One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: WA Tiger on April 20, 2013, 08:01:26 PM
-
Lids is now crap, shoot Rance, drop Vickery, Martin has had it, Houli is no good, Grigg sux, get rid of Petterd, put McGuanne down back, the coach was out coached......geezus after one loss. A reality check is all we had from a better side.
We will have a few more against Sydney, the Hawks, the Cats, the Dockers, Eagles and the Roos, win a couple of them and we are ok.
We should be more peeed off if we don't beat the Suns, GWS, Dees, Crows, Lions and Port!!
Next week will tell us more about our team, not today!
-
Shoot Ross Lyin
-
Lids is now crap, shoot Rance, drop Vickery, Martin has had it, Houli is no good, Grigg sux, get rid of Petterd, put McGuanne down back, the coach was out coached......geezus after one loss. A reality check is all we had from a better side.
We will have a few more against Sydney, the Hawks, the Cats, the Dockers, Eagles and the Roos, win a couple of them and we are ok.
We should be more peeed off if we don't beat the Suns, GWS, Dees, Crows, Lions and Port!!
Next week will tell us more about our team, not today!
Agree with the gist of the msg WAT but today told us plenty about our team :thumbsup We've improved as the first 3 weeks have shown, but we still have a ways to go! Not a bad thing to cop a reality check early on in the season, especially when we've had a 6 month love in about how much we've improved and where we're going. Learn from today and get better. We want finals, we're going to have to earn it, it won't just happen
-
Well said Tony. Definite wake-up call today.
We're still building and need to learn from games like this. It's a good thing we have depth now because we can make some changes if we see fit.
Not the end of the world, as WAT is implying.
-
Billshit!
We got our pants pulled down because we are SOFT
The boys poo themselves today, Scared of our own shadows.
If there was ever a time to beat the pies it was today, to make a statement and tell the comp. "we're not going to be pushed around anymore!"
But all we've proved is that when you apply the pressure on us we crack and panic.
Harden up FFS!
Marshmallow softie rubbish pansy gay bird footy makes me sick! :banghead :chuck
-
Yes Willy and TM, very well said.
Mr T...... :police:
-
Thought the umpires ought to be strung up was some dead set howlers
-
At least we should see Vlad come into the side
-
Just thought today showed what some of us knew and that is we still have a way to go to match it with the top 4 teams.
What was disappointing though was a number of our players again got stage fright, that's a concern but part of me wasn't shocked by it, disappointed yes but not shocked
Today told us something about our club next week will tell us even more
-
At least we should see Vlad come into the side
Or his brother Vlas.... :whistle
-
Just thought today showed what some of us knew and that is we still have a way to go to match it with the top 4 teams.
What was disappointing though was a number of our players again got stage fright, that's a concern but part of me wasn't shocked by it, disappointed yes but not shocked
Today told us something about our club next week will tell us even more
Yes agree!!!
-
There is no doubt we have the skill to beat the Pies. I know it doesn't look like it on today's effort but we do.
Today's problem was a mind problem. We allowed ourselves to become "hunted" we didn't "hunt".
There was a time when i would have said that we didn't handle the pressure today but i think in a sporting sense, one doesn't "handle" pressure, one "creates" pressure. In order to win one must either equal or better the pressure created against them, obviously we didn't, and we lost.
We were out created on the day.
-
Just thought we had 20 minutes of hell in the 3rd and that resulted in game, set and match
-
Yes Willy and TM, very well said.
Mr T...... :police:
What are u on about WAT?
I was right and so was Paul Roos in his article today.
The signs were there in the first 3 games and many didn't acknowledge it.
Poor tackling numbers, low pressure act stats, low contested possession.
Today I was at the game in the hope that they'd be fierce, hard and would pressure them but half way through the second qtr the pies started to apply the pressure. I reckon the we all could smell the fear so the pies knew all they had to do was ramp up that pressure and go in for the kill. It's probably all they spoke about in the half time break.
I spoke to 2 Collingwood supporter at the half time break (who thought we were going ok) and I told them exactly what was going to happen in the third and it unfolded exactly as I said it would.
We got our pants pulled down and spanked. We were like scared little toothless baby cubs.
It needs to be addressed and it needs to happen now!
-
Lids is now crap, shoot Rance, drop Vickery, Martin has had it, Houli is no good, Grigg sux, get rid of Petterd, put McGuanne down back, the coach was out coached......geezus after one loss. A reality check is all we had from a better side.
We will have a few more against Sydney, the Hawks, the Cats, the Dockers, Eagles and the Roos, win a couple of them and we are ok.
We should be more peeed off if we don't beat the Suns, GWS, Dees, Crows, Lions and Port!!
Next week will tell us more about our team, not today!
Add Cotchin to that list. Worse than all of the above. Can't kick or tackle.
-
Yes Willy and TM, very well said.
Mr T...... :police:
What are u on about WAT?
I was right and so was Paul Roos in his article today.
Yeessssssssss :clapping
(http://cdn.fd.uproxx.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/SenorChangDismissiveWank.gif)
-
Yes Willy and TM, very well said.
Mr T...... :police:
What are u on about WAT?
I was right and so was Paul Roos in his article today.
Yeessssssssss :clapping
(http://cdn.fd.uproxx.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/SenorChangDismissiveWank.gif)
:lol
-
Just thought we had 20 minutes of hell in the 3rd and that resulted in game, set and match
Thats funny because I thought we had 20 minutes in the first and then got spanked for the rest of the game by playing softie pansy girly gay bird lollipop footy.
-
Just thought we had 20 minutes of hell in the 3rd and that resulted in game, set and match
Thats funny because I thought we had 20 minutes in the first and then got spanked for the rest of the game by playing softie pansy girly gay bird lollipop footy.
Your comments are the same as your first post, hence my.... :police:
-
The signs were there in the first 3 games and many didn't acknowledge it.
Poor tackling numbers, low pressure act stats, low contested possession.
Um might want to look into the contested possession comment
Going into today we were in the top 5 in the comp ;D
-
Mr Tiagra, so you think for 3 quarters we played soft unnacountable footy, and that was the only thing that hurt us, particlarly in the third? everything else was OK?
will you ever answer the question as to whether 50 tackles would have been an acceptable number?
-
Not happy with Grigg at all btw. He's got the best worst disposal I've ever seen
-
Mr Tiagra, so you think for 3 quarters we played soft unnacountable footy, and that was the only thing that hurt us, particlarly in the third? everything else was OK?
will you ever answer the question as to whether 50 tackles would have been an acceptable number?
Everything else? We were crap there wasn't anything else but 20 min of reasonable footy in the first.
I have mentioned it before but I'll answer it again just for you Al, we should be aiming for no less than 60 tackles a game. The reason I say this is because we as a team MUST learn the art of pressure acts, tackling and hard accountable footy. Seasoned finals team may not need this number but we certainly do because we need to learn it.
The team ethos should be "kill or be killed!"
It must be ingrained into their thinking. We are soft and all the teams know it and it's the seasoned finals teams that can execute it more effectively.
-
:lol
we matched them for 3 quarters and probably our worst quarter of footy for over 12 months cost us dearly. AS i have already said, it wasnt just our pressure and tackling, but everything that went down the poo shute, but hey you keep harping on about one aspect as if that is the be all and end all.
The biggest issue was not absorbing the pressure applied by the opposition, that is what wins big games against quality opposition.
