Autopsy 2018 Rd 16 Bolton's Battered Blues Belted By Brisbane *Play Nice*

[PrinceCharles]

So because I stated a fact and facts are apparently the lowest form of scientific knowledge, that means it's not true?

First time I've seen Aph miss a 'whoosh'.

 

[carlton2dabone]

Your analysis is fair to you -except it falls down when one considers that apart from Harry McKay - who are the kids not being played?

First of all, seeing as how we spent a first round pick on McKay, there is no way on earth he should only have played a handful of senior games 3 years after being drafted and 3 years into our rebuild.

Any one of our recent draftees that hasn’t been injured at any time should have been getting games pumped into them, either to simply get games and experience under their belts or at least to assess their potential at the highest level.

Instead players like O’Shea and lamb and graham kept getting games ahead of our latest draftees even though those above players continue to Ben the weakest link in our team week after week

 

[JustaBattler]

First of all, seeing as how we spent a first round pick on McKay, there is no way on earth he should only have played a handful of senior games 3 years after being drafted and 3 years into our rebuild.

Any one of our recent draftees that hasn’t been injured at any time should have been getting games pumped into them, either to simply get games and experience under their belts or at least to assess their potential at the highest level.

Instead players like O’Shea and lamb and graham kept getting games ahead of our latest draftees even though those above players continue to Ben the weakest link in our team week after week

Like I said leaving harry McKay aside because that is the only obvious one..

Who else do you suggest hasn't been getting a game? I think a few of the draftees of 2016/17 have been unavailable for even VFL due to injury and you may be over estimating the actual number of players actually fit enough to even get a run in firsts...?

 

[carlton2dabone]

Like I said leaving harry McKay aside because that is the only obvious one..

Who else do you suggest hasn't been getting a game? I think a few of the draftees of 2016/17 have been unavailable for even VFL due to injury and you may be over estimating the actual number of players actually fit enough to even get a run in firsts...?

Let the following sentence sink in a bit:

We are continually told to stick fat because we are in a rebuild and 3 years into that rebuild and 3 years after using a first round pick on Harry, a player like O’Shea that is absolutely not in our future has played more games this season than McKay has lol

As for the rest, I’m sorry but throughout the last 2 seasons there have been plenty of times where our recent draftees have been fit and playing. It’s Bolton that has decided that he’d rather see our mature aged players deliver crap on the field rather than let our recent draftees deliver that crap instead with the added benefit of getting games and experience under their belts

 

[JustaBattler]

Let the following sentence sink in a bit:

We are continually told to stick fat because we are in a rebuild and 3 years into that rebuild and 3 years after using a first round pick on Harry, a player like O’Shea that is absolutely not in our future has played more games this season than McKay has lol

As for the rest, I’m sorry but throughout the last 2 seasons there have been plenty of times where our recent draftees have been fit and playing. It’s Bolton that has decided that he’d rather see our mature aged players deliver crap on the field rather than let our recent draftees deliver that crap instead with the added benefit of getting games and experience under their belts

I think the only point you are making is that Harry McKay should be played. I have asked you for a list of players who haven't been played ( because I am genuinely interested in understanding the basis of your point of view) however you don't seem to have a list of players to share. So I'll leave it at that.

 

[RudyBlue]

As for the rest, I’m sorry but throughout the last 2 seasons there have been plenty of times where our recent draftees have been fit and playing. It’s Bolton that has decided that he’d rather see our mature aged players deliver crap on the field rather than let our recent draftees deliver that crap instead with the added benefit of getting games and experience under their belts

Do you know which club has given its 2015-17 draftees the most games?

 

[carlton2dabone]

I think the only point you are making is that Harry McKay should be played. I have asked you for a list of players who haven't been played ( because I am genuinely interested in understanding the basis of your point of view) however you don't seem to have a list of players to share. So I'll leave it at that.

Well for starters, beside Harry who should have been in the team all year regardless of his output, players like Kerr, Schumacher polson etc etc should have also been in the team all year every time they were fit instead of getting only a couple games here or there.

No point in playing the likes of O’Shea, graham lamb instead when they have been the ones literally dragging the team down every week

 

[JustaBattler]

Well for starters, beside Harry who should have been in the team all year regardless of his output, players like Kerr, Schumacher polson etc etc should have also been in the team all year every time they were fit instead of getting only a couple games here or there.

