point fans hanging Daisy and Wright for boo-boos last night, prior to last night they've been holding the team together.
Kerridge got plenty of the ball but had another bad disposal week.
Anyone else notice the poke at Simmo by the commentators, I think it was Ling or BT, someone like that. BTs an idiot as proven on the broadcast, but when Simmo kicked to himself they called it like it was, another empty disposal efficiency stat making his figures look better than they really were! Unfortunately it's the truth, even with all those kicks to himself that count as a 100% DE stat Simmo only went at 67%! He's had 16 kicks, about half of them to himself!
SoJ played well, but before people pump up his tyres about a midfield role, how often did SoJ actually start in the center? He was often at stoppages around the ground but not in the centre bounce very often, in fact hardly at all!
I presume you're talking about when Simpson kicks to himself when kicking in after a behind, if so that doesn't count as a disposal (or a kick), because he hasn't actually disposed of the ball! Those are not included in DE
The votes on the AFL website must go purely of stats and DE, because there is now way Simmo, Kerridge and Weitering were not in our top 5. Kreuzer and Charlie Yes, Fisher, Ed and Jones should have been.
I thought Weitering looks like he's fined down a bit, lost the heavy legs and seemed a bit faster across the turf, had plenty of closing speed. Maybe previously he's been carrying an injury.
If not that, it's amazing the difference some confidence and a clarity of role makes! ;)
The kick ins don't count as a kick that's why they kick it to themselves and play on so when they do kick it it counts.
The kick ins don't count as a kick that's why they kick it to themselves and play on so when they do kick it it counts.
What you say is true but I doubt that that is the primary reason that players do it.
Sydney manned the goal square with two players to largely nullify the effect of blocking the play-on and the change of direction that Simpson commonly uses. I haven't seen that tactic before - it was very effective.
No point fans hanging Daisy and Wright for boo-boos last night, prior to last night they've been holding the team together.
Kerridge got plenty of the ball but had another bad disposal week.
Anyone else notice the poke at Simmo by the commentators, I think it was Ling or BT, someone like that. BTs an idiot as proven on the broadcast, but when Simmo kicked to himself they called it like it was, another empty disposal efficiency stat making his figures look better than they really were! Unfortunately it's the truth, even with all those kicks to himself that count as a 100% DE stat Simmo only went at 67%! He's had 16 kicks, about half of them to himself!
SoJ played well, but before people pump up his tyres about a midfield role, how often did SoJ actually start in the center? He was often at stoppages around the ground but not in the centre bounce very often, in fact hardly at all!
The votes on the AFL website must go purely of stats and DE, because there is now way Simmo, Kerridge and Weitering were not in our top 5. Kreuzer and Charlie Yes, Fisher, Ed and Jones should have been.
Kerridge did a fair job on Hannebury but ruined his game by atrocious disposal......Simpson and Thomas were able assistants in this area, both had shockers.....agree though on Daisy and Wright....the former has been good this season and Matty Wright has been about as straight a kick as anyone in the AFL.....both looked a bit slow last night.
The kick ins don't count as a kick that's why they kick it to themselves and play on so when they do kick it it counts.
I not sure that is totally correct, it may be differentiated from the kick count, but if they fork up the kick to themselves it definitely counts as a Clanger. Like when someone steps out of the square kicking to themselves!
If it didn't count as contributing stat you couldn't have it counting as a clanger either, you can't have it both ways or else the stats are worthless!
Thomas has had a great year but last night, especially the 3rd qtr, won't be adding to his year.
His first half was good but after half time he played like someone had spiked his Gatorade, he's got some runs on the board this season though so I wouldn't be hanging him just yet.
SPS, O'Brien, Cunningham and Dow were all very quiet to half time, Dow and SPS lifted a bit in the second half and O'Brien has some nice skills but Cunningham has now played two poor ones in a row and might be in some trouble.
Lamb just isn't any good, Garlett may or may not make the grade but Lamb definitely won't so we'd be better off playing Garlett.
We gave it our best shot but the skill errors kill us time and time again.
Bolton should show Dow the footage of his attempted pass to Silvagni on the boundary and point out to him that midfielders are allowed to kick goals themselves, he's only a kid and he'll learn but it was a glaring mistake.
Jones was our best I thought.
From the AFL site
When a player kicks the ball back into play after an opposition behind. Kick-ins are regarded as a function of the team and do not count as kicks, although they are similarly graded for quality.
From the AFL site
When a player kicks the ball back into play after an opposition behind. Kick-ins are regarded as a function of the team and do not count as kicks, although they are similarly graded for quality.
Isn't that the point I was making, and they made on a broadcast?
