Thanks Thanks:  3
Likes Likes:  33
Page 1 of 7 1234567 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 93
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    West of somewhere.
    Posts
    6,148
    Post Thanks / Like

    We beat the Giants - Has anything "REALLY" changed?

    Strong performance Friday night featuring some great focus/commitment to the ball. I was one of many who really appreciated the efforts (I'm sure) put forth by the players.

    Glass half full:
    - Liber is the difference maker.
    - Great show of resilience by Bont.
    - Naught's terrific in consistently attacking the ball.
    - JJ showed a willingness to compete we haven't seen much of in the past couple of seasons.
    - Alex Keath looked like he was both willing AND able to play as a one-vs-one defender.
    - MC played players in more familiar positions and all is OK with the world.

    Glass half empty:
    - We barely troubled the scorers vs a Giants team missing Whitfield, Greene and Kelly.
    - English was better but really played as a 7th defender not a ruckman - you might be able to do that against Jacobs but other teams have actual footballers playing in the ruck.
    - Suckling continues to look terrible.
    - Bruce continues to look terrible. As for the Brereton opinion that the presence of Bruce helps Naughton walk taller - please. The kid grew up in Rockingham and was raised to fight the fight.
    - Dale and Lloyd completely ineffective - I guess you could argue Dale was better than Lloyd (at least) but...wow.
    - Can ANYONE play as an outside mid and get the ball except for Hunter in our entire squad? Vandermeer is (admittedly) a baby (a baby with a nice sidestep to be fair) but he is miles off being a 25 possession per game player.
    - What is going on with Toby? Is he the player he flashed in the first quarter or whoever than bloke was who played out the game with barely a touch?
    - We needed the Giants and the history and the EJ milestone etc to get 'UP' for a contest...what happens vs the Swans and Roos over the next two weeks when there is no emotion in the build up.

    So - where are you. Half full or half empty. Are we moving ahead or was it just an unconvincing flash in the pan from a consistent team.
    What should I tell her? She's going to ask.

  2. Likes GVGjr, Dry Rot, Max469, choconmientay, DOG GOD liked this post
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Location
    Melbourne, Victoria
    Posts
    1,210
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: We beat the Giants - Has anything "REALLY" changed?

    Our small forwards all suck, apart from Dickson who lets face it, this is his final year with us. Llyod and Dale seem to apply little to zero pressure, their tackling is beyond terrible, and frankly both are shit at hitting the big sticks. I’d be looking at immediate replacements for both or dropping them down to the 2s for a very long period until they learn that they must apply pressure, and be able to finish.

    English still needs backup. Id be pulling Suckling out for Trengove for the foreseeable future.

    Our wing players have always been a problem with Hunter being our best, I know Jong and Hayse were being trained as wing players as well but who knows whats happened there.

    Bruces kick from 50 the other night looked lazy and uninspired. I’m not sure whats going on with him.

    I’m a glass half full kind of guy but we have heaps of improvements we could make with just shuffling around more pieces, more players coming in, more being dropped to the 2s, and this upcoming draft / trade period we need to focus on picking up another X factor small forward type. Fingers crossed Weightmen works out, but we need another. We’re not far off being top 8 good but until Bevo and Match Committee keeps proving they can put up a good team, I’m remaining skeptical.
    "Its always good to win the Ashes test match'' - Libba, AFL Grand Final, 2016

  4. Likes DOG GOD liked this post
  5. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Doglands
    Posts
    39,498
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: We beat the Giants - Has anything "REALLY" changed?

    I like to think I'm still in the half full group but there is still plenty to do with players that aren't performing and our match committee selections are still a bit of a puzzle

    I get that we have to play Bruce but he's not covering the ground that well, his kicking depth is questionable and we haven't seen his marking strength yet. Just 4 marks in his 3 games so far. If we are playing those who are performing well on track we need to give him a reminder that he needs to improve quickly because he isn't performing well on the ground.

    Suckling won me over in the last 2 years but his form so far this year isn't good and there is something wrong with his kicking and his agility

    Dale and Lloyd must be on notice.

    There is some work to do but we can do better if we get the selections right
    Western Bulldogs Football Club "Where it's cool to drool"

  6. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    18,739
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: We beat the Giants - Has anything "REALLY" changed?

    I think we're following the same trend most other teams are following. Players have returned in extremely patchy form, at different levels of fitness and are putting inconsistent effort and performances together.

    Your half full and half empty categories are fair enough this week, but who knows what they will be next week? There's so much hand wringing going on two games into a restart of an already fragmented season. What I liked about Friday was players brought effort and intensity, and seemed to defend the ground well. All of our problems aside, all of the inconsistencies aside if we do that each week I'll be reasonably content as I think the rest will work itself out as the group gets continuity and the season progresses.