No point in playing the likes of O’Shea, graham lamb instead when they have been the ones literally dragging the team down every week

Kerr got a run of games and did what he did.
Schumaker as a first year player - to play where?
Polson is getting his run of games and doing what he is doing - have you seen what he is doing?

any more?

the cupboard is bare mate - simple as that.

 

[carlton2dabone]

Do you know which club has given its 2015-17 draftees the most games?

And it’s still not nearly enough considering who we are playing in our team instead.

Look, I understand the notion of having too many kids in the team at one time can result in huge losses, but we gave Bolton that 3 year leeway as long as we saw progress, instead he has played too many c-grader matures for no benefit as they have been the ones holding back the team every week

 

[Sector 7G]

Kerr got a run of games and did what he did.
Schumaker as a first year player - to play where?
Polson is getting his run of games and doing what he is doing - have you seen what he is doing?

any more?

the cupboard is bare mate - simple as that.

The only other is DC should have played rd 1 and not been dropped after the North game. Has had injuries issues preventing him from being back in the side though. Though he struggles to find the footy and ball watches too often he has AFL qualities.

 

[TD2010]

I call crap.

SOS gave Bolton 17 players from the draft in 3 years as the building blocks of this rebuild.
The club and supporters gave Bolton the leeway of 3 years to pump games into our building blocks even if it meant losses and even heavy losses at times.

Instead Bolton decided to keep giving games to the deadwood Mature aged players on our list instead of pumping as many games into our youngsters as possible even when it has been apparent to all that the deadwood players have contributed absolutely nothing to helping protect our kids on the field.
In fact, I’d argue that our youngsters development on field has been hampered by having players like O’Shea, Rowe, Lamb, Casboult, Graham, Kerridge etc continually be out of position or simply hand the ball straight back to the opposition with their abismal skill level.

Regardless of injuries, the only way any of our b-graders that aren’t part of our future should ever get a game is if any position is still vacant after using every one of our available youngsters first.

This is all on Bolton not SOS.
3 years in to the leeway our supporters have given the club for losses, we are still screaming for the club to pump games into as many of our kids as possible instead of giving games to the likes of casboult or Rowe or lamb etc.

We have been getting thrashed by the bottom teams around us regardless so playing every kid on our list can’t be much worse than watching our mature aged hacks waste time in the field doing absolutely nothing.

No sure what you're calling crap on.

Who would you have a game to this weekend? McKay
Schumacher....

The point is the cupboard's pretty bare hence the older, lesser skilled and cheap players are out there.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

 

[TD2010]

Kerr got a run of games and did what he did.
Schumaker as a first year player - to play where?
Polson is getting his run of games and doing what he is doing - have you seen what he is doing?

any more?

the cupboard is bare mate - simple as that.

Just read your post after posting mine, ha.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

 

[carlton2dabone]

Kerr got a run of games and did what he did.
Schumaker as a first year player - to play where?
Polson is getting his run of games and doing what he is doing - have you seen what he is doing?

any more?

the cupboard is bare mate - simple as that.

I honestly don’t care how well Kerr or polson or McKay or any other kid plays every week as long as they are in the team all year when fit getting games and experience under their belts instead of selecting mature aged players that are holding back the team as much as any first year player could.

Mate, just on this board for the first half of the year, on every gameday thread and every autopsy thread there were constant calls for O’Shea to be dropped week after week and yet he still kept getting picked until recently.

Same with lamb. Same with a bunch of other ‘matures’.

So please don’t tell me pumping games into any youngster when fit would have been a worse outcome than any of those players have produced for the team

 

[carlton2dabone]

No sure what you're calling crap on.

Who would you have a game to this weekend? McKay
Schumacher....

The point is the cupboard's pretty bare hence the older, lesser skilled and cheap players are out there.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

Originally I was calling crap on the notion that SOS has put Bolton under the pump with his drafting/trading.

I contend that SOS has given Bolton 17 players in 3 drafts as the building block of this rebuild, and that too give him that many building blocks SOS couldn’t possibly get enough decent mature aged guys at the same time.

It’s bolton that has refused to get as many games as possible into these 17 building blocks instead of gifting games to players like O’Shea for the entire first half of this season

 

[JustaBattler]

I honestly don’t care how well Kerr or polson or McKay or any other kid plays every week as long as they are in the team all year when fit getting games and experience under their belts instead of selecting mature aged players that are holding back the team as much as any first year player could.

