549 posts since I last logged on...

[Sedat]

Re: 549 posts since I last logged on...

Didn't we beat Port Adelaide comfortably in our last wet weather match last year? We played that night with great intent at every contest and were well organised. And our worst 2 losses this season were under the roof at Marvel.

I'm confident we'll bounce back this week but it won't be because of any weather forecast.

[jeemak]

Re: 549 posts since I last logged on...

After you called him out for his efforts the previous week I thought Wood came back to the pack a bit yesterday.
I wish we could get Duryea in the park because I think he would do a lot for us organising the back line along with Crozier

I thought we were still a chance to pinch the game in the last quarter but there is no other way to look at it from my perspective because the way we capitulated was just so damn disappointing. You can't grow up a Bulldogs supporter and not be able to handle losses but there is a limit when we just go missing in a quarter.

Never miss an opportunity eh G? You've been riding Wood for years now.

The guy has been playing in a poorly structured back half since 2016, you can't see it, but he had a good game last week.....first after a significant lay off and now he's on the outs again.

It's almost becoming manic, a bit like me and my belief in incentivising scoring....we get it!

[GVGjr]

Re: 549 posts since I last logged on...

Never miss an opportunity eh G? You've been riding Wood for years now.

The guy has been playing in a poorly structured back half since 2016, you can't see it, but he had a good game last week.....first after a significant lay off and now he's on the outs again.

It's almost becoming manic, a bit like me and my belief in incentivising scoring....we get it!

Did you read the quote I replied to? It was about how much of a difference he made in that game

The quote was

:-)
I don't know - Wood in or out hasn't made much difference the last couple of years...though sometimes (like last week) he does some good things individually.

We have been the best defensive team in the comp for 3 weeks...on the weekend, we didn't leak inside 50's ( I think they had 40) but we DID leak goals...it was the Saints game all over again. We are better than that and sometimes you play better than others...

As for never missing a chance, I gave him a vote in Marmo the previous week. If he plays well he gets noticed and vice-a-versa
Are you sure he's played in a poorly structured back half for 4 years? I don't believe that to be correct but it's a convenient POV if you want it to be

Bruce, Wood, Daniel and probably one or two others came back to earth from their efforts the previous week, that's all that has been highlighted. Wood played OK like many others in the back line, but in truth it was nothing like the previous week in my opinion and that's bound to happen.

[GVGjr]

Re: 549 posts since I last logged on...

I guess I wasn't really calling him out for his efforts as much as asking if the game he played was a sign of things to come or...something else.

I actually think it IS (was?) a sign of things to come...but if you want him to be the 'extra' then you need a full complement of defenders around him. We didn't have that so he was back into having to play on an opponent...which he is fine at but it sucks the life out of the best parts of his game.

Plus, trying to free up Wood is tough when you are playing a team that scores every time they go inside 50.

I didn't think our problem on Sunday was our back line players but in the last quarter we needed to score goals and perhaps our mids and defenders pressed up a bit in an effort to achieve that and then it resulted in some Carlton goals.

Does Crozier fix all that against Essendon or does it require a rethink?

[Mofra]

Re: 549 posts since I last logged on...

After you called him out for his efforts the previous week I thought Wood came back to the pack a bit yesterday.
I wish we could get Duryea in the park because I think he would do a lot for us organising the back line along with Crozier

Duryea is our only small defender capable of locking down an opponent, he's important for us.

[GVGjr]

Re: 549 posts since I last logged on...

Duryea is our only small defender capable of locking down an opponent, he's important for us.

I agree, you have to wonder if he will get onto the park though

[Mofra]

Re: 549 posts since I last logged on...

I agree, you have to wonder if he will get onto the park though

You also have to wonder if we'll ever start actually developing someone else who can perform the role.
Our philosophy seems to be all out attack / intercepting the ball. The fact the ball hits the deck in our defensive 50 seems to be an after thought.

[mjp]

Re: 549 posts since I last logged on...

Did we move English to centre half back to allow Wood and JJ to play their natural game , Schache into the ruck to get him into the game, Wallis into the centre to lock down the flow into the into the backline from bounces, Cordy into the forward line to get better mobility and take pressure off the small forwards?

