Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Fremantle' started by jedi mind tricks, Mar 27, 2016.
So this has nothing to do with Pav and McPharlin retiring?
(Log in to remove this ad.)
So top 4, top of the table and GF finishes mean stuff all to you. Struggle to defend under Lyon? Really..... WC struggled to get entries into the 50 and managed 74 points against a defence of 3 rookies and a key defender at a new club with minimal games. Gob on all you like about not scoring enough but when you say Lyon can't coach a defensive tactic your credibility goes out the window.
PS if you didn't notice the forward half was incredibly young with an 18 year old KF who pinch hit in the ruck with a 19 year old rookie.
I thought we were shit yesterday, and listening to RTB and Fyfe today saying we did well is concerning the f**k out of me.
we are in for another 6 years of pain
some people in here are lunatics
Kicking was terrible forward of the half back line yesterday. Not sure how Blakely could be termed to have had his worst game for Freo yesterday. That is just nonsense. The people lauding Hurn, Duggan and McGovern for being good in the back half for the Eagles would be singing his praises if we had converted up front. As a team we generated enough opportunity to win the game. Surely that suggests we were sufficiently attacking.
Ross and the other coaches can't kick the ball for the players. So often the forward was in the right place and leading in one direction and the upfield kicker kicked to the wrong side of the contest putting them out of it. This happened so many times I lost count! Lets hope that the Hills, Sonny, Weller Neale and co don't all have such terrible kicking games at once again! I am also 100% sure that the game plan did not read kick it high into the forward 50 to our undersized forwards against the bets intercept and marking defender in the comp (still sucks that McGovern is at the Eagles and that is worth a melt for sure) but pressured kicks often led to that happening.
The players need a rocket for their lack of composure and skill errors and we need a marking target in attack most definitely. That is what we need to find somewhere somehow in the draft, free agency or through trading. A high draft pick is what gives us some currency to make that happen. That is what we should be melting about instead of the incessant bleating about the game plan. The inside 50 count says we had enough opportunity to create a winning score so the game plan ain't all bad. Not perfect and in need of some improvement and personnel that can execute absolutely.
Our game plan chose to go in with undersized forwards. The game plan doesn't get a pass when that predictably doesn't work.
High kicks into the forward line are an unavoidable occurrence in footy. That's why every team (except Fremantle) plays tall forwards.
A game plan that relies on never kicking long to a contest in the forward line is not a realistic one.
Another option is that we could play any one of the tall players currently on our list in the forward line (rather than playing 3 tall defenders but only 1 tall forward each week). Sounds revolutionary, I know, but given we are in a development year, surely it's at least worth trying? Rather than the same old shit that has never worked? The same old shit that cost us a premiership in 2013?
I take your points as well made.
That said which tall forward would you like to have played? Taberner? I would probably have given him another shot but I don't work at the club. I don't know what he is doing aside from dominating guys much smaller than him when playing for Peel and only after getting a rocket from Rodger Hayden at half time. He has built an AFL body but unless he can motivate himself to use it and really attacks the ball he is not the answer. Especially given the propensity to come in and play one good game an follow it up with several poor ones.
Griffin? Heart and soul player but time has passed him by. Strnadica? Might get there but if he is playing Peel Ressies he is not there yet. Injuries to guys like Apeness, Pearce and maybe even Ubergang are really limiting our options. Dawson or Collins may be able to hold down a backline spot so we could throw Johnson or Hamling forward but neither of them are natural forwards form what I have seen of them.
The game plan has to adapt to what we have available to put on the field so I take the point about the high ball being a necessary fall back part of any plan but suggest that it is a default position that can mostly be avoided with composure, execution, effort, work rate or whatever other euphemism you want to use. Watching the game yesterday I would say we were kicking it high to a contest inside 50 at about twice the rate of the Eagles and they do have some taller forward targets. That says to me that we had the ball enough to do some damage and it was execution that was the issue not the game plan.
I think the thing that most cost us at the GF in 2013 was kicking for goal so on that point based on yesterday's effort nothing much has changed.
