Opinion Setting up for a fall?

[Bluebear]

Hi Guys,
Long time no see. Having just opened a new business, I've been reading posts from time to time but not posting as often.

Anyway, just wanted to say I think we are setting ourselves up for a fall this year. I don't think the attitude of players or coaches is right.

This surrounds the issue of restong players. Now don't get me wrong. I am all for resting some key guys to keep them fresh, but the message this is done with smacks of arrogance.

Last week Ratts was trying to hose things down, yet Jammo comes out and spoke about practising some defensive structures. Clearly the tone of the comments were that we could afford to play around and work on some things, rather than just focus on the game.........and for 3 quarters the comments bit them on the bum. I'm not sure what structures they were trying to work on, but they seemed to work better when they weren't "working on them".

Now today I read in The Age, a quote attributed to Ratts about resting Kreuzer, "so that will just change our view of when we do give Matthew.........an easier week or an easier game."

I know the quote has been edited, but the term "easier game" should never be used by an AFL coach.

I don't beleive we are paying all our oponents, week to week, due respect.

We haven't achieved anything yet, and I fear some within our ranks are hanging their hats a little on smashing the Pies, which, while a good result, was a reflectn on the opposition as much as it was our superb effort.

Coming into a season defining month either side of the bye, we should not underestimate the Saints, Crows, Port at home and Dees, or we may go into a very tough patch under the pump and having squandered another promising start to the year.

BB

 

[blue gunslinger]

considering factors such as travelling West to play Freo previously it was an easier game and to be honest a luckily timed easy game

 

[Sharks On A Plane]

Ratts clearly means 'easier game' in the context of resting Kreuzer at full-forward or on the bench for longer periods of time, as opposed to rucking most of the day, and 'easier week' in the context of giving him a lighter week on the track.

Not sure what the big deal is...

 

[Faz 2000]

I am 100% OK with our team being modern and "grown-up" and managing players appropriately. I think it's tremendously naive to suggest we should play our absolute best team every week and be "up" at maximum intensity for every week. That's not how it works, and *that* would set us up for a fall come finals time.

We need to win enough games in the home and away season to make top 4. Sure, ideally, we'd win every game - and we NEVER go into a game to lose. But the over-arching aim must be to win *enough* games to make top 4 AND be fresh and ready to 100% commit to finals. Fit team, rested stars, absolute intensity.

I think the real fall we're set up for is what happens when our best players are nullified/missing. When it falls to Robinson, Curnow, Joseph, Russell etc to play primary roles, it's clear they cannot do it. Lousy ball-use, etc - we look awful when those guys are our leading ball-winners. They are all useful role-players, but it's still Judd-Murphy and co that make our team work. That makes it all the more important that the big guns are fresh and ready for finals/big games.

 

[KennyHunter9]

Bit of an overreaction by the OP.

We have a very clear focus:

1. Finishing the H&A in top four
2. Heading into finals with a fresh and healthy list
3. A flexible game plan - team defence, players who can play multiple roles

This is what I have gleaned from Ratts and others through the year.

I would prefer for Ratts to say a little less at times about certain issues but he's accessible and responsive to the media and that's part of modern coaching.

 

[blueboy25]

We have to remember that we had a very interrupted preseason where we couldn't try certain defensive structures as the majority of our top 6-8 defenders were in the rehab group.

At the end of the day we are 5-1 which includes three 10 goal plus wins, a 7 goal win and good solid win interstate.

If we are taking teams lightly in late July/early August I will be worried.

 

[Peete]

Our best 22 can match it with any other team. Take out 4 players and we are no certainties against any top 8 team. Last year we were a few men down in an away game in Perth - we lost by three points.

So yes managing a list which hasnt achieved required depth yet - is important. Luck will be more important factor - but no one talks about that

 

[Franc de Borges]

Good luck and focus on the business mate, nothing to see here.

 

[Blue since 72]

While I absolutely agree we haven't achieved anything yet I don't believe we're being arrogant.

Ratts doesn't strike me as an arrogant person, more driven TBH and I'd be surprised if he allowed arrogance to permeate throught the team. Caveat being I don't know the guy.

With regard to resting players and the perception of a lack of respect for the opposition I also have to disagree.

