The LOSS Response Thread

[Blue Bawls]

Good loss today. West Coast have been good all year and this was a good run for our depth players who will have seen our game plan pretty much thrown back at us.

Was surprised our midfield didn't stand up a little better, and couldn't understand we tried to lob the ball onto the heads of shortarses in the forward line, but ultimately with so many outs, I wasn't devastated.

 

[ScarfacePacino]

• Our lack of quality talls will see us get found out in September.
  
  Injuries have exposed us badly. Today was the first real test of our supposed depth, and we failed miserably. We have overpaid terribly in the Warnock and McLean trades. Pick 11, 24, and 56. One of the key reasons our depth is suspect.
  
  Henderson is neither a forward nor a backman.

I agree we can't rely on Waite and Jamison to do everything we need a couple to stand up now not 5 years time.

 

[PP34]

It was for tripping.

Schofield tapped his foot with his hand. Hardly targeting.

I'm sorry but you can't trip someone like that you can seriously hurt someone by doing that he'll get a week or so. Murphy also got whacked off the ball by Cox and Lynch who will also both get weeks.

 

[A320]

I can't understand ....one minute some supporters are saying we've got so much depth now that we can cover injured players and then when we lose it was due to all the injuries we have. In reality we have depth, but maybe it isn't as deep as we like to think it is.

I was at the game today, we were outplayed by simply a better side. Likewise with the forthcoming game against Richmond, I'd like to think we'll beat them but to start suggesting we're going to smash them is a bit presumptious.

I don't subscribe to the theory if we had a full team we would have beaten west coast today...that's just hypothesis ... I think as supporters we need to focus on the players we have available not who we'd like to have in.

I'll probably get flamed for this post but being confident is a positive attitude and I certainly want Carlton to have success each round, but over confidence can leave you with egg on your face.

 

[Thomop]

Good loss today. West Coast have been good all year and this was a good run for our depth players who will have seen our game plan pretty much thrown back at us.

Was surprised our midfield didn't stand up a little better, and couldn't understand we tried to lob the ball onto the heads of shortarses in the forward line, but ultimately with so many outs, I wasn't devastated.

I know people keep justifying the loss and taking refuge in the fact that we were missing players. But it really worries me that 3 teams in front of us would have easily accounted for similar personnel absentees against this side. I know I know i sound bitter and un-optimistic but let's be realistic about our chances this year. Still hoping to finish top 4 though.
Agree with regrouping and smashing Richmond!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[le dominateur]

8 point ball game and WC came to play and we didn't. Might lead to an interstate final again in Perth in the 2nd week if WC hold their form and keep their best side in.
It would be good if we could get through a game with no injuries for a change.

 

[blue gunslinger]

I tend to think you are over playing the importance of jamisons departure. Whilst no doubt important and he would have offered more than Gibbs and henderson, the real issue was the midfield.

Naitanui and Cox gave first supply and Selwood and Kerr shut Judd out of the game and found ball themselves to effectible cut of your supply and feed their forwards.

I thought Shuey broke even with Murphy and pressured him well most of the time.

Only Scotland could say he won his battle but West Coast simply had too many good runners.

great 1st statement. Means I don't have to bother reading the rest of your post

 

[Blueboys7]

He is saying that our mids were well beaten and that had bigger consequences than losing Jamo. He is spot on. Calm the f down.

I acknowledged that in my second paragraph...

Pretty obvious that our structure was completely stuffed when Jamo went down which made it harder to contain their talls.

It may not have changed the result but it would have made things a lot easier.

 

[Blue and Silver]

Settle down, Lynch is no sniper.

Has never gone hard at the man, not even this season. No excuse but I would suggest clumsiness/lack of awareness are to blame not anything malicious.

Definitely not a thing I like seeing though.

Don't feed me this BS. Lynch went for his much shorter opponents on 4 occassions today. 3 times he collected them dangerously.

Big Vacation for him coming up if the MRP is fair

 

[BlueTouchPaper]

I can't understand ....one minute some supporters are saying we've got so much depth now that we can cover injured players and then when we lose it was due to all the injuries we have.

The utter disrespect for our opponents this week was alarming - obviously not that it reflects our player's mindset, but nevertheless the Eagles are, this year, a quality outfit.

They pushed Hawthorn in Launceston, they really stuck it to us, they have undeniable talent in the forward line, and the best blue-collar midfield in the game at the moment, that will give them every chance against the top teams.

Worsfold is also a very astute coach.

We lost a lot of intensity before the match today in Robinson, Duigan, Hampson and to a lesser extent Curnow - and it totally threw our team balance out. It really exposed players who lacked 100% commitment and intensity.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

Don't feed me this BS. Lynch went for his much shorter opponents on 4 occassions today. 3 times he collected them dangerously.

Big Vacation for him coming up if the MRP is fair

If the MRP is fair, will get a reprimand or a week.

Nothing he did was enough to earn him "weeks" nor did he target Murphy or any other player.

I know you had a loss but turn it up.

