Autopsy Rd 9 - If only games went for 1 quarter aka Still the Hawks bunnies

[Earls Smother]

I wonder how many schools of thought there's going to be in terms of player resting during games via longer durations on the bench. There's a post a bit earlier in the thread featuring 3-4 players all of whom played less than 60% game time.

Obviously, we want to win games of football. But at what stage do we be careful with what pieces we've got to ensure they're full of run in 5 days?

Why does it need to be the fitness staff making that type of decision over and above the coaches though?
It appears with us that Russell is pre-determining minutes within a game. If he provides that info to Teague, then Teague should use it at selection to freshen the team. It just seems like the MC don’t want to hurt players feelings by appearing to “drop” them.
We are going to get a really good look at about 25 players this year, and hardly see (or learn) anything about the next 6 we should be seeing more of.
There is nothing wrong with identifying one forward (Betts, Cuners) one mid (Kennedy, Murph, Setters) and one back (Simmo, Samo, Willo) for a “rotation” if needed.
I can understand with the structural players (Cas last week) that you need to play them sore sometimes. IMO with Fisher, O’Brien, Dow when fit, Honey/Owies, Cottrell etc. we have genuine options. Those guys fresh would have to give the side a lift over the tired/sore versions of the ones listed above.

 

[Jimthegreat]

Welcome to the world of a developing side. Great wins, like Geelong at Geelong, Essendon and the Dogs, combined with s**t losses like Melbourne, St.Kilda and last night. That's the journey of an up and coming side. While the result is unacceptable it will happen along the way. 10-10 under Teague is real progress. Inconsistency, that's caused s**t losses, means we're not 13-7 or 14-6. Over time the inconsistency will hopefully disappear.

 

[Ald Gardiner]

Simmo’s experience and nous will eclipse whatever LOB can bring to the table, but the trade off is we’ll be getting minutes into LOB and given his age we should be expecting him to have a decent run of games to see where he is at. He’s still likely to make as many errors as Simmo, but regardless whether he wants to go on this should be his last year as his performance isn’t warranting a spot ongoing.

Murphy frustrates me no end with his lack of pressure and feeble tackling attempts. When we play well he’s usually a good contributor, when we’re under pressure he’s a genuine liability which is unbearably disappointing for a guy of his experience and talent.

I thought it was well known that Murphy has banged up shoulders just can’t apply any pressure in tackles, ala Walks towards the end

 

[Iamcarlton]

As much as we needed Andrew Russell to sort the lads out physically, we need an equivalent in the sports psychology realm. Our lads make some god awful baffling decisions at key points of games. There is not one shred of an effective winning mentality in this side. Skill errors are one thing and part of the game, but the right mentality, professionalism, and composure are crucial if we are ever going to be more than a side that shows flashes of brilliance now and then.

According to some former Hawthorn players Shane Crawford being one and i think Lewis was another this is actually one of his best traits being able to mentally prepare the players as well as physically .

 

[La Dispute]

It was still bold and for the right intentions.
Is it something we could do and given our list, probably should do?
There are no guarantees in any move, but it was clear what Hawthorn wanted to do, allowing the likes of Worpel, O'Meara more midfield minutes.

This isn't on the back of one game only, but I'd be surprised should we not allow Murphy to remain should he want to. That's the difference.

Different set of circumstances, but yes it’s something we should be looking to do. For all his experience and for what he does bring on field Murphy isn’t much of a leader and his defensive effort is dismal at best and non-existent at worst.

Last year we made the tough call in letting Daisy go despite his solid senior form, so there should be no qualms about getting rid of other senior players if it’s in the best interest of the squad. We have noticed no real difference defensively with Daisy out of the side - and of course Doc and Willo returning has helped that, and almost certainly factored into our thinking - and I think there will be a similar result with Murphy.

 

[Gethelred]

Why does it need to be the fitness staff making that type of decision over and above the coaches though?
It appears with us that Russell is pre-determining minutes within a game. If he provides that info to Teague, then Teague should use it at selection to freshen the team. It just seems like the MC don’t want to hurt players feelings by appearing to “drop” them.
We are going to get a really good look at about 25 players this year, and hardly see (or learn) anything about the next 6 we should be seeing more of.
There is nothing wrong with identifying one forward (Betts, Cuners) one mid (Kennedy, Murph, Setters) and one back (Simmo, Samo, Willo) for a “rotation” if needed.
I can understand with the structural players (Cas last week) that you need to play them sore sometimes. IMO with Fisher, O’Brien, Dow when fit, Honey/Owies, Cottrell etc. we have genuine options. Those guys fresh would have to give the side a lift over the tired/sore versions of the ones listed above.

I don't know that they are. I'd expect such a process to be consultative rather than managerial; they would plan it out, and structure it as a compromise instead of Teague or Russell overruling each other. After all, they have a joint goal - to win games of football. Teague wouldn't want players out due to soft tissue injuries or fatigue, and neither would Russell.

It's just an interesting thought just a few games in. We played our game on Sunday, then on Friday; a 5 day turnaround. We've lost both of our 5 day turnarounds this year, Saints and Hawthorn. I'd be interested in league wide stats concerning the short turnaround, because I hardly think we'd be the only club afflicted.

 

[Curnivore]

Not you too Arr0w...

Right or wrong. That's it. There's no such thing as a hard choice, just a correct one.

You ever heard of a little film called Sophies choice?

 

[BlueView]

And just on that, we have looked by far our most settled when Casboult is behind the ball intercepting in the backline. With so many tall forwards injured he's needed forward but I hope we can get him back there again soon.

Defensively we’ve been really good but that was an experiment that worked wonders last year. Surprised we haven’t seen more of it in spurts this year, just wonder if we’ve become a little less nimble with those type of moves

 

[JustaBattler]

You have outcome X, and you have what actually happened (Y). To what extent does X equal Y?

If it's to a large extent, you've succeeded in making the correct choices to get to that point, regardless of how 'tough' they were or how 'strong' you had to be to make them. If it's to a lesser extent, you have an opportunity to reassess if - and only if - something is actually wrong.

Sometimes, the hardest thing to do is nothing, to allow the status quo to continue and eventually to turn in your favour, if all variables are accounted for. Does the hardness of that choice make it correct, or is it simply the right decision because it's the right decision?

The most difficult move in chess is to do nothing - but that nothing move is important and strategic because it forces your opponent to do something that will disadvantage their position. Doing nothing for the sake of doing nothing however, is a different thing entirely when there is no strategic benefit - all you are doing is kicking the can down the road...

Anyway...I guess the big lesson (again) is that in a shortened format a big lead after Q1 doesn't mean the other team is out of the game. It is a one-game loss and perhaps the circumstances leading up to the game were a bit against the side - a cross country move a long wait to check in a couple of blokes that would have been more than handy not available...and covid and fines and ....

the side isn't battle-hardened it is getting the experience up - but there is an air of fragility constantly hanging around - if enough of the mids are having an off day or quarter(s) any decent side can and probably will (as we have seen) come back...

I'd like to see Carlton learn to play a possession game (ie do nothing except keep possession) for 5-minute stretches to good effect - I don't understand how a midfield structure can fall apart like it did yesterday - but in order to play a possession game, slow things down , take the momentum out of the game - the skill and execution factor has to go up a few notches...and that is where I have a problem fitting in some of our mids, including Murph.

I feel like Teague is encouraging this full-on game - because we do lack the skill and ability to actually control the game via kick to kick, especially between the arcs where it matters - Hawthorn had something like 60+ more uncontested possessions than we did for the last 3 quarters - which means that they controlled the ball - they took control and run us around and made the team look like unstructured witches hats - what they did for extended periods of time was do nothing kicks and maintained possession and waited for our structure to meltdown - it did.

The same lack of polish is shown when it comes to kicking set shots - we don't have a lot of players who can kick a goal from 40 meters out - Cripps cant do it that's for sure - he has an abysmal kicking action - hopefully he adds to his need to fix list.

