Always Right Match Committee R6, Vs Fremantle

[Rocket Science]

What was Macrae doing that seemed so demonstrative? It seems highly out of character.

I for one can't possibly fathom that he might be just a little bit frustrated.

Speaking of fish heads, if we're advancing revolutionary thinking maybe Bevo should have a spell for a week.

[bulldogtragic]

What was Macrae doing that seemed so demonstrative? It seems highly out of character.

I for one can't possibly fathom that he might be just a little bit frustrated.

Speaking of fish heads, if we're advancing revolutionary thinking maybe Bevo should have a spell for a week.

Enough of that already. Every single player without exception has to be somehow flexible, except Bevo.

[bornadog]

Some of these threads are getting ridiculous.

[The Adelaide Connection]

I came over for the final round v Richmond last year and I remember leaving with overflowing buckets of optimism that if we could put out a similar team in 2019 that we would do well.

The named team was:
Wood Naughton Smith
JJ Morris Crozier
Hunter Macrae Richards
Gowers Schache Lipinski
Roughead Bontempelli Greene
Dunkley Wallis Trengove
I-Daniel Williams McLean Lynch

From that team we have Greene and Morris unavailable (injured), Roughead off the list, and Lipinski and R. Smith not currently getting a run.

Could the changes be:
English as the obvious Roughead replacement
Lipinski to resume in his R23 position
Cordy for Morris
Lloyd/Lynch for Greene
Williams for R. Smith with B. Smith taking the vacated spot on the bench

So the final team would be:
Wood Naughton Williams
JJ Cordy Crozier
Hunter Macrae Richards
Gowers Schache Lipinski
English Bontempelli Lloyd/Lynch
Dunkley Wallis Trengove
I: Daniel B. Smith McLean Lloyd/Lynch

To me this team fills me with hope. It feels more balanced adding speed, height (Naughton to the back line, resting ruck, and overall with some midsizers coming in) and addresses the ruck concerns in both the short term (with a backup on the field and no more Dunkley watching the opposition) and long term (English burnout worries).

Naughton can always be swung forward within games (with maybe Trengove heading back or the midget crew we had last week holding up every now and then). Carlton getting to 100 for the first time in three years (with Naughton having no impact forward) needs to force our hand on this.

[mjp]

I hope playing the boys in their natural position is not too revolutionary.

Their 'natural' positions will be like this:

Backs: Naughton
Mids: Wood, jj, Macrae, Dunkley, Daniel, Hunter, Mclean, Gowers, Lloyd, Bont, Libba, Dickson, Williams, Hayes, Richards, Wallis, Smith
Rucks: English
Forwards: Schache

AFL footy is a compromise 'cos in a 'best of the best' environment everyone has to find a way to make a position their own - even if they grew up playing as a mid, they might just have to become a half-back to make it.

Saying the problem isn't the players it is the structure is just BS. We got smashed in the contest after being the leading clearance team going into the Carlton game...if that was OK for 4-weeks - including a game vs the Collingwood hype-machine midfield - then why was it not OK vs the Blues? 'Cos our effort SUCKED and our attitude SUCKED and we are all giving them a cop out by saying "Excuse me, but little Johnny plays best when he is on the left half forward flank and gets 2 runs in the centre each quarter and if one of the other players in there does all the defensive work to allow him to run forward and use his skills...'

It isn't u12's. Play where you are put and FIGHT THROUGH IT. Get a strong starting point vs your opponent, be first to the ball and make an impact on the game. Whether you are playing on ball or back pocket doesn't actually matter at all. And if you think it does then I don't think you understand what it takes to be a successful player.

Could the coaches have done a better job? Well, I don't know what they were trying to do 'cos I wasn't in the meetings. But I am pretty sure they had a plan - and we will never know if it would have worked or not because the players effort SUCKED!

[Rocket Science]

Some of these threads are getting ridiculous.

I agree. Almost as ridiculous as getting flogged by Carlton.

More seriously, Bevo's suggested the reasoning behind the strange midfield rotations was that our "mids were cooked" in the second half the week prior.

I've no truck with trying to find support for our prime movers in there, but why execute it with a poor result slipping away? Why are our mids "cooked" in round four? Is our game plan cooking them rapidly? Is it an interchange or club conditioning issue? Did he just not respect Carlton enough to think it wouldn't cost us?

Losing to a handy Freo team away might seem more forgivable than losing to Carlton, but if and when we do the questions for the coaching staff are only going to amplify. Doubly so if we drop the following game against Richmond.

It's going to be a fascinating couple of weeks.

[bornadog]

Their 'natural' positions will be like this:

Backs: Naughton
Mids: Wood, jj, Macrae, Dunkley, Daniel, Hunter, Mclean, Gowers, Lloyd, Bont, Libba, Dickson, Williams, Hayes, Richards, Wallis, Smith
Rucks: English
Forwards: Schache

AFL footy is a compromise 'cos in a 'best of the best' environment everyone has to find a way to make a position their own - even if they grew up playing as a mid, they might just have to become a half-back to make it.

Saying the problem isn't the players it is the structure is just BS. We got smashed in the contest after being the leading clearance team going into the Carlton game...if that was OK for 4-weeks - including a game vs the Collingwood hype-machine midfield - then why was it not OK vs the Blues? 'Cos our effort SUCKED and our attitude SUCKED and we are all giving them a cop out by saying "Excuse me, but little Johnny plays best when he is on the left half forward flank and gets 2 runs in the centre each quarter and if one of the other players in there does all the defensive work to allow him to run forward and use his skills...'

It isn't u12's. Play where you are put and FIGHT THROUGH IT. Get a strong starting point vs your opponent, be first to the ball and make an impact on the game. Whether you are playing on ball or back pocket doesn't actually matter at all. And if you think it does then I don't think you understand what it takes to be a successful player.

Could the coaches have done a better job? Well, I don't know what they were trying to do 'cos I wasn't in the meetings. But I am pretty sure they had a plan - and we will never know if it would have worked or not because the players effort SUCKED!

Excellent post (as usual MJP)

I saw it the same as you, and said, the players need to take responsibility.

Carlton just worked harder than us and wanted a win.

We may carry on that we were short in the backline (which I think we were), but Carlton have been last in the AFL for taking marks inside 50, and we allowed their mids to feed them.

[Mofra]

We may carry on that we were short in the backline (which I think we were), but Carlton have been last in the AFL for taking marks inside 50, and we allowed their mids to feed them.

We were short in the backline for our wins too - it's no excuse. Carlton aren't a crap F50 team though - Harry McKay is in the top handful of players in the competition for contested marks.

Our mids were beaten and we couldn't handle it as it happens so rarely.

[S Coast Simon]

To me I worry a bit when they don’t pull moves that even I can see. What I don’t understand is why Naughton wasn’t thrown down back for a stint. There were two reasons for it to happen. 1 we were getting killed by a big fella in the air. 2 Naughton was not getting a touch so needed to get near the ball. This is basic shit. How they thought it a good idea to have English ruck solo is absolutely ridiculous. Trengove needs to ruck the first ten minutes then English gets a go when the other guy is tiring in the middle of the quarter. All basic stuff. The Coaches are getting to tricky for their own good

[Grantysghost]

Their 'natural' positions will be like this:

Backs: Naughton
Mids: Wood, jj, Macrae, Dunkley, Daniel, Hunter, Mclean, Gowers, Lloyd, Bont, Libba, Dickson, Williams, Hayes, Richards, Wallis, Smith
Rucks: English
Forwards: Schache

AFL footy is a compromise 'cos in a 'best of the best' environment everyone has to find a way to make a position their own - even if they grew up playing as a mid, they might just have to become a half-back to make it.

