Autopsy What just happened? A draw???

[frizzle]

Did Bucks put any spares in the backline in the last qtr?

Reid & Elliott were both down there in the last couple of minutes. Not sure who else.

 

[Vankri]

Milked the clock? he got the free ran back and was given 4 seconds...he didn't milk shit. Literally 4 seconds pass from when Langdon runs back to when he is asked to move it on. He was one of 3 tacklers as well you guys make it sound like he did it all on his own some heroic effort.

It was only one mistake in the context of the game but it was a mistake.

We're absolutely not seeing that sequence of play the same way. Langdon was the first tackler and he locked the ball in to ensure the HTB call so it's his tackle.

The players should have created a pack, they were just not in sync. Moore can't seriously expect premium 60m delivery from a guy standing right on the goal line, another tall should have been there, and De Goey and Wells should have acted like forwards not midfielders waiting for the ball to spill to breaway as we didn't need to break away at all, just needed a boundary throw in.

 

[Apex36]

Ahh fair enough, I was at the ground so wasn't sure on game timing. I can see your point I think it's still a guessing game though. The same structure saw 3 goals in quick succession to us so I can see why he decided to stay the course in this instance. There was still a long time between the Otten and McGovern goals so I think the rot was stopped eventually. Ultimately Moore and earlier on Crisp had chances to probably ice the game but them's the breaks.

Those 3 lightning goals came and then Adelaide tightened their defence. Given how easily Adelaide had been scoring for the duration of the second half, once they got that first rebound goal the directive should have been to immediately tighten up and not allow any loose men at any cost, but that didn't come until they had two more quick goals on the board.

It was incredibly frustrating to watch when a couch expert like me could see what needed to be done but the changes didn't happen until Adelaide were back within a kick.

 

[loki04]

Happy for you to post a freeze frame of the moment he kicked highlighting exactly where the Crows weren't set up and where we had a free player.

I did, thanks ****.

Darcy was leading to space near the boundary in that piece of play he literally runs past the 2v1 on Blair before Langdon kicks it.

It goes to our 203cm player who has a gap on his defender, if Darcy fails to mark it he would be close enough to the boundary for it to be rushed over killing the 10 seconds.

Kicking to a 2v1 with Blair as your marking target is dumb but I guess I shouldn't be surprised because half the season they have thought he is our CHF.

 

[jackcass]

The sad thing for me is that I'm rarely surprised these days by what we serve up.... Even when we got out to 50 I knew game wasn't over, and when we blew it at the end I was not shocked.

It's almost as if mediocrity has become the norm, as I don't even find myself getting that upset about losses... and I consider myself a relatively devoted fan who spends countless hours thinking about and reading about this club.

Guess it all boils down to expectations and sadly after 4 years of this just 'blah' position we find ourselves in, that I subconsciously expect us to loiter between 11-14th forever.

Yes we're playing young blokes, but I also feel a lot of our players are already in their prime and not sure how much improvement we get from this group beyond natural development of Moore, Grundy, De Goey & Maynard - and every club could point out 4 players in their side that they expecr to see improve and take them forwqrd. Most others in the side alreay at their peak or past it.

Still, we saddle up again next week - but I feel a more concerted youth policy and rebuild via the draft is the only way forward - I just hope those running the club agree and don't try and tweak via trades/FA.

Playing group still need to build chemistry, learn to play more instinctively. While the squad has been much more stable this year we need to get more best 22 playing games together. The Wells - Elliott contested chest mark on the wing the case in point, DeGoey going for the dinky 20m kick into F50 instead of handballing to the runners in support another.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

He could have walked into play and waited until the Adelaide player approached him and then taken the ball back through the goals. Can't ping him for that.

Yes you can. It's deliberate. He had prior opportunity and umpire could easily rule that he chose to run the clock down and draw the opponent to him . Very risky strategy.

 

[loki04]

We're absolutely not seeing that sequence of play the same way. Langdon was the first tackler and he locked the ball in to ensure the HTB call so it's his tackle.

The players should have created a pack, they were just not in sync. Moore can't seriously expect premium 60m delivery from a guy standing right on the goal line, another tall should have been there, and De Goey and Wells should have acted like forwards not midfielders waiting for the ball to spill to breaway as we didn't need to break away at all, just needed a boundary throw in.

