Review Very ugly vs North.

[Roovolution]

To summarise the article (it's up already):

• drop a defender back
• tag Rory Sloane
• ferocious tackle pressure
• get physical

Hardly rocket science or unique to the Crows.

Let's also combine this with have 5-6 of your players play the career best game, in a unique stadium, with unique conditions, win the toss, kick with the wind, which will disappear in the middle of the second quarter, ensure the Crows kick long to a contest (this is the actual crux of the issue).

Crows game plan seems to suit dry, not too windy conditions, i.e. start of the season, end of the season and Etihad.

If Geelong do this to us this year, and we lose, I'll admit I was wrong, but I think Saturday was an aberration.

Not exactly deeply analytical stuff. He's not much of a journo.

 

[Roovolution]

I don't know what game you were watching, but what I saw was our midfield being consistently beaten to the ball, trailing their opponent and jogging (Richard Douglas) instead of chasing. I also saw our guys hesitate to put their bodies in.

Yeah we must've decided not to play hard against Geelong twice last year as well. What a coincidence. Easy to look like crap when the oppositions gameplan and execution is better than yours. Players were putting in but they were getting beaten badly. Everyone is desperate to call it a one off for whatever reason so they don't have to face the reality that our gameplan can be beaten. I look forward to us smashing Melbourne and everyone clapping and saying see it was just an effort problem. Then Geelong will employ the same tactics and we'll lose. Then we'll win the week after and people will say it's ok it was just an effort problem and then it'll be the finals and we'll get found out again.

 

[Huntercrow]

I think you are on the mark in most of your posts, Hunter, but I don't really see what you are trying to get across here. Are you saying that it was the defenders' fault that Waite played well? The defenders were pretty bad, but Waite was independently in top form and flying: he is a matchwinner when on song. I don't see the relevance of thinking that he shouldn't have been able to do that after 5 weeks off, if that's your point: he was able! It was certainly very bad luck on our part that we caught him in the only one of his 2/9 games this year when he was kicking straight.

When Waite was named to play against the all conquering Crows did anyone seriously think he was going to have such an impact? You say he is a match winner. Let's look at his history...
Jarrad Waite has kicked more than 40 goals only once in a season. He averages 1.5 goals per game. Except for his brilliant start to the 2016 season (which ended with 29 goals in 14 games) Waite has had a lean return in general. These are the facts. In my opinion our defense should not have been intimidated by those numbers. He managed only 3 goals against a Crows side without Hartigan last year.

I believe in the case Of Waite due to his circumstances (which I don't need to repeat again) more than likely was aided by a poor Crows defense. Some want to heap praise on his 6 goals against the Crows and I have no problem with that. Good on him! But for the sake of a serious analysis you need to look at all aspects of the situation. Disregarding the facts (first game in 5 weeks) just lets our defenders off the hook.

 

[feenix67]

Yeah we must've decided not to play hard against Geelong twice last year as well. What a coincidence. Easy to look like crap when the oppositions gameplan and execution is better than yours. Players were putting in but they were getting beaten badly. Everyone is desperate to call it a one off for whatever reason so they don't have to face the reality that our gameplan can be beaten. I look forward to us smashing Melbourne and everyone clapping and saying see it was just an effort problem. Then Geelong will employ the same tactics and we'll lose. Then we'll win the week after and people will say it's ok it was just an effort problem and then it'll be the finals and we'll get found out again.

Nah it's not a one off, but you're missing the point. Our intent drops off whenever it is met by an equal or greater intent from the opposition. Our mids lose the willingness to work, match physicality and put in defensively. It's happened in every losing quarter we've played for the last two years.

 

[Donkey Magoo]

Disagree with the intent and disposal was just as likely to be due to pressure and being out structured. Our disposal was terrible against Geelong as well. Wonder why that could be? Hmmm.

You think we played with good intent. Must of got a different telecast to me.

 

[Aaron929]

People are still over thinking this result!

We played on a ground that none of our players knew how to play. North know how to play that ground perfectly they suckered is in to a few things like kicking out to the attacking side etc. The Toss has a HUGE impact on the game no the breeze was not 10 goals but it was probably 6 or 7 we kicked 5 with it in the second and it had died down so it could of been an 8 goal breeze to be completely honest.

Yes we played like crap the first quarter and didn't deserve to get even close to winning we didn't show up AT ALL but i also saw around 5 free kicks in the first quarter that resulted in Goals people may not agree but umps were against us from the start.

Now the rest of the game
Quarter 2 we kicked 5.6 to 2.2 - We had breeze
Quarter 3 we kicked 4.1 to 5.6
Quarter 4 we kicked 4.1 to 5.1 - We had breeze (well was gone completely)

I think it's pretty dam clear how much of an effect winning the toss and kicking with the wind had on the game. I also wouldn't be surprised if we basically won every stat after quarter time (not including the first quarter of course)

Another thing they only kicked 2.2 without the breeze in the second and they were on fire so it was clearly crazy hard to score down that end! If i remember correctly they kicked it very low to the ground so they carried

Expect the Crows to come out and make a huge statement against Melbourne on Saturday. You can tell by the way Tex was talking in his presser and a few other players and coaches they have something to prove this week don't be surprised if they if they get 10 goals up they just put the there foot down and blow it out by 100+

 

[mistylake]

I just saw the two tackles which resulted in suspensions last weekend, Waite and some GWS player.
Have they changed the rule again?
Neither were very slingy. How do you effect a tackle and not have them hit there head, it's just bad luck.
There are so many variables that it's not really a controllable result considering the speed it all happens at.