 

[Krooooze]

As good as Collingwood are, I'm quite amazed the Eagles got pummeled like they did against them. They are good enough to match some quality sides with the pressure they apply

 

[40yearBLUE]

I can't understand ....one minute some supporters are saying we've got so much depth now that we can cover injured players and then when we lose it was due to all the injuries we have. In reality we have depth, but maybe it isn't as deep as we like to think it is.

I was at the game today, we were outplayed by simply a better side. Likewise with the forthcoming game against Richmond, I'd like to think we'll beat them but to start suggesting we're going to smash them is a bit presumptious.

I don't subscribe to the theory if we had a full team we would have beaten west coast today...that's just hypothesis ... I think as supporters we need to focus on the players we have available not who we'd like to have in.

I'll probably get flamed for this post but being confident is a positive attitude and I certainly want Carlton to have success each round, but over confidence can leave you with egg on your face.

Perhaps you dont fully understand what depth means. Today we played the depth for our depth players because even our depth players are out injured.

And perhaps you also dont understand that the top teams have about 6 or 8 depth players, but if they have to play ALL of them at once or worse, have to play all of them at once first up in the same game because they had 4 or 5 forced injury changes, they are going to struggle.

Perhaps not a great example but an example none the less is the fall of the Bombers, first 6 rounds on fire, lose a couple of players in round 4 but were able to cover them, lost a couple more and thats it, they were overstretched and could no longer cover.

We have much more depth across more areas of the ground than we have had in the past. We are still a KP forward and a KP defender shy, but we can usually cover for them, all other things being equal. We can lose players such as Waite, and cover for them, we can lose players like Bower and cover for them, we can lose players like Laidler and cover for him, we can even lose Jamo for a game and cover (didnt play in our first 2 wins and has been subbed out of a few now but we managed to keep up the defensive pressure in those games because we had the cover), we lost Knockers and covered him with either Hammer or Irish and Hammer had really played well the last 2 weeks keeping Knockers out of the side (all examples of our depth working for us);

but to lose Curnow, Robbo, Duigan and Hammer in the same week, on top of not having Waite and Laidler and suddenly we are, LIKE ANY TEAM WOULD BE, stretched. That is 6 of your starting 18, a third of our key personnel gone, 2 we could cover, 6.......big ask.

That is not a lack of depth hurting us, but a lack of a second fully ready AFL list, no team has that. No team has 40 first grade AFL quality players on their list. Not one team has that kind of depth. Like I said, Aussie and Okeefe are understudies to our understudies, I posted in another thread that our actual depth players are also injured so our last line make up the numbers players have suddenly been called upon. I am stoked they got a chance and am not bagging them, they are what they are, they tried, they are good VFL players and got selected on good VFL form but lets not kid ourselves, if we did not have they injuries they would not be getting the call up and they didnt show enough to suggest they will play again, should the depth players, let alone the best 22 get back on the park. Which is fine, they are what they are, and I am not being critical of them, Okeefe and Aussie have both had a very tough injury path to travel but if we need to rely on them for long then we, as any club would be, are in trouble. Thankfully we dont have to. Put one into a strong team, and we can nurse them through, but all of them at once, nup, no surprises happened today. I am disappointed as I am with any loss, but I understand why it happened.

A bit of perspective I think.

 

[ESKIE]

If the MRP is fair, will get a reprimand or a week.

Nothing he did was enough to earn him "weeks" nor did he target Murphy or any other player.

I know you had a loss but turn it up.

I think Murphy gained a lot of 'attention' today, twice by Lynch, I will be amazed if he doesn't get cited for the other, so that;s twice for striking Murphy.

We're not making excuses for the loss you guys were far better today and have made stunning improvement, out marked and out played today by a better side.

Anyway I'd say we stick a fork in round 14 and move on to round 15 and beyond and reckon we might get a crack at the Eagles in September with our best team and at the MCG

 

[yibbida]

If the MRP is fair, will get a reprimand or a week.

Nothing he did was enough to earn him "weeks" nor did he target Murphy or any other player.

I know you had a loss but turn it up.

For each incident? That will mean he gets at least 2 or 3 weeks.

 

[Blue and Silver]

If the MRP is fair, will get a reprimand or a week.

Nothing he did was enough to earn him "weeks" nor did he target Murphy or any other player.

I know you had a loss but turn it up.

You can't call the first two accidents, they were shepherds, poorly executed which could of been very dangerous to the players he hit. The last Murphy was perhaps negligent, but the contact was much more flush.

You are entitled to your opinion, but Lynch was involved in 4 incidents where smaller players were on the receiving end of high bumps. Calling him a sniper based on this evidence seems fair to me

 

[GO EAGLES]

The Carlton player I feared the most did not play today.
Mitch Robinson.

He makes a 5 goal difference to your side.

He is like Bateman was in 2008 before he cut his hair.
He provides manic energy and wins some of the hardest hard ball gets imaginable.
These posessions change the feel of the game.

Priddis is winning many really hard ball gets for us this season.

When I found out that he was not playing there was no chance of us losing, with the other outs Carlton had.

