Autopsy 2023 Round 1 DRAW. Ugly Blues still can't close out games

[Stamos]

Just over 90 seconds left when Mots took the mark - so around 80 - maybe 75 if the ump is generous - seconds by the time he needs to pass.

We should've been able to wipe most of that off the clock if we've supposedly been making a point of it. You should be able to find 3-4 marks in that time. 3 marks and a down the line kick probably finishes it, 4 marks definitely finishes it. He had 2 targets running right past him unmarked so they should quite easily have been able to work out at least 2 amongst themselves there before even having to have a look around.

99 seconds. You're allowed 7 seconds in play, so would be extremely generous to be 80 to go. And if he took that long, I'm not sure LOB has so much space to take an uncontested mark.
But say he does, you reckon we were odds on to maintain possession for 75 seconds in the backline?

 

[thylacine60]

good sign many posters are upset with 2 points - a few years back we'd be borderline singing the song - the usual disrespect and moronic commentary from the usual suspects but if I keep out of most autopsy threads I reckon I'll get through the season - exciting times ahead...........

 

[Stamos]

If anyone wants to pinpoint a moment - it was Motlop choosing to give the hands to LOB with 90 seconds to go. This moment has nothing to do with skill execution (as seen with Acres or H moments) but is purely decision based.

Mots was unfortunately caught up in the moment and LOB didn't have the leadership to yell HOLD IT. Mots had both LOB and Hollands in 20 metres of space. If he goes back, kicks to LOB, who kicks to Hollands, who finds one more target, there is probably 40 seconds left and worst case scenario we go long down the line, halve the contest, and the game is done.

No doubt Vossy will highlight this and both players will learn from it.

That's not the worst case scenario...

 

[luke livingston seagull]

Easy to see why Voss was so furious about the Cuners incident. Imagine a high HF who can create scores and win his own footy out there last night.

 

[JyeDye]

Why?

This is genuinely dumb. Why would a coach of an AFL team highlight an excellent play that would've iced the game - using the method we'd employed throughout the game to tremendous effect; running the ball after winning clear of the defensive cluster - that only didn't work because a full forward slipped over while running in a straight line???

Because of the context of when the play was made? Sure it was a great play if we needed a goal to win, but we didn't. We didn't need to go full attack mode with 1 minute left to open ourselves up to turning the ball over and playing right into the oppositions strength, rebounding off turnovers. They even had a sign out clearly instructing to play slow and safe...

 

[Stamos]

Fundamentally the decision to kick to a contest when in the lead with such little time on the clock was the wrong one. Player can always fall over, defenders can get a fist on it etc.

It wasn't a contest though

 

[JustaBattler]

Is it more likely that he made up a story, a story that completely explains the cause and effect of the attack that results in the defence being exposed exactly as it was

or

The 3-time premiership captain, and renown backline general, knows what he's talking about when it comes to team defence and how reckless attacks can leave it exposed?

Just because he sits in a suit on TV doesn't mean he's full of sh**. What a narrowminded perspective.

Believe it or not I don't blame LOB for the loss and have posted several times in this thread about why, so you're wrong in that assumption.

They may be facts, however, facts presented without perspective or context are open to misinterpretation. Yes, on the simplest level Weitering, McGovern, Young and the rest of the defence were outmarked or beaten, but why where they beaten is the question that needs answering for us to avoid being beaten next time. Dismiss that as weaponised hyperbole if you like, but I'd like to know the reasons why, as do the coaches and analysts of the game. It just might prevent it from happening next time.

Well if you aren't blaming LoB - that's the end of the discussion - because everything I said was countering the stuff that has been posted on here post game. That is the alpha and omega of it for me.

If you and Hodge think that it is ok for Weitering/Young and McGovern attempting to spoil a mark from one player and fluffing it up is of no consequence that is fine as well - it is just one example of not LoB's fault I put.