    All we can do for now is hang on for dear life and just try and keep ahead of the ledger by a game or two until round ten.
    Nobody's looking for a puppeteer in today's wintry economic climate.

  7. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    10,040
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: We beat the Giants - Has anything "REALLY" changed?

    We are a work in progress with some critical areas that still need to be addressed and improved. However the structural changes, particularly defensively, were greatly appreciated after the farcical defensive structure and effort of the previous week.

    Agree 100% that we don't have the forward mix right. However, I'd rather we button up our defensive line first (which we simply had to after last week) before getting to work on the front half.
    "Look at me mate. Look at me. I'm flyin'"

  8. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    4,822
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: We beat the Giants - Has anything "REALLY" changed?

    Hmm I'm generally glass half full and certainly enjoyed Friday, but am sceptical on that being our new standard at all.

    This feeds into your final statement.
    Quote Originally Posted by mjp View Post
    - We needed the Giants and the history and the EJ milestone etc to get 'UP' for a contest...what happens vs the Swans and Roos over the next two weeks when there is no emotion in the build up.
    Exactly. The worry was if we couldn't get up for this game then we had no hope. Luckily we did get them but after talking the talk and then getting bullied in the previous two games against non-Giant opponents I am sceptical as to whether this is a one off, although at least the monkey is off the back somewhat now.

    Quote Originally Posted by mjp View Post
    - Liber is the difference maker.
    Yes against a side that didn't move the ball quickly, didn't really embrace pace and was easily wound up by him. Not sure he can do that against most defences and can certainly see a lot of sides try to exploit him, but we certainly walked taller with him in the side and he was good when he was involved.

    Quote Originally Posted by mjp View Post
    - Great show of resilience by Bont.
    - Naught's terrific in consistently attacking the ball.
    - JJ showed a willingness to compete we haven't seen much of in the past couple of seasons.
    - Alex Keath looked like he was both willing AND able to play as a one-vs-one defender.
    All these a valid and great, although I think the Bont and Keath ones both rely on our team committing to applying pressure and defending well like they did on Friday and most importantly helping eachother out. We've had too many games where players have been individually bullied without teammates helping them out to take the match where we clearly made that a key focus as the standard.

    Quote Originally Posted by mjp View Post
    - MC played players in more familiar positions and all is OK with the world.

    Glass half empty:
    - We barely troubled the scorers vs a Giants team missing Whitfield, Greene and Kelly.
    - Bruce continues to look terrible. As for the Brereton opinion that the presence of Bruce helps Naughton walk taller - please. The kid grew up in Rockingham and was raised to fight the fight.
    - Dale and Lloyd completely ineffective - I guess you could argue Dale was better than Lloyd (at least) but...wow.
    I think all these are linked. MC continue to pick too many pure forwards with not much other than a decent mark and kick. Bruce has been woeful in every aspect apart from being a wrecking ball in melees. Our forward setup is clearly not working. bevo made the comment that they are happy with the pieces but they haven't come together yet, i think the MC should be going in a different direction with the pieces.

    Quote Originally Posted by mjp View Post

    - Can ANYONE play as an outside mid and get the ball except for Hunter in our entire squad? Vandermeer is (admittedly) a baby (a baby with a nice sidestep to be fair) but he is miles off being a 25 possession per game player.
    Maybe two other candidates. Hayes is hard running enough and is probably our best approximation of Hunter in the squad. I don't think he is a very good player but I think he is serviceable and could be a stop gap. The alternative is Lipinski, who has demonstrated he is a pretty good link up option. He maybe hasn't played as a pure wing yet (more of a high half forward) but I think he is our best prospect, but seeing as he got dropped after what i thought was a solid game then I have no idea what the MC's thoughts are on him except he isn't doing what they want.
    Quote Originally Posted by mjp View Post
    - English was better but really played as a 7th defender not a ruckman - you might be able to do that against Jacobs but other teams have actual footballers playing in the ruck.
    I guess the fact that we are all pumped that he had a good game in the ruck when he really only got 12 hitouts is an interesting insight into how low the bar is for him in that area. He was good/excellent around the ground but we knew that already and he has shown that before. Tbf this was the first time I've seen him get genuine hitouts to advantage, so I guess that's encouraging, but he needs to show an ability to atleast negate the opposing ruckman in the ruck before he has taken the next step, and Jacobs is probably the easiest challenger in the comp for this.
    Quote Originally Posted by mjp View Post

    So - where are you. Half full or half empty. Are we moving ahead or was it just an unconvincing flash in the pan from a consistent team.
    I think we showed that we are good enough to bring the heat. If we kicked straight we probably kick a decent score as well but we all know that's completely irrelevant to the vision Beveridge has for us so won't be addressed. If we bring our team defence like we did Friday we probably are good enough to beat teams, but without that I don't think we can score enough with our current setup.

