Autopsy Rd 3 Blues beat Giants - We're not putting that one in a time capsule

Who played well for the Blues in Round 3 versus GWS?


  • Total voters
    153
  • Poll closed .

Remove this Banner Ad

Our highest scores last year had 31 scoring shots. We also had a game with 30 scoring shots last season. 29 scoring shots last night will end up being one of the highest we have this season too.

Fixing the shot taking and adjusting the forward 50 entries is more solvable than getting contested ball or setting up a team defence (had those been in our problems instead).

So my main takeaway is the thing we need to work on most is actually very solvable.






Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
 
For me - Fisher is only surviving in the side because of his likeable personality. He has never been a 4Qtr player and in a year where we are supposed to be taking it up to the next level, these efforts should not be tolerated. LOB has had limited opportunity to run into some form, but 7 disposals is a poor return on 70% game time.

I get Vossy is trying to build a tight-knit team but there comes a time when you have to recognize those players that continually and repeatedly taper off. Martin needs to stay out until he is playing football that demands he be picked, and not off the back of a single game. Now Fish should go out for a spell as well.

Owies gets a reprieve for his 2 goals but 4 disposals for the match is woeful.

Not quite one for the Chicken Little thread, but we have a lot of work to do and most of it is mentally.
I don't think we need to congratulate ourselves quite as much and endlessly quote 'learnings'.

Our football should do the talking, and we should now be burying teams, but even though the competition is close, the Teams like *, Norf, West Coast, Adelaide are already a threat to us.

Time to stop the pats on the back and start focusing on smashing teams (moreso on the scoreboard) over 4 Qtrs.

I’ve been very critical of Fisher over the years but I actually thought he took a step forward as a player yesterday. It’s important for players to find a way to get involved when they’ve had a quiet game. He did that yesterday. I thought him getting back to help the defence a fair bit in the second half was important.

Also realistically Honey is not doing enough to push him out, Martin even if fit isn’t offering much more (possibly less) and Cunners is still in need of an extra run or maybe 2 yet. Aside from those 3 there really isn’t another player on our list who can play the high half forward role Fisher plays.

Lob on the other hand took a step backwards yesterday. He used the ball poorly, run out of position and amazingly - given he is an endurance athlete - looked exhausted in the last quarter. He needs a run in the 2s to find some form. We have Hollands and Acres on the wings, and Walsh is due back soon so our running power won’t be hindered.

Ps: you do realise Owies was subbed at quarter time with an injury?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

To be fair until Owies gets a better running pattern and fixes his diet and takes up tantric yoga he'll never be a true AFL level player.
 
Votes from the footy show


20230402_115757-jpg.1647365
 
I suppose that’s true, but that free was eyebrow raising. I’m not complaining, just a weird rule that isn’t enforced well.

But what should be done when there’s dissent? The league wants it stopped, so other than a free what else could be done?

Maybe in this instance the kick out is taken from GWS and a ball up at the top of the square? Do the rules allow for that though?
 
The media is going with a shot of Gov with his arms out appealing for a deliberate free and with Higgins of the Saints doing the same thing, and asking why they weren't free kicks.

However, appealing for a free before a decision is made, is not the same as asking why a free wasn't paid after the decision is made. Furthermore, they are looking at where it happened and what the result of the free was and asking how can something like that be worth a goal. If it were paid in the middle of the ground, nobody would care. I'm not sure why they are asking the umpires to be inconsistent depending on where the ball is.

I'd hate it if it happened to us but that's heat of the moment stuff. I see some really suspect free kicks against some of our defenders and they take it on the chin, almost emotionless when I'd expect them to be as pissed as I am. We're pretty well drilled on this part of the game.
 
But what should be done when there’s dissent? The league wants it stopped, so other than a free what else could be done?

Maybe in this instance the kick out is taken from GWS and a ball up at the top of the square? Do the rules allow for that though?

There was no other option. The free goes to the opposition. It doesn't cancel out a kick in. It's no different than a second shot at goal for knocking a player over after a score.

The media drive me mad. They drive home the umpire respect thing but want the umpire to consider the state of the match when making decisions. They want to be experts and fans at the same time.
 
LOB - after getting the 50 metre penalty, turned it over and we were lucky they only scored a point. Played 71 mins so looks like he was benched for roughly a third of each quarter.

It's worse than that. LOB was benched for the entire first quarter. It's almost as though he was waiting to be invited to play.
 
Owies gets a reprieve for his 2 goals but 4 disposals for the match is woeful.

Not wrong there BT. His fitness is an issue too as he didn't run out the game. Good chance of being dropped next week. They'll probably have him save face with some excuse about an injury. Hamstring strain or something equally suspicious. ;)
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

In the first few minutes it became obvious we were going to go round the boundary line out of defence every time. As a result we practically abandoned the corridor and were scored against very easily. It also requires a lot of short accurate passing subject to being intercepted. A lot f work for little result. Need to be more efficient than this.

