Yet to be thumped

[birdmanptr]

The good thing is we are yet to be thumped
BUT what worries me is that Melbourne get beat by freo in melbourne then beat us then they never looked like beating Hawthorn.Brisbane have won 1 in the last 4.

 

[just maybe]

We are yet to be thumped because Craig is gun-shy after that 141-point loss last year and uses extreme flooding and extreme negative tactics to keep the scoreline close - only the Bulldogs effort came close as it was attacking football, and funny that for 3 weeks since that we've played ugly, negative, shutdown football. A joke.

 

[McLeodMagic]

It's not something to be proud of, not being thumped yet this season, as we were in winning positions in all the games we've lost so far (well except for yesterday game which we should have never lost in the first place )

 

[Alex99]

So much for this plan A, B, C, D and E? I am yet to see any versatility in the side and meaningful moves to win a game. Why not take a gamble and try Trent Hentschel on J Brown allowing Ben Rutten to go forward. If we lose by 1 point or 141 points who really cares, we have still lost the game. Try to win a game not save it and look good by only losing by a small margin.


At least we found out that Ken McGregor was going to start forward, unless that was another story JR was feeding us. We will find out next week.

 

[just maybe]

So much for this plan A, B, C, D and E?

Yes, Craig the man with a 'myriad of ideas' and a plan for every situation.

The plan for every situation exists, except it's exactly the same plan - a negative, defensive, heavy flood plan.

He pulled out an attacking game against Western Bulldogs because he underrated them and thought we could beat them easily...but since that failed he's gone back to the ultra-defensive gameplan.

 

[McLeodMagic]

With moving Rutten to the forward line - If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Brown would've pushed Hentschel off with one finger. McGregor would be a better option to go forward, although I think it's a must that we bring in one of Stevo or Watts (preferably Stevo) and Ladhams or Bode for the Saints game this week.

 

[cooperjai]

personally I would prefer a thumping like the Power recieved, that may just wake them up and snap them out of their present mind set.
Losing like the Crows did last night would probably demoralise them more than a thumping.
Losing when you should have won are the most gut-wrenching losses.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Spinny were you at the game last night?????

I would argue that Brisbane were more defensive than we were and they flooded a hell of a lot more than we did. When we went into attack there was either no one in Brisbane's attacking 50 or there was Merrett at FF and the rest of the players in their defensive half.

We went inside 50 some 58 times so that there doesn't suggest a negative defensive footy. We are just second rate with decision making and skills. Brisbane were more defensive last night than we were so I don't get where you get your claim of "a negative, defensive, heavy flood plan"

 

[dA Crow]

The good thing is we are yet to be thumped
BUT what worries me is that Melbourne get beat by freo in melbourne then beat us then they never looked like beating Hawthorn.Brisbane have won 1 in the last 4.

Yer, thats great news, just like saying Perrie tries hard, or Burton just needs to work on his disposals. It is not getting us anywhere.

 

[tribey]

The good thing is we are yet to be thumped

With all due respect, I'm sure that's what supporters of South, West, Glenelg, et al thought coming away from playing Port or Norwood in the mid-90s.

It's a dangerous attitude to have - a good belting doesn't go astray as long as there are clear positives to come from it, ie. you're taking risks, forging an attacking gameplan and blooding kids, etc.

Craig is showing a tendency to play it safe too much, and as a result we've lost a few games that were plainly there for the taking at key junctures.

 

[just maybe]

Spinny were you at the game last night?????

I would argue that Brisbane were more defensive than we were and they flooded a hell of a lot more than we did. When we went into attack there was either no one in Brisbane's attacking 50 or there was Merrett at FF and the rest of the players in their defensive half.

We went inside 50 some 58 times so that there doesn't suggest a negative defensive footy. We are just second rate with decision making and skills. Brisbane were more defensive last night than we were so I don't get where you get your claim of "a negative, defensive, heavy flood plan"

No, watched it. Yes Brisbane were negative as well, but that doesn't change the fact that we were negative. Negative play doesn't mean you have no forward entries, it just means you pack numbers behind the ball and choke up the game - we had 58 entries but didn't have any options when we did.

And I'm not talking this game...in a more general sense of our season

6 of our 8 games have been largely negative football - only Port and Bulldogs have been different.

 

[tribey]

For extended periods last night Craig had 1 or 2 spare men in the back fifty, allowing the likes of Power and Sherman a free rein on the wings.

Why concede the midfield to bolster the defence when you can go head to head in the middle and most likely create more opportunities for our dysfunctional forward line?

The way Rutten was fisting Brown there was no need to play the spare man or two - all the tactic did was create copious opportunities for the likes of the aforementioned Power and Sherman, and also Ashley McGrath, who consistently flooded forward from the wings and flanks as noone was there to make them accountable.

 

[just maybe]

The way Rutten was fisting Brown

 

[kirky]

For extended periods last night Craig had 1 or 2 spare men in the back fifty, allowing the likes of Power and Sherman a free rein on the wings.

Why concede the midfield to bolster the defence when you can go head to head in the middle and most likely create more opportunities for our dysfunctional forward line?

The way Rutten was fisting Brown there was no need to play the spare man or two - all the tactic did was create copious opportunities for the likes of the aforementioned Power and Sherman, and also Ashley McGrath, who consistently flooded forward from the wings and flanks as noone was there to make them accountable.

That additional men in defence occured in the second quarter and guess when we lost the game!!!

 

[macca23]

Rutten was fisting Brown

And a jolly and gay time was had by all.

 

[just maybe]

And a jolly and gay time was had by all.

And Craig was heard to say after the game...'I really thought young Ben tore Brown a new one...'

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

For extended periods last night Craig had 1 or 2 spare men in the back fifty, allowing the likes of Power and Sherman a free rein on the wings.

Why concede the midfield to bolster the defence when you can go head to head in the middle and most likely create more opportunities for our dysfunctional forward line?

The way Rutten was fisting Brown there was no need to play the spare man or two - all the tactic did was create copious opportunities for the likes of the aforementioned Power and Sherman, and also Ashley McGrath, who consistently flooded forward from the wings and flanks as noone was there to make them accountable.

Nice choice of words DT. Not the sort of rhetoric expected of a mod. I suggest you step aside and let someone else have a go- Vote 1 Springy.

Although it maybe a little embarrasing have a mod on the AFC board who has managed to get a ban from the Port board.