The dust has settled....some perspective

[Snoop Dog]

Its taken me a couple of days to digest that loss.

I wasn't surprised we lost but I was just surprised at after the showing in the first we could just crumble when the game went up a gear.

Injuries

Said it before I just think its shocking that 15 blokes aren't available for selection. Sure Reid and White would have helped Cloke but guys like Seedsman (ball use), Blair and Dwyer (chase, tackles and hard ball gets) would have also been pretty handy.

Certainly would have given a better effort than guys like Young, Goldsack and Clarke who had stuff all influence on the night. IN a game where you have 83 tackles, Clarke and Young had 1 between them!


Running the 'other way'

As much as we laud our mids something is not right. We draw level at contested possession, win tackles and clearances (I think) and yet they have 15 more inside 50's. That tells me we were really haphazard about clearing it and got done on the rebound. Add to that twice we were 'gutted' up the middle from a point being scored where they got goals. For me that is just not running hard enough in the middle and off HF.

That might be a bit rough given last year we were good at restricting pop fwd 50 entries. Certainly weren't in this game.

Defence

Look Frost and Brown were ok and Langdon was good. The others were average but to be fair Sinclair and Toovey were under done. The issue for me is there are not a lot of players to come back that help us in defence. Goldsack or Lumumba may have to go back I reckon or you get a Sidebottom.

Coaching Staff

I am a bit perplexed with Buckley. Our best is good enough and certainly showed that in final rounds last year. He clearly had them firing for game time but something went very wrong and that cant all fall at his feet. Our first qtr was absolutely good enough and if Beams, Ball and Sidebottom had kicked better we would have been 3-4 g up.

Kids

Got to remember also we are playing a lot of kids and looks like we will continue to. Frost, Langdon, Kennedy, Witts and Grundy dont have a heap of footy behind them.

Summary

It wasn't good but I think Pendles was right, we just didn't cope with the pressure and we didn't execute well. The other facets of the game were ok to good. We are young and we had a lot out against the perm favs so lets wait another week or two for mine.

 

[Collingwoodity]

Yes. And no. Injuries and inexperience are an excuse to a limited extent. But every single player in the starting 22 should be putting in effort. About 4 players only put in the required effort for the whole game. You don't lose by that much when you are all pulling in one direction together.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Scodog10]

Yes. And no. Injuries and inexperience are an excuse to a limited extent. But every single player in the starting 22 should be putting in effort. About 4 players only put in the required effort for the whole game. You don't lose by that much when you are all pulling in one direction together.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think you can put in the effort that was there in that first quarter if you aren't all singing from the same hymn book. IMO the answer lies somewhere in between.

There was probably some sort of disconnect after quarter time, but that probably gets back to a lack of scoreboard pressure, injuries and inexperience more than anything seriously wrong.

It's also worth noting Snoop that you gave very little credit to the opposition in the OP. 2014 has a very 2011 feel to it with two quite outstanding teams at the head of the table and the rest from 3-14 relatively even. The more I reflect on it the more I feel that it may simply be a case of us being pantsed by a ****ing good outfit and sometimes there isn't much you can do about that.

Who know's when Freo are 6-0 with a % of 180 and we're 3-3 or 4-2 some might realise we were just owned by a bloody good team. The fact that we faced them first up just happened to compound that...

 

[legendstatus]

Perspective only works if we can win a few in the next weeks, but seriously Goldsack, Clarke & Brown cannot be played in the 1st any more, otherwise nothing will change..


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Da Main Man]

Perspective only works if we can win a few in the next weeks, but seriously Goldsack, Clarke & Brown cannot be played in the 1st any more, otherwise nothing will change..


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[domus]

Yes. And no. Injuries and inexperience are an excuse to a limited extent. But every single player in the starting 22 should be putting in effort. About 4 players only put in the required effort for the whole game. You don't lose by that much when you are all pulling in one direction together.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes you can. I thought Wayne Carey's comments about Collingwood playing "bruise free" footy were ridiculous. Every player tried hard but when you can't get your hands on the pill you are not going to have much influence on the game no matter how hard you run or tackle. Trying hard and playing smart are two different things. He mentioned the moment when Crowley took an uncontested mark in the square-Pendlebury was his opponent, he was standing a metre off him and the ball was kicked to Crowley's right. Pendles was wrong footed and off balance. It looks bad but anyone who has played the game understands what happened.

