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

[agro]

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.

Harry saved the game last week versus Geelong - he may not win the Coleman but he’s doing enough - he just needs to tidy up those set shots.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Ollie Hollands has a little Kade Simpson

6

Kade Simpson

Age

40

Ht

183cm

Wt

75kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

21.3

5star

K

14.0

5star

HB

7.3

5star

M

5.7

5star

T

2.6

4star

MG

409.0

5star

D

16.3

4star

K

11.9

5star

HB

4.4

3star

M

3.9

4star

T

0.8

1star

MG

258.6

4star

D

2.0

1star

K

1.2

1star

HB

0.8

1star

M

0.8

1star

T

1.6

4star

about him. Not the biggest dog in the fight but the biggest heart and knows where the ball will be.

 

[agro]

Ollie Hollands has a little Kade Simpson about him. Not the biggest dog in the fight but the biggest heart and knows where the ball will be.

And stacks more possessions than Simmo got in his first three games as well.

 

[JustaBattler]

The issue with Fish is he doesn't have a dominant position. He's nominally a high half forward who goes on ball now and then. A floating small if you like.

He scores half a goal per game so doesn't stack up with the small forwards. He averages 16 disposals per game so doesn't stack up against on ballers. He gets 2 marks per game and has 4 contested marks in his career thus far, so he doesn't stack up against outside midfielders/wingers.

He's around 2 and a half tackles per game so he doesn't stack up against defensive half forwards or run with players. He has 1 Brownlow vote in his whole career so he doesn't dominant games. He averages less than 1 one percenter per game so he's not a team orientated player. He just slips into the cracks.

Mind you, I advocated for Fisher to be taken with our second selection in his draft year. He and Nic Newman are probably the best (maybe only) calls I have made in advance as a supporter. So it's not like I have an agenda where Fish is concerned. I just feel that the occasional good game, where someone might call out all of the Fisher critics, don't necessariy negate those where he's not performing.

Right now though, we have nobody to replace him. Perhaps Binns is the best 'like for like' option in time, despite Binns being more of a winger.

Durdin and Motlop have gone past him already as far as small forwards go Hollands is a better player already as far as flank play goes - it will get interesting for Fisher when Cunningham gets a few games under his belt and or Martin and Cottrell become available. What Fisher is good at are two things when 'on' evasive spurt running in congestion and a natural sense for attacking play - his defensive deficiencies are unfortunately more significant.

It is pretty obvious who teh players re that will struggle to keep their spots over time- he is one of them ( IMO)

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

And stacks more possessions than Simmo got in his first three games as well.

Well that's low hanging fruit.

 

[El Topo]

Some observations from the replay:

• Cripps BOG. Monster.
• Team defence won the game but we should have buried them in the third.
• Newman is the backline general, this is both a compliment to Nic and a criticism of Weitering
• O'Brien
• Need to keep the two rucks. TDK is building and SOS is important up forward.
• The Durdin/Motlop combo is almost as important as Harry/Charlie
• Hollands outstanding. He and Cowan make us a better side.
• Cerra would be a coach's favourite for his sacrificial team roles. Not enough love for Cez.
• I'm as critical of Fisher an anyone but he was clearly under instructions to work back in defence.
• Charlie is getting better.
• Acres. Trite to say that we would have played finals with him in the side last year.
• Composure will come, just gotta keep winning.

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

The issue with Fish is he doesn't have a dominant position. He's nominally a high half forward who goes on ball now and then. A floating small if you like.

He scores half a goal per game so doesn't stack up with the small forwards. He averages 16 disposals per game so doesn't stack up against on ballers. He gets 2 marks per game and has 4 contested marks in his career thus far, so he doesn't stack up against outside midfielders/wingers.

He's around 2 and a half tackles per game so he doesn't stack up against defensive half forwards or run with players. He has 1 Brownlow vote in his whole career so he doesn't dominant games. He averages less than 1 one percenter per game so he's not a team orientated player. He just slips into the cracks.

Mind you, I advocated for Fisher to be taken with our second selection in his draft year. He and Nic Newman are probably the best (maybe only) calls I have made in advance as a supporter. So it's not like I have an agenda where Fish is concerned. I just feel that the occasional good game, where someone might call out all of the Fisher critics, don't necessariy negate those where he's not performing.

Right now though, we have nobody to replace him. Perhaps Binns is the best 'like for like' option in time, despite Binns being more of a winger.