I like the way you now say that seasoned finals teams dont need high numbers, but we do. you have obviously looked at the stats and seen that the scum only had 48 tackles themselves..
for three quarters we matched them in all facets. In one we crumbled and got blown out of the water in ALL facets, but you keep harping on about only one thing.
speaking of harping on about one thing, how did your weapon go today.
A bit like a scud missile eh? always threatening, but never delivering when it counted.
-
Interesting to note that tackle numbers are down across the comp this year
:whistle
-
Thought the umpires ought to be strung up was some dead set howlers
Some?
Try fecking heaps!! :banghead
-
Not happy with Grigg at all btw. He's got the best worst disposal I've ever seen
His captain was just as bad today.
-
Not happy with Grigg at all btw. He's got the best worst disposal I've ever seen
His captain was just as bad today.
Thats a one off. Grigg always kicks helicopters and can't hit targets. Isn't a goalkicker either. Extremely frustrating footballer.
He'd probably be a good kick if it weren't for his pea heart.
-
Not happy with Grigg at all btw. He's got the best worst disposal I've ever seen
His captain was just as bad today.
Thats a one off. Grigg always kicks helicopters and can't hit targets. Isn't a goalkicker either. Extremely frustrating footballer.
He'd probably be a good kick if it weren't for his pea heart.
Cotchin has been putting up dinky little floaters all season. That's if they're not going out of bounds on the full.
-
Not happy with Grigg at all btw. He's got the best worst disposal I've ever seen
His captain was just as bad today.
Thats a one off. Grigg always kicks helicopters and can't hit targets. Isn't a goalkicker either. Extremely frustrating footballer.
He'd probably be a good kick if it weren't for his pea heart.
Cotchin has been putting up dinky little floaters all season. That's if they're not going out of bounds on the full.
At least we know Cotch will fix it though
-
Do we?
-
:lol
we matched them for 3 quarters and probably our worst quarter of footy for over 12 months cost us dearly. AS i have already said, it wasnt just our pressure and tackling, but everything that went down the poo shute, but hey you keep harping on about one aspect as if that is the be all and end all.
The biggest issue was not absorbing the pressure applied by the opposition, that is what wins big games against quality opposition.
I like the way you now say that seasoned finals teams dont need high numbers, but we do. you have obviously looked at the stats and seen that the scum only had 48 tackles themselves..
for three quarters we matched them in all facets. In one we crumbled and got blown out of the water in ALL facets, but you keep harping on about only one thing.
speaking of harping on about one thing, how did your weapon go today.
A bit like a scud missile eh? always threatening, but never delivering when it counted.
Paul Roos agrees with me. I'll take his opinion over yours thankyou.
We play that girly poo pansy footy we ain't playing finals. If we do play finals we will have our pants pulled down like they were today.
You can dream all you like about how you'd like the team to play but a defensive no compromise hard ball, fierce and tough footy is what I want to see.
Kill or be killed!
They are soft and they shat themselves. Fact!
-
is that all youve got?
c'mon mr football, surely you can give a more detailed account of what went wrong rather than swinging off roos's nuts and a one dimensional carry on.
tell me exactly where and why you disagree with my post.
-
:lol
we matched them for 3 quarters and probably our worst quarter of footy for over 12 months cost us dearly. AS i have already said, it wasnt just our pressure and tackling, but everything that went down the poo shute, but hey you keep harping on about one aspect as if that is the be all and end all.
The biggest issue was not absorbing the pressure applied by the opposition, that is what wins big games against quality opposition.
I like the way you now say that seasoned finals teams dont need high numbers, but we do. you have obviously looked at the stats and seen that the scum only had 48 tackles themselves..
for three quarters we matched them in all facets. In one we crumbled and got blown out of the water in ALL facets, but you keep harping on about only one thing.
speaking of harping on about one thing, how did your weapon go today.
A bit like a scud missile eh? always threatening, but never delivering when it counted.
Paul Roos agrees with me. I'll take his opinion over yours thankyou.
We play that girly poo pansy footy we ain't playing finals. If we do play finals we will have our pants pulled down like they were today.
You can dream all you like about how you'd like the team to play but a defensive no compromise hard ball, fierce and tough footy is what I want to see.
Kill or be killed!
They are soft and they shat themselves. Fact!
all you do is rubbish the club, criticise everything, then wait for us to fail and gloat about it. You are a turd.
-
Third quarter. Look at the spread of the Pies. Win the ball in tight run to space ball out in front of teammate link in the chains give to Cloke or a finisher in Sidebottom or Elliot and that's all she wrote.
We do not have the players who do this and too many times it falls in the hands of Grigg who misses from 30 as he did in the last or Jako who handbills a point from 20. Pour finishes should be the Edwards or the Martins or the Deledios.
Thought Petterds one handed effort and then blaming the sun for dropping. Mark was inadequate and inexcusable. Knights missed two get table shots also.
For me it showed where we are exactly a 6-10 sidearms what type of gut running players we need to certainly get us to finals and moving beyond the first week. Officially Hawthorn last year was not a break out game that's my opinion it was a game that turned their fortunes around as they have lost 3 from 20 since then. That is just my take.
I think how far we have come as a side will be decided next week on whether we can tick another box and beat Freo in Perth and a side coached by Ross Lyon. Next week is the non negotiable the win at all costs and leave nothing on the field because with Geelong and Port the next few weeks we may found our early season jump on other top 8 contenders will be extinguished.
-
:lol
we matched them for 3 quarters and probably our worst quarter of footy for over 12 months cost us dearly. AS i have already said, it wasnt just our pressure and tackling, but everything that went down the poo shute, but hey you keep harping on about one aspect as if that is the be all and end all.
The biggest issue was not absorbing the pressure applied by the opposition, that is what wins big games against quality opposition.
I like the way you now say that seasoned finals teams dont need high numbers, but we do. you have obviously looked at the stats and seen that the scum only had 48 tackles themselves..
for three quarters we matched them in all facets. In one we crumbled and got blown out of the water in ALL facets, but you keep harping on about only one thing.
speaking of harping on about one thing, how did your weapon go today.
A bit like a scud missile eh? always threatening, but never delivering when it counted.
Paul Roos agrees with me. I'll take his opinion over yours thankyou.
We play that girly poo pansy footy we ain't playing finals. If we do play finals we will have our pants pulled down like they were today.
You can dream all you like about how you'd like the team to play but a defensive no compromise hard ball, fierce and tough footy is what I want to see.
Kill or be killed!
They are soft and they shat themselves. Fact!
Mr T you are so full of it from Punt Rd end to no tackles to this and that. You need to take a step back.
Look at the loss philosophically rather than justifying your convictions through the supposed thoughts of someone else. We got beaten in spread and skill and not being able to go with a superior side when they stepped up. Had nothing to do with being a girls side . That is garbage because I am not questioning the teams application or endeavour or brand of footy which has been sustainable full of toughness and courage for the most part.
You are a troll of the highest order and whilst I am not pleased with the result and know what needs to be done you just over criticise every aspect of the club and revel in results such as this expecting knee jerk reactions to things that should be addressed otherwise. I think it is quite petty to react in that way. It is okay to be disappointed but revelling in it is too much.
-
is that all youve got?
c'mon mr football, surely you can give a more detailed account of what went wrong rather than swinging off roos's nuts and a one dimensional carry on.
tell me exactly where and why you disagree with my post.
They are soft, scared and stupid.
Dropping easy marks...stupid!