People also carry on when a player is wrong footed and his opponent(running at top pace), breaks his tackle. Oh that was soft! Crap, It's almost impossible to lay an effective tackle when you are wrong footed and tackling someone on the run. People just love to vent.

 

[Kirby]

Yes, I think Freo may be an exceptionally good team. They certainly run hard and put on enormous pressure, it was too much for us.

In terms of our game style did anyone else think that we didn't use the corridor much at all and instead played quite wide? It looked like our old MM style at times. It was probably the Freo pressure that pushed us wide I guess.

I'm reserving judgement on us until the next game against Sydney. It's too early to panic.

 

[jonbe54]

A bad start but not catostrophic, as others have said the 1st quarter was good enough. Too many kids at this stage to cover for missing seniors, we had a very young and inexperienced team in and got royally reamed. It's all very well to say our defense isn't up to it and our mids aren't running enough and if you just look at those statements with blinkers on and without actually taking note of circumstances you would say we were bottom 4.

That simply isn't the case.

We did well in the clearances and failed to capitalize from there, much of the blame goes to forward entries and again you simply cannot have a one tall forward line against a team like Freo as we did. Put White and Reid into that team and all of a sudden we are a 5 goal better outfit .

Every time we have been beaten badly in recent years it was from a superior running defense able to block Cloke and Lynch then simply run it out in waves, keeping posession and setting up a quick forward entry. That is exactly the reason Reid was moved forward and White was recruited. Both those players on the field, fit and firing and I gaurantee there won't be the sort of end to end stuff we have seen.

As for the mids well everyone has a limit to thier tanks, needing a minute or two to recuoperate but they didn't get the chance as the ball kept zooming out of our forward line so fast they were simply run off their feet.

The same can be applied to the backline, zillions of fast and unchallenged entries will wear any defense down.

Those of you that have thrown the bath water out better start looking for the baby coz the fat lady is still on her way to the theatre.

Lyon has a well drilled team capable of making the finals and perhaps a GF - BUT - I wouldn't put my house on his gameplan to win a flag, it will get you close and put you in the hunt but it relies on defense and you simply MUST score well to win a GF, it has been shown repeatedly that his plan just doesn't quite get there.

 

[Optimax]

We lost this game Thursday night.

All preseason we spoke about how cloke needs extra support, how we will play three talls forward. Reid and White get injured, instead of replacing like for like we changed the structure back to what we know doesn't work (2 talls up forward) and expected to be able to kick a winning score like that. When Reid and White went out, Lynch and Witts had to play along side Cloke and Grundy.

What did we get instead? Caff and Sack attempting to be tall forwards with Johnson not only beating them but peeling off onto Cloke, Witts and Grundy being expected to play as a main target without the actual forward ability or strength to do it....meaning Dawson could beat them easily and then yiu guessed it peel onto Cloke. Of course this lead to Cloke being completely nullified and even when we were winning ball in ten first quarter we couldn't put any damage on because our forward line was completely disarray.

There were other issues too; no keeffe, Clarke plays, Kennedy one of if not our best performed in preseason as sub, Langdon on Walters and Sinclair on Ballantyne meaning both had the wrong match up all night.

We forced ourselves to start behind the 8 ball, and chased tail all night. Of course pointing out that Buckley ****ed up is being a heretic, so I don't expect too much support on this.

 

[Optimax]

And on clearances

We won the clearances yes, but they were rushed and ugly quick, blind kicks 30m forward, or a chain of handbills for a 10m gain before causing another stoppage. The stats lie here, Freo's midfield torched us.

 

[BEEG]

We are now a middle of the league team we are in a mini rebuild and these results will happen

Structure was bad and Cloke can't do it all himself

The one thing that infuriates me is our delivery inside the 50 I would rather turn it over trying to hit up a leading target then that bombing in the 50 shit we have done since 2010

 

[jonbe54]

We lost this game Thursday night.

All preseason we spoke about how cloke needs extra support, how we will play three talls forward. Reid and White get injured, instead of replacing like for like we changed the structure back to what we know doesn't work (2 talls up forward) and expected to be able to kick a winning score like that. When Reid and White went out, Lynch and Witts had to play along side Cloke and Grundy.

What did we get instead? Caff and Sack attempting to be tall forwards with Johnson not only beating them but peeling off onto Cloke, Witts and Grundy being expected to play as a main target without the actual forward ability or strength to do it....meaning Dawson could beat them easily and then yiu guessed it peel onto Cloke. Of course this lead to Cloke being completely nullified and even when we were winning ball in ten first quarter we couldn't put any damage on because our forward line was completely disarray.

