Roast Inner Feral Fan Unleashed - Warning - Unbridled, passionate, and objectionable opinions within

[Prem17]

Because when you worry your face will frown,
that will bring everybody down,
So don't worry, be happy,
Don't worry, be happy now

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Bumpy McBump Face

 

[hoopsicle]

Is there any point criticizing this setup on here? Just to be hammered by the glitterati who believe everything is ok and next man up is an excuse.

 

[hoopsicle]

Love you ODN the only mod who appears worried abot this rebuild

 

[Gethelred]

I feel like we don't get the tradeoff for being slow around the ball.

For every turning point - endurance vs burst, speed vs power, etc - you have an acceptable trade off; we are slow around the ball so from necessity we have to be getting something for it. Do we get increased ball winning? Kinda. Do we get increased power, players who are stronger and can challenge the tackler and lay bonecrunching tackles themselves? Not really. Do we get players who keep their feet where others go to ground? Not really to not at all; see, tonight was a ****ing disaster but by and large around the ground we go to ground an awful ****ing lot. I'd argue we are inside the worst in the comp at keeping our feet when it counts, where Sydney would be about the best; could be three quarters of their players will handpass to the space in front of them before they get tackled and back themselves to beat us to the ball, but even when and where they did get tackled they refused to go down. It's not just about getting your hands free; it's about controlling the position your hips are in, refusing to turn when your opponent is turning you.

We have some players who'd I'd consider to be good here - Cripps, Walsh - but we also have some players who cannot keep their feet even when they've taken no contact. Durdin, Owies, Fantasia, I'm looking at you. So many players are one effort and done; I'm off, not going again, bye for now. It is tremendously frustrating to me to see players who I know can give second and third efforts - because I've seen them bloody do it before - just up and surrender on a loose ball.

So, if we're slow around the ball, what precisely are we gaining for it? If we're tall around the ground, are we getting anything for it?

Where's the tradeoff successful for us?

 

[Stickitupthem]

We are all experts in here and heaven forbid this was our full time job but really all any of us want is a tough side that uses the ball well and takes advantages of its inside 50 s and gets managed appropriately when we are injured
Not to mention that we are we’ll run and nail our picks and don’t pick up cheap injured players constantly guess what that’s why there cheap and drift in the draft
What I wouldn’t give for a Harley Reid to go watch each week such an excitement machine
Rant over

 

[BlueTongue]

We are all experts in here and heaven forbid this was our full time job but really all any of us want is a tough side that uses the ball well and takes advantages of its inside 50 s and gets managed appropriately when we are injured
Not to mention that we are we’ll run and nail our picks and don’t pick up cheap injured players constantly guess what that’s why there cheap and drift in the draft
What I wouldn’t give for a Harley Reid to go watch each week such an excitement machine
Rant over

^ 100% - Nailed it.
To add my pet hate - small forwards with NFI
Owies nails his set shots, be none of our smalls know how to crumb or stay around the forwards. If you are going to play up the ground, you need to play as an effective mid.

 

[JustaBattler]

Is there any point criticizing this setup on here? Just to be hammered by the glitterati who believe everything is ok and next man up is an excuse.

This the thread for it- shout out your wisdom as loud as you can - don't be shy!

 

[Arr0w]

Is there any point criticizing this setup on here? Just to be hammered by the glitterati who believe everything is ok and next man up is an excuse.

Not much is off limits in this thread, lay it out

This the thread for it- shout out your wisdom as loud as you can - don't be shy!

Yeap

 

[Michael Jezz]

The consequences of the review we had a few years a go, are starting to be felt now. The review left Russell, lloyd and Austin in situ & our injury list and recruiting are not showing results

 

[JustaBattler]

The consequences of the review we had a few years a go, are starting to be felt now. The review left Russell, lloyd and Austin in situ & our injury list and recruiting are not showing results

Understand the question marks over Lyod and Russell- but why Austin ?

 

[Arr0w]

It's sad that many still focus on the negatives and or work in progress areas (which every club endures), rather than enjoying the ride of the positives in the last 12 months

Even more bizarre, posters trying to enforce their negative opinions in an attempt to sway others to their way of thinking

Could you imagine sacking Voss, assistants and others, mid last year based on the white noise

And having Ross as a coach

 

[Blue Reaper]

It's sad that many still focus on the negatives and or work in progress areas (which every club endures), rather than enjoying the ride of the positives in the last 12 months

Even more bizarre, posters trying to enforce their negative opinions in an attempt to sway others to their way of thinking

Could you imagine sacking Voss, assistants and others, mid last year based on the white noise

And having Ross as a coach

Take that back!

