Autopsy Cats lose to Blues by 2 points - should never have been near it.

[Cataholic]

I dunno. I'm not there. He went out to lunch with some of them a couple of years ago.

A rhetorical question. Just musing........

 

[Down at K Park]

So, if the players aren't doing what Scott wants it begs the question 'why not?'

Is it because they don't understand what he wants, can't execute what he wants, don't have the focus, or because they aren't wholly dedicated to playing for him?

No fear of being dropped. No pressure to perform = no effort

 

[Munich]

Yeah but it's a weird season with weird results. And let's be honest a silly season.
We had 2 down from the start and had Steven.
It's hard to care too much for me.
Except for our defense though. Looks very shaky.

Kolo will settle it

 

[Cataholic]

Kolo will settle it

He improved?

 

[Spazz Cat]

Kolo will settle it

Nah, he's going bald.

 

[Munich]

Nah, he's going bald.

Don't think so bud

 

[Heckler]

GEELONG WE HAVE A PROBLEM.
Is it the players? is it the Coach?
The answer is both!!!... and it runs deep.
The problem is mental. A lack of commitment as in Esprit de corps.
A feeling of pride and mutual loyalty shared by the members of a group.
Some are old and mentally done.
Some don't trust the plan.
Some are individualist
Some are just going along for the ride.
Some don't understand what is required.
Some have self doubts.
Some are stuck in their ways.
Some prefer to blame others.
Some need freedom others discipline.
It won't be fixed at the selection table.
It won't be fixed on the playing field.
It won't be fixed between the ears.
If the coach can't bring unity.
He must take the fall.

 

[Spazz Cat]

Don't think so bud

Tis. People will be accidently sticking their fingers in his ear at the bowling alley soon.

 

[David the Cat]

Just saw the vision of Scott's half time bake....he singled out Ablett, Selwood and Dangerfield....pointing the finger at each of them in turn.....and he wasn't giving them a pat on the back I can tell you.

 

[Cataholic]

Just saw the vision of Scott's half time bake....he singled out Ablett, Selwood and Dangerfield....pointing the finger at each of them in turn.....and he wasn't giving them a pat on the back I can tell you.

Bs interesting to see who pays the price at the selection table for his new found wrath

 

[David the Cat]

Bs interesting to see who pays the price at the selection table for his new found wrath

Indeed....

if we are being sensible, clearly he wont drop them....but you'd expect a much more significant contribution than we got Saturday night. All three of them were pretty average....

 

[Biggy_Boy]

Indeed....

if we are being sensible, clearly he wont drop them....but you'd expect a much more significant contribution than we got Saturday night. All three of them were pretty average....

Ablett's 36. Selwood is 32 and has had his body put through the wringer for nearly 300 games. They're in the twilight of their careers, they're fading. Ablett could be excused for being done. You can't expect guys at that stage of their careers to consistently be your top contributors. If you're going for a flag, and you need those players to be your key players rather than icing, then it illustrates a fundamental problem with your approach. Ablett should just be up forward using his skills to set people up and finish, benefiting from the good work of a younger midfield. Selwood shouldn't be the one tasked with doing the bulk of the midfield work alongside Danger. Those guys are not in their prime anymore. If they are really what we need, then it's time to abandon a pursuit of the flag now, retire those guys off and rebuild - we don't have the necessary core to be attempting a flag.

We've seen Dangerfield, Ablett and Selwood take ownership of games and attempt to will the side over the line countless times. Time for some others to do it. If they're unable, then their development hasn't been good enough and it's time to start over.

 

[Munich]

Tis. People will be accidently sticking their fingers in his ear at the bowling alley soon.

Right...

 

[PatrickBateman]

No fear of being dropped. No pressure to perform = no effort

Correct.

Chris Scott has always put perceived talent over work rate. Always!

With him it's really the big irony. He has constructed a side that performs and has values almost the opposite to those he had as a player. Chris Scott was a scrapper, a hard worker, always first to get to a brawl, or starting one.

His legacy is going to be - deconstruction of a tough, hard side, creation of one that while talented, is unquestionably soft and mentally weak in comparison. The only hits this side gives out are cheap shots. This side used to be feared under Thompson, even as a top four H&A side Geelong are easy pickings in finals, opposition treat them as such.

