Analysis How bad has our form been?

[Metalcrusher]

Media or BF campaigners?

Asking for a friend

You're a good judge and a reasonable man ... I'll let you decide

 

[HalloweenJack]

We should go hard at Andrew Gaff. He’s a Victorian. He’s an onballer (mainly outside which we desperately need). He’s quick. He has great disposal. He is a brilliant trainer and excellent role model. Easily covers off on A B C.
Then we pick best onballer with our first draft pick and hopefully SOS finds a mature age 21-22 y.o onballer (like Geelongs Kelly) with a later pick.
Same again in 2019 and we have four, hopefully six players that will meet A B C

I believe that SOS and his team have missed a trick in failing to draft mature players (midfielders as a preference) from senior competitions. These type of players would not be costly both in terms of salary and pick. For example, Shane Nelson (not big only 178cm and 74kgs and 24 years) a ball magnet from West Perth, would be ideal in my opinion. I am sure that if the Blues looked hard enough we could pick a few gems for peanuts.

 

[katmanblue]

Pretty good this week.

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Mr_Plow]

You can accept these performances - doesn't mean I will. Each to their own.

You better be a ******* top-line elite athlete or psychological savant if your 'acceptance' of mediocre sport performance actually means anything.

Easy for us to say that externally without consideration of the underlying circumstances.

 

[therubbernub]

So round 8 brought us all the best present of all- another nail in the coffin of the team that we all love to beat.
It also showed us that there is more than one way to structure our side- with an emphasis on mobility rather than aerial ability.

The injury to Cas gave what many wanted to see- a forward line that was without him. if there was one side that it was a definite advantage to have more mobility and pressure on the ball carrier. it was going to be the free wheeling Essendon who's smalls have cut us to pieces in the past. Especially without Daniher the decision was easy to make.

If not essendon then who? If we failed to beat the bombers, it was going to be hard to see where the next win would come from - The saint and lions in rnd 16 and 17! Yikes.

BUT WE WON! Suddenly there is light. Are we as bad as we thought? We did have a lot of injuries- maybe we will turn the corner form here? I feel the need to recap from my OP.



1.THE TOP 3 TEAMS : Tigers WCE and Adelaide

2. The other games :

a. Gold Coast- The Lynch factor

b. Pies - Resurgent and top 8 IMO

c. Nth- currently 7th

d. Dogs-

e Bombers- beaten!

Leaving our games against the top 3 sides to one side, because we weren't blown away against the best 3 sides and the results were expected.

The Gold coast looks to me as an aberration. Our defensive issues were the issue. Jones was all at sea, and in hindsight having Rowe at his side to combat Lynch could have made all the difference. Jones has looked completely different once Rowe has returned. Having three tall intercept defenders in Jones, Marchbank and Weitering hasn't worked. No 8 goals to Lynch and the game could have been ours.

The Pies : Playing decent footy and no disgrace to lose by 4 goals.

North: Playing pretty good football without injuries. This was one result that made us look ordinary.

Dogs: 21 point loss to the Dogs- equal on points with the Pies , North and Freemantle


An analysis of the ladder really shows how well the AFL equalization policy is working. It really is a very even competition , with 1 game separating 11 sides. When there is such a small difference between teams, injuries can play such a huge factor, both in talent on the field, but also, the disruption to the synergy and cohesion between the playing group. This is where the more established clubs- with a playing group that has played together for 4-5 years have a huge advantage over the clubs that are rebuilding . There is simply a much bigger core group of players that have played with each other over the years, so when a player goes out injured, instead of a first gamer coming in to replace him, they have a player that has played 30+ games.

When you look at our injuries, and the fact that they have been to key players, such as our captain , our best ruckman, our 2 best defenders (Doc and Marchbank), the 2 mids brought in to compensate for Gibbs (lang and kennedy), and 2 of our best youngsters in Pickett and Williamson , its easy to see that particularly in a rebuilding team, we simply dont have the depth to cover such key losses and remain competitive.

All in all a disappointing start with significant mitigating factors. The 2 games that were the most disappointing Nth and Gold coast .

 

[Soapy V]

I really believe that if we had our best 22 available we would have beaten GCS, possibly Collingwood, WCE Bulldogs and North. IMO we would have had 3-4 wins which given our list would have been a great effort. When you are young and inexperienced you simply can't afford injuries to so many key players. The advantage is kids are getting game and improving.