 

[Gethelred]

I get extremely grumpy when I see people proposing bringing in Young because Kemp got beat by a roaring Hogan with the entire midfield beaten, because it demonstrates that what we do behind the ball is misunderstood.

Make no mistake, Hogan would've towelled up Young last night; it might've looked different - he'd have gotten Young on the lead instead of in the contest - but he'd have done it all the same. They were genuinely out with no pressure on the inside 50 kick just so, so many times that it wouldn't have mattered; you could chuck SOS on him and he'd have still kicked a bag, just SOS would've looked rather grumpy while it happened. Sometimes, your opponent is going to play well; we are footy fans, not the players, so we can admit it where they have to begrudge it.

No, the problem isn't with the matchup, but with the midfield being so soundly beaten and us being unable to shut down their transition game.

What we do behind the ball - and why we seem to leak goals, regardless of whatever the scoreboard says; prior to this match, we were the best defense in the comp over the preceding 6 games - is intercept. Weitering, Gov, Kemp, Newman all intercept the ball in flight, creating marks and turnovers. It's why Boyd has become the preferred candidate for that second back pocket position; compared to the other options (Cincotta, Williams) he takes more intercepts and competes in the air better than the equivalents. Saad is also not a slouch here. We take opposition attack and pivot it into possession.

Do we look exposed sometimes? **** yes we do. We get beaten overhead, and when you beat us overhead we look ****ing average. Easy to score against. But statistically speaking, we do not get beaten often regardless of what your eyes tell you, and this is why we usually exit D50 so quickly and can string possession into front half so quickly; we have contested marks all over the ****ing ground and talls that can and do provide outlet and chopout. Our slow game is built from being able to widen the ground by getting it to the back flank much, much faster than other sides can, and as a consequence we can spread a zone at the thickest part of the ground.

Last night was shit for two reasons:
1. Our midfield was soundly beaten for more than a thirty minute period, ensuring that they kept getting the ball inside forward 50.
2. Our defenders couldn't mark the ball safely for the first three terms, because they kept spilling chest marks and dropping sitters due to dew and the lights; Harry, for example, held his hand out above his eyes when a high ball came in a few times so it's pretty ****ing clear the lights were a factor.

That's pretty much it. Our transition game is fouled when we don't take intercepts, and upon intercepting that next kick cannot find a target at half back. For two terms, we gave it back with that kick, and they kept getting frees inside forward 50 early during that string which generated momentum.

And none of that - ****ing none of it - is because Young didn't play.

 

[Arr0w]

I get extremely grumpy when I see people proposing bringing in Young because Kemp got beat by a roaring Hogan with the entire midfield beaten, because it demonstrates that what we do behind the ball is misunderstood.

Make no mistake, Hogan would've towelled up Young last night; it might've looked different - he'd have gotten Young on the lead instead of in the contest - but he'd have done it all the same. They were genuinely out with no pressure on the inside 50 kick just so, so many times that it wouldn't have mattered; you could chuck SOS on him and he'd have still kicked a bag, just SOS would've looked rather grumpy while it happened. Sometimes, your opponent is going to play well; we are footy fans, not the players, so we can admit it where they have to begrudge it.

No, the problem isn't with the matchup, but with the midfield being so soundly beaten and us being unable to shut down their transition game.

What we do behind the ball - and why we seem to leak goals, regardless of whatever the scoreboard says; prior to this match, we were the best defense in the comp over the preceding 6 games - is intercept. Weitering, Gov, Kemp, Newman all intercept the ball in flight, creating marks and turnovers. It's why Boyd has become the preferred candidate for that second back pocket position; compared to the other options (Cincotta, Williams) he takes more intercepts and competes in the air better than the equivalents. Saad is also not a slouch here. We take opposition attack and pivot it into possession.

Do we look exposed sometimes? **** yes we do. We get beaten overhead, and when you beat us overhead we look ****ing average. Easy to score against. But statistically speaking, we do not get beaten often regardless of what your eyes tell you, and this is why we usually exit D50 so quickly and can string possession into front half so quickly; we have contested marks all over the ****ing ground and talls that can and do provide outlet and chopout. Our slow game is built from being able to widen the ground by getting it to the back flank much, much faster than other sides can, and as a consequence we can spread a zone at the thickest part of the ground.

Last night was shit for two reasons:
1. Our midfield was soundly beaten for more than a thirty minute period, ensuring that they kept getting the ball inside forward 50.
2. Our defenders couldn't mark the ball safely for the first three terms, because they kept spilling chest marks and dropping sitters due to dew and the lights; Harry, for example, held his hand out above his eyes when a high ball came in a few times so it's pretty ****ing clear the lights were a factor.

