Remove this Banner Ad

Autopsy Geelong crush Bulldogs in dirty night.

  • Thread starter Thread starter WAbulldog
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

I can't remember feeling so shell shocked after a singular match, not since that 1996 game which should never be named.
Hey mate, reckon you are talking about the 97 Prelim. I thought of that last night and compared the emotions of 29 years ago. The 97 Prelim was a lot worse for me.
 
Biggest mistake at selection was not to play Treloar.
He is an AFL level footballer. No point running him around in the VFL where he is just as likely to get hurt as in the AFL.

Enough of the prove your fitness rubbish. If he is fit enough for VFL then he is fit enough for AFL.
Calling absolute rubbish on the claim you're just as likely to get injured in VFL as AFL.
A lot of soft tissue injuries relate to the pace and speed of the game (i.e. the intensity of the muscle use). The speed between the two levels is worlds apart.
 
Hey mate, reckon you are talking about the 97 Prelim. I thought of that last night and compared the emotions of 29 years ago. The 97 Prelim was a lot worse for me.
Yes, thanks for the correction. But you're not supposed to ever mention that game by name! 😀
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Calling absolute rubbish on the claim you're just as likely to get injured in VFL as AFL.
A lot of soft tissue injuries relate to the pace and speed of the game (i.e. the intensity of the muscle use). The speed between the two levels is worlds apart.
And obviously it's far more appropriate to manage minutes in the VFL than the AFL. If we lose a VFL game because Treloar is playing 50% TOG and a different fit player would have played 80% TOG and won us the game ... nobody would care though.

But if we lose an AFL game because we're one short because of managing Treloar's fitness within that game, people would go ape.
 
And obviously it's far more appropriate to manage minutes in the VFL than the AFL. If we lose a VFL game because Treloar is playing 50% TOG and a different fit player would have played 80% TOG and won us the game ... nobody would care though.

But if we lose an AFL game because we're one short because of managing Treloar's fitness within that game, people would go ape.
I can’t remember the last time we saw Treloar go full tilt. When he has got onto the park he’s cruised through games at half rat power not pushing at all.
 
I can’t remember the last time we saw Treloar go full tilt. When he has got onto the park he’s cruised through games at half rat power not pushing at all.
Watching him play as well as his All-Australian season in 2024 despite like you say not really feeling like he was possibly full tilt was kind of extraordinary.

He literally led the entire league in the very base measurement of average disposals. Sure, he wasn't the best player in the league, but he was the most accumulative, and was clearly one of the best 10 midfielders in the league by virtue of his All-Australian selection. Even if we get 70% of that player back, it's a highly valuable player to have. I think when people talk about the quality of player we miss to injury, they gloss over Treloar there's almost an expectation he shouldn't be fit given his age and his history. That isn't really true IMO.

He was fit for the whole 2024 season, and should we have expected him to be not fit at any given point during that season? Obviously not.
 
Exiting the back half has become a pretty big issue. Not sure what the fix is. I don't trust a lot of our guys to transition sidewards let alone pick out a pass in the middle of the ground.

Perhaps we move Freijah back again?
 
Missing from the kennel possibly left behind after the last pre season game:

If the following happens to be located please return to the WO reception asap.
B Dales boots
West’s goals
4 Quarter performance from Truck

Thank you. A small reward of 5 percent of bulldog merch will be awarded to the persons who can locate any of the above.

Thank you
 
Play Bont off half back. Treloar into the middle.

We basically had no leadership or experience down back at the best of times, and that’s gotten worse.

Would not mind Bont getting cheapies off half back while organising/steadying the backline.

I’m sure Bont would be missing weeks in another universe but he generally plays through injuries out of necessity.
 
Final whinge from me. AFL is played Australia wide, why do we constantly draft or use list spots on Footscray players.
Just on this point I don’t share your concerns. I have faith in our list managers that they always go for best available but when there is a line ball selection they opt for the Footscray player to let footballers know that there is a good path way onto an AFL list and this attracts better quality recruits to Footscray. I get that some selections haven’t worked out but that is true of non- Footscray recruits too.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

I really do just hope, that if we somehow battle our way to 4th or 6th on the ladder, people will praise that. That we overcome the injuries to still give ourselves a chance at the flag come September. Maybe it will involve some good fortune in winning narrow games - like we already have vs Brisbane and Adelaide.