    It was really nice to enjoy watching us again but I need us to bring the heat in a game not so perfectly setup to fire us up before I think we have taken that step forward.
    I should leave it alone but you're not right

  9. Thanks Happy Days thanked for this post
    Likes jeemak liked this post
  10. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    West of somewhere.
    Posts
    6,148
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: We beat the Giants - Has anything "REALLY" changed?

    Quote Originally Posted by soupaman View Post


    (outside mids)
    Maybe two other candidates. Hayes...Lipinski...
    What about Smith (r version) who made a good fist of it pre season?
    Quote Originally Posted by soupaman View Post

    (English) I guess the fact that we are all pumped that he had a good game in the ruck...
    See - I don’t think he really played as a ruckman. He played spare behind the ball but ‘take the hitouts’...I’m not even sure that is a position but it sure help block things up defensively.
    What should I tell her? She's going to ask.

  11. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    4,822
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: We beat the Giants - Has anything "REALLY" changed?

    Quote Originally Posted by mjp View Post
    What about Smith (r version) who made a good fist of it pre season?
    Honestly forgot about him. Yeah he was decent there but obviously been injured the last two weeks. A bit like hayes serviceable but hardly inspiring, but in Hunters absence serviceable is probably needed.

    Quote Originally Posted by mjp View Post
    See - I don’t think he really played as a ruckman. He played spare behind the ball but ‘take the hitouts’...I’m not even sure that is a position but it sure help block things up defensively.
    Yeah that's fair. It's just encouraging seeing him not be a liability I guess, but the problem is hardly fixed long term, even if he performs as he did on Friday consistently.
    I should leave it alone but you're not right

  12. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,830
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: We beat the Giants - Has anything "REALLY" changed?

    I knew I shouldn’t have clicked this thread - it makes too much sense.

    I think this is going to be such a weird season and all teams will show a lot of variation - imagine Geelong being torched at their fortress. There is going to be a greater struggle with ‘motivation’ when there is always a sense we’re one COVID cluster from the season being shut down. It has to affect intensity. Player selections are going to be more than usually difficult with only training form to go by.

    I find it hard to look too far ahead, but I was encouraged perhaps more than I should have been, by the spirit in the group and patches of footy where we moved the ball better than we’ve seen for a while. Some of the defensive efforts to deny goals against the Orange were really inspiring.

    However the forward line doesn’t look right. Everyone is so slow. When the ball hits the deck, locking it in is all we can do ... there’s no one to pounce on it. The ineffectiveness of Lloyd and Dale costs us.We miss Hunter - so much maligned but a high possession getter and gut runner.

    I really can’t say which camp I’m in but I will be pretty happy if we maintain that intensity in this strange year as it’s likely to be even more important.
    www.bulldogtragician.com A blog about being a lifelong fan of the Dogs and our quixotic attempt to replicate 1954. AND WE DID
    Author of "The Mighty West: the Bulldogs journey from daydream believers to premiership heroes"
    Twitter @bulldogstragic

  13. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Dogsville
    Posts
    12,738
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: We beat the Giants - Has anything "REALLY" changed?

    Quote Originally Posted by mjp View Post
    Strong performance Friday night featuring some great focus/commitment to the ball. I was one of many who really appreciated the efforts (I'm sure) put forth by the players.

    Glass half full:
    - Liber is the difference maker.
    - Great show of resilience by Bont.
    - Naught's terrific in consistently attacking the ball.
    - JJ showed a willingness to compete we haven't seen much of in the past couple of seasons.
    - Alex Keath looked like he was both willing AND able to play as a one-vs-one defender.
    - MC played players in more familiar positions and all is OK with the world.

    Glass half empty:
    - We barely troubled the scorers vs a Giants team missing Whitfield, Greene and Kelly.
    - English was better but really played as a 7th defender not a ruckman - you might be able to do that against Jacobs but other teams have actual footballers playing in the ruck.
    - Suckling continues to look terrible.
    - Bruce continues to look terrible. As for the Brereton opinion that the presence of Bruce helps Naughton walk taller - please. The kid grew up in Rockingham and was raised to fight the fight.
    - Dale and Lloyd completely ineffective - I guess you could argue Dale was better than Lloyd (at least) but...wow.
    - Can ANYONE play as an outside mid and get the ball except for Hunter in our entire squad? Vandermeer is (admittedly) a baby (a baby with a nice sidestep to be fair) but he is miles off being a 25 possession per game player.
    - What is going on with Toby? Is he the player he flashed in the first quarter or whoever than bloke was who played out the game with barely a touch?
    - We needed the Giants and the history and the EJ milestone etc to get 'UP' for a contest...what happens vs the Swans and Roos over the next two weeks when there is no emotion in the build up.

