Review Round 20, 2022 - Richmond vs. Brisbane Lions

[Tom14]

The one where McCarthy kicked the goal really hurt.

We needed it and it was a total prima donna performance. Aren't you meant to cop a whack for staging ?

As the middle aged richmond fan behind me sitting on his own, and dropping C bombs and F bombs at the umpires every 10 seconds sagely said after we got a free: "Real players don't need to throw their arms out to win a game!!!!!"

 

[Elixuh]

You're a total genius at extrapolating what someone says and trying to make out it's something more bizarre to pretend that what they said in the first place has no validity.

And ignoring the gist or original content totally.

Unlike you who when they get backed into a corner regarding their brain dead take, claims he was just being sarcastic.

 

[spotthedog1]

We are guaranteed to play finals - probably pretty close to locking in a home final which gives us a fairly good chance of winning at least one final and making it so SF/PF stage. That is a month away. Fages just watched us have a devastating loss but also probably put together the best quarter of footy this squad has ever played.

You think with a team thats going to go fairly deep in September that just showed it can play premiership level footy - that hes going to come out and say its no use, we arent up to it? His job is to instil belief.

I specifically said I wasn't expecting the club to say we couldn't win this season.

"With a team that's going to go fairly deep in September". Are we? I just did a ladder predictor, and if we go WWL, most likely is 5th place. I have a path to the premiership of Bulldogs Dockers Demons Cats. 50/50 against the in-form dogs, and underdogs every other match.

As I said, I think a few fans would like a sign that the club has awareness of the problems. Any way they like. Drop some players, make a change to the style, take a public swipe at defensive running... Anything. The only change we've seen so far is bringing in Matho and really, Matho is not the solution to any serious problem. He's borderline 22 and always has been.

 

[Mighty Lions]

It really doesnt matter what the club's rhetoric is at this point. The club's sole focus right now is to get the team into the finals in the best possible position and not have to worry about explaining every decision they make to fans stamping their feet like toddlers. Nothing the fans say now makes an iota of difference to the outcome of this season and they should stop pretending it does and let the professionals at the club get on with the next game. Save the recriminations until the season is over.

Great post. Agree 100%

 

[Morbidly_Obese]

I’m a believer in Flagbane

Side note I got my first ever Lions tickets for the Demons game and I’m so pumped.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Gibbo_88]

Watched the last quarter again just to see how it was without the emotion. We played in a way that still gave us a number of chances to win, we didn't go into our shell like I felt we did watching it live.

It was good attacking plays that led to the Mcluggage miss on the run, the Mccarthy goal that was a BS free kick, Charlies + Robbo's set shot misses. Gardiners turn over looked like he was kicking to someone free in the square. There were a few moments where Rayner and Matho tried to do too much when we had more numbers at the contest. If we had our time again it could easily have been at least 2-3 goals in the last quarter and that completely changes the way we would have played the final 5 minutes.

The Jack Graham

17

Jack Graham

Age

27

Ht

181cm

Wt

85kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

14.7

4star

K

8.0

3star

HB

6.8

4star

M

2.1

2star

T

6.3

5star

CL

1.8

4star

D

11.8

3star

K

5.3

2star

HB

6.5

4star

M

2.8

3star

T

4.2

5star

CL

1.2

4star

D

14.0

4star

K

6.0

3star

HB

8.0

5star

M

1.8

2star

T

7.0

5star

CL

3.2

5star

behind was out of character for how we play. It's the kind of thing you'd see from a really young team. We were a player short on the half back line and they still had time to chip the ball around and we didn't correct it. That lapse in concentration stands out the most in the last quarter as poor effort whereas the other things were skill errors.

 

[martinson]

Watched the last quarter again just to see how it was without the emotion. We played in a way that still gave us a number of chances to win, we didn't go into our shell like I felt we did watching it live.

It was good attacking plays that led to the Mcluggage miss on the run, the Mccarthy goal that was a BS free kick, Charlies + Robbo's set shot misses. Gardiners turn over looked like he was kicking to someone free in the square. There were a few moments where Rayner and Matho tried to do too much when we had more numbers at the contest. If we had our time again it could easily have been at least 2-3 goals in the last quarter and that completely changes the way we would have played the final 5 minutes.