Watching the man and not the ball....stupid!
Allowing Sidebottom to roam free....stupid!
Not giving Rance any help on Cloke....stupid!
Throwing the ball on the boot in hope....stupid!
Why? Because we shat ourselves?
Why did we poo ourselves?
Because of applied and perceived pressure.
Perceived pressure creates mistakes
Established by the pies in the second quarter and executed early in the third where we were jumping at shadows and caught man watching, rushing and petrified.
Thus the mistakes started to happen.
We were outmuscled, outplayed, to slow to react and unproductive.
We didn't make a statement, we didn't establish a resolve, we got caught with out fingers up our bum.
We let them dictate and bully. We got caught with our pants down with all of the Collingwood supporters laughing at our tiny limp dick.
We didn't block and protect our captain.
We didn't work hard enough for each other.
There wasn't any support for Rance, no accountability for our opponents.
I was there I saw it unfold and I predicted it by half time.
Did I go expecting it? No!... I hoped I was wrong. I hoped I was overreacting. I hoped we'd flex our muscle and smash them. But my hopes were shattered half way through the second quarter.
-
is that all youve got?
c'mon mr football, surely you can give a more detailed account of what went wrong rather than swinging off roos's nuts and a one dimensional carry on.
tell me exactly where and why you disagree with my post.
They are soft, scared and stupid.
Dropping easy marks...stupid!
Watching the man and not the ball....stupid!
Allowing Sidebottom to roam free....stupid!
Not giving Rance any help on Cloke....stupid!
Throwing the ball on the boot in hope....stupid!
Why? Because we shat ourselves?
Why did we poo ourselves?
Because of applied and perceived pressure.
Perceived pressure creates mistakes
Established by the pies in the second quarter and executed early in the third where we were jumping at shadows and caught man watching, rushing and petrified.
Thus the mistakes started to happen.
We were outmuscled, outplayed, to slow to react and unproductive.
We didn't make a statement, we didn't establish a resolve, we got caught with out fingers up our bum.
We let them dictate and bully. We got caught with our pants down with all of the Collingwood supporters laughing at our tiny limp dick.
We didn't block and protect our captain.
We didn't work hard enough for each other.
There wasn't any support for Rance, no accountability for our opponents.
I was there I saw it unfold and I predicted it by half time.
Did I go expecting it? No!... I hoped I was wrong. I hoped I was overreacting. I hoped we'd flex our muscle and smash them. But my hopes were shattered half way through the second quarter.
geez half way through the second quarter, can I have the tatts numbers for next week.
I was there also and felt it was still anyone's game at half time.
-
Hey Tigra.
We are on year 4 of a rebuild since the end of 2009.
Collingwood have been rebuilding since 2004.
They have played finals every year since 2006 and every prelim since 2009 minimum.
Did you expect we were going to beat them as easy as you formulated in your mind?
What about your secret weapon had numerous chances to repay the critical errors he made in the second and he hit the post from 30 when he could have run in and kicked a goal but I digress and I don't want to be seen as as someone who is susceptible to knee jerk reactions and sensationalist comments.
You know who you are the type of person that will be on the news during Grand Final week when Richmond make it one day saying something like this....
Yeah I have been a fan for so many years and I always believed we would get here and everything has been so worth it and I am so happy and they are just so good and yadda yadda yadda.
Homer Simpsons and the Isotopes syndrome that is you.
-
:lol
we matched them for 3 quarters and probably our worst quarter of footy for over 12 months cost us dearly. AS i have already said, it wasnt just our pressure and tackling, but everything that went down the poo shute, but hey you keep harping on about one aspect as if that is the be all and end all.
The biggest issue was not absorbing the pressure applied by the opposition, that is what wins big games against quality opposition.
I like the way you now say that seasoned finals teams dont need high numbers, but we do. you have obviously looked at the stats and seen that the scum only had 48 tackles themselves..
for three quarters we matched them in all facets. In one we crumbled and got blown out of the water in ALL facets, but you keep harping on about only one thing.
speaking of harping on about one thing, how did your weapon go today.
A bit like a scud missile eh? always threatening, but never delivering when it counted.
Paul Roos agrees with me. I'll take his opinion over yours thankyou.
We play that girly poo pansy footy we ain't playing finals. If we do play finals we will have our pants pulled down like they were today.
You can dream all you like about how you'd like the team to play but a defensive no compromise hard ball, fierce and tough footy is what I want to see.
Kill or be killed!
They are soft and they shat themselves. Fact!
all you do is rubbish the club, criticise everything, then wait for us to fail and gloat about it. You are a turd.
Billshit!!!!
And Don't call me names!!!!
It's unprofessional, uncalled for and unnecessary.
How about try and have an opinion and argue a point.
Atleast I have an opinion and I'm man enough to state a case whether anyone agrees with me or not.
Name calling is just too easy and a gutless action.
Try debating a point or rebut my argument with a thought of your own.
-
:lol@ tucker
is that all youve got?
c'mon mr football, surely you can give a more detailed account of what went wrong rather than swinging off roos's nuts and a one dimensional carry on.
tell me exactly where and why you disagree with my post.
They are soft, scared and stupid.
Dropping easy marks...stupid!
Watching the man and not the ball....stupid!
Allowing Sidebottom to roam free....stupid!
Not giving Rance any help on Cloke....stupid!
Throwing the ball on the boot in hope....stupid!
Why? Because we shat ourselves?
Why did we poo ourselves?
Because of applied and perceived pressure.
Perceived pressure creates mistakes
Established by the pies in the second quarter and executed early in the third where we were jumping at shadows and caught man watching, rushing and petrified.
Thus the mistakes started to happen.
We were outmuscled, outplayed, to slow to react and unproductive.
We didn't make a statement, we didn't establish a resolve, we got caught with out fingers up our bum.
We let them dictate and bully. We got caught with our pants down with all of the Collingwood supporters laughing at our tiny limp dick.
We didn't block and protect our captain.
We didn't work hard enough for each other.
There wasn't any support for Rance, no accountability for our opponents.
I was there I saw it unfold and I predicted it by half time.
Did I go expecting it? No!... I hoped I was wrong. I hoped I was overreacting. I hoped we'd flex our muscle and smash them. But my hopes were shattered half way through the second quarter.
gee you'd think we were belted over 4 quarters and lost by 10 goals.
a little bit of truth mixed in with a heap of kaka does not make you a seer.
nothing you have said is enlightening nor does it address as to what you think and why what i posted is incorrect.
eff me, i said early in the third that if collingwood get a 4 goal lead we are stuffed. wow what a marvelous insightful statement that turned out be ::)
can i pull myself stupid too?
-
Hey Tigra.
We are on year 4 of a rebuild since the end of 2009.
Collingwood have been rebuilding since 2004.
They have played finals every year since 2006 and every prelim since 2009 minimum.
Did you expect we were going to beat them as easy as you formulated in your mind?
What about your secret weapon had numerous chances to repay the critical errors he made in the second and he hit the post from 30 when he could have run in and kicked a goal but I digress and I don't want to be seen as as someone who is susceptible to knee jerk reactions and sensationalist comments.
You know who you are the type of person that will be on the news during Grand Final week when Richmond make it one day saying something like this....
Yeah I have been a fan for so many years and I always believed we would get here and everything has been so worth it and I am so happy and they are just so good and yadda yadda yadda.
Homer Simpsons and the Isotopes syndrome that is you.
What the stuff are you on about?
