Autopsy Post Mortem vs Essendon

Aug 29, 2005
30,291
26,929
Adelaide
AFL Club
Collingwood
Structure looked pretty good live. It's literally once we get the ball from a turn over and go forward where the problem is. Not running to the right areas, too many players in the same area, or the kick isn't to advantage / space enough of the time. Because like the other bloke said, you'd take the inside 50 count every day of the week.

I honestly thought we defended well and structured up well, just got beaten 1on1 few too many times and they converted way better then us.

But no wait it's all bucks fault.

Ultimately it is.

You are saying we structured up well and in the same breath say when we go forwards it all goes to s**t. That in itself is structure related.

Also when people say players need to take responsibility how do they do that ? drop themselves? walk in to Bucks office and say sorry Bucks I keep letting you down I'm not up to this AFL caper?

Buckley picks the 22 he then chooses to back in players that regularly let him down and the team down. Look at Blair.

Fasolo is now also becoming an issue as due to his lack of want to pressure when we lose possession and he is now also inaccurate so is not hitting the score board it makes him a liability.

Moore is plainly not ready and is badly out of form and confidence yet Buckley has refused other then a token quarter of footy in the wet at the end of a game to send the 1 bloke on our list who can help him out forward in Reid.

Our small defenders get spanked defensively every week, rarely changed up.
 
Not it didn't! We overcommitted at the contest allowing them to get out the back on any turnovers beyond 60 from goal. That lead to 25 scoring shots from just 43 I50's. Despite flooding the contest with numbers we lost the clearance count and congested our F50 to the point that we only scored 27 times from 66 I50's.
Don't get frustrated with my question, okay?
How is that game plan? Do you believe that is what they train for?

What it might be is that the message is not clear, incapable of maintaining structure due to confidence shot or personnel (last one unlikely) as their best is very good but when they are off, terrible.
 
Oct 7, 2009
18,925
30,123
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Dallas Cowboys Chicago Bulls
Here are my issues with what i saw yesterday.

#1 - Selecting Mason Cox when we all knew what the conditions were going to be like.

#2 - With Mason Cox in the side and his inability to hold marks in the dry would mean he would most likely just be making a contest to get the pill to ground directly in front of him, how many times did we not have crumbers at his feet?

#3 - Multiple players flying for the ball and no-one staying down for a dropped mark or spoil.

#4 - Mason Cox standing the mark on Essendon kick outs allowing them to kick to themselves and run 20m and clearing the ball to the wing literally every time.

#5 - Lack of accountability, not my man, not my concern.. Case in point, Crisp casually jogging through the middle and allowing Fantasia to run forward and get on the end of Tipungwiti's kick off the ground to take a mark with Crisp still trailing by 20m.

#6 - Our hesitancy to kick the ball inside through the middle instead take the ball slowly along the boundary allowing Essendon defenders and midfielders to get back an plug every hole in defence. Late in the game Howe actually kicked inside and although WHE was run down by Tipungwiti you saw how easy it was to open up the opposition.

#7 - Goal Kicking.. You're paid a crap load of money to be able to kick a ball straight over 0-40m, why do we have such difficulty doing this? Is it technique, is it between the ears?

#8 - If Daicos isn't ready, then surely Moore isn't ready. Zero impact on games so far in 2017 and needs to go back to the 2's.

#9 - Essendon turn the ball over and have players streaming forward and plenty of options to kick to, we force Essendon to turn the ball over and we literally have to kick sideways and hold up the ball and wait for players to get in position.

#10 - If Pendles is injured, don't play him.

#11 - You can't have players like Ramsay and Maynard in defence if they continue to cost you goals week in week out.. Ramsay needs to be dropped and i would trial Maynard up the ground.

#12 - Treloar should not kick on his left foot, ever...

#13 - Adams has probably been our 2nd best player this year, what was the thinking behind playing him forward unless he was carrying something.
 
Jul 25, 2008
24,067
40,245
The Linc
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Oakland Raiders
Serious question for those that keep referring to us having the wrong/bad game plan. I don't buy into it but am open to someone explaining. I really don't believe it is that complicated and it isn't that the game was played at the same frenetic pace as that first quarter against the Swans.

Given the personnel out there yesterday, how would a different game plan resulted in a win? I just don't see it and if someone can engage in a decent discussion without abuse, I am happy to discuss.

The way I see it is if we don't get enough of the ball, didn't have enough I50, play undisciplined football, we lose. To me it is all about planning for the opposition both as a team, looking at different scenarios, practicing/training and individual players and going out there and putting those plans into action.