The Jack Graham behind was out of character for how we play. It's the kind of thing you'd see from a really young team. We were a player short on the half back line and they still had time to chip the ball around and we didn't correct it. That lapse in concentration stands out the most in the last quarter as poor effort whereas the other things were skill errors.

The thing that stood out for me were the many opportunities we had to get a reasonable lead and shut it down and for one reason or another couldn't get it done

There's no doubt we deserved to win this game but just didn't take our chances.

Injuries ,subs, whatever else ,Richmond aren't that good . It hurts to lose a game in this way. We get another chance this week.

 

[davemc_lions]

The one where McCarthy kicked the goal really hurt.

We needed it and it was a total prima donna performance. Aren't you meant to cop a whack for staging ?

Tigers be up for big $$ each week
Honestly most people I talk to sick of the flopping and throws
Nothing seems to be done about it.. Some pies player follows what Selwood did for years and the rules change

 

[Mighty Lions]

Watched the last quarter again just to see how it was without the emotion. We played in a way that still gave us a number of chances to win, we didn't go into our shell like I felt we did watching it live.

It was good attacking plays that led to the Mcluggage miss on the run, the Mccarthy goal that was a BS free kick, Charlies + Robbo's set shot misses. Gardiners turn over looked like he was kicking to someone free in the square. There were a few moments where Rayner and Matho tried to do too much when we had more numbers at the contest. If we had our time again it could easily have been at least 2-3 goals in the last quarter and that completely changes the way we would have played the final 5 minutes.

The Jack Graham behind was out of character for how we play. It's the kind of thing you'd see from a really young team. We were a player short on the half back line and they still had time to chip the ball around and we didn't correct it. That lapse in concentration stands out the most in the last quarter as poor effort whereas the other things were skill errors.

Agree with this assessment.

In saying that, we have won several games of footy this year without being the better side on the day. This time, we were the better side and lost.

Despite what some say here, I believe Richmond are a quality side. They have played finals in the last 4 out of 5 seasons & will probably play finals again this season as well. 3 premierships in that time ....suffice to say, that is a quality side.

That said, we let this one slip...it happens. Wallowing in the loss isn't going to help them win this week. Learning from it will however and I am sure they took a lot out of it that will help them in future contests......in my opinion.

 

[lioninthesand]

Agree with this 100% and also Sanchez365 comments a little bit ago 100%. Fort as the sub worked for us against The Suns but there is no doubt it cost us against Tigers. We (as BF Posters) all have hindsight and feel pretty smart to make comments in review that cannot be argued. But plenty don't want to mention that Starc as a late out, Bailey out for the remainder of the game after the 1st quarter, Berry almost crippled in the 2nd half, Coleman cramping every time he attempted to run, along with the medi sub who is slower than a wet week, it's no wonder The Tigers out run us like they did. 4 of our best runners out in the last 1/4 was a huge concern.

Suffice to say, the odds for Fort to be the medi sub this week will be off the charts.

I am not sold on our list being unfit. I would say its more that they dont have the athletic ability to run like others do & I think that needs to be addressed rather than it being a fitness problem.

Fort as medi sub in any game is/was a terrible idea, heindsite or otherwise.

Not sure if we can asses it worked againts the Suns so confidently either? He had 2 hit outs and zero marks/tackles/clearances in 16 minutes in that game againts a tired ruck.

I love forty, but as discussed this time last week, he should never have been medisub in any game and thankfully as you mentioned - it is likely to never happen again.

 

[Mighty Lions]

Fort as medi sub in any game is/was a terrible idea, heindsite or otherwise.

Not sure if we can asses it worked againts the Suns so confidently either? He had 2 hit outs and zero marks/tackles/clearances in 16 minutes in that game againts a tired ruck.

I love forty, but as discussed this time last week, he should never have been medisub in any game and thankfully as you mentioned - it is likely to never happen again.

Your opinion mate & you are entitled to it. Fagan had his reasons and I am sure they are good reasons despite you and others (including me) not knowing what is happening inside the club. Judgements by ourselves often astound me by the way some think they are coaching experts who know more than Fagan & his coaching group. I can understand the questioning of Fort being the medi sub in both games but to dismiss the decision of the club without knowing why is wrong. They will learn from it for sure.

 

[Squizz89]

Agree with this assessment.

In saying that, we have won several games of footy this year without being the better side on the day. This time, we were the better side and lost.

Despite what some say here, I believe Richmond are a quality side. They have played finals in the last 4 out of 5 seasons & will probably play finals again this season as well. 3 premierships in that time ....suffice to say, that is a quality side.

That said, we let this one slip...it happens. Wallowing in the loss isn't going to help them win this week. Learning from it will however and I am sure they took a lot out of it that will help them in future contests......in my opinion.

Were we really the better side last week though ML? Granted we played our best footy for a long time in the first quarter.

Second was pretty even although you could get the sense before half time they were just starting to get on top.

Third quarter. Pantsed. Enough said.

Fourth quarter. Certainly had some chances to ice it and missed some sitters (Hugh/Robbo in particular) but I always felt with their extra run that they were more likely and were finding easier avenues to goal.

Anyway probably time to move on from that game. Team list Thursday so let’s see what tonight brings, although hate Sunday games with the extended squad.

 

[Dalions]

Your opinion mate & you are entitled to it. Fagan had his reasons and I am sure they are good reasons despite you and others (including me) not knowing what is happening inside the club. Judgements by ourselves often astound me by the way some think they are coaching experts who know more than Fagan & his coaching group. I can understand the questioning of Fort being the medi sub in both games but to dismiss the decision of the club without knowing why is wrong. They will learn from it for sure.

Fagan has said publicly a couple of times that it is so we have cover if Oscar goes down but I am wondering if it is more cover for Joe with his shoulder.
In which case I would be more tempted to player Fort in replace of McStay in the team but then have McStay as the sub because atleast then McStay can come on and play fresh and in a number of positions to help cover for who ever goes out.

 

[Nathan Barley]

I think our strength is our contested marking. We also have a pretty average ruck who doesnt give our mids silver service anyway. So I think we can get away with using some of our smaller players in marking contests or get away with a part time ruck and try to negate the opposing rucks influence

What we can't afford is to lose any of the few quick or skilful or long running players we have in our team and replace them with an additional tall when the talls we currently have aren't being overly effective.

 

[spotthedog1]

Your opinion mate & you are entitled to it. Fagan had his reasons and I am sure they are good reasons despite you and others (including me) not knowing what is happening inside the club. Judgements by ourselves often astound me by the way some think they are coaching experts who know more than Fagan & his coaching group. I can understand the questioning of Fort being the medi sub in both games but to dismiss the decision of the club without knowing why is wrong. They will learn from it for sure.

Nup. It remains a terrible idea. Either we played someone we thought a reasonable likelihood to need a sub (terrible idea), or just chose a ruckman just in case (terrible idea). It was neutral against the sun's. It probably would've been the difference between winning and losing against the Tigers.

If you can see another reason, let me know.

 

[Sherrinator]

Alternate reality -we finish 5th or 6th, play a first up home final v a lesser side and have a strong win. Go to the elimination final v a week 1 loser with a head full of steam.

 

[scott_the_man]

Yesterday i read the first 12 pages of this thread. Only just read page 20 now
As expected a dump on just about everything and everyone
I was also very disappointed in our 2nd half effort
It was like a different game plan was rolled out for the 2nd half by both teams

We played so well in the first half i doubt any team could have matched us in that period so that's a positive

I was thinking we may be a little bit short with 2 of our 3 KPD defenders listed as 192cm being Adams & Gardiner
However looking at the Demons and Cat's 2nd tier KPD they are not overly tall. Just good marks and mobile defenders
Maybe a change and drop one of Adams or Gardiner. Prefer to drop Gardiner as Adams takes way more marks

Who could come in assuming (my assumption only) that these players are safe. Andrews - Adams- Starcevich- Rich - Coleman - Answerth
Maybe go with Cockatoo 185cm as he is mobile enough. So out Gardiner in Starcevich
Ah Chee 183cm is fine in defense but i thought he was playing well on the wing until he started to get moved around once again
Madden 188 cm is also a mobile defender
Then we get taller again with Payne 197cm but he is fairly mobile

My 7 defenders for the Blues game in order of slowness
Andrews- Rich - Adams - Cockatoo - Starcevich - Answerth -.................. Coleman

Answerth and Starc are both quicker than Coleman.

