Autopsy Hawks vs Cats - Do the autopsy here.

[Roger Rogerson]

And geez I am just so farking sick and tired of our bullshit antics at the selection table with late changes and our bullshit reports to the media about injuries. Why cant we be men and deal with what is at our disposal rather than fabricating bullshit. Happens more weeks than it doesnt. Strip back the bullshit please.

 

[Bosk]

Paul Roos!

Do.Not.Want.

 

[falcons2]

Current forecast for Perth next Sunday, 29 Humid with the chance of showers.

 

[Phil McCreviss]

I dunno, Phil. I thought there was some danger signs half way through the second quarter. We actually had the chance to bury them, I thought, and squandered chance after chance. We seemed sharp and more creative than the Cats and able to bust their systems apart when needed. Aside from a disturbing lack of concern about leaving the defensive wing open, we seemed in total control but not taking our chances. The guy I was with turned to me when we were about 5 goals up and said, "we should be at least 7 goals up... they need to hold this lead going into half time." But we didn't. Letting up two easy goals just before the bell was critical.

Then, of course, in the third quarter they smashed us. We seemed so flat footed; handballing to stationery players, over-using the ball etc. Our forward line was disfunctional. Couldn't help but ponder with the sheer quantity of tall talent (on paper) why we didn't use them to advantage. Roughead seems to lack a position.

We can muse all we like about fitness, first game of the year and the like, but, for me, once again, a frailty was exposed by the Cats. Our gameplan unravelled and, most alarmingly, our forward line was reduced to impotency much like what the Swans did on Grand Final game.

I'm not going to rule a line through anything until a few rounds have passed, but there are a few worrying signs for me and they're not new one, rather ones that have dogged us for a couple of years. Above all, and I know this is contentious, but there's something about the spirit of the Cats, their belief, their desire that just seems to show us up of late.

Make some good points Grizz. There are cracks - no doubt.

What frustrates me in these situations is that our gameplan, for all it's flaws, holds up for periods of time even against quality opposition. It's the sustaining which is the issue. Today we got 6 goals up. In the GF we dropped 6 goals in a 10 minute burst. I think there is enough evidence to suggest our gameplan is structurally sound. Based on that assumption (and clearly a concern) is that the only aspect left to question is the players pysch.

Like you, I won't rule a line through us just yet. And I won't subscribe to the Clarkson hysteria. But I was looking for something in the post game presser. Maybe a touch of anger, a steely focus to improve. But I saw a very philosophical matter of fact coach who was almost accepting of the result.

I always felt Clarkson was at his tactical best when there is an us v them attitude. It drives him to be more competitive which in turn permeates through the playing group. Sadly this playing group does not handle the weight of expectation well. Being the "hunted" is not their forte.

Which is why I don't mind Kennett's comments. He knows what makes AC tick...maybe it's the rocket he needs to get the edge back.

 

[SSSSSS]

Remember when we could rip on John Barker for our forward structure? Those were the days...

Seriously though why do we have no forward structure.

 

[grizzlym]

Make some good points Grizz. There are cracks - no doubt.

What frustrates me in these situations is that our gameplan, for all it's flaws, holds up for periods of time even against quality opposition. It's the sustaining which is the issue. Today we got 6 goals up. In the GF we dropped 6 goals in a 10 minute burst. I think there is enough evidence to suggest our gameplan is structurally sound. Based on that assumption (and clearly a concern) is that the only aspect left to question is the players pysch.

Like you, I won't rule a line through us just yet. And I won't subscribe to the Clarkson hysteria. But I was looking for something in the post game presser. Maybe a touch of anger, a steely focus to improve. But I saw a very philosophical matter of fact coach who was almost accepting of the result.

I always felt Clarkson was at his tactical best when there is an us v them attitude. It drives him to be more competitive which in turn permeates through the playing group. Sadly this playing group does not handle the weight of expectation well. Being the "hunted" is not their forte.

Which is why I don't mind Kennett's comments. He knows what makes AC tick...maybe it's the rocket he needs to get the edge back.

Actually, JK is only speaking his mind here. it's not meant as a rocket, I believe.

 

[Phil McCreviss]

Actually, JK is only speaking his mind here. it's not meant as a rocket, I believe.

Even better then.

 

[BobHawk]

Mitchell, Schoenmakers and Puopolo really the only standouts for me today. Hill was also superb in the first quarter. The moment that summed up the game for me was when Shiels was running for the ball and failed to get in line with it. Bartel was in line with it and burst away with it, whilst Shiels attempted to tap it forward. Really have got to get in line with the ball there to A win the ball or if not B take the opponent out. Cats wanted it more.

We had it good from the umpires today and we failed to capitalize.

Good observations. Thought Pop was a real warrior today and brought some real hardness at the contest. I noticed quite a few blokes not getting behind the ball resulting in fumbles and turnovers. Just basic stuff. Hard to believe. Also, as has already been commented by many people our forwards all jumping for the mark and creating congestion whereas Geelong were using their bodies to keep our defenders away from the ball in their forward line. They got caught out a couple of times by the umps but worked well for them. Actually, their shepherding in general was great. We seem to lack that in our game hence, pressure and congestion in general play. Maybe just laziness.