I've been a member for 30 odd years.
Sat through all the billpoo rebuilds and thrashings.
You don't know me.
I've rattled the stuffing tins and given my hard earned as many supporters here have.
You don't have any stuffing right to accuse a fellow supporter of his or her loyalty to a club they've forever loved.
I for one would never question yours or any other supporters loyalty to the tigers. I think it's gutless petty and downright disrespectful.
I consider all OER members or contributers to be loyal passionate fans. I don't see how having an opinion can change that for anyone here.
-
Hey Tigra.
We are on year 4 of a rebuild since the end of 2009.
Collingwood have been rebuilding since 2004.
They have played finals every year since 2006 and every prelim since 2009 minimum.
Did you expect we were going to beat them as easy as you formulated in your mind?
What about your secret weapon had numerous chances to repay the critical errors he made in the second and he hit the post from 30 when he could have run in and kicked a goal but I digress and I don't want to be seen as as someone who is susceptible to knee jerk reactions and sensationalist comments.
You know who you are the type of person that will be on the news during Grand Final week when Richmond make it one day saying something like this....
Yeah I have been a fan for so many years and I always believed we would get here and everything has been so worth it and I am so happy and they are just so good and yadda yadda yadda.
Homer Simpsons and the Isotopes syndrome that is you.
What the stuff are you on about?
I've been a member for 30 odd years.
Sat through all the billpoo rebuilds and thrashings.
You don't know me.
I've rattled the stuffing tins and given my hard earned as many have supporters have.
You don't have any stuffing right to accuse a fellow supporter of his or her loyalty to a club they've forever loved.
I for one would never question yours or any other supporters loyalty to the tigers. I think it's gutless petty and downright disrespectful.
I consider all OER members or contributers to be loyal passionate fans. I don't see how having an opinion can change that for anyone here.
Trust me I know enough just to help me get by in life. ;)
What's this tripe you post?
A post that is supposed to pull at the heart strings and give you credence. Oh yes manipulation tinged with sadness justification and maybe a tear. You are a real trouper.
Makes your comments all the more irrelevant inept and inadequate.
Essendon culture anyone. :lol :rollin :lol
-
:lol@ tucker
is that all youve got?
c'mon mr football, surely you can give a more detailed account of what went wrong rather than swinging off roos's nuts and a one dimensional carry on.
tell me exactly where and why you disagree with my post.
They are soft, scared and stupid.
Dropping easy marks...stupid!
Watching the man and not the ball....stupid!
Allowing Sidebottom to roam free....stupid!
Not giving Rance any help on Cloke....stupid!
Throwing the ball on the boot in hope....stupid!
Why? Because we shat ourselves?
Why did we poo ourselves?
Because of applied and perceived pressure.
Perceived pressure creates mistakes
Established by the pies in the second quarter and executed early in the third where we were jumping at shadows and caught man watching, rushing and petrified.
Thus the mistakes started to happen.
We were outmuscled, outplayed, to slow to react and unproductive.
We didn't make a statement, we didn't establish a resolve, we got caught with out fingers up our bum.
We let them dictate and bully. We got caught with our pants down with all of the Collingwood supporters laughing at our tiny limp dick.
We didn't block and protect our captain.
We didn't work hard enough for each other.
There wasn't any support for Rance, no accountability for our opponents.
I was there I saw it unfold and I predicted it by half time.
Did I go expecting it? No!... I hoped I was wrong. I hoped I was overreacting. I hoped we'd flex our muscle and smash them. But my hopes were shattered half way through the second quarter.
gee you'd think we were belted over 4 quarters and lost by 10 goals.
a little bit of truth mixed in with a heap of kaka does not make you a seer.
nothing you have said is enlightening nor does it address as to what you think and why what i posted is incorrect.
eff me, i said early in the third that if collingwood get a 4 goal lead we are stuffed. wow what a marvelous insightful statement that turned out be ::)
can i pull myself stupid too?
No but in the 50's apparently you could pull yourself blind. For someone on here it will be forever 1953. :lol :rollin :lol
-
Nothing new here Al thinking his opinion is supreme. Tackles don't matter. Hahaha
:sleep :sleep :sleep
We were owned today 33 pts should've been 66.
The pies gave us a real hard lesson in tackling and defensive pressure today
That's why we lost. Anyone who thinks otherwise is dillusional
Tucker you see Dwyer today. First year great game. How about Petterd or Grigg you see them?
Well weather your in year 1 or year 7 of a rebuild you should be able to chase tackle and take relatively easy marks.
Its an area of our game which has become worse. Tackling and defensive pressure. You can't win too many games with the elite teams with those numbers we have dished out this yr
-
Petterd going for the ball one handed and dropping an easy mark and Vickery too has to do with individual attitude not whether a tackle or a nimble of tackles made a difference.
With the openness of scoring this season and the higher scores being kicked there are less stoppages and more flow therefore as a stat tackles have fallen as an industry wide thing this year.
Aside from the 25 minutes of the third quarter where all our parameters were woeful it would be remiss of anyone to think that tackling was the only thing S someone is chirping on here.
Now on that where of Martin who went AWOL after half time or the Cotchin clangers or the fact that Lids had 7 kicks and 17 handballs and we overlooked the footy in the first half when the game was to a certain extent manageable or it was on the scoreboard.
Yet tackles are the reason that makes a difference in the overall picture?
Whilst I am not making an excuse for our loss or any individuals as I will dish it out when I deem appropriate to any player what I will say is this as a whole we fell short in a lot of areas today against a side that has made the last 4 Prelims and at this stage of where we are at that is part of the learning process.
What Collingwood showed us today was a lesson in 25 minutes of simple footy lesson 1a run spread first option help kick to the advantage of a forward target and goal. Something we failed to maintain to any reasonable effort in the third.
Overall it wasn't our best effort but the side was competitive and diligent but their execution lacked the polish our opponents had.
As for Grigg and Petterd and others they can only take you up to a point and that point is 6-10 what we need to find, recruit and gather as well as develop is the players who will spread and have the skills and footy smarts to execute simple footy lesson 1a which will help move us up the ladder.
Whilst I am at it I will say that our endeavour and diligence cannot be questioned given the quality we have out there which is good enough to take us to finals but honestly not beyond a second week at best we now need to plan to get us to a stage above that whether it be through development of young talent on our list or free agency.
Tackling has nothing to do with it.
As for Petterd what has he done. All he has done is keep Batchelor out who played well against Carlton and was dropped after a poor effort against St Kilda but who is much more combative and physical than Petterd and who can play both tall and small.
I actually think Dimma got it wrong at selection regardless of what Rance said, Chaplain should have played on Cloke, Batchelor played an excellent game against Collingwood last year and should have played today and Vlaustin should have played today instead of Ellis.
Today was just a bad day whose genesis was spawned at selection on Thursday night and and grew in team planning and positioning on the ground.
-
Came away from the game not really that surprised, think we all knew if Collingwood came toplay and pressured us we'd struggle to stay with them. If we brought our best footy we'd give them a red hot crack but we brought our C Grade effort and the likely result eventuated.
What I came away from the game questioning was:
- The time machine back in time to Terry Wallace game plan of handball at all cost, run and carry? What happened to our kicking to space and going long that worked so well in the first 3 weeks? Maybe Pies pressure caused the lack of time and space to make these decisions which is also an area in itself that we need to get better at. The best sides deal with the opposition coming at you with pressure.
