Autopsy Late fight back not enough as dogs Bow out of finals

[Proffessor]

Only turned up for 1 quarter and nearly pinched it

So why so ordinary for the 1st 3?

Well for what it is worth here is my theory.

3 of our 22 players didn't want the footy enough simply because they never really do. Gardner and Roarke Smith because like most supporters they doubt their own ability and expect to screw up should they gain possession. Lipinski because who knows why, just never prepared to show desperation on the field.

1 understandably didn't want it that much because he just had an operation on his face after it was caved in during his last match.

A few weren't really sure how they were supposed to play, being played out of position to fit in Bev's project players, but confusion generally equals hesitation.

Throw in an early injury and you have our usual scenario of leaving way too much to too few. Story of our last 4 seasons.

The other team also wants to win of course and will successfully target some of those few, whilst the those not targeted may be forgiven for losing focus occasionally as a result of the general mess going on around them.

So it doesn't matter what we do in the off season, if the match committee is going to continue to play their favourite players, regardless of form or fitness, again next year.

We only had three specialist forwards in the team tonight, Bruce, Naughton and Wallis, and Aaron and Mitch have only recently been converted into forwards. Not a surprise we struggle to kick goals.


Off season we need to target an experienced, talented and forthright assistant coach, because we need someone to temper Bev's weaknesses for project players and help his undeniable strengths shine through.

 

[Nadzy17]

Should never have let Roughead go. Would love him in the backline and chopping out in the ruck. Would mean we wouldn’t be playing one of Gardner or Bruce too. We’re not going to win a flag with Gardner at chb and Bruce at chf

 

[ossie_21]

Roarke was not even in our worst 5 tonight, not sure why he’s getting hammered

 

[Igloo]

Actually think Roarke has been serviceable. Best 22 now.

Roarke has had a couple of games where i've thought he was going alright, but I didn't think he was good at all today. Got more of the ball than normal but didn't make good decisions, and we went through him far too often. Coffield marking the ball 4 forward 50 entries in a row while playing on Roarke at the start of the last was hugely deflating.

He's ok backup if someone gets injured, but wouldn't even be my first choice to come into the 22. I'd be disappointed if we had a full list to choose from and he was getting a game.

 

[Struggle]

Roarke was not even in our worst 5 tonight, not sure why he’s getting hammered

First half was very good for his level. In the last quarter he just stood around watching his man take uncontested intercepts

 

[Lex22]

Roarke has had a couple of games where i've thought he was going alright, but I didn't think he was good at all today. Got more of the ball than normal but didn't make good decisions, and we went through him far too often. Coffield marking the ball 4 forward 50 entries in a row while playing on Roarke at the start of the last was hugely deflating.

He's ok backup if someone gets injured, but wouldn't even be my first choice to come into the 22. I'd be disappointed if we had a full list to choose from and he was getting a game.

I should’ve phrased that a little better but it’s more I can see role for him now, but you’re right, address a few weaknesses and he’s probably fringe at best.

Right now though, he’s serviceable and has a job.

I just don’t think he’s as big an issue as many others do.

 

[Oliver G]

Collingwood 7.0 from Set Shots so far, would be nice if we could that one day. 6.7 from us tonight.

 

[Libba39]

Now that its all over for us, I must say that I am extremely grateful for the football this year and for the sacrifice by the players who've spent the better part of 4 months away from home (not to say others aren't doing it far tougher). We've been up and down, frustrating and exciting, dreadful and world beaters, but it's honestly felt to me like a godsend just to have something to cheer on. We were never realistically winning the flag, but in a difficult year it was nice that we didn't give up on the season after a shocking start and fought it out until October. I really think the players and the club (and the rest of the league) deserve a huge amount of kudos for that.

Great post! We were never truly in the hunt, but the team turned it around and gave us something to look forward to each weekend.

