Author Topic: Why we lost today vs North Melbourne  (Read 15528 times)

Offline Chuck17

  • The Shaun Grugg of OER
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 13136
Re: Why we lost today vs North Melbourne
« Reply #15 on: September 13, 2015, 08:26:53 PM »
The big reason we lost today is this........GOLDSTEIN!

Plus a handful of soft pricks in our team

Offline The Machine

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 3574
Re: Why we lost today vs North Melbourne
« Reply #16 on: September 13, 2015, 08:28:45 PM »
Looking back I'm surprised we were in front for so long with all our leaders (bar Jack) so poor. Thought McIntosh was also very good today. He's had a great first year in the side. Well done son.

 :thumbsup played a good game and stood up :clapping

No More

  • Guest
Re: Why we lost today vs North Melbourne
« Reply #17 on: September 14, 2015, 02:11:56 AM »
Im depressed anyone got some ice

Online MintOnLamb

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 3425
  • You have to think anyway, so why not think big? DT
Re: Why we lost today vs North Melbourne
« Reply #18 on: September 14, 2015, 03:48:02 AM »
The minute Newman, Griffiths and Conca were named we were in trouble, nothing against them but 2 underdone players and 1 slow player ain't going to cut it against North.
Support for Cotch was non existent, where did Lids go to?
A great season marred by stage fright.

Online Hard Roar Tiger

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 7555
Re: Why we lost today vs North Melbourne
« Reply #19 on: September 14, 2015, 05:46:47 AM »
Marks inside 50 would be a compelling stat.
Scores from rebound 50 another.

3 scores over 100 vs us all year - Norf have 2 of them.

Bottom line, we played the game on their terms.
“I find it nearly impossible to make those judgments, but he is certainly up there with the really important ones, he is certainly up there with the Francis Bourkes and the Royce Harts and the Kevin Bartlett and the Kevin Sheedys, there is no doubt about that,” Balme said.

Offline eliminator

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 3687
Re: Why we lost today vs North Melbourne
« Reply #20 on: September 14, 2015, 06:00:19 AM »
Compelling stats they won more of the contested ball, they had more hit outs to advantage, they had more tackles, they had more shots on goal and once they got on top re uncontested possession we were in trouble. Cotch and Lids did not have good games and they got it out of our forward line too easily and got easy goals from turnovers.

Offline wayne

  • Fame of Hall
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 8409
  • In Absentia
Re: Why we lost today vs North Melbourne
« Reply #21 on: September 14, 2015, 07:00:50 AM »
Was Hardwick trying to be too smart?

'Norf bringing back all their "big guns", pfft, i'll show you big guns norf, i'll raise you conca and griffiths'.

Finals are a contested game, everything changes in finals. Thomas should have been in. That should have been the only change, Thomas in, Newy out.
And you may not think I care for you
When you know down inside that I really do

Offline 🏅Dooks

  • FOOTBALL EXPERT
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 10370
  • 🏆✴✔👍⛉🌟
Re: Why we lost today vs North Melbourne
« Reply #22 on: September 14, 2015, 07:04:20 AM »
In order:-

1) lost at the selection table. Lennon and Lloyd would have been more effective and fit than those 2 peanut ins

2) lids, cotch and Martin all down. Poor leadership.

2 part 2) nobody prepared to take the game on. Run and carry and kick the ball longer into 50.

3) dumb decisions. Eg Chaplin around nahas.

3) part 2 - dumb decisions in the coaches box. Move Cotchin and lids fwd or back if getting tagged so hard. Batch on there top fwd for the day.

4) Seemed to hammer us in centre clearances when they got on a run.

5) inside 50s from them relentless. Even great defenses lose a certain % of contests.

6) overall, bad luck with the umpires at influential times and locations.
"Sliding doors moment.
If Damian Barrett had a brain
Then its made of sh#t" Dont Argue - 2/8/2018

Offline Go Richo 12

  • Richmond tragic, bleeding heart, hopeless cricketer and terrible fisherman.
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 5277
Re: Why we lost today vs North Melbourne
« Reply #23 on: September 14, 2015, 07:05:09 AM »
I reckon Dimma got sucked in by the 9 fresh players and thought I'd should bring in some fresh ones of his own.

Offline yandb

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Why we lost today vs North Melbourne
« Reply #24 on: September 14, 2015, 07:50:32 AM »
!2 months ago we were smashed by a team playing loose man in defence yesterday we were beaten by a team playing loose man in defence.

The definition of stupidity is to repeat the same thing over and over and expect a different result.

Can some one point out who was our loose man?

Offline 🏅Dooks

  • FOOTBALL EXPERT
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 10370
  • 🏆✴✔👍⛉🌟
Re: Why we lost today vs North Melbourne
« Reply #25 on: September 14, 2015, 08:18:24 AM »
!2 months ago we were smashed by a team playing loose man in defence yesterday we were beaten by a team playing loose man in defence.

The definition of stupidity is to repeat the same thing over and over and expect a different result.

Can some one point out who was our loose man?

Chaplin at times
"Sliding doors moment.
If Damian Barrett had a brain
Then its made of sh#t" Dont Argue - 2/8/2018

Offline WA Tiger

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 14257
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: Why we lost today vs North Melbourne
« Reply #26 on: September 14, 2015, 08:20:12 AM »
We need another tall backman. As well as a mid, ruck, goal sneak and utility.
DIMMA - You will be held ACCOUNTABLE...

“We are really excited about what we have brought in. We have got great depth of players that can take us where we need to go. We are just putting some cream on the top at the moment,” he said.

"Rucks:
Shaun Hampson is the No.1 man"

tony_montana

  • Guest
Re: Why we lost today vs North Melbourne
« Reply #27 on: September 14, 2015, 08:29:45 AM »
!2 months ago we were smashed by a team playing loose man in defence yesterday we were beaten by a team playing loose man in defence.

The definition of stupidity is to repeat the same thing over and over and expect a different result.

Can some one point out who was our loose man?

Floss, big difference between Hanson and him and their ability to influence the contest in the air.


Offline WilliamPowell

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 38964
  • Better to ignore a fool than encourage one
    • One Eyed Richmond
Re: Why we lost today vs North Melbourne
« Reply #28 on: September 14, 2015, 09:08:00 AM »
Can some one point out who was our loose man?

Deledio played loose man off CHB at the majority of centre bounces
"Oh yes I am a dreamer, I still see us flying high!"

from the song "Don't Walk Away" by Pat Benatar 1988 (Wide Awake In Dreamland)

Offline YellowandBlackBlood

  • Long suffering….
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 10688
Re: Why we lost today vs North Melbourne
« Reply #29 on: September 14, 2015, 09:14:18 AM »
!2 months ago we were smashed by a team playing loose man in defence yesterday we were beaten by a team playing loose man in defence.

The definition of stupidity is to repeat the same thing over and over and expect a different result.

Can some one point out who was our loose man?

Floss, big difference between Hanson and him and their ability to influence the contest in the air.
Sorry Tony, but that is a very very poor comparison. Vlastuin is listed as 187cm and Hansen at 197cm. You would expect Hansen to be far more influential in the air. They are totally different players. That is why I said we should have further developed Elton this year. He is 197cm and has the physical characteristics to play at the top level. The mental side of things are still undeveloped and will remain so unless we pull the trigger and play him in the seniors. If they're not going towrope Chaplin,  I'd drop Batchelor, put in Elton and play Flossy in the middle as a big bodied mid floating back and helping out the defence.
OER. Calling it as it is since 2004.