- Lack of option when we had the ball - how many times did we have the ball and Collingwood have a zone press and it felt as if our players conceded that we weren't going to find an obvious option so they waited for the kicker to kick long to a contest? Too many flat footed players today.
- Why did it seem every time we went to Jack that Brown, Reid and Shaw were all around Jack every time he went for the ball where as Cloke had Rance one on one on numerous occasions?
- Happens every week that oppositions cruise out of our backline with ease and each of our kick ins came straight back with interest. Decision making poor kicking to the side where they had Lynch and Hudson following Maric... every single time..
We'll learn from it, players and coaches alike had a bit of a mere, especially in the 3rd qtr.
-
Thought the umpires ought to be strung up was some dead set howlers
Some?
Try fecking heaps!! :banghead
Exhibit A: This was called 'play on' ...
(http://www.aflphotos.com.au/images/thumbs/450/2013/04/20/283236.jpg)
-
Petterd going for the ball one handed and dropping an easy mark and Vickery too has to do with individual attitude not whether a tackle or a nimble of tackles made a difference.
With the openness of scoring this season and the higher scores being kicked there are less stoppages and more flow therefore as a stat tackles have fallen as an industry wide thing this year.
Aside from the 25 minutes of the third quarter where all our parameters were woeful it would be remiss of anyone to think that tackling was the only thing S someone is chirping on here.
Now on that where of Martin who went AWOL after half time or the Cotchin clangers or the fact that Lids had 7 kicks and 17 handballs and we overlooked the footy in the first half when the game was to a certain extent manageable or it was on the scoreboard.
Yet tackles are the reason that makes a difference in the overall picture?
Whilst I am not making an excuse for our loss or any individuals as I will dish it out when I deem appropriate to any player what I will say is this as a whole we fell short in a lot of areas today against a side that has made the last 4 Prelims and at this stage of where we are at that is part of the learning process.
What Collingwood showed us today was a lesson in 25 minutes of simple footy lesson 1a run spread first option help kick to the advantage of a forward target and goal. Something we failed to maintain to any reasonable effort in the third.
Overall it wasn't our best effort but the side was competitive and diligent but their execution lacked the polish our opponents had.
As for Grigg and Petterd and others they can only take you up to a point and that point is 6-10 what we need to find, recruit and gather as well as develop is the players who will spread and have the skills and footy smarts to execute simple footy lesson 1a which will help move us up the ladder.
Whilst I am at it I will say that our endeavour and diligence cannot be questioned given the quality we have out there which is good enough to take us to finals but honestly not beyond a second week at best we now need to plan to get us to a stage above that whether it be through development of young talent on our list or free agency.
Tackling has nothing to do with it.
As for Petterd what has he done. All he has done is keep Batchelor out who played well against Carlton and was dropped after a poor effort against St Kilda but who is much more combative and physical than Petterd and who can play both tall and small.
I actually think Dimma got it wrong at selection regardless of what Rance said, Chaplain should have played on Cloke, Batchelor played an excellent game against Collingwood last year and should have played today and Vlaustin should have played today instead of Ellis.
Today was just a bad day whose genesis was spawned at selection on Thursday night and and grew in team planning and positioning on the ground.
Good response and agree with most of it.
Ive watched the game again this time on TV and their pressure on us for the whole game was first rate.
Watch Cotchin and how many errors he made. I felt they were at us all day causing us to make stupid decisions.
What's happened to that forward press we were so good at last year. Jack R Edwards were fighting tooth and nail last year to keep that ball in. We respond by laying 4 tackles in a quarter of football.
This year teams are cruising out of our back line with great ease
Petterd Grigg and those efforts today were because of the pressure around them. Didn't see those mistakes last week.
Just on Grigg have we overestimated his worth?
I'm trying not to judge him on that effort but what can he actually do for us in our flag aspirations.
A nick DAL type without a penetrating kick.
Would love to see his spot under review at some point this year
We learnt a lot about our side but next week will test us even more. Massive test
-
As for Grigg and Petterd and others they can only take you up to a point and that point is 6-10 what we need to find, recruit and gather as well as develop is the players who will spread and have the skills and footy smarts to execute simple footy lesson 1a which will help move us up the ladder.
Whilst I am at it I will say that our endeavour and diligence cannot be questioned given the quality we have out there which is good enough to take us to finals but honestly not beyond a second week at best we now need to plan to get us to a stage above that whether it be through development of young talent on our list or free agency.
Excellent points Tucker. I wrote this last night on the Bachar Houli thread
"problem from a supporters point of view is that a lot of people cant see that when Hardwick started this job some people said we had a worse list than Fitzroy. That was the starting point, so Hartley went out and got the likes of Houli and Grigg and thats good because that type of player gets you out of the basement but the reality is that they can only get you to the bottom end of the finals at best. Our supporters or some of them at least seem to think that we can be top 4 ... with whom? With recruiting the likes of Aaron Edwards or Chris Knights or Ricky Petterd? Problem is they are probably the same level as Houli and Grigg ... players who will only get you to the bottom reaches of the eight. They arent capable of taking us higher. Frank Jackson has done a good job but Ellis, Conca and Vlastuin are one in the same ... I see them as foot soldiers. Then we have too many weaknesses in our team, Jackson has supposedly been our best player (according to the coaches) I cant see it, Newman is getting on, we only have 1 ruckman, we dont have a big defender who can a key forward to the cleaners. Those are problems that any club has to deal with if they want to go higher.
Our side IMHO is not capable of top4. Our side has a maximum output that may get us to 7th or 8th and thats about it. If we want to finish higher we need to 1) get better players 2) develop our players better 3) have our coaches continue to improve. Thats it in a nutshell. We lost today because they (Collingwood) have better players than us. Thats the reality."
-
Great Post Ramps and actually a great thread WAT :thumbsup
I'd add that it is more so our depth of talent and the extent of player development that is the difference between being middle of the road and top 4.
The Pies have had sophisticated player development programs for a decade, ours started a couple of years ago.
I remember Bobby Simpson installed a competitive attitude and a focus on the basics like fielding when rebuilding the Australian test side 25 years ago, then as we improved there was an increased investment in development programs of our juniors and then we implemented the Cricket Academy which eventually made us an elite team.
There are many sides like us who sit below the top few clubs - Hawks, Pies, Cats and Swans - jostling for position in the bottom rungs of the top 8.
Being middle of the road is good for us, it is progress.
Supporters who fail to see that progress or want to see accelerated improvement beyond our current state cannot see the forest for the trees.
It's the Rachel Hunter Pantene shampoo syndrome.
BTW, good to see a decent thumping bring out the emotions - been sorely missing from the forum in the 1st month ;D
-
Great Post Ramps and actually a great thread WAT :thumbsup
I'd add that it is more so our depth of talent and the extent of player development that is the difference between being middle of the road and top 4.
The Pies have had sophisticated player development programs for a decade, ours started a couple of years ago.
I remember Bobby Simpson installed a competitive attitude and a focus on the basics like fielding when rebuilding the Australian test side 25 years ago, then as we improved there was an increased investment in development programs of our juniors and then we implemented the Cricket Academy which eventually made us an elite team.
There are many sides like us who sit below the top few clubs - Hawks, Pies, Cats and Swans - jostling for position in the bottom rungs of the top 8.
Being middle of the road is good for us, it is progress.
Supporters who fail to see that progress or want to see accelerated improvement beyond our current state cannot see the forest for the trees.
