Autopsy Fremantle lose to Carlton

[more_of_bito]

Build bridge. If we win then what?
We scrape into finals (?) we make a miraculous run and become premiers (?) umpires will be sacked ? fantasy stuff to change.

Carlton won’t play finals and 30yo Curnow, 35 yo Murphy and Cripps centre setup “smashed” our 21 and younger midfield setup to continue the Teague train rolling to get 8th/9th?

There’s a false dawn at Carlton. Their top 10 picks Walsh, SPS, Dow are barely sighted in the centre even against our younger opposition setup 4 years after begging drafted .

I feel like our approach was correct. Only one of Fyfe, Walters and Mundy to attend centre clearances. With Brayshaw, Serong (was on Cripps most of the night), Cerra with bewley, Aish coming in on the wings.

It’s the long game we need to play.
Suggest for all our sanity....


/End Thread

 

[Van_Dyke]

fu** me. I have not watched any of that game for good reason and now I'm just pissed off all over again.

yeah thanks to those posting those videos, i've had birthdays go better than my one in 2013

 

[CakeEater]

Appalling decision that
Though the one that I think killed us the most was the gift free to Roughhead in the third quarter by Nicholls just after we had got it back to a three point deficit. Such a crucial momentum changing decision. I swear Dawson barely touched him.

That and the failure by nicholls to pay a far worse deliberate than Tabs's one, where Hodge soccered it 3 times from the centre square to make it go oob. We had the momentum as well.

 

[dropbear101]

Build bridge. If we win then what?
We scrape into finals (?) we make a miraculous run and become premiers (?) umpires will be sacked ? fantasy stuff to change.

Carlton won’t play finals and 30yo Curnow, 35 yo Murphy and Cripps centre setup “smashed” our 21 and younger midfield setup to continue the Teague train rolling to get 8th/9th?

There’s a false dawn at Carlton. Their top 10 picks Walsh, SPS, Dow are barely sighted in the centre even against our younger opposition setup 4 years after begging drafted .

I feel like our approach was correct. Only one of Fyfe, Walters and Mundy to attend centre clearances. With Brayshaw, Serong (was on Cripps most of the night), Cerra with bewley, Aish coming in on the wings.

It’s the long game we need to play.
Suggest for all our sanity....


/End Thread

You might be right on that one however I rate some of their talent such as weitering, jack martin, cripps, mckay and plowman.

Very thin on midfield depth/talent that would get you a premiership midfield.

 

[Docker82]

Not quite right. The coaches have instilled strategies and techniques that have made umpiring more difficult and generally detracted from the game as a whole.
Umpires put in a lot of hard work and follow the directions given to them.

Changing the rules of the game would generally make it harder to umpire wouldn’t it? Coaches don’t change the rules or interpretations.

Changing interpretations of rules like deliberate out of bounds, hands in the back and holding the ball when there was nothing wrong with it in the place has made umpiring a bunch of 50/50 decisions. That’s the reality.

[QUOTE="RedV3x, post: 66477785, member: 168905”]
For the umpiring to improve it would require:
1. Neutral umpires to stop the wholesale shafting of interstate clubs.
2. The umpiring fraternity has to concentrate on consistency and not week-to-week tweaks as they have been doing.
3. The laws of the game have to move to a qualitative basis away from interpretative type laws.
Prior opportunity should be a "one Mississippi", "immediate disposal" meaning immediate disposal. Deliberate kick replaced a kick back in. Make a goal a football going between the two big posts.
4. Any law changes to be made by people with an analytical insight to the ramifications of law changes.
5. The laws of AFL being divorced from Australian Football in general.[/QUOTE]

Agree entirely, although I stand by my statement that AFL umpires have next to no consequence for poor decisions is the biggest problem that has contributed to the poor standard of umpiring.

The biggest thing that’d help imo is sacking/moving sideways the entire AFL rules committee and not replacing them. Having these guys employed to change the rules means they change the rules for the sake of it.

 

[eastfreo75]

It's apparent that Whateley's issue with Freo was with Rosich and Lyon. He (and Robbo) have been nothing but positive about Freo and especially JLo all season. Robbo in particular has a massive man crush on Fyfe and both of them have referred back to Serong on multiple times since they interviewed him after his rising star nom.

Even Caro Wilson on the Age podcast yesterday was sticking up for Freo and talking in glowing terms about JLo and the class of his presser.

Not forgetting Barrett is on the record on multiple occasions stating that Sonny is his favourite player in the game.