He is being asked to play a variety of roles depending on the rotation and opposition. Pushed deep into the back pocket in the last quarter, started on the wing at some points, started as a deep forward at others.

Last year he had a pretty good season when left at half forward and I reckon that's where Voss wants him in his best 22. Once Walsh comes back he can do some of those left over wing minutes and Fish can be left to do what he does best.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

He is being asked to play a variety of roles depending on the rotation and opposition. Pushed deep into the back pocket in the last quarter, started on the wing at some points, started as a deep forward at others.

Last year he had a pretty good season when left at half forward and I reckon that's where Voss wants him in his best 22. Once Walsh comes back he can do some of those left over wing minutes and Fish can be left to do what he does best.

All of our small forwards push into defence on occasion. That's just part of the role and he starts further up the ground than the others. He was desperate in the last quarter along with everyone else, but a little timid prior to that. He certainly doesn't have the aggression of Owies, Durdin and Motlop.

 

[BlueTang]

The issue with Fish is he doesn't have a dominant position. He's nominally a high half forward who goes on ball now and then. A floating small if you like.

He scores half a goal per game so doesn't stack up with the small forwards. He averages 16 disposals per game so doesn't stack up against on ballers. He gets 2 marks per game and has 4 contested marks in his career thus far, so he doesn't stack up against outside midfielders/wingers.

He's around 2 and a half tackles per game so he doesn't stack up against defensive half forwards or run with players. He has 1 Brownlow vote in his whole career so he doesn't dominant games. He averages less than 1 one percenter per game so he's not a team orientated player. He just slips into the cracks.

Mind you, I advocated for Fisher to be taken with our second selection in his draft year. He and Nic Newman are probably the best (maybe only) calls I have made in advance as a supporter. So it's not like I have an agenda where Fish is concerned. I just feel that the occasional good game, where someone might call out all of the Fisher critics, don't necessariy negate those where he's not performing.

Right now though, we have nobody to replace him. Perhaps Binns is the best 'like for like' option in time, despite Binns being more of a winger.

Great analysis, I hope every player makes it, but it is not looking great for him. Last year he was a bit of a team barometer, if he got 20 disposals we seemed to win. HFF’s for me are the teams weakness for me atm

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

All of our small forwards push into defence on occasion. That's just part of the role and he starts further up the ground than the others. He was desperate in the last quarter along with everyone else, but a little timid prior to that. He certainly doesn't have the aggression of Owies, Durdin and Motlop.

His output generally reflects that. 17 touches again last night, those two moments where he turned it over in poor fashion stick out but are also clouding judgement. He is still the most productive and consistent small in our forward line. That is quickly changing with Mots on the rise but I'm not ready to kick out Fish yet.

 

[El Topo]

The issue with Fish is he doesn't have a dominant position. He's nominally a high half forward who goes on ball now and then. A floating small if you like.

He scores half a goal per game so doesn't stack up with the small forwards. He averages 16 disposals per game so doesn't stack up against on ballers. He gets 2 marks per game and has 4 contested marks in his career thus far, so he doesn't stack up against outside midfielders/wingers.

He's around 2 and a half tackles per game so he doesn't stack up against defensive half forwards or run with players. He has 1 Brownlow vote in his whole career so he doesn't dominant games. He averages less than 1 one percenter per game so he's not a team orientated player. He just slips into the cracks.

Mind you, I advocated for Fisher to be taken with our second selection in his draft year. He and Nic Newman are probably the best (maybe only) calls I have made in advance as a supporter. So it's not like I have an agenda where Fish is concerned. I just feel that the occasional good game, where someone might call out all of the Fisher critics, don't necessariy negate those where he's not performing.

Right now though, we have nobody to replace him. Perhaps Binns is the best 'like for like' option in time, despite Binns being more of a winger.

They'll want to keep Hollands in the side when Walsh comes back...

 

[GinTonic]

it doesn't matter what the wording is though - we know the head high rule, everyone does - does that stop the cries of "that wasn't high?" "that was soft!" wouldn't have thought so - there is a weird other-worldly type thinking among supporters that one day it will all be ok - it won't - the proof being I have personally experienced the same complaints for 50 years and it goes back much further - concentrate on what you can control - like not abusing umps for a kickoff.....

While we all know the head high rule, I don't believe the dissent rule is as clear, things like pointing and swearing at umpires is clear cut, but I must admit, I had no idea that asking the question "why wasn't that holding the ball?" constituted dissent. Especially since it seemed like the arms out being demonstrative rule had been relaxed.

I think the AFL have made it clear. Dissent is disagreeing with an umpire's decision in a demonstrative fashion. Arms out is demonstrative. What you phrase as 'asking for clarification', was clearly disagreeing with an umpiring decision after the decision has been made. I don't feel like the umpire had any choice there. If Coniglio didn't have the arms out and simply asked if that was illegal disposal by McKay, it would have passed. It wasn't though, he demanded the umpire explain himself.

I agree with your assessment ODN, what has perplexed me in this instance was from the games I've seen so far this year the arms out being demonstrative rule seems to have been relaxed (I think there was a tweet by Tom Brown stating as much). If this is the way the AFL are interpreting the dissent rule so be it, but it seems very harsh as you'd have to be a robot to not react as Coniglio did.

 

[toddkurnski]

Watched the replay and it was worth it. Some key takeaways for me.
Absolutely got cut up in the first quarter from the kick in and turn overs at half back. Giants all to easily hitting the corridor with runners forward of the ball from half back with no pressure on them at all, so something breaking down there from our shape and structure.

What was pleasing is that for the 2nd and until the last 5 minutes 3rd term we rectified this and strangled them and gave them very few looks, while also creating opportunities. Won the contested ball and looked defensively very strong. Both Harry and Charlie’s shots were gimme’s, LOB should have nailed his. Should have been a 5 goal margin at 3/4 time.

Then the inevitable momentum swing occurred when the Giants got their pressure up, but I thought we did well to wrestle it back and eventually repeat entries got a pretty soft free kick. We’ve been on the receiving end of those for some years so not going to lie, don’t feel guilty about it. Good to see Charlie also go back from outside 50, use up the 30 seconds, even though he missed was the right play given the clock and the match situation.
People are also missing Fisher’s role in the game. Played a really smart game getting back to help the defence, well positioned many times to provide an outlet, used it well coming out of there under pressure. If it was a coaching instruction, might even get 1 vote in the coaches award. The criticism of him is that if he can’t get it at HF then he adds no value, wasn’t the case today.

Got to get it into McGoverns hands more at half back. His kicks on the 30 to 45 angle really open teams up. We look great when he can get that kick into the right space in the corridor. Gives us speed on the ball and doesn’t give teams an opportunity to cover both H and Charlie.

Lyon and Dunstall were right about H and Charlie. Can’t stretch a defence if they both bring defenders to the same spot. Was disappointing to see them do that.

Acres staying out there was important. He winced every time he had to move that arm. Still committed to every contest. Will have earned so much respect from the players and coaches for getting through that game.

Motlop was excellent, composed and making good choices. Good progression from him this week.
LOB was very poor. Seemed to be the one most effected by the surface.

What a shitshow that ground was. I think it did have an impact on the game, without sure footing kicks seemed to be getting sprayed, I guess it’s harder when your planted foot doesn’t feel as stable.

Cripps great. Newman excellent.

Honorable mentions

Saad, Cerra, Docherty, Silvagni

Forgettable

Harry, Hewett

Seems in here there are quarter to quarter week to week over reactions. We are a 5-8 team who controlled a game against a 9-15 team for 70% of the game. Convert those easy set shots and it’s a 4-5 goal win which is about where we are at. We are hard to score against, but lack polish up forward to gap teams.

If you asked anyone what Sydney’s game plan was in that first quarter against the Dees, you’d struggle to define it. They got completely cut up with short options and no pressure on the Dees defensively. Couldn’t escape the Dees excellent structure through a 3/4 field press. But I doubt anyone thinks Sydney have a poor game plan or lack structures or coaching nous.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I agree with your assessment ODN, what has perplexed me in this instance was from the games I've seen so far this year the arms out being demonstrative rule seems to have been relaxed (I think there was a tweet by Tom Brown stating as much). If this is the way the AFL are interpreting the dissent rule so be it, but it seems very harsh as you'd have to be a robot to not react as Coniglio did.

It's the two steps though. The verbal and physical dissent. There needs to be both or an extremely over the top version of one.

Arms out alone isn't enough. But arms out and disagreeing with the ump is pretty obvious.

 

[GoBlues!]

I'd have to see what the other options were at the time. You're assuming any other option would have been a turnover in order to justify kicking to a two on one.

You said Jack’s kick was a low percentage kick…what would you have preferred him to do instead?

 

[Gethelred]

Okay.