 

[Phil McCreviss]

Kennet curse, lol!

Now it's 10 since he opened his mouth, surely he has to apologise...might be the only way to break the curse

No thanks. If you asked me back in Sep 2008 if that GF win will cost us 20 consecutive losses to the Cats I would have taken it in a heart beat. Still stand by that - as frustrating as it is.

 

[hawkstars]

Next hawks v cats game we need Dermie to pop in at half time. Line in the sand.

 

[grizzlym]

Next hawks v cats game we need Dermie to pop in at half time. Line in the sand.

Getting him to run through the Geelong huddle would be a good start.

 

[BobHawk]

Next hawks v cats game we need Dermie to pop in at half time. Line in the sand.

Is it too late to rookie list him so we can promote him to the seniors?

 

[BobHawk]

No thanks. If you asked me back in Sep 2008 if that GF win will cost us 20 consecutive losses to the Cats I would have taken it in a heart beat. Still stand by that - as frustrating as it is.

Sorry to intrude Phil but I think you are looking at it the wrong way.

 

[Phil McCreviss]

Sorry to intrude Phil but I think you are looking at it the wrong way.

Maybe. But that's what make our opinions just that - opinions.

I can tell you one thing. I'd take a 10 consecutive loss streak against the Swans to have another trophy in the cabinet.

 

[Bosk]

Remember when we could rip on John Barker for our forward structure? Those were the days...


Seriously though why do we have no forward structure.

If I had a dollar for every time a Hawk supporter on this board posted something to this effect I'd be rich...


We DO have a forward structure. Our forward structure is functioning in accordance with our gameplan.
Our gameplan is to bomb the ball either to the top of the square or to one of the forwards pockets where one of our talls will hopefully mark it, or worse case scenario cause a stoppage or throw-in. This allows us to trap the ball inside our 50 with frantic forward pressure from our smaller players.

The advantage of this gameplan is that by getting the ball deep inside our 50 as soon as possible it minimizes the odds of the opposition forcing a turnover in a particularly dangerous part of the ground (like right on the 50 at CHB for instance) and then scoring on the rebound. It also maximizes the number of scoring possibilities we can get for each inside 50 entry in theory.
The disadvantages of this gameplan are that it generates few easy scoring opportunities by hitting up players on a lead, and many of the scoring chances it does generate are from positions & angles where kicking a goal is difficult. (ie. the pockets)

Oh and I was one of those people calling for Barker to be sacked a long time before it actually happened. Sadly his removal did very little to change the style of game we play, leading me to believe Clarkson is the one who calls the shots in this area and is reluctant to change our forward gameplan despite its deficiencies. (and in fairness to him were the #1 scoring team in the AFL last year)

 

[hawker92]

Not sure what happened in the 3rd quarter. Couldn't seem to find space and play the game on our terms.

My opinion on our best performers:
- Sewell
- Mitchell
- Guerra
- Schoenmakers
- Gibson
- Stratton
- Burgoyne
- Puopolo
- Hill

Inconsistent performances from:
- Franklin
- Rioli
- Lewis
- Birchall
- Bailey
- Breust

Disappointing performances from:
- Roughead
- Smith
- Gunston
- Savage
- Shiels
- Hale

Anderson did some nice things on debut. Improvement needed in his disposal. A few of his kicks inside 50 were to our disadvantage. Loved his shirt front though.
Thought our defence did very well today. Schoenmakers in the first half was fantastic.
3rd Quarter was eerily reminiscent of the GF. Game seemed to be clogged up and restricted any space we gained at clearances. Brick walls everywhere.
I think playing Bailey, Hale, and Rough is a mistake. Simpkin would have been an ideal replacement for one of those three by adding a bit more depth in the midfield.

 

[grizzlym]

Not snagging some goals from our mids is becoming a slightly worrying trend.

 

[Roger Rogerson]

Make some good points Grizz. There are cracks - no doubt.

What frustrates me in these situations is that our gameplan, for all it's flaws, holds up for periods of time even against quality opposition. It's the sustaining which is the issue. Today we got 6 goals up. In the GF we dropped 6 goals in a 10 minute burst. I think there is enough evidence to suggest our gameplan is structurally sound. Based on that assumption (and clearly a concern) is that the only aspect left to question is the players pysch.

Like you, I won't rule a line through us just yet. And I won't subscribe to the Clarkson hysteria. But I was looking for something in the post game presser. Maybe a touch of anger, a steely focus to improve. But I saw a very philosophical matter of fact coach who was almost accepting of the result.

I always felt Clarkson was at his tactical best when there is an us v them attitude. It drives him to be more competitive which in turn permeates through the playing group. Sadly this playing group does not handle the weight of expectation well. Being the "hunted" is not their forte.

Which is why I don't mind Kennett's comments. He knows what makes AC tick...maybe it's the rocket he needs to get the edge back.