As per above. Our game plan is based around extra numbers at stoppages and in our F50.

What this does is allow opposition outriders to get overlap and goalside so they can convert at least every second time they go I50. The extra congestion I50 makes it harder for players to spot up options I30 (exhibit A Wells' two direct turnovers yesterday).

This inability to spot up targets pushes our shots longer and wider meaning we can't convert at better than 50%.

The extra numbers at stoppages create stagnant ball movement where we basically play hot potato with the ball looking for an outlet runner. The thing is we never have those runners because our numbers are inside the contest.

I know I'm fighting a losing battle here, but that's it. If we move away from contesting the contest and back our mids in on natural talent to get the ball moving forward we'll create more 1 v 1 opportunities I50 and have better flow with our ball movement. What I would suggest is to watch how Adelaide exit stoppages compared to us. They rarely have handball chains over three because they know the midfield is their weakness so when they win it they work hard to release runners and get it to their strength area quickly. In other words they cover a weakness to feed a strength with speed of ball movement.

The final point I would make is that with this shift we would need to adjust defensively as well and go with players more adept 1 v 1 because our overpossessing largely papers over that particular crack because we own the ball and territory for long periods of time. It's a game plan that will keep us competitive against all but the very best teams and relies on deadly accuracy to get past any team that can match us through the middle.
 
Last edited:
Jul 25, 2008
24,067
40,245
The Linc
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Oakland Raiders
Don't get frustrated with my question, okay?
How is that game plan? Do you believe that is what they train for?

What it might be is that the message is not clear, incapable of maintaining structure due to confidence shot or personnel (last one unlikely) as their best is very good but when they are off, terrible.

Why would I it's a legitimate question and I don't believe it is a game plan. The problem is the coach does. I know it's what the coaches plan for and have them train to do look at our drills pre-match with the use of the handball. It's all about sharing it in congestion until someone "gets out".

The reason it appears that the message isn't getting through is that opposition clubs have clued onto it after the Bulldogs used it to great effect last year and now know how to shut it down.

It also might not be any of that and looking for ours doesn't help us. It might be as simple as it just isn't effective with this group which again is something I doubt I can convince you of because we won't see an alternative from the current coaching group. I also know from one of the players that they get it and are going with it they just don't think it's all that effective.

It's like trying to prove a negative it can't be done and relies on your buy in to understand what is wrong...

FWIW I'm quite confident the coach hasn't lost the group. He just needs to develop a functioning game plan and they'll buy in. It's probably the one element allowing him to cling to the role.
 

Ketchup

Cancelled
May 9, 2009
6,894
8,512
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Tottenham Hotspur, Aberdeen FC
Structure looked pretty good live. It's literally once we get the ball from a turn over and go forward where the problem is. Not running to the right areas, too many players in the same area, or the kick isn't to advantage / space enough of the time. Because like the other bloke said, you'd take the inside 50 count every day of the week.

I honestly thought we defended well and structured up well, just got beaten 1on1 few too many times and they converted way better then us.

But no wait it's all bucks fault.
As long as you're not talking about these structures and set ups especially considering the position on the field and the time remaining when chasing the game!

18110194_10155255332109269_393941922_o.jpg


There is that many things wrong with this
 
Aug 29, 2005
30,291
26,929
Adelaide
AFL Club
Collingwood
Serious question for those that keep referring to us having the wrong/bad game plan. I don't buy into it but am open to someone explaining. I really don't believe it is that complicated and it isn't that the game was played at the same frenetic pace as that first quarter against the Swans.

Given the personnel out there yesterday, how would a different game plan resulted in a win? I just don't see it and if someone can engage in a decent discussion without abuse, I am happy to discuss.

The way I see it is if we don't get enough of the ball, didn't have enough I50, play undisciplined football, we lose. To me it is all about planning for the opposition both as a team, looking at different scenarios, practicing/training and individual players and going out there and putting those plans into action.

Clearances.

Too many players get sucked into the contest so although we win it we then have no one as riders to receive break the lines or clear cleanly, often resulting in a lot of congested handballs or a scrub kick forward often to their spare man and then we have to defend or reset to lock in our forward half.

Around the ground throw ins/ups Grundy winning taps but not overtly effectively as he "deadpans" them within a few feet of him allowing easy sharks by opposition mids all they did was play in front close to grundy, he needs to mix it up to not be so predictable.
Our mids also often start flat footed rarely on the move to receive or rove and break at pace.

