Bankers & Anchors: Rnd 4, 2023 vs Richmond Tigers

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

This is the Round 4, 2023 edition of the weekly Bankers and Anchors thread. Once the game against Richmond is concluded post your nominations for:

The Bankers = 3 guys/aspects of the game that we banked on to do the right thing during the game
The Anchors = 3 guys/aspects of the game that weighed us down by their errors or poor play

Please limit it to no more than three of each player or aspect of the game, but feel free to make honourable/dishonourable mentions. As usual try to make it constructive criticism.

Try and restrict it to individual players rather than aspects of the overall match - I will allow more freedom now as the thread seems to be going down more of the aspects of the game path so you can have 3 for each made up of aspects of the game and individual players.

The thread is named in honour of a popular WOOF Contributor, The Banker, who passed away on 22/04/2012 after a six month battle with cancer.

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

Bankers

1. Tim English. Great performance. Nank has had his measure before, so well done on standing up tonight, especially when it looked like our weaknesses were going to be terminal in that second quarter.

2. Bailey Dale, crucial early and also again late. He's underated for his defensive work too. He's just a top line player.

3. Ed Richards. Will really make things tough for opposition coaches if he and Bailey Dale are going to perform consistently at this level at the same time!

Anchors

1. If not for the patch in the 2nd quarter, our mids would all feature strongly in the Bankers. But Libba, Bont and Macrae were so guilty of repeating past sins at stoppages during the run of 8 Richmond goals. Some of the positioning was just so super aggressive. At some stage surely the guys have to identify how exposed they are if they allow an easy takeaway from their direct opponent if they just over commit to trying to win the ball.

If we don't work this shit out, this giving run ons, like biiiig 8 goal runs ons quickly, this team is going to be marked forever mentally and it will prevent us from winning anything when things get tough.

2. Lobb's hands. I know it was wet, but he dropped some dead set sitters.

3, Oscar Baker, his overcommitting and then lack of defensive pressure enabled that end to end passage of play that led to the last Richmond goal from Bolton. Not good enough.

[Danjul]

Bankers

1. Tim English. Great performance. Nank has had his measure before, so well done on standing up tonight, especially when it looked like our weaknesses were going to be terminal in that second quarter.

2. Bailey Dale, crucial early and also again late. He's underated for his defensive work too. He's just a top line player.

3. Ed Richards. Will really make things tough for opposition coaches if he and Bailey Dale are going to perform consistently at this level at the same time!

Anchors

1. If not for the patch in the 2nd quarter, our mids would all feature strongly in the Bankers. But Libba, Bont and Macrae were so guilty of repeating past sins at stoppages during the run of 8 Richmond goals. Some of the positioning was just so super aggressive. At some stage surely the guys have to identify how exposed they are if they allow an easy takeaway from their direct opponent if they just over commit to trying to win the ball.

If we don't work this shit out, this giving run ons, like biiiig 8 goal runs ons quickly, this team is going to be marked forever mentally and it will prevent us from winning anything when things get tough.

2. Lobb's hands. I know it was wet, but he dropped some dead set sitters.

3, Oscar Baker, his overcommitting and then lack of defensive pressure enabled that end to end passage of play that led to the last Richmond goal from Bolton. Not good enough.

https://postimg.cc/gwfCw7c0

this is the ruck contest that led to the last goal.

Count the number of dogs inside. Richmond had 3 players inside and 6 forming a perimeter. They are all set up for a shot at goal.If the ball comes out the likely result is a goal. It did and it was.

[macca]

There is only 1 fwd setup i see we play and that is the long bomb to Naughton in 3-1 contest . the third player being our JUH or Hannan opponent crashing into the same lead
Sorry but i dont understand what a forward setup is ,our team has not had it for a few years now .

thanks for the great footy tactc, but our coaches dont respect forward craft. But we dont need any extra home work as we can still win games

Yours sincerely
Woofer fantasy fwd coach

[bornadog]

Bankers

1. Dale, repelling so many goals and picking up 30 disposals off HBF

2. Team - not giving up and working hard to win this.

3/ Tim's HTA 7 - matching Nankervis (8) but picking up 20 disposals around the ground.

Anchors

1. Although we smashed them in centre clearances, that brief 10 min in the 2nd enabled them to get some easy goals direct from CC

2. McComb fumbling and turnovers - not AFL standard (I know he has less than 20 games, but sheesh)

3. Hannan missing easy goals and marks - why do we pick him

[macca]

I am not sold on McComb being a permenant in the team ( banker) nor can i blame his turnovers (anchor) for our 10 min of footy.