It would of been a 55m kick the same distance it travelled to Blair. Wells did the right thing he tracked the best option which was Darcy Moore and would of been there for the crumb had he elected to use him.
He is a 250 game player and extremely smart in his mind he clearly thought Darcy was going to be the target, both he and Darcy had to double back to get to Blair.

Langdon was 1 of 3 players he got 1st tackle the others pretty much tackled simultaneously a split second later and helped take Jenkins down he was standing up through Langdons initial attempt.

 

[TheSierBear]

Can you not see Darcy on the lead in that? he is the one going towards the boundary line you know the 203cm forward! Not only that but wells is running in that direction anticipating a kick to Darcy you see it in the still frame.

He actually runs past Blair, who is the one standing there in a 2v1. So no if he had kicked it to "Darcy" towards the boundary line I wouldn't of flamed him as he made the best choice possible.

If he had kicked it directly to Blair, *which is what he actually did this is not a hypothetical* and you know the whole point, yeah I'd flame him like I am??

You are right on one thing that hair do is a shocker.

Hey Loki it's all objective, you may be right you are probably wrong on this, it's just your opinion. I agree with the others that you are being way too harsh on Langdon who played a good game.

I think you wasted far far too much of your life on the Fogarty debate. If I remember you wanted us to lose games to get the chance on him? Now it seems he will slide and be available at out pick anyway which will probably be pick 6? Could you yourself have learned something from that?

Don't get me wrong I want us to win games, but just barrack for the other sides as well, we need the Hawks and Saints to win a game or two from here and we won't rise up the ladder, hopefully despite some important players for the future showing form and us winning a couple of games.

There's been a lot of positive the past month. Degoey, Moore, Schaz, Langdon, etc, to go with what we already have. We are bulding much better cause we've won a couple of games drew with the big dogs, and will still be in a good position come draft time to fix a glaring weakness, I'd be all for Balta...

Cheer up mate, if someone told you we'd string a couple of wins together then a draw despite not jeapordizing our chances to get Fogarty you'd take that surely.

Langdon is coming along well after a year out, cut him some slack, no, get on the bandwagon.

 

[Countrypie]

I don't care what he was 2 yrs ago.. how much pre season he's done.. I'm talking about 10 yrs of experience to throw down back for a half or a quarter of football.

AS I said it might hav eworked, but I don't think Rance would have made a difference. It was silver service on a platter

 

[loki04]

Yes you can. It's deliberate. He had prior opportunity and umpire could easily rule that he chose to run the clock down. Very risky strategy.

Never ever seen it called deliberate when a player has been behind the line and took to long it is always called play on and a point. It would of set a precedent had they paid deliberate.

 

[jackcass]

what about the coaching nouse that go the team to 50 point up.
why ignore it?
when a team kicks 13.3 ie 80% conversion it not a coaching issue.

They kicked 13.3 largely because they cut us apart transitioning from defence and managed relatively simple set shots on goal so can't absolve Buck's from that.

 

[TTRRAAVVIISS]

And if you're Aunty had balls she'd be your uncle.

Shoulda, coulda, woulda......didn't.

Yeah, the old "if we kick straight we win" argument is a rather circular one.

Crows still have to kick out from a point so we have an opportunity to defend well, win the ball back on the kick out and have a repeat entry inside 50.

I'd have to go back and look at the tape. In some instances I'd say crows went Coast to coast for a goal from a poster. In others, I'd say we may have ultimately had a scoring shot from the kick out.

Even if all 5 posters were goals, who is to say the crows don't win the centre clearance and kick a goal to nullify it anyway?

Bottom line, you can't not win when your 50 points up. A draw is not good enough. were we 22 points up in the 4th as well?

I'd have to rewatch the game but I'm sure we dropped a loose man back in the 4th to stop the rot. So basically, it confirms the system and structure we had was figured out by crows and torn apart. A capitulation of this magnitude, the worst of its kind in 125 years, suggests a lack of ability and or flexibility of the coach, and his game plan, to milk the clock and close out a guarenteed win.