It's the Rachel Hunter Pantene shampoo syndrome.
BTW, good to see a decent thumping bring out the emotions - been sorely missing from the forum in the 1st month ;D
If we are 3 and 3 after 6 rounds youll start to see people get abit emotional on the forums and they will be forgetting that we are just middle of the road. 12 wins would be a terrific season for us. People need to adjust their expectations.
-
Ramps
Yesterday proved a few things
We arent good enough -player wise
Thought the coaching was poor at times
Petterd spare man back was comical . As if by chance he got possesion, he isnt a run and carry and is a poor kick and decision maker :banghead :banghead :banghead :banghead :banghead :banghead
-
To be honest guys I agree with all of the above,but some of us are getting ahead of ourselves if they thought we were a certain to win against the pies.We aiming for a 6th,7th or 8th position to make the finals we are not close to the top 4 that's my view.When we can do that then we can aim higher.
-
To be honest guys I agree with all of the above,but some of us are getting ahead of ourselves if they thought we were a certain to win against the pies.We aiming for a 6th,7th or 8th position to make the finals we are not close to the top 4 that's my view.When we can do that then we can aim higher.
Unfortunately the more gullible brought the media hype
-
hey Chuck.
How did Ivan go against Old Ben Hudson yesterday ?
-
hey Chuck.
How did Ivan go against Old Ben Hudson yesterday ?
LOL been waiting a while to say that haven't you, a season and a few games
-
Nothing new here Al thinking his opinion is supreme. Tackles don't matter. Hahaha
:sleep :sleep :sleep
Why do you make things up?
thats an outright lie, and you know it, unless you can prove thats what i said.
-
Credit where its due.
Ivan was sensational last year :thumbsup
This year, brought Carlton back in game in last quarter eg dropped marks, hitouts to opposition players etc
We got belted against the Saints in centre clearnances and he struggled
Was ok/good against the Minson
I thought yesterday he tried and broke square against a hack.
Either he is injured or gone off the boil.
-
Paul Roos agrees with me. I'll take his opinion over yours thankyou.
We play that girly poo pansy footy we ain't playing finals. If we do play finals we will have our pants pulled down like they were today.
You can dream all you like about how you'd like the team to play but a defensive no compromise hard ball, fierce and tough footy is what I want to see.
Kill or be killed!
They are soft and they shat themselves. Fact!
Unfortunately for you and Paul Roos , Mr Tigra a number of things (they call 'em stat categories) that were quoted in that article are wrong. So sorry if I am not paying much attention to you and Mr Roos
-
Credit where its due.
Ivan was sensational last year :thumbsup
This year, brought Carlton back in game in last quarter eg dropped marks, hitouts to opposition players etc
We got belted against the Saints in centre clearnances and he struggled
Was ok/good against the Minson
I thought yesterday he tried and broke square against a hack.
Either he is injured or gone off the boil.
Said it before I believe big Ivan is playing sore
And I thought he was our best yesterday so to me that reflects how bad others were
-
Ramps
Yesterday proved a few things
We arent good enough -player wise
Thought the coaching was poor at times
Petterd spare man back was comical . As if by chance he got possesion, he isnt a run and carry and is a poor kick and decision maker :banghead :banghead :banghead :banghead :banghead :banghead
As I mentioned Jack perhaps the genesis of our loss was spawned at selection and preparation for the game. Too many tv and radio interviews by coaches and players talking about fourth year at the club and Dimma going on TFS and the club trying to act positive and progressed off the field and neglecting to be progressed on it.
Dimma had an awful day in the box yesterday and if he had his time again some of the howlers he made during the week may not have caused the loss or a loss on that level yesterday.
Furthermore the club should learn from this and whether we get to a game like this later in the year or next year show some added maturity and get blokes like Benny Gale, Gary March and Barry Richardson's boy to field the media circus.
It is okay to be positive and embrace the hype but we clearly are not yet at the level quality wise on our list bar a select half dozen or so to to be media savvy player wise to embrace the week we've had and respond appropriately as Dane Swan did for his 200th.
-
Lids is now crap, shoot Rance, drop Vickery, Martin has had it, Houli is no good, Grigg sux, get rid of Petterd, put McGuanne down back, the coach was out coached......geezus after one loss. A reality check is all we had from a better side.
We will have a few more against Sydney, the Hawks, the Cats, the Dockers, Eagles and the Roos, win a couple of them and we are ok.
We should be more peeed off if we don't beat the Suns, GWS, Dees, Crows, Lions and Port!!
Next week will tell us more about our team, not today!
its funny in a way. but i have to say most of the players are criticised not because we win or lose but because they invariably make the same sort of mistakes win or lose.
and in a way i disagree. getting beat by sides like collingwood tells us more about where we are at than losses or wins against sides that are around us.
we all agree well 90% of us agree that we are a middling side atm. that being 7th thru 12th or so.
the logical thing is to go above that and go top 6 or top 4. to do that we do need to improve in lots of areas including personel.
on those you mention
rance well win or lose some point out his weaknesses they dont magically disappear because we have a win., mcguane tries his guts out but the weaknesses never go away.
grigg and houli are soft and are average kicks under certain circumstances win or lose this has not changed. vickery continues to be poor not just because we lost the criticisms are the same even when we win.
i dont need to go on im sure you get the point.
if we want to go to the next level we have to get better and we have to find better personell as well. it really has nothing to do with winning or losing.
i said at the start of the yr we could win just 3 games but significantly improve in critical areas that still holds true.
atm yes 7th or 8th should rightly be the aim but it is not the be all end all. without a doubt the main focus has to be on finding more players and developing them properlyto take that next step.
we were a middling team last yr and we are a middling team this yr so what has really changed not a lot really the same flaws are there that were there last yr.
whats the point of having players who go alright when its on their terms but fail when it counts.
jackson houli mcguane king possibly grigg and edwards are all players id be looking to find better petterd vickery as well and there are others in the gun atm. but hey this has been stated constantly and regularly regardless of wins or losses.
i have to ask is the sky falling or are people doing what they always do and putting their heads in the sand.
-
heads are just going into the sandpit claw. we are middle of the road and our recruiting this year was aimed at cementing our middle of the road status.
-
As for Grigg and Petterd and others they can only take you up to a point and that point is 6-10 what we need to find, recruit and gather as well as develop is the players who will spread and have the skills and footy smarts to execute simple footy lesson 1a which will help move us up the ladder.
Whilst I am at it I will say that our endeavour and diligence cannot be questioned given the quality we have out there which is good enough to take us to finals but honestly not beyond a second week at best we now need to plan to get us to a stage above that whether it be through development of young talent on our list or free agency.
Excellent points Tucker. I wrote this last night on the Bachar Houli thread
"problem from a supporters point of view is that a lot of people cant see that when Hardwick started this job some people said we had a worse list than Fitzroy. That was the starting point, so Hartley went out and got the likes of Houli and Grigg and thats good because that type of player gets you out of the basement but the reality is that they can only get you to the bottom end of the finals at best. Our supporters or some of them at least seem to think that we can be top 4 ... with whom? With recruiting the likes of Aaron Edwards or Chris Knights or Ricky Petterd? Problem is they are probably the same level as Houli and Grigg ... players who will only get you to the bottom reaches of the eight. They arent capable of taking us higher. Frank Jackson has done a good job but Ellis, Conca and Vlastuin are one in the same ... I see them as foot soldiers. Then we have too many weaknesses in our team, Jackson has supposedly been our best player (according to the coaches) I cant see it, Newman is getting on, we only have 1 ruckman, we dont have a big defender who can a key forward to the cleaners. Those are problems that any club has to deal with if they want to go higher.