It's an empty disposal that contributes to DE! Like when they kick to themselves, then pass the ball barley 15m to a guy in the pocket, that is one kick stat but two effective disposals.
What is the point of the kicking to yourself running 3m and kicking the ball another 10 or 15m, it just wastes 5 or 10s and telegraphs your intentions to the opposition!
If you are going to kick the short pass into the pocket, then why not just kick the short pass straight away and then feck off up the field providing an option?
A question, we are on the bottom of the ladder, with little to gain from playing injured players.
Yet we sent Cripps out there not fully fit!
WTF is our club thinking, it says it plans and is implementing long term strategies yet that is clearly a short term decision! No wonder our fans are confused and disgruntled!
Sames goes for Kreuzer, I watched him last night and he clearly isn't fully fit but he's a warrior.
Anyway, they have a couple of weeks off now, so they have time to get sorted, but they could also have had three weeks off and hit the last part of the season in fine fettle!
Too busy by far but that is often the nature of indigenous art - unless you are close enough to see the detail.
However, I was very impressed with the portrayal of the CFC emblem.
Actually, the CFC logo was pretty cool, I agree.
Actually, the CFC logo was pretty cool, I agree.
I was in LA once sitting on the tarmac and one of the Indigenous painted Qantas planes roller past. A couple of middle Amercian norbits looked out the window and stated "What is with that plane, it looks like it was painted by a two year old!"
I leaned across and quietly let them know it was based on Indigenous art that has been around as cave paintings for 40000 years, long before Christians existed!
One of them corrected me, told me it cannot be true because the earth is only 6500 years old, what more could I say, God Bless America! :o
I was in LA once sitting on the tarmac and one of the Indigenous painted Qantas planes roller past. A couple of middle Amercian norbits looked out the window and stated "What is with that plane, it looks like it was painted by a two year old!"
I leaned across and quietly let them know it was based on Indigenous art that has been around as cave paintings for 40000 years, long before Christians existed!
One of them corrected me, told me it cannot be true because the earth is only 6500 years old, what more could I say, God Bless America! :o
As you were at the airport, can I assume those norbits actually had a passport, since that might be a good start.
and Matty Wright has been about as straight a kick as anyone in the AFL.....both looked a bit slow last night.
That was the first time this year he's missed from a set shot. I thought the player on the mark put him off by running hard at the mark as he was about to kick. Something you don't see often.
I was in LA once sitting on the tarmac and one of the Indigenous painted Qantas planes roller past. A couple of middle Amercian norbits looked out the window and stated "What is with that plane, it looks like it was painted by a two year old!"
I leaned across and quietly let them know it was based on Indigenous art that has been around as cave paintings for 40000 years, long before Christians existed!
One of them corrected me, told me it cannot be true because the earth is only 6500 years old, what more could I say, God Bless America! :o
Those 74s (x 2) are now mothballed .... so should be the idiots who thought the world started yesterday.
Just watched the highlight s on the AFL site and you'd have to wonder if it was put together by a Swans fan, 90% of it was all Swans stuff. Pathetic.
Also when we start winning I want our players to give as much cr*p back to oppo teams, for sooo long they have kicked us when we were down, laughed at us and basically have no respect for the club.
That day is coming, but I wish it would come sooner. >:D
Just watched the highlight s on the AFL site and you'd have to wonder if it was put together by a Swans fan, 90% of it was all Swans stuff. Pathetic.
Also when we start winning I want our players to give as much cr*p back to oppo teams, for sooo long they have kicked us when we were down, laughed at us and basically have no respect for the club.
That day is coming, but I wish it would come sooner. >:D
The Swans are pretty clean and benevolent compared to a lot of other teams. Buddy likes to gob off constantly, but other than that.............
As you were at the airport, can I assume those norbits actually had a passport, since that might be a good start.
Actually I was on a domestic leg from LA to Tuscon at the time.
Those 74s (x 2) are now mothballed .... so should be the idiots who thought the world started yesterday.
I'd arrived in LA on the red one, which I thought looked terrific. It was the blue one taxing at LA that the locals commented on.
I suppose they are expensive to fly and decorate but you'd think Tourism Australia would sponsor them. I read somewhere it requires an extra 500kg of paint which adds to fuel costs.
Actually I was on a domestic leg from LA to Tuscon at the time.
..................................
Ah well, say no more.
I liked the kit I thought it was far better than some of our alternative strips, and I loved the painted boots, there should be more of it!
Totally agree. Well done CFC.
That was the first time this year he's missed from a set shot. I thought the player on the mark put him off by running hard at the mark as he was about to kick. Something you don't see often.