Ross and Caro seem to be developing a respect for each other.

Ross while critical of his own sacking, has been very positive about Fremantle.

 

[eastfreo75]

Build bridge. If we win then what?
We scrape into finals (?) we make a miraculous run and become premiers (?) umpires will be sacked ? fantasy stuff to change.

Carlton won’t play finals and 30yo Curnow, 35 yo Murphy and Cripps centre setup “smashed” our 21 and younger midfield setup to continue the Teague train rolling to get 8th/9th?

There’s a false dawn at Carlton. Their top 10 picks Walsh, SPS, Dow are barely sighted in the centre even against our younger opposition setup 4 years after begging drafted .

I feel like our approach was correct. Only one of Fyfe, Walters and Mundy to attend centre clearances. With Brayshaw, Serong (was on Cripps most of the night), Cerra with bewley, Aish coming in on the wings.

It’s the long game we need to play.
Suggest for all our sanity....


/End Thread

100%

 

[Daddoo]

there has been a change over the years...........in the 80s AFL's product was a "game", where now it is "entertainment". As such I wonder if "entertainment" includes creating sensationalism, as we see with reality tv programs?

I also question about rule changes. How can the ruck rule change occur so quickly, such as the "primus rule", yet the "duckwood" rule not be implemented until the near end of his career?

Sadly I feel the AFL rule the game with an agenda in mind

Welcome to the world of professional sports. NFL has become the same, which is why I started to look for other sports, which is why I’m here. With content to fill the non stop sports shows (radio and tv) it’s almost better to have some controversy to talk about just the usual stuff.

I believe the saying goes “there’s no such thing as bad press.”


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[RedV3x]

Changing the rules of the game would generally make it harder to umpire wouldn’t it?

No.

Coaches don’t change the rules or interpretations.

That is a totally naive statement. Coaches have changed the way the game is played and the AFL has responded.

Changing interpretations of rules like deliberate out of bounds, hands in the back and holding the ball when there was nothing wrong with it in the place has made umpiring a bunch of 50/50 decisions. That’s the reality.

How far are you going back in history?

I stand by my statement that AFL umpires have next to no consequence for poor decisions is the biggest problem that has contributed to the poor standard of umpiring.

There are little consequences for what what the public perceive as poor umpiring.
Consequences only occur when the AFL see it as poor umpiring.

The biggest thing that’d help imo is sacking/moving sideways the entire AFL rules committee and not replacing them. Having these guys employed to change the rules means they change the rules for the sake of it.

Well, we agree that the rules committee is the pivotal problem.
The biggest problem in the AFL is congestion caused by a wall of players in front of the kicker as demanded by coaches.
The only 'natural' counter method available is to move the ball quickly and create 'space'.
The AFL's answer was to remove prior opportunity but removing prior opportunity has consequences.
We have the centre square bouncedown and that works because there is no congestion.
Why the AFL doesn't simplify the laws and make all bouncedowns the same (one player within 5m of the umpire) is beyond me.
One less law.
Deliberate kicking out is also contentious so making a kick out-of-bounds to be penalised simplifies three laws down to one,
replaces interpretation with definitive action and also speeds up the game slightly.

 

[more_of_bito]

You might be right on that one however I rate some of their talent such as weitering, jack martin, cripps, mckay and plowman.

Very thin on midfield depth/talent that would get you a premiership midfield.

Exactly, and I agree. Weitering, Curnow and Mackay and elite KPF/D and CHF. The development of their midfield is a concern.
Martin is a brilliant player and pick up but was an elite mid in juniors and as a 26 yo play him off half forward.
If Cripps gets injured they’re in trouble (sound familiar?(ie Fyfe)

 

[Fat Nyfe]

He also mentioned if the jumpers were reversed Carlton would be going mental.

If jumpers were reversed, there would be an official enquiry lodged about reversing the result

 

[eastfreo75]

Exactly, and I agree. Weitering, Curnow and Mackay and elite KPF/D and CHF. The development of their midfield is a concern.
Martin is a brilliant player and pick up but was an elite mid in juniors and as a 26 yo play him off half forward.
If Cripps gets injured they’re in trouble (sound familiar?(ie Fyfe)

Agree, the Blues young midfield is very underwhelming.

Cripps is heading to an early retirement like Judd. Too much asked of him and playing on Docklands.

