Remove this Banner Ad

Mentality

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

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

theboxmike

theboxmike

Premiership Player
Veteran
Joined
Jun 16, 2008
Posts
4,641
Reaction score
1,647
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
For as long as i can remember we have a huge problem with effort. Why oh why does it take 3 quarters and being at deaths door does it take for our boys to decide to kick into gear against a raging swans outfit? This is has to change and i am bloody sick of it! we are clearly not currently as professional as say Collingwood.

Now i would like to put my full congratulations to Sydney who played a great game but we are honestly much better than this and you all know it!
 
I do agree that mental attitude has been an issue for us. But I think 2nite was an example of us expecting and preparing for a contested game. We toyed with the structure, subbed bell chambers and started to get back into it at half time. I think the boys were switched on but I think we were just beaten by a really good Sydney team. They were very impressive.
 
Not sure it was a lack of effort tonight, I thought that was there, some silly decision making, and poor goal kicking cost us, and a SYdney that was playing very well, and a game style we didn't really expect,
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

It didn't go our way in the first half and they murdered us. Our shit kicking didn't help, but you could tell after half time the tides were bound to turn, just a shame it went too late. Oh well, re-group after the bye and hopefully we can put an end to our pathetic record in Perth. The fact we are playing Ross Lyon gives me confidence seeing as we dominated the Aints whilst he was there!
 
Dominated most of the second qtr for no scoreboard result. Had nothing to do with attitude or lack of effort, the structures didnt work and the decision making was poor.
 
Lemon, why was Sydney able to score so freely and we couldn't hit the middle of the sticks? Coud it be directly related to the pressure we applied to them when they had the ball and the pressure they applied to us when we had the ball? I think so.
 
Mumbo Jumbo said:
Lemon, why was Sydney able to score so freely and we couldn't hit the middle of the sticks? Coud it be directly related to the pressure we applied to them when they had the ball and the pressure they applied to us when we had the ball? I think so.
Click to expand...

I thought they had a lot more space in their fwd line compared to us. Neeld might have found a crack in our game plan last week but all season the fwd line hasn't functioned on all cylinders. I dont agree with we didnt come to play which the OP is suggesting, the effort was there just didnt capitalise on it. Hard for fwds to apply pressure when there always seemed to be one extra Sydney runner coming out of defence.
 
Thought that Sydney made sure they had one or two fast players waiting on the wings - Read Lewis Jetta - Then could fins space in transition.
 
Mumbo Jumbo said:
Lemon, why was Sydney able to score so freely and we couldn't hit the middle of the sticks? Coud it be directly related to the pressure we applied to them when they had the ball and the pressure they applied to us when we had the ball? I think so.
Click to expand...

That's not really related to effort though. Perhaps Sydney appiled more pressure simply because they had greater ability to do so, or because we were getting the ball in congested situations, and they were getting it in defence and the Sydney spread was better. Was Sydney's performance in the last because of their effort?\

complaining about effort is usually something that happens when people don't want to face up to more bothersome challenges (Such as, is our midfield good enough? Are we too reliant on a select few? etc.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

And we won contested possession. That says the effort was good, but we were perhaps just not good enough, or guilty of playing into Sydney's hands. We got the ball in congested positions, they attacked the ball carrier, we turned it over to their loose men who gathered uncontested possessions until they got a goal.
 
Yes but that's why "defensive efforts" is such a thing.

Winning a hard ball and chasing your opponent while they're in possession are two entirely different things.

We did it against Richmond too, even while we were dominating in the first half. You could see our guys not even bothering to chase after theirs half of the time, yet that stuff doesn't necessarily get picked up on TV.

Having said that, I only saw last night's game on TV so I have no idea, but I thought the tackle count was pretty telling.
 
Phone said:
That's not really related to effort though. Perhaps Sydney appiled more pressure simply because they had greater ability to do so, or because we were getting the ball in congested situations, and they were getting it in defence and the Sydney spread was better. Was Sydney's performance in the last because of their effort?
Click to expand...

If you were at the game then you would know the defensive effort was far below where it's been before, and hence it's reasonable to say that it may have made a difference. Tackling is an indicator of defensive effort and ours was well down. It's something that's not always captured on the screen.

Phone said:
complaining about effort is usually something that happens when people don't want to face up to more bothersome challenges (Such as, is our midfield good enough? Are we too reliant on a select few? etc.
Click to expand...

No, complaining about effort is usually something that happens when there's lack of effort. Complaining about whether our midfield is good enough happens when our midfield is not good enough. People can accept hard-fought losses like Anzac Day. Our midfield wasn't good enough that day but were people complaining about lack of effort? No, sir.
 
The reason our tackling numbers were down were because Sydney were mostly getting the ball through the likes of Richards, Grundy and Shaw instead of Bolton and Kennedy. We won contested possession. We won clearances. The problem was, we weren't taking advantage of that. They were taking uncontested marks at the back to gain possession, we were gaining possession at stoppages. It's easily to tackle in one of those situations isn't it?
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Think that Phone is winning this my argument so far.

For me the game was like a soccer game - One team dominates territory/possession/shots on goal, but the other side score on the break. Unfortunately, the Swans got too many goals on the break but the fortunate thing is that it doesn't happen too often in footy.
 
I don't think it matters where you were. It's just common sense. the way the game is played nowadays, if your midfielders are sinking the ball down the necks of loose defenders down back who have loose defenders to kick to and get out of the defence, your defensive efforts, good or bad, don't stand a chance. the way the game was played last night, we had no opportunity to set-up a forward press. If you want to be critical, why not attack the coach for letting those defenders be free, or the midfielders for not adjusting? that's why they were able to score so easily. they out-positioned us, and we stood no chance on the rebound.

The way I see it, attacking the effort is just an easy way to criticise the entire team, without criticising anyone.

As I've pointed out, we won the contested ball, we won the clearances. We just didn't play well.
 
Mumbo Jumbo said:
Was your vantage point from China as good as Phone's from Sydney?
Click to expand...

I expect there will be little or no discussion about our next game against Fremantle - Seeing that few posters will be able to watch the game live.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom