Review The Grand Final Disaster of 2017.

Remove this Banner Ad

The measured explanation: Our players didn't have the mental capacity to handle the pressure cooker of a Grand Final and our coaches failed to alter our style or make moves at half time to change the game.

The quick explanation: Our players have a soft underbelly that can get exposed and our coaches are one-dimensional.

The most disappointing part was that they knew what Richmond would bring, their style is nothing we haven't seen from them in the last month & yet they seemed completely unprepared & unable to handle it.

There was no plan B & in the end Richmond seemed to want it more than Adelaide & that was the difference. Richmond had 22 contributors while Adelaide had more passengers than an Obarn bus trip.
 
The most disappointing part was that they knew what Richmond would bring, their style is nothing we haven't seen from them in the last month & yet they seemed completely unprepared & unable to handle it.

There was no plan B & in the end Richmond seemed to want it more than Adelaide & that was the difference. Richmond had 22 contributors while Adelaide had more passengers than an Obarn bus trip.
I will never, ever understand this. It is reprehensible.
 
I see this and I wonder where this starts from? Is it a club thing or is it Pykes style and the assistants fall into line, or does the tail wag the dog? I'm not saying you are wrong but it seems to be a comment that could be directed at Sando and Craig etc. One note coaches who stubbornly insisted their game plan was the best and couldnt change

You can be stubborn, as long as it's working. We didn't recognise that it wasn't working, or at least we did but refused to change.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Our staff need to have balls and realise the expectations of a few players moving forward.

Jenkins soft as butter, with his size he should be able to muscle through opponents
Mackay sure he had a good finals series, but he doesn't offer anything moving forward
Otten is nothing more than depth
Atkins - Another soft player, he shines against poor sides however does trash when the game matters most
 
Hmmm, no I'm blaming the players for failing to enact Plan A (maybe it was mindset which may come back to coaches)

Pyke has shown throughout the year he can make mid-game strategic shifts...problem is this time selection was so bad it gave him minimal options to change it up against the style of game we were up against.
This, and as he said, it's the players that are responsible for effort.
 
You can be stubborn, as long as it's working. We didn't recognise that it wasn't working, or at least we did but refused to change.
I love to hear Pyke's thoughts on this too - would he defend it like Neil Craig's 'no regrets' over Massie v Franklin? Would he admit he was restricted by selection? I'd love to know where he stands.
 
It still boggles the mind, and will do for some time, that a team that had clearly developed a real hard edge over the past 2 or so months, suddenly reverted back to their former selves. I never thought we were genuine premiership material until we bullied Geelong at home a few months back. The toughness was there, the grit, the determination, and belief in our game.

Everything totally fell to pieces on Saturday. It was hard to watch. They totally failed to handle the pressure. They were spooked by the grand stage. Richmonds pressure was unbelievable, and when we realised it wasn't going away, we totally capitulated. It was embarrassing to see a team totally bereft of ideas. They were panicked, defensive, afraid to take risks, and dare I say it, soft. Was essentially a gutless and lifeless display. Very, very disappointing.
 
we lost to Richmond the same way we lost last year to Sydney: to a swarming pressure team that was harder at the ball, the body and the contest.

the 2 finals losses were by and large identical. and the only difference this year is that we avoided a team like that until the grand final. luck of the draw and all that

look at North Melbourne game as well, there is a blue print on how to beat us.
 
There is talent in this group, without doubt, but there are also some very mentality weak individuals who are not up to the fight.

If we are to truly learn our lessons there 2 things I want to see.

1. Discard these mentally weak individuals. We all know who they are.


https://www.sen.com.au/news/2016/09/11/malthouse-on-kb-and-top-three-pies-in-finals/

One of the great things about sport is to be able to perform on the big stage and I loved to go into a season after a finals series and know that my players stood up in the finals,” said Malthouse.

“Those that didn’t have got one more chance, only one more chance because you can’t muck around in finals.

“You can’t give a third and fourth chance… if you don’t perform then that’s curtains because it’s so hard to get there.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

This hear....nailed it.

We just could not sweep up the crumbs from spilled marks. And all over the ground. Every time there were crumbing contests, Richmond walked away with ease, time and again.

Exactly.

People look at the contested possessions and think it is all about the hard in and under stuff. But in any marking contest, the next possession is deemed contested.

Clearly we were too top heavy and playing Otten was a mistake. We need to find a half forward flanker that can read the ball off hand and then pressure the opposition.
 
we lost to Richmond the same way we lost last year to Sydney: to a swarming pressure team that was harder at the ball, the body and the contest.

the 2 finals losses were by and large identical. and the only difference this year is that we avoided a team like that until the grand final. luck of the draw and all that

look at North Melbourne game as well, there is a blue print on how to beat us.
One of the most frustrating things is how the message coming out from us during the week wasn't one that paid attention to our opponent. I wanted to hear Pyke or whoever say they'd been looking closely at Richmond's victories and losses.
 
There is talent in this group, without doubt, but there are also some very mentality weak individuals who are not up to the fight.

If we are to truly learn our lessons there 2 things I want to see.

1. Discard these mentally weak individuals. We all know who they are.

2. More elite class, especially through the backline and midfield.

The truly high pressure games expose these two things as clear weaknesses in our game.

And replace them with what? another set of home grown and developed mentally weak individuals? Its our very own system that produces these results.
 
Exactly.

People look at the contested possessions and think it is all about the hard in and under stuff. But in any marking contest, the next possession is deemed contested.

Clearly we were too top heavy and playing Otten was a mistake. We need to find a half forward flanker that can read the ball off hand and then pressure the opposition.
Edwards said he practiced against Richmond pressure at training and then found he had more time against Adelaide. That is not surprising as we are not a quick side and even more so with Brodie, McGovern out. Anyone would have time against Walker, Lynch, Otten, Crouch and our two basketball converts
 
Rory Sloane & Laird, along with Matt Crouch....they can hold their heads high. The rest? Disgrace. Greenwood showed some real flair, but it was short lived.

Coaching? The precision-kicking, short disposal game works well against bigger, slower bodies, but it was never going to work against a side that's smaller and quicker (than Geelong). As soon as we were forced to kick long, we were exposed (badly) in our lack of contested ground ball/crumbing skills, and the game was essentially lost from there. 99.99% of crumbing contests were easily won by Richmond, and we were completely incapable of stopping this.
While we well and truly lost the game in the Midfield and not up Forward, our over-reliance on three talls up Forward (where two of the three seriously lack pace) has repeatedly proven to be a big mistake, where we again learnt this on the one day that counts. All said and done, we desperately need:
  • An established A1, blue chip, tough, inside Mid to help Rory Sloane and Matt Crouch.
  • Another fast, agile, crumbing Forward to help Betts.
Until then, we will continue to be competitive and make Finals, but we will not take the next step in September.
 
Was at the game yesterday and the lack of absolute top end talent cost us yesterday. We don't have anyone of Dustin Martin or Rance's class and it showed. Need to hit the draft with the Lever and Cameron (hopefully 3 first rounders).
 
Exactly.

People look at the contested possessions and think it is all about the hard in and under stuff. But in any marking contest, the next possession is deemed contested.

Clearly we were too top heavy and playing Otten was a mistake. We need to find a half forward flanker that can read the ball off hand and then pressure the opposition.

What's bolded was a big issue.

The #1 reason we lost was because of crumbing, or lack there of. The short pass precision game we played was against bigger, older, slower bodies in Geelong, as there were (relatively) very few contested marking contests. Against Richmond, they were quicker and closed down this precision-passing option, forcing us to kick long down the line. If you're continually getting beaten in crumbing contests from long kicks, you either keep trying to switch play again and again to open up a space, or you opt to handball-carry. Or you drastically reshuffle who's in the Midfield.

Our reliance on three talls was a (huge) mistake, but we lost the game well before the ball reached our Forward Line (which was nowhere near enough). The only time we seriously took clean possession of the ball was when our Defenders managed some intercept marks (and they did this quite well). But almost every other kick (from either team, in any direction) that went to a contest....we just could not mop up the crumbs. And again, not just up Forward, but all over the ground. I would've chucked both Rory Laird and Luke Brown in the Middle, as they're two of our better in/under grunt players, where leaving them in Defence was not helping our case. We made no attempt to change player positions or tactics. Long kicks down the line, repeatedly beaten in crumbing contests, opposition gains possession, runs off, then goal. Rinse and repeat.
 
I was thinking regarding the game being played at the MCG. Nothing is stopping the AFL from changing the size of the playing pitch, the MCG is already the biggest playing pitch in the compe, the AFL could bring the boundary lines in to be the size of the Adelaide Oval or any other team's home ground dimensions depending if that team makes the GF and is the higher placed team.

Same for other finals, if the AFL is going to make Geelong play on the MCG in finals, do the dimensions of Kardinia Park for the boundary.
Good idea re AO. Won't happen. Too fair to us, or other higher ranked non-VFL teams.
Can't agree with the Geelong comment. Stuff them. KP is their fortress and that's enough. ;)
 
from pretty much the first bounce was that Richmond came with an intensity and belief that we lacked. We got smashed in the contested ball and its as simple as that one statistic. Even with fair umpiring, we don't win the flag if we are getting smashed in contested possession.
Yep. This.
 
he said that they showed Walker in the rooms at half time, sitting on his arse in silence looking totally chilled out. Even he felt like screaming "you're losing!" at the screen. As captain wouldn't you be talking to everyone, revving them up, encouraging players that were down etc? It's bizarre.
and
Seriously thats bloody damning if thats true. The other issue is where was the leadership group if Tex was sitting on his arse doing nothing?
1) They crossed on CH 7 to the rooms a few times. I didn't see any of the same white chairs that Richmond players were sitting on in the Crows' room. If deliberate, it's ingenious to make the Crows sit on the floor, which
2) they did, spaced apart, leaning against the wall.
3) Their body language was appalling.
4) I didn't see any animated discussions, any revving up, any groups of 4-6 mids/defenders nutting out a plan for the second half.
It looked like the game was over. Mentally, maybe it was.

Someone suggested above that Lever told the group he was leaving on GF day. If true, thanks Jake. Way to spoil their focus. Surely Pyke would not have allowed this?
 
I'd say it's dead now. Served its purpose but not worth doing anymore. After this loss it's just ripe for ridicule.
It was ridiculed before the game and now it's a laughing stock. We've done some pretty cringe-worthy things over the last few years (chant night, 12 days of Christmas) but I think that tops it, especially considering what we dished up.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top