If people have been critical that 2024 and 2025 should only count for the ladder position irrespective of bad luck in losing close games, to be consistent and fair, they have to praise whatever ladder position we do achieve this year, even if we play shit football to get to that ladder position with small wins over bad teams. That's already partiially true given more than a quarter of the season is already gone. We only have a percentage of 102% currently, but still get narrow wins (such that we're currently 4-2 and not 3-3).

But we all know that won't happen.
If you think we’ll be top 6 let alone top 4 at the end of the year you are watching a different team to me.
 
If you think we’ll be top 6 let alone top 4 at the end of the year you are watching a different team to me.
I think even if we play as badly as we did vs Geelong, we might collapse over the line by beating a tanking West Coast team late in the season by less than a goal or two. A margin that is less than the home-ground advantage we get to enjoy playing at our home stadium.

Take that principle to our remaining 17 games - 11 which are against the clear "bottom 10" teams of the league - and we'll somehow collapse into a top 4 or top 6 spot. Maybe with a ladder percentage of something like 105%. If we do, we may even win a final, even as part of an overall bad season.

I'm making the broader point that I don't think that team is very good. But I also think that the people who criticised our 2024 and 2025 for 'failing to win a final' despite performing better on the season are obligated to thus praise our 2026 team for 'winning a final', even though luck went in the opposite direction to help us win our two close games so far this year vs Brisbane and Adelaide. You can't have it both ways. Either we consider luck, or we don't.
 
Just on this point I don’t share your concerns. I have faith in our list managers that they always go for best available but when there is a line ball selection they opt for the Footscray player to let footballers know that there is a good path way onto an AFL list and this attracts better quality recruits to Footscray. I get that some selections haven’t worked out but that is true of non- Footscray recruits too.
And it's burying the contest of how Lewis got on our list in the first place - we had very limited options given how late in the piece Harmes was taken off our list.

If we're going to criticise any element of our list management, shouldn't we criticise the fact that we recruited Harmes, a bloke that maybe we should have had some foresight that he might (allegedgly) cheat on his missus, who is best mates with all the other Dogs wags? (because she isn't Australian, so she didn't have a social circule when she moved to Australia herself other than the other wags). Allegedly.
 
I think even if we play as badly as we did vs Geelong, we might collapse over the line by beating a tanking West Coast team late in the season by less than a goal or two. A margin that is less than the home-ground advantage we get to enjoy playing at our home stadium.

Take that principle to our remaining 17 games - 11 which are against the clear "bottom 10" teams of the league - and we'll somehow collapse into a top 4 or top 6 spot. Maybe with a ladder percentage of something like 105%. If we do, we may even win a final, even as part of an overall bad season.

I'm making the broader point that I don't think that team is very good. But I also think that the people who criticised our 2024 and 2025 for 'failing to win a final' despite performing better on the season are obligated to thus praise our 2026 team for 'winning a final', even though luck went in the opposite direction to help us win our two close games so far this year vs Brisbane and Adelaide. You can't have it both ways. Either we consider luck, or we don't.
We are very much bottom 10. With our injuries, structural deficiencies and coaching this is clear.
 
I think even if we play as badly as we did vs Geelong, we might collapse over the line by beating a tanking West Coast team late in the season by less than a goal or two. A margin that is less than the home-ground advantage we get to enjoy playing at our home stadium.

Take that principle to our remaining 17 games - 11 which are against the clear "bottom 10" teams of the league - and we'll somehow collapse into a top 4 or top 6 spot. Maybe with a ladder percentage of something like 105%. If we do, we may even win a final, even as part of an overall bad season.

I'm making the broader point that I don't think that team is very good. But I also think that the people who criticised our 2024 and 2025 for 'failing to win a final' despite performing better on the season are obligated to thus praise our 2026 team for 'winning a final', even though luck went in the opposite direction to help us win our two close games so far this year vs Brisbane and Adelaide. You can't have it both ways. Either we consider luck, or we don't.
If we’re lucky we finish 10th and in the usual fashion get smashed again in the first round of finals.
 