That's pretty much it. Our transition game is fouled when we don't take intercepts, and upon intercepting that next kick cannot find a target at half back. For two terms, we gave it back with that kick, and they kept getting frees inside forward 50 early during that string which generated momentum.

And none of that - ****ing none of it - is because Young didn't play.

Valid, but we can also look at in a different way

Young takes Riccardi, Weitering takes Hogan

What I love about Kemp is his natural aggression, but still has brain fade moments in every game

Over the last month, something is NQR with the cohesion between Weitering and Kemp, it's a real watch for me

 

[Gethelred]

Valid, but we can also look at in a different way

Young takes Riccardi, Weitering takes Hogan

I really don't like a pure matchup analysis of AFL. I think it's borne of punditry all being out of date within a good 4-5 years of having played themselves and most of them (if they've coached at all) only having coached at juniors level. It's simplistic, as though simply beating your man leads to your team winning; it ignores that teams win games, not individuals.

What I love about Kemp is his natural aggression, but still has brain fade moments in every game

Over the last month, something is NQR with the cohesion between Weitering and Kemp, it's a real watch for me

I still do not like Kemp as a pure defender. I think he's a wrecking ball, albeit one that has done very, very well at controlling his natural instincts to date and has allowed the rest of the back six to function as a compromise. He's not better than Gov at intercepting or disposing of the ball to advantage, but he allows Gov to avoid sitting a key forward and he's been strong enough to man some pretty good forwards.

I'm certainly not pulling him out because he lowered his colours against ****ing Jesse Hogan.

I've not noticed anything between Weitering and Kemp, might have to rewatch a few games. What I will say is that after Weitering was injured, there was a concerted attempt from GWS to lead him away from the drop of the ball or to kick where he wasn't; it was beyond frustrating to me to see Hogan mark the ball with Weitering a good 20m away from him, manning someone else or doing something else. The communication that has been so vaunted in our back half didn't work last night.

It's frustrating, but to an extent I'm willing to boil it down to the Showgrounds being a place our opposition play well and we play rarely, let alone at night. We don't spill a good 30 marks across the evening elsewhere.

 

[JustaBattler]

I think Vossy and Co were guilty of experimenting ( some forced and some just for S's and giggles) last night.

As a team - Carlton lost the hard ball get game badly for 2 quarters. I think Vossy and co now have enough 'learnings' under their belts to understand which players can and which players cant in certain aspects of the game.

As a team ( looking at you Charlie) Carlton couldn't take a chest mark last night - to release pressure - 2 quarters of pretty much not being able to get your hands on the pill is as bad as it gets.

Those that think TDK is able to beat any ruckman or break even and that his ground ball game will make Carlton a winner and therefore Pittonet is redundant- have come in for a rude ( and predictable ) shock last night.

I have some sympathy ( although limited) for the idea that home ground advantage ( that stadium with that lighting and those conditions) were new experiences for Carlton - but new experience doesn't account for 15 V ~90 points scored against you in 2 quarters nort does the (obvious) absence and physical inability of Weitering to take charge of Hogan ( Weitering couldn't jump after his injury- -no surprises there.


Austin and co would have a pretty good idea that (just maybe) a second proper KPD is a missing item at Carlton -Ive been calling for it for two years now. Austin is having a laugh with Young and Durdin on the list - both about as inspiring as Mirkov - plenty of height in the forward line and after Weitering nothing in defense - ridiculous.


I scratch my head looking at O Hollands week in week out- he gets to contests and loses them pretty much guaranteed - definitely a case of using his endurance whilst waiting for him to learn how to win a ground ball - he is now at the stage where he at least hilds things up for a little while sort of sometimes.

Mind you E Holands was as influential as Cerra and Walsh last night - and Williams switched from a 3 goal champ to chump.

No what has got my radar up more than all of that is selection and why I stated up front I think Voss and Co were taking the pizz

In what world do you drop Owies or omit Hewett or continue to allow numbers advantages to GWS around contests for 2 quarters except int eh world of experimentation?

The conditions were there for all to see wet underfoot added to night time slime - classic Western Suburnbs Sydney in winter.

I hope the learnings have been learned- by the look of Voss he was as disappointed with himself and his game plan as some players. Hanson was particularly demonstrable in speaking to Voss in TV footage I saw.

I get a tad itchy and scratchy when I watch brain farts in action and that was last night.

 

[Worm4]

Re - dekoning
He copped an injury early so not writing off that performance from last night

 

[Blues_1864]

I think everybody knows that the defensive unit's job is much more difficult when the midfield is getting beaten. But if we have a defensive unit that relies on midfield pressure in order to do a holding job, that is potentially an issue.

