Review Rd 1 Review - !?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? (Freo Beat Adelaide by a Point - Praise be to ChapGod)

Remove this Banner Ad

It’s interesting in our 3 games this year, albeit including a couple of scratchies, we have started strongly, which is great, but our 3rd quarters have been very poor (apart from the smashing v WC).
Awesome to get the starts, but perhaps need to address our half time breaks to ensure it’s not going to be a constant issue. Yes it’s early in the season, but our intensity after half time was sh*t & that’s hard to turn around as we saw today.
Not sure if anyone responded to this because I haven't had time to read thee whole thread. However, this is potentially going to be a recurring issue.

The long break is the first opportunity that a coach can get the team together and properly move the magnets around the board. Where we have dominated the first half, the oppo coach is going to be looking at how can they arrest our momentum - but also what can they do to get back into the game. Whereas, what is the coach of a team that has dominated the first half going to do - probably tell the team to keep doing what they're doing.

So - it's perhaps inevitable that if we've been on top for the first half then we're going to see a different team come out in the 3rd quarter. From a coaching perspective - do we need to have 'first five minutes of 3rd quarter if we're leading' drill - or at least something we can switch to if the oppo starts to get a run on.
 
We lost to Melbourne round 1 last year thinking they were a bottom 8 team. We don't know how good Adelaide will be yet....


And even in that game Melbourne we’re not that impressive YET!
Who knows how much we will improve as the season goes on but even watching Melbourne in that game last year they were also not that impressive in the first game of the season.

On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 

Log in to remove this ad.

This is the exact perception I'm talking about. People see it when perhaps it's not there. I look at any number of incidents when commentators say he was "playing for the free" and in watching it carefully on replay there's no way he was. It happens a lot.

At the end of the day, the umpires are there to adjudicate the rules. Full stop. Not some pre-conceived story.

You may not be wrong, history and contextual knowledge influence perception. But it isn't as simple as umpires should just be more professional and not be effected by what actually is a fundamental cognitive principle that influences many facets of perception. I'm not immune to it, you may be right I see staging where there might not be. Judges, psychologists, doctors, etc. also aren't immune and require training to have some self awareness of the effect.

Long story short it really is negative for a player to develop a reputation for staging as it colours every incident to appear as such unless extremely blatant. For me personally, I'd rather our players play the game in good faith, which helps the umpires, rather than make what is a very difficult job even more so which I personally don't think I could do in such split second scenarios with players like Walters.
 
I'm intrigued by this sudden notion that we're shallow in the midfield. I don't recall any comments suggesting it prior to the game, but its being thrown around everywhere since. We dominated the first half, did we not? Then got beaten for a quarter and then held our own in the last didn't we? Did we select less midfielders than Adelaide?

Can someone help me understand where, why or how this needing depth in the midfield came about please?
Because the commentators said it a couple of times and people are easily lead. There will be posts about missing Cerra too forgetting the guy didn't complete a full game as an inside mid for us till about 4 games before he left.

We weren't shallow, they just got beat over a long stretch from during the second till near the end of the 4th.

Frankly I think Mundy is the current issue. He's a defensive liability now, old man can hardly turn around. Long term we need three A grade mids to be a top team and we only have 2. One of last years crop need to be good.
 
Because the commentators said it a couple of times and people are easily lead. There will be posts about missing Cerra too forgetting the guy didn't complete a full game as an inside mid for us till about 4 games before he left.

We weren't shallow, they just got beat over a long stretch from during the second till near the end of the 4th.

Frankly I think Mundy is the current issue. He's a defensive liability now, old man can hardly turn around. Long term we need three A grade mids to be a top team and we only have 2. One of last years crop need to be good.
We currently have three and we have Erasmus and Johnson in waiting. The midfield is fine.
 
Because the commentators said it a couple of times and people are easily lead. There will be posts about missing Cerra too forgetting the guy didn't complete a full game as an inside mid for us till about 4 games before he left.

We weren't shallow, they just got beat over a long stretch from during the second till near the end of the 4th.

Frankly I think Mundy is the current issue. He's a defensive liability now, old man can hardly turn around. Long term we need three A grade mids to be a top team and we only have 2. One of last years crop need to be good.
We needed to make changes to a badly beaten midfield in the 3rd quarter and we either didn't have anyone or chose not to use them. I came up with that, right or wrong, all by myself. I also said it all year last year.
 
We chose not to use them. Switta, Walters, Tucker, Banfield and Acres have all played inside at AFL level before. I think having 9 options in your 22 is more than enough.
But why didn't we use the. The supporters are over the midfield education thing, so why would you risk losing a game we should have won by 5 goals rather than use your suggested options.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

But why didn't we use the. The supporters are over the midfield education thing, so why would you risk losing a game we should have won by 5 goals rather than use your suggested options.
We did in the 4th, once the coaches had a chance to change it up, Switowski and Banfield both played mid. Think it should have been done earlier but I think everyone was in shock.
 
We did use Switta in the 4th quarter and that's one of the main reasons why we got the win.
Switta plays more like a midfielder than a forward which is another problem. He does bring good pressure I50 though. This is why we need our other small/medium forwards to stand up.
 
Jordan Clark comes over to Fremantle and plays his best game of his career right from the word go. Shows how much Geelong were misusing his talents.
 
Jordan Clark comes over to Fremantle and plays his best game of his career right from the word go. Shows how much Geelong were misusing his talents.

Or rather not using him would be more accurate.
 
Who doesn't love a one point win? That was a fun game. I just don't care anymore. It's like WWF due to the AFL being super corrupt, and having umpires so blatantly bias.

I havent forgotten the Carlton debacle a few years ago.
 
Who doesn't love a one point win? That was a fun game. I just don't care anymore. It's like WWF due to the AFL being super corrupt, and having umpires so blatantly bias.

I havent forgotten the Carlton debacle a few years ago.
Wouldn't shock me if there's WWE style scripting to some extent, you see it happen all the time in American sports. The narratives and stories that the league want to push are the ones that will get focus. The AFL clearly have teams they want to push at the forefront and we're very clearly at the bottom of that list.

The story of Fremantle winning their first flag holds no importance up at the top.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Review Rd 1 Review - !?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? (Freo Beat Adelaide by a Point - Praise be to ChapGod)

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top