There were other issues too; no keeffe, Clarke plays, Kennedy one of if not our best performed in preseason as sub, Langdon on Walters and Sinclair on Ballantyne meaning both had the wrong match up all night.

We forced ourselves to start behind the 8 ball, and chased tail all night. Of course pointing out that Buckley ****** up is being a heretic, so I don't expect too much support on this.

Opti you said it yourself, shit forward line structure with Reid and White out, given how Lynch performed recently and Witt's still young and raw I sincerely doubt the results would have been any different - perhaps worse.

You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear - without White and Reid we were always going to be vulnerable - and so it ensued.

 

[Axl the great]

Great analysis Snoop, agree with pretty much everything but feel that you are touching on the symptoms rather than the disease so to speak.

Well here is my 2 cents about what i see as the issue.

I Don't see 100 different problems in the team dynamics as the issue but a flawed gameplan causing these symptoms.
Injuries and youth do weaken a side no doubt but a strong game plan and simple instructions make it much easier for the wheel to keep turning in so that you don't lose as much as far as team set up goes.

Teams need to play to their strength's and a coach must realise his team's limitations, i feel our greatest limitation is that outside our top 8 or maybe 10 players, we are either hampered by players not ready for senior footy, or players that are simply not good enough, there are probably 5 to 6 players that have little to no influence in a game whether we win or lose, when you win that is masked because they did their 'bit' so to speak but during a loss it is said that they did not do enough, the reality is there is probably no difference at all between those player's performance in the two games. That speaks volumes for me and is symptomatic in a lot of clubs.

The youth excuse is another one that irks me to a degree, yes it matters but time and time again you see really good sides introduce youth who not only step in and perform straight away and make it hard to drop them, but also have a real influence on games, I am thinking Geelong, Hawthorn, and even Port. Age seems no barrier and the workload shared whether you are 18 or 32 years old, Collingwood of late seem to have a tier system as far as expectation and performance goes, this is a very dangerous way of operating, it is folly to think bit players and role players can automatically step up to become really influential players whenever the time comes and a changing of the guard is required in the tier system.
The heat and expectation on these types needs to be almost unreasonable and unfair from day one, as i have learn't from my profession, ask somebody for 120% and you might get 90% which is what you were after anyway, ask for 90% and you find you usually get 50 to 80% in reality.

The game plan.

Not pretending to be an expert here but i do like to analyse the game a bit and may be way off the mark but it's what i see as what is happening and what the problems may be and have been for a few seasons now.

Collingwood now, are a far more offensive minded unit as far as ball movement goes, we attack through the corridor try and create run and carry and deliver quickly in the forward line- MYTH!!!

Not true at all, It appears that way because why? Buckley and the media say it because we are more direct? in reality ball movement is slow and overdone, players are not quick as far as foot speed goes and not on the same page when link up play is required.

This overuse of the footy around defensive 50 and through the middle is what is killing us defensively, we see clusters of our players all within 5 metres of each other waiting for a handball or standing flat footed outside a pack, why does it take 3 or 4 players to move the ball 10 or 15 metres? when they can be better utilised as the next link in the chain further up the ground?

It is all well and good for 'the troops to arrive at the contest' but when some of those who have come to lend a hand are there for no specific purpose they become null and void and this is where we are getting killed on the rebound should we not win the contest.

Like Snoop said, we broke even or won a lot of the stat's including contested posession, this was also the case last year in games we lost so that tells me we are making it too easy for teams to score and to have uncontested posession through the middle of the ground, and the link between the two needs to be explored by the powers that be.

The forward defence and pressure has been on the radar for a while and has some scratching the heads as to where it has been, yes it has dropped of a touch but not as much as you would think, and in my opinion the intent is still very strong but looks like it is not.

The big problem with this part of the plan is that pressure cannot make much of a difference if the players don't know where the ball is going to land, and every player in that area goes to the contest, this just allows the opposition to spread with ease because all our bloody players are in the one area all 6 or 7 of them with in a 10 meter radius.

Precise kicking and a REAL intended target make it so much more effective to apply pressure and for players to get to the RIGHT contest and influence it properly you can have all the right intentions on the ground but at the end of the day if that intent is not met with reward then you have to ask if the structure is right.