As far as I'm concerned Judd having a rest or two in season is a given and allows him to maximise his impact for the team, particularly at the end of the home and away.

No issue if any of our other older players like Waite and Scotty get a break either, we all know the pace of the game nowadays is extreme and fresher players come September are going to be gold.

Also happy to rest players with niggles if it can be accomodated.

What I wouldn't like to see is five or six guys being rested at once, that can be kept in the pre-season when trialling youngsters.

There was a fair amount of talk, both on here and in the media during the lead up to the GWS game about resting players and were we disrepecting them which Sheedy obviously milked but I 'll be blunt here; at this point GWS are not competitive with a fair portion of the competition, us included. Respect is earned and they haven't earned it yet. That's not being harsh it's just their reality.

They, along with GC will most likely have their time in the sun and the rest of the competition will show them plenty of respect but that time isn't now.

If Jamo has said they were practising defense structures in game then a) I don't have an issue with it in regards to playing someone like GWS (but probably noone else TBH) and b) it certainly makes understanding of the way the game flowed alot clearer.

The path to September has nevered be more planned/structured/managed/detailed than it is now and as long as all of this doesn't de-rail the march and each player respects themselves by putting in a performance every week that they're proud of, then I'm happy to put faith in the club and team that they're on the right track.

 

[zeeCFC]

Hampson shouldn't smile.

 

[Silvagnis]

I think the real fall we're set up for is what happens when our best players are nullified/missing. When it falls to Robinson, Curnow, Joseph, Russell etc to play primary roles, it's clear they cannot do it. Lousy ball-use, etc - we look awful when those guys are our leading ball-winners. They are all useful role-players, but it's still Judd-Murphy and co that make our team work. That makes it all the more important that the big guns are fresh and ready for finals/big games.

This applies to nearly every team who have their fair share of B and C graders. Yet Robinson was one of our best players against WC with Judd held by Scott Selwood. It would be more interesting to compare Murphy's great games to his games without Judd there to get the number one tag. Marc doesn't get as much space without Judd drawing a man and others to him. Smurf needs to dig deeper if Judd isn't there like last Sunday. Poor game by his standards.

 

[Sector 7G]

This applies to nearly every team who have their fair share of B and C graders. Yet Robinson was one of our best players against WC with Judd held by Scott Selwood. It would be more interesting to compare Murphy's great games to his games without Judd there to get the number one tag. Marc doesn't get as much space without Judd drawing a man and others to him. Smurf needs to dig deeper if Judd isn't there like last Sunday. Poor game by his standards.

WC found out their B graders were C graders when Cousins, Kerr and Judd weren't in the side.

Murphy's game was good enough to get BOG from John Ralph, the man who is now making a career around writing articles on how he was wrong ( See yesterday's article on Hunt). Should have material for the rest of the year

 

[Faz 2000]

This applies to nearly every team who have their fair share of B and C graders.

Yeh, I agree, though I tend to think our next-rung-ers all have similar weaknesses - lousy disposal.

When the ball is moved forward by Judd, Murphy, Simpson, Gibbs, Yarran, Scotland - we're a top 4 team. Definitely. We can beat anybody.

When it's Curnow, Robinson, Russell et al progressing the ball, we look terrible. Some B- and C- graders in sides are there cos they're not great in the contest - but they still have skills. Our guys are all of a type, I'd argue, and our ball-movement (and really our whole gameplan) absolutely falls to pieces when the top-shelf guys aren't executing it.

Again, this doesn't JUST apply to us, but I think we're particularly susceptible to it because of the nature of our bottom end players. They're hard, but they're not skillful at all.

 

[Tanks_Alot]

How come every time someone has something negative to say everyone jumps on their back here? The OP has a point to a degree, although I don't think we're going to see this attitude last throughout the whole season it certainly needs to be addressed.

I feel like we started the season on a mission, we had something to prove. The media were writing us off based on our pre season form, so we were keen to shut them up and did so perfectly by beating the Tigers comfortably in the end (who were tipped to beat us) and then we belted Brisbane by 91 points at the Gabba in another game where many tipped against us. Then came the Pies, this was our true test to see where we were at and we passed it with flying colours. But after that, then what? It's like as if we've been content with what we've achieved so far this season and are happy to just coast through.