The year isn't over it was just one game - but finals are probably a bit too hard from here unless someone flicks a switch and fixes the gaps in polish and class.

I agree that we are probably sitting on a bit of class playing in the wrong position(s) atm - Cuningham in a forward pocket is a bit of a waste of kick and run ability - I'd be switching him for Murph at least half the time. SPS has to play closer to contested action more often he is still superb and controlled with ball in hand and finding a loose player with a kick - but he lacks the running power to drive us off HBF - I'd trust him to find the right forward in our 50 OR execute into the corridor - something that Knewnes and Walsh aren't particularly good at and neither is Murph these days.

Jones is the definition of chaos in defence - he let the ball get out the back way too often yesterday and whilst being an excellent technical kick - of the ball - he has a habit of kicking it to the wrong place or person at the wrong time a tad too often. However, the most disappointing aspect of the game for me anyway was the ineffectiveness of Setterfield and Kennedy when it was time to start winning contests and wrestle back momentum - the whole midfield set up and strategy was broken yesterday - made us look awfully pedestrian.

 

[Gethelred]

You ever heard of a little film called Sophies choice?

I have, and people continue to bring it up when I make this argument.

That is a choice between two things, without a correct or incorrect option. Technically both are correct. But the implication of this argument is that by choice or decision we are referring to the same thing, that a decision made in pursuit of winning an AFL grand final or in a business context is akin to being forced to choose between two of your children as to who will die.

Suffice to say, it's hardly an apples to apples comparison.

 

[Curnivore]

I have, and people continue to bring it up when I make this argument.

That is a choice between two things, without a correct or incorrect option. Technically both are correct. But the implication of this argument is that by choice or decision we are referring to the same thing, that a decision made in pursuit of winning an AFL grand final or in a business context is akin to being forced to choose between two of your children as to who will die.

Suffice to say, it's hardly an apples to apples comparison.

It's apples to apples for people who don't like there kids

 

[La Dispute]

We need to start planning for life after Jones too, realistically.

He’s almost 30 and for all his athleticism he’s still learning the defensive caper and is also good for a couple of excruciating mistakes each game.

We need to look at other squads and pick out a decent replacement for him. Get in someone like Barrass (hypothetically) to take on the mantle at full-back.

 

[Metalcrusher]

The most difficult move in chess is to do nothing - but that nothing move is important and strategic because it forces your opponent to do something that will disadvantage their position. Doing nothing for the sake of doing nothing however, is a different thing entirely when there is no strategic benefit - all you are doing is kicking the can down the road...

Anyway...I guess the big lesson (again) is that in a shortened format a big lead after Q1 doesn't mean the other team is out of the game. It is a one-game loss and perhaps the circumstances leading up to the game were a bit against the side - a cross country move a long wait to check in a couple of blokes that would have been more than handy not available...and covid and fines and ....

the side isn't battle-hardened it is getting the experience up - but there is an air of fragility constantly hanging around - if enough of the mids are having an off day or quarter(s) any decent side can and probably will (as we have seen) come back...

I'd like to see Carlton learn to play a possession game (ie do nothing except keep possession) for 5-minute stretches to good effect - I don't understand how a midfield structure can fall apart like it did yesterday - but in order to play a possession game, slow things down , take the momentum out of the game - the skill and execution factor has to go up a few notches...and that is where I have a problem fitting in some of our mids, including Murph.

I feel like Teague is encouraging this full-on game - because we do lack the skill and ability to actually control the game via kick to kick, especially between the arcs where it matters - Hawthorn had something like 60+ more uncontested possessions than we did for the last 3 quarters - which means that they controlled the ball - they took control and run us around and made the team look like unstructured witches hats - what they did for extended periods of time was do nothing kicks and maintained possession and waited for our structure to meltdown - it did.

The same lack of polish is shown when it comes to kicking set shots - we don't have a lot of players who can kick a goal from 40 meters out - Cripps cant do it that's for sure - he has an abysmal kicking action - hopefully he adds to his need to fix list.