Gone is the intimidation, Chris 'nice guy' Scott who fears talking to players during a game because "I might be too emotional" has feminised a playing group - don't get triggered.

 

[Cataholic]

Indeed....

if we are being s

Indeed....

if we are being sensible, clearly he wont drop them....but you'd expect a much more significant contribution than we got Saturday night. All three of them were pretty average....

No, they won't be dropped, but I'm interested to see if his anger gives him the courage to make some other changes and pump game time into some kids.

 

[Partridge]

So you'd be willing to accept spending a draft pick on a tall ruck prospect that needs 4-5 years to develop. Im not saying its a bad idea - im a staunch believer in giving kids time to develop - but that's not a popular theory anymore and one not often mentioned as acceptable.

Tim English has been at Doggies for I think 3 years now as has offered little but is developing nicely. You'd be happy to have him 3 years in having returned little and probably needing another 2 full years to really start showing anything. Again, not crticising just seeing if you'd support that concept as it seems thats what it takes. 5 years is a long time these days to allow players to slow cook.

Go Catters

Yes, most definitely. And not just ruck prospects either.

Going to the draft is for me like the argument for winning the toss in cricket (9 out of 10 times you bat, the 10th time you think about bowling, then bat etc.). Go to the draft every year. Use every pick. Occasionally, good deals come up and it seems once a decade great deals (Ottens in 2004, Dangerfield in 2015). But otherwise, load up on as many draft picks as you can and use them.

 

[ATSAM]

Just saw the vision of Scott's half time bake....he singled out Ablett, Selwood and Dangerfield....pointing the finger at each of them in turn.....and he wasn't giving them a pat on the back I can tell you.

Not sure why he would single them out. They usually give their all and there are 15 other players on the field that need to step up. On another note who are our on field leaders. We use to have several of them, back, forward and middle. Now????

 

[ATSAM]

Correct.

Chris Scott has always put perceived talent over work rate. Always!

With him it's really the big irony. He has constructed a side that performs and has values almost the opposite to those he had as a player. Chris Scott was a scrapper, a hard worker, always first to get to a brawl, or starting one.

His legacy is going to be - deconstruction of a tough, hard side, creation of one that while talented, is unquestionably soft and mentally weak in comparison. The only hits this side gives out are cheap shots. This side used to be feared under Thompson, even as a top four H&A side Geelong are easy pickings in finals, opposition treat them as such.

Gone is the intimidation, Chris 'nice guy' Scott who fears talking to players during a game because "I might be too emotional" has feminised a playing group - don't get triggered.

Bit sexist. The womens team would have played better tougher football.

 

[PatrickBateman]

Bit sexist. The womens team would have played better tougher football.

Context. But yes, you could be right.

 

[Cataholic]

Not sure why he would single them out. They usually give their all and there are 15 other players on the field that need to step up. On another note who are our on field leaders. We use to have several of them, back, forward and middle. Now????

Yep, he should've torn every single one of them a new orifice.

And he should be demanding, insisting, that the younger guys step up faster and better. The older guys are on their last legs, and don't have much more to give. The improvement must come from the younger guys.

 

[Spazz Cat]

Not sure why he would single them out. They usually give their all and there are 15 other players on the field that need to step up. On another note who are our on field leaders. We use to have several of them, back, forward and middle. Now????

Dunno about Ablett, but Danger and Selwood were big offenders. Particularly Selwood. Paid their midfield no respect at all, wasn't goal side at stoppages.

 

[Turbocat]

Ablett's 36. Selwood is 32 and has had his body put through the wringer for nearly 300 games. They're in the twilight of their careers, they're fading. Ablett could be excused for being done. You can't expect guys at that stage of their careers to consistently be your top contributors. If you're going for a flag, and you need those players to be your key players rather than icing, then it illustrates a fundamental problem with your approach. Ablett should just be up forward using his skills to set people up and finish, benefiting from the good work of a younger midfield. Selwood shouldn't be the one tasked with doing the bulk of the midfield work alongside Danger. Those guys are not in their prime anymore. If they are really what we need, then it's time to abandon a pursuit of the flag now, retire those guys off and rebuild - we don't have the necessary core to be attempting a flag.