If you think that the team should never be able to cope with a 'rebound' or so called 'turnover' from an opposition's goalsquare - and that the natural consequences of any such play is a goal to the opposition - then you and Hodge live on a different planet to me.




I mean are you kidding or what -with that 'analysis' supported by Mr genius Hodge - it was natural that Richmond were going to get the ball from goals square to goal square take a contested mark against three Carlton defenders as a matter of course ??? I mean really????

I'll just leave it there - pffffft

 

[Gethelred]

Because of the context of when the play was made? Sure it was a great play if we needed a goal to win, but we didn't.

We kick a goal in that circumstance, we win the game. Harry keeps his feet but spills the mark over the boundary, we win the game. Harry keeps his feet but spills the mark at his toes, we arguably win the ****ing game.

This is the cutting off of ones nose to spite their face writ large. The idea that the coaches would have a crack at ****ing Motlop because Harry slipped over running in a straight line is so far beyond mindblowing to me that one wonders if those around me are also experiencing out of body sensations.

Tell me, when did you last trip over running in a straight line whilst wearing studded boots on grass?

We didn't need to go full attack mode with 1 minute left to open ourselves up to turning the ball over and playing right into the oppositions strength, rebounding off turnovers. They even had a sign out clearly instructing to play slow and safe...

Hang on.

Full attack mode?

Lolwut?

A winger taking possession and breaking clear of congestion - literally, running in the only direction players aren't - is not full attack mode. Full attack mode would've been to run straight at the goals via the most direct route, looking to evade and outpace anyone in the way, and to take the shot yourself.

This is silly.

 

[JyeDye]

We kick a goal in that circumstance, we win the game. Harry keeps his feet but spills the mark over the boundary, we win the game. Harry keeps his feet but spills the mark at his toes, we arguably win the ******* game.

This is the cutting off of ones nose to spite their face writ large. The idea that the coaches would have a crack at ******* Motlop because Harry slipped over running in a straight line is so far beyond mindblowing to me that one wonders if those around me are also experiencing out of body sensations.

Tell me, when did you last trip over running in a straight line whilst wearing studded boots on grass?

Hang on.

Full attack mode?

Lolwut?

A winger taking possession and breaking clear of congestion - literally, running in the only direction players aren't - is not full attack mode. Full attack mode would've been to run straight at the goals via the most direct route, looking to evade and outpace anyone in the way, and to take the shot yourself.

This is silly.

When you are up with less then a minute to go you play the percentages. It really is that simple. You are being pedantic with the language here, full attack mode or not, it's not the most optimal way to LIMIT Richmond from scoring a goal, because that is all that was required. Will the coaches go over to Motlop and tell him he's an idiot, obviously not, but I would be surprised if they don't reiterate what is expected to retain a lead in the final minutes of a match. Safe and conservative football limiting the oppositions ability to score a goal. A team like Geelong is not making that handball and play.

 

[thylacine60]

For every if only being torn apart in here there are just as many over there. Bolton.

 

[Aphrodite]

Face grew a darker red soon as Gov gifted Martin's goal and was often full Eddie throughout. Wouldn't get too fussed about things till we setup how we want with the players we have........

