Thanks Thanks:  7
Likes Likes:  17
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 27 of 27
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    18,735
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Were we really that bad?

    Quote Originally Posted by Go_Dogs View Post
    I wasn't sure where to post this but here's as good as anywhere

    Our defensive transition. Probably not something you can see on TV. Matt Suckling - our smartest, best, transition defence runner. He reads the next three kicks and sprints in transition to get there and impact a kick. I can see why he's been in coaches votes.

    It sucked we lost. We should've won. But it's not time to throw the baby out...we are a solid, competitive team. It's still a development year, but we've made progress already. Enjoy the ride WOOOFERS.
    I agree with you on Suckling, his pace and work rate is underrated.

    We should have won, what really disappoints me is that sitting in pretty in third position would have been a really great confidence boost for a developing team. On the flipside seeing how the team regroups after a short break and disappointing effort will be really interesting.
    Nobody's looking for a puppeteer in today's wintry economic climate.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    27,890
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Were we really that bad?

    Quote Originally Posted by Go_Dogs View Post
    I wasn't sure where to post this but here's as good as anywhere

    Our defensive transition. Probably not something you can see on TV. Matt Suckling - our smartest, best, transition defence runner. He reads the next three kicks and sprints in transition to get there and impact a kick. I can see why he's been in coaches votes.

    It sucked we lost. We should've won. But it's not time to throw the baby out...we are a solid, competitive team. It's still a development year, but we've made progress already. Enjoy the ride WOOOFERS.
    Not last year but the year before (against Collingwood I think) the game is winding down toward the final siren, about the 29/30 minute mark) and we were hanging onto a lead of less then a goal. My son nudges me in the ribs and says ''check Suckling'' I look over and he is standing 30 metres away from the pack on the defensive side about 50-60 metres away from the goal square (ie the pack is between him and the goal) when the ball gets squirted out by a Collingwood kicking it off the ground. The ball rolls to Suckling's feet (he didn't have to move) and he picks it up and kicks a goal. He's a very clever player. I'm going to go as far as to say that he reads the game almost as well as Doug Hawkins did. (Doug had a few other attributes that made him stand out from Suckers though)
    Have you been reading those Roddy Doyle books again, Dougal!?


    I have, yeah Ted, you big gobshite

  3. Likes soupman, Go_Dogs liked this post
  4. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    sydenham
    Posts
    12,591
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Were we really that bad?

    I’m still trying to figure out if it’s our mids coach and forwards coach having two different running patterns , are they not communicating ?
    It seems our mids are told kick long into the forward line but the forwards are told to lead, thus the defenders just sit back and take the Mark.
    It’s been happening for a few years now.
    Bring back the biff

  5. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    3,930
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Were we really that bad?

    Good thread - we werent that bad, we just lost when we had lots of chances to win

    GC were better organised and more vocal on the ground - they used it better and got easier goals

    Still lots to like about the way we have started the season and things look to be heading in the right direction - next exam is Friday night

  6. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Wherever the dogs are playing
    Posts
    60,866
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Were we really that bad?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bulldog Revolution View Post
    Good thread - we werent that bad, we just lost when we had lots of chances to win

    GC were better organised and more vocal on the ground - they used it better and got easier goals

    Still lots to like about the way we have started the season and things look to be heading in the right direction - next exam is Friday night
    I agree, we are getting lots of the ball and the stats are showing we are getting similar numbers as 2016. We are way ahead of any team with inside 50, marks inside 50, and good numbers with clearances, stoppages and centre clearances. We just need to kick those goals.

    Compared to Collingwood we are way ahead in all those stats including contested poss. and we have kicked 37 goals to date compared to 36. I think Friday is going to be a close game.
    FFC: Established 1883

    Premierships: AFL 1954, 2016 VFA - 1898,99,1900, 1908, 1913, 1919-20, 1923-24, VFL: 2014, 2016 . Champions of Victoria 1924. AFLW - 2018.

  7. Likes Eastdog liked this post
  8. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Dogsville
    Posts
    12,738
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Were we really that bad?

    Quote Originally Posted by mjp View Post
    So - we lost by a goal. And we all expected to win. But was it really that bad?

    We won the Tackle count AND the possession count. Effort was OK.
    We dominated the game from q-time onwards - won the stoppages despite being absolutely murdered in the hitouts and dominated the i50 count.

    What we didn't do well was hold a strong defensive structure when the Suns countered after the ball had been bouncing around between the mid-field and our forward half...again, our defenders are (mostly) young and inexperienced and are 100% inexperienced at playing together.

    There is a lot of talk about bad use inside 50m etc - and our determination to kick the ball to the GC spare 40m out from goal was frustrating...but that so often happens to teams when they are dominating in the midfield - the corridor is getting clogged, the forwards lead wide, the mids have been told not to go wide...it is a bit of a perfect storm.

    Were we dumb with the footy? Yep. Were we a bit disorganised and prone to allowing sling-shot goals? Yep. Was there really a lack of effort? I honestly don't think so. You can point to the first 10-minutes and say there was no effort then, but in all seriousness we simply could not get the ball! So it is a bit hard to assess what we were doing 'cos we simply couldn't get the footy...that happens at times in a game and it just happened to us early...I would submit that we went in thinking we would get a LOT better contest vs Witts than we actually did and set up too aggressively at the clearances, but...

