Roast The mental game

[catempire]

Because then effectively our performs rests on whether two players are playing well or not. If one or both are down, we're in trouble - conversely, if they are both up, we're usually flying. In our heyday, if Ablett or Bartel had a down day, it didn't have such a great effect on the side because there were so many others to step into that breach.

They play well every week. When we lose it's because the mid tier fail us.

 

[iameviljez]

Nope, I still don't get it. We have (clearly) two best players, who would be (clearly) two best players in any side, and we don't want them in our best players every week? That sounds like crazy talk.

But skirting around the logic you are presenting, even suggesting that we relied on them alone to win is a fallacy. Whilst those two definitely featured, other critical moments were won by Tom Hawkins, Henderson, Horlin-Smith, Lang and Menzel, to name a few.

But we are massively, massively overdependent on them, that's the issue. The gap between Selwood and the next best player is just huge, and that, IMO, is why we are so inconsistent.

 

[Ricketz]

But we are massively, massively overdependent on them, that's the issue. The gap between Selwood and the next best player is just huge, and that, IMO, is why we are so inconsistent.

Fair enough. My point being, you would still see Dangerfield and Selwood named in the best each week even if the gap was whatever width you deemed acceptable - they are just that good.

I agree that our mid tier are still inconsistent. But I also think North were on song yesterday. And I think it is early days, too. We can expect some quality to return, and competition for available spots to heat up.

 

[Turbocat]

I think I heard Adam Ramauskas say (paraphrase) "Thats the trouble with Geelong , they are too up and down with their intensity , basically that was the issue last year and nothing has changed"

I'd say there is a component that I agree with Bobby. We didn't always play to pedal to the metal in the past but the efficiency of class can mean that even when playing at 80% you can get it done with giving a glimpse here or there , a quarter at full throttle. Geelong atm has to play far closer to 100% for us to be the beat all comers side. The mountain is harder to climb when you are not as talented , and to turn up week in week out expecting a group to play at ones best is a forlorn hope. The question is just how short on talent are we? And is that the main concern?

Id say no its not the main concern , a side that has enough talent to make the finals even when most of the year they have these yoyo like games , when they have enough talent to make a PF but then start the game with a whoopsy attitude on such a big day , there is more going on than just talent. It resonates with me as some sort of a disjointed power structure when not everyone is in sync and too many expect others to know what they should do. It resonates with me that its not unusual to have performances like this usually happens when one is hearing leaked stories about player/club/coach disharmony. Talent is not the main answer , can you imagine 18 Nick Kyrgios running around. The mental game is key. Is someone really saying that Abletts has lost so much of his ability to perform as he did V GWS.

 

[catempire]

*bump*

 

[UnitedWarrior93]

We lost the mental game today.

 

[Stan The Caddy]

*bump*

Yep, it's got us again mate. Until we start practicing the right habits on a consistent basis I'm going to be extremely nervous once September rolls around...

 

[Pollywaffle]

Yep, it's got us again mate. Until we start practicing the right habits on a consistent basis I'm going to be extremely nervous once September rolls around...

Might not matter come September if we don't get our act together.

 

[Stan The Caddy]

Might not matter come September if we don't get our act together.

We'll make finals standing on our heads. That's not the issue. The issue is can we perform at a high level consistently once we actually get there.

 

[Willo_]

I'm trying to work out if we are an average team that has good moments and our position is above where we truely sit

Or a good team who gets ahead of itself and switches and just expects it to happen.

 

[cats2rise]

I'm trying to work out if we are an average team that has good moments and our position is above where we truely sit

Or a good team who gets ahead of itself and switches and just expects it to happen.

Whynotboth.gif

 

[catempire]

I'm trying to work out if we are an average team that has good moments and our position is above where we truely sit

Or a good team who gets ahead of itself and switches and just expects it to happen.

We are above average. But you only need to look at our list to know we are not ahead of the pack (nor is anyone else for that matter). So when things don't click we get done. A lot will have to go right for us to make a mark in September.

 

[Turbocat]

I'm trying to work out if we are an average team that has good moments and our position is above where we truely sit

Or a good team who gets ahead of itself and switches and just expects it to happen.

I feel we are good enough to raise expectations to at time look better than good but also quite capable of falling like a stone . Its almost like we are a tease but in the end I feel we may just be headed for finals disappointment yet again. One should only elevates your hopes at your own risk. Perhaps we just have too many attribute types in our side..its all or nothing or almost nothing.

 

[SJ]

We lost the mental game today.

Lost the strategic and structural game.