Autopsy Rd 11 Blues create a contest but fade in the last

[FRUMPY]

Hopefully the discussion turns to the real concerns/issues

As to why more than half our games under Teague have conceded massive point swings

Why do they happen, what do we do to combat it

Same as always, sfa leadership. Previous years we left it to Cripps to do it on his own and now he isn't getting it done .

Where was Cripps, Doc, Simpson, Murphy etc when they get on a role.

Sent from my CPH1879 using Tapatalk

 

[Bearded Carpenter]

Next ‘mate’ is going to be a doozy

 

[Arr0w]

Same as always, sfa leadership. Previous years we left it to Cripps to do it on his own and now he isn't getting it done .

Where was Cripps, Doc, Simpson, Murphy etc when they get on a role.

Sent from my CPH1879 using Tapatalk

Onfield leadership certainly plays a part, a huge part. My concerns are more to do with the gameplan not having consistent gears

We played very smart, balanced tempo footy in the 1st half, yet it was non existent 2nd half.

While TDK, a natural jumper, was in the ruck in 2nd qtr, we halved the centre and stoppage clearances and kicked away

Ed shift to Kelly should of started at 1st bounce, finally when the move came it slowed their movement, this too was relaxed in the 2nd half

 

[Opine]

I think this thread should be renamed.

It should be called "5PM with Tony Lynn 15 and Opine".

I agree.

 

[TheReal99prelim]

Umpires definitely cost us the game.

Umpires definitely halted momentum on several occasions to significantly impact on the outcome

 

[Macca43]

Doubt TDK was gassed in the third quarter.

Yes but he was gassed by the end of the game AFTER being given a chop out in the third, if we had of kept pushing him through the third he would have blown up much earlier.

 

[Macca43]

The main one was was Ryan caught dead drops the ball when we were 13 points up, 1 goal into their comeback. We should have had a free kick at CHB, instead they get a goal.
Straight after that, Samo's second free against, and there is all your momentum.
Sure you can argue that the second Samo one was there, but that's not how it was paid throughout the game.

And spare me the 'undisciplined 50'. Do not be ridiculous.

Then after Samo's second free kick against they get the centre clearance and shove it straight down Darlings throat - wouldn't have happened if Samo's free wasn't paid.

Add in the holding the ball not paid to TDK against Naitanui which would have seen us go to 25 points up and there is a massive impact on the game.

"Sure you can argue that the second Samo one was there" If that one was there so was Fisher tackle on Duggan and there was also a tackle on Hurn in our goals square.

 

[Macca43]

To say they cheat does not do you any favours. They make mistakes and some yesterday were howlers. It did not cost us a win. We are not good enough yet. Take the advice offered - when local footy starts again, put your hand up and umpire. It is not an easy task.

Neither is playing AFL football but people seem pretty happy to pot players who make mistakes.

You can play with semantics as to whether or not the umpiring errors "cost us the game"but it is clear the had a massive impact, the Eagles wouldn't have piled on 4 goals late in the 3rd without some favourable questionable decisions and the blues clearly weren't paid a number of free kicks that would have more than likely resulted in goals.

 

[ajb72]

The umpire in case isnt a cheat. He just isnt very good.

 

[Bearded Carpenter]

So now that we are playing against 2 teams each weekend - the opposition and the umpires - can I suggest we just kick more goals that the team we are playing to ensure we beat both.

A simple way to do this is to play better.

 

[Macca43]

Same as always, sfa leadership. Previous years we left it to Cripps to do it on his own and now he isn't getting it done .

Where was Cripps, Doc, Simpson, Murphy etc when they get on a role.

Sent from my CPH1879 using Tapatalk

Someone posted an excellent article from SEN going through what happened when the Eagles got on a role, it explains that we did most things pretty much perfectly but small errors and blind luck hurt.

Where was Cripps - being buried by Kelly and Naitannui at a centre clearance.
Where was Docherty - getting a cruel bounce playing across half back.

 

[Skull Face]

So now that we are playing against 2 teams each weekend - the opposition and the umpires - can I suggest we just kick more goals that the team we are playing to ensure we beat both.

A simple way to do this is to play better.

We aren't that good without our forward line playing. Have to remember Mckay, Curnow, Mcgovern, JSOS, Cuningham, Martin missed this contest. Only Betts and Casboult of our best 8 forwards played.

 

[Bearded Carpenter]

We aren't that good without our forward line playing. Have to remember Mckay, Curnow, Mcgovern, JSOS, Cuningham, Martin missed this contest. Only Betts and Casboult of our best 8 forwards played.

So what you're saying is when when we get them back on the park it will nullify the umpires influence.

I like the way you think.

 

[Bluesome]

What's with the sudden stern defence of anything umpires here?
How exactly did this come about where discussing the game in total, comes secondary to defending umpires at any cost?
When exactly did this 'movement' take control?

It's boring listening to people whining about umpires but doubly so people defending them as though they were their relatives.

there is a difference between questioning decisions and personally attacking umpires, or spouting theories of head office influencing results and a WA umpire consciously cheating for WC...that is the first point...

the second is a worthy debate I think of whether the umpires actually “cost us the game”...clearly I am in the “no” camp, others are in the yes, and some on the fence...

no one (I don’t think) is saying that the level of umpiring was great or denying they made quite a few errors...the question being asked is more so whether we are too focused on their errors rather than our own teams and/or why some feel the need to personally attack these guys/girls for clearly what was simply just not a great game by them...

 

[Macca43]

there is a difference between questioning decisions and personally attacking umpires, or spouting theories of head office influencing results and a WA umpire consciously cheating for WC...that is the first point...

the second is a worthy debate I think of whether the umpires actually “cost us the game”...clearly I am in the “no” camp, others are in the yes, and some on the fence...

no one (I don’t think) is saying that the level of umpiring was great or denying they made quite a few errors...the question being asked is more so whether we are too focused on their errors rather than our own teams and/or why some feel the need to personally attack these guys/girls for clearly what was simply just not a great game by them...

I can't remember a game where so many controversial decisions had such a direct impact on the scoreboard. There isn't an anti Carlton agenda and the umpires aren't biased but clearly there were some absolute shockers that had a significant impact on the result. Denying this is as much folly as believing their is a conspiracy against us.

At the moment we just aren't getting much luck, we seemed to get the Hawks the one week they actually decide to turn up, Port get the perfect final 30 seconds to beat us and now we get the Eagles when the umpires have an absolute mare - yes we made mistakes as a team that cost us those games as well but luck plays a part. REmember the old French saying "The question to ask of a General isn't is he skilful but is he lucky"

 

[Bluesome]

I can't remember a game where so many controversial decisions had such a direct impact on the scoreboard. There isn't an anti Carlton agenda and the umpires aren't biased but clearly there were some absolute shockers that had a significant impact on the result. Denying this is as much folly as believing their is a conspiracy against us.

At the moment we just aren't getting much luck, we seemed to get the Hawks the one week they actually decide to turn up, Port get the perfect final 30 seconds to beat us and now we get the Eagles when the umpires have an absolute mare - yes we made mistakes as a team that cost us those games as well but luck plays a part. REmember the old French saying "The question to ask of a General isn't is he skilful but is he lucky"

Saying that we got the rough end of the stick is fine...calling these umpires all sorts of names because of it will only cause those that may be great umpires to think "this just isn't worth it"...there is a reason there is less and less umpires going through the pathway, and the personal abuse and threats they cop on line and at matches when they aren't earning that much is one of the reasons why...there is a way to say it, as you have, and there is a way others have gone about it...

Following the NHL has been a real eye opener...they go the complete other way...they sometimes question decisions, but no-one really blames the refs...a team got knocked out of the playoffs last year because a ref missed a hand pass (which is illegal) in overtime which led directly to the team scoring a game winning goal...the debate centred around whether there ought be a 'review' system rather than just blaming the ref...that one decision knocked the team out of the final, and was clearly a bad 'non-call', but there was nowhere near some of the vitriol spouted by some on here towards the umps for this home and away game...

If you want the umpiring level to improve, calling them every name under the sun will only cause the pool of those wanting to become umpires to shrink, and the standard of umpiring to get lower and lower...

 

[Macca43]

Saying that we got the rough end of the stick is fine...calling these umpires all sorts of names because of it will only cause those that may be great umpires to think "this just isn't worth it"...there is a reason there is less and less umpires going through the pathway, and the personal abuse and threats they cop on line and at matches when they aren't earning that much is one of the reasons why...there is a way to say it, as you have, and there is a way others have gone about it...

Following the NHL has been a real eye opener...they go the complete other way...they sometimes question decisions, but no-one really blames the refs...a team got knocked out of the playoffs last year because a ref missed a hand pass (which is illegal) in overtime which led directly to the team scoring a game winning goal...the debate centred around whether there ought be a 'review' system rather than just blaming the ref...that one decision knocked the team out of the final, and was clearly a bad 'non-call', but there was nowhere near some of the vitriol spouted by some on here towards the umps for this home and away game...

If you want the umpiring level to improve, calling them every name under the sun will only cause the pool of those wanting to become umpires to shrink, and the standard of umpiring to get lower and lower...

As I said - "There isn't an anti Carlton agenda and the umpires aren't biased but clearly there were some absolute shockers that had a significant impact on the result. Denying this is as much folly as believing their is a conspiracy against us."

 

[Bluesome]

As I said - "There isn't an anti Carlton agenda and the umpires aren't biased but clearly there were some absolute shockers that had a significant impact on the result. Denying this is as much folly as believing their is a conspiracy against us."

Well - we can agree to disagree on that...spouting a conspiracy theory of anti-Carlton bias is completely unsupported by anything...debating whether umpiring truly impacted the result can be argued either way...to say that both arguments are 'as much a folly' as the other is just not correct...

I saw a few bad decisions and us getting the 'rough end of the stick'...I also saw a West Coast team that was better than us on the day, taking out the umpires...they beat us, for mine, due to an exceptional period in the 3rd quarter where their centre bounce work was excellent leading to very good opportunities...we weren't tight enough in that period, both inside the contest and outside of it, and if you allow space to the WCE midfield as we did, they will make you pay...

The second decision against SPS in that period was justifiable for mine, albeit a little rough, as he clearly surveyed prior to being tackled...just because they didn't pay the NicNat one (which also should have been HTB) doesn't mean they don't pay the SPS one...you don't make a 'non-call' on the SPS one just because you got the NicNat one wrong...

For me, nothing was stopping WCE in that 15 minute period of utter dominance...we couldn't score with momentum in the first half of the third and kept allowing intercept marks in our forward 50, they made us pay in the second half of the 3rd when we weren't tight enough...that, for me, is the story of the game...

 

[Macca43]

Well - we can agree to disagree on that...spouting a conspiracy theory of anti-Carlton bias is completely unsupported by anything...debating whether umpiring truly impacted the result can be argued either way...to say that both arguments are 'as much a folly' as the other is just not correct...

I saw a few bad decisions and us getting the 'rough end of the stick'...I also saw a West Coast team that was better than us on the day, taking out the umpires...they beat us, for mine, due to an exceptional period in the 3rd quarter where their centre bounce work was excellent leading to very good opportunities...we weren't tight enough in that period, both inside the contest and outside of it, and if you allow space to the WCE midfield as we did, they will make you pay...

The second decision against SPS in that period was justifiable for mine, albeit a little rough, as he clearly surveyed prior to being tackled...just because they didn't pay the NicNat one (which also should have been HTB) doesn't mean they don't pay the SPS one...you don't make a 'non-call' on the SPS one just because you got the NicNat one wrong...

For me, nothing was stopping WCE in that 15 minute period of utter dominance...we couldn't score with momentum in the first half of the third and kept allowing intercept marks in our forward 50, they made us pay in the second half of the 3rd when we weren't tight enough...that, for me, is the story of the game...

HOw many of those rough decisions had a direct impact on the scoreboard either through the Eagles gaining a shot or Carlton being denied one?

"The second decision against SPS in that period was justifiable for mine, albeit a little rough, as he clearly surveyed prior to being tackled...just because they didn't pay the NicNat one (which also should have been HTB) doesn't mean they don't pay the SPS one...you don't make a 'non-call' on the SPS one just because you got the NicNat one wrong..." True, but when they also didn't pay the Fisher tackle on Duggan and the tackle on Hurn in our goal square (both of which would have resulted in shot on goal, the second would have been a certain goal) either the blues should have got 3 goals or the Eagles miss 1.

"or me, nothing was stopping WCE in that 15 minute period of utter dominance." Possibly but we had held them up from scoring for a considerable period of it, then the umpires miss the Ryan free kick and the Eagle score which takes them back to a set play they had an advantage in, the SPS gets pinged and the eagles score which takes them back to a set play they had the advantange in and they score again, the decisions clearly helped them capitalise.

I could list numerous other decisions that went against the blues (Ed's trip, Ed's deliberate, the no deliberate against the Eagles for punching the ball over the line from a handball etc etc), it is simply impossible to argue so many decisions with a direct score impact didn't affect the game. The Eagles may still have won but the margin would have been much closer. Even if We take just 1 goal off the Eagles or add just one goal to the blues up to 3/4 time Setterfields goal then puts us in front and the way both teams play changes, the blues don't need to push as hard, the Eagles have to go harder.

" 3rd quarter where their centre bounce work was excellent leading to very good opportunities"But the don't get those opporutniites from centre bounces if the goals aren't kicked and the goals aren't kicked if different umpiring decisions are made.

 

[therubbernub]

Lets not forget who we played the flag favorites and how we made them look in the first half.
They were pretty much full strength and we had Charlie, harry, Gov, DC , Martin out
Cripps playing injured IMO
We were on their home ground
We definitely had the rough end of the stick with the umpires

To lose by just 22 is amazing. Well done guys Get into the finals and we can beat anyone on our day

 

[murphster]

Onfield leadership certainly plays a part, a huge part. My concerns are more to do with the gameplan not having consistent gears

We played very smart, balanced tempo footy in the 1st half, yet it was non existent 2nd half.

While TDK, a natural jumper, was in the ruck in 2nd qtr, we halved the centre and stoppage clearances and kicked away

Ed shift to Kelly should of started at 1st bounce, finally when the move came it slowed their movement, this too was relaxed in the 2nd half

Another massive factor was there set plays from stoppages and our complete lack of awareness as to what was coming, on the wing they used the identical set play 3 times in a row Nic Nat taps down to his left Yeo runs through sharks tap and runs clean into the corridor, we really need to make another big play to try and get Sam Mitchell out of Hawthorn to be our stoppages coach not getting him from West Coast hurt us big time, either that or make Power our stoppages coach.

 

[murphster]

Then after Samo's second free kick against they get the centre clearance and shove it straight down Darlings throat - wouldn't have happened if Samo's free wasn't paid.

Add in the holding the ball not paid to TDK against Naitanui which would have seen us go to 25 points up and there is a massive impact on the game.

"Sure you can argue that the second Samo one was there" If that one was there so was Fisher tackle on Duggan and there was also a tackle on Hurn in our goals square.

Well we laid 18 tackles in the 50 you would think we would have got 1 at least seeing they were going at 60% for tackles to frees inside 50.

 

[Bluesome]

Another massive factor was there set plays from stoppages and our complete lack of awareness as to what was coming, on the wing they used the identical set play 3 times in a row Nic Nat taps down to his left Yeo runs through sharks tap and runs clean into the corridor, we really need to make another big play to try and get Sam Mitchell out of Hawthorn to be our stoppages coach not getting him from West Coast hurt us big time, either that or make Power our stoppages coach.

Would love Mitchel to come on board...particularly as he made up for deficiency in leg speed by very good footy smarts...hopefully he is a good 'teacher' of this craft, as we certainly don't have a heap of pace inside...

My worry however, following from that SEN article, is particularly how much structures/instructions had to do with it, as opposed to simply 'brain fades' and just being slightly too slow on opponents, such as Setters on Kelly in the third...this part has to be on the players, not the stoppage coach...

 

[Skull Face]

So what you're saying is when when we get them back on the park it will nullify the umpires influence.

I like the way you think.

Umpires are only ever an issue when the personal can't make a gap big enough to accommodate for their bad decisions. We haven't been that good for a long while sadly.

 

[Macca43]

Umpires are only ever an issue when the personal can't make a gap big enough to accommodate for their bad decisions. We haven't been that good for a long while sadly.

Or there are so many bad decisions the gap is too wide for any team to cover. I don't think I have seen as many poor decisions that directly impacted the scoreboard as I did on the weekend.