Author Topic: 2011=2007  (Read 6033 times)

10 FLAGS

  • Guest
Re: 2011=2006
« Reply #30 on: July 16, 2011, 06:06:20 PM »
MR CLAW is 100% absolutely spot on.  :clapping

the claw

  • Guest
Re: 2011=2006
« Reply #31 on: July 16, 2011, 06:13:36 PM »
We were 4-1-4 after 9 this year.

3 of the last 14 goals this week.
Last 10 goals last week.
103 point loss the week before.
16 points up half way through first against Melbourne and 20 points down at quarter time.

Players have no heart.

Jackstar under Wallace it was a combination of poor list and game plan.
I think Dimma has the game plan he just does not have the cattle.
A win today given how the last 3 quarters were played would have been as bad as the loss we are feeling now.
That aint DImma's fault. 6 goals up at quarter time you shouldn't lose from there. PLayers not mentally tough enough.
we were 0 9 at the start of last yr.
how does one say this and still make sense. its not wins that determines improvement. the  4-1-4 this yr may as well have been the 0 -9 of last yr when you take into account what we produced how we played who we played and what state they were in injuries etc when we played them. meaningless wins against mediocre opponents that is what was argued last yr and you know what it can be argued again.
the simple fact is the list is currently a bottom 4 list. we are hamstrung from quickly getting out of the bottom 4 because the vast majority of players in the 22  23 thru 30 age bracket are mediocre.
did gcs kids get them over the line today or was it their more senior types.

my concern is reactions from supporters like today. its as if they truly thought we were something more than a mediocre bottom 4 side with lots of work to do over a pretty decent length of time.
im peeed off we got beat today but i tipped us to lose im not upset and im not surprised i understand where the list is at im just surprised more of our supporters dont seem to grasp where its at and just how long it may take to fix.

in many ways jackstar is correct as far as performances go we are no better off than we were in the wallace days or frawley days. but i do think we are better off with the way we are trying to climb out of the cellar i think we have improved many areas we are going thru the right processes even if we are getting things wrong.

sorry this is as well as i can say what i want but it doesnt seem enough to explain myself properly.

Jackstar is back again

  • Guest
Re: 2011=2006
« Reply #32 on: July 16, 2011, 06:31:44 PM »
the win ratio isnt important, I agree with that.
The way you play is though
The last 6 weeks havent been good.
Last week, this week, and who knows what crap we dish up next week.
its a real worry and has 2006 written all over it.
We are extremely poorly coached at the moment, and the job at hand might be too difficult for an inexperienced coach.
hardwick doesnt have the ability or knowledge to stop the "bleeding "' in  game
As soon as Gold Coast kicked 2 goals after quarter time, it should of been to put several players behind the ball and a spare running in off the back of the square, but nah, let Gold Coast catch up.
same as against the Bombers, same as against Carlton.
Dimma might have to go
Something RADICAL needs to happen at Punt Road

Hellenic Tiger

  • Guest
Re: 2011=2006
« Reply #33 on: July 16, 2011, 06:33:38 PM »
In 2006 we overachieved and finished 9th.
At least this year we will be lucky to finish in the bottom four. Round 23 game against Adelaide will be critical if we are to finish bottom four which will equate to a top four pick.

Jackstar is back again

  • Guest
Re: 2011=2007
« Reply #34 on: July 16, 2011, 06:40:43 PM »
sorry 2007.got my years mixed up

the claw

  • Guest
Re: 2011=2006
« Reply #35 on: July 16, 2011, 07:47:07 PM »
In 2006 we overachieved and finished 9th.
At least this year we will be lucky to finish in the bottom four. Round 23 game against Adelaide will be critical if we are to finish bottom four which will equate to a top four pick.
agreed in 2006 we most certainly over achieved  and again the type of sides we beat in 06 were  in the main ordinary. i ask what quality sides did we beat. 11 wins or 4 wins if you still getting rolled by massive margins and struggling to beat top 8 sides its all the same.
i liken it to asking whats  the better performance. beating pa in darwin in a very ordinary game or pushing collingwood to within 5 goals in a high pressure game. the win means little but 5 goals against collingwood in the right circumstances despite being beaten would probably indicate massive improvement.

Online camboon

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 2443
Re: 2011=2007
« Reply #36 on: July 16, 2011, 07:54:59 PM »
2007  - older age group
2011 - younger age group

Not that hard really, development.

Its sad, but we wont win another game this year on current form.

Jackstar is back again

  • Guest
Re: 2011=2007
« Reply #37 on: July 16, 2011, 07:58:26 PM »
2007  - older age group
2011 - younger age group

Not that hard really, development.

