The game has changed a lot under the current rules, the need for system and the allowable margin of error is much tighter.
All this frantic forward disposal needs blokes tuned into playing with each other 24x7, fill ins become a fish out of water because a millisecond of hesitation makes them look like bystanders.
If you are thinking about what to do next, it's already too late!
I would've had both in the team and dropped Ison personally.
I thought the same, I think Ison is overdue a break, he did a couple of important things at opportune moments, but at this time he's just not getting enough footy to hold that high half forward role.
Having said that, who does it short term? There is no doubt Ison has what is needed long term. I had hoped one of the Campos, but if the OH disposal makes fans fume then the Campos at the moment would send them insane!
My mate said yesterday, if Weiters returns do we rotate Derksen forward and put Kemp into that high half forward role? If nothing else, Derksen should be taking some confidence into F50 from his last few weeks.
We have to get fair dinkum about the KPP / Ruck types, I think this continual attempt to convert rucks to be KPFs is a dead end. HOK and Riley are clearly rucks, the ruck role comes natural to them, I thought HOK was better at the follow up efforts than Riley. I was impressed by Riley's contested marking yesterday, that is what you want to see, blokes his size dropping into space and filling gaps and actually clunking marks.
The difference between Harry and other converted KPFs, is that even when the disposal and decision making turns crap up the field Harry is still effective at drawing the focus, the part timers only become useful and effective when they are directed into the right spaces by the kicker.
OH just gets whipped by fans for pushing hard and getting to the contest, then under fatigue much like Acres disposal can be variable, but they are running themselves into the ground to get to the contest.
You don't see this disposal variability from other players, because they didn't push hard to get there in the first place, and the opposition had a free uncontested possession. Acres, OH, Cottrell, when they are on automatic they close the gaps.
Of course many fans ball watch, so they don't ever see the lead up effort.
FWIW. My criticism of Acres last week wasn't about his effort, he always works hard to get to the contest. My criticism was he was a bit variable on contesting, to me there should be no choice, no hesitation, contesting should be automatic and instantaneous. Especially a player of Acres size and shape, he's no lightweight frame. Maybe he is still not 100%, as I think was Cripps last night.
There were pre-match suggestions that Cripps was sore and might not have played so I am wondering if he was rotated out of the centre square more than usual as a form of protection.
@RiverRat I was thinking the very same thing, like we were trying to limit further damage or something, because normally there is no way in hell when we are being smashed in clearances that we'd be moving Cripps out!
And speaking of commentators - I am sick and tired of hearing them repeatedly telling us what they would do, instead of describing what tactics and match-ups are being employed.
How silly of you, to actually think the commentator would be calling the game!
Tonight we saw the pointless nature of counting hit outs, because if you look at these stats in a year or so you'd probably think Pitto won on the night. But excluding Hewett, I'd probably have Nankervis and Bolta as 2 of the 3 best on the ground.
But we shouldn't be shocked about this, we just have to go into games with open eyes and an open mind. If you put on the navy blue glasses you'll be disappointed because you be shuttering your eyes to our weakness. Look at the result this way, we were smashed in the ruck, smashed at stoppages and smashed around the ground, the stats might not clearly show it. But we won, despite Cripps, Walsh and Cerra being soundly defeated. Jagga was probably a break even, and Hewett was a win.
Last week we saw some of the early signs of the pre-Fraser Carlton starting to poke it's head out, last night was another step backwards. I hate that this happened but I predicted it, and I predicted Nankervis having that influence, because he's a poison to our Mids. This isn't about OH or Cottrell being in, Acres or Weiters being out, that is just correlation. It's about the team starting to sit back and hesitate, waiting for the person next to them to do the hard work.
Go back and watch the replay, count how many times two blues get to the footy first and spend precious moments staring deeply into each other's eyes waiting for someone to pick up and give them the footy. The exact opposite of Fraser's "play so we look like a team you'd want to play for!" Partly this is a Nankervis / Balta aggression effect.
Sam Mitchell won't miss this fact, and you can expect next week the Dawks will be in full bruiser mode after that disastrous first half against the Dees.
They match up well against us because their strength is our ultimate weakness. They are a bit nasty aggressive and we aren't, they are ultra-fast on the outside we we aren't.
you cant physically throw the opposition ruck out of the contest like he did. Thats why he didnt remonstrate he knew he did a dumb thing
He didn't throw anybody, Balta fell over across Pitto, he was falling even before Pitto's left arm made contact, and the umpire guessed as there were players standing in his line of site.
Stop listeining to the commentary, they talking you into believing them, if you watch with the audio off you'd see it differently.
Same game style as the AFL team, but burning the footy is wasting opportunities just like the AFL team did for the first 1/2 of the season.
We should probably have been 4 or 5 goals up, but multiple times we kicked over the head of our teammate, and / or picked out an opposition defender standing alone 5m in the clear.