Saying the problem isn't the players it is the structure is just BS. We got smashed in the contest after being the leading clearance team going into the Carlton game...if that was OK for 4-weeks - including a game vs the Collingwood hype-machine midfield - then why was it not OK vs the Blues? 'Cos our effort SUCKED and our attitude SUCKED and we are all giving them a cop out by saying "Excuse me, but little Johnny plays best when he is on the left half forward flank and gets 2 runs in the centre each quarter and if one of the other players in there does all the defensive work to allow him to run forward and use his skills...'

It isn't u12's. Play where you are put and FIGHT THROUGH IT. Get a strong starting point vs your opponent, be first to the ball and make an impact on the game. Whether you are playing on ball or back pocket doesn't actually matter at all. And if you think it does then I don't think you understand what it takes to be a successful player.

Could the coaches have done a better job? Well, I don't know what they were trying to do 'cos I wasn't in the meetings. But I am pretty sure they had a plan - and we will never know if it would have worked or not because the players effort SUCKED!

Is this Rocket ? (Just kidding just kidding). Get your point I think it would be a bit of both personally. Was Bevo just giving them an easy out in the presser saying they were cooked previous game?

[bornadog]

Is this Rocket ? (Just kidding just kidding). Get your point I think it would be a bit of both personally. Was Bevo just giving them an easy out in the presser saying they were cooked previous game?

I think it was an easy out, had to say something. (miserable excuse though )

[Danjul]

Their 'natural' positions will be like this:

Backs: Naughton
Mids: Wood, jj, Macrae, Dunkley, Daniel, Hunter, Mclean, Gowers, Lloyd, Bont, Libba, Dickson, Williams, Hayes, Richards, Wallis, Smith
Rucks: English
Forwards: Schache

AFL footy is a compromise 'cos in a 'best of the best' environment everyone has to find a way to make a position their own - even if they grew up playing as a mid, they might just have to become a half-back to make it.

Saying the problem isn't the players it is the structure is just BS. We got smashed in the contest after being the leading clearance team going into the Carlton game...if that was OK for 4-weeks - including a game vs the Collingwood hype-machine midfield - then why was it not OK vs the Blues? 'Cos our effort SUCKED and our attitude SUCKED and we are all giving them a cop out by saying "Excuse me, but little Johnny plays best when he is on the left half forward flank and gets 2 runs in the centre each quarter and if one of the other players in there does all the defensive work to allow him to run forward and use his skills...'

It isn't u12's. Play where you are put and FIGHT THROUGH IT. Get a strong starting point vs your opponent, be first to the ball and make an impact on the game. Whether you are playing on ball or back pocket doesn't actually matter at all. And if you think it does then I don't think you understand what it takes to be a successful player.

Could the coaches have done a better job? Well, I don't know what they were trying to do 'cos I wasn't in the meetings. But I am pretty sure they had a plan - and we will never know if it would have worked or not because the players effort SUCKED!

sorry, cannot agree.

how many times have we seen Daniel outmarked by someone 30+ cm taller? Too many. It is not a freak occurrence, it’s happening frequently. The first time was funny because nobody had ever seen anything like this before. It is now a sign of poor team management.

I have seen the same happen to Wood and Cordy. Neither are key position players but they get told to beat giants and lose all attacking momentum.

we went into Sunday’s game with 1 key position player (Naughton) and 1 novice ruckman. When English had a spell we didn’t even compete. Never seen that before in 50 years. I’m all for innovation but that is unforgivable.

Sunday’s team didn’t have a hope of winning. All Liam Jones had to do was punch the ball and we lost all scoring capacity. Yet Cordy couldn’t reach the ball at the other end.

In the professional era guts are not enough to make up for mismanagement.

[Bulldog4life]

It is very simple. We are trying to win by fielding a team of mid fielders plus English, Naughton and Cordy. Yes of course we need effort without that we are shot. But we need a balanced team height wise. That's what wins finals. Otherwise results like last week will be the norm.

[Mantis]

That’s fair enough. My point is that he was terrible last week and his body language was worse...and whilst we continue to mess around at selection time with the fringes of the team nothing will change.