I noticed that as well. Looked for all the world like he went over the mark, Hawthorn style. I’d love to see a replay from a different angle.
Just finished watching the game again. IMHO in was only skill errors that cost us, no more complicated than that. Critical skill errors at that, and from people who should know better... a few howlers from Simmo and Kerridge who were both, otherwise, very good. Attitude, intensity, game plan... all good. We certainly didn't embarrass ourselves which many 'experts' predicted.
Probably O'Shea's best game for us thus far.
Cuningham is just about confirmed as Kane Lucas Mk III. What a waste of sublime talent.
SOJ imposed himself on the contest though tired somewhat in the second half... he'll only improve further as he builds his tank and strength.
O'Brien needs time in the twos.
If we continue and build upon that approach and intensity, and with some experienced blokes back, I reckon we'll win a few in the back half of the season... and how you finish a season is really important.
Sinclair and Rowe both fined.
Franklin twice handed out high forearm fend-offs, as well as one blatant high tackle that wasn't penalised! Yet escapes scrutiny!
Rowe was lucky. ;)
Carlton players don't usually get off with a fine :(
Menegola hardly gets looked at, yet Rowe cops a $1500 fine.
Sinclair flops around like a fish and gets $1000 fine.
Level playing field my ar$e.
Just finished watching the game again. IMHO in was only skill errors that cost us, no more complicated than that. Critical skill errors at that, and from people who should know better... a few howlers from Simmo and Kerridge who were both, otherwise, very good. Attitude, intensity, game plan... all good. We certainly didn't embarrass ourselves which many 'experts' predicted.
Probably O'Shea's best game for us thus far.
Cuningham is just about confirmed as Kane Lucas Mk III. What a waste of sublime talent.
SOJ imposed himself on the contest though tired somewhat in the second half... he'll only improve further as he builds his tank and strength.
O'Brien needs time in the twos.
If we continue and build upon that approach and intensity, and with some experienced blokes back, I reckon we'll win a few in the back half of the season... and how you finish a season is really important.
I’m surprised that you didn’t mention Daisy Baggers. His third quarter was perhaps the worst football I’ve seen from an established player and virtually handed the game to the Swans.
Some of our other players had moments that they’d rather forget but none of them came close to Daisy’s profligate efforts.
Sinclair and Rowe both fined.
Franklin twice handed out high forearm fend-offs, as well as one blatant high tackle that wasn't penalised! Yet escapes scrutiny!
We should appeal Rowe’s fine and show the footage of Menegola sinking the slipper into Rowe’s head as the basis of the appeal.
I’m surprised that you didn’t mention Daisy Baggers. His third quarter was perhaps the worst football I’ve seen from an established player and virtually handed the game to the Swans.
Some of our other players had moments that they’d rather forget but none of them came close to Daisy’s profligate efforts.
I would agree with that, have really liked Daisy's game this year , but your right DJC , he stunk it up big time , lost focus completely.
I’m surprised that you didn’t mention Daisy Baggers. His third quarter was perhaps the worst football I’ve seen from an established player and virtually handed the game to the Swans.
Some of our other players had moments that they’d rather forget but none of them came close to Daisy’s profligate efforts.
Just forgot to put his name in there. Also aghast at his errors in a 3rd qtr to forget. Simmo and Kerridge also handed the opposition possession and goals with howlers... but Daisy headed the podium.
Much was made of Daisy's defensive role in the game. Was this more so than in previous games? If so maybe it was a case of him getting to grips with a different role. He was pretty bad though.
We should appeal Rowe’s fine and show the footage of Menegola sinking the slipper into Rowe’s head as the basis of the appeal.
I agree. There has to be some consistency. At least once per season.
Much was made of Daisy's defensive role in the game. Was this more so than in previous games? If so maybe it was a case of him getting to grips with a different role. He was pretty bad though.
I don't think he was a bad as people make out, they are influenced by the commentary during the game and come to permanent conclusions. Other than a couple of obvious mistakes he played a pretty good game, far better than O'Shea who also sold several team-mates into trouble, yet O'Shea gets praised by some!
I think that blind handball straight to a Swans player was in response to a call, but pretty bad for a player of his experience to get sucked in like that.
He'll be keen to butter up in his next game that's for sure.
I don't think he was a bad as people make out, they are influenced by the commentary during the game and come to permanent conclusions. Other than a couple of obvious mistakes he played a pretty good game, far better than O'Shea who also sold several team-mates into trouble, yet O'Shea gets praised by some!
I thought Daisy was pretty good, apart from his error-ridden third quarter. O’Shea was no worse the Simpson, Jones and others in turning the ball over and giving teammates no chance of equalising contests.
