Looked better as a mobile ruck. I do think his wing/midfield minutes haven't been amazing since his first two very strong weeks.
When Conway is available I'd like to see the Conway/Blicavs ruck partnership be our primary one.
-
Guest - BigFooty Tipping 2025 - Get on! - $500 first prize - Weekly Prizes - Click to Join
PLUS Your club board comp is now up!
Autopsy Cats lose to Port by 6 points after being down by 10 goals
- Thread starter dazbroncos
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
When Conway is available I'd like to see the Conway/Blicavs ruck partnership be our primary one.
Yes. Our top possession winner in the 1st half, when nobody else was getting their hands on it at all, and more than effective in the ruck after Stanley was subbed off.
BlakeyNoFlakey
Brownlow Medallist
I have yet to watch the game and will just watch the Kayo Mini of it since we lost. But on "First Crack" last night, they did highlight two things. First, Port tagged Tom Stewart out of the game, so he wasn't allowed to be that intercept marker we so needed and thus had little impact on the game. Kingy said that moving Stewart to the wing was pretty much an admission of defeat.
The other thing they highlighted in the first half was our defenders were playing too far up the ground, leaving Ports forwards unattended (especially Rioli), and that led to goals against us. They highlighted in one clip where SDK runs up the ground, leaving Rioli on the arc, and then the ball comes back, and Rioli kicks a goal while SDK is nowhere to be seen. They mentioned in the second half that the Cats adjusted this, and that's what got them back into the game.
The other thing they highlighted in the first half was our defenders were playing too far up the ground, leaving Ports forwards unattended (especially Rioli), and that led to goals against us. They highlighted in one clip where SDK runs up the ground, leaving Rioli on the arc, and then the ball comes back, and Rioli kicks a goal while SDK is nowhere to be seen. They mentioned in the second half that the Cats adjusted this, and that's what got them back into the game.
Blitz also ran with JHF for a lot of the night when Mullin wasn’t in the picture.
- Apr 6, 2010
- 3,566
- 4,444
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- Man Utd, AC Milan, Wolfsburg,
One one of the talk shows they highlighted McEtee niggling Stewart
Correct me if I'm wrong but if you bump more than 5m off the ball isn't it a free kick? Not to mention the holding behind play?
Then Stewart retaliates and 50m is paid
What exactly are the non officiating umpires looking at
Correct me if I'm wrong but if you bump more than 5m off the ball isn't it a free kick? Not to mention the holding behind play?
Then Stewart retaliates and 50m is paid
What exactly are the non officiating umpires looking at
Harsh…
Very hard for Melbourne based people to get there with the 7:10 start on a Friday.
So management of players is going to be very interesting over the next 4 rounds. Mackie talked about a “rolling 4 week plan” that of course was subject to change with circumstances.
We have Gold Coast in Darwin., GWS at home, Richmond home and then Sydney away before the bye.
Players in line to be managed may include
Hawkins, Jezza, Dempsey, J Henry, O Henry, 2E (again), Duncan, and various midfield group (including Ruck). Maybe Guthrie and Rohan get managed in that cycle?
On the notion that they only manage 2 a game (maybe they sneak an injury in as well against weaker teams) we will manage 8 over the next month.
No doubt in my mind they would have slated Jezza for a rest I reckon against Richmond but he is having his a couple of weeks early.
Gold Coast manage is Hawkins and maybe Duncan and/or Dempsey (I am assuming Stanley gets omitted and plays VFL). Injury to Jezza.
GWS harder to think who they manage but I assume a mid fielder and maybe O Henry (to give Scratcher another game?)
Richmond they would like to do a few and I wouldn’t be suprised if we have a couple of short term injuries that week. Would want to give maybe J Henry, Rohan, 2E and Gurthrie a rest that week to prepare for Sydney. If they could somehow keep Scratcher in for a 3rd week that would be great so maybe Rohan (given Jezza misses his this week).
Expect a debut or two against Richmond so to do that need to look beyond the current 26 squad which means maybe 5 out that week?!
Against Swans it is a serious game so maybe we don’t manage anyone or just 1 given the bye the following week?
Going to be an interesting watch as want to go into the bye 9 and 4 at worst whilst also managing the sqaud?
We have Gold Coast in Darwin., GWS at home, Richmond home and then Sydney away before the bye.
Players in line to be managed may include
Hawkins, Jezza, Dempsey, J Henry, O Henry, 2E (again), Duncan, and various midfield group (including Ruck). Maybe Guthrie and Rohan get managed in that cycle?
On the notion that they only manage 2 a game (maybe they sneak an injury in as well against weaker teams) we will manage 8 over the next month.
No doubt in my mind they would have slated Jezza for a rest I reckon against Richmond but he is having his a couple of weeks early.
Gold Coast manage is Hawkins and maybe Duncan and/or Dempsey (I am assuming Stanley gets omitted and plays VFL). Injury to Jezza.
GWS harder to think who they manage but I assume a mid fielder and maybe O Henry (to give Scratcher another game?)
Richmond they would like to do a few and I wouldn’t be suprised if we have a couple of short term injuries that week. Would want to give maybe J Henry, Rohan, 2E and Gurthrie a rest that week to prepare for Sydney. If they could somehow keep Scratcher in for a 3rd week that would be great so maybe Rohan (given Jezza misses his this week).
Expect a debut or two against Richmond so to do that need to look beyond the current 26 squad which means maybe 5 out that week?!
Against Swans it is a serious game so maybe we don’t manage anyone or just 1 given the bye the following week?
Going to be an interesting watch as want to go into the bye 9 and 4 at worst whilst also managing the sqaud?
He was on JHF for at least a few of those Q1 centre bounces, he got into the game more after the substitution.
Also he only took one mark for the game. I think he is just going at the moment.
- Sep 3, 2011
- 8,107
- 17,661
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Why was Stanley subbed off btw? Injured or tactical?
#6 Thorp #7 Selwood LOL
Club Legend
- Jul 11, 2020
- 1,342
- 3,832
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Tactical. We were getting hammered and Scotty decided to try a different look by getting Mullin into the game. His decision was made easier by the fact that Rhys was not playing well at all.
cats_09
Otters United
- Jun 21, 2011
- 68,477
- 142,025
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Moderator
- #986
Injured - no reports of any injury
But the reason will change depending on who you ask
Geelong coach Chris Scott was quick to explain in the aftermath of the clash that the switch was not due to Stanley’s efforts on the field, instead describing it as an “aggressive move” with the Cats down as much as 49 points in the second term.
But Gerard Whateley wasn’t buying those comments.
“In the aftermath (Scott) was careful to say this was about balance, but there’s no doubt he subbed Stanley because he was just so weak in the contest against (Port Adelaide’s Dante) Visentini… that was pretty clear, wasn’t it?” Whateley said on SEN’s Crunch Time.
“He got monstered by the four-gamer.
“But then Mullin comes in and clamps Horne-Francis, who played so well (early) and Geelong peg (the lead) back from 49 to 6.
“For a tactician, the deep dive into this is so rich. I feel like (it’s the first tactical sub before half-time).
“It was the old-fashioned dragging, except it’s a bit more permanent these days.”
David Kind added: “If you’re having a shower before half-time, things have gone horribly wrong.”
“Got monstered by the four-gamer”: Why Scott’s explanation of Stanley sub doesn’t add up
“It was the old-fashioned dragging, except it’s a bit more permanent these days.”
www.sen.com.au
- Aug 15, 2009
- 1,681
- 3,715
I thought I'd watched a different game to you until I watched the replay. Now I'm sure I watched a different game.
You claim that Parfitt was terrible because he was killed by Horne-Francis. Except he mostly wasn't on Horne-Francis. He started the game on Butters. At other times he was on Wines. Blicavs started on JHF and was on him for most of the first quarter. When he drifted forwards briefly, it was up to the backmen to pick him up (and twice they didn't).
At the start of the second quarter, Blicavs was on Butters and Cuthrie was on JHF. Parfitt was moved onto JHF early in the second quarter and was on him for a brief period (maybe 5 mins). He was beaten by him, as everyone else was in the first half. Later, Clark and Atkins seemed to spend time on him. But most of the damage was done in the first half when Blicavs was on him. It was only when Mullin was moved onto him that he was kept quiet.