SOS - gets brushed aside a bit too much, great mark
Dow - borderline invisible
Mots - intrigues, buzzes about and I liked his flair and effort to make space - kick some goals little dude
LOB - looked so fresh compared to the rest of the tired blokes obviously - that run showed effort and also the fact he is never going to give anyone confidence in his abilities - one bounce too many maybe but one day he'll ice a game for us - still not locked into the 22 and perhaps never will be
Cerra - great game - was everywhere - how often is he getting up last from packs? great year coming up
Zac - may as well have been in the stands
BBang - loved his toughness - please quit the throw on the boot around the corner s**t please, Matty
Fog - unsighted, perhaps fog too heavy
Crippa - perplexing nothing game he will be pissed off with
Harry - magnificent game - 1000 marks, what a foil for goldilocks he is - no more behinds this year please
Gov - best and worse have to sit down to dinner sometime and make some form of compromise
TDK - took it on, loved his endeavour - it's all true, the hype........
Acres - consistency please
Dutchy - is a player
Doc - what a goal! I never thought he was in with a chance - please stop the gibbs bang on the boot kicks out of danger into danger
Carol - no impact
Kemp - see above
Walsh - will be unhappy with that effort
Durds - nope
Plow - barely hanging on
Martin - you're not paid to be the biggest celebrator of other goals
Marchy - poor game
Weits - solid
Newman - too scared to say anything here cause I think Jimster knows where I live
Fish - lovely goal - the end
Cow - brings the heat and experienced the real stuff last night - didn't look out of place
Pitt - well beaten
Cuners - still waiting
George - fabulous george was fabulous
Charlie - I think 3 goals? can kill with a touch
Lemm - Binns - both need to do more on last night's effort
Huey - won his position, better composure
Ed - ok but won't be improving much
Saad - very un-adam game
Owies - clever goal but..........

#TLDR

 

[JustaBattler]

When you are up with less then a minute to go you play the percentages. It really is that simple. You are being pedantic with the language here, full attack mode or not, it's not the most optimal way to LIMIT Richmond from scoring a goal, because that is all that was required. Will the coaches go over to Motlop and tell him he's an idiot, obviously not, but I would be surprised if they don't reiterate what is expected to retain a lead in the final minutes of a match. Safe and conservative football limiting the oppositions ability to score a goal. A team like Geelong is not making that handball and play.

The percentages are get the ball as far away from your goal as possible mate. Playing tiddlewinks amongst a bunch of very tired players close to your own goals is a negative percentage play - every time.

 

[Gethelred]

For every if only being torn apart in here there are just as many over there. Bolton.

Deserves it. Is incredibly fortunate he didn't lose them the game shortstepping; he did it multiple times last night, only to have the ball spill out to Rioli Jnr for a goal twice.

 

[JyeDye]

The percentages are get the ball as far away from your goal as possible mate. Playing tiddlewinks amongst a bunch of very tired players close to your own goals is a negative percentage play - every time.

You've just ended an entire industry of sports analytics and coaches with this one. Take your money out of the bank, we're going into a recession now, unemployment meeting a new high.

 

[Blue since 72]

Their entry into the 50 was far better than our over the entirety of the game.

And yet they shot the same score as us. 18 scoring shots from 66 entries, pretty ordinary really.

So did our defensive game hold up or were we just lucky 48 times?

Entries into the forward 50 stat in isolation is like pretty much every other stat, not worth much.

 

[thylacine60]

And yet they shot the same score as us. 18 scoring shots from 66 entries, pretty ordinary really.

So did our defensive game hold up or were we just lucky 48 times?

Entries into the forward 50 stat in isolation is like pretty much every other stat, not worth much.

this - we soaked up a shitload of attack across our backline and there is so much room for improvement.....

 

[JyeDye]

And yet they shot the same score as us. 18 scoring shots from 66 entries, pretty ordinary really.

So did our defensive game hold up or were we just lucky 48 times?

Entries into the forward 50 stat in isolation is like pretty much every other stat, not worth much.

I think a lot of their entries where 'pseudo entries' if that's a thing where the ball would ping pong around the 45m to 60m counting as consecutive entries. A lot of the kick ins were constantly just going straight back in but our defence was already well set up to handle the reentry. Not all I50's are of equal value, when we got it in it was typically in much more dangerous positions.

 

[Moon]

We tried our best to lose that with all the late stuff ups ... but stuffed up the loss as well.

As previously mentioned, Richmond played better and should've won ... so yeah ... take the draw and the 2 points

 

[Gethelred]

When you are up with less then a minute to go you play the percentages. It really is that simple.

Except it's manifestly not that simple, is it?