    Still a good chance this Friday.
    It depends on your expectations. If you had us finishing outside the 8 on the recent where will we finish poll then no, we weren't that bad, or at least the result was disappointing but not overly unexpected. If you had us having a red hot go at finals this year because you scanned our list and saw over a dozen Premiership players still playing and a wealth of new, young talent then yes, it probably was pretty bad.

    The stats are one thing but the overall impression is another. When you win well against two supposed top 8 sides in the first two rounds and you just start to believe that your prediction in that poll may be accurate and then you lose to the Suns at home who are basically fielding a VFL level side with 5 pretty good players it feels really, really bad.

    Hoping we bounce back.
    But then again, I'm an Internet poster and Bevo is a premiership coach so draw your own conclusions.

  9. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    4,569
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Were we really that bad?

    Quote Originally Posted by bornadog View Post
    I agree, we are getting lots of the ball and the stats are showing we are getting similar numbers as 2016. We are way ahead of any team with inside 50, marks inside 50, and good numbers with clearances, stoppages and centre clearances. We just need to kick those goals.

    Compared to Collingwood we are way ahead in all those stats including contested poss. and we have kicked 37 goals to date compared to 36. I think Friday is going to be a close game.
    That may be, but they've faced significantly better opponents in Geelong, Richmond and the premiers.

    This is comfortably our toughest test to date, and their easiest ... potentially.

    I hope we're 'on' and our systems hold up.
    BORDERLINE FLYING

  10. Likes Mofra liked this post
  11. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    West of somewhere.
    Posts
    6,147
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Were we really that bad?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocket Science View Post
    That may be, but they've faced significantly better opponents in Geelong, Richmond and the premiers.

    This is comfortably our toughest test to date, and their easiest ... potentially.

    I hope we're 'on' and our systems hold up.
    Well, if Richmond lose this week, they are going to be 1-3...so maybe beating them wasn’t such a great effort? Things change from year to year...
    What should I tell her? She's going to ask.

  12. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Mulligan's Boogie-board
    Posts
    13,681
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Were we really that bad?

    Quote Originally Posted by mjp View Post
    Well, if Richmond lose this week, they are going to be 1-3...so maybe beating them wasn’t such a great effort? Things change from year to year...
    In a few weeks GCS may well be seen as a difficult assignment. They are playing good football right now.
    Western Bulldogs: 2016 Premiers

  13. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    East of the West
    Posts
    9,036
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Were we really that bad?

    I think the issue isn't were we bad, because for a lot of it we weren't.

    The problem is we continue to be bad in the same areas and they really hurt us.
    "It's over. It's all over."

  14. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    4,569
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Were we really that bad?

    Quote Originally Posted by mjp View Post
    Well, if Richmond lose this week, they are going to be 1-3...so maybe beating them wasn’t such a great effort? Things change from year to year...
    Sure they do. But put another way only one of our opponents thus far might play finals in 2019; the Hawks, maybe.

    Richmond have some challenges at the moment, finally, but you'd safely suggest the Pies' three opponents to date will all be there at the pointy end.

    Anyway, popping away the crystal ball tonight's a pretty timely test for us. We'll learn a bit.
    BORDERLINE FLYING

  15. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    West of somewhere.
    Posts
    6,147
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Were we really that bad?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rocket Science View Post
    Sure they do. But put another way only one of our opponents thus far might play finals in 2019; the Hawks, maybe.

    Richmond have some challenges at the moment, finally, but you'd safely suggest the Pies' three opponents to date will all be there at the pointy end.
    Agree - but at some point in the season you simply ARE what your record says you are. For example, for all the good stuff being written and said about West Coast:

    1/. They lost to Brisbane after leading by 30 points.
    2/. They beat an undermanned GWS team in Perth after conceding 20x inside 50's in the first quarter...the Giants dominated but couldn't take advantage and it would have been game over if they had.
    3/. They beat Collingwood at the MCG. Collingwood have only won one game - and that was against Richmond who have also only won one game...and that was against Carlton who haven't won a game.

    A month ago I thought Richmond, West Coast, Adelaide and Collingwood would be top 4. Right now I am not convinced about any of them though West Coast's home ground advantage sure gives them a leg up. I thought GC would be hopeless and they clearly aren't...they will be 3-1 if they beat the winless Blues this week...

    Projecting records and records based on opponents and all of that stuff is great - but as I said, ultimately you are what your record says. Lose tonight (which they will) and the 'Pies are 1-3 and in a LOT of trouble. And how many finals teams would they have played? Based on pre-season projections, the thought was Geelong would fall back...they seem pretty good. Richmond are in dead set trouble. West Coast are 'just going'. Pre-season, you wouldn't have thought that a lot of teams in the current top 8 would be playing finals footy...generally the ladder doesn't change much after 8 games...Melbourne are already half-way to that point and have just one win...against the equally hapless Swans...

    Wins are wins and losses are losses and ultimately trying to assess form based on 'strength of schedule' this early in the year - when we have no idea who is actually 'STRONG', is futile.
    What should I tell her? She's going to ask.

  16. Likes Bulldog Joe, Mofra, bornadog, Topdog, jeemak liked this post

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •