Why is it?

[Waltzing Woof Biscuit]

Why is it that of all teams (yes - including Freo and Weagles), the Doggies tend to be absolutely steamrolled by opponents who get 'run ons.' The Carlton game was yet another example of stagefright - you know that feeling when opponents can scarcely do a thing wrong, they have 3 or 4 loose men in the centre corridor, we keep on slipping over, over-running the ball and turning it over. That period of the game when there seems to be only one team on the field, and commentators exclaim that it is the greatest quarter of football they've seen a team play. Collingwood and Hawthorn have blown games to the shizenhousen at crucial stages by running similarly rampant for a quarter - to a lesser extent North.

As exciting as the occasional fightbacks are, I don't want the Dogs to be the comeback kings. It is easier to play well when you have nothing to lose. The Carlton game was a prime example. When the heat went out of the match, you could sense that the Doggies found a belief in themselves.

What does everyone else here think about it? Is it that we now have a less experienced, youthful side? Do Terry's tactics inadvertantly cause the occasional blowout?

It was less than satisfying on the weekend to see Bubba roost it 40 metres into our forward 50, and still be the closest Bulldog to the ball when it landed. Four Carlton players sauntered after it, the ball was motionless by the time Christou casually picked it up. He stood still for a couple of seconds whilst he chose one of the seven disposal options he had, prompting radio commentator Steven Quartermain to exclaim that it was the easiest kick that Christou was ever likely to get.

Bullies, I am prepared to take the field against Essendon this weekend. Will any of my Big Footy colleagues join me? We'll field a team of supporters and have our arses kicked to the farthest planet. The Bulldog team will be sparsely dispersed into the crowd to witness the devastation, amidst seething hoards of Bomber yobbos. As Waltzing Woof Biscuit spills an uncontested chest mark, falls over and watches as Matthew Lloyd crumbs the ball and runs into an open goal, Bulldog players will be hearing an endless tirade about how gutless I am, that I'm a *******, how the Bulldogs are shyte, pretenders, tragic, western scum - balding, fat-gutted, big-bearded Essendon supporters will be s******ing (and the men are even worse), laughing, mocking. These people live vicariously through the fortunes of their team. So what if they clean toilets at Albion railway station?

Love hurts don't it.

 

[HahnPremium8]

The players didn't follow the plan apparently. Plus we lost 2 of our defenders in the 1st quarter. At the same time it was a terrible performance by just about every1. I was sitting there thinking how could they play this bad with all the quality players out there. I definitely think the break had something to do with it. I was at training last week and the way they trainied was so crap it's not surprising i spose that they started badly but to get that far behind was rediculous. Plus twenty one tackles to forty six!!! That is so bad.

 

[Westy Boy]

Beautifully put, WWB.

Simply, I wouldn't have a clue as to why it happens. When you see it, it's as if the boys are resigned to the fact that 'these run on's are bound to happen, but we know we'll bounce back later in the game' -- and as we've seen, sometimes we do, a lot of times we don't.

Though, the thing that got me on Saturday was, we were actually getting our hands on the ball, with Darcy and Garlick doing a terrific job .... whereas against Collingwood (in THAT 3rd quarter), Hawthorn, and St Kilda, we just did not touch the ball. What this shows to me is that it isn't necessarily "one" problem (or tactic like flooding) which always gets us to concede so many goals in a matter of minutes, but more a collective psychological thing, where all the players fall away. I mean, how can so many of our players play so below themselves for half or a full quarter, and then, collectively, play like champions only minutes later?

From his Herald Sun articles and press conferences, Terry realises our problems with remaining consistent during a game, but as of yet, doesn't seem to have found a solution. These 'combacks' seem to have become an ingrained part of our culture, whether it stems from the 'never say die' attitude, or making games more 'emotion charged', i don't know.... but it certainly can't be changed overnight. But, I've got full confidence in Wallace and the team overcoming that mentality in the not too distant future.

One thing that I do notice is though, is that Scotty West is a barometer on how we are travelling. Not saying that he drops his head or isn't giving him best .... but when he's on fire, we're on fire, and if he isn't .... the rest of the team aren't. If you look at our bad losses ..... he didn't perform at his best on Saturday (maybe something to do with being ill during the week), ditto St Kilda, ditto Port, ditto North. All games where we we got destroyed for periods of the game. But as proven against Geelong, when he's on fire .... the team fires.

