AFL Autopsy RND 19: Loss to the Pies

[EFL Boy]

One thing I've been quite proud of about this team is that we don't (seem to) have any players that play for free kicks, drop the knees, lower the shoulder etc.

Noticed Hobbs doing a bit of it on the weekend and hope it doesn't become a go-to for him. Is good enough to win his own ball without adding that to his game.

 

[yodellinhank]

The whole thing about this is that it's extremely boring. We have a devastating loss and all we have to blame is a player no-one really wants out there anyway. (another player to blame is Wright for not keeping up to Moore, which...yeah of course he couldn't)

Wright should never have given Moore such a head start. He should have been on the line to block as the shot went through and then straight back out on the ground. Instead he's wandering around behind the goal line.

 

[Phone]

Wright should never have given Moore such a head start. He should have been on the line to block as the shot went through and then straight back out on the ground. Instead he's wandering around behind the goal line.

which means, in any case, our two actual problems in this collapse so far have got nothing to do with defensive structure, & nothing to do with a failure of leadership.

 

[Chief Hopper]

I don't feel as bad from this loss as I thought I would be. The dons played back hard after a dire first quarter, really were the better team for most of it. To lose from a flukey goal at the last minute.
This young dons team will learn and become stronger from here.

Collingwood supporters went in thinking they were going to thrash Essendon and now carrying on like they won a grand final.

 

[Bjchan13]

Yep. How does King's own example say otherwise? The screenshots as provided by the The Prosecutor (AFL Autopsy - RND 19: Loss to the Pies) say it all. There was one Collingwood player on that side of the ground (plus a runner/medic near the logo). Ham made a mistake in trying to press Moore and I have no idea how anything else can really be discussed. The corridor was sufficiently jammed - flooded. Sam Draper is smack bang in the centre circle in the third photo so structurally he was there in case the Pies went straight down the ground. There was a 2 on 1 in the defence which I've spoken about elsewhere.

The whole thing about this is that it's extremely boring. We have a devastating loss and all we have to blame is a player no-one really wants out there anyway. (another player to blame is Wright for not keeping up to Moore, which...yeah of course he couldn't)

Yep. How does King's own example say otherwise? The screenshots as provided by the The Prosecutor (AFL Autopsy - RND 19: Loss to the Pies) say it all. There was one Collingwood player on that side of the ground (plus a runner/medic near the logo). Ham made a mistake in trying to press Moore and I have no idea how anything else can really be discussed. The corridor was sufficiently jammed - flooded. Sam Draper is smack bang in the centre circle in the third photo so structurally he was there in case the Pies went straight down the ground. There was a 2 on 1 in the defence which I've spoken about elsewhere.

The whole thing about this is that it's extremely boring. We have a devastating loss and all we have to blame is a player no-one really wants out there anyway. (another player to blame is Wright for not keeping up to Moore, which...yeah of course he couldn't)

Agree Ham did the dumbest thing by far. I reckon McGrath could've been a bit wider and covered Bianco had he been switched on earlier and seen Ham leaving him.

 

[yodellinhank]

which means, in any case, our two actual problems in this collapse so far have got nothing to do with defensive structure, & nothing to do with a failure of leadership.

I'd say it is a breakdown in structure. Ham is less inclined to find himself in no-man's land if Moore doesn't get out. Moore got out because Wright didn't take up a position for the kick out.

 

[fishardansin]

Going to be a long week. Fluff pieces popping up re Pies "Daring to Dream" about a flag!

I suppose it will make their exit all the sweeter.

Truth is, this string of close wins against lowly sides is going to throw them into a finals series they're not qualified to be in. Can't see them lasting past the first one tbh.

They are team that has had to clean out for salary cap issues. They were left with aging stars and zero draft picks. Lucky for them they had a great father-son this year. However, if you look at the quality of their talls and young mids their list is in a world of hurt. They needed some quality draft capital this year to start the rebuild. Trading out Grundy and De Goey is going to happen, imagine if it included a top 5 pick this year and top ten next year. Those two trades should net them 2 top 10 picks and probably another in the top 20, especially if they pay some of Grundy's salary.

However, the draft is only part of it. Next year they're going to have a very tough draw with the only old side in the top 6 is Geelong and I image they'll be strong next year. They are going to have a very very tough year.

This crap about "know how to win the close ones" is just that. Crap. I wish I could find it, but someone did a fairly detailed stat research into winning close games. It always evens up over the medium term.

 

[bacon buster]

Yep. How does King's own example say otherwise? The screenshots as provided by the The Prosecutor (AFL Autopsy - RND 19: Loss to the Pies) say it all. There was one Collingwood player on that side of the ground (plus a runner/medic near the logo). Ham made a mistake in trying to press Moore and I have no idea how anything else can really be discussed. The corridor was sufficiently jammed - flooded. Sam Draper is smack bang in the centre circle in the third photo so structurally he was there in case the Pies went straight down the ground. There was a 2 on 1 in the defence which I've spoken about elsewhere.

The whole thing about this is that it's extremely boring. We have a devastating loss and all we have to blame is a player no-one really wants out there anyway. (another player to blame is Wright for not keeping up to Moore, which...yeah of course he couldn't)

you're kidding yourself if you're excusing the leaders (circled below - clearly ready to celebrate and not focused on what's around them). congregating together so closely is a good zone at this time in the game? i don't think so?

Ham ****ed up later in this play, we know that. but i blame the experienced guys more than him for allowing it to get out to Bianco so easily in the first place anyway.



i agree with King also.

 

[boncer34]

Kings a moron. His analysis is embarrassingly simplistic.