Defending.

We then over commit numbers in our defensive half (ie a 2005 Swans Paul Roos style flood) except our last line of forwards are even more over committed and come all the way up to the CHB line.

When/if we eventually gain possession and are on the transition our fwds or mids usually have to hold it up on the flanks or wings until the over committed forward line has time to sprint back to the forward 50 and then make leads (an exhausting process).

Transition and Fwd line entry.

By this time the opposition has also pushed numbers back and we pull our FB line up to our CHF line creating even more congestion the new kicker (as we have moved the ball backwards and side wards to other side of ground slowly) now looks up to see a congested mess the forwards standing still unsure where to lead as there is no space so a resultant bomb cones in.

This is then pressured and usually quick kicked out to our Howe line and re-entered but again usually without clean entry, if we do manage a mark the players are rooted from doing a basketball style full length sprints followed by 5-10mins of frontal pressure chase and tackles that when they kick they have more lactic acid built up then a energiser bunny.

This effects goal accuracy.


Forward line movement, structures and systems.

Elliott, Fasolo are great smalls who play tall on the lead but neither are overtly adept at roving packs or spills, both often look to rove out the back instead of front and center.
Fasolo especially also likes to fly up against Moore White Cox etc when he should be staying grounded in those situations.

Moore our only KPF.

Players don't block for each other go back and watch the Rocca and Tarrant show of 02/03/04 the way the lead in and out of zones block to help get that separation, lead up at the ball carrier, lead in behind the other not too where he is leading etc. Smalls coming in front and centre at pace attack the ball drop.

Stagnation (is it fatigue or laziness), often our forwards are found standing still arm in air waving to the mids to "bomb" it to them which they often reluctantly do as no options present with authority.


There is more but I think that is enough.
 
As per above. Our game plan is based around extra numbers at stoppages and in our F50.

What this does is allow opposition outriders to get overlap and goalside so they can convert at least every second time they go I50. The extra congestion I50 makes it harder for players to spot up options I30 (exhibit A Wells' two direct turnovers yesterday).

This inability to spot up targets pushes our shots wider and deeper meaning we can't convert at better than 50%.

The extra numbers at stoppages create stagnant ball movement where we basically play hot potato with the ball looking for an outlet runner. The thing is we never have those runners because our numbers are inside the contest.

I know I'm fighting a losing battle here, but that's it. If we move away from contesting the contest and back our mids in on natural talent to get the ball moving forward we'll create more 1 v 1 opportunities I50 and have better flow with our ball movement. What I would suggest is to watch how Adelaide exit stoppages compared to us. They rarely have handball chains over three because they know the midfield is their weakness so when they win it they work hard to release runners and get it to their strength area quickly. In other words they cover a weakness to feed a strength with speed of ball movement.

The final point I would make is that with this shift we would need to adjust defensively as well and go with players more adept 1 v 1 because our overpossessing largely papers over that particular crack because we own the ball and territory for long periods of time. It's a game plan that will keep us competitive against all but the very best teams and relies on deadly accuracy to get past any team that can match us through the middle.

If I recall, Buckley mentioned that there were too many numbers at stoppages at one of the first supporters gathering and for a while there it changed but now back to the same bad habits. I just don't believe it is part of the game plan, which is why I put up three suggestions as to why.

The congestion in our forward line to my mind is because when we near I50, we stop and prop, don't take the first option or if a player is in position to kick for goal, we short pass.

I have watched Adelaide, and their ball movement is not dis-similar to what we want to achieve but they are playing with confidence in each other and their execution is a hell of a lot better. I don't believe that the game plan for most teams is that different and the difference is execution and occasional tweaking against some teams.

If you read jjsmitty8 player analysis, we had a lot of players playing well below expectations.https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/members/jjsmitty8.148050/
 
Why would I it's a legitimate question and I don't believe it is a game plan. The problem is the coach does. I know it's what the coaches plan for and have them train to do look at our drills pre-match with the use of the handball. It's all about sharing it in congestion until someone "gets out".

The reason it appears that the message isn't getting through is that opposition clubs have clued onto it after the Bulldogs used it to great effect last year and now know how to shut it down.

It also might not be any of that and looking for ours doesn't help us. It might be as simple as it just isn't effective with this group which again is something I doubt I can convince you of because we won't see an alternative from the current coaching group. I also know from one of the players that they get it and are going with it they just don't think it's all that effective.

