WaynesWorld19
Moderator
- Moderator
- #301
Maybe down the track ....at this stage we're a long way off top teams in terms of team confidence / arrogance
Review Good, Bad and Ugly vs Melbourne
- Thread starter Glenno23
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
Maybe down the track ....at this stage we're a long way off top teams in terms of team confidence / arrogance
Phil Walsh isn't though, it seems...
Kind of a complaint don't you think? He could have said part of the game and moved on straight away.
WaynesWorld19
Moderator
- Moderator
- #304
Walsh does look in control doesn't he ....seems to know where we're at & where we're going
Good: - David Mackay. Shocked at that performance would be how I would describe it. Pleasantly surprised. BOG
- Walker managing to kick 3 in those conditions with a quality defender on him
- Sloane, Hans-Yolmen, Betts, Lynch, Talia, Jacobs, Smith all played pretty well
- Crowd. 42k was good for the weather. Very vocal. Still wish the bridge was about twenty feet wider though!
- Thommo. Great to see him come in and play that well. Is a real asset to us when he plays like that.
Bad: - Jenkins. If we had any other options right now I'd be playing them. He was horrendous.
- C.Cameron. Has more talent in his little finger than many in our team but needs to find a way to get involved. Needs a run in the SANFL to find touch
- Laird. After a fantastic two weeks I was pretty disappointed in his game. Expected him to stand out a little more in those conditions.
- Hartigan. Had a stinker. He keeps playing due to lack of options but we need him to do better than he did if we are to match it with the best
- Dangerfield. Couldnt get himself into the game (had an excuse but could have done more)
Ugly: - Paul Roos. Made the game uglier than it needed to be. Although I was a little bemused by our tactics early, we started with 4 in the forward line and then they had an extra player or two on the outskirts of the first couple of contests of the game.. from what I saw that is the a major reason they got off to such a good start. I think Walsh or whoever thought of that maybe need stick to at least 5 to start the game. Too defensive too early.
- umpiring: the protection of Danger was non-existent and was truly an embarrassment on themselves. In fact the umpiring for the match was pretty bad. Way too much holding going on which directly influenced play. They missed some for both sides but I felt the first half especially they missed heaps of holding frees our way.
- Hartigan/Cameron kicking towards the centre of the ground to switch play when the obvious play should have been to go down the line. I think Walsh needs to address this because its not just these two instances that have cost us in the first three games.
- Walker managing to kick 3 in those conditions with a quality defender on him
- Sloane, Hans-Yolmen, Betts, Lynch, Talia, Jacobs, Smith all played pretty well
- Crowd. 42k was good for the weather. Very vocal. Still wish the bridge was about twenty feet wider though!
- Thommo. Great to see him come in and play that well. Is a real asset to us when he plays like that.
Bad: - Jenkins. If we had any other options right now I'd be playing them. He was horrendous.
- C.Cameron. Has more talent in his little finger than many in our team but needs to find a way to get involved. Needs a run in the SANFL to find touch
- Laird. After a fantastic two weeks I was pretty disappointed in his game. Expected him to stand out a little more in those conditions.
- Hartigan. Had a stinker. He keeps playing due to lack of options but we need him to do better than he did if we are to match it with the best
- Dangerfield. Couldnt get himself into the game (had an excuse but could have done more)
Ugly: - Paul Roos. Made the game uglier than it needed to be. Although I was a little bemused by our tactics early, we started with 4 in the forward line and then they had an extra player or two on the outskirts of the first couple of contests of the game.. from what I saw that is the a major reason they got off to such a good start. I think Walsh or whoever thought of that maybe need stick to at least 5 to start the game. Too defensive too early.
- umpiring: the protection of Danger was non-existent and was truly an embarrassment on themselves. In fact the umpiring for the match was pretty bad. Way too much holding going on which directly influenced play. They missed some for both sides but I felt the first half especially they missed heaps of holding frees our way.
- Hartigan/Cameron kicking towards the centre of the ground to switch play when the obvious play should have been to go down the line. I think Walsh needs to address this because its not just these two instances that have cost us in the first three games.