What struck me last night was that for all GWS's midfield superiority, Hogan did not get silver service. A lot of the time, the ball going to him was not even all that quick. But he dominated anyway, because nobody could stop him marking it.

It's not really on Kemp. He's not really a key defender. We have the luxury of playing him as one, just because Weitering is so good, and most weeks we benefit because of the rebound Kemp gives us. But it does make us more reliant on an unfettered Weitering than perhaps we should be; the extent to which no Weitering = no Carlton is a concern.

Goodness knows it's hard to promote Young. It's had to make a case for his selection, even if (like me) you think he's important to us defensively. Criticisms of him with ball in hand are entirely justified. And there is an element of horses-for-courses to it as well. Maybe Young is not suited against Hawkins/Cameron, for example, but there are other tall forward setups (e.g. GWS, Bulldogs) where he could be more effective. I'll admit I don't know how to make it work (Kemp + McGovern + Newman = same-y but good; Saad + Boyd + Cowan = same-y but good), which is why I have copped out and suggested he be sub, at the expense of one of Fantasia or Cottrell.

I am not suggesting our systems don't matter, or that midfield pressure doesn't matter. They definitely do, and they are more important than match-ups, in general. Last night was just one of those games that really spotlighted a match-up.

 

[AceAndy]

Just getting sick of people trotting out the 95 side had two bad losses on the way to a premiership.

Every loss seems to bring out this rubbish as if what happened 30 years has any relevance to today

 

[JJBagger]

Surely I’m not the only one that gets frustrated at supporters reactions to losses. I’m absolutely of the mindset that we do not know how to lose yet. We are still in the state of “x is no good”, “drop x”, “throw the kitchen sink at x” every single time we lose. Then when we win the following week, that rhetoric disappears into thin air.

I firmly subscribe to the notion that we are an immature, over emotional fan base that doesn’t know how to cope with losses in a pragmatic and thoughtful way. I’m 28 years old, and am witnessing the best Carlton team I can remember. How about people enjoy it, rather than trying to overanalyse every single game and player every time we lose? And don’t give me any of this “scar tissue” or “PTSD” rubbish

 

[Coona Blues]

Surely I’m not the only one that gets frustrated at supporters reactions to losses. I’m absolutely of the mindset that we do not know how to lose yet. We are still in the state of “x is no good”, “drop x”, “throw the kitchen sink at x” every single time we lose. Then when we win the following week, that rhetoric disappears into thin air.

I firmly subscribe to the notion that we are an immature, over emotional fan base that doesn’t know how to cope with losses in a pragmatic and thoughtful way. I’m 28 years old, and am witnessing the best Carlton team I can remember. How about people enjoy it, rather than trying to overanalyse every single game and player every time we lose? And don’t give me any of this “scar tissue” or “PTSD” rubbish

Now, that is a post.

 

[Arr0w]

I really don't like a pure matchup analysis of AFL. I think it's borne of punditry all being out of date within a good 4-5 years of having played themselves and most of them (if they've coached at all) only having coached at juniors level. It's simplistic, as though simply beating your man leads to your team winning; it ignores that teams win games, not individuals.

I still do not like Kemp as a pure defender. I think he's a wrecking ball, albeit one that has done very, very well at controlling his natural instincts to date and has allowed the rest of the back six to function as a compromise. He's not better than Gov at intercepting or disposing of the ball to advantage, but he allows Gov to avoid sitting a key forward and he's been strong enough to man some pretty good forwards.

I'm certainly not pulling him out because he lowered his colours against ****ing Jesse Hogan.

I've not noticed anything between Weitering and Kemp, might have to rewatch a few games. What I will say is that after Weitering was injured, there was a concerted attempt from GWS to lead him away from the drop of the ball or to kick where he wasn't; it was beyond frustrating to me to see Hogan mark the ball with Weitering a good 20m away from him, manning someone else or doing something else. The communication that has been so vaunted in our back half didn't work last night.

It's frustrating, but to an extent I'm willing to boil it down to the Showgrounds being a place our opposition play well and we play rarely, let alone at night. We don't spill a good 30 marks across the evening elsewhere.

Mids certainly do need to impact opposition delivery into the forward 50, but we were burnt in the air from long kicks to packs and outmarked

Weitering and Kemp aren't working well together defensively in the air at the moment, we need those balls either to be intercepted or spoiled more often

Prior to the GWS, we had lost only 7 defensive contests in 50, 5 in air, 2 at ground level

We were spanked on the weekend in both areas

 

[ITCHY EYEBALLS]

Bit too much sensible discussion going on...i thought this was meant to be where everyone lost their shit

 

[Gethelred]

Bit too much sensible discussion going on...i thought this was meant to be where everyone lost their shit