 

[thylacine60]

You belted us in every aspect of the game - wasn't just because Robbo was missing that you won.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

You can't call the first two accidents, they were shepherds, poorly executed which could of been very dangerous to the players he hit. The last Murphy was perhaps negligent, but the contact was much more flush.

You are entitled to your opinion, but Lynch was involved in 4 incidents where smaller players were on the receiving end of high bumps. Calling him a sniper based on this evidence seems fair to me

Name the 4.

Better not include the sheppard against Tuoey(?) because I am watching a replay now and there was no high contact.

 

[Malifice]

He is like Bateman was in 2008 before he cut his hair.

The Sampson effect.

Glad someone else noticed this.

 

[Thomop]

Perhaps you dont fully understand what depth means. Today we played the depth for our depth players because even our depth players are out injured.

And perhaps you also dont understand that the top teams have about 6 or 8 depth players, but if they have to play ALL of them at once or worse, have to play all of them at once first up in the same game because they had 4 or 5 forced injury changes, they are going to struggle.

Perhaps not a great example but an example none the less is the fall of the Bombers, first 6 rounds on fire, lose a couple of players in round 4 but were able to cover them, lost a couple more and thats it, they were overstretched and could no longer cover.


We have much more depth across more areas of the ground than we have had in the past. We are still a KP forward and a KP defender shy, but we can usually cover for them, all other things being equal. We can lose players such as Waite, and cover for them, we can lose players like Bower and cover for them, we can lose players like Laidler and cover for him, we can even lose Jamo for a game and cover (didnt play in our first 2 wins and has been subbed out of a few now but we managed to keep up the defensive pressure in those games because we had the cover), we lost Knockers and covered him with either Hammer or Irish and Hammer had really played well the last 2 weeks keeping Knockers out of the side (all examples of our depth working for us);

but to lose Curnow, Robbo, Duigan and Hammer in the same week, on top of not having Waite and Laidler and suddenly we are, LIKE ANY TEAM WOULD BE, stretched. That is 6 of your starting 18, a third of our key personnel gone, 2 we could cover, 6.......big ask.

That is not a lack of depth hurting us, but a lack of a second fully ready AFL list, no team has that. No team has 40 first grade AFL quality players on their list. Not one team has that kind of depth. Like I said, Aussie and Okeefe are understudies to our understudies, I posted in another thread that our actual depth players are also injured so our last line make up the numbers players have suddenly been called upon. I am stoked they got a chance and am not bagging them, they are what they are, they tried, they are good VFL players and got selected on good VFL form but lets not kid ourselves, if we did not have they injuries they would not be getting the call up and they didnt show enough to suggest they will play again, should the depth players, let alone the best 22 get back on the park. Which is fine, they are what they are, and I am not being critical of them, Okeefe and Aussie have both had a very tough injury path to travel but if we need to rely on them for long then we, as any club would be, are in trouble. Thankfully we dont have to. Put one into a strong team, and we can nurse them through, but all of them at once, nup, no surprises happened today. I am disappointed as I am with any loss, but I understand why it happened.

A bit of perspective I think.

Good point and does make me feel a little better.
One thing though, it's easy to say that our 'fill in players' played as expected. But the most annoying thing was the errors and turnovers by senior players.
Just hurts to loose to westcoast.

 

[Krooooze]

A glaring concern today was how many easy marks they took inside 50. It was ridiculous how many marks they took in their F50, yes we were down on man power but it was disappointing we didn't at least make it difficult for them.

They took 17 marks inside 50 to ours a poultry 3. Yes, we have the mosquito fleet but you can't expect them crumb everything. Some of our decision making going inside 50 was very ordinary. We desperately need a key target up there who can take some contested marks

 

[Blue and Silver]

Name the 4.

Better not include the sheppard against Tuoey(?) because I am watching a replay now and there was no high contact.

Scotland 1st quarter hit him in the chest and glanced up. Fair play but edgy which is why I included it

Touhy/Ellard? 1st quarter, from what I saw it was similar to the Scotland incident. I thought he got collected high, I haven't the benefit of a replay

Murphy 2nd quarter. Clear elbow to the face while shepparding. Raised arm will see him get weeks

Murphy 4th quarter. Hip to head, reckless, and high more weeks

 

[40yearBLUE]

You can't call the first two accidents, they were shepherds, poorly executed which could of been very dangerous to the players he hit. The last Murphy was perhaps negligent, but the contact was much more flush.

You are entitled to your opinion, but Lynch was involved in 4 incidents where smaller players were on the receiving end of high bumps. Calling him a sniper based on this evidence seems fair to me

I recall a KPD had a shepherd go wrong in a practice match which resulted in an unblemished record being blotted with a 2 week break. Only difference is a stretcher didnt need to be called out. Good luck not good management. Will be interesting to see if we have any consistency from the MRP. Somehow I doubt it.

 

[Blue and Silver]

Oh an before you mention it, I included the Touhy incident because I didn't claim he would get weeks for it, I was referencing a recurring pattern of hitting smaller players