Then we come out complacent and get thumped by the Bombers, we go to Perth and are VERY lucky that we won especially considering it was one of the only matches where we were very accurate in front of goal and ultimately that's what won us the game. Then we take another complacent approach against the Giants and honestly I think we were embarrassed in that first half. Here's a team claiming the goal of the season is to finish top 4 and they produce that crap for a whole half to lead the worst team in the comp by just 10 points.

Resting players worked for Geelong, but we are not the powerhouse they were for the past 5 years. The Geelong players are more mature than our group, they know what it takes to win a flag and they had been through losing a GF, they are older and experienced not to go out there complacent.

With our group, resting players has sent the wrong message, the whole team took a complacent approach because the coaching staff took a complacent approach. The playing group NEEDS to understand that they cannot go into a game thinking they've already won before the game even starts. In a year where percentage is likely to be VERY important, we blew a good chance to boost it. We are a 150 point better side than GWS, we should've gone out there with the intent to destroy them. The coaching staff are trying to do the right thing by resting players to make sure they're right come finals, but if the playing group is going to keep coming out flat like that as a result then I'm betting the coaching staff are going to think twice about giving players a rest.

There are only 2 more games, possibly 3 where we should consider resting players and when we do rest players, no more than 2 and Judd must be one of those 2 each time. We play Melbourne in a few weeks, Judd and either Kruezer or Scotland. Then later we have GC, again Judd and maybe Waite again too. The Brisbane game at Etihad could be the third one but it depends where we are at and where they're at at the time.

It's very disappointing to see that the cocky attitude of the playing group wasn't blasted after the Essendon loss. Do these guys not learn from their mistakes? Are they stupid? That loss was only 2 weeks before the Giants game surely they would've learnt not to EVER come out complacent after that loss but I guess not.

This week against the Saints, I want to see a Carlton side that is focussed 100% on putting in a 4 qtr effort. I want to see them work hard for each other and play like we all know they can play. None of this complacent crap and then we will belt the shit out of them. Come out complacent in this one and we lose.

 

[gbatman]

I would be lieing if I though that I wasn't concerned with a number of things. The attitude seems to be poor, they way we played against GWS and Essendon strangely enough with a lack of intensity and work rate is a concern. It's concerning we can play like that and can play below ourselves.

What else concerns me is that I don't think we have enough even spread of quality onballers. We have Judd and Murphy and Carrazzo who is injured and might not come back the same. The rest are just make shift, they are excellent players to rotate through there but are not genuine onballers who can honestly say that is their best position and can dominate games. The fact we have been losing the clearances lately is enforcing this view.

If we improve our attitude and have less effortless games and find another guy who can go on the ball and consistantly gater around 30 possessions and have good clearance numbers then we are preimership contenders, at this stage I think we are just below that.

 

[Sublime]

Of course there are easier and harder games in a season. That said though, any team can beat any other team on their day.

Take 95 for example. Possibly the best teams we've put on the park that year, yet the only 2 games we lost was against 2 of the worst teams in the league that year. Did that derail our premiership in the slightest? Nope!

You can afford to take more selection chances against teams that are lower on the ladder. It doesn't mean we're not showing them the respect they deserve, but we DO have higher goals for the season. If we start to fall behind the 8 ball a bit with a few losses, then we won't have the luxury to rest players. While we're going along nicely, i'm sure we'll continue to do it as needed and that can only be a good thing in my opinion.

 

[Peete]

Tanks - you are spot on with your observation regarding where WE are versus where Geelong were - last year.

Worrying (for me) is the public announcements made by our coaching staff regarding the 'rest issue'. Why tell anyone - anything about our plans?

More worrying is the schoolboy' link the dots' thinking invoilved in the whole exercise..

Geelong win a premiership because(?) they rested all players throughout the year? and IF so

we should AND can do the same?

hahahhahhaah what a load ot bollocks.

Each year is different. Each draw produces different biases and each team is in a different siutuation due to its list/ injurioes and unforseen outcomes - every year.

Setting up for a fall? Thsi year is a very close fought competition - a lot closer gaps between a lot of teams- arrogance is thinking any different and acting accordingly.