It's like trying to prove a negative it can't be done and relies on your buy in to understand what is wrong...

FWIW I'm quite confident the coach hasn't lost the group. He just needs to develop a functioning game plan and they'll buy in. It's probably the one element allowing him to cling to the role.
Cheers Sco.
 

Ari

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 5, 2003
12,923
1,691
Pascoe Vale
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Ferrari
Whoever was responsible for bringing in Buckley must fall of their sword when Buckley does.

It's one of the worst decisions in the modern CFC history.

Bucks has taken us from a premiership superstar team to a laughing stock

The Essendon football club and its members present James Hird.
 
Jul 25, 2008
24,067
40,245
The Linc
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Oakland Raiders
If I recall, Buckley mentioned that there were too many numbers at stoppages at one of the first supporters gathering and for a while there it changed but now back to the same bad habits. I just don't believe it is part of the game plan, which is why I put up three suggestions as to why.

The congestion in our forward line to my mind is because when we near I50, we stop and prop, don't take the first option or if a player is in position to kick for goal, we short pass.

I have watched Adelaide, and their ball movement is not dis-similar to what we want to achieve but they are playing with confidence in each other and their execution is a hell of a lot better. I don't believe that the game plan for most teams is that different and the difference is execution and occasional tweaking against some teams.

If you read jjsmitty8 player analysis, we had a lot of players playing well below expectations.

Not overly interested in individual analysis because our issues are the collective as both myself and loki04 are at pains to point out.

If you truly believe we are attempting to move the ball in a similar fashion to Adelaide I cannot take the discussion further because their ball movement is as pure as any we've seen this century including Geelong in 07-08 and Hawthorn 12-14. We are that far from it it's not funny.
 
Aug 29, 2005
30,291
26,929
Adelaide
AFL Club
Collingwood
If I recall, Buckley mentioned that there were too many numbers at stoppages at one of the first supporters gathering and for a while there it changed but now back to the same bad habits. I just don't believe it is part of the game plan, which is why I put up three suggestions as to why.

The congestion in our forward line to my mind is because when we near I50, we stop and prop, don't take the first option or if a player is in position to kick for goal, we short pass.

I have watched Adelaide, and their ball movement is not dis-similar to what we want to achieve but they are playing with confidence in each other and their execution is a hell of a lot better. I don't believe that the game plan for most teams is that different and the difference is execution and occasional tweaking against some teams.

If you read jjsmitty8 player analysis, we had a lot of players playing well below expectations.

Adelaide play much different game to us.

Tex and Betts hold their shape much more in their forward half, then they have a fleet of quick and skilled indigenous players very adept at ground level. Cameron, Millera and Hampton.

They create space and move the ball at pace. They play with a plus one in defence, ours is at the coal face.

Their defensive set up is different too.
 
Everyone is talking about the coach and the game plan but what about the recruiting and list management team?
We have not recruited to fill forward positions, how has this been allowed to happen?
Why are they unaccountable for the recruiting of Cox, White, Mayne etc.....
Cox was a free hit, White a pick in the 40s and he hasn't been that bad, Mayne I can't begin to explain

While there's no guarantee that a change in coach will be an instant fix, recruiting and list management certainly isn't going to change things overnight. Aside from a lack of key position depth I think the list is in reasonable shape especially considering we traded out of the 2009 (Jolly, Ball (yeah he was drafted, but it still wasn't a pick for the future)), 2010 (Krakouer, Tarrant) and 2011 (Clarke) drafts to build or try and sustain a premiership side. Admittedly Ceglar and Elliott were traded in as part of the Krakouer and Clarke trades, so we had some eye to the future.

Looking at those drafts if we didn't trade for the flag undoubtably we'd be playing better now, but would be worse off for not having the 2010 premiership. Just looking at those who went around those selections:

2009 pick 14 (Jolly) - Menzel (17), Fyfe (19), Carlisle (24)
2009 pick 30 (Ball) - Gawn (34), Reid (38),
2009 pick 46 (Jolly) - Stratton (46)
2010 pick 25 (Krakouer) - Darling (26), Howe (33), Parker (40)
2011 pick (Clarke - potentially we could have traded a later pick for just Elliott) - Brad Hill (33)


In terms of key position youth our mistakes were made a few years ago when we lacked the foresight to plan for the departures of Cloke, Brown and Reid. Obviously Reid is still playing, but the point is we don't have anyone to replace him. Hence changing the recruiting/list management won't be an instant fix as drafting key position players requires time for them to develop.