In 12 months the benefits will be obvious

 

[pinot]

You better be a ******* top-line elite athlete or psychological savant if your 'acceptance' of mediocre sport performance actually means anything.

Easy for us to say that externally without consideration of the underlying circumstances.

What is your issue? Judd himself said on MMM earlier in the week we need to see improvement week by week.

Are you going to start insulting Chris Judd?

 

[Mr_Plow]

What is your issue? Judd himself said on MMM earlier in the week we need to see improvement week by week.

Are you going to start insulting Chris Judd?

The concept of a supporter not accepting our current position or gameday performance (and seeking prompt personnel change) as if one is above this phase of our club that we are invested in. It's arrogant and one of the reasons why we have sucked for so long.

"I don't accept these performances", "I don't accept mediocrity", easy to say from behind the keyboard.

Guess what? We're all intrinsically competitive, that perception is nothing new or special.

We don't accept mediocrity from ourselves in our line of education/work, but when learning new concepts/skills and competing against others of our calibre, we allow for development time and consider the wider factors at play.

 

[pinot]

The concept of a supporter not accepting our current position or gameday performance (and seeking prompt personnel change) as if one is above this phase of our club that we are invested in. It's arrogant and one of the reasons why we have sucked for so long.

"I don't accept these performances", "I don't accept mediocrity", easy to say from behind the keyboard.

Guess what? We're all intrinsically competitive, that perception is nothing new or special.

We don't accept mediocrity from ourselves in our line of education/work, but when learning new concepts/skills and competing against others of our calibre, we allow for development time and consider the wider factors at play.

Disagree - everyone was using injuries as an excuse. I said its a poor one. Who is using injuries as an excuse this week to have won a match?

I am not even expecting us to win as said repeatedly. But playing with cohesion - majority of players whether you accept or not are senior players sprinkled with plenty of youngsters. But guess what - all teams have youngsters in their team we are no special snowflakes. So yes - I do expect better from my football club. Tangible week by week improvements not moving backwards - I don't expect it as a member, supporter whatever - I bloody demand it.

 

[thylacine60]

 

[Mr_Plow]

Luckily for you/everyone, I'm not one to follow up with multiple back and forth erudite replies. Cbf with that s**t, one will do.

 

[JustaBattler]

you will read this s**t, think about this s**t and understand what this s**t really is - it is s**t - and like it.

 

[Wickzki]

 

[therubbernub]

Disagree - everyone was using injuries as an excuse. I said its a poor one. Who is using injuries as an excuse this week to have won a match?

I am not even expecting us to win as said repeatedly. But playing with cohesion - majority of players whether you accept or not are senior players sprinkled with plenty of youngsters. But guess what - all teams have youngsters in their team we are no special snowflakes. So yes - I do expect better from my football club. Tangible week by week improvements not moving backwards - I don't expect it as a member, supporter whatever - I bloody demand it.

Yes every club has injuries and No its not an excuse. But add a young developing list (name another that is younger ) and you have a perfect storm. You simply cant have injuries to so many senior players and expect that their replacements will perform. They are too young too inexperienced and simply dont have the cohesion with the playing group yet.

 

[Gethelred]

Disagree - everyone was using injuries as an excuse. I said its a poor one. Who is using injuries as an excuse this week to have won a match?

I am not even expecting us to win as said repeatedly. But playing with cohesion - majority of players whether you accept or not are senior players sprinkled with plenty of youngsters. But guess what - all teams have youngsters in their team we are no special snowflakes. So yes - I do expect better from my football club. Tangible week by week improvements not moving backwards - I don't expect it as a member, supporter whatever - I bloody demand it.

I've said this to you before.

Injuries aren't an excuse, they're a reason why a team isn't functioning as well as they could've; take the top 5 players out of any squad, and see how the team performance decreases in output. Take the 5 most structurally important players out of any 22, and watch the team struggle to play their 'brand' or implement their gameplan. Take out 5 leaders, and watch your vaunted synergy go out the window.

Teams that are developing have the greatest degree of variation in their performance, due to having players that a) haven't played together as much as others, and correspondingly don't know each other's games as well as they could, and b) players that have played less than 50 games usually aren't at the stage in which they can consistently play at the same level week in week out. From there, if you remove players that have played more than 50 games, and are at that level of consistency, and are leaders, and you can clearly see the effects.

Feel free to demand what you like, criticise what you like, whinge about what you like; there is not words sufficient to the frustration I feel at times. But past a certain point, you're not merely outlining your impression and how you'd go about fixing things, you're just complaining loudly.