I’m sure that Daisy will be determined to make up for that quarter.
I thought Daisy was pretty good, apart from his error-ridden third quarter. O’Shea was no worse the Simpson, Jones and others in turning the ball over and giving teammates no chance of equalising contests.
I’m sure that Daisy will be determined to make up for that quarter.
Well I'd certainly like to see Daisy get fully back to his previously good form and perform well in his defensive role (or whatever role he gets for that matter). He is a terrier so I think he will and he's important for us this year.
Well I'd certainly like to see Daisy get fully back to his previously good form and perform well in his defensive role (or whatever role he gets for that matter). He is a terrier so I think he will and he's important for us this year.
Daisy is a stop gap in defence whist Marchbank, Byrne, Doc and Willo are unavailable. Much prefer him as a high half forward.
Daisy is a stop gap in defence whist Marchbank, Byrne, Doc and Willo are unavailable. Much prefer him as a high half forward.
Yes I agree Baggers but needs must atm.
Daisy is a stop gap in defence whist Marchbank, Byrne, Doc and Willo are unavailable. Much prefer him as a high half forward.
In an area where we struggle there are a number of players we could move into the forward line.
Although he's struggled there before I'd like to see Jones play a couple of games forward in a 'chaos' role.
Thomas and Simpson are both getting plenty of the ball.
Play them at half forward for a bit.
No, they're not the future...but they are the present...and it would help our young forwards to have a few other 'distractions' for other sides to worry about.
When Marchbank comes back I'd also like to see him getting a run as a forward.
Yep, we have some good young prospects in Kerr and McKay...but Marchbank has a couple of years in maturity and I'd like to see what he's capable of as a forward ...now!
One of them corrected me, told me it cannot be true because the earth is only 6500 years old and flat, what more could I say, God Bless Help America! :o
EFA
To digress a tad, walked into a cafe in inner Melbourne early this morning with my 5 yo lad who was staunchly carrying his recently acquired 2018 AFL footy cards album....
The barrista, a nice young guy, asked the kid which team he followed.
Not realising how shy my kid is (who had not answered due to shyness and turned away), the bloke said oh no, it's not that bad is it?
Then as he finished making the coffee seconds later, followed up with "it's Carlton".
Not even a question, but a statement of fact.
I'm getting really sick of that.
And I have started to question Bolton quite frankly, not the process - the journey - or even Bolton's ability or willingness to "educate",
Granted injuries don't help, but some selections and match days moves (or lack of) this season don't sit well with me.
In my eyes, he has till this stage next season to be fully judged.
Ex teacher? So f',n what really, can he Coach?! The jury is very much out on that score....
To digress a tad, walked into a cafe in inner Melbourne early this morning with my 5 yo lad who was staunchly carrying his recently acquired 2018 AFL footy cards album....
The barrista, a nice young guy, asked the kid which team he followed.
Not realising how shy my kid is (who had not answered due to shyness and turned away), the bloke said oh no, it's not that bad is it?
Then as he finished making the coffee seconds later, followed up with "it's Carlton".
Not even a question, but a statement of fact.
I'm getting really sick of that.
And I have started to question Bolton quite frankly, not the process - the journey - or even Bolton's ability or willingness to "educate",
Granted injuries don't help, but some selections and match days moves (or lack of) this season don't sit well with me.
In my eyes, he has till this stage next season to be fully judged.
Ex teacher? So f',n what really, can he Coach?! The jury is very much out on that score....
This is where the media bias against CFC comes in and like I said in another thread, people that don’t really follow footy gear the media bs and it’s just their go to, saying crap about Carlton.
I’m onboard the Bolton train - I did falter and maybe he does need some match day help BUT he is not arrogant like MM was and I think takes onboard abt and all advice given. We have lost two of our best in Doch and Gibbs when we couldn’t afford to lose abt Be mid tier let alone top tier.
I can personally see the future in a lot of our players so to people like the barista I would just say don’t worry about Carlton, we’ll be right!
This is where the media bias against CFC comes in and like I said in another thread, people that don’t really follow footy gear the media bs and it’s just their go to, saying crap about Carlton.
I’m onboard the Bolton train - I did falter and maybe he does need some match day help BUT he is not arrogant like MM was and I think takes onboard abt and all advice given. We have lost two of our best in Doch and Gibbs when we couldn’t afford to lose abt Be mid tier let alone top tier.
I can personally see the future in a lot of our players so to people like the barista I would just say don’t worry about Carlton, we’ll be right!
And what would a coffee maker know about footy?
As for Bolts, don’t get sucked in by folk who think he isn’t a tactical coach. With our lack of depth and top end talent on our list, throwing players around is a bit like moving deckchairs on the Titanic. At this stage of our development, it’s better to persevere with structures and allow players to grow into their roles.
Agree Micky, obviously frustrating our distinct lack of success and bottoming out. Was saying to a few mates yesterday we just have to keep going a no turning back now.
On Bolton’s lack of game day moves, is it possible he wants a player to learn his role and from time to time that means they will get beaten on the day? I.e his lack of moves on game day are pre meditated
Agree Micky, obviously frustrating our distinct lack of success and bottoming out. Was saying to a few mates yesterday we just have to keep going a no turning back now.
On Bolton’s lack of game day moves, is it possible he wants a player to learn his role and from time to time that means they will get beaten on the day? I.e his lack of moves on game day are pre meditated
Absolutely.
If you want to teach someone how to do something the best way is via repetition.
Do it again and again and again until they know it and learn it.
Bolton is unproven as a tactical coach especially in the heat of the game, while I agree there is the issue of development vs winning I think he struggles to pick up the flow of games and has trouble working our matchups and what other teams are doing. We have had some very odd selections v some teams and he seems thrown when another coach pulls a shock move like a midfielder to full forward. I know he has limited resources to work with but when you see key opposition players unmanned and allowed to run around freely you have to wonder what he is doing. I'm waiting for the Brisbane game where there are some obvious players that need manning up tightly, its a game we can win but not if the likes of Zorko and Beams are allowed to run around on their own which is what usually happens....
Bolton is unproven as a tactical coach especially in the heat of the game, while I agree there is the issue of development vs winning I think he struggles to pick up the flow of games and has trouble working our matchups and what other teams are doing. We have had some very odd selections v some teams and he seems thrown when another coach pulls a shock move like a midfielder to full forward. I know he has limited resources to work with but when you see key opposition players unmanned and allowed to run around freely you have to wonder what he is doing. I'm waiting for the Brisbane game where there are some obvious players that need manning up tightly, its a game we can win but not if the likes of Zorko and Beams are allowed to run around on their own which is what usually happens....
The Gold Coast game flies in the face of that somewhat.
His tactics can be unusual, but I actually think its a matter of trying something that isn't working, rather than not doing something to counter it, as he does make in game changes which seem to be ineffective because of various factors, which usually have to do with robbing peter to pay paul.
The absence of Docherty and Marchbank i think are weighing heavily on our ability to make bonafide changes to how we play, as is the absence of Matt Kennedy.
The reinvention of Jones as a key defender, and JSOS to the midfield have worked well, and Ive seen Matt Wright pushing into midfield more of late through a lack of other options.
I think his lack of matchup in your instances of Beams and Zorko has more to do with him stating that we want to win rather than not get smashed.
At the moment we are choosing between those two options.
Friday night showed that no Cripps at full flight is no great drama which is a big tick to Bolton.
And what would a coffee maker know about footy?
(http://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/b0668c2fd5d9239129dff12989c5d048?width=650)
A question, we are on the bottom of the ladder, with little to gain from playing injured players.
Yet we sent Cripps out there not fully fit!
WTF is our club thinking, it says it plans and is implementing long term strategies yet that is clearly a short term decision! No wonder our fans are confused and disgruntled!
Sames goes for Kreuzer, I watched him last night and he clearly isn't fully fit but he's a warrior.
Anyway, they have a couple of weeks off now, so they have time to get sorted, but they could also have had three weeks off and hit the last part of the season in fine fettle!
A possible answer to your question... no Cripps and Kreuzer = 100pt flogging on Friday night TV.
Both of these guys @ 50% fitness are equal to their replacements @100% fitness, but these two can perform magic whilst their replacements can do card tricks...
Every player on the field will have an injury or niggle that prevents them from being 100%
Theres another factor.
Cripps demands an opponent.
Nick Graham doesnt. They will simply park someone on the next best midfielder (hypothetically Fisher).
No Cripps, means an additional decrease in output from at least one other midfielder (Fisher) and another samish performance from lets say Paddy Dow.
The Gold Coast game flies in the face of that somewhat.
His tactics can be unusual, but I actually think its a matter of trying something that isn't working, rather than not doing something to counter it, as he does make in game changes which seem to be ineffective because of various factors, which usually have to do with robbing peter to pay paul.
The absence of Docherty and Marchbank i think are weighing heavily on our ability to make bonafide changes to how we play, as is the absence of Matt Kennedy.
The reinvention of Jones as a key defender, and JSOS to the midfield have worked well, and Ive seen Matt Wright pushing into midfield more of late through a lack of other options.