The 2013 draft where we had the chance to select McCarthy, but instead drafted Scharenberg and Freeman and the 2015 draft where we had the chance to select either Wright or Lever, but instead drafted DeGoey standout as chances missed. I'm ok with the Treloar trade as he provides much needed pace, although Weideman* and Logue went at the selections we traded. *I'm not confident Weideman would have lasted to pick 7 had we held that selection, there's a chance Melbourne would have pounced at pick 4.

Using the above ramblings we could have Fyfe, Reid, Stratton, Parker, McCarthy and Wright/Lever playing for us now, but the first three would have came at the expense of our 2010 flag and Parker at the expense of the 2011 grand final. McCarthy and Wright/Lever vs Freeman and DeGoey looks to be the mistake.
 
Last edited:
Cox was a free hit, White a pick in the 40s and he hasn't been that bad, Mayne I can't begin to explain

While there's no guarantee that a change in coach will be an instant fix, recruiting and list management certainly isn't going to change things overnight. Aside from a lack of key position depth I think the list is in reasonable shape especially considering we traded out of the 2009 (Jolly, Ball (yeah he was drafted, but it still wasn't a pick for the future)), 2010 (Krakouer, Tarrant) and 2011 (Clarke) drafts to build or try and sustain a premiership side. Admittedly Ceglar and Elliott were traded in as part of the Krakouer and Clarke trades, so we had some eye to the future.

Looking at those drafts if we didn't trade for the flag undoubtably we'd be playing better now, but would be worse off for not having the 2010 premiership. Just looking at those who went around those selections:

2009 pick 14 (Jolly) - Menzel (17), Fyfe (19), Carlisle (24)
2009 pick 30 (Ball) - Gawn (34), Reid (38),
2009 pick 46 (Jolly) - Stratton (46)
2010 pick 25 (Krakouer) - Darling (26), Howe (33), Parker (40)
2011 pick (Clarke - potentially we could have traded a later pick for just Elliott) - Brad Hill (33)


In terms of key position youth our mistakes were made a few years ago when we lacked the foresight to plan for the departures of Cloke, Brown and Reid. Obviously Reid is still playing, but the point is we don't have anyone to replace him. Hence changing the recruiting/list management won't be an instant fix as drafting key position players requires time for them to develop.

The 2013 draft where we had the chance to select McCarthy, but instead drafted Scharenberg and Freeman and the 2015 draft where we had the chance to select either Wright or Lever, but instead drafted DeGoey standout as chances missed. I'm ok with the Treloar trade as he provides much needed pace, although Weideman* and Logue went at the selections we traded. *I'm not confident Weideman would have lasted to pick 7 had we held that selection, there's a chance Melbourne would have pounced at pick 4.

Using the above ramblings we could have Fyfe, Reid, Stratton, Parker, McCarthy and Wright/Lever playing for us now, but the first three would have came at the expense of our 2010 flag and Parker at the expense of the 2011 grand final. McCarthy and Wright/Lever vs Freeman and DeGoey looks to be the mistake.
You make some good points with drafting prior to 2011 but in regards to Freeman and Scharenberg, think it was just bad luck with the injuries both have.

Interestingly the same recruiters are still there.
 

McGuanes Seven

Senior List
Dec 27, 2013
223
464
AFL Club
Collingwood
I thought it was during the 3rd. Didn't have much impact up forward.
Yes it was in the third - but it seemed like only for ten minutes. He was double teamed in the few marks he went for. Amazing that it takes until Anzac Day for him to be tried forward. Further amazing that it was the third quarter and only very briefly.
 
May 7, 2011
53,963
13,052
Wangaratta
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Celtics, Tottenham, Oakland Raiders
Have had time to ponder and calm down. All 4 of our losses have been the same in that we've been excellent for short periods during the game but then mediocre during the other times. Our team is inconsistent week to week and within the 4 quarters of a game since 2012. Clearly Buckley cannot rectify this. For this reason he needs to go. Hurts to say this because he is a legend of the club, seems a great hard working guy and most of all I don't want all his haters to have the last laugh.

I don't doubt we have the talent but not the right mix of players and obviously a very flawed forward line. It amazed me to see Greenwood and Adams play most of the game forward. Both players are the last of the midfield group I would have playing forward especially in todays conditions. I wouldn't mind seeing Crocker come in for the Geelong game for Greenwood or Broomhead. Will provide something aerially and is generally a good finisher. One thing Ive noticed is that all our players get sucked to the ball. Doesn't matter if the ball is coming in long and high or the ball is on the ground. This allows the opposition to only need one handball out of the congestion and they are away. Bucks accused the Bulldogs and Saints of cherry picking (I assume he means leaving players forward of the ball) but it seems to be tactic that works against us and thus the easy goals.

Finish with some positives. I thought Phillips was pretty good today. Crisp played his best game for the season (not hard considering his early season form). They were up there with Howe, Wells, Treloar and Elliott as our better performers. We can expect and will get more output from Pendlebury, Adams (if in midfield), Grundy and Sidebottom in most games this season.
Good post.
On the positives part: credit to Crisp for turning around his season yesterday. Disposal remains an issue (not alone there!) but far less fumbly this time.
 

McGuanes Seven

Senior List
Dec 27, 2013
223
464
AFL Club
Collingwood
Tell you what I saw yesterday that stood out to me like a beacon... Nobody wants to take a shot! WTF is going on with that? Where is the value in holding the ball inside 50 if you're not going to pull the trigger when you get a chance? As I say... Fear Of Failure!
I have noticed that to a greater or lesser degree a few times this year. I also can't understand it. When they were warming up initially and kicking to the end of Essendon's cheer squad, Fas Pendles and others were putting them through the middle from all angles and ranges.
 

TheSierBear

Premiership Player
Jan 25, 2016
4,487
4,080
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
soft spot for Carlton out of pity
I think that in light of the loss there was a positive that far outweighs the loss. Jamie Elliott. A lot of talk, especially from in house trolls who I have on ignore and suggest others do the same, said was finished. He was very good and even if he has lost some of his leap and athleticism, he's still elite. The other was Wells. I am against the recruiting of Mayne, but not Wells. He is our only player over thirty, so no worries for recruiting him, and he's a gun. He is more sublime than Penldes at the moment. Bona fida elite, the players love him too.
Brayden Maynard is another positive, he is shaping into a very good defender. Kicked a torp that pinpointed someone on the wing. Soon his biggest weakness will become is biggest strength. He will time and again make the right decisions and execute them with his lethal left foot boot. Howe is an AA star, lets stop crying about Heath Shaw Howe is a better footballer now and will be into the next five years. Adams goes alright too.

The negatives were Cox, Pendles, Reid, Broomhead, Adams, Schade, and the biggest of all Ramsay and that's off the top of my head. Ramsay is really really bad I have never seen a player caught holding the ball so close to goal more than he has in the space of a few weeks. He must be dropped. Scharenberg to come in. If Broomhead has a broken jaw, then he goes out for the one and only Josh Daicos. Cox out for Dunn. Play Reid forward. If Pendles is sore rest him, looks like Smith is going to come back in. We should rest Pendles for this week IMO.
 
Aug 29, 2005
30,291
26,929
Adelaide
AFL Club
Collingwood
Yes it was in the third - but it seemed like only for ten minutes. He was double teamed in the few marks he went for. Amazing that it takes until Anzac Day for him to be tried forward. Further amazing that it was the third quarter and only very briefly.

He was moved 5 mins to go in the 3rd quarter, immediately gave us better structure and we scored 2 goals off contests he competed in from players roving the spills. Looked tired.

He then started the 4th quarter on the bench and came on after about 5 mins in again forward had numerous leads ignored and was shot physically. Needs to start the game there and be given a proper run at it.
 
Aug 29, 2005
30,291
26,929
Adelaide
AFL Club
Collingwood
Just watched Buckley's presser, I didn't have any issue with what he said about the three players he mentioned. Their output was below par.

Look I don't have an issue per se but he was:

Potting a bloke who is clearly injured and shouldn't be playing...Pendles.

Then Adams who Bucks played out of position, an inside mid would of been handy in the wet...no?

So he chose to:

a) play a player who can't even get out of "jog" speed.

b) Chose to play a small, inside mid, up forward when that mid has never shown any propensity for the position.


Sidebum out of all our mids should be the one who moves forward if we need to go that route.
 
Moore is plainly not ready and is badly out of form and confidence yet Buckley has refused other then a token quarter of footy in the wet at the end of a game to send the 1 bloke on our list who can help him out forward in Reid.
Just on that, do you reckon it was a coincidence that Moore was finally able to get a run at the ball and take a mark without being double teamed when Reid went forward?

It's amazing what can happen when there's a second legitimately dangerous key forward that defenders actually have to pay attention to!
 
Back