Mate, just on this board for the first half of the year, on every gameday thread and every autopsy thread there were constant calls for O’Shea to be dropped week after week and yet he still kept getting picked until recently.

Same with lamb. Same with a bunch of other ‘matures’.

So please don’t tell me pumping games into any youngster when fit would have been a worse outcome than any of those players have produced for the team

there are two issues you are speaking to


1. some of the players picked during the year aren't up to AFL standards and don't offer much ; and
2. younger players shoudl be being played instead of these in order to get development time into them

You have to seperate the issues - for example O'Shea was being played because all the other talls were injured in backline; and
as for kids - some are up to being played and I see thatthey ll ave been played and some aren't or there isnt any position for them to play.
Harry McKay is the burning question here of course but his not being played seems to be something different - worryingly different as each week goes by.

Within all this is the notion that a certain standard of play has to be delivered - so Weitering was dropped and Cuningham ( now out for year) was dropped. However the players you don't like - eg Graham/lamb/o'Shea/Mullett - have all been dropped during the year soem of them multiple times for not meeting standards=- sometimes dropped and some preferred players brought back in perhaps too soon - Marchbank/Kennedy only to be reinjured...

I put to you that the only reason these types are being played or where being played is because of injuries to preferred players.

 

[JohnnyFontane90]

Most teams that have won flags have not done so by playing "follow the leader".

Eg Tigers and Dogs introduced different game styles.

West Coast beat Tigers primarily with tall forwards and tallish defenders.

Talls take longer to develop so Blues strategy makes sense given they had very little "capital" on their list to trade with.

Now is the time to start balancing the list with speed and trade out excess talls.

I.e if I could trade out pick 1 plus Jones for 3 quality mids - I would do it.

There's nothing wrong with talls as long as they're not liabilities at ground level. When the ball hits the deck if casoublt and rowe are in the team then we're playing with 16 men.

it's not so much following the leader as simply observing what works. the west coasts talls can apply pressure and apart from the geelong and hawthorn dynasties that had superstars on every line, all the recent successful sides were built around pressure.

 

[carlton2dabone]

there are two issues you are speaking to


1. some of the players picked during the year aren't up to AFL standards and don't offer much ; and
2. younger players shoudl be being played instead of these in order to get development time into them

You have to seperate the issues - for example O'Shea was being played because all the other talls were injured in backline; and
as for kids - some are up to being played and I see thatthey ll ave been played and some aren't or there isnt any position for them to play.
Harry McKay is the burning question here of course but his not being played seems to be something different - worryingly different as each week goes by.

Within all this is the notion that a certain standard of play has to be delivered - so Weitering was dropped and Cuningham ( now out for year) was dropped. However the players you don't like - eg Graham/lamb/o'Shea/Mullett - have all been dropped during the year soem of them multiple times for not meeting standards=- sometimes dropped and some preferred players brought back in perhaps too soon - Marchbank/Kennedy only to be reinjured...

I put to you that the only reason these types are being played or where being played is because of injuries to preferred players.

I don’t disagree with most of your analysis of what’s happened, I disagree with the fact that the path taken was the only path available.

I contend that it’s either about one of 2 things:

A) rebuilding - if so then having an initial 3 year window where it’s not about losses or wins according to Bolton, we should be getting games into every single one of our youngsters at every chance when they are fit, regardless of whether they are ‘ready’or not.

Or

2) winning - in which case someone like O’Shea shouldn’t have been getting a game ahead of any other player on our entire list seeing as how Allie ever did on the field was turn the ball over and put the rest of the team under immense pressure.

if O’Shea in the team had of helped the development of the youngster we did play then I’d agree with you that he was the best available option given the injuries, but instead of helping their development he hampered it.

Imagine being a young kid developing in the team and having to consistently watch on as your more mature team mate kept putting the whole team under the pump with his abysmal skill level

 

[bludrew79]

Lets not forget that in Round 18 of 2017..
We went up to Brisbane with the following players ...
BnF Fit Marc Murphy, Sam Docherty, Simpson, Fit Kruezer, Cuningham, Plowman, Gibbs, McKay, Casboult, Williamson, Macreadie.

