Always Right Match Committee Thread Round 13, Vs Carlton

[chef]

Is it a loss of confidence?

Or loss of giving a shit?

Seems like hes going through the motions.

[mjp]

It's all well and good to demote a Schache or Richards as second year players with us, but right now we need to reward effort over reputation/ability.
Bailey Dale with zero tackles in two games goes as well for mine until he can demonstrate intensity.

Hey - a post that makes sense. If the players aren't following the plan - and how can they be? - then the ones who aren't following it need to be left out. And that means one of our 'key players'/'most talented players' needs to go.

There is no point in making changes around the periphery of the side. Schache doesn't decide games at this point in his career. He doesn't lead. Bont, Macrae, Wood, Hunter, Libber, Suckling, JJ...these are (like it or lump it) our leaders. Are they playing according to our 'trademark' or not. If not, relegate them.

What's the worse thing that can happen? We lose? In case no-one has noticed, we are already doing that.

[Ozza]

I would have dropped Macrae after the last game against Carlton and said so on here (not that I got a lot of support for it at the time). Terrible body language and it has not gotten any better...yesterday it may have been the worst I have ever seen it.

Maybe he is injured - if so, I wish the club would just tell us.

As an aside, has Bontempelli played a worse game than he did yesterday? What is actually WRONG with these guys? Why does it seem as if they simply don't care? (I know that they do - and are suffering a lot more than we are - but it just LOOKS TERRIBLE). Gowers does stupid things and is frustrating, but at least (in his own misdirected ways) he seems as if he gives a @#$%.

Bontempelli had a shocker yesterday. He was awful at the centre bounces and had the fumbles all day.
Given he's been as good as nearly anyone in the league this year - I'm prepared to forgive!

[mjp]

Bontempelli had a shocker yesterday. He was awful at the centre bounces and had the fumbles all day.
Given he's been as good as nearly anyone in the league this year - I'm prepared to forgive!

Yeah - he's been epic this season, no argument from me. Not everyone has though...

[Danjul]

I don't want to go back and check the numbers for Geelong, but vs West Coast we had more possessions...but LESS KICKS.

Without wanting to dig out my posts of two weeks ago where I detailed all of this let me cut to the chase:

1/. Our ball movement is a MASSIVE problem - we over handball and generally f about with it. And we play-on too much particularly when we have no 'forwards' (aka team-mates) in position ahead of us to receive the ball.

2/. Whilst our ball movement cannot be isolated from our defensive mechanisms (obviously), for you to continue to insist that if we just use the ball a bit better everything will be OK is simply crazy. We are not set behind the ball EVER.

I have never suggested that. I have said repeatedly that they are using a high risk game plan which requires better skills than they have.

So I agree 100 % with everything you have said except for using the ball better won’t make a significant difference.

Very few in the team can reliably pass 40 metres by foot. Often they miss by 10 or 15, with the ball going out or making it easy for the opposition to gather when our game plan has put half of the team out of position. The kicking skills are the worst I have seen in a long time and continually put others under pressure. And should be fixed as quickly as possible.

How often do they kick to a contest where we get outmarked? Very often. Because the team lacks height they form packs where everyone tries to spoil, a gift for the opponents. Then Two or three kicks from the opponents and they have either a goal or a shot at goal. See it week after week.

The ball mistakes are killing us. So is bad strategy.

where do our defenders set up? They stay back because most are not strong enough to play body on body. They try to jump and spoil. That’s why we see so many chest marks from spearing entries. And I suspect some play under extra pressure knowing they will be dropped quickly.

And where do you find them? Frequently not near their opponent because they have to flood forward with the handball game. Turnovers happen too often.

Look at how often our defenders are in the forward half of the ground. Dangerous when the opposition is faster.

When the team is defending they zone off from their opponents to guard space, so opposition kick ins ,for example, generate twice as many metres gained as ours.

It is not the player’s fault if they are obviously following orders.

[GVGjr]

In the last three weeks the opposition teams have kicked 60 goals 20 against the Dogs. That’s 380 points.
We have had 3 disastrous losses.

In the last three weeks the opposition teams have had a total of 10 more scoring shots than the Dogs.