The year isn't over it was just one game - but finals are probably a bit too hard from here unless someone flicks a switch and fixes the gaps in polish and class.

I agree that we are probably sitting on a bit of class playing in the wrong position(s) atm - Cuningham in a forward pocket is a bit of a waste of kick and run ability - I'd be switching him for Murph at least half the time. SPS has to play closer to contested action more often he is still superb and controlled with ball in hand and finding a loose player with a kick - but he lacks the running power to drive us off HBF - I'd trust him to find the right forward in our 50 OR execute into the corridor - something that Knewnes and Walsh aren't particularly good at and neither is Murph these days.

Jones is the definition of chaos in defence - he let the ball get out the back way too often yesterday and whilst being an excellent technical kick - of the ball - he has a habit of kicking it to the wrong place or person at the wrong time a tad too often. However, the most disappointing aspect of the game for me anyway was the ineffectiveness of Setterfield and Kennedy when it was time to start winning contests and wrestle back momentum - the whole midfield set up and strategy was broken yesterday - made us look awfully pedestrian.

All valid points.

 

[Thrall]

According to some former Hawthorn players Shane Crawford being one and i think Lewis was another this is actually one of his best traits being able to mentally prepare the players as well as physically .

He can only work with the cattle he has. Unfortunately second best is acceptable down at Carlton and its hard to change that mindset within the group

 

[Arr0w]

Whether a decision is right or wrong can only be judged in retrospect. You make the best decision you can, on the basis of the available evidence, and you monitor the situation. But you do not suddenly - out of a desire to be or to seem hard - start allowing pressure to force you into making different or divergent decisions.

People obsessed with hardness/toughness need to have others look at their choices and wince. They eat gravel for breakfast, ask for a punch as encouragement, and shovel sh*t at work all day. They go home and yell at their kids and partners, they go to bed in their iron maiden, and when someone offers them a gift for their birthday they'd be disappointed if they were capable of feeling anything so soft.

I do not care how hard a decision was or is. It is completely irrelevant as far as I'm concerned. I am solely concerned with making the right call after consideration of alternatives with as many different expert perspectives considered. That's it.

I see it slightly different, but let's not do it here

 

[carlton2dabone]

The usual suspects are out in force defending mediocrity, finding any and every excuse under sun to defend individual players or the team as a whole because we have slightly moved up off the bottom of the ladder 5 years into a rebuild.
I or no one I know has any faith that we can win a game no matter how far in front we are:

- up by 13 points with 7min left against Port and failed for the entire 7min to even get the ball out of our backline past the halfway point of the ground even though we had many clear possessions to do so
even worse yet, we were still up by a few points with 40 seconds to go and in possession of the ball ourselves yet let the opposition.

- Up 31-0 against the Hawks in the first quarter only to lose the game by 32 points by end of game.

- 42 points up against Geelong with less than a half to play and we only win because they miss some very easy shots at goal from directly in front.

- Up by 4 points with 50 seconds to go against the Bombers with the opposition having to kick out of our own goal square and only won because their players failed to make the distance by half a metre.

- Up by 5 goals against North who are second last on ladder and only iced the game with a few minutes left on the clock.


Add to the above that:

- down by 40 plus points against the Tigers before we finally woke up.

- down by 5-6 goals against demons before we finally woke up and then found a way to avoid winning the game when we were stream rolling over the top of them.

- down by 5-6 goals against the saints before we finally woke up.

 

[Iamcarlton]

He can only work with the cattle he has. Unfortunately second best is acceptable down at Carlton and its hard to change that mindset within the group

Understand that i think however we are 10-10 under Teague so theres improvement win/loss anyway .
The rest of this season will tell a story on how far weve come imo .

 

[Brackets]

Second quarter is where the game was lost. 25 lead turned into a 13 point deficit in 11 minutes.

Breakdown of key moments:

12:05: Kennedy has space to have a shot on the run but fumbles. They score a goal soon after.

9:30: Martin has time to deliver into forward 50 and hits their player on the chest.

8:25: Willo blocks for Newnes who fumbles. Hawks goal.