 

[cherrypie]

Thoughts

• Lacked composure in our F50 entries. Missed a few easy marking targets (Gardners opposite foot landing short, Bailey Smith wobbling one in to Coffield etc) that should have resulted in set shots
• Tim mostly struggled with the throw-ins. Seemed to often be too far back and unable to even reach the contest. Should've adjusted after the first couple
• Too many players contributing in spurts rather than consistent efforts across the game
• Too worried in defence about Kings height rather than actually going for the ball. There's no point playing in-front if you're just going to be looking behind you for contact
• The passion and energy we showed late in the game was great but it was nowhere to be seen when we had the opportunity to build a lead
• Bruce needs to lose weight and provide a mobile marking option. We probably aimed at Wallis too often when Bruce/Naughton should be getting the majority of our targets i50
• Bailey Smith looked up to it in the first quarter and does seem to be like a finals-type player. Just lacked composure in some moments
• Gardner again was actually decent. His turnover was extremely costly but otherwise his kicking was decent and he was one of our few defenders not easily beaten in the air
• Most of our experienced players played well. I do think that Wood should really start to be losing his spot next year. I think with the emergence of Williams he's probably our least necessary defender and doesn't have the flexibility that others provide. Still plays well sometimed but isn't as reliable as he once was

 

[Oliver G]

Thoughts

• Lacked composure in our F50 entries. Missed a few easy marking targets (Gardners opposite foot landing short, Bailey Smith wobbling one in to Coffield etc) that should have resulted in set shots
• Tim mostly struggled with the throw-ins. Seemed to often be too far back and unable to even reach the contest. Should've adjusted after the first couple
• Too many players contributing in spurts rather than consistent efforts across the game
• Too worried in defence about Kings height rather than actually going for the ball. There's no point playing in-front if you're just going to be looking behind you for contact
• The passion and energy we showed late in the game was great but it was nowhere to be seen when we had the opportunity to build a lead
• Bruce needs to lose weight and provide a mobile marking option. We probably aimed at Wallis too often when Bruce/Naughton should be getting the majority of our targets i50
• Bailey Smith looked up to it in the first quarter and does seem to be like a finals-type player. Just lacked composure in some moments
• Gardner again was actually decent. His turnover was extremely costly but otherwise his kicking was decent and he was one of our few defenders not easily beaten in the air
• Most of our experienced players played well. I do think that Wood should really start to be losing his spot next year. I think with the emergence of Williams he's probably our least necessary defender and doesn't have the flexibility that others provide. Still plays well sometimed but isn't as reliable as he once was

Pretty much spot on.

 

[Oliver G]

Collingwood 7.0 from Set Shots so far, would be nice if we could that one day. 6.7 from us tonight.

Make that 8.0

 

[Oliver G]

See what happens when teams kick straight in tight contests.

 

[Bazza Bulldog]

Rather than singling out the match committee, coach and players, the reasons we lost IMO are:
- Inability to bring the ball to ground enough in marking contests
- Bombing the ball long into the forward line for 3.5 quarters and expecting a different result (the definition of insanity)
- Poor set shot kicking
- Multiple players running into an open goal around 45-50 metres out and not feeling confident enough to have a shot
- Failing to get our handball game going, until the last 8 minutes
- Whilst we competed hard and generally tackled well, there were 3-4 chances to nail them in our F50 and somehow they managed to stand-up and get a kick/handball away
- Plenty to work on in the offseason ... contested marking and improved skills by foot going I50 the main two for me.

See everyone in March!

 

[Northernsoul74]

Rather than singling out the match committee, coach and players, the reasons we lost IMO are:
- Inability to bring the ball to ground enough in marking contests
- Bombing the ball long into the forward line for 3.5 quarters and expecting a different result (the definition of insanity)
- Poor set shot kicking
- Multiple players running into an open goal around 45-50 metres out and not feeling confident enough to have a shot
- Failing to get our handball game going, until the last 8 minutes
- Whilst we competed hard and generally tackled well, there were 3-4 chances to nail them in our F50 and somehow they managed to stand-up and get a kick/handball away
- Plenty to work on in the offseason ... contested marking and improved skills by foot going I50 the main two for me.

See everyone in March!

Surely the players and coaches are responsible for the majority of the above.

 

[Oliver G]

14 times we bombed inside 50 14 times, our previous record was 12 in R10. St Kilda bombed it in 3 times.

 

[perro_loco]

I ac

Your first sentence tells me why you are baffled. We are not good enough to compete with the best this year and have been beaten every time by teams above us other then the Eagles in Qld who are rubbish there.

We are a mid table team with a mid table coach, it’s pretty simple and the last 4 years have proven that.

I actually agree with this. You cannot win finals with one and only one inexperienced ruck and without a second ruck to help out. every team has one. Then at least five players going missing in the game. Lipinski, Richards, Smith, Bruce, Cordy (injured early). We missed three easy shots at goal. Bevo totally outcoached. As I have said earlier, the footy department needs a full review, Bevo needs a mentor or close assistant, and new assistant coaches for fresh and new ideas. Thanks for 2016 Bevo, but another similar year and a new coach is needed.