Imagine if Carlton or Richmond didn't win a game after being 50 points up? We'd be laughing are ass off saying "reappoint your coach for 5 more years" purely so we can see them shit the bed time and time again.

Consistent and systemic failure is on the coach

 

[Morganashlee]

Wow what an epic game. We were lucky to come away with a draw.

Well played Magpies.

No likes for you

Nah, it's been that way since Morganashlee , Ilksy and other floggo received welch badges and told they weren't allowed to change their listed teams.

Was gonna change it back after yesterday as to not receive any backlash on here but forgot.

Other floggo lol makes me laugh everytime

 

[TheSierBear]

Keath may well have only played 2 games but he's 25 and a mature body. Rather than laugh at Reid getting out-bodied, maybe wonder why the kicks to him were rarely to his advantage. He sets up for a contest with a clear need for the footy to be delivered to a certain side and it invariably goes to the other side or out in front where it again becomes a 50/50.

I thought Keath played really well. The thing we can learn from Adelaide is their ability to get mature bodies in their twenties for nothing. Greenwood, keath, Beech etc...

We need to do the same with a KPP.

 

[jackcass]

Is Bucks stubborn loki? 100%

I thought he coached well today.........the only move I would have made was Howe forward when the Crows got on a roll. He was average at best today and we needed to try something.

WHE going back was his move but didn't have much influence on the result.

Moore's miss in the third hurt.

Starting to worry Howe might have drunk too much of his own bath water in terms of his disposal. Was always a pretty good kick although prone to an occasional shank (who isn't) but it's becoming way too common for my liking.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Never ever seen it called deliberate when a player has been behind the line and took to long it is always called play on and a point. It would of set a precedent had they paid deliberate.

Maybe it hasn't happened since the new interpretations because players know not to risk it. Imagine the furore if Langdon had lost the match that way.

 

[TheSierBear]

I did, thanks ****.

Darcy was leading to space near the boundary in that piece of play he literally runs past the 2v1 on Blair before Langdon kicks it.

It goes to our 203cm player who has a gap on his defender, if Darcy fails to mark it he would be close enough to the boundary for it to be rushed over killing the 10 seconds.

Kicking to a 2v1 with Blair as your marking target is dumb but I guess I shouldn't be surprised because half the season they have thought he is our CHF.

That was so lame I genuinely LOL'ed.

 

[Vankri]

It would of been a 55m kick the same distance it travelled to Blair. Wells did the right thing he tracked the best option which was Darcy Moore and would of been there for the crumb had he elected to use him.
He is a 250 game player and extremely smart in his mind he clearly thought Darcy was going to be the target, both he and Darcy had to double back to get to Blair.

Langdon was 1 of 3 players he got 1st tackle the others pretty much tackled simultaneously a split second later and helped take Jenkins down he was standing up through Langdons initial attempt.

Why does Wells need to crumb the ball? At that time of the game anyone forward of the ball should not focus on defensive play to support Moore's (and his lead wasn't great), and avoid a Crows mark. Regardless of whatever the kick coming is looking like, it's unacceptable that there was no one near Kelly when he ran for it. That's where the fault lies to me, anywhere the ball drops whether 5m from the boundary or 10m from the boundary we should have been able to create a defensive marking pack.

 

[swiftdog]

Those 3 lightning goals came and then Adelaide tightened their defence. Given how easily Adelaide had been scoring for the duration of the second half, once they got that first rebound goal the directive should have been to immediately tighten up and not allow any loose men at any cost, but that didn't come until they had two more quick goals on the board.

It was incredibly frustrating to watch when a couch expert like me could see what needed to be done but the changes didn't happen until Adelaide were back within a kick.

I see your point and it is valid. However, those 3 quick Collingwood goals came on the back of two Adelaide final quarter goals when they had all the momentum and were already within a kick. I think it's a roll of the dice either way, but the team managed to win back momentum once in the final quarter so I can see the argument for backing in the players to do it again.

Since Collingwood's final goal we finished the game with 4 behinds and an out on the full, Adelaide finished with 4 goals and 1 behind. Similar number of chances (Adelaide's were easier though granted), but Adelaide took theirs, Collingwood didn't.