He is my dream team captain and I don’t think there is any chance he will be left out...but a fish rots from the head and his performance last week was (along with Bont, Hunter and Libaj the reason we lost the game. So if you want changes, start with one of them.

How was Libba at fault? His midfield time was obviously being managed (coming off a 9 day break what's more) so not sure what more he could've done.

Understand the mids got owned (for probably the first time this year), but were our defenders & forwards not at fault too?

[mjp]

how many times have we seen Daniel outmarked by someone 30+ cm taller? Too many. It is not a freak occurrence, it’s happening frequently. The first time was funny because nobody had ever seen anything like this before. It is now a sign of poor team management.

1. I don't think it's funny when Daniel is 1-v-1 for a high ball inside D50. I don't think it is funny at all (and I never did).
2. He isn't positioned as such - he 100% is not. Any simple observation would tell you that the reason he finds himself 1-v-1 against a tall is because he is the one who gets on his bike and works back to compete...nothing is stopping Cordy, Wood, Crozier or any number of others doing it...they just don't.
3. I don't think the coaches are telling Caleb to be the one to 'play deep'. But at the same time, if he is the nearest one, then he just has to go - if that is what happens, that is what happens...we play a zoning defense (again, another complete off subject issue) and whilst we are doing that we risk any player in the back 6 being caught out this way.

I have seen the same happen to Wood and Cordy. Neither are key position players but they get told to beat giants and lose all attacking momentum.

If Cordy isn't a KPP what the hell is he?
Wood needs to be able to compete against 195cm size players overhead. And between the TWO of them, they 100% should be able to bring the ball to ground. That's why it is a team game - not a procession of 1v1 contests...helping one another out is not only allowed, some would say it should be actively encouraged.

When a team is going poorly, they don't help one another in the back 6 - they all play on their men. Mids try and get easy kicks/gather stats. And forwards play behind looking for easy touches/goals...all of those things happen so the players can point at the stats sheet and say "Well, it wasn't my fault. I still had 30/my man didn't hurt us/I still kicked 2". Sound familiar. It is BS is what it is and that is what we dished up.

Sunday’s team didn’t have a hope of winning. All Liam Jones had to do was punch the ball and we lost all scoring capacity. Yet Cordy couldn’t reach the ball at the other end.

If Liam Jones punches the ball, our players are actually allowed to pick it up off the deck and have a shot on goal...this is how you win the i50's (again) but lose on the scoreboard. All a tall forward really needs to do is bring the ball to the deck...

As for 'Cordy couldn't reach it'...here's a radical suggestion you might have heard in the u7's. Play in front.

Are there issues with selection and structure? Sure, fine. But none of that excuses the effort on the weekend and getting smashed in the clearances by Carlton.

I don't understand what everyone wants. We are unhappy that Boyd wasn't left up forward despite his struggles and played some time in the ruck. But now when the coach says Naughton is going to play as a forward, we all want him moved back? You can't have it both ways. You either want the coaches to develop players in set positions in which case Naughton should stay forward and we should persist with English in the ruck or you want versatility in which case we should swing Naughton back at the first sign of 'trouble' and send English back to the magoos.

I can just imagine the outcry if we were bouncing Boyd between forward and back....but you want Naughton to do that?

None of this means I necessarily agree with the 'call' to make Naughton a forward...but that is the call. So now we have made it, we need him to play forward and tell him to compete hard even when it is not his day. And maybe he will actually learn by DOING that even when it is not his day, if he persists and attacks the footy relentlessly it might actually be his moment? And one moment can turn a match (we even have a thread about that).

As for Schache, well, I think he should have played against Carlton and the help he provided English with + different 'match-up' in the forward 50 was important in the first few games...but you couldn't pick him after the Collingwood game when he simply didn't bring effort. You can't have that in the side - it cannot be accepted/rewarded and EXCLUSION is the only thing that means anything to players. (If you don't believe me on this, you don't know footballers). So whilst we 'needed' him from a team perspective, he HAD to be dropped. You can't tolerate that sort of stuff.