You are being pedantic with the language here

Me? Pedantic about language?

I've NEVER been so insulted (so accurately) in my life!

... full attack mode or not, it's not the most optimal way to LIMIT Richmond from scoring a goal, because that is all that was required. Will the coaches go over to Motlop and tell him he's an idiot, obviously not, but I would be surprised if they don't reiterate what is expected to retain a lead in the final minutes of a match. Safe and conservative football limiting the oppositions ability to score a goal. A team like Geelong is not making that handball and play.

I don't know that I agree at all that Geelong wouldn't have gone for that play, last year. From 2014-2018, you'd absolutely be right; in that block, they played mark-kick all the way round the ground. But last year and earlier, they'd have absolutely made that play.

Did you not watch Brad Close play that precise same way against us last year? D'you watch their game against Collingwood in the quarterfinal?

I think people are allowing their disappointment with the result to colour what was about the only real choice LOB had other than just be someone else. I too wish LOB was Kevin Bartlett - who would've gone straight line at goal, trying to be the hero and to kick it himself - but I don't think that would've won him many friends in the box if he'd ****ed that up, either.

 

[Stamos]

Because of the context of when the play was made? Sure it was a great play if we needed a goal to win, but we didn't. We didn't need to go full attack mode with 1 minute left to open ourselves up to turning the ball over and playing right into the oppositions strength, rebounding off turnovers. They even had a sign out clearly instructing to play slow and safe...

When you are up with less then a minute to go you play the percentages. It really is that simple. You are being pedantic with the language here, full attack mode or not, it's not the most optimal way to LIMIT Richmond from scoring a goal, because that is all that was required. Will the coaches go over to Motlop and tell him he's an idiot, obviously not, but I would be surprised if they don't reiterate what is expected to retain a lead in the final minutes of a match. Safe and conservative football limiting the oppositions ability to score a goal. A team like Geelong is not making that handball and play.

What next? With the siren blowing?

Motlop marked the ball with 1:39 left on the clock. 99 seconds. In the context of icing the game, that is a lot more than 60 seconds.

 

[Aphrodite]

So much for Doc.

This goal ... Rnd 1 2022 MK11

 

[JustaBattler]

You've just ended an entire industry of sports analytics and coaches with this one. Take your money out of the bank, we're going into a recession now, unemployment meeting a new high.

If you have more than 250K in one bank - you fail to understand that the government guarantees only up to 250k per person or entity. So yeah it is a very bad idea for risk averse people to have all their cash in one bank if it is more than 250K.

The chances of 'recession' are significantly greater than they were 6 months ago and growing - but that is a natural consequence of rising cost of capital butting heads up against over-leveraged households. btw - that isnt me talking that is the global bond market shouting.

Sports analytics is really interesting - sounds really scientific and all I am so impressed - hope I haven't damaged the science too much by offering up some observations - which run contrary to Hodgey's POV.

 

[Sharks On A Plane]

Some incredibly weird takes in here. If anyone should be copping it it's Harry.

Missed two extremely easy goals and then fell over for no reason when the game was there to be won. Played a very good game overall but is exhibiting some worrying signs re: mental midgetry.

 

[Aphrodite]

Enough of the LOB bashing (pages and pages of it).


Harry slipped over and he also missed 2 easy set shots earlier in the game!



42sec mark onwards (1min 42sec left on the clock) ...

 

[Stamos]

I think people are allowing their disappointment with the result to colour what was about the only real choice LOB had other than just be someone else. I too wish LOB was Kevin Bartlett - who would've gone straight line at goal, trying to be the hero and to kick it himself - but I don't think that would've won him many friends in the box if he'd ****ed that up, either.

The thing is, even if LOB kicked the goal, it wouldn't have been as good a play as H taking the mark. There would have been 80 seconds to go with the ball in the centre. We almost certainly win, but I think an H set shot with 55 seconds to go is a better outcome.
Just terrible luck that H fell over.