West Coast - where to now?

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
I keep hearing about injuries, but Cockatoo and Guthrie were gone at half time and Geelong had us on toast. Was their absence a difference or not?
one bloke on the bench was always going to be hard in the last quarter. they ran out of puff because of injuries which meant rotations were gone. you should be winning again next week and working on keeping your foot on the throat and not relenting. As should have happened yesterday.
 
one bloke on the bench was always going to be hard in the last quarter. they ran out of puff because of injuries which meant rotations were gone. you should be winning again next week and working on keeping your foot on the throat and not relenting. As should have happened yesterday.

You know that West Coast aren't that good, right? We're talking about a team with 3 of the top few midfielders in the comp that most people think will finish top 4 vs a team that is supposedly on the slide and has one of the worst midfields going around? It's not like Geelong were playing a full strength Adelaide in Adelaide or something.

We got lucky that Geelong were down rotations but with only 2 on the bench for the second half they were all over us. The real turning point was Ablett going off in the last quarter because he was having a big influence. It's hardly a famous victory for the ages but the alternative to kicking 6 goals in 10 minutes to win the game is rolling over and losing because of yet another second half fade out - which we did 6 times last year. Had we lost we'd be copping s**t for losing to a team with 1 on the bench and letting a lead slip, but we won and are still copping s**t. As I said, no pleasing some people.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Ablett going off being the turning point is a bit of a mislead IMO

Geelong kicked 2 more goals and 2 points after that so they still kept their momentum up.

It was 10 minutes after he went off when the tide finally turned.
 
it isn't about pleasing people. you had the game shot to bits in the first half. and as you point out you faded out and, imo, only won the game due to the cats running out of rotations therefore puff. ablett was the icing on the cake. you should be concerned about the fade out but happy with the win. there are good signs and bad signs. analyse the game for what it was.
 
We really should just give the 4 points to Geelong for bravery in the face of adversity.

Not at all , take any little bit of luck you can get there are plenty of times the boots been on the other foot I'm sure but there was quite a few ' stick that up your a** anyone who ever doubted us ' posts after the game that were being a bit disrespectful to the Cats considering the circumstances. Anyway it should be a nice spicy lead up and a all,out war come derby time


On iPad using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Outplayed Geelong for two and a half quarters, possibly the best midfield in the competition. Sure, they ran out of steam, but it's impressive any way you cut it.

There was clearly an adjustment made in terms of structure / gameplan by Geelong. Something was woefully wrong in that first half, once that was corrected it was a complete reversal. Shame for the Cats that even during that impressive run, another 2 or 3 goals went begging that might have broken the Eagles properly.
 
I was watching Danger in the last 7 or 8 minutes and he was basically standing still on the spot..he was spent. Burst players need that time on the bench and with Ablett out they lost their engine room, swinging Yeo into the guts was the pivotal point of the last quarter and a very good decision.
 
I was watching Danger in the last 7 or 8 minutes and he was basically standing still on the spot..he was spent. Burst players need that time on the bench and with Ablett out they lost their engine room, swinging Yeo into the guts was the pivotal point of the last quarter and a very good decision.

In fairness - the holy trinity rarely run both ways. It's up to others to do that sort of running.

That's not a criticism per se - you want your best attacking footballers.. attacking. Chasing and tackling can be done by role/grunt players.

Which is why you need balance in your 22.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

There was clearly an adjustment made in terms of structure / gameplan by Geelong. Something was woefully wrong in that first half, once that was corrected it was a complete reversal. Shame for the Cats that even during that impressive run, another 2 or 3 goals went begging that might have broken the Eagles properly.
True, but the Eagles had a couple of goals go begging during their impressive first half that could have iced the game by half time. Likewise, the Masten goal that wasn't that became a 12 point turnaround could have halted the momentum if allowed to stand. Footy is full of what-ifs'.
 
In 2016-17, WC debuted a total of four players: Cole, Karpany, Mutimer and Partington.

Already in 2018, they've debuted another four players in Ryan, Venables, Waterman and Rioli.

I'm not sure any of the first group are best 22 – maybe Cole. But all of the second group might be – or at least best 25.
 
Yeah lots of negativity... weird.

We gave Sydney a good run for their money and Sydney are right in the premiership mix. Then we get a good away win in Melbourne and then beat another top four fancy in Geelong.

Why the negativity? All this without the best FF in the comp who kicks 75 plus a year. We are also debuting kids in Rioli, Ryan, Venable and Waterman.

I think it's been a hugely positive start to the season.
Yeah you d have to be happy if your an eagles supporter at the start so far.

Maybe some caution with the win over Geelong but more to the point there no where near as good as the media would have you believe.
Still , can only beat what's in front of you
 
I was watching Danger in the last 7 or 8 minutes and he was basically standing still on the spot..he was spent. Burst players need that time on the bench and with Ablett out they lost their engine room, swinging Yeo into the guts was the pivotal point of the last quarter and a very good decision.

Dangerfield played 89% of the game against Hawthorn and 84% against us, Selwood 88 and 83, Ablett 93 and 66.

These guys shouldered a pretty heavy workload only 6 days before yesterday's match. Not surprised if they were cooked towards the end.

Waterman, Venables, Lycett, Naitanui, Rioli, Ryan were our only players to play sub 80% of game time. Geelong had Parsons plus the 3 guys who went off injured. Midfield minutes were pretty even for both teams.
 
Not a ruck but only had to do 10-15% where as lycett is doing 50% .
If natanui could play 80% game time i would be happy to try darling but even at his peak fitness nic cant do that 80%
The question also begs to be answered - nn at 80% game time might not have the impact he has now playing in bursts.

He is a burst player - if hes playing 80% tog you would suggest hes more use resting in the forward line than on balling
 
True, but the Eagles had a couple of goals go begging during their impressive first half that could have iced the game by half time. Likewise, the Masten goal that wasn't that became a 12 point turnaround could have halted the momentum if allowed to stand. Footy is full of what-ifs'.

I'm not claiming Geelong should have won, just pointing out that there was a serious deficiency in structure or setup in that first half which contributed to the lead, as much as some shite efforts and skills from the Cats.
 
The question also begs to be answered - nn at 80% game time might not have the impact he has now playing in bursts.

He is a burst player - if hes playing 80% tog you would suggest hes more use resting in the forward line than on balling

Averaged 79% in 2011 and started to impose himself on games. Averaged 82% in 2012 and made the AA team. Averaged 75% in 2015 and made the AA squad.

Right now we are managing his time on ground, not just his time in the ruck. He's not going to be as good as he's been so far pro rata for 100% of game time, that's just ridiculous - but he should be able to maintain his current level and spend 10-20% of the game forward rather than just sitting on the pine. He has 2 goals so far for the year and both have come from him just being close to goal and creating something out of nothing. He kicked multiple goals 5 times in 2015 playing with Sinclair and 6 times in 2012 playing with Cox. For a bloke who doesn't know how to mark taking 45 contested marks in a season isn't a bad effort.
 
In fairness - the holy trinity rarely run both ways. It's up to others to do that sort of running.

That's not a criticism per se - you want your best attacking footballers.. attacking. Chasing and tackling can be done by role/grunt players.

Which is why you need balance in your 22.

Joel Selwood had more tackles than any of your mids, and would dare say his career average is higher also. Please don't contribute to the spreading of falsehoods.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top