 

[Paracleet]

Well, we agree that the rules committee is the pivotal problem.
The biggest problem in the AFL is congestion caused by a wall of players in front of the kicker as demanded by coaches.
The only 'natural' counter method available is to move the ball quickly and create 'space'.
The AFL's answer was to remove prior opportunity but removing prior opportunity has consequences.
We have the centre square bouncedown and that works because there is no congestion.
Why the AFL doesn't simplify the laws and make all bouncedowns the same (one player within 5m of the umpire) is beyond me.
One less law.
Deliberate kicking out is also contentious so making a kick out-of-bounds to be penalised simplifies three laws down to one,
replaces interpretation with definitive action and also speeds up the game slightly.

Making the ball going out of bounds being a kick to the opposition is not going to relieve congestion any more than paying more holding the balls. It will favour locking the ball in and pressuring = all players in one 50. They should do the opposite and allow people to kick for territory down the line again. A boundary throw in on half forward or towards the wing forces the team that was attacking to spread back out down the field to allow for the possibility they might lose the stoppage. As it is all clearing kicks to the line being paid as deliberate just leads to repeat entries into crowded forward lines.

 

[dominguez]

The appointment of umpires and their performance for our game this weekend will be very interesting.

 

[Cesoir]

OK, you can all relax now, the issue has been settled. I heard Dean Margetts interviewed on 91.3 this morning and he said that all of the decisions in the Carlton game were correct. The Brayshaw one looked iffy on Fox, but Margetts had access to some footage from a different angle and you could see that Andy made forceful contact.

Thank heavens we have him to clarify things for us.

 

[malpaso]

OK, you can all relax now, the issue has been settled. I heard Dean Margetts interviewed on 91.3 this morning and he said that all of the decisions in the Carlton game were correct. The Brayshaw one looked iffy on Fox, but Margetts had access to some footage from a different angle and you could see that Andy made forceful contact.

Thank heavens we have him to clarify things for us.

Yeah but the SPOT OF THE FREE KICK IS THE BIGGEST F**K UP I've ever seen. Boundary umpire clearly spots at the intersection of the 50 and boundary line, SOMEHOW the field umpire runs from the middle of the 50 and marks the spot 10 metres further down the field. HOW THE F**KING F**K is that possible?
Who was that field umpire and bet your bottom dollar he's a Blues man..

 

[Quazar]

Some good follow up points.

Agree very much on the conversion. We're not getting reward for forward 50 dominance and that was evident in the Hawks game as well. I think there's a few issues that contribute to it. The slow ball-movement style is, for the most part, minimising our turnovers in bad spots (i.e. that second/third kick out of our back half) but it's giving so much time for opposition defences to get back and clog our 50. There have been very few times over the last few weeks that we've actually hit a genuine lead at the ball carrier inside 50 that hasn't been an accidental one. The times we have have been when we have moved it faster between the arcs. Need that to happen more often, and I think we need Hogan cruising around that CHF line to help it. I wouldn't be surprised if corridor use is deliberately down compared to last year but that's just an impression I don't actually know.

The above is my main issue with the way we're playing this year. It is so very reminiscent of Collingwood who just cannot score with any regularity to save themselves and it is costing them severely. We have better pieces up forward than they do, we need to get it working. Otherwise it's just the same forward entries crap we've gone through the last 4 years with Ross, but the method of getting to that point is different. 50% the way we're getting it in there and 50% who it's going to and who's around them.

I agree on Bewley but not on Schultz. I think Schultz can work as that 'every team has to have a crab pressure forward' guy even if I resent the fact that it is a necessity in AFL football these days. Bewley you are correct is undroppable and that is a list issue.

Some good follow up points. The follow up to the follow up of the original up?!

I think the thing with Bewley and Schultz (and not just limited to them either..) is that I don't see a body of work that makes me feel comfortable or even excited by their inevitable selection the next week. However I guess with so many injuries and a young team trying to find its feet at AFL level, you need some consistencies with selection and those that aren't obviously embarrassing themselves or doing anything too bad are not close to risk of getting dropped and I suppose those 2 are meeting that criteria.

I think you're right about the slower ball movement, it looks like we're trying to open up the ground a bit more, but we still sometimes look nervous about using the corridor in case of turn overs...it's an ironing out process, but I think the better balance will come once we get a closer representation of our better "22" out there (your Hogans, Henrys, Logues etc...). I mean Willo and Ryan the Rhino have had to play a fair bit deeper to cover the talls in defence being out.

 

[Bigger]

I have slowly realised that Bewley is playing the Masten defensive winger role, in our adaptation of the West Coast plan. He is there to "keep shape," providing an outlet option and running super hard to help build the wall preventing oppo movement through the corridor.