8:10: Ball would have hit the roof at Marvel yet Impey somehow takes an uncontested mark after the centre clearance on Sammo. Luckily a point.

7:15: We switch it, Murph has it on defensive 50, and has no one to kick to. He overcooks the kick and turns it over, but that was on the whole team. Another point.

6:15: Weitering tells Jones where to kick it then runs the opposite direction. Know your teammates, Jones will follow instructions. Turnover. Goal.

4:05: Cripps losses the plot. Doc scrubs the kick. Point against.

3:10: Cripps can chip to Betts for an open goal, almost kicks it ootf.

2:10: No one bothers to pick up Smith as he runs the length of the ground. Wingard is left unnacounted. Unsurprisingly they goal through these two.

Shoutouts to Sammo, Martin, Gibson, Newnes and Jones who were all made to look second rate within 50 seconds.

2:00: Jones having a mare. Goal.

00:40: Sammo continues to show why he's not a defender. Goal.

Lot of senior names there.

I don't believe it was due to their pressure. Most of these were of our own doing. Half hearted jogs and not presenting. Lazy and selfish unaccountable footy. I hope we were just spent.

Sammo and Cripps were particularly bad. Jones close behind. Many unsighted. Plowman, Ed, Betts, Willo persevered. Moore tries but plays on a 10 second delay.

 

[haveago]

Second quarter is where the game was lost. 25 lead turned into a 13 point deficit in 11 minutes.

Breakdown of key moments:

12:05: Kennedy has space to have a shot on the run but fumbles. They score a goal soon after.

9:30: Martin has time to deliver into forward 50 and hits their player on the chest.

8:25: Willo blocks for Newnes who fumbles. Hawks goal.

8:10: Ball would have hit the roof at Marvel yet Impey somehow takes an uncontested mark after the centre clearance on Sammo. Luckily a point.

7:15: We switch it, Murph has it on defensive 50, and has no one to kick to. He overcooks the kick and turns it over, but that was on the whole team. Another point.

6:15: Weitering tells Jones where to kick it then runs the opposite direction. Know your teammates, Jones will follow instructions. Turnover. Goal.

4:05: Cripps losses the plot. Doc scrubs the kick. Point against.

3:10: Cripps can chip to Betts for an open goal, almost kicks it ootf.

2:10: No one bothers to pick up Smith as he runs the length of the ground. Wingard is left unnacounted. Unsurprisingly they goal through these two.

Shoutouts to Sammo, Martin, Gibson, Newnes and Jones who were all made to look second rate within 50 seconds.

2:00: Jones having a mare. Goal.

00:40: Sammo continues to show why he's not a defender. Goal.

Lot of senior names there.

I don't believe it was due to their pressure. Most of these were of our own doing. Half hearted jogs and not presenting. Lazy and selfish unaccountable footy. I hope we were just spent.

Sammo and Cripps were particularly bad. Jones close behind. Many unsighted. Plowman, Ed, Betts, Willo persevered. Moore tries but plays on a 10 second delay.

spot on sum up.......but IMO the being knackered was the biggest factor...watched replay, very heavy legs all over park.

 

[Accidental genius]

Second quarter is where the game was lost. 25 lead turned into a 13 point deficit in 11 minutes.

Breakdown of key moments:

12:05: Kennedy has space to have a shot on the run but fumbles. They score a goal soon after.

9:30: Martin has time to deliver into forward 50 and hits their player on the chest.

8:25: Willo blocks for Newnes who fumbles. Hawks goal.

8:10: Ball would have hit the roof at Marvel yet Impey somehow takes an uncontested mark after the centre clearance on Sammo. Luckily a point.

7:15: We switch it, Murph has it on defensive 50, and has no one to kick to. He overcooks the kick and turns it over, but that was on the whole team. Another point.

6:15: Weitering tells Jones where to kick it then runs the opposite direction. Know your teammates, Jones will follow instructions. Turnover. Goal.

4:05: Cripps losses the plot. Doc scrubs the kick. Point against.

3:10: Cripps can chip to Betts for an open goal, almost kicks it ootf.