 

[scott_the_man]

Just had a look at a hand full of our recent matches on the Telstra tracker and we were below our opposition for distance covered and work rate for pretty much all the games I looked at.

Notably against the Tiges the top 5 players for distance covered at speed were all Richmond players.

Pretty damning but not overly surprising really, it has been a noticeable problem of late.

 

[Mighty Lions]

Nup. It remains a terrible idea. Either we played someone we thought a reasonable likelihood to need a sub (terrible idea), or just chose a ruckman just in case (terrible idea). It was neutral against the sun's. It naaahprobably would've been the difference between winning and losing against the Tigers.

If you can see another reason, let me know.

Naah …. After reading your post above i am on the spotthedog 1 train…. What would Fagan & his cronies know anyways!!

 

[davemc_lions]

Alternate reality -we finish 5th or 6th, play a first up home final v a lesser side and have a strong win. Go to the elimination final v a week 1 loser with a head full of steam.

hope your right.. maybe this time we will learn.
No more Mulligans

 

[briztoon]

Naah …. After reading your post above i am on the spotthedog 1 train…. What would Fagan & his cronies know anyways!!

I believe there are a lot of us who agree with spotthedog1 on this one.

Fagan said Oscar was sub because one of our talls carried an injury in to the game.

If our coaches were that concerned, that they specifically put a ruck as the sub, just in case. Then said player shouldn’t have played.

You don’t need to win the ruck battle against Richmond, to beat Richmond. You need to win the contested game, and nullify their running game.

This isn’t said in hindsight either. Plenty of posters said this before the team was announced.

We lost the game (in part) because we lost one of our running players. This stretched our mids and other running players, which potentially led to Berry’s injury, and certainly led to Coleman’s cramping.

So this was a loss, due to getting the team selection wrong. And picking an injured player that might need to be subbed off, and the need to pick a ruck as sub as a contingency, is part of team selection.

We lost, because Fagan and the coaches screwed up, that was all to predictable and discussed before the game.

 

[On the quiet]

That makes sense if that was the case but if so it would've been smarter to have Payne as the sub. At least he can run around a bit and replace a tall forward or back. And provide a tall option on the wings with McStay rucking on the remote chance that Oscar went down.

could possibly have been better...will never know.

 

[martinson]

I believe there are a lot of us who agree with spotthedog1 on this one.

Fagan said Oscar was sub because one of our talls carried an injury in to the game.

If our coaches were that concerned, that they specifically put a ruck as the sub, just in case. Then said player shouldn’t have played.

You don’t need to win the ruck battle against Richmond, to beat Richmond. You need to win the contested game, and nullify their running game.

This isn’t said in hindsight either. Plenty of posters said this before the team was announced.

We lost the game (in part) because we lost one of our running players. This stretched our mids and other running players, which potentially led to Berry’s injury, and certainly led to Coleman’s cramping.

So this was a loss, due to getting the team selection wrong. And picking an injured player that might need to be subbed off, and the need to pick a ruck as sub as a contingency, is part of team selection.

We lost, because Fagan and the coaches screwed up, that was all to predictable and discussed before the game.

That's so logical.

Bailey was getting around the ground as well which affected the defence.

If one of our talls was carrying something to potentially get them subbed off and that was the thinking then Payne should've been sub. He's far more likely to fill the need than Fort. More mobile ,quicker as well.

I don't think Fagan actually said one of our talls carried an injury into the game. He said they had reasons why Fort was sub but weren't telling anybody.

 

[davemc_lions]

I don't think Fagan actually said one of our talls carried an injury into the game. He said they had reasons why Fort was sub but weren't telling anybody.

by not telling does he basically say there is a problem

Or the fact our game plan is for 3 tall forwards so if one goes down we have a problem

 

[Elixuh]

I kinda got over the sub thing once Fagan acknowledged that it was a mistake, which it was.

If we can’t squeeze Lohmann into the best 22, maybe he will come in as sub (subject to who we have returning from injury).