We are about average at the moment. But the AFL standard is currently subpar across the board. There's time to improve, but we aren't the only team doing that. luckily our early season draw isn't too bad.

If we improve our goal kicking things will change quickly. We are a confidence team ATM and goals - especially early goals - gets the younger players to lift and tightens up our skill level across the ground. This will bring better performances across the board. Success breeding success.

So no cause for despair, but still a lot of work to do,and time for Voss' learning curve to rise.
 
In the first few minutes it became obvious we were going to go round the boundary line out of defence every time. As a result we practically abandoned the corridor and were scored against very easily. It also requires a lot of short accurate passing subject to being intercepted. A lot f work for little result. Need to be more efficient than this.

We are about average at the moment. But the AFL standard is currently subpar across the board. There's time to improve, but we aren't the only team doing that. luckily our early season draw isn't too bad.

If we improve our goal kicking things will change quickly. We are a confidence team ATM and goals - especially early goals - gets the younger players to lift and tightens up our skill level across the ground. This will bring better performances across the board. Success breeding success.

So no cause for despair, but still a lot of work to do,and time for Voss' learning curve to rise.

We know we have pace on the wings to at least force a stoppage. We know we are treacle slow through the midfield unless it is broken play and we can get Saad rebounding through there. We also know the Giants love the corridor tsunami. Might have been a horses for courses approach. I'd prefer we adjusted tactics to beat our opponents, rather than arrogantly just look at our best gameplan as though it works for all opposition. Giants have some good contested midfielders themselves so it wasn't going to be an area of superior strength for us.

Yes, it costs our forwards clean opportunities if we abandon the corridor, but I feel like it may have saved us on the turnover a bit more.

I don't think we should be doing it against North but we shall see what the lineups are. North tend to move the ball very well against us and Larkey and Zurhaar clean up.
 
But what should be done when there’s dissent? The league wants it stopped, so other than a free what else could be done?

Maybe in this instance the kick out is taken from GWS and a ball up at the top of the square? Do the rules allow for that though?
When there’s dissent it should be a free but it needs to remain consistent
 
There was no other option. The free goes to the opposition. It doesn't cancel out a kick in. It's no different than a second shot at goal for knocking a player over after a score.

The media drive me mad. They drive home the umpire respect thing but want the umpire to consider the state of the match when making decisions. They want to be experts and fans at the same time.

Yep I agree. The umpire paid the kick according to the rules so I’m fine with that.
 
I'll take that. The good sides still win when they play sh1t. And we were shight. I have to say that even when GWS hit the front in the last I was more than confident we'd still win.

Harry Mckay a big big worry just doesn't seem to have the appetite to compete ATM. Always running under the ball, sometimes playing for a free kick that's not there. Needs to learn how to impose himself more on games and quickly.

Charlie kicked a couple of brilliant goals, like to see that x 3.

Cripps took up the slack from the missing Kennedy. Amazing performance.

Big shout out to Blake Acres who put in his second great performance in two weeks, this time clearly held back by a dodgy shoulder. This guy clearly makes us a better side, he's a great pick up.
 
Pitto another low TOG game at 54%. TDK 64%.

Cowan might need a rest soon, only 64% TOG as a small defender is very low...next lowest out of our smaller defenders was Saad at 81%.

Like the 2 ruck set up, think it helps our stoppage and clearance work, but wonder if it's sustainable since everyone else has to play higher TOG to accommodate.
 
To be fair, the only bad takes about Newman have been from Jimmae.

His takes have added 5 pages to this thread alone with people talking about how good Newman was.

Voss gave him special praise in the presser.

Sorry did I hear correctly? Someone is criticising Newman's game? Even if you dont rate him or dislike him, you can't deny him his stellar victory over one of the competitions best forwards. Even victory is underplaying it. He eclipsed Greene.
 
Our highest scores last year had 31 scoring shots. We also had a game with 30 scoring shots last season. 29 scoring shots last night will end up being one of the highest we have this season too.

Fixing the shot taking and adjusting the forward 50 entries is more solvable than getting contested ball or setting up a team defence (had those been in our problems instead).

So my main takeaway is the thing we need to work on most is actually very solvable.






Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
8 were rushed
 
If you face the fact, that Carlton are a 6th to 8th side without a premiership list, which lacks the personel to put speed on the ball by hand or foot-then you appreciate the win.

Is it really a fact that we are a 6th to 8th side? Feels a little like a prediction.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Autopsy Rd 3 Blues beat Giants - We're not putting that one in a time capsule

Back
Top