 

[bacon buster]

Kings a moron. His analysis is embarrassingly simplistic.

sometimes. but he wasn't wrong yesterday

 

[Bjchan13]

Kings a moron. His analysis is embarrassingly simplistic.

How is it embarringly simplistic. What did he miss?

 

[Bjchan13]

you're kidding yourself if you're excusing the leaders (circled below - clearly ready to celebrate and not focused on what's around them). congregating together so closely is a good zone at this time in the game? i don't think so?

View attachment 1456513

Ham actually is guarding a player here. Merrett should have ran over to where Bianco is (or directed somone else to) - let's be honest, he's not impacting an aerial content anyway. he wasn't paying attention and Bianco slipped through the cracks. Wright was too slow to zone up.

Ham *ed up later in this play, we know that. but i blame the experienced guys more than him for allowing it to get out to Bianco so easily in the first place anyway.



i agree with King also.

You've circled a runner on the wing there mate

 

[Alberto_Magnifico]

One thing I've been quite proud of about this team is that we don't (seem to) have any players that play for free kicks, drop the knees, lower the shoulder etc.

Noticed Hobbs doing a bit of it on the weekend and hope it doesn't become a go-to for him. Is good enough to win his own ball without adding that to his game.

Tippa used to do play for a high tackle a bit, but no one on the current list is a genuine serial offender.

Dropping the knees for an in the back I see played for most games but it's rarely called consistently enough for any standouts.
Overall something to be proud of as a supporter I reckon.

 

[boncer34]

How is it embarringly simplistic. What did he miss?

4 players together. Oh they must be going to celebrate.

Hasn't considered at all the various points raised in here ie. They went to where the ball logically goes in that scenario from the kick, straight up the guts.

He thought about it for 15 seconds, drew one conclusion, didn't bother thinking about any other reason.

 

[bacon buster]

You've circled a runner on the wing there mate

oops, it was a bit blurry for my eyes. i can see Ham is next to Bianco now.

 

[boncer34]

sometimes. but he wasn't wrong yesterday

Yes he was.

 

[citizen-erased]

How is it embarringly simplistic. What did he miss?

There are lots of liberties taken.
We spread wide, they get the corridor.
Ham doesnt come to moore and his options are likely greater.

We kicked 10 behinds. They went coast to coast on one of them. It was a hail mary play and it came off perfectly.
Win some, lose some.

No narrative that we went 7 goals down and wrenched a game from a top 4 side and nearly took another one down

 

[bacon buster]

Yes he was.

so just Ham's fault then was it? we must have an exemplary record in close games when Ham doesn't play then, right?

what's your cutting edge analysis that King missed?

 

[boncer34]

so just Ham's fault then was it? we must have an exemplary record in close games when Ham doesn't play then, right?

what's your cutting edge analysis that King missed?

Speaking of simplistic. I've never pinned it all on Ham.

If Ham doesn't leave Bianco or Langford punches the ball does that mean that we set up right?

 

[bacon buster]

Speaking of simplistic. I've never pinned it all on Ham.

If Ham doesn't leave Bianco or Langford punches the ball does that mean that we set up right?

you're answering a lot of questions with more questions?

why don't you point out where we lost it? also be good if you could explain what McGrath, Merrett, Shiel and Caldwell were doing? not exactly noted aerialists

 

[Bjchan13]

4 players together. Oh they must be going to celebrate.

Hasn't considered at all the various points raised in here ie. They went to where the ball logically goes in that scenario from the kick, straight up the guts.

He thought about it for 15 seconds, drew one conclusion, didn't bother thinking about any other reason.

I think he's right. The ground could've been set up better for a kick in and it could've started happening as Harry was taking his 30 seconds.

 

[boncer34]

you're answering a lot of questions with more questions?

why don't you point out where we lost it? also be good if you could explain what McGrath, Merrett, Shiel and Caldwell were doing? not exactly noted aerialists

There's multiple areas where we lost it in that last passage.

Which was my point. King picked one and according to him that was it.

What were they doing? They were at where they thought the fall of the ball would be. They got it wrong.

If Ham doesn't leave Bianco or Langford punches the ball does that mean that we set up right?

 

[TheGrizz]

How is it embarringly simplistic. What did he miss?

He said that Merrett/McGrath and Caldwell were hanging around to celebrate with Jones before the kick, when if you look at the footage they are all standing literally less than 2m away from a Collingwood player (meaning they were actually...you know...just manning up?)

He didn't mention Wright not paying attention, giving Moore a 20m headstart and get in space which prompted Ham to (erroneously) leave his man.

He plugged Merrett, Caldwell, Shiel and McGrath for starting and continuing to be in the middle of the ground, which is where just about every other kick in that situation goes historically, ergo in the best position (until of course Wright and Ham ****ed up)

He didn't talk about how Langford made zero body contact or contact with the ball in an attempt to spoil 2v1.

He plugged Heppell for being off the field (and that somehow showing a lack of leadership) for the last 4 minutes of the game after 60 minutes straight on the field, which, in combine with his leg speed would have made him a liability in transition.

Instead, iT'S bEcAuSE LeaDeRsHiP.

Other than that, he got most of it.

 

[Bjchan13]

There's multiple areas where we lost it in that last passage.

Which was my point. King picked one and according to him that was it.

What were they doing? They were at where they thought the fall of the ball would be. They got it wrong.

If Ham doesn't leave Bianco or Langford punches the ball does that mean that we set up right?

King picked more than 1 though, if we're talking about 1st crack. They mentioned Wright and Ham.

 

[boncer34]

I think he's right. The ground could've been set up better for a kick in and it could've started happening as Harry was taking his 30 seconds.

There's more reasons then just that though. Wright not reacting as quick as Moore, Ham's brain fade, Langford not killing the ball.

Hence his analysis is simplistic.