 

[StonesThrow]

I just saw the two tackles which resulted in suspensions last weekend, Waite and some GWS player.
Have they changed the rule again?
Neither were very slingy. How do you effect a tackle and not have them hit there head, it's just bad luck.
There are so many variables that it's not really a controllable result considering the speed it all happens at.

It will just be a case of outlawing bringing someone to ground with force. Players will start to think twice about really hurting people in a tackle and likely just stay standing or drop their weight.

I personally don't have an issue with it being outlawed as I suffered two bad concussions from (what I was told) were tackles where I had no control and was pummelled into the ground. I'm pretty nervous about my bad concussions I received in my football days.

 

[TheRoo32]

I just cannot get over how bad that performance was, and seeing the reactions of the players and coaches in the media this week I'm not filled with confidence they are taking it as seriously as they should. They don't seem to be hurting or concerned.

I just can't write that game off as an 'off' game or put it down as a game affected by weather/conditions, or the loss we needed to have. It was so bad and is extremely concerning that we could dish a performance like that up. Huge doubts now linger imo.

 

[skoobydoo]

It will just be a case of outlawing bringing someone to ground with force. Players will start to think twice about really hurting people in a tackle and likely just stay standing or drop their weight.

I personally don't have an issue with it being outlawed as I suffered two bad concussions from (what I was told) were tackles where I had no control and was pummelled into the ground. I'm pretty nervous about my bad concussions I received in my football days.

Yes. I hope they ultimately outlaw any and all pinning tackles that sling or throws a player with leading head towards the ground, even if head contact does not occur. Bring them down by any other means, but not with the sling which is just executed to hurt/damage the player. It ain't Neccessary. And for any who think that it is another step in removing the 'manly vigour' from our game, hell, even Gridiron has penalties for things like 'unsportsmanly conduct' !!

 

[feenix67]

Yes. I hope they ultimately outlaw any and all pinning tackles that sling or throws a player with leading head towards the ground, even if head contact does not occur. Bring them down by any other means, but not with the sling which is just executed to hurt/damage the player. It ain't Neccessary. And for any who think that it is another step in removing the 'manly vigour' from our game, hell, even Gridiron has penalties for things like 'unsportsmanly conduct' !!

Yeah, and let's divide the ground into thirds, and a semi circle at both ends, and a rule where you're not allowed to contact or obstruct... oh wait

 

[baldandbroke]

As someone who was at the ground, anyone who thinks Douglas and Otten were bad must have had a different view to mine.

My ire on the day was completely aimed at Jacobs. I like Sam, but he was owned by Goldstein. He made mistake after mistake, even the taps he won went to the opposition. A few times he didn't compete in the air, just stood and watched then shook his head.

Not good, but hopefully not the start of a pattern.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

 

[weneverland]

I just saw the two tackles which resulted in suspensions last weekend, Waite and some GWS player.
Have they changed the rule again?
Neither were very slingy. How do you effect a tackle and not have them hit there head, it's just bad luck.
There are so many variables that it's not really a controllable result considering the speed it all happens at.

Are you joking? They were both 'slingy'. AFL footballers do learn how to tackle someone without slinging him. Tex learnt it. The rule hasn't changed. You don't sling a guy and bash his head into the ground. Simple really. It's not rocket science. If you do, you are looking at a suspension. Tom Lynch received a concussion and that is exactly why the AFL have been targeting this practice for the last five years or longer.

 

[Donkey Magoo]

Waite clearly used force once the tackle was heading toward the ground; Unnecessary for the completion of the tackle.

 

[Donkey Magoo]

I just cannot get over how bad that performance was, and seeing the reactions of the players and coaches in the media this week I'm not filled with confidence they are taking it as seriously as they should. They don't seem to be hurting or concerned.

I just can't write that game off as an 'off' game or put it down as a game affected by weather/conditions, or the loss we needed to have. It was so bad and is extremely concerning that we could dish a performance like that up. Huge doubts now linger imo.

Not every sniffle is the plague. We have a 2017 data set of 7 matches, 6 of them were wins the sky isn't falling just yet.
Sometimes I feel that people on this board want to find failure early so that if it happens they can feel righteous if it goes bad.
Just because you don't carry on like pork chop after a loss doesn't mean that you don't feel it. They look to me like they want to atone quickly and badly.

 

[StonesThrow]

Yeah, and let's divide the ground into thirds, and a semi circle at both ends, and a rule where you're not allowed to contact or obstruct... oh wait

You like unnecessary concussions?

Players get concussed going back with the flight of the ball. These acts of courage and physically demanding acts are still prevalent and always will be.