2:10: No one bothers to pick up Smith as he runs the length of the ground. Wingard is left unnacounted. Unsurprisingly they goal through these two.

Shoutouts to Sammo, Martin, Gibson, Newnes and Jones who were all made to look second rate within 50 seconds.

2:00: Jones having a mare. Goal.

00:40: Sammo continues to show why he's not a defender. Goal.

Lot of senior names there.

I don't believe it was due to their pressure. Most of these were of our own doing. Half hearted jogs and not presenting. Lazy and selfish unaccountable footy. I hope we were just spent.

Sammo and Cripps were particularly bad. Jones close behind. Many unsighted. Plowman, Ed, Betts, Willo persevered. Moore tries but plays on a 10 second delay.

They put an extra man down back but we continued to get it into f50 quickly hoping we could continue scoring but they kept rebounding which put a lot pressure on our defence. Which resulted in us making lots of mistakes. This is sort of what tesugue alluded to in his presser.

 

[HARKER]

Different set of circumstances, but yes it’s something we should be looking to do. For all his experience and for what he does bring on field Murphy isn’t much of a leader and his defensive effort is dismal at best and non-existent at worst.

Last year we made the tough call in letting Daisy go despite his solid senior form, so there should be no qualms about getting rid of other senior players if it’s in the best interest of the squad. We have noticed no real difference defensively with Daisy out of the side - and of course Doc and Willo returning has helped that, and almost certainly factored into our thinking - and I think there will be a similar result with Murphy.

Good point about Thomas. Forgot about him and that was a hard/right call.
Murphy may be a little different though, as he is a Carlton man.

We know what Murphy is and there's no need to pretend otherwise.
He still has a place in our best team, but he's not the smash and bash type and for whatever reason, cannot stick tackles.
If the value he currently has diminishes, the 'right' call has to be made and that's not a slight on Murphy at all.
He'll be remembered favourably as a player but maybe just a little more favourably should he exit on a high rather than a possible low....How knows for sure?

 

[HARKER]

Not you too Arr0w...
Right or wrong. That's it. There's no such thing as a hard choice, just a correct one.

You're wrong in this instance....or at least for the choices that clubs confront

Clubs are sometimes reluctant to move on players that have served them well and can make the wrong call by allowing them to carry on beyond the real use by date, if said player is adamant they want to go on. It's happened to most clubs by one means or another, including internal pressures to retain and to not be seen as being the bad guys.

Then there's the measure of what is right and what is wrong. How exactly do you determine this?
Sometimes we see things that aren't really there and h'hope' that the negatives of one year will correct themselves the next when it comes to the players most beloved by the club. This is nothing new.

 

[Metalcrusher]

You're wrong in this instance....or at least for the choices that clubs confront

Clubs are sometimes reluctant to move on players that have served them well and can make the wrong call by allowing them to carry on beyond the real use by date. It's happened to most clubs by one means or another, including internal pressures to retain and to not be seen as being the bad guys.

Then there's the measure of what is right and what is wrong. How exactly do you determine this?
Sometimes we see things that aren't really there and h'hope' that the negatves of one year will correct themselves the next when it comes to the players most beloved by the club. This is nothing new.

Hmm most people learned and fans alike had that opinion of the Dorks list too .....

 

[carlton2dabone]

spot on sum up.......but IMO the being knackered was the biggest factor...watched replay, very heavy legs all over park.

Very heavy legs or fitness is such a cop out To use for this game considering nearly every game this year we have either let teams get 5 goal leads on us, or given up 5-7 goal leads at some point.

 

[Brackets]

Probably hard to tell live but Kennedy’s transition defence running is appalling. Cost us the first goal Hawks got in the second quarter. Just let Shiel jog forward fo the wing and kick to Burgoyne....Shiel then jogged forward and marked unattended and goaled.

Simpson created the mismatch, Kennedy was watching Worpel. Where was Cripps, Murphy or Setterfield, Walsh started behind all 3 and still got the closest after a detour. It was on SPS to pick Shiels up.