So that's 9 missing altogether from that team... and 2 playing on despite injury.
And we were down by 53 points at half time...

Yes we clawed back to only lose by 30... but it puts the weekends result into comparison

What it doesn't do is excuse the effort... but the result was never out of the question...

 

[JohnnyFontane90]

Yeah I don't get our fascination with talls. You look at the way the game has gone the last few years with Richmond, the Western Bulldogs, Collingwood etc and they've all got players that can run all day, have some versatility and apply defensive pressure.

Every thrashing I've seen the last few years has been against teams where we're too slow and too tall. It dates back to round 1 last year but the club still doesn't seem to get it. On that night the Tigers burnt us with their speedy smalls while we had a tall defence that got exposed at ground level. Ended up being a preview of what the Tigers would do all year. They've got Rioli, Butler, Castagna, Caddy and Lambert all playing up forward. The first three players harass their opponents all game, forcing them into bad decisions which allows Rance etc to mop up their panic kicks. We haven't even found one reliable small forward with genuine speed yet. Yesterday was just another example of how slow and terrible we are at pressuring teams. It was constantly bombed to Curnow and their defenders had no issues at all double or triple teaming him, knowing full well we didn't have anyone capable of mopping up at ground level nor another dangerous forward threat. It's why Hodge and Witherden did as they pleased.

It's amazing. It's like the complete opposite to what we were under Ratten. Back then the criticism was that we didn't have a strong enough spine and our gameplan was too reliant on speed. Almost a decade later we seemingly have too many talls and not enough fast players.

and back in rattens time there was unlimited interchanges so running ability of the players wasn't as important.

If you look a GWS's list they have guns in every position. The only areas they lack in is small forwards. I know they have toby greene and they had devon smith but both are midfielders who simply couldn't fit in the giants engine room. in their prelim runs they got stevie J as a free agent. SOS built that list and given he's a key position background maybe he just doesn't rate small forwards as important, which is simply an outdated philosophy. If SOS doesn't address that this draft we need to seriously question if he's the right man for the job.

And bolton has made selection mistakes all year. no casboult, great, but to play a defense of rowe, weitering, jones, marchbank and jack silvagni against a side that has only 1 tall forward target is inexplicable. Jack silvagni has played pretty well in games when levi hasn't crowded the forward line including against sydney when he was probably BOG in the first half at a ground that's notoriously difficult to move the ball. Particularly without harry it would have been a great opportunity to give him some space in the forward line and provide someone else to defend so charlie isn't outnumbered.

 

[Gethelred]

and back in rattens time there was unlimited interchanges so running ability of the players wasn't as important.

If you look a GWS's list they have guns in every position. The only areas they lack in is small forwards. I know they have toby greene and they had devon smith but both are midfielders who simply couldn't fit in the giants engine room. in their prelim runs they got stevie J as a free agent. SOS built that list and given he's a key position background maybe he just doesn't rate small forwards as important, which is simply an outdated philosophy. If SOS doesn't address that this draft we need to seriously question if he's the right man for the job.

And bolton has made selection mistakes all year. no casboult, great, but to play a defense of rowe, weitering, jones, marchbank and jack silvagni against a side that has only 1 tall forward target is inexplicable. Jack silvagni has played pretty well in games when levi hasn't crowded the forward line including against sydney when he was probably BOG in the first half at a ground that's notoriously difficult to move the ball. Particularly without harry it would have been a great opportunity to give him some space in the forward line and provide someone else to defend so charlie isn't outnumbered.

See, I see the selection of the sheer amount of talls we've picked all season, then to try to go out and compete, as attempts at fast-tracking the development of our players. Our smalls are outnumbered, required to play greater roles and to run defensively when outnumbered; our talls are required to play more of games, to compete in less space, when outnumbered, and when under the pump.

That sounds to me like a crucible, designed to beat players within an inch of their lives, while the club off-field prevents long term damage by being supportive, working on expectations, and telling the players the truth; that their futures are determined by their effort and their adherence to their part of the gameplan.

As for whether or not SOS doesn't see small forwards as important, GWS's draft concessions were something of a double edged sword as far as that position's concerned. See, when you try to find a forward pocket in the first round, what you're mostly getting is a forward/midfielder hybrid; you're not taking a great pressure forward in the first round, why would you when the ball needs to get there for them to be relevant. We're in a different boat, and SOS has picked Le Bois as one of only 6 players he's drafted that can be definitively classed as a small and not a utility size.