 

[Silvagnis]

Negative comments are poor because it's like the butterfly effect blowing away a five and one start to the season. Over the top. Imagine the reaction if we were Melbourne. I can't wait to see the reaction to Carlton facing Geelong, WC, Hawthorn and Collingwood either side of our bye.

You need your head read if you think it's wrong for a side to have a soft ten goal win after travelling to Perth. Some of the players looked like they were running through concrete after busting their guts the previous week.

Yeh, I agree, though I tend to think our next-rung-ers all have similar weaknesses - lousy disposal.

When the ball is moved forward by Judd, Murphy, Simpson, Gibbs, Yarran, Scotland - we're a top 4 team. Definitely. We can beat anybody.

When it's Curnow, Robinson, Russell et al progressing the ball, we look terrible. Some B- and C- graders in sides are there cos they're not great in the contest - but they still have skills. Our guys are all of a type, I'd argue, and our ball-movement (and really our whole gameplan) absolutely falls to pieces when the top-shelf guys aren't executing it.

Again, this doesn't JUST apply to us, but I think we're particularly susceptible to it because of the nature of our bottom end players. They're hard, but they're not skillful at all.

I don't share your view about our skill level. Robinson, Curnow and Russell aren't Gibbs, Laidler and Yarran, but they are capable of picking the right option. Out of our best 22, Armfield is probably the only player who needs to check his kicks and go short. Our disposal is a lot better than previous games where we defeated Geelong and Collingwood under Ratten. It's improved tenfold with Tuohy, Laidler, Henderson and Yarran moving into the backline. Lucas hasn't really clicked, yet he has shown he is a good decision maker with clean hands and poise. Loved his skill and vision to find Waite with a kick off the outside of his boot. Bruce would have blown his load if that was Rioli setting up Franklin for a goal from 50.

 

[Peete]

Fair call on too much negativity.

 

[The_Wookie]

When people start complaining about players smiling, theres too much negativity

 

[Faz 2000]

I don't share your view about our skill level. Robinson, Curnow and Russell

Well that's OK.

I think those three, for example, struggle to deliver under pressure. Why did we look SO pants against Essendon? Or GWS for that matter? I felt it was because guys who aren't our "prime movers" were relied upon to get the job done, and were found wanting. I think our much vaunted "run and spread" works when the big guns are up and going, but needs a significant re-think if they're not available or well-held.

Note it's not an all-round blast of those players - there's plenty they bring and I think Robinson in particular is extremely important so us. His intensity and appetite for the contest has him deep inside the first 18 every week regardless of whether one rates his footskills good or bad.

 

[Blues_Man]

Hampson shouldn't smile.

Yup, this thread is right up there with Hammo smirking after kicking a goal...normally BB is a pretty canny poster ..but this thread is terrible.

 

[Tanks_Alot]

I don't share your view about our skill level. Robinson, Curnow and Russell aren't Gibbs, Laidler and Yarran, but they are capable of picking the right option. Out of our best 22, Armfield is probably the only player who needs to check his kicks and go short. Our disposal is a lot better than previous games where we defeated Geelong and Collingwood under Ratten. It's improved tenfold with Tuohy, Laidler, Henderson and Yarran moving into the backline. Lucas hasn't really clicked, yet he has shown he is a good decision maker with clean hands and poise. Loved his skill and vision to find Waite with a kick off the outside of his boot. Bruce would have blown his load if that was Rioli setting up Franklin for a goal from 50.

Robinson also needs to do this instead of bombing into F50 every time.

 

[Faz 2000]

Robinson also needs to do this instead of bombing into F50 every time.

...or shinning it directly to an opponent on his left. I feel like he did that 9 times against Essendon. Maybe it was just once and I had repeated nightmares about it...

 

[mediumsizered]

Robinson also needs to do this instead of bombing into F50 every time.

On a number of occasions it has been Robbo's long bombs into F50 which have created goals at a time when the opposition has been strangling our forward line.

The reality is you are not going to be able to spot up a forward everytime you go into F50. Sometimes the long bomb to the hotspot makes the defenders nervous & if you have a big bloke down there creating a crumb, that is when our small/medium forwards shine.