AFL Autopsy RND 4: Dons Demolished

[Squeaky]

And inexperience.

I don't know what to say anymore. I kind of expected that result last night but was hoping I'd be wrong. I feel for the fans especially the ones who travelled to go see that crap.

Brad must be wondering what the hell he was thinking taking over the coaching role. Gee he has a mountain of work to do. Goodluck mate you're really going to need it.

Biggest frustration for me is that we cannot ever field our strongest side. Injuries are haunting us year after year.

Calling it, season over.

Very very early call there, Mike.
Early but not wrong!

 

[katana]

Did not hurt Ridley and Redman to both play under 4 games in year one and then under 8 games in year despite the fact we where a mid range side then too.

what lol? it clearly did hurt them. they both could easily have been a year ahead on the development cycle if we pumped games in.

 

[ant555]

what lol? it clearly did hurt them. they both could easily have been a year ahead on the development cycle if we pumped games in.

Bollocks.

 

[katana]

Bollocks.

mate is it really that outrageous to say that afl intensity/systems/etc. is something that can't be learnt in a vfl team.

 

[ant555]

mate is it really that outrageous to say that afl intensity/systems/etc. is something that can't be learnt in a vfl team.

That is not what I said.
I said the fact they played limited AFL games did not hurt them and both played VFL when we had a solid VFL team that was a finals contender.
I said bollocks to the fact you said it did hurt them and they could have been further ahead. It did not and has not for just as many players who have been played less early as it has for those who have played early.

 

[katana]

That is not what I said.
I said the fact they played limited AFL games did not hurt them and both played VFL when we had a solid VFL team that was a finals contender.
I said bollocks to the fact you said it did hurt them and they could have been further ahead. It did not and has not for just as many players who have been played less early as it has for those who have played early.

well i said i think adjusting to afl earlier would have been better for both of them. i don't think it's really possible to dispute that a few games at sandringham oval and willy did anything to make them players now. it's kinda laughable really.

 

[ant555]

well i said i think adjusting to afl earlier would have been better for both of them. i don't think it's really possible to dispute that a few games at sandringham oval and willy did anything to make them players now. it's kinda laughable really.

Not laughable at all.
Players learn a lot playing VFL. Some players are actually worse off playing to much AFL before they are ready and can set them back. That is just how it is. They both got some exposure early but got a decent grounding in the VFL. Has playing McGrath in the midfield at AFL level turned him into a midfielder ?
There have been hundreds of players who have benefited by not just being flung straight into AFL footy.

 

[katana]

There have been hundreds of players who have benefited by not just being flung straight into AFL footy.

yes of course there is no in between is there.

my point is quite simply that redman and ridley should have 10-20 more games under their belt. and as we are surely learning through perkins/caldwell/etc. that time at afl level is invaluable.

 

[BrunoV]

Both of them where considered burst players.

In what sense?

One is slow and inside. The other is fast and outside.

 

[ghostdog]

He’s not going to get the midfield minutes in the seniors he would in the VFL.

Not forever.

 

[Old Campaigner]

mate is it really that outrageous to say that afl intensity/systems/etc. is something that can't be learnt in a vfl team.

I mean you only have to look as far as Geelong to see how you can develop players in the 2s for a year or so and have them come into the AFL side able to contribute in a meaningful way

 

[ant555]

In what sense?

One is slow and inside. The other is fast and outside.

Phillipou large and powerful . Tsatas smaller and faster. Both where considered players who could break out of the contest despite their different skill sets.
The fact is Scott did not make the pick. It came down to two blokes. They went with Tsatas. Trying to say that Scott had any major input on what happened at the end of 2022 is not accurate. He was appointed at the end of September. On top of that he was head hunted so he was not preparing any sort of presentation on the playing list or had done any research. I can not find the article but there was one where he flat out said he would be having little impact of the list decisions that year.
And Tsatas is not actually a bust despite the concerns.

 

[ant555]

yes of course there is no in between is there.

my point is quite simply that redman and ridley should have 10-20 more games under their belt. and as we are surely learning through perkins/caldwell/etc. that time at afl level is invaluable.

And my point is it is bollocks as it is not a one size fits all system. Saying they should have proves nothing. They both have ended up very good players.
You shot yourself in the foot with Caldwell. He played mainly NEAFL and just 2 AFL games in his first year and just 9 AFL games in his second year. Add in the injury issues and he played just 14 games in his first 3 seasons so you can not put him into the playing plenty of AFL early made him the player he is.

 

[ant555]

Anyway having watched the game back a couple of times it was a shit fight on several fronts.

We where poor after quarter time because of some issues that are not a short term fix and because we made too many mistakes and at stages we where physically poor.

First up there is my hobby horse . The lack of marking power forward of the footy across all sizes of players. When sides go one on one or solid midfield zone and we have to kick down the line we struggle to get the ball out of our back half. Lots of kicks to contests that end up going back the other way more often than not. Port where the first side to go pretty hard one on one and simply choke us out of the game. No leading space for Jones and no space to get on the outside with forward handball.

The physical presence at times was simply poor at stages. There was not a lot of hard edge.