I don't mind the sentiment of what you are saying but isn't doing things like moving non-competitive forwards into the midfield (eg. Schache) a little like moving deck-chairs on the Titanic? You are still going down. There's not much point digging up old bones now but for most of the game we were 'in touch' and 'just needed to take a couple of chances' and things coulda/woulda/shoulda been different...

I guess from the coaches perspective, why would you move English out of the ruck when he had been so important the past few weeks? And whilst I think you are on the money with the English to CHB comment, didn't you want him moved permanently to CHF a couple of weeks ago as it was his 'natural position'...but I digress.

When you are 18 points down half way through the last and are coming off a 3-game winning streak, making whole-sale positional changes 'earlier' wouldn't have been something I would have contemplated. I know the final score is pretty one sided but it was 18 points (I think 10.7 to 7.7 or something) early in the last and we were entering the ball....

A few moments didn't go our way. And we didn't defend well in transition. And we 100% didn't adjust to the conditions. But I think it is unrealistic to think that - maybe in the 2nd quarter of a close game - that the coach would start making wholesale positional changes...don't you have to back your players in to turn it around and show the form that they HAD been showing?

[mjp]

Re: 549 posts since I last logged on...

Does Crozier fix all that against Essendon or does it require a rethink?

Crozier helps but he doesn't fix all of it. We need to defend better out of stoppage/in transition as well...

There were a few balls that got us over the back on the weekend and I haven't seen that since the Saints game...continuity is important with a back 6 and he is a major part of what has been building back there...

Were they individually the problem? No - but Carlton kicked 100 points from 40 entries which is pretty bloody remarkable.

[Danjul]

Re: 549 posts since I last logged on...

I don't mind the sentiment of what you are saying but isn't doing things like moving non-competitive forwards into the midfield (eg. Schache) a little like moving deck-chairs on the Titanic? You are still going down. There's not much point digging up old bones now but for most of the game we were 'in touch' and 'just needed to take a couple of chances' and things coulda/woulda/shoulda been different...

I guess from the coaches perspective, why would you move English out of the ruck when he had been so important the past few weeks? And whilst I think you are on the money with the English to CHB comment, didn't you want him moved permanently to CHF a couple of weeks ago as it was his 'natural position'...but I digress.

When you are 18 points down half way through the last and are coming off a 3-game winning streak, making whole-sale positional changes 'earlier' wouldn't have been something I would have contemplated. I know the final score is pretty one sided but it was 18 points (I think 10.7 to 7.7 or something) early in the last and we were entering the ball....

A few moments didn't go our way. And we didn't defend well in transition. And we 100% didn't adjust to the conditions. But I think it is unrealistic to think that - maybe in the 2nd quarter of a close game - that the coach would start making wholesale positional changes...don't you have to back your players in to turn it around and show the form that they HAD been showing?

It is not the loss that hurts, there will be plenty more.

It is the fact that aspects of the game were not anticipated, and then nothing was done to address the problems.

The Dogs were never going to win the game. It was lost in the first 5 minutes, I think that was how long their first 3 goals took. And problems revealed early remained. It was always catch up based on individual efforts like Smith’s brilliant goal . Carlton was cruising with end to end plays that were easier than training drills. Their goals were the easiest I have seen this year, our backline didn’t have a chance. Our backline needed more height, to allow our interceptors to move. 16 goals in a shortened game in the wet, that’s the equivalent of 20+ normally, an absolute thrashing. Carlton fans will be reliving the glory for decades.

It was quite obvious our guys were going to fall away, they were being worn down just trying to stay in the game. Yet one of our talls sat out half the game contributing nothing. The flow into the forward line was senseless, it was like kicking a ball against a wall. I think at one stage in the game we had 9 consecutive entries for no goals . Our full forward had half a dozen touches but was run off his feet. We got no drive from over 20 centre bounces, but the opposition continually did.

When what you are doing is failing everywhere the normal reaction is swallow your pride and do something different.

I am not criticising players here. I think we have enormous talent. But a game plan which repeatedly brings crushing defeats must have room for improvement.