Need him getting more than 10 possies and sticking to his man better, good trier etc but we need to win the wings well and get some run through there.
Of course, but he is still new/young.
Kade didn't get a touch in year 1. In year 2 he played another 3 games and got a total of 12 touches. In year 3 he played 15 games, but averaged just 11 touches. Year 4 he played 22 games and averaged 19.
It's bizarre some at Carlton would call for removal of prior, an even worse situation for our slower midfield that relies on bigger heavier bodies to create a clearance.
Not everything is about us. I know that might be a bizarre way to look at things, but you should try it.
Yes, it would not benefit us, but i never said it would.
I'm looking at it with my AFL hat on, not my Navy blue hat.
Do you really believe those changes would have made the difference in what was a smacking before our opposition clearly took the foot off our throat with nothing to gain. Its possible those changes see us lose by even more with the kids being scarred by a 15- 20 goal loss? Just because we will never know doesn't imply they are correct selections. The club needed to risk all to have any chance and when that fails of course you can argue what if they did this or that but the reality is we entered the finals in poor health and regardless who we picked as sub or at MC in this game we were cooked before the ball was bounced.
We need to be very active in the offseason and make a few ballsy decisions to improve on this year
The what if game works both ways.
If every man and his dog can see it before it happens then perhaps it's worth looking into.
Whether or not is the difference e between winning and losing is irrelevant. It was an error and an error we need to analyse to ensure it doesn't happen again. Perhaps if we ignore it and make the same error next time it WILL be the difference. Let's not make the same mistake twice.
After banishing the thought of a Pitto / TDK combo halfway through the season, "the experts" want them in stone cold as a duo functioning in perfect harmony in a final.
My suggestion to fans, find some better "experts"!
You are starting to make me think you have some serious mental issues so I shouldn't go too hard on you.
This post shows you have zero idea about what you've been arguing against for years.
60 -0, hardly went forward. Blame the small forwards. Really???
Pittonet, Cripps, Cerra and Walsh got their butts kicked in that time. That was the ball game.
I'm not blaming the small forwards, I'm blaming the mc. They are what they are and they do what they do. When you have 4 of them, it limits your options instantly to make moves. The ball didnt go forward so it meant that we had 6 players who were out of the game and couldn't change things around to get them into the game. 4 small forwards were stuck there or on the bench. Harry and Kemp had no influence either, but at least Harry could go in the ruck. Kemp could go back if required. The others.....nowhere.
As I said pregame.... Cincotta kicks as many goals as our small forwards (when played forward, even defensively) but he can be played elsewhere as well. Rotate him through the middle. Put him down back. We lacked versatility from our small forwards and it hamstrung us.
So lets take out the worst -Williams, Durdin, Motlop and Ollie Hollands.
Substitute them with Lord, Moir, Binns and Cincotta.
Do we win?
No. But that's not what I would've done.
Keep hollands.
Choose any 2 smalls to go out. I would've chosen durdin and fantasia to miss.
Tdk starts. Moir is sub.
Cincotta comes in and cerra goes out. Your last spot goes to either lord, carroll or binns. Probably Carroll but given he is likely to be going maybe go lord instead.
Not Hawks Not cats ....they've had their fair share.
Port are fun watching implode so let that continue.
Swans are a safe choice and that doesn't other me. Gws is a choice that doesn't really bother anyone. Brisbane probably deserve one given how good they've been over last few years and losing to the eventual premiers can take a bot of sting off the double elimination by them.
4 small forwards and cerra was who I had an issue with pre-game.
5 of our worst 10 players were from that group including the worst 2.
I also had an issue with tdk starting as sub and said he shouldve started. Tdk - 6 Pittonet - 6 Walsh - 6 Newman - 6 Weitering - 6 Acres - 7 Cripps - 8 Hewett - 8
'Post game experts' they say.
The loss is hard enough to take. But when you can highlight the issues before the game (and I'm not alone in this) it makes it all that harder to take.
Lots of post match experts ranting on here but there’s not many of them who wouldn’t have selected the same team. We weren’t beating the Lions with the team that beat eagles or almost beat the saints.
Disagree.
Plenty of people called out the issues before hand and were ultimately proven right. Whether or not we had a chance of winning, who knows. But you gotta give yourself that chance.
Don't let these imbeciles drag you into a stupid debate.
For the first quarter we hardly had the ball forward of centre, and at one stage it was 15 / 20 Lion's I50s to just 4 for us. It wouldn't matter if we had Charlie, Harry, Carey, Lockett and Dunstall inside F50!
As for blaming the 1st 50 minutes on the Sub selection, it's stupidity, the Sub could have been Judd, Dusty, Ablett, any fecker anybody likes, they had no bearing on the first 50 or so minutes of the game. And it made no difference if the Sub was a ruck, rover, utility, fullback or tagger.
This is what.....the 4th time you've said as much now.
Nobody is blaming the first 50 minutes on the sub decision.
^ acres, cerra - they’re such good players when they play well but when they don’t - and when acres does crap kicks it just kills us. Newman at times too just wasn’t reliable! Senior players need to be reliable! Not flashy but just do not kick it directly time and again to our disadvantage.
Acres was fine. He has been playing with a dodgy shoulder for most of his career at carlton. He reinjured it about 6 weeks ago. He hurt it again in Q1 or Q2. Yet he keeps putting his body on the line, gut running the length of the ground and being our goal keeper.
Yes, his kicking can be average, but he's improved that this year. I think he suffers from 'jelly legs' from all the running he does.
EB do you really think our list is that good that we flip a 60-0 start by changing one or 2 selections. I wish i agreed but we have more issues then MC selections imo. We fans seem to think our problems would be solved by a smarter coach better selection's etc however maybe the list has more holes then we think. We don't have the overall talent to challenge the best teams when it matters. We fail year in year out mate. We just aren't good enough for long enough.
We didn't need to flip the 60-0 start. Just limit it to 30-0.
But we handicaped ourselves with the team we picked. TBH, i think its a minor miracle there was no injuries, but even that withstanding, we handicapped ourselves with a couple selections that would've made SOME difference. How much will never be known.
Some "experts" on here want to make the Sub about the rucks, they are sh1t talkers, they signalled this intent even before the first ball was bounced.
In that regard with TDK on the bench we basically went with the "experts" preferred option, one ruck and an extra Mids to run and link up, and had our arse handed to us to the tune of almost 10 goals!
There is only 1 crap talker on here.
Every man and his dog is in agreement.
TDK and Pitto both needed to play because Charlie didn't. I said as much, as did plenty of other '1-ruckers' when the side was picked.
You are a fan of dunning-kruger. Look in the mirror and you'll see the picture next to the explanation.
You are so far off the mark its embarrassing. YOUR focus on the ruck is the issue here.