We can overanalyse things forever and a day about gameplans etc. It is our personnel that is the problem. Too many players with flaws which show up against the best sides. And a lot of them are our topliners. Even Mitchell who is absolutely brilliant a) is a midget so is susceptible to a tag (compare him to trying to tag Josh Kennedy) and b) cant run both ways so is vulernable defensively. Franklin and Roughead cant take a mark. Gibbo is undersized up back. The list goes on and on. All clubs have flaws in their players but I would think a number of the blokes who do it for us in the home and away season regularly who we assume will do it in finals now haven't stood up in the big games.

 

[BobHawk]

Maybe. But that's what make our opinions just that - opinions.

I can tell you one thing. I'd take a 10 consecutive loss streak against the Swans to have another trophy in the cabinet.

I haven't stated this yet but my big issue today is that I would have thought the boys would have been jumping out of their skin for this game to make some sort of statement or redemption or call it what you like for losing the big dance last year. In some ways it is as disappointing as the GF because it worries me that our blokes don't lift to make a point or don't understand. Whether they do or not I'm not sure. Geelong did not field a very strong team today. We should have been all over them like a rash.

 

[MisterMarcus]

You guys may have done this argument to death round here.....but why not plonk Roughy at centre half back for a few games?
For whatever reason it just isn't happening as much for him as a forward, and maybe a change of scenery could do him the world of good. If Lake isn't playing, there is still the question mark over a backmen to take the bigger forwards, plus as an outsider it seems Franklin+Roughead+Gunston+Hale is one tall forward too many. So it could benefit the team structure as well as helping Rough get his mojo back.

You could easily have enough options in attack by playing Franklin, Gunston, and a bunch of medium-smalls in there, plus Hale rotating through....

 

[jegsteam]

Not sure what happened in the 3rd quarter. Couldn't seem to find space and play the game on our terms.

My opinion on our best performers:
- Sewell
- Mitchell
- Guerra
- Schoenmakers
- Gibson
- Stratton
- Burgoyne
- Puopolo
- Hill

Inconsistent performances from:
- Franklin
- Rioli
- Lewis
- Birchall
- Bailey
- Breust

Disappointing performances from:
- Roughead
- Smith
- Gunston
- Savage
- Shiels
- Hale

Anderson did some nice things on debut. Improvement needed in his disposal. A few of his kicks inside 50 were to our disadvantage. Loved his shirt front though.
Thought our defence did very well today. Schoenmakers in the first half was fantastic.
3rd Quarter was eerily reminiscent of the GF. Game seemed to be clogged up and restricted any space we gained at clearances. Brick walls everywhere.
I think playing Bailey, Hale, and Rough is a mistake. Simpkin would have been an ideal replacement for one of those three by adding a bit more depth in the midfield.

Take Hale out if that bottom bracket and I'd be happy for the others listed not to play next week in the 1s

 

[Procrastinator35]

3 Simple Words Guys:

BRING BACK BARNEY!

 

[Steven Tyler]

M

I haven't stated this yet but my big issue today is that I would have thought the boys would have been jumping out of their skin for this game to make some sort of statement or redemption or call it what you like for losing the big dance last year. In some ways it is as disappointing as the GF because it worries me that our blokes don't lift to make a point or don't understand. Whether they do or not I'm not sure. Geelong did not field a very strong team today. We should have been all over them like a rash.

Maybe we are overrated as a team?
I certainly think a few of our boys are for sure!

 

[Phil McCreviss]

We can overanalyse things forever and a day about gameplans etc. It is our personnel that is the problem. Too many players with flaws which show up against the best sides. And a lot of them are our topliners. Even Mitchell who is absolutely brilliant a) is a midget so is susceptible to a tag (compare him to trying to tag Josh Kennedy) and b) cant run both ways so is vulernable defensively. Franklin and Roughead cant take a mark. Gibbo is undersized up back. The list goes on and on. All clubs have flaws in their players but I would think a number of the blokes who do it for us in the home and away season regularly who we assume will do it in finals now haven't stood up in the big games.

Yes I agree it's our personnel and their ability to mentally get themselves over the line. It is definitely not an ability issue. And it's not a gameplan issue.

 

[Leather Poisoning]

So frustrating to see Geelong beat us exactly the same way every time.

Just way too much room in their forward half and way too crowded in ours.

No way through the corridor leaving us to bomb it long onto our forwards heads. Then somehow, we have no runners at the fall of the ball either.

I don't profess to be a tactical mastermind, but I do wonder how it is that our forward line is crowded all day, whilst they're able to waltz across the 50m line and take shots with time and space. It happened in the GF, it happened in the PF, and it's happened in rd 1.

Poor contested marking is epidemic within our group. 4 contested marks to 11 at half time. No idea what it was at the end of the match, but seeing Harry Taylor do as he pleased once again was no good at all.

Most of the time I yield to the notion that Clarko has more idea than me, but seriously, getting Anderson to tag Selwood in that final quarter was just dumb. I'm all for education, throw the kid in the deep end, etc - but you've basically conceded that postiion, which is the most important on the ground in a game decided largely on clearance ability.

Really frustrated. We took our foot off 5 minutes before half time. Took us 35 minutes of game time to get it back on our terms. Not good enough. Sick of it happening.