Our side IMHO is not capable of top4. Our side has a maximum output that may get us to 7th or 8th and thats about it. If we want to finish higher we need to 1) get better players 2) develop our players better 3) have our coaches continue to improve. Thats it in a nutshell. We lost today because they (Collingwood) have better players than us. Thats the reality."
Didn't read your post last night Ramps but yep pretty much sums up what I was saying.
Great Greek minds. :thumbsup
-
Lids is now crap, shoot Rance, drop Vickery, Martin has had it, Houli is no good, Grigg sux, get rid of Petterd, put McGuanne down back, the coach was out coached......geezus after one loss. A reality check is all we had from a better side.
We will have a few more against Sydney, the Hawks, the Cats, the Dockers, Eagles and the Roos, win a couple of them and we are ok.
We should be more peeed off if we don't beat the Suns, GWS, Dees, Crows, Lions and Port!!
Next week will tell us more about our team, not today!
its funny in a way. but i have to say most of the players are criticised not because we win or lose but because they invariably make the same sort of mistakes win or lose.
and in a way i disagree. getting beat by sides like collingwood tells us more about where we are at than losses or wins against sides that are around us.
we all agree well 90% of us agree that we are a middling side atm. that being 7th thru 12th or so.
the logical thing is to go above that and go top 6 or top 4. to do that we do need to improve in lots of areas including personel.
on those you mention
rance well win or lose some point out his weaknesses they dont magically disappear because we have a win., mcguane tries his guts out but the weaknesses never go away.
grigg and houli are soft and are average kicks under certain circumstances win or lose this has not changed. vickery continues to be poor not just because we lost the criticisms are the same even when we win.
i dont need to go on im sure you get the point.
if we want to go to the next level we have to get better and we have to find better personell as well. it really has nothing to do with winning or losing.
i said at the start of the yr we could win just 3 games but significantly improve in critical areas that still holds true.
atm yes 7th or 8th should rightly be the aim but it is not the be all end all. without a doubt the main focus has to be on finding more players and developing them properlyto take that next step.
we were a middling team last yr and we are a middling team this yr so what has really changed not a lot really the same flaws are there that were there last yr.
whats the point of having players who go alright when its on their terms but fail when it counts.
jackson houli mcguane king possibly grigg and edwards are all players id be looking to find better petterd vickery as well and there are others in the gun atm. but hey this has been stated constantly and regularly regardless of wins or losses.
i have to ask is the sky falling or are people doing what they always do and putting their heads in the sand.
i agree Claw we need to get good players in, unless we find some genuine talent we will never be any good. Another rebuild is needed. At least 10 need to go at the end of the year and we need to draft kids and develop them. 2 ruckman 2 KPF and 2 KPD are essential in the next draft.
We'll be the youngest in the comp but so be it we need to bring in kids. :whistle
-
Mr Tiagra, so you think for 3 quarters we played soft unnacountable footy, and that was the only thing that hurt us, particlarly in the third? everything else was OK?
will you ever answer the question as to whether 50 tackles would have been an acceptable number?
In his defense I've seen him answer this a few times
-
where and what was the answer?
-
actually it doesnt really matter as he worked out what i was getting at and said that the top sides dont need a high tackle count but we do, or something along those lines.
-
actually it doesnt really matter as he worked out what i was getting at and said that the top sides dont need a high tackle count but we do, or something along those lines.
in 2012 the top sides had high tackle counts none were below an ave of 50. only two averaged less than 60 tackles a game ad and wce who both ave 59 tackles a game.
id say an ave of 60 tackles a game is the minimum we should be aiming at.
just for the record we ave 62 tackles a game last yr and we were fairly competetive in all games.
no surprise the only time we have gone over 50 tackles a gamer this yr we played our best footy against the dogs we played with intensity and applied pressure.
tackle count is a concern so is the intensity levels we are going at 41 tackles a game is that good enough no other side is below 50 tackles a game the next lowest and closest to us is both stkilda and gws going at 51 tackles a game
-
collingwood had 48 against us. those that love to leap on a single stat have saying that number is too low.
for someone who pooh pooh stats all the time im surprised you put such credence on a single stat in isolation.
also the overall trend in tackles seems to be down this year.
-
heads are just going into the sandpit claw. we are middle of the road and our recruiting this year was aimed at cementing our middle of the road status.
Frankly this is rubbish.
Our four national draft picks were 17 or 18 yoa.
-
heads are just going into the sandpit claw. we are middle of the road and our recruiting this year was aimed at cementing our middle of the road status.
Frankly this is rubbish.
Our four national draft picks were 17 or 18 yoa.
you dont think that getting petterd, knights, stephenson etc was aimed at just getting us into the eight?
-
collingwood had 48 against us. those that love to leap on a single stat have saying that number is too low.
for someone who pooh pooh stats all the time im surprised you put such credence on a single stat in isolation.
also the overall trend in tackles seems to be down this year.
when the stats back up the percieved weaknesses id say you take notice.
lots have complained about the lack of intensity the lack of tackling pressure and the poor skills. just to keep that stat in perspective collingwood had 48 tackles low for them yet we had just 33 thats a difference of 15 its massive when we have just 33 tackles.
we are currently last for ave tackles per game and by some margin.
in all fairness to those who are complaining id say there is some cause for concern. its not just tackling imo we have too many who dont work both ways dont do the team things and we dont play with enough intensity bulldogs excepted. our over all pressure created percieved pressure and some easy ball for our players against the dogs.. in all other games we have felt that percieved pressure and it reflects in the mistakes turnovers and constant skill errors..
tackling stats like all stats can be misleading. it could mean you are chasing tail all game and are second to the ball. i agree stats by themselves can be misleading but whos looking at them in isolation.
sides who are winning well are averaging a decent amount of tackles along with managing to win contests. they win games because they have a good balance between defense attack and ball winning.. the same can be said for the finals teams of last yr.
in all honesty are you telling us we have that balance right atm. if so i disagree. they beat us not just in tackles but had 57 more marks that says what. they had more contested ball yet out tackled us simply put it was not good enough.
i dont know about you but i want to see the intensity lift and the tackles happen. bruise free footy wont get you to finals and certainly not top 4. imo to be a good side first and foremost comes good defense right across the ground.
-
collingwood had 48 against us. those that love to leap on a single stat have saying that number is too low.
for someone who pooh pooh stats all the time im surprised you put such credence on a single stat in isolation.
also the overall trend in tackles seems to be down this year.
when the stats back up the percieved weaknesses id say you take notice.
lots have complained about the lack of intensity the lack of tackling pressure and the poor skills. just to keep that stat in perspective collingwood had 48 tackles low for them yet we had just 33 thats a difference of 15 its massive when we have just 33 tackles.
we are currently last for ave tackles per game and by some margin.
in all fairness to those who are complaining id say there is some cause for concern. its not just tackling imo we have too many who dont work both ways dont do the team things and we dont play with enough intensity bulldogs excepted. our over all pressure created percieved pressure and some easy ball for our players against the dogs.. in all other games we have felt that percieved pressure and it reflects in the mistakes turnovers and constant skill errors..
tackling stats like all stats can be misleading. it could mean you are chasing tail all game and are second to the ball. i agree stats by themselves can be misleading but whos looking at them in isolation.
sides who are winning well are averaging a decent amount of tackles along with managing to win contests. they win games because they have a good balance between defense attack and ball winning.. the same can be said for the finals teams of last yr.
in all honesty are you telling us we have that balance right atm. if so i disagree. they beat us not just in tackles but had 57 more marks that says what. they had more contested ball yet out tackled us simply put it was not good enough.
i dont know about you but i want to see the intensity lift and the tackles happen. bruise free footy wont get you to finals and certainly not top 4. imo to be a good side first and foremost comes good defense right across the ground.