We've seen Dangerfield, Ablett and Selwood take ownership of games and attempt to will the side over the line countless times. Time for some others to do it. If they're unable, then their development hasn't been good enough and it's time to start over.

Ist either development or or the lack of raw talent to develop. I think a bit of both but favour the latter.

You are right about the 30 pluses. There are elements of Animal Farm in wanting to push the older guys till there is nothing left in the orange. It goes back to my 'whinge' abut multiple debutantes and dry wells.Sure we have brought in plenty of kids but how many have gone on to become A grade players.

Guys like Guthrie who debuted in 2011 , 27 and over 150 games should by now beat his peak and be the mainstay and be in our best 5 player.
Players are probably at the best between 150<>250 games and in the band of years from 23-29. Most players are sliding after 30.
Guthrie is at their peak..now. I can't say he has ever played one game like Rowell in his first few... now one can't blame someone for a lack of talent or ability ... thats not their fault. it is the fault that we have not found or developed someone better.

The lack of early picks probably has contributed to that . Rowell is a gun #1.. and we have lacked the chance to draft anyone that early but since 2011 ... its a long time and yes we brought in Danger ...but in a way that was very much like buying water in a drought. Only so much water available and reasonably expensive to purchase IF you can get it.

Drafting is no perfect answer either . Gold Coast have waited ten years for Rowlell. Carlton have burnt draft picks like match sticks. Melb another. StK after burning early picks have gone back to trade. Soon, not to far away, old Boxer the Animal Farm horse will be heading for the glue factory after working his guts out. GA will be gone after this year. Joel and Patrick in a few... but playing doesnt mean they will continue to be what they have been. Who will be the ones who the coach points his fingers at when they are not our best players? Who will be our mainstays. The older guys have been crutch for too long.

 

[Tony Barber]

Just saw the vision of Scott's half time bake....he singled out Ablett, Selwood and Dangerfield....pointing the finger at each of them in turn.....and he wasn't giving them a pat on the back I can tell you.

I was just thinking about this David.
You and I grew up in a time where leaders would cop a bake, and their peers (me for example) would think 's**t, I'm not giving him the support on the ground he needs"


Wouldnt it have been interesting to see Scott (or any coach), pull the line coaches aside and give them a complete bake within earshot of the players.

I.e 'David, dazbroncos, have you guys not been effing talking together? We've discussed the transition from ...... To...... What the eff are your guys doing? Get your s**t together"

 

[David the Cat]

Not sure why he would single them out. They usually give their all and there are 15 other players on the field that need to step up. On another note who are our on field leaders. We use to have several of them, back, forward and middle. Now????

I know why....check out the footage of their work on Cripps...showed him zero respect at stoppages..

The coach had Narkle on Cripps ( physically not yet in the same ball park) then Selwood and Dangerfield were given the task and were nowhere near Cripps at the stoppages...they actually ran away from him on multiple occasions while Pittonet was having a field day...

Its so easy to pick out the usual whipping boys while not seeing the woods for the trees.........Dangerfield's contribution so far this season has been very, very ordinary...to put it mildly. He was taken apart by DeBoer in the GWS game, and was...adequate... against the Hawks. ...and poor on the weekend.

I love Danger...he's a terrific footballer and critical to our success. Perhaps its time he steps back from his media and re-assess where he's at right now.

 

[Johnny Cattery]

I know why....check out the footage of their work on Cripps...showed him zero respect at stoppages..

The coach had Narkle on Cripps ( physically not yet in the same ball park) then Selwood and Dangerfield were given the task and were nowhere near Cripps at the stoppages...they actually ran away from him on multiple occasions while Pittonet was having a field day...

Its so easy to pick out the usual whipping boys while not seeing the woods for the trees.........Dangerfield's contribution so far this season has been very, very ordinary...to put it mildly. He was taken apart by DeBoer in the GWS game, and was...adequate... against the Hawks. ...and poor on the weekend.

I love Danger...he's a terrific footballer and critical to our success. Perhaps its time he steps back from his media and re-assess where he's at right now.

Totally agree on Danger. Narkle does not quite have the size or craft at this stage. I couldn't see why Guthrie was not on Cripps, he destroyed us early.