And finally the game plan as a whole, Bucks is on record as saying he want's to get the ball in more players hands, similar to Hawthorn or Geelong, well if you don't have the skills, ball handling and understanding of these teams and expect their results with that approach then you are kidding yourself and creating a confused and bewildered group of players with no real direction or knowledge about what works and what does not, especially when it works against the weak teams, the feeling is 'we are on the right track' when in fact we are not because it does not stack up against the smarter better teams.

 

[Optimax]

Opti you said it yourself, shit forward line structure with Reid and White out, given how Lynch performed recently and Witt's still young and raw I sincerely doubt the results would have been any different - perhaps worse.

You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear - without White and Reid we were always going to be vulnerable - and so it ensued.

You don't just change the structure a week out prior to the season, regardless of how good or bad Lynch is he would provide more of a structural and useable target than Goldsack and Caff. Spangher llayed games for the hawks last year, including a final iirc, because he allowed them to keep playing the same and successful structure. Spangher is no better than Lynch, wasn't even a key forward until last year but it worked.

I'm not saying we would have won but by playing Lynch and keeping the structure we decided on over summer, we would have given ourselves a chance instead of starting behind the 8 ball.

 

[jonbe54]

You don't just change the structure a week out prior to the season, regardless of how good or bad Lynch is he would provide more of a structural and useable target than Goldsack and Caff. Spangher llayed games for the hawks last year, including a final iirc, because he allowed them to keep playing the same and successful structure. Spangher is no better than Lynch, wasn't even a key forward until last year but it worked.

I'm not saying we would have won but by playing Lynch and keeping the structure we decided on over summer, we would have given ourselves a chance instead of starting behind the 8 ball.

Structure is fine and to a degree I agree with you BUT structure in and of itself will not make up for shit play. Lynch was abysmal in the last half of the year and hasn't shown to advantage in the preseason. The little we have seen of Witts suggests he has a turning circle on a par with the Queen Mary so how would that have helped?

Niether of them are anything approching the quality of mark of Reid and neither of them is in the same postcode when running as White.

I agree that changing the structure contributed - and heavily - to our defeat, but I disagree that Lynch and Witts would have helped - despite fitting the structural profile - simply put if they didn't take the mark their opponent would have torn them new ones on the ground.

 

[Optimax]

Structure is fine and to a degree I agree with you BUT structure in and of itself will not make up for shit play. Lynch was abysmal in the last half of the year and hasn't shown to advantage in the preseason. The little we have seen of Witts suggests he has a turning circle on a par with the Queen Mary so how would that have helped?

Niether of them are anything approching the quality of mark of Reid and neither of them is in the same postcode when running as White.

I agree that changing the structure contributed - and heavily - to our defeat, but I disagree that Lynch and Witts would have helped - despite fitting the structural profile - simply put if they didn't take the mark their opponent would have torn them new ones on the ground.

Lynch would have required more raking than goldsack or Caff

Witts can't be expected to play KPF yet, so what happened Friday? He was our starting full forward, we play lynch then he becomes our third tall....the much easier role.

By changing the structure it nullified our greatest forward strength by sticking him up against 2 or more defenders. Stupidity by our coaches.

The side chosen couldn't kick a winning score, and that was prior to the game starting.

 

[jonbe54]

Lynch would have required more raking than goldsack or Caff

Witts can't be expected to play KPF yet, so what happened Friday? He was our starting full forward, we play lynch then he becomes our third tall....the much easier role.

By changing the structure it nullified our greatest forward strength by sticking him up against 2 or more defenders. Stupidity by our coaches.

The side chosen couldn't kick a winning score, and that was prior to the game starting.

Ah well Opti we disagree on Lynch, with his performances late last year he would have been head hunted if selected and the effect would have been the same in my book.

As for stupidity from our coaches . . . well I'm certainly not going to make that sort of a call as I don't have anything approaching the experience.

 

[blaze036]

Young and Lynch have to be the most disappointing high profile recruits in a long time.

Taken the club backwards, taking up salary cap space whilst giving us literally ZERO on field

 

[jonbe54]

Young and Lynch have to be the most disappointing high profile recruits in a long time.

Taken the club backwards, taking up salary cap space whilst giving us literally ZERO on field

Lynch simply appears past it atm though I'm not prepared to write off Young yet.