I think his lack of matchup in your instances of Beams and Zorko has more to do with him stating that we want to win rather than not get smashed.
At the moment we are choosing between those two options.
Friday night showed that no Cripps at full flight is no great drama which is a big tick to Bolton.
That’s pretty much how I see it Thry.
Of course, Bolts showed his hand as a tactician and match day coach when he had good sides in Hawthorn and Box Hill.
That’s pretty much how I see it Paul.
Of course, Bolts showed his hand as a tactician and match day coach when he had good sides in Hawthorn and Box Hill.
Wrong fella David.
Wrong fella David.
Bloody autocorrect :)
I was sure that I had typed “Thry”!
No harm no foul David.
Absolutely.
If you want to teach someone how to do something the best way is via repetition.
Do it again and again and again until they know it and learn it.
So if true, all Bolton is teaching blokes is how to lose.....and i think we're getting pretty darn good at it!
So if true, all Bolton is teaching blokes is how to lose.....and i think we're getting pretty darn good at it!
In fairness to BB, I think he's got our defensive setup pretty well sorted if he was to play that game style. I think we could easily win a few sub-10 goal games if we wanted to do it that way.
To me it appears BB and our club are under external pressure to play more allegedly "attractive" football. Which seems to be pretty thinly focussed on goal scoring. The broadcasters repetitive emphasis on Carlton scoring 100pts, even when we are ahead at the time, seems to confirm that!
Theres another factor.
Cripps demands an opponent.
Nick Graham doesnt. They will simply park someone on the next best midfielder (hypothetically Fisher).
No Cripps, means an additional decrease in output from at least one other midfielder (Fisher) and another samish performance from lets say Paddy Dow.
Cripps often gets an opponent at the stoppage then after that the opposing teams have an opponent running off him looking to exploit his lack of pace.....the opponent can often
be a different player.
In fairness to BB, I think he's got our defensive setup pretty well sorted if he was to play that game style. I think we could easily win a few sub-10 goal games if we wanted to do it that way.
Maybe, just MAYBE, the strategy of stemming the flow of heavy losses by shoring up our defence was the wrong horse to back. I mean, on the surface it
seemed logical. If I was on the interview panel and the prospective coach pitched a game plan based on sound defence after which the focus would shift to forward structure and scoring, I probably would have bought it.
However ... WHAT IF some maverick, crazy-son-of-a-b*tch waltzed in there and said, "Pfft, don't care how many points the opposition scores. Recruit me 4 or 5
natural born forwards, help me build a decent midfield, then let the other clubs try and catch us."
Much easier to play back than forward which is why I put the emphasis on
natural born.
Unfortunately, we'll never know. The horse has already bolt(on)ed.
Menegola hardly gets looked at, yet Rowe cops a $1500 fine.
Sinclair flops around like a fish and gets $1000 fine.
Level playing field my ar$e.
I'm still pi$#ed about that. >:(
Maybe, just MAYBE, the strategy of stemming the flow of heavy losses by shoring up our defence was the wrong horse to back. I mean, on the surface it seemed logical. If I was on the interview panel and the prospective coach pitched a game plan based on sound defence after which the focus would shift to forward structure and scoring, I probably would have bought it.
However ... WHAT IF some maverick, crazy-son-of-a-b*tch waltzed in there and said, "Pfft, don't care how many points the opposition scores. Recruit me 4 or 5 natural born forwards, help me build a decent midfield, then let the other clubs try and catch us."
Much easier to play back than forward which is why I put the emphasis on natural born.
Unfortunately, we'll never know. The horse has already bolt(on)ed.
For whatever reason, most coaches seem to be either ex defenders or ex mids. There are, as always, exceptions, but it's generally the case. I think the emphasis on defence starts from there. I also think that as you imply, it's easier to defend than to attack. I would say attacking is a more creative act than defending. Coaches talk a lot about defensive structures and defensive mechanisms, but rarely about attacking structures and attacking mechanisms. I think coaches also feel a little uneasy about high scoring, shoot out footy, because they don't have as much control over the players - it tends to be more instinctive when you play that way.
Many coaches preach the mantra of a strong defence, and regard building from the back as important to a successful attacking game - Malthouse, Leigh Matthews, even Ratten started out trying to shore up our defence in late 07 and 08.
Maybe, just MAYBE, the strategy of stemming the flow of heavy losses by shoring up our defence was the wrong horse to back. I mean, on the surface it seemed logical. If I was on the interview panel and the prospective coach pitched a game plan based on sound defence after which the focus would shift to forward structure and scoring, I probably would have bought it.