It's definitely a need, though, and it's one I'd expect to be rectified over the course of the coming draft.

 

[Blue Pulse]

and back in rattens time there was unlimited interchanges so running ability of the players wasn't as important.

If you look a GWS's list they have guns in every position. The only areas they lack in is small forwards. I know they have toby greene and they had devon smith but both are midfielders who simply couldn't fit in the giants engine room. in their prelim runs they got stevie J as a free agent. SOS built that list and given he's a key position background maybe he just doesn't rate small forwards as important, which is simply an outdated philosophy. If SOS doesn't address that this draft we need to seriously question if he's the right man for the job.

And bolton has made selection mistakes all year. no casboult, great, but to play a defense of rowe, weitering, jones, marchbank and jack silvagni against a side that has only 1 tall forward target is inexplicable. Jack silvagni has played pretty well in games when levi hasn't crowded the forward line including against sydney when he was probably BOG in the first half at a ground that's notoriously difficult to move the ball. Particularly without harry it would have been a great opportunity to give him some space in the forward line and provide someone else to defend so charlie isn't outnumbered.

What needs to be taken into account is that whoever Bolton sent forward also had to ruck because we only went in with 2 x tall forwards, hence why Rowe was sent forward. Would have probably preferred Jones and left Rowe back but I would be afraid that Jones would probably hurt Charlie in a marking contest.

 

[Ruckus]

And bolton has made selection mistakes all year. no casboult, great, but to play a defense of rowe, weitering, jones, marchbank and jack silvagni against a side that has only 1 tall forward target is inexplicable. Jack silvagni has played pretty well in games when levi hasn't crowded the forward line including against sydney when he was probably BOG in the first half at a ground that's notoriously difficult to move the ball. Particularly without harry it would have been a great opportunity to give him some space in the forward line and provide someone else to defend so charlie isn't outnumbered.

Indeed, this was bewildering. The coaching department is in poor form at the moment, and looks to be operating with a similar lack of confidence and conviction as afflicts the playing group.

Struggling in two areas that really compound each other, and this match highlighted both:

1) questionable selection; balance out of kilter, and not catered to the likely opposition line-up (admittedly somewhat hamstrung by injury)

2) tactically very slow to react (if at all) to changes/mismatches/developments/opportunities on game day - seem to fear that shuffling the magnets on the board will make things worse?

 

[carlton2dabone]

Indeed, this was bewildering. The coaching department is in poor form at the moment, and looks to be operating with a similar lack of confidence and conviction as afflicts the playing group.

Struggling in two areas that really compound each other, and this match highlighted both:

1) questionable selection; balance out of kilter, and not catered to the likely opposition line-up (admittedly somewhat hamstrung by injury)

2) tactically very slow to react (if at all) to changes/mismatches/developments/opportunities on game day - seem to fear that shuffling the magnets on the board will make things worse?

How can the coaching not see something so simple, just apply a bit of logic.

By picking a taller team I’m guessing the important part of the plan relies on controlling the ball through the air.
But to control the ball through the air you need the players to be able to hit their targets yet half our team have such poor skills they can’t hit the side of a barn with their kicks.

Boggles the mind the coaches can’t figure this out

 

[RudyBlue]

How can the coaching not see something so simple, just apply a bit of logic.

By picking a taller team I’m guessing the important part of the plan relies on controlling the ball through the air.
But to control the ball through the air you need the players to be able to hit their targets yet half our team have such poor skills they can’t hit the side of a barn with their kicks.

Boggles the mind the coaches can’t figure this out

How would you coach our team given our injuries and the composition of our list?

I agree that the ease with which our zone has been opened up (at times) has been concerning, but it's also worked very well (at times). We played a majority of the Geelong game in our half but poor finishing and some easy goals against cost us. In that third quarter against Port we dominated them, but again, kicking 2.5 to 0.0 isn't going to get you very far ahead.

 

[Ruckus]

How would you coach our team given our injuries and the composition of our list?

For a start, given the patchwork nature of our defensive unit due to injuries, you put the zone defence initiative on hold. Instructing a cobbled-together group to simply do a job on a nominated opponent, rather than expecting them to enact complex patterns and structures is, to me, a no-brainer given our current team, form and predicament.