Once I twigged, I cut him some slack and also began to appreciate the number of forward entries he does make while playing essentially a defensive role.

He still seems like he needs someone to remind him he's huge and can kill blokes as well but, overall, I think he does his job and does it well more often than not.

I was fearful that we would end up Collingwood Lite, unable to regularly kick a significant score, but I am confident we have the cattle to pull off the next part of the development of Longmuir, J's plan - which is speed up ball movement overall but particularly to forwards.

You build defensive systems first, then the rest. We're still at the start and I dips me lid to Longy, who has done a pretty amazing job given the inability of the lines to train together for an extended period.

As for the Carlton game - the umpies cruelled the s**t out of us from about halfway through the third, but you don't win games of footy kicking 1 goal in the second half. I personally think we need to look at what's going on with the boundary umpires, who appear to be a stack of work experience kids, and who are too scared to blow the whistle when blokes like Docherty run 5 or so metres OUT OF BOUNDS after play-on is called and who get ignored when they point to where the ball goes out.

 

[malpaso]

Keep your eye on these umpires and their duties this weekend:

Jacob Mollison (32), David Harris (24), Andrew Heffernan (29)

 

[danstar]

Keep your eye on these umpires and their duties this weekend:

Jacob Mollison (32), David Harris (24), Andrew Heffernan (29)

w***ers, will screw us over because freo fans have kicked up a stink over the boundary line utensil up on the weekend

 

[RedV3x]

Making the ball going out of bounds being a kick to the opposition is not going to relieve congestion any more than paying more holding the balls.

Penalising kicks out-of-bounds will not ease congestion greatly but it will dissuade players from kicking down the line like when kicking-out-on-the full was first penalised. Keeping the ball in play always adds to the flow of the game.
As well, penalising kicks out-of-bounds removes all that contentious 'deliberate' debate.
Make goals as a football passing between the posts and you have very little opportunity to do anything 'deliberate' without being penalised.

They should do the opposite and allow people to kick for territory down the line again.

Any boundary throw-in, under the current interpretations and laws is a recipe for congestion.

 

[Ysaye]

I have slowly realised that Bewley is playing the Masten defensive winger role, in our adaptation of the West Coast plan. He is there to "keep shape," providing an outlet option and running super hard to help build the wall preventing oppo movement through the corridor.

Once I twigged, I cut him some slack and also began to appreciate the number of forward entries he does make while playing essentially a defensive role.

He still seems like he needs someone to remind him he's huge and can kill blokes as well but, overall, I think he does his job and does it well more often than not.

I was fearful that we would end up Collingwood Lite, unable to regularly kick a significant score, but I am confident we have the cattle to pull off the next part of the development of Longmuir, J's plan - which is speed up ball movement overall but particularly to forwards.

You build defensive systems first, then the rest. We're still at the start and I dips me lid to Longy, who has done a pretty amazing job given the inability of the lines to train together for an extended period.

As for the Carlton game - the umpies cruelled the sh*t out of us from about halfway through the third, but you don't win games of footy kicking 1 goal in the second half. I personally think we need to look at what's going on with the boundary umpires, who appear to be a stack of work experience kids, and who are too scared to blow the whistle when blokes like Docherty run 5 or so metres OUT OF BOUNDS after play-on is called and who get ignored when they point to where the ball goes out.

I think it is actually more "defensive" half forward but yes (and I call it the Michael Barlow role, simply because Barlow talks about playing it on radio) but yes the essence is to keep the shape and run super hard to fill space and build the wall.

The corollary of the fact that we "need" such a role is that you are unlikely to see a forward line with 6 super-offensive players (The likes you see in the Best 22 thread) because we will always be wanting to play someone in this role, and chances are that that won't be someone who who is super dangerous around goals.

 

[wayToGo_]

OK, you can all relax now, the issue has been settled. I heard Dean Margetts interviewed on 91.3 this morning and he said that all of the decisions in the Carlton game were correct. The Brayshaw one looked iffy on Fox, but Margetts had access to some footage from a different angle and you could see that Andy made forceful contact.

Thank heavens we have him to clarify things for us.

Just when you think we are not going to have to hate Margetts because he didn't umpire our game he manages to chip in to get the hate flowing anyway. Just STFU you dumb *.

 

[Cesoir]

Just when you think we are not going to have to hate Margetts because he didn't umpire our game he manages to chip in to get the hate flowing anyway. Just STFU you dumb fu**.

Sorry, I was just reporting what I heard,