 

[loki04]

Hey Loki it's all objective, you may be right you are probably wrong on this, it's just your opinion. I agree with the others that you are being way too harsh on Langdon who played a good game.

I think you wasted far far too much of your life on the Fogarty debate. If I remember you wanted us to lose games to get the chance on him? Now it seems he will slide and be available at out pick anyway which will probably be pick 6? Could you yourself have learned something from that?

Don't get me wrong I want us to win games, but just barrack for the other sides as well, we need the Hawks and Saints to win a game or two from here and we won't rise up the ladder, hopefully despite some important players for the future showing form and us winning a couple of games.

There's been a lot of positive the past month. Degoey, Moore, Schaz, Langdon, etc, to go with what we already have. We are bulding much better cause we've won a couple of games drew with the big dogs, and will still be in a good position come draft time to fix a glaring weakness, I'd be all for Balta...

Cheer up mate, if someone told you we'd string a couple of wins together then a draw despite not jeapordizing our chances to get Fogarty you'd take that surely.

Langdon is coming along well after a year out, cut him some slack, no, get on the bandwagon.

Lol how am I wrong? there is video evidence to back me up. Jeebuz H Christ.

Yeah Langdon played excellent first half of the game, I'm not a Langdon hater he just made the wrong choice at the end is my argument.

Not solely blaming the loss on him as there was a whole heap of shit that went wrong over 2 quarters that made it a draw.

Sure if we land Darcy and he becomes what I think he will and we keep winning great. A whole lot of IFs. What if his champ games was not because of his knee injury and more due to increased time put into him?

I wanted a top 3-5 pick secured. Yep. Had we made finals I agree it would of been a very poor call. But should we not make the finals and like I expect win another 2 games maybe 3 we will likely have pick 8 a far cry from being able to select Brander or Rayner or Uniake or even "maybe to slide" the Fog. Fog isnt the only gun I was looking at, he was just my favourite pre champs.

 

[loki04]

I see your point and it is valid. However, those 3 quick Collingwood goals came on the back of two Adelaide final quarter goals when they had all the momentum and were already within a kick. I think it's a roll of the dice either way, but the team managed to win back momentum once in the final quarter so I can see the argument for backing in the players to do it again.

Since Collingwood's final goal we finished the game with 4 behinds and an out on the full, Adelaide finished with 4 goals and 1 behind. Similar number of chances (Adelaide's were easier though granted), but Adelaide took theirs, Collingwood didn't.

Our run had clearly stopped in the last 15 minutes, Adelaide had much more of the momentum it was clear and they opened us up through the center which a runner should of went out and told the players to guard it after the first goal they got through it.

The 3rd quarter is when we should of tightened the reigns as well which is where most our lead was erroded.

 

[TradeDraft]

A game of two clear halves.

Our lead was build on unsustainable work rate and 6/7 brilliant, individual one on one wins and efforts.

From then on The Crows dismantled us with the over the top slingshot method.
They did it with frightening ease.
And our coach wasn't capable of counteracting it, as usual.

Been our Weakness for Years that we get Scored on really easy when we turn it over and how bad our Disposal is. Happens a Bloody Lot

 

[TradeDraft]

I was at my mates house and I said to him at half time "Watch us go to sleep and have them run over the top of us. It's how we roll."

I had the Same Feeling at Half Time and even when we where 50 Points Up I never felt safe that we had the Game in the Bag.

We Looked Stuffed by 3qtr Time

 

[TradeDraft]

Seriously???

No but That how Angry I be

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

You're not wrong. We can pinpoint so many little things in that last quarter. That was definitely one.

As was the hail-mary shot on goal from Fasolo (anytime we turned the ball over, they killed us), the non-contest from Reid in the dying second, Maynard's brain fade. Moore's miss.

Blair played an ok game. Nothing special, but if he did that every week he'd hold his spot. But yes, that holding the ball was unforgiveable.

No problem with fasolos Hail Mary shot. Even a point would have won the game. Not sure he had any decent low percentage alternatives. Sometimes you just have to have a ping.

Dont recall Reids non contest but he had contested hard all night and whilst was low on output definitely applied plenty of pressure.

Maynards blunder was epic. Just stupid.

Moores shot wasn't a gimme.