    So - where are you. Half full or half empty. Are we moving ahead or was it just an unconvincing flash in the pan from a consistent team.
    But the game felt like a 10 goal win, we were all over them like a cheap suit. They could not move it out of our forward line for large parts of the game. Our pressure was excellent, they struggled all night with fluidity and played static footy for a good chunk of the night because of it.

    They had great players out, but we also had Wood and Hunter out who are just as critical for us. Glass half full.
    But then again, I'm an Internet poster and Bevo is a premiership coach so draw your own conclusions.

  14. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Wherever the dogs are playing
    Posts
    60,873
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: We beat the Giants - Has anything "REALLY" changed?

    Quote Originally Posted by 1eyedog View Post
    But the game felt like a 10 goal win, we were all over them like a cheap suit. They could not move it out of our forward line for large parts of the game. Our pressure was excellent, they struggled all night with fluidity and played static footy for a good chunk of the night because of it.

    They had great players out, but we also had Wood and Hunter out who are just as critical for us. Glass half full.
    Agree, also Duryea out, an important backline general.

    What did change is we instilled some confidence into the group. Of course there are flaws, always will have.
    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.

  15. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,830
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: We beat the Giants - Has anything "REALLY" changed?

    And the Giants didn’t exactly field a team short of talent, line by they would have had line better and more developed players. Grand finalists, pre-season still a strong premiership fancy, with the reigning Coleman medallist. Just a shame that self same Coleman medallist was embroiled in a pregame stoush with shortest bloke on the field Caleb Daniel and allowed the most inexperienced player on the ground to side step him.

    We still have weaknesses, agreed, but if we’d kicked better this should have been a 10goal win.. in terms of assessing the merits of our victory it’s still early, but I wouldn’t downplay its significance either, time alone will tell.
    www.bulldogtragician.com A blog about being a lifelong fan of the Dogs and our quixotic attempt to replicate 1954. AND WE DID
    Author of "The Mighty West: the Bulldogs journey from daydream believers to premiership heroes"
    Twitter @bulldogstragic

  16. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    West of somewhere.
    Posts
    6,148
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: We beat the Giants - Has anything "REALLY" changed?

    Quote Originally Posted by The bulldog tragician View Post
    ...but if we’d kicked better this should have been a 10goal win..
    :-)

    I liked your post but that line could be on our 2018/2019 tombstone!
    What should I tell her? She's going to ask.

  17. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    1,496
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: We beat the Giants - Has anything "REALLY" changed?

    Quote Originally Posted by The bulldog tragician View Post
    but if we’d kicked better this should have been a 10goal win..
    The kicking has been poor for a very long time and, amazingly, shows absolutely no sign of improvement in years.

    On Friday the forwards with set shots couldn’t get better than 20 degrees off line. So any shot from 40m was doubtful. Why can’t they put the ball over the goal umpire?

    Our 2 key forwards have had 20 kicks between them over those 3 games, for a total of 1 goal each. Their supporting forwards haven’t done much with the ball. I think Dale had three relatively easy shots on Friday and one only just snuck in.



    To be honest there is minimal coordination between zones so the forwards are having to battle for possessions. Things would be better if the ball was kicked forward better.

    This bad kicking is part of the reason why the three games this season have delivered the worst number of goals for the 3 opening games in ten years. 5,7,8 is 20 goals in 12 quarters.

    Dominating all over the ground should have led to a 10 goal win, but it didn’t because the kicking was so poor. And if it stays like this it will cost wins.

  18. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,830
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: We beat the Giants - Has anything "REALLY" changed?

    Quote Originally Posted by Danjul View Post
    The kicking has been poor for a very long time and, amazingly, shows absolutely no sign of improvement in years.

    On Friday the forwards with set shots couldn’t get better than 20 degrees off line. So any shot from 40m was doubtful. Why can’t they put the ball over the goal umpire?

    Our 2 key forwards have had 20 kicks between them over those 3 games, for a total of 1 goal each. Their supporting forwards haven’t done much with the ball. I think Dale had three relatively easy shots on Friday and one only just snuck in.



    To be honest there is minimal coordination between zones so the forwards are having to battle for possessions. Things would be better if the ball was kicked forward better.

    This bad kicking is part of the reason why the three games this season have delivered the worst number of goals for the 3 opening games in ten years. 5,7,8 is 20 goals in 12 quarters.

    Dominating all over the ground should have led to a 10 goal win, but it didn’t because the kicking was so poor. And if it stays like this it will cost wins.
    I noticed kicking was really poor in the nth-swans match - it’s part of the game that you’d think would have improved wouldn’t you.
    www.bulldogtragician.com A blog about being a lifelong fan of the Dogs and our quixotic attempt to replicate 1954. AND WE DID
    Author of "The Mighty West: the Bulldogs journey from daydream believers to premiership heroes"
    Twitter @bulldogstragic

Posting Permissions

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