 

[piedpiper32]

As much as we laud our mids something is not right. We draw level at contested possession, win tackles and clearances (I think) and yet they have 15 more inside 50's. That tells me we were really haphazard about clearing it and got done on the rebound

Given our players seem to be drawn to the ball like moths to a flame we absolutely should be winning contested possessions, clearances, and tackles. The problem is it isn't as effective as it should be when everyone is crowded around the ball and there is hardly anyone on the outside to release to.

There has to be a balance between getting numbers to win 50-50 ball, but also having enough options outside the contest to release away. Fremantle seemed to have that balance a lot better than us so were a lot more damaging when they could get the contested ball or clearance.

I am not sure if this numbers to the ball is a game plan or we just have too many guys whose instinct to hunt the ball all the time is too strong, but in any case it needs to be rebalanced.

 

[Scottabe_pendles]

Young and Lynch have to be the most disappointing high profile recruits in a long time.

Taken the club backwards, taking up salary cap space whilst giving us literally ZERO on field

Young and Harry L's mid range kicking are atrocious you cant have that on the wings... frustrating

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk

 

[Lord Wilberforce]

We lost this game Thursday night. Of course pointing out that Buckley ****** up is being a heretic, so I don't expect too much support on this.

Agree.

However, this was also lost (or blown out) in the coaches box. Freo is a better side - particularly when it comes to coaching.

When things went pear shaped in the Pies game last year, Ross Lyon sat on the bench making team changes instead of giving a rocket to the players. He was flexible enough to change things mid game. We never really seem to do that.

Coaches are like ruckmen - they take a long time to mature (if they ever do). Do we have the time for Buckley to do his apprenticeship while half the team matures and half the team gets too old and needs to retire? That's how you end up in the perpetual loop of being a middle ladder team.

 

[blaze036]

We chose to let Johnson run free and destroy us all game

Our terrible structures regularly allowed Fremantle to go coast to coast and score easily.

Our forward line structure was woeful

Our coaching group is substandard

 

[FAIRANDBALANCED]

We chose to let Johnson run free and destroy us all game

Our terrible structures regularly allowed Fremantle to go coast to coast and score easily.

Our forward line structure was woeful

Our coaching group is substandard

This was absolutely my greatest frurstration too. It was the same 5 years ago when Sam Fisher would do the mopping up for Ross Lyon, now it is Johnson. How we left him loose, or allowed him to double team Cloke so often is beyond me. He tore us apart, and imo was the best player on the ground. Conversely we have nobody anything like him in our defense who can do the same thing. There is a big problem to start.

I feel we could get away with Nathan Brown as our full back, if he was supported by Ben Reid and we had a Michael Johnson type as the third man in (Maxy doesn't have it anymore). Maybe Scharenberg will be that man in 5 years time, but not in the next couple of years, and this is where we will struggle. Goldsack is too dumb to do it, Maxy has disposal and physical restrictions, and there really is nobody else. How often lately do we see the opposition key forward held down by his direct opponent while a COllingwood player lofts across and takes the mark? Never is the easy answer. UNtil our backline finds a quarterback type and a good third tall/zone off defender, we are going nowhere.

 

[HeavyPop]

This was absolutely my greatest frurstration too. It was the same 5 years ago when Sam Fisher would do the mopping up for Ross Lyon, now it is Johnson. How we left him loose, or allowed him to double team Cloke so often is beyond me. He tore us apart, and imo was the best player on the ground. Conversely we have nobody anything like him in our defense who can do the same thing. There is a big problem to start.

I feel we could get away with Nathan Brown as our full back, if he was supported by Ben Reid and we had a Michael Johnson type as the third man in (Maxy doesn't have it anymore). Maybe Scharenberg will be that man in 5 years time, but not in the next couple of years, and this is where we will struggle. Goldsack is too dumb to do it, Maxy has disposal and physical restrictions, and there really is nobody else. How often lately do we see the opposition key forward held down by his direct opponent while a COllingwood player lofts across and takes the mark? Never is the easy answer. UNtil our backline finds a quarterback type and a good third tall/zone off defender, we are going nowhere.

I agree with your post, but IMO the reason we can't get a player in to impact the contest it because of how easily the ball is coming into our backline. If the oppositions midfield are able to lower their eyes and kick to a lead, its almost impossible for one of our backs to get across and help. It happens because when opposition midfield wins the ball from a stoppage, they spread it well to a team mate who then has time to assess, rather than just throwing it on the boot like Collingwood seem to do. Being able to spread well is a huge need in a game that keeps increasing in pressure.