If new data comes out showing possible causation between concussion and later effects, would you not want unnecessary risk taken out?

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

No one watches football to see players thrown to the ground. No one considers it tough or hard or courageous either.

The game won't lose a thing from stamping out these tackles

 

[TheRoo32]

Not every sniffle is the plague. We have a 2017 data set of 7 matches, 6 of them were wins the sky isn't falling just yet.
Sometimes I feel that people on this board want to find failure early so that if it happens they can feel righteous if it goes bad.
Just because you don't carry on like pork chop after a loss doesn't mean that you don't feel it. They look to me like they want to atone quickly and badly.

64-0 in a quarter is more than a sniffle mate.

I'm not trying to find failure, I'm just posting valid concerns after that dismal (and probably record breaking loss). I hope we can atone quickly and think we should win this week but clearly there are seeds of doubt that will linger until we can get it done when it matters most.

 

[ftmch]

As someone who was at the ground, anyone who thinks Douglas and Otten were bad must have had a different view to mine.

My ire on the day was completely aimed at Jacobs. I like Sam, but he was owned by Goldstein. He made mistake after mistake, even the taps he won went to the opposition. A few times he didn't compete in the air, just stood and watched then shook his head.

Not good, but hopefully not the start of a pattern.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

Honestly, I think the pattern is already there.

 

[the universal]

As someone who was at the ground, anyone who thinks Douglas and Otten were bad must have had a different view to mine.

My ire on the day was completely aimed at Jacobs. I like Sam, but he was owned by Goldstein. He made mistake after mistake, even the taps he won went to the opposition. A few times he didn't compete in the air, just stood and watched then shook his head.

Not good, but hopefully not the start of a pattern.

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk

Sauce never beats Goldstein. This is quite normal.

 

[JohnnyD]

I never saw Waite as anything but an average to good forward (who had potential but never quite made it) at Carlton. His career average is 1.5 goals per game. Hardly anything to get excited about.

That fails to take into account that he often played at Carlton as a swingman...was definitely a better than average defender...he often played on Matthew Richardson and took the points more often than not...

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Waite always offers up a mixed bag. His good games are amazing, has plenty of shockers too. Then has meltdown games where he gives away numerous free kicks and gets reported.

Has wasted his career really. Could have been an excellent player though admittedly did his knee at a bad time for him and also was at Carlton when they were poor.

 

[feenix67]

You like unnecessary concussions?

Players get concussed going back with the flight of the ball. These acts of courage and physically demanding acts are still prevalent and always will be.

If new data comes out showing possible causation between concussion and later effects, would you not want unnecessary risk taken out?

Players get concussed a number of ways. Bringing a bloke to ground in a tackle is integral to the game, and at times s**t happens. There was no intent by Waite to slam Lynch's head into the ground - in fact Tom's hips hit the ground before his head snaps over. I can cop slings being outlawed, but we're asking a lot of a tackler to:

1) wrap the arms up
2) bring him to ground
3) avoid forward movement by rolling to the side
4) bring him down hard enough to cause a stoppage/HTB/ball spill, but not hard enough for his head to hit the deck incidentally.

all in the space of a second.

You play a physical, contact sport, you have to accept a certain amount of risk. Heads hitting the ground as a result of a legal tackle is a legitimate risk.

 

[Sanders]

No, but he's right about hurt factor. I've been saying this for a while and it's not dissimilar to Scott Thompson's last few years. The two Hawthorn mids (Mitchell and O'Meara) had similar games against us a few weeks back. Get and give, get and give.

We saw a bit of promise a couple of weeks ago with 600+ metres gained, but under pressure he's not quick enough to gain space, and goes back to the quick gives and dinky sideways passes. He's becoming a one dimensional player, is Matt, and I fear if he doesnt develop a few more strings to his bow, the game will leave him behind. He gets plus 30 touches most weeks, but opponents dont put any work into him at all. Thats got to tell you something.

When all the parts are working, our midfield looks good and versatile. But sit on Sloane, and the lesser lights aren't capable (yet?) of filling the void. Im willing to give Brad Crouch until after the bye to really step it up, but at the moment he's not looking like a first round (some said top 5) midfielder. Matt is doing what Matt does, but if the coaches are praising him based on stats, then he will not develop further, which is a negative. He needs to develop a weapon - we often compare him to a Sam Mitchell, well Mitchell had his leg and his decision making as a weapon. Matt needs to develop his skills to an elite level in order to make up for a lack of pace imo.

The problem with Matt Crouch is the problem with a lot of slowish accumulator players: their impact is diminished when they are forced to do more of the heavy lifting because of a lack of quality around them

He should not be our no.2 mid and it's not his fault we don't have better players around him

Would be a star (ish) if he were the Tyson Edwards type no.4 guy in the rotation

Or more to the point we could praise his qualities more than his shortcomings if we didn't ask too much of him

 

[Bicks]

The Crows' fans appreciated his efforts on the weekend even if he was just a good, honest trier.

http://www.afc.com.au/video/2017-05-09/crows-fans-mvp-round-seven