Calling absolute rubbish on the claim you're just as likely to get injured in VFL as AFL.
A lot of soft tissue injuries relate to the pace and speed of the game (i.e. the intensity of the muscle use). The speed between the two levels is worlds apart.
There have been many players injured in the VFL, whilst trying to regain fitness for the VFL. Similarly, there are many injuries sustained at training sessions.

Sometimes it makes sense to bring people back slowly at a lower level but not always.

In Treloar's case, I seriously question how much the probability of personal injury would be reduced between bringing him back through getting a case of leather poisoning in the VFL, arguably stressing his muscles with the extra strain of all those disposals, versus just coming straight back into the AFL, at a time that the senior team were in desperate need.

We had a bunch of players in the seniors playing through injury, e.g. Naughton and Richards, obviously that is a calculated risk. I would have been more than happy to take a calculated risk and bring Treloar straight back into the AFL team last night.

Who knows, had we done so, then maybe a bunch of other senior players might even have avoided injury, because they wouldn't have been overextending themselves quite as much, metaphorically and physically, as they were trying to make up for the large quotient of sub-standard players in last night's team with their horrendous decision making and disposal.
 
Last edited:

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

And obviously it's far more appropriate to manage minutes in the VFL than the AFL. If we lose a VFL game because Treloar is playing 50% TOG and a different fit player would have played 80% TOG and won us the game ... nobody would care though.

But if we lose an AFL game because we're one short because of managing Treloar's fitness within that game, people would go ape.
An 80% Treloar would have been of significantly more value than the nominal 100% we got from several players in last night's line up.
 
An 80% Treloar would have been of significantly more value than the nominal 100% we got from several players in last night's line up.
The whole point of managing minutes though isn't just to reduce chance of re-injury, it's because there's an assumption that the player won't be able to play effectively beyond minute 60 on the field given their lack of match sharpness and uncertainty in their own body.

Therefore, I don't think that Treloar would have been that effective had he played and been asked to play 80% TOG, irrespective of the fact that he did get 41 touches in the VFL on reduced minutes. Many AFL-quality players would get 40 touches. Riley Garcia has gotten 40 touches in the VFL before.
 
The whole point of managing minutes though isn't just to reduce chance of re-injury, it's because there's an assumption that the player won't be able to play effectively beyond minute 60 on the field given their lack of match sharpness and uncertainty in their own body.

Therefore, I don't think that Treloar would have been that effective had he played and been asked to play 80% TOG, irrespective of the fact that he did get 41 touches in the VFL on reduced minutes. Many AFL-quality players would get 40 touches. Riley Garcia has gotten 40 touches in the VFL before.
I’m not suggesting he would have dominated, and gotten straight back to generating his typical output at AFL level.

I am however suggesting that he would have been able to contribute substantially more than several of the players that were selected ahead of him, and that he would have also been able to provide some desperately needed on field leadership and composure.
 
I’m not suggesting he would have dominated, and gotten straight back to generating his typical output at AFL level.

I am however suggesting that he would have been able to contribute substantially more than several of the players that were selected ahead of him, and that he would have also been able to provide some desperately needed on field leadership and composure.
Fair enough, I get where you're coming from but agree to disagree.

Or disagree to the extent that, when combined on the chance of re-injury, it just wasn't worth it.

I would be very surprised and disappointed if Treloar isn't straight into the team now. I can understand managing him in the reserves to keep him in tip top shape for some critical key top 4 qualiifer late season games, and finals themselves, had we started 6-0 in the season. But that time has come now. Our next two games are obviously key top 6/top 10 swing games either way. If Treloar helps us pinch a win out of the next two games, even if he's injured for the rest of the season, he's done a job on our list to us to a final spot.
 
We are very much bottom 10. With our injuries, structural deficiencies and coaching this is clear.

I'd love to know exactly what happened at half time versus Essendon. What was in the Gatorade? Seriously, since that moment in time, it's like we've had the footballing equivalent of a frontal lobotomy. It's one of the strangest turnarounds, if not THE strangest, that I've seen with the Dogs. Two weeks ago, we were championing a top four contender. Fast forward two weeks and we are a cellar dweller. Injuries have something to do with it, but that doesn't explain everything. The sudden onset personality disorder on that Sunday afternoon has transformed us into what looks like a suburban football team. As I say, I'd love to know. Maybe it will come out one day.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom