Review AFL Round 5 autopsy - Geelong defeats Western Bulldogs by 21 points

[Partridge]

I would like to disagree on GHS.

I have been fortunate to see GHS in the last two games live. He is not explosive like the outside mids/small forwards but he is as quick as most inside mids. Thats what he is there for - not to burn off opposition but to get to the contest, win ball and dish off by hand or foot. Then get to the next contest. He is an efficient runner and gets a lot of his ball in the corridor in congestion and better still he does not release to first option unless he is already in a tackle. He sums up his options and chooses the best option (usually).
With over 20 disposals in each game at good efficiency this has been a seamless transition from VFL to AFL.
Better than I had hoped for.

I would agree on Guthrie.

Although I already consider him AFL standard. He played well v doggies- and does all the important defensive things well especially then 1%ers. A long term player with us.

Seriously, Wells has unearthed two absolute nuggets here. Both players are going to be around for a long, long time. They're only going to get better too.

Very difficult thing to teach composure, and they both have it already.

 

[vealesy]

Only thing that frustrates me with Guthrie is sometimes he gets caught behind a leading opponent. Almost looks deliberate so he can reach in with that spoiling action he has.

No doubt it will be rectified in his game soon though.

 

[who_let_the_dogs_out]

Liam Jones is the Jessie White of the Dogs....a pure chump who does 9/10ths of SFA in his career but looks like Carey and Royce Hart reincarnated against Geelong. The Dogs players ran and chased relentlessly (and given they were without Griffen and Higgins) it was an amazing effort by them. We had few answers to Smith and Stringer with their goals, but thanks to Harry Taylor and co we got the four points.

Very harsh mate.

He is still very young, and as everyone knows key position players take time. Look how long Hawkins took to come on.

He kicked 4 a couple of weeks ago against Richmond as well, so this game wasn't out of the ordinary.

He had a very poor season last year, but the signs this year are good.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Seriously, Wells has unearthed two absolute nuggets here. Both players are going to be around for a long, long time. They're only going to get better too.

Very difficult thing to teach composure, and they both have it already.

Agree with this. I'm an unabashed fan of Guthrie and GHS. The 2010 draft (when you include Smedts, Schroder - ND and Walker, Simpkin, Burbury and Bathie - RD) could end up being another ripping crop for the club. Maybe not the multiple HOFers that we scooped up in 1999/2001 (and possibly 2006, the way things are going), but just an exciting mix of players, with a few looking capable of playing 200 games for the club.

 

[vinum coupe]

Seriously, Wells has unearthed two absolute nuggets here. Both players are going to be around for a long, long time. They're only going to get better too.

Very difficult thing to teach composure, and they both have it already.

Wells wasn't the only one looking at GHS. At least 4 other clubs were too

 

[JUBJUB]

The Notso Goodes got 2 weeks for his elbow on Caddy.
Cheapshot Boyd got a reprimand for his whack on Selwood.

 

[catempire]

Was Boyd saved from suspension because of a good record?

 

[witsend]

Being at the game with 26000 others...there was ZERO atmosphere or intensity before, during and after the game.
Actually considered leaving early, the game was so devoid of drama. It's all very well to think elite (if that's what we are) teams should get "up" every game, but the reality is they simply can't and won't.
Our older stars don't get out of bed for games like that where the 4 points really were never in danger. They have had sustained success for 6-7 seasons now. They will choose their battles sub-consciously.
Our younger players should be hungrier, but guess what? They're younger, so less consistent.
It's no disrespect to the Doggies but we all know they are not within a bulls roar of the Top 4 teams atm.
Richmond will get our full attention as will Essendon and Collingwood.
GCS and GWS will not.
You can say they will 'til you're blue in the face but they won't. It's human nature.
We tried being "on" for every single game in 2008. How did that work out?
Also hard for the MC and Coaches to demand 100% effort and commitment when they rest players.

 

[Beth]

So the message from the AFL is that Joel is fair game. Rightio then....

 

[oozeboss]

Was Boyd saved from suspension because of a good record?

Undoubtedly. And not in order to mark "Joel [as] fair game".

Boyd has a proven track record as a cleanskin, and this was out of character. Should he stray to the dark side again, I doubt that he'll be treated as leniently as he was here (and as he deserved to be, in the context of his playing record).

 

[Beth]

Undoubtedly. And not in order to mark "Joel [as] fair game".

Boyd has a proven track record as a cleanskin, and this was out of character. Should he stray to the dark side again, I doubt that he'll be treated as leniently as he was here (and as he deserved to be, in the context of his playing record).

This is true he's been fair game for a while now.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

Undoubtedly. And not in order to mark "Joel [as] fair game".

Boyd has a proven track record as a cleanskin, and this was out of character. Should he stray to the dark side again, I doubt that he'll be treated as leniently as he was here (and as he deserved to be, in the context of his playing record).

Yep, as expected, it was assessed exactly the same as Johnson's hit on Ballantyne. Difference being, Johnson has a history of these brain fades; Boyd doesn't. Simple as that.

Boyd has either 70-odd or 90-odd points hanging over him (depending on whether he makes an early guilty plea, or challenges and loses - something we did not risk with Johnson, so we don't know what the outcome would have been at the tribunal). Which means if Boyd does the same thing again in the next 12 months, he can't avoid a suspension from the MRP. That's how it works.

Our boys have had their Boyd-esque reprimands. They took them and didn't learn their lesson from them over the past 2-3 years. How bad did it get? When critical veterans were loaded up with 80-90 points late in the season, people on here were seriously suggesting that they should just get themselves rubbed out of a less important game for the most minor offence possible, to try to clean their slate (somewhat) for an inevitable incident happening and ruling them out for finals matches. And the worst part? It was a reasonable argument: we did not have any faith in our veterans keeping themselves from doing something stupid and getting suspended at the most important time of the year. And with good reason (hello, Steve Johnson and James Kelly).

I'm over this victim complex...it is absolute crap. In fairness though, they have been very good on that front so far this year and we all hope they can keep it going.

 

[AM]

Was Boyd saved from suspension because of a good record?

Yes!

 

[catempire]

You effectively get one good whack before you cop a suspension, don't you? Boyd will probably never lay another finger on another player.

 

[AM]

You effectively get one good whack before you cop a suspension, don't you? Boyd will probably never lay another finger on another player.

You do if it doesn't cause any significant damage. Boyd isn't a sniper by nature. I put it down to a brain fade. Reprimand is reasonable in the circumstances.

Sad thing is this sort of thing will continue until the umpires penalise it. It takes me back the the Baker assault on SJ which went on and on while the umpire stood metres away and took no action. A free kick and a warning to Baking and that whole unpleasant affair would have been nipped in the bud.

 

[InnocentBystandr]

Just out of interest IB, what do you think the reasons are for our not-so-great performance? There have been reasons like tough four weeks, injuries in first half, former players coaching Bulldogs etc. But you said "there were a few passengers out there tonight" I tend to agree and am interested in a explanation/different reasons why?
For me it's a general complacency, because the Boyz seem to prefer performing in Blockbusters - IMO.

Sorry for the delayed response (been away).
It was the lack of effort at times that irked me the most. The Dogs seemed desperate for the ball, our guys seemed laconic. When I said 'passengers', I mean that the guys seemed to take 'time off' during the game.
Reason: I think they underestimated the opposition (who were up for it) and had the game won before the game. Chris was relatively generous in his post match - I reckon he'd have been more stern behind closed doors. Anyway - on to Richmond, who aren't the mugs they used to be. 100% effort required this week!

 

[catempire]

You do if it doesn't cause any significant damage. Boyd isn't a sniper by nature. I put it down to a brain fade. Reprimand is reasonable in the circumstances.

Sad thing is this sort of thing will continue until the umpires penalise it. It takes me back the the Baker assault on SJ which went on and on while the umpire stood metres away and took no action. A free kick and a warning to Baking and that whole unpleasant affair would have been nipped in the bud.

100% agree. I would be surprised if the umps don't have a focus on it this week.

 

[candiehappy]

Sorry for the delayed response (been away).
It was the lack of effort at times that irked me the most. The Dogs seemed desperate for the ball, our guys seemed laconic. When I said 'passengers', I mean that the guys seemed to take 'time off' during the game.
Reason: I think they underestimated the opposition (who were up for it) and had the game won before the game. Chris was relatively generous in his post match - I reckon he'd have been more stern behind closed doors. Anyway - on to Richmond, who aren't the mugs they used to be. 100% effort required this week!

partly agree, but also I think Hawkins out changed the structure a lot. Coupled with Rivers subbed early, Caddy off early and Duncan half lame. I think that it was more than just attitude.

 

[vealesy]

partly agree, but also I think Hawkins out changed the structure a lot. Coupled with Rivers subbed early, Caddy off early and Duncan half lame. I think that it was more than just attitude.

There were legitimate excuses but that does not account for poor decision making.

 

[The Quandrinator]

credit to Dogs, they showed terrific attack on the footy and Jones looks a star of the future if not already.
They desperately need another big forward or two though.

For us, Taylor BOG, Guthrie, Smedts, Enright and that was really it to be honest

Agree. The dogs tried to make the game grubby - let's face it they couldn't allow our speedsters loose. So credit to them for playing ugly, unsociable footy. It's a different style to a couple of previous games. Surprisingly different to the Swans game.

I think Guthrie showed a lot but some of his decisions were awful. There were a couple of passes straight down their throats - if he can get that out of his game then he'll be a keeper

 

[candiehappy]

ummm, Stevie J ??

 

[Vdubs]

There were legitimate excuses but that does not account for poor decision making.

and average disposal by Enright, Duncan in particular. Duncan is normally so smooth, we'll allow the injury to be causative here.

 

[candiehappy]

and average disposal by Enright, Duncan in particular. Duncan is normally so smooth, we'll allow the injury to be causative here.

that's at least the fourth time Boris has been guily of average disposals (in 249 games ... )

 

[Farmer2Goggin]

partly agree, but also I think Hawkins out changed the structure a lot. Coupled with Rivers subbed early, Caddy off early and Duncan half lame. I think that it was more than just attitude.

Tend to agree , under those circumstances winning ugly was an acceptable result.
Tigers match will be a beauty............

 

[flatcat]

I would like to disagree on GHS.

I have been fortunate to see GHS in the last two games live. He is not explosive like the outside mids/small forwards but he is as quick as most inside mids. Thats what he is there for - not to burn off opposition but to get to the contest, win ball and dish off by hand or foot. Then get to the next contest. He is an efficient runner and gets a lot of his ball in the corridor in congestion and better still he does not release to first option unless he is already in a tackle. He sums up his options and chooses the best option (usually).
With over 20 disposals in each game at good efficiency this has been a seamless transition from VFL to AFL.
Better than I had hoped for.

I would agree on Guthrie.

Although I already consider him AFL standard. He played well v doggies- and does all the important defensive things well especially then 1%ers. A long term player with us.

I never said he can't play. Actually, mean he needs more game time. Happy to have good slow players rather than poor fast ones. But to my observation, he looked slow covering the ground. Maybe the speedy players we have now have changed my calibration. To be honest Jimmy was looking pretty slow on the weekend.