Ed has been consistent all season and Cuningham has played a couple of decent games in a row, jury still out on him but he has some weapons in terms of pace and being able to kick goals and lets hope he can stay fit and interested. I'm going to agree with Krud on Pittonet and I dont get the negative waves about his game likewise, I thought he won the ruck, was handy in the clearances getting his frame in the play and had a good game as you alluded too. He isnt going to be the next Dean Cox but given he was a cheap moneyball solution from the Box Hill Hawks in the main he has earned his money unlike a few more highly paid imports who have been in the news on this forum lately.
You can talk til you’re blue in the face about how well we did and how the Dogs lost their bundle the week before to lose their lead and on and on.
The fact is we had complete control of the game and we blew it - we could not, again, temper their bombardment, not even once. We did not give one whimper, just let them go and stood and watched, twice we didn’t stand on the mark - I’ve never played or coaches AFL but I know that is a basic thing that should be done. Not sure what the problem is but leadership seems to be number 1. Fitness. Smarts.
I thought Pitto, Cuningham and Ed were just about our only mids!
Fwiw....cunners had.... 2 goal assists.....equal most with Ed 4 tackles....most was 5 3 i50s.......most was 4 9 score involvements....=2nd 83.3% DE......4th overall behind Betts, parks, docherty....highest mid! 19 pressure acts.....2nd to Walsh
So to me that's shows me a player who is working hard back and forward, using the ball well and setting up goals.
So yeah, good enough for me considering what a lot of his team-mates did (or didn't do)
I'm wrapped to see the improvement in Cuningham... especially as I believe I was one of his chief critics. The time spent by Luke Power with Cuningham, especially helping his defensive game and concentrating for 120 minutes has been worth its weight in gold - thus far. I hope he continues with his improvement as he really could be a very dangerous ingredient in our mid/forward combo.
No doubt it's a topic of hot discussion amongst our coaching group. They're struggling to find the answer.
There seems to be a couple of 'schools of thought' at a supporter level....
Some see us as 'very close'. We dominate games for long stretches. If we can just stop these constant periods where the opposition get a bit of run... we'll be there!
Other see us as still a 'fair way away'. A line up that's far from settled. To them it just seems the opposition have to press a button, go up a level, and we have no answer.
Is it a mental/attitude thing? (not coming ready to play, switching off when in a winning position) Is it a personnel issue (players capable of the shutdown) Is it a 'fitness issue'? (possibly, but many of these lapses occur in early parts of a game.) Is it a leadership problem when these runs occur? (Who stands up?) Is it a coaching issue (moves that don't occur, or don't work)?
(All of the above?)
1. On-field leadership. Too much reliance on too few - too many passengers/lack of discipline. 2. Reactionary game day changes only. 3. Loser in-ground culture resulting from 20 + years of instability = zero killer instinct - fold under pressure/brittle confidence/not enough mongrel. 4. Injuries to key personnel / playing injured & poor performing blokes. 5. Is the game plan designed to suit the list (?) or are we trying to make blokes into things they're not - square peg, round hole syndrome.
Agree on Honey...think Gibbons has to go out, we just have one too many small bodies IMO with Owies now in the team. Cottrell was ok on Hunter for a while and the whipping boy Newnes wasnt our worst.... Zac Williams if he wasnt on a crap load of money should be dropped too.....
The club has really made a rod for its back with Williams, he came to us with OUR promise to him of being a midfielder... which, to date, he clearly aint - or is it that our key mid (Crippa) is not up to it which leaves more to others who aint up to it?
The big question is - who dropped their heads in that last qtr, ie who are the softies when serious heat comes? Did the coaching box also drop the ball in the last qtr?
But Jack going down was the turning point. Momentum turned after that.
If we are that dependent on SOJ then we're in much more trouble than I thought!
Late in that 3rd qtr you could see the Dishlickers, to a man, lift and start applying much more pressure all over the ground... and that's when we started to wilt. Poor contributions from Crippa and Williams did not help. I don't know what is up with Crippa, or whether the game is just too quick for him now, but either way, he aint anywhere near as influential as he once was.
Again, when serious heat comes, we wilt - too many passengers. That final qtr was simply deplorable, and says exactly where we are against quality opposition - we do it far too often for it to be anything other than in our DNA.
We had some very good moments, but plenty of bottom sides have good moments.
We still rely on individuals. Weitering, Doc, Eduardo, H, Walsh & Cuningham - their individual skills were impressive.
I'm yet to see why all the fuss about this Williams.
Baffled as to why changes weren't made in the box during the final qtr.