So im going to permenantly put him as the sub , in between , threatening to be a good afl footballer ( he does some good things) but his disposals let him down.

I do hope he proves me wrong

[hujsh]

Bankers

1. Dale, repelling so many goals and picking up 30 disposals off HBF

2. Team - not giving up and working hard to win this.

3/ Tim's HTA 7 - matching Nankervis (8) but picking up 20 disposals around the ground.

Anchors

1. Although we smashed them in centre clearances, that brief 10 min in the 2nd enabled them to get some easy goals direct from CC

2. McComb fumbling and turnovers - not AFL standard (I know he has less than 20 games, but sheesh)

3. Hannan missing easy goals and marks - why do we pick him

Lobb also picked up 4 so overall we won that stat even in if we lost the hitouts. TBH I think that's a decent goal for Tim given his strengths around the ground

[Bullies]

I am not sold on McComb being a permenant in the team ( banker) nor can i blame his turnovers (anchor) for our 10 min of footy.

So im going to permenantly put him as the sub , in between , threatening to be a good afl footballer ( he does some good things) but his disposals let him down.

I do hope he proves me wrong

He can not and should not be permanent Sub. He is not up to AFL standard. How many chances is he is given and why?? He fumbles, can't read the game and is slow.

[bornadog]

He can not and should not be permanent Sub. He is not up to AFL standard. How many chances is he is given and why?? He fumbles, can't read the game and is slow.

Also hates body contact

[josie]

He can not and should not be permanent Sub. He is not up to AFL standard. How many chances is he is given and why?? He fumbles, can't read the game and is slow.

I would prefer pretty much anyone on our afl list playing in vfl, and a number of vfl players (Sullivan was and is a better player, Garner whom I am a fan of, Goater, Poulter……) to be picked instead, especially the young ones showing promise instead of McComb being gifted games. I’d love him to prove me wrong but when he has the ball you think here’s a turnover coming up and when that doesn’t happen and you are pleasantly surprised that’s not promising.

[ratsmac]

I would prefer pretty much anyone on our afl list playing in vfl, and a number of vfl players (Sullivan was and is a better player, Garner whom I am a fan of, Goater, Poulter……) to be picked instead, especially the young ones showing promise instead of McComb being gifted games. I’d love him to prove me wrong but when he has the ball you think here’s a turnover coming up and when that doesn’t happen and you are pleasantly surprised that’s not promising.

Spot on. Surely we aren't the only ones who see it. The players must roll their eyes when they see the team selected.

I would of thought McComb would dominate in those conditions given his size and gritty looking game style. Apparently not. He did kick a goal from a pretty lucky free kick though, without it we lose. That will get him another game next week.

[ratsmac]

Bankers

1. Winning games in the wet. These are character building type of wins.

2. Bont setting the tone again. Proper captain shit right there. 12 tackles is leading from the front. Follow me boys!

3. Richards, Dale and JJ running the ball out of defence. Lovely to watch. We need to capitalise on their speed and ball use a bit better but it's still a good weapon to have.

Anchors

1. I don't want to pick on Bruce because I think he's been good in d50 but someone has to teach him when to punch and when the try mark. There were a few occasions where a clearing fist is what we needed and not a dropped mark.

2. Missing goals from in close. I know they are half chances sometimes but there were so many today that coulda woulda shoulda.

3. 7 goals in a row. We just can't seem to stop these run ons. Surely with the talent on our list the brains trust have plans in place to go full Ross Lyon defence after 3 goals in a row or something....surely

[AshMac]

Bankers

- a solid team performance with a lot of contributors
- Caleb Daniels last quarter
- Richard?s and Bailey Dales run and composure
- the half time break to stop the bleeding
- Libba. Just Libba
- beating Richmond at the G


Anchors
- our defensive zone and how teams just cut through us like butter on the turnover
- our setup behind the ball and lack of overlap run, slow and stagnant ball movement
- NO ONE standing at the back of our forward packs. Why have 43 tall forwards if we aren?t going to setup to crumb the ball
- the 15 minute haemorrhaging again - no on-field leadership or heart during those periods

[Ozza]

Bankers:

The inside mids and Tim for the complete dominance of clearance and giving us a chance.

Anchors:

Our gameplan - the players completely dominate clearance and inside 50s only to scrape over the line, because we leak like a sieve when absolutely everything doesn't go our way. Enormously frustrating.