:clapping :clapping :clapping :clapping :clapping :clapping :clapping
Top post Claw. :thumbsup
-
collingwood had 48 against us. those that love to leap on a single stat have saying that number is too low.
for someone who pooh pooh stats all the time im surprised you put such credence on a single stat in isolation.
also the overall trend in tackles seems to be down this year.
when the stats back up the percieved weaknesses id say you take notice.
lots have complained about the lack of intensity the lack of tackling pressure and the poor skills. just to keep that stat in perspective collingwood had 48 tackles low for them yet we had just 33 thats a difference of 15 its massive when we have just 33 tackles.
we are currently last for ave tackles per game and by some margin.
in all fairness to those who are complaining id say there is some cause for concern. its not just tackling imo we have too many who dont work both ways dont do the team things and we dont play with enough intensity bulldogs excepted. our over all pressure created percieved pressure and some easy ball for our players against the dogs.. in all other games we have felt that percieved pressure and it reflects in the mistakes turnovers and constant skill errors..
tackling stats like all stats can be misleading. it could mean you are chasing tail all game and are second to the ball. i agree stats by themselves can be misleading but whos looking at them in isolation.
sides who are winning well are averaging a decent amount of tackles along with managing to win contests. they win games because they have a good balance between defense attack and ball winning.. the same can be said for the finals teams of last yr.
in all honesty are you telling us we have that balance right atm. if so i disagree. they beat us not just in tackles but had 57 more marks that says what. they had more contested ball yet out tackled us simply put it was not good enough.
i dont know about you but i want to see the intensity lift and the tackles happen. bruise free footy wont get you to finals and certainly not top 4. imo to be a good side first and foremost comes good defense right across the ground.
You know a lot about our game Claw
Good post mate.
I wonder how 33 tackles will go against Freo?
-
I haven't had an issue with our tackling all year. We've had a stack of the ball compared to the opposition and you can't tackle when you have it. But that 3rd quarter they had the ball all quarter. Lay a bloody tackle. :banghead :banghead
-
Tackling is the new buzz word.
-
Looking at the year so far ,i am more or less content with how things have gone so far.Our standard of play has not been great ,but nevertheless we have won the majority of our games,so the upside is good.We do have deficiencies ,namely our disposal ,and i include shots on goal in that.
Going forward, for me anyway there are 3 elements that if they fall our way can propel us from a bottom 8 team to one much higher.The 3 elements are Dylan grimes,nathan foley and ty vickery.All 3 have missed substantial amounts of football and only now are just finding their feet.if all 3 can remain on the park and find form then watch out...our backline tightens and gets drive,our midfield becomes almost unstopable,and our forward line suddenly becomes potent.Of course i'm assuming that no substantial injuries happen to our other guns in the meantime.
-
collingwood had 48 against us. those that love to leap on a single stat have saying that number is too low.
for someone who pooh pooh stats all the time im surprised you put such credence on a single stat in isolation.
also the overall trend in tackles seems to be down this year.
when the stats back up the percieved weaknesses id say you take notice.
lots have complained about the lack of intensity the lack of tackling pressure and the poor skills. just to keep that stat in perspective collingwood had 48 tackles low for them yet we had just 33 thats a difference of 15 its massive when we have just 33 tackles.
we are currently last for ave tackles per game and by some margin.
in all fairness to those who are complaining id say there is some cause for concern. its not just tackling imo we have too many who dont work both ways dont do the team things and we dont play with enough intensity bulldogs excepted. our over all pressure created percieved pressure and some easy ball for our players against the dogs.. in all other games we have felt that percieved pressure and it reflects in the mistakes turnovers and constant skill errors..
tackling stats like all stats can be misleading. it could mean you are chasing tail all game and are second to the ball. i agree stats by themselves can be misleading but whos looking at them in isolation.
sides who are winning well are averaging a decent amount of tackles along with managing to win contests. they win games because they have a good balance between defense attack and ball winning.. the same can be said for the finals teams of last yr.
in all honesty are you telling us we have that balance right atm. if so i disagree. they beat us not just in tackles but had 57 more marks that says what. they had more contested ball yet out tackled us simply put it was not good enough.
i dont know about you but i want to see the intensity lift and the tackles happen. bruise free footy wont get you to finals and certainly not top 4. imo to be a good side first and foremost comes good defense right across the ground.
No i am not saying that 33 is acceptable. I am on record as saying a number in the low 40s is low. so that should put to bed that sort of rubbish, although there are some will continue to twist things to suit themslevs.
people keep harping on about this as if it is the be all and end all, as if we suddenly start getting 80 tackles a game we will be premiers and champions.
Against footscray our pressure and very good,acknowledged by most, yet we still only had 50 tackles. but for some thats not enough. somehow they think there is a magic number that you must get, yet thats 2 more than collingwood got on the weekeend. i then get one rabbit tell me that it is acceptable for a top team, but we need more? what the logic behind that? as you say looking at the differencial is a better indicator, but even that is flawed.
Despite our low tackle count rnd 1 we had the highest scoring from turnovers. Now isnt the idea of tackling to create a turnover? even now we are up there with turnovers created in our forward 50. add to that that the tackle count seems to be down accross the comp, except for a couple of games like freo last week and perhaps sides are applying pressure in a different way?
perhaps we should be looking at tackles in conjunction with pressure acts and turnovers? On the weekend i noticed that collingwood would get a couple of cheap cheap posessions coming out of the backline, but then break down badly. you could see the player with ball desperately searching but would often end up kicking either straight to one of our players or to a contest where we were at least the same numbers and many times outnumbered. result, we get the ball back without a tackle being layed. It appeared as if we allowed that easy kick to set up a defensive zone further up the ground that simply strangled them. Now once again for slow witted and trolls, that doesnt mean that tackles are not important, just that there other ways to win back the ball.
for three quarters on the weekend we matched Collingwood but were blown out of the game in one. In those three quarters they kicked 9 goals, in the one they kicked 7. You dont keep a side like collingwood to 9 goals in 3 quarters without applying some sort of pressure?
so for the umpteenth time, everything about our game went the window in that quarter, everything, tackles included. in fact because our structures went out the window, we didn't get near them to lay a tackle. so what was the issue?
did our lack of tackling cause our structure to break down, or did our structures breaking down cause the lack of tackling ( as well as actually getting the stuffing ball) . someone lese asked where do we get a quarter by quarter breakdown of the stats and it would be good to get hold of. their number of uncontested possessions would have been phenomenal for that quarter.
When things go to the crapper and opposition start spiltting you wide open and getting a lot of uncontested posessions, lack of tackles is not the cause, but a symptom.
-
Thought the umpires ought to be strung up was some dead set howlers
Only real shocker was the Swan HTB, he even stopped and had a look on his face that he'd been caught red handed.
-
4-2 Ill pass 3-3 means we have achieved f all