- Apr 18, 2012
- 2,960
- 1,465
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Sample size is too small. We'll have some idea of where we're at after the port game. Need to look at the bigger picture.
Two steps forward one back kind of thing.
We've been pretty lucky with our draw. Need to see how we stand up after the bye to get a true idea.
he does... it's gonna be interesting to see how he handles the blow torch when it comes... good luck to him...
WaynesWorld19
Moderator
- Moderator
- #309
Yesterday was an early indication i thought ......good to see a strong 2nd half in bad weather
WaynesWorld19
Moderator
- Moderator
- #310
- Thread starter
- #311
Scoreboard says 3-0, so yep
- Apr 18, 2012
- 2,960
- 1,465
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
If I were a player I'd buy in solely on this expression
'this **** knows what he's doing'Just watching the replay ....yesterday yes ...replay may prove to be different
watching the replay - that will take dedication...
Anyone saying Patrick wasn't effective today is a fool. We won the game before the bounce when Roos decided to put their most creative player in a nullifying role on one of our many damaging midfielders. Roos showed how defensive minded he is by doing so.
As a result, Patrick won that battle because he's Patrick.
As a result, Patrick won that battle because he's Patrick.
- Thread starter
- #316
watching the replay - that will take dedication...
I never want to watch that game again and i watched last years MFC game replay in the pre season!
WaynesWorld19
Moderator
- Moderator
- #317
It actually looks better in replay than it did on the daywatching the replay - that will take dedication...
If I were a player I'd buy in solely on this expression
it's got "you wanna play* with me?" all over it...
"Say Hello to my little friend!"....
that's not even funny...
- Jul 19, 2010
- 25,584
- 63,152
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Camporeale summed it up well on radio this morning.
"This stuff has been happening for as long as I've been involved in footy. It's part of the game. We just need to help Dangerfield a bit more and he needs to help himself."
Perfectly put.
Good to see the club isn't buying into the wailing and gnashing of teeth happening on this board.
God help us if we ever play in a game like the '89 GF. Some of you will be rocking back and forth in the foetal position.
"This stuff has been happening for as long as I've been involved in footy. It's part of the game. We just need to help Dangerfield a bit more and he needs to help himself."
Perfectly put.
Good to see the club isn't buying into the wailing and gnashing of teeth happening on this board.
God help us if we ever play in a game like the '89 GF. Some of you will be rocking back and forth in the foetal position.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm convinced most on this board have never played footy. Vince did his job. The laughable thing is that Roos told him to do it, and sacrificed one of their few playmakers in doing so.
- Thread starter
- #322
Danger handled yesterday poorly. Yes, i agree. He needs to play smarter like he did in rounds 1 and 2. He reverted back to 2014 Danger yesterday
And there'll never be a game like the 89 GF again. It's a completely different era and you know that. If they had the rules in place in 89 like they do now, both teams wouldn't have been able to field a full team in 1990 due to the suspensions handed out
Last edited by a moderator:
Melbourne are going absolutely no where if they are satisfied with that s**t. Going man on man at stoppages, standing off your player so you can tackle and scrag when they get possession is nothing more than a ploy to not get smashed. It will never win a game.
- Thread starter
- #324
And that was a win for us. We have more play makers than MFC to take Danger's spot than they do Vince
I just don't get why they did it. They win week 1 kicking a great score (it appears against average opposition) they then have a great first half in week 2 then get run over. They then fall into old habits quicker than a fat kid runs at a cupcake and they go all shithouse game style yesterday
They'll never return to any sort of glory continuing to fall into old tricks like that
Anyway, i'm off to golf. See you tonight BF
He actually got cheers from many in our crowd in the same fixture last year. I didn't hear a boo at all in that game. We were all sad to see him traded.
Yesterday, as you mentioned, he wasn't booed until it became obvious (and it was far more obvious at the ground than on TV) that he was playing 'unsociable football', targeting our playmakers off the ball.
- Status