Prior to last year, we had never beaten the Giants away. The losing margins up there had also not been small; here are, in order, the losses we've had up there:

2014, Round 14: 100 vs 92
2015, Round 22: 132 vs 51
2016, Round 16: 127 vs 65
2019, Round 9: 138 vs 45
2021, Round 14: 102 vs 66

As can be seen pretty clearly, we've struggled to score up there. We've had our own issues scoring over the past ten years, but those issues take an entirely new complexion when you consider that last year and this year are the only times we've confined them - ever - to below 100 points against us at the venue. Not only do we struggle to score, we struggle to defend the ground.

Now, one would think we have a collective of independing thinkers on this forum who are capable of recognising when they're regurgitating the messaging from the broadcast, but an awful lot of what I'm reading here sounds like the commentary. AFL commentary is at a trough at the moment; commentary is intended to illustrate the game, to illuminate the shadows in a brighter shade, to add visibility to depths unfathomable. Right now, commentators seem to complain they're not being provided the kind of footy they'd like to be watching and it's bleeding over to the viewers. I'm not going to tell you you're not seeing what you're seeing, but what I am going to tell you is no-one is immune to propaganda; it might be worth another watch without the commentary, just to see if your first impulse is derived in any amount.

Because I'm seeing players back feet sliding when they're going for angled kicks. I'm seeing players fumbling where on other days in other stadiums they're one touch players. I'm seeing marks getting spilt by players who clunk them in all other conditions.

There being a bit of rain on a subpar deck which we do not play very well is a completely different narrative by which to frame the game than the broadcast chose. It puts the game across as a clear 50/50, which is what the game was because we do not play GIANTS stadium well.

I dislike intensely that I have to point this out, because my job isn't that of a pundit.

We are not firing on all cylinders. We have a few out, and we have a series of players whose form is well down. We haven't lost a game yet. All victories have been close, but not so close we have been in trouble properly. A free kick for dissent does not ****ing decide a game that has 12 ****ing minutes to go.

The Grade Cricketer makes a joke that the way Australians enjoy cricket is by complaining about it. I cannot help but wonder if the same is true of Carlton fans sometimes.

No-one could ever accuse us of being short passion.

 

[Jimmyonesix]

Surely there’s better options knocking down the door!?

Watching the seconds problem is carrol hasn't come on like most thought he would - fog not up to it - cunners a ways off- unfortunately honey pulled early so couldn't push his case ..
Probably have to hope for Martin to comes good or wait for Binns to do the miles but his kicking needs work no use bringing him in unless you know will succeed ..
Walsh and cerra will probably rotate off half fwd anyway - we really need our 5 mids up and running then selection pressure will come on those bottom 6

 

[SammaGilberto]

Take the win and move on, crappy stadium and a crappy make believe team. Should be a cracker against norf

 

[reg_lower91]

Can't believe the lack of votes he's getting in the MVP thread

He was unbelievably clean, in a game where we lacked some polish.

 

[Accidental genius]

Okay.

Prior to last year, we had never beaten the Giants away. The losing margins up there had also not been small; here are, in order, the losses we've had up there:

2014, Round 14: 100 vs 92
2015, Round 22: 132 vs 51
2016, Round 16: 127 vs 65
2019, Round 9: 138 vs 45
2021, Round 14: 102 vs 66

As can be seen pretty clearly, we've struggled to score up there. We've had our own issues scoring over the past ten years, but those issues take an entirely new complexion when you consider that last year and this year are the only times we've confined them - ever - to below 100 points against us at the venue. Not only do we struggle to score, we struggle to defend the ground.

Now, one would think we have a collective of independing thinkers on this forum who are capable of recognising when they're regurgitating the messaging from the broadcast, but an awful lot of what I'm reading here sounds like the commentary. AFL commentary is at a trough at the moment; commentary is intended to illustrate the game, to illuminate the shadows in a brighter shade, to add visibility to depths unfathomable. Right now, commentators seem to complain they're not being provided the kind of footy they'd like to be watching and it's bleeding over to the viewers. I'm not going to tell you you're not seeing what you're seeing, but what I am going to tell you is no-one is immune to propaganda; it might be worth another watch without the commentary, just to see if your first impulse is derived in any amount.

Because I'm seeing players back feet sliding when they're going for angled kicks. I'm seeing players fumbling where on other days in other stadiums they're one touch players. I'm seeing marks getting spilt by players who clunk them in all other conditions.

There being a bit of rain on a subpar deck which we do not play very well is a completely different narrative by which to frame the game than the broadcast chose. It puts the game across as a clear 50/50, which is what the game was because we do not play GIANTS stadium well.