Self diagnosis is not a good idea. Get your self some help.
Assuming we don't want to play Taberner because "reasons", that is what I would be doing right now. Whichever one of those 4 is the best kick for goal is the one I'd play in the forward line for the rest of the year. They don't have to be the next Buddy Franklin, they just need to keep the opposition tall defenders honest and make a contest to bring our small forwards into the game. Collins has been playing well enough all year to deserve a run in the AFL. Raffle which one of him, Johnson or Hamling you want to play forward.
For most of the derby we had Nick Suban playing on McGovern for god's sake. It was a disaster.
Stop making so much sense!!
i was referring to the lunatics who think picking taberner is a good idea
Don't get how 6 years of pain relates to Tabs who won't be around .
*probably going to be irrelevant due to the card (RIP) but anyway...
So they have good 'structure' but they still don't score as much as us? Surely the natural progression from efficient or effective forward positioning is scoring reasonably heavily? I think we're pretty awful going forward at the moment for a bunch of different reasons, but the unfavourable comparison to Carlton is odd.
We've shown glimpses of different attacking plans throughout the year, but often at times the execution has been deplorable or the personnel haven't been suited.
The metric should be i50 efficiency rather than scores really. I think we have a far better midfield than Carlton, so we should score more than them.
We average 48.4 i50s per game and 75 points.
Carlton average 45.9 i50s per game and 72.4 points
so Carlton get 1.58 points per inside 50.
Fremantle get 1.55
But the worst team in the league as far as I can tell on this metric is western bulldogs, who average 1.50 points per inside 50. But this is mostly explained by their very inaccurate kicking this year (they average 11.2 goals and 13.2 behinds per game).
Just realised I should probably use scoring shots rather than total scores for a more accurate representation.
That was one of the worst Freo games I have sat through since day 1. The Eagles did what they had to do to win and hardly raised a sweat while we scrambled, fumbled, bumbled and miss kicked our way to an embarrassing loss.
I agree with the sentiment that young players will take 25 to 50 games to become reliable contributors but it was the senior players who stuffed up as much if not more than the young ones yesterday.
Given that the players are at the club 5 days from 8.30am to 4.30pm most week days during the footy season why can't the coaches spend 1 hour out of all that time to get it through to them not to give away stupid 50 metre penalties like they did yesterday. Yes those calls can be harsh at times but ffs just play it safe and be more aware. Those calls are momentum killers when the opposition get a shot in the goal square rather than outside the 50 metre arc.
Any talk of us being finalists or flag hopes in the next 5 years with that forward line set up is a pipe dream. Some of the players are reasonable however anyone but an absolute champion like Pav will be in for a short career if they get cast as a forward for Freo and perhaps that is why they are all trying to get behind the ball.
Plenty of ticker shown by Stephen Hill in coming back onto the ground in the final quarter after hurting his shoulder. Sean Darcy is a real find.
**** there's some complete wombats on here
I was hoping at half time that Ross was going to switch Nyhuis and Logue around. See what each is capable of at the other end. Forward is an easier gig than defending. The idea is simple. Get ball, kick goal. That would be easy enough for someone like Logue to follow at this stage of his career.
We tried Logue forward earlier this season and while he got a fair bit of it, his goal kicking was shocking. I think he'd need a season practicing kicking at goal before we'd consider moving him there more permanently.
But in the context of yesterday's game we could have bolstered the defence taking Logue out of there and it wasn't like he would have done any worse at kicking for goal than the others.
True. We could have taken any one of our key defenders out really and moved them forward. They were all pretty ineffectual.
Pretty sure forward is the hardest place to play. Same in most sports, it is harder to attack. It is the reason the big KPFs, Strikers and Big Hitters get the big bucks in their respective sports.
That said, think Nyhuis spent some time in the D50 towards the end of the game. Looked ok.
But repetition doesn't have the relationship with validity that you're chasing.
This. Some shocking calls.
Height up forward solves everything. Bring back Jon Griffin ASAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!