It's not just Scotty though...... it's everyone ..... everyone falls away at the same time .... then everyone lifts when we've got our backs to the wall.... and like you WWB, i don't think it's a good trait to have. All those 'character building fighting comebacks' are all well and good, but if we are going to seriously challenge for the flag, something has to be done about falling so far behind.

But if it came to it, coming back from 10 goals down to beat Brisbane/ Adelaide/ Carlton/ Collingood/ Essendon/ Richmond in a Grand Final would be the kind of victory I would like to see But I'll be happy to win the premiership with a "conventional" 5 goal win. Us Bulldog supporters aren't too demanding!

PS: Bearded, fat gutted, balding footy supporters are people too.... ..... and not all of us barrack for Essendon.

 

[Captain Sensible]

I think that it comes down to team structure. We don't have a tall, strong and robust on-baller that can bring opposition players down in a flying tackle or get behind a pack and stop the ball spilling out to opposition on-ballers.

Look at the teams and players that habitualy get run ons against us. Brisbane-Voss, Collingwood-Buckley, Essendon-take your pick. We don't have any answers to the questions these blokes ask.

So what do we do? Develop one? Who? Grant would be too big a price to play at either end of the ground. Ellis takes to long to get ball to foot. A left field solution would be Darcy, he has the strength and the skills to do the job and has done the job at various times in the last few seasons. But that was when we had Wynd to play in the ruck. Who would we play in the ruck? Could Darcy do both jobs?

The other answer is to recruit one. Now thats not going to be easy either. See one of Westys other posts where we discussed this for details.

Now that we seem to have corrected our defensive problems(Hunters form is a worry though) THIS is our most presssing problem IMHO

 

[Captain Sensible]

BTW Westy you are right about male bearded, fat gutted, balding footy supporters. All clubs have them.
I think that WWF was talking about the female ones though

 

[Darky]

Originally posted by Waltzing Woof Biscuit
.
These people live vicariously through the fortunes of their team. So what if they clean toilets at Albion railway station?

Are you talking about the midget that at used to work at Albion when it was a manned station? His name is Eddie and he was a pretty good bloke. BTW, Jack Aziz (Willi & Werribee, VFA) used to work at Sunshine station. I bet not to many fare-dodgers used to get past him!

 

[Waltzing Woof Biscuit]

Yeah, I ran into Eddie at my local gp. There was a bit of queue and the doctor told him to be a little patient (that line in memory of the dearly departed Benny Hill).

 

[Captain Sensible]

Jack Aziz also played at Footscray. Don't think he ever played seniors though, just in the twos.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

After the Geelong game, Chris Grant said that the reason Geelong got away from us in the first quarter was because the boys did not follow "The Plan". After the Carlton game, we heard that, again, they did not follow "The Plan". Um, just what is this Plan that is the difference between us playing proper footy or looking like a schoolboy side? Is there a different Plan each week, or is it tailor-made to fit the opposition?

Do you think we should forget about Plans, and get on with our natural game, ie beating our opponent to the ball, relying on our skills to get it to each other and kick a few more goals than the opposition?

And how much is fear of the tribunal or bad press influencing how we play these days? Before just about every game we hear about how the Dogs play scrappy, scragging footy, use intimidation, are in-your-face, never-say-die, us-against-them, backs-to-the-wall - and it just doesn't happen! If we are stuck with this reputation, I reckon we should live up to it.

 

[bulldogs1]

Against Kangaroos the boys just didn't tackle, and we got our arses kicked. Solution? Terry got 'em doing heaps of tackles, and that showed the next week against Geelong.

So, after such a poor tackling performance (again), two guesses (OK, one) what the boys will be concentrating on this week at training. Just my observation, but with the exception of a notable few, I don't think the side tackles (or scrags) like they did in 97 and 98

 

[sbagman]

Re: Re: Why is it?

Originally posted by Darky


Are you talking about the midget that at used to work at Albion when it was a manned station? His name is Eddie and he was a pretty good bloke. BTW, Jack Aziz (Willi & Werribee, VFA) used to work at Sunshine station. I bet not to many fare-dodgers used to get past him!

Yeah he did too! Used to see him all the time! (Dunno why I added that...)