I dislike intensely that I have to point this out, because my job isn't that of a pundit.

We are not firing on all cylinders. We have a few out, and we have a series of players whose form is well down. We haven't lost a game yet. All victories have been close, but not so close we have been in trouble properly. A free kick for dissent does not ******* decide a game that has 12 ******* minutes to go.

The Grade Cricketer makes a joke that the way Australians enjoy cricket is by complaining about it. I cannot help but wonder if the same is true of Carlton fans sometimes.

No-one could ever accuse us of being short passion.

some big scores there...

in one of those games didn't they have 16 on the field at one time?

commentators making a bit of a mockery of the situation we found our selves in...dark days

 

[Blueballs38]

Two things I noticed throughout the game is our lack of footy IQ when giving it off to other players by hand ball and how much Curnow and McKay get in each others way. The number of times a player gave it to a “hot” player by hand ball was frustrating to say the least. Good teams just don’t do that anywhere near the amount of times we do.
As for Harry and Charlie ….. fix it! It’s stupid footy!
This is something that needs to critically be worked on.

 

[Accidental genius]

Two things I noticed throughout the game is our lack of footy IQ when giving it off to other players by hand ball and how much Curnow and McKay get in each others way. The number of times a player gave it to a “hot” player by hand ball was frustrating to say the least. Good teams just don’t do that anywhere near the amount of times we do.
As for Harry and Charlie ….. fix it! It’s stupid footy!
This is something that needs to critically be worked on.

yeah definitely, could include tdk ...talls need to compliment one another in a pack mark not compete against each other.

 

[Gethelred]

some big scores there...

in one of those games didn't they have 16 on the field at one time?

commentators making a bit of a mockery of the situation we found our selves in...dark days

IIRC, that one was at Marvel, 2018.

 

[gunslingr]

Okay.

Prior to last year, we had never beaten the Giants away. The losing margins up there had also not been small; here are, in order, the losses we've had up there:

2014, Round 14: 100 vs 92
2015, Round 22: 132 vs 51
2016, Round 16: 127 vs 65
2019, Round 9: 138 vs 45

I drove up for 2015, 2016, and 2019

 

[T2B_]

Okay.

Prior to last year, we had never beaten the Giants away. The losing margins up there had also not been small; here are, in order, the losses we've had up there:

2014, Round 14: 100 vs 92
2015, Round 22: 132 vs 51
2016, Round 16: 127 vs 65
2019, Round 9: 138 vs 45
2021, Round 14: 102 vs 66

As can be seen pretty clearly, we've struggled to score up there. We've had our own issues scoring over the past ten years, but those issues take an entirely new complexion when you consider that last year and this year are the only times we've confined them - ever - to below 100 points against us at the venue. Not only do we struggle to score, we struggle to defend the ground.

Now, one would think we have a collective of independing thinkers on this forum who are capable of recognising when they're regurgitating the messaging from the broadcast, but an awful lot of what I'm reading here sounds like the commentary. AFL commentary is at a trough at the moment; commentary is intended to illustrate the game, to illuminate the shadows in a brighter shade, to add visibility to depths unfathomable. Right now, commentators seem to complain they're not being provided the kind of footy they'd like to be watching and it's bleeding over to the viewers. I'm not going to tell you you're not seeing what you're seeing, but what I am going to tell you is no-one is immune to propaganda; it might be worth another watch without the commentary, just to see if your first impulse is derived in any amount.

Because I'm seeing players back feet sliding when they're going for angled kicks. I'm seeing players fumbling where on other days in other stadiums they're one touch players. I'm seeing marks getting spilt by players who clunk them in all other conditions.

There being a bit of rain on a subpar deck which we do not play very well is a completely different narrative by which to frame the game than the broadcast chose. It puts the game across as a clear 50/50, which is what the game was because we do not play GIANTS stadium well.

I dislike intensely that I have to point this out, because my job isn't that of a pundit.

We are not firing on all cylinders. We have a few out, and we have a series of players whose form is well down. We haven't lost a game yet. All victories have been close, but not so close we have been in trouble properly. A free kick for dissent does not ******* decide a game that has 12 ******* minutes to go.

The Grade Cricketer makes a joke that the way Australians enjoy cricket is by complaining about it. I cannot help but wonder if the same is true of Carlton fans sometimes.

No-one could ever accuse us of being short passion.

Wow, great post Get. Grappled with the issue like a Durdin tackle...