 

[Bemoreboyddog]

We were inconsistent all year so it suits that we only played two quarters.

Need ruck support for English already.

Too many turnovers and poor decision making.

Poor defensive efforts - Lack of body on talls and maning the zone.

I feel like we were consistently average. Only beat West Coast above us (close and Eagles had key injuries) and only lost to Carlton below us. We were just a very average side this year. It was a tough year but it was tough for most sides. We didn’t have too many injury concerns.

Keath was a welcome addition. Bruce struggled, big time. I was disappointed we didn’t see more of Weightman.

We desperately need a forward line that works, we might need some help down back and we need English to just be better. Has 2-3 really good games. Not much else. Needs to take a big step next year. Can he? I’ve got my doubts.

Lastly, and I feel like I said this last year and I’ll probably say it again next year because I doubt anything will change, but geez it would be nice to get some fresh voices and ideas into the club. It seems stale. How long has Hansen been there? Bubba? Maple? Gia? King? Is Bevo the newest person in that box? I’d like to see that change but feel like I’ll be disappointed.

 

[Mutt]

I feel like we were consistently average. Only beat West Coast above us (close and Eagles had key injuries) and only lost to Carlton below us. We were just a very average side this year. It was a tough year but it was tough for most sides. We didn’t have too many injury concerns.

Keath was a welcome addition. Bruce struggled, big time. I was disappointed we didn’t see more of Weightman.

We desperately need a forward line that works, we might need some help down back and we need English to just be better. Has 2-3 really good games. Not much else. Needs to take a big step next year. Can he? I’ve got my doubts.

Lastly, and I feel like I said this last year and I’ll probably say it again next year because I doubt anything will change, but geez it would be nice to get some fresh voices and ideas into the club. It seems stale. How long has Hansen been there? Bubba? Maple? Gia? King? Is Bevo the newest person in that box? I’d like to see that change but feel like I’ll be disappointed.

My thoughts exactly.

 

[Bazza Bulldog]

Surely the players and coaches are responsible for the majority of the above.

Yes they are 'collectively' responsible (not singularly).

 

[Substance]

Pretty disappointing some of the comments from "supporters" online.

 

[Doggies_13]

Listening to beveridges press conference may take aways were:

he got very defensive when asked about our deficiencies, asking the report to tell him what our deficiencies are, we scrapped into finals and got knocked out first round we clearly have deficiencies not sure why so defensive.

Won’t review the game until next year, all leaving Queensland Tuesday, having exit interviews before then and BnF Monday.

English is 2-3 years from his peak but we won’t be bringing in a ruck because if you bring in a ruck that isn’t first choice they will just want to leave so why bring them in and develop them - I didn’t really get this ramble from beveridge, you could bring in a mature ruck for a year or two.

Also went on about how well our mids do for scores from centre clearances sitting second in the league. Centre clearances aren’t the issue the around the ground stoppages are.

The team will probably have 6 different players round one next year. Not sure who those would be VDM and JUH are the only ones that spring to my mind.

Our pressure from our forwards and lack of smalls allowed them to transition back out too easily - I agree with that

We will try to be active in the trade period to strengthen our team and depth to put pressure on positions - obviously not the ruck though

 

[Mr. Walker]

I get the support for Roark Smith and I agree he was solid. But IMO that is as good as it will get. We need players capable of changing the course of games so I favour turning over players and giving opportunities for a gem or two to emerge. Vandermeer is a case in point.

 

[BEaston]

The team will probably have 6 different players round one next year. Not sure who those would be VDM and JUH are the only ones that spring to my mind.

I'd take Jong in a heart beat. A player that actually wants the footy and will do anything he can to get it.

 

[Doggies_13]

Roarke was good but if he’s in your best 22 your not going to be a top 6 team.

Gardner was poor, he competed but woeful by foot and terrible decision maker again if he’s your second kpd your not going to be a top 6 team.

They are depth players

 

[Sharkey66]

Sorry but I think that’s a pretty pathetic attitude. Nothing to do with MD but these boards would be much better with others views as long as respectful and kept to footy. Weird to review a game and only have one teams views especially when we lose. Each to their own I guess.

Thats what the main boards for, this is our board.