I think we have to be realistic, we're a bottom 6 side.
Sack the f-wit immediately if that's true. I have maintained for a long time that we DONT LEARN ENOUGH at school about Indigenous Australia and its culture.
Absofcknlutely. And as a part of the curriculum - respect. Respect for their spirituality, their arts and their culture.
I think we're heading in the right direction, and so we should be.
I still cannot fathom folks who are opposed (threatened?) by the emphasis in genuinely acknowledging our indigenous folks. All that is required is the empathy and imagination to truly put yourself in the skin of these folks... and understand what they've been through, who they are, and then, what they have to offer/share. Then acknowledge that difference is okay, in fact, good... we can learn from each other, and share our mutual gifts, then grow together allowing each to their own, surrendering the need to change and convert.
If we humans don't address our fundamental capacity for evil and self interest, no system can be made to work. Capitalism is a mess at the moment, unless you're part of the lucky 1%.
Yes, Pauly, we humans are indeed a most paradoxical critter. We are capable of amazing compassion and sacrifice for our fellows in times of trouble - we can band together and work together, tirelessly, for the greater good... but, sadly, it often takes a disaster or common enemy to unite us.
Equally, perhaps even moreso, we're also capable of breathtaking ignorance, narcissism and a most profound violence - to ourselves, others and our ball in the sky. I think it is the Navajo who, in their spirituality, believe that humans are born bad/evil and it is our task in life to find and adopt principles and values that unite for the common good.
If you study, as you and I have, the phenomena of the 'shadow' side of human nature -- introduced with clarity to psychology by Carl Jung -- you'd hardly be optimistic about our future. It takes an enormous amount of personal courage for any individual to so know themselves (Plato) as to understand their own shadow side. Sadly, fear abounds in our world... courage is in short supply.
Of all people, it was Ronald Reagan who once said that the only way humanity will unite is if invaded by aliens from another planet. Says a lot.
@PaulP Would you say socialism has roots in some very fundamental religious principles?
I often think about this when I see the likes of ScoMo preach liberal policies, while worshipping socially.
Of course some may claim perhaps what ScoMo and his like really worship, is the business of religion, the capitalist version! This seems to be a philosophical debate that plays out in all religions, I've seen it play out first hand during my years of schooling, and subsequently when some school friends entered then exited the clergy. Victorians might see this demonstrated in the behavioural differences between for example Rev George Pell and Father Bob Macguire.[/b]
I had the great pleasure of working with Fr Bob many years ago. You are right, he is the very antithesis of Pell. If all Catholic priests were like Fr Bob the world would be a very different place. Such a down to earth, real person who understood spirituality ...deeply. And a very funny bugger too. We jousted often re footy - he's a one-eyed Rottingwood supporter.
The Church couldn't wait to retire him off, they tried a few times but the congregation outcry was too loud to ignore. He was a thorn in the Church's side with his constant reminders that the Church should be serving the community... out amongst the community... helping anyone and everyone regardless of social standing. He complained that too often priests were serving the Church, themselves and not the community - good way to be unpopular with the hierarchy.
Yes, but it was really inspired by humanitarianism which was a great passion of his. Circa 1932 Albert could see what was happening in Germany and started a movement, of sorts, to promote humanitarianism as a way to short-circuit growing nationalism & Hitler. After a fair while, he had 3 signatures! He packed his bags and went to the US at the end of the year.
Highly intelligent (IQ & EI) folks can envision the natural consequences of certain behaviours/movements, generally well before the rank and file.
I recall a quote from Einstein that I'll paraphrase, it went something like, 'when someone is blindly loyal to any political party or ideology they no longer need their brain as they will think what they're told to think (by that political party or ideology leader). All they require is a brain stem to breath, walk and eat.' He had a similar opinion for those who declared themselves, 'patriots.'
When I think of Albo, ScoMo, Dutton, Shorten, Cash... etc., all I see are shallow opportunists.
Although I may not agree entirely with their ideologies, I do see (saw) sincerity and a genuine concern for all Aussies from Rudd, Howard, Turnbull, Hawke and a few others. None were perfect.
But I think that the bottom line is that, globally, there are very few 'real' leaders... people of vision, altruism, business acumen, superior negotiation skills, courage and genuine substance. Dare I say that in the modern world we tend to see more boldness and vision from women leaders!!! (Except M. Cash - shallowness and simplistic thinking personified).
You have to wonder at the thought processes the religious right must wrestle with to justify policies and actions that conflict with their faith. I guess it depends on how perverted their particular brand of religion has become.