Its sad, but we wont win another game this year on current form.

that will mean 10 losses straight and the end of Dimma

Jackstar is back again

  • Guest
Re: 2011=2006
« Reply #38 on: July 17, 2011, 09:11:20 AM »
this club always puts up with mediocrity.
This club is going no where. FACT
Our players we have recruited are POOR.
Are coach is POOR !.
We have the wind and we play slow tempo footy, your kidding !
make some hard decisions and get Malthouse and clean the place right out !
BUILD AN EMPIRE, not a playground :banghead

So after the Dreamtime game the game plan was what exactly?

And the coach was what exactly?

We were going no-where right?

Conca, Batchelor, Martin, Cotchin, are all poor recruits are they? All of them

Look I am disgusted as anyone on this forum but I reckon to compare now to 2006 is just a bit over the top

sorry, 2007

Offline Owl

  • Magnificent Bastard
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 7012
  • Bring me TWO chickens
Re: 2011=2007
« Reply #39 on: July 17, 2011, 10:04:37 AM »
There is something up, my spidey senses are tingling.
Lots of people name their swords......

Offline Tigeritis™©®

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 9657
  • Richmond, Premiers 2017.2019.2020
Re: 2011=2006
« Reply #40 on: July 17, 2011, 12:02:56 PM »



my concern is reactions from supporters like today. its as if they truly thought we were something more than a mediocre bottom 4 side with lots of work to do over a pretty decent length of time.
im peeed off we got beat today but i tipped us to lose im not upset and im not surprised i understand where the list is at im just surprised more of our supporters dont seem to grasp where its at and just how long it may take to fix.

sorry this is as well as i can say what i want but it doesnt seem enough to explain myself properly.
excellent job Claw, I thought you put your thoughts very well.  :thumbsup

I'm glad we lost. So now people all over this club can WAKE UP!
....including those posters who actually think Browne and Hislop are actually good players. I still can recall the posts "bring on the slop" "Hislop must come in the side!"
this is the exact same rubbish I'm hearing from those who want Tuck back in.
People we want excellence not mediocrity! 
The club that keeps giving.

Offline Penelope

  • Internet nuffer and sooky jellyfish
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 12777
Re: 2011=2006
« Reply #41 on: July 17, 2011, 05:38:12 PM »
Disagree.

Sure the stats have changed but the game plan has not.

Players like Nahas, King etc who were playing like champions in the first 10 weeks are now doing bugger all.

The way the players are executing the game plan has changed.

It's interesting with nahas.

when we were winning games he was often breaking the lines and creating 'overlaps' to quote a rugby term.

the last month or so  he seems to be getting closer attention and not having the same impact, and we seem to be having much more trouble moving the ball in the right direction. yesterday he created a bit in the first but after that was hardly sighted, which pretty much sums up the teams performance.

pretty bleak when an average player seems to be a vital cog
“For My thoughts are not your thoughts,
Nor are your ways my ways,” says the Lord.
 
“For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
So are my ways higher than your ways,
And my thoughts than your thoughts."

Yahweh? or the great Clawski?

yaw rehto eht dellorcs ti fi daer ot reisae eb dluow tI

Offline Coach

  • Hardly A Prude
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 8719
  • Depend on Schulzy
Re: 2011=2007
« Reply #42 on: July 17, 2011, 07:40:28 PM »



my concern is reactions from supporters like today. its as if they truly thought we were something more than a mediocre bottom 4 side with lots of work to do over a pretty decent length of time.
im peeed off we got beat today but i tipped us to lose im not upset and im not surprised i understand where the list is at im just surprised more of our supporters dont seem to grasp where its at and just how long it may take to fix.

sorry this is as well as i can say what i want but it doesnt seem enough to explain myself properly.
excellent job Claw, I thought you put your thoughts very well.  :thumbsup

I'm glad we lost. So now people all over this club can WAKE UP!
....including those posters who actually think Browne and Hislop are actually good players. I still can recall the posts "bring on the slop" "Hislop must come in the side!"
this is the exact same rubbish I'm hearing from those who want Tuck back in.
People we want excellence not mediocrity! 

"People we want excellence not mediocrity"

stuff off then and stop posting mediocre poo all the time you ass bandit

Offline Penelope

  • Internet nuffer and sooky jellyfish
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 12777
Re: 2011=2007
« Reply #43 on: July 17, 2011, 07:47:09 PM »
 :lol
“For My thoughts are not your thoughts,
Nor are your ways my ways,” says the Lord.
 
“For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
So are my ways higher than your ways,
And my thoughts than your thoughts."

Yahweh? or the great Clawski?

yaw rehto eht dellorcs ti fi daer ot reisae eb dluow tI