You claim that Holmes was terrible because he was killed by Rioli. Except he was hardly on him. Zuthrie was on him for most of the first quarter, at the start of the second and later in the second. For the goal he kicked when Dixon knocked the back into play, it wasn't clear he was on him. But regardless, De Koning should have spoiled it through for a point. Holmes seemed to be on him for a very brief period at the end of the first quarter. For a short time, Henry was on Rioli. Holmes was was moved onto him late in the second. Rioli had a shot from the boundary line, which was touched by Henry.
Just because you say something is true doesn't make it so. If you don't believe me, go back and watch the replay.
Regardless, it's very rare these days for one player to play on another player for a whole half, let alone a whole game, so blaming one player for another player's dominance is mostly pointless. But if you want do do so, blame Blicavs for JHF (in the first quarter, when he was at his best) and Zuthrie for Rioli.
The idea that Parfitt has regressed is laughable. Until two weeks ago you'd been (grudgingly) praising him. He had a very quiet game against Melbourne and a quiet first half against Port. No doubt he does need to eliminate these quiet periods. But he was poor last year, which was why he spent most of the time in the VFL. He'll probably always be borderline best 22 because, as everyone knows, his skills aren't great.
You're entitled to your opinions but simply making stuff up, such as blaming Holmes for Rioli and Parfitt for JHF, does you no credit.
- Jun 19, 2006
- 11,715
- 23,747
- AFL Club
- Geelong
I wouldn't have had Clark anywhere near our worst in the first half. He was about our only midfielder who was able to lay some tackles and keep up with the Port players.
In midfield it was Stanley and Blicavs that really struggled with Atkins and Parfitt not much better. Then there were a heap of dumb individual errors from O'Connor, Dempsey, SDK, Holmes, etc that cost us 4-5 goals.
- Jun 19, 2006
- 11,715
- 23,747
- AFL Club
- Geelong
Injured - no reports of any injury
But the reason will change depending on who you ask
Geelong coach Chris Scott was quick to explain in the aftermath of the clash that the switch was not due to Stanley’s efforts on the field, instead describing it as an “aggressive move” with the Cats down as much as 49 points in the second term.
But Gerard Whateley wasn’t buying those comments.
“In the aftermath (Scott) was careful to say this was about balance, but there’s no doubt he subbed Stanley because he was just so weak in the contest against (Port Adelaide’s Dante) Visentini… that was pretty clear, wasn’t it?” Whateley said on SEN’s Crunch Time.
“He got monstered by the four-gamer.
“But then Mullin comes in and clamps Horne-Francis, who played so well (early) and Geelong peg (the lead) back from 49 to 6.
“For a tactician, the deep dive into this is so rich. I feel like (it’s the first tactical sub before half-time).
“It was the old-fashioned dragging, except it’s a bit more permanent these days.”
David Kind added: “If you’re having a shower before half-time, things have gone horribly wrong.”
“Got monstered by the four-gamer”: Why Scott’s explanation of Stanley sub doesn’t add up
“It was the old-fashioned dragging, except it’s a bit more permanent these days.”
I think "got monstered by the 4-gamer" isn't right. The ruck battle was pretty even. But then he continually fumbled ground balls and marks that he should've taken cleanly putting us in terrible spots.
- Sep 3, 2011
- 8,107
- 17,661
- AFL Club
- Geelong
I agree. And the other thing that was very evident at the game was that Port were just 'on'. They made no skill errors, their handpassing through traffic was subime and their forwards timed their movement so well that there were no pauses or even head swivels when midfielders kicked into the 50. It was just a training drill.
You could say - oh Geelong's intensity wasnt great, but honestly, Port played out of their skins in the first half.
And Rioli was just playing clutch.
Sometimes, things go there way.
Credit to the Cats to change things around and then start doing their own (although much more clumsy) version in the second half.
The only real issue I saw the JHF was that when he was drifting into the forward line, there was just no communication between our players to pick him up. I don't think our team knew who was playing on him - and it definitely wasnt Parfitt, he was hardly near him - he was picking up other players.
I think his freedom was a team issue TBH.
Clark would be just about leading our team for "letting go of tackles".
The kid definitely has a dip but doesn't have the size/strength to hold bigger mids up when their feet are set or have momentum.
He looks small and always has to me.
Probably needs two more preseasons to put size and then we will be able to see what he can be fully.
It's probably a good thing to get games into him if it isn't costing us wins... and IMO it hasn't cost us until Friday night.
It might sound harsh but I'd almost think we win if Bowes plays over Clark.
Last edited:
Glad you did this so I didn't have to. Thought I was going crazy reading this thread and matching people's assessment of Blicavs with what I saw on the night.
They certainly were - even all the little illegal/almost illegal shit - stuff that you can sometimes get away with - they were doing. Stuff like blocking players to stop the one-two handpass chain, getting a bit more body that should be allowed involved in spoils, all that stuff.
- Sep 26, 2017
- 29,264
- 49,590
- AFL Club
- Geelong
I would leave Mulin in the middle this week he could be a surprise developing midfielder/tagger for the future
Kobe Gryant
'07, '09, '11, '22
Agree totally.
It'll be great for his development as a midfielder having his opponent leading him to the ball.
He'll learn the running patterns of the great mids, when to go vs when not to go, and sharking the taps of either ruckman.
Let him do that for a year or two to learn the game and the position, and we could have something pretty special wants the shackles are released and he can do his own thing.
I have always pushed "Mullin to play as a mid in the VFL", so I can't say I don't want to see in the AFL.
But gee it's a weird way to go about it.
We basically never play him as a mid in the VFL or AFL.
He has been trained up as a small back and then due to Stanley being a spud, all of a sudden he's a tagger in the AFL.
I assume that would completely flip what we have been "working on" as a midfield.
Our mids have been so lacklustre that I won't complain if it happens... It's not like we risk getting worse as a midfield.
But I'm just scratching my head as to why they weren't doing this more in the VFL in the past, so he could've been fast-tracked, getting more minutes in the guts.
Playing him as a small back and then giving him some sub minutes here and there seems a little odd to me.
Maybe he is just ready to go now though, and we pull the trigger.
I do think Mullin will turn into a pretty good dynamic and power player in the future, so it's potentially exciting to see... But he still could be a liability in there (but almost all our mids are liabilities anyway).
Personally I like him in the backline because without Bews were in real need of a player like that that can potentially shut down dangerous small forwards. Plus he has that line breaking speed which, from an attacking perspective, is so invaluable in the back half.
Art Vandelay_
TheBrownDog
- Oct 28, 2012
- 108,504
- 150,609
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- Bushrangers - Tottenham
That is a fact. Was even commented on by Krock. Think it was Neeld. Lambasted for being good offensively but being nowhere near Rioli defensively.
Easy mistake as Holmes was often 50-100m off him and other players covering him. But make no mistake when the ball was bounced he kept standing next to Rioli. Something a TV screen won't show. Then after Stanley was subbed Henry was switched onto him.
As for the rest hardly worth a response. Every midfielder Friday night was garbage that first half. Including the ruck Stanley. Mullin cracked in when he came on but still had no real meaningful influence. We were 8 good also down 10 minutes into the 2nd quarter and tactically subbed before HT. To then accrue a lowly 13 touches is not a good performance at all.
cats_09
Otters United
- Jun 21, 2011
- 68,477
- 142,025
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Moderator
- #999
I wasn't able to attend Friday night, so more reliant on TV commentators & feedback here than I often am
Your info above regarding Rioli matches pretty spot on with what commentators were discussing at half-time about how we were matching up on him - Zach Guthrie started on him, and then Jack Henry spent time on him, but neither showing enough respect & sticking on him
It's good to read the fan commentary that matches up with the tv commentary to get clarity on the situation
He has the speed but doesn't know how to use it yet.
That is still much better than not having it all together.
He isn't that type that runs past and gets handball receives like Holmes does and then uses his speed/agility to explode forward or get him or the team out of a tight situation.
I'd say he is just about as fast as Holmes (and that is lightning)... Hopefully he learns to use it sooner rather than later.
Having speed and using it are two different things, IMO.
Long term, I'd love Mullin to become that explosive power mid and Humphries to play the small-back distributor... Humpa doesn't have that speed though.
It's almost a fork-in-the-road moment for Geelong & Mullin position wise... I look forward to seeing out what direction they go.
- Status