However ... WHAT IF some maverick, crazy-son-of-a-b*tch waltzed in there and said, "Pfft, don't care how many points the opposition scores. Recruit me 4 or 5 natural born forwards, help me build a decent midfield, then let the other clubs try and catch us."
Much easier to play back than forward which is why I put the emphasis on natural born.
Unfortunately, we'll never know. The horse has already bolt(on)ed.
Pretty much Geelong of the early 90's and we all know what happened there.
4 Grand Finals and zero wins.
Pretty much Geelong of the early 90's and we all know what happened there.
4 Grand Finals and zero wins.
North under Pagan were much the same, but have 2 flags. They always relied on simply out scoring the opposition. Easy to do when you have an arrogant and talented Duck as your CHF, hence the Pagan's Paddock game plan. And Longmire was very good as well.
North under Pagan were much the same, but have 2 flags. They always relied on simply out scoring the opposition. Easy to do when you have an arrogant and talented Duck as your CHF, hence the Pagan's Paddock game plan. And Longmire was very good as well.
They did have a pretty solid defence too though: Over those two premierships, the likes of - Archer, Martyn, Blakey, Pickett, Pike. But yes, I accept probably not quite in the league of the Doull, English, Southby, Perovic, McConville, Hunter.
They did have a pretty solid defence too though: Over those two premierships, the likes of - Archer, Martyn, Blakey, Pickett, Pike. But yes, I accept probably not quite in the league of the Doull, English, Southby, Perovic, McConville, Hunter.
That's a good back 6, no doubt. I guess I was referring more to emphasis and intent, rather than personnel.
A bit off topic, but worth a read IMO :
http://www.nmfc.com.au/news/2015-08-13/the-evolution-of-pagans-paddock
Maybe, just MAYBE, the strategy of stemming the flow of heavy losses by shoring up our defence was the wrong horse to back. I mean, on the surface it seemed logical. If I was on the interview panel and the prospective coach pitched a game plan based on sound defence after which the focus would shift to forward structure and scoring, I probably would have bought it.
However ... WHAT IF some maverick, crazy-son-of-a-b*tch waltzed in there and said, "Pfft, don't care how many points the opposition scores. Recruit me 4 or 5 natural born forwards, help me build a decent midfield, then let the other clubs try and catch us."
Much easier to play back than forward which is why I put the emphasis on natural born.
Unfortunately, we'll never know. The horse has already bolt(on)ed.
It's the way finals are played these days. All of Richmond's finals were low scoring affairs for a long time until Richmond's pressure broke them. The QF was 3 goal all against Geelong late in the 3rd qtr. Geelong have more gone done that path this year. More defensive, lower scoring but the opposition not scoring much. It's what wins finals these days as the pressure and congestion in finals goes up about 5 notches these days. It's one game we do play well and revel in even with our skinny bodies. Even though we lose we often make life very tough for good opposition when we play that brand. We'll play it very well in September when our bodies become bigger and stronger.
The play the attacking way you talk about gets you obliterated in finals as you won't be allowed to play that way.
They did have a pretty solid defence too though: Over those two premierships, the likes of - Archer, Martyn, Blakey, Pickett, Pike. But yes, I accept probably not quite in the league of the Doull, English, Southby, Perovic, McConville, Hunter.
I just had a look at some of the ladders from 1996 through to 2000 and the North defence while dotted with stars was pretty average in terms of points conceded....mid table (or below on some occasions.)
I think their effectiveness may have been more about "attacking" from defence than pure defending.
In their 1996 premiership year they were nearly 173 points better than the second highest scoring team (Geelong) and 200+ points ahead of all the others.
But in terms of points against they ranked 7th defensively in a 16 team comp(one more point and it would have been 8th).
In 1999 they were still top for "Points for" (albeit a little bit closer) but they were 10th best defensively...so it's a fair point Paul makes in saying they just went for it and said catch us if you can.
For whatever reason, most coaches seem to be either ex defenders or ex mids. There are, as always, exceptions, but it's generally the case. I think the emphasis on defence starts from there. I also think that as you imply, it's easier to defend than to attack. I would say attacking is a more creative act than defending. Coaches talk a lot about defensive structures and defensive mechanisms, but rarely about attacking structures and attacking mechanisms. I think coaches also feel a little uneasy about high scoring, shoot out footy, because they don't have as much control over the players - it tends to be more instinctive when you play that way.
Many coaches preach the mantra of a strong defence, and regard building from the back as important to a successful attacking game - Malthouse, Leigh Matthews, even Ratten started out trying to shore up our defence in late 07 and 08.
That all depends on what you are talking about.
Defending requires much more discipline. Attacking is all about being an opportunist.
Id argue its hard to remain discipline in your tasks, and much easier to throw caution to the wind.
It's why the focus on defense exists, because if players aren't worried about defensive duties they often sell out their teammates, which builds mistrust, which also makes them play conservatively rather than rolling the dice, which breeds bad morale, and which also leads to players being labelled cowards, and downhill skiers.
Even applying defensive pressure in the forward line is easy. You can make an attempt at 5 tackles and succeed once in holding the ball, and your defensive pressure is lauded, but if you spoil 4 marks out of 5 and then concede 3 goals from 15 entries you lost that battle against your opponent and your forward had a decent day out and the defender had a dirty day.
Modern sports is best summed up by simple statements. Risk vs Reward. If the reward is great, but the risk is great, then you need to have a good handle on what point of the game you are in. Teams that are down by a couple of goals with very small amount of time left in the game can afford to take the high risk high reward route. Teams that are dead in the water, can also play high risk footy. Teams that are infront by a minute margin or have trouble converting their chances, or don't get many chances are better off playing low risk footy.
Sometimes, its all about momentum too. If the momentum is with you, take more risks. They will pay off more frequently and hurt you less. If momentum isn't with you, sometimes you need to hold your ground.
People often get too caught up in the arguments above to realize that every team takes risks, but the major difference is how the game is going when they do. We often threw caution to the wind under Ratten as an example. Made for exciting games, but we often got beaten by teams who had a better appreciation for when to take the game on, and when not to. The great grand final comeback is the best example of this. We were dead and buried, and then played on for the rest of the game. Its all about getting the balance right.
In 1999 they were still top for "Points for" (albeit a little bit closer) but they were 10th best defensively...so it's a fair point Paul makes in saying they just went for it and said catch us if you can.
In terms of aggregates for goals in games, "total of goals for and against" there is very little difference between the top and bottom teams.
Other than the Dogs, the lowest scoring games regardless of for or Against are not the ones people expect.
Dogs, GWS, GC, Aints, Norp, Sydney, Geelong are all below the AFL average of 262 goals in games for the first in 11 rounds.
Freo is the average at about 262.
Carlton games are just above average at 267, that's 24 goals for and against per game.
The teams participating in the highest scoring games on average are just averaging a couple of goals per game better at 26.
The media would make this out to be earth shatteringly low scoring, it's just not the case and certainly not Carlton's problem.
Thry, I don't really disagree with any of that, but sometimes the exact same strategy yields opposing results. When the risk comes off (e.g. 1970 GF), it looks great and everyone lauds a winning tactic. When it doesn't, everyone involved looks like a goose.
North under Pagan were much the same, but have 2 flags. They always relied on simply out scoring the opposition. Easy to do when you have an arrogant and talented Duck as your CHF, hence the Pagan's Paddock game plan. And Longmire was very good as well.
Their mids worked both ways.
Geelongs only ran forward
We dont kick enough goals and play a scrapping brand of football based on contesting and dragging the other team down to our poor skill level...four games on a friday night was a poor move from the AFL but great for us but we have not been able to take advantage and use it to market the club.
We dont have a game plan, we just scrap and hope the other team fall into the same pattern and we get lucky......its reminds me of the old days when Footscray had Jose Romero, Libba snr and Dimmatina as their midfield...just awful games based on scrapping, players behind the ball, niggling and rolling scrums...
Like so many of our games there are many lost opportunities - 4 points from fairly easy shots for goal (including a couple from experienced enough players), a stuffed kick, handball, fumble at inopportune moments.
I don't think we would have won had we converted those goals, but it starts building confidence within the team getting closer.
Each time a player takes their moment builds the team. Each player would only have possession for a couple of minutes a game on average - need to make the most of every touch.
I just had a look at some of the ladders from 1996 through to 2000 and the North defence while dotted with stars was pretty average in terms of points conceded....mid table (or below on some occasions.)
I think their effectiveness may have been more about "attacking" from defence than pure defending.
In their 1996 premiership year they were nearly 173 points better than the second highest scoring team (Geelong) and 200+ points ahead of all the others.
But in terms of points against they ranked 7th defensively in a 16 team comp(one more point and it would have been 8th).
In 1999 they were still top for "Points for" (albeit a little bit closer) but they were 10th best defensively...so it's a fair point Paul makes in saying they just went for it and said catch us if you can.
Thanks lods.
Can I also just add, in a continuation of my perfect, unblemished record of strict impartiality when discussing ex CFC coaches, that in 2011 we finished 5th overall, 5th in points for, 5th in points against, and 5th in %.