Focusing on the second statement holds the key to better success. Why do 10 kicks make so much difference?

Because The selectors have been doing the same thing for the last 40 games and it has not worked. I am sure they will keep doing it.

What should they be doing? Getting a new mindset would be a good start. Focus on what is actually generating the results for a change instead of blaming players. Some of the suggestions made here seem very positive to me.

And our response has been nowhere near as accurate

[mjp]

I have never suggested that. I have said repeatedly that they are using a high risk game plan which requires better skills than they have.

Let's continue to agree to disagree. In post #20 of this very thread you said:
"What we do with the ball is our biggest problem. fix that and the defenders will have a chance."

I do like how you are saying we need to kick more. We 100% do.
I do like how you are identifying that our defenders are pushing up to become involved in (unnecessary) handball chains.
I agree both of those things are major problems. I don't think we are WORSE kicks than other sides...but because we handball ourselves into trouble so many times - and play-on when we don't need to - we 'pluck' ball movement decisions from a place where the sun doesn't shine and bad things are the result.

I don't necessarily agree it isn't the players fault - I am not sure they are following orders ('cos I don't know what the orders are)...BUT when defenders are trailing up and allowing lead-up space (aka 'caravanning') on their opponents, I am pretty sure that they aren't being told to do that. We are (under Bevo) a zone defending, play in front sort of defensive group. I will continue to insist that we started changing this last year to a behind the ball structure consisting of 1v1 match-ups keyed on Naughton as the defensive interceptor...but that change was thrown out (along with everything else - Williams in the mids, Trengove in the ruck etc etc) in Rd#1 this season after the practice match disasters and I remain convinced that has contributed to the chaos/problems behind the ball. Because whilst ball-movement changes can be made 'in season', defensive ones are HARD because they are not instinctive to most players. About the only thing that hasn't changed is the use of Daniel as a d50 distributor...but I think he would be a LOT more effective if he had Naughton floating around saving his bacon...but we'll never know now, will we??

[GVGjr]

Will we do the unthinkable and play someone on Cripps to limit his influence?
If so, who will we go with?

[Nuggety Back Pocket]

Will we do the unthinkable and play someone on Cripps to limit his influence?
If so, who will we go with?

Makes sense as Cripps is their playmaker. Dunkley is our in form midfielder and appeals as the obvious one with good aerial skills to match Cripps in the air. The other challenge facing the Club is our ability to match the Blues height on their forward line. We were far too short previously.

[Rocket Science]

Intrigued to note Fagan's response when asked yesterday about Cripps' influence.

He basically said they had a crack at tagging him but it wasn't working so they pretty much gave up on the idea.

Gobsmacking honesty.

If we plonk Dunks onto him I trust the other mids will lift their output to compensate.

[bornadog]

Will we do the unthinkable and play someone on Cripps to limit his influence?
If so, who will we go with?

I think we lost the game in our last encounter, purely due to Cripps. He alone killed our midfield.

[GVGjr]

I think we lost the game in our last encounter, purely due to Cripps. He alone killed our midfield.

So it's a no?

I think Dunkley needs to tag him for at least 50% of the game

[bornadog]

So it's a no?

I think Dunkley needs to tag him for at least 50% of the game

I think we should try and tag him. I am thinking of Mclean.

[Twodogs]

Intrigued to note Fagan's response when asked yesterday about Cripps' influence.

He basically said they had a crack at tagging him but it wasn't working so they pretty much gave up on the idea.

Gobsmacking honesty.

If we plonk Dunks onto him I trust the other mids will lift their output to compensate.

When I first read that I thought you had said 'limit' and that made more sense in the context of this season. "great news, Dunks is all over Cripps like a cheap suit and giving him a real bath. That means the rest of us don't have to bother so much."

But then I saw that you said 'lift' and now I'm starting to worry about you...

[Happy Days]

I don't like taggers but Cripps might necessarily be an exception.

I really hope we're willing to try Trengove in the ruck if Kreuzer starts to get on top. He was phenomenal last time against us and leaving the ruck unchecked really hurts later in the game if he gets the opportunity to get his cadence down. I want Tim forward but I understand persevering with him in the middle, but at the same time hope we adjust if necessary.