Usual team defense mistakes from the forwards and midfield that just add up. There is one thing about footy and that is chasing the opposition after turnover or defensive transition mistake makes you look slow and unfit as you are doing more running across the board. It is the same at every level of footy. The side that makes the most defensive mistakes combined with turnover ends up looking slow and tired.

Does not matter who Scott picks. Young or old. Right now we need a minimum 1 speedy small forward. Preferably 2. We have no rucks that are a marking presence consistently. We need a big forward that is able to clunk some contested marks and not just inside 50.

The midfield copped a beating and I think we still lack a classy strong body midfielder but the mix has improved and I think it was more a bad day out than a huge issue but players coming in and out due to injury is not helping.

 

['51 Bewick]

Wow, I've been following since about '79, hate to think how old you must be, no disrespect intended.

Age is just a state of mind. My teacher in grade 3 is still going strong (Tom Hawkins grandfather) and my father-in-law turns 100 next month. My grandmother lived to 102. I consider myself to still be reasonably young.

 

[hirdylloydy1]

As far as the stats go our effort was definately there, i just dont think they knew what to do when port went one on one, while the game was on our terms ( zone ) we were the better side. The coaches seemed surprised that another team would go man on man and didnt look to have planned for it.

Im sure the coaches are looking at it this week, but this fail imo is on them

 

[ant555]

As far as the stats go our effort was definately there, i just dont think they knew what to do when port went one on one, while the game was on our terms ( zone ) we were the better side. The coaches seemed surprised that another team would go man on man and didnt look to have planned for it.

Im sure the coaches are looking at it this week, but this fail imo is on them

Problem is the plan for one on one footy is to have a ruck that can take 2 or 3 contested marks and a forward who can as well. Then you need your other size players to be able to do the same against their opponents. It allows faster footy and more control. We can not plan for it because we do not have the personal to make the plan happen. Even or small and medium types are not good contested marks against their own size.
I said at the end of last year that we fell away once sides worked out they simply had to play solid man on man of a 14 man midfield zone. Nothing was going to change given we had limited moves to make last season.
The fail is not on them. The fail is the list has issues that do not allow plan B to be executed. Good sides can execute plan B because they are good. Average sides have issues with it. Bad sides have no plan B because they simply do not have the cattle to do it. Make no mistake you have top be a top end side to play plan B when plan A goes wrong.

 

[sameolds33]

Not laughable at all.
Players learn a lot playing VFL. Some players are actually worse off playing to much AFL before they are ready and can set them back. That is just how it is. They both got some exposure early but got a decent grounding in the VFL. Has playing McGrath in the midfield at AFL level turned him into a midfielder ?
There have been hundreds of players who have benefited by not just being flung straight into AFL footy.

doesn't it depend on the makeup of the VFL team? You've said that the team that Ridley and Redman played in was strong. The same can't be said of the current team. The question remains: which is better for development of our high draft picks? I suspect it's a combination of AFL and VFL game time. With the head coach's focus on putting out the best team each week.

 

[sameolds33]

Anyway having watched the game back a couple of times it was a s**t fight on several fronts.

We where poor after quarter time because of some issues that are not a short term fix and because we made too many mistakes and at stages we where physically poor.

First up there is my hobby horse . The lack of marking power forward of the footy across all sizes of players. When sides go one on one or solid midfield zone and we have to kick down the line we struggle to get the ball out of our back half. Lots of kicks to contests that end up going back the other way more often than not. Port where the first side to go pretty hard one on one and simply choke us out of the game. No leading space for Jones and no space to get on the outside with forward handball.

The physical presence at times was simply poor at stages. There was not a lot of hard edge.

Usual team defense mistakes from the forwards and midfield that just add up. There is one thing about footy and that is chasing the opposition after turnover or defensive transition mistake makes you look slow and unfit as you are doing more running across the board. It is the same at every level of footy. The side that makes the most defensive mistakes combined with turnover ends up looking slow and tired.

Does not matter who Scott picks. Young or old. Right now we need a minimum 1 speedy small forward. Preferably 2. We have no rucks that are a marking presence consistently. We need a big forward that is able to clunk some contested marks and not just inside 50.

The midfield copped a beating and I think we still lack a classy strong body midfielder but the mix has improved and I think it was more a bad day out than a huge issue but players coming in and out due to injury is not helping.

I've also noticed the huge difference between our field marking and kicking and that of the top teams - this weekend : Port, Geelong, Sydney particularly stand out.

Why are we so poor? It's a basic skill. My best guess is that its got more to do with confidence than talent. And that building that team confidence takes time and buy-in from the players. It's why there aren't wholesale changes each week.

 

[yodellinhank]

Age is just a state of mind. My teacher in grade 3 is still going strong (Tom Hawkins grandfather) and my father-in-law turns 100 next month. My grandmother lived to 102. I consider myself to still be reasonably young.

Brad Scott will send the scouts over, see if you might be able to plug a hole or wallpaper over some cracks.

 

[eth-dog]

Good work, Carlton?

15-23

 

['51 Bewick]

Brad Scott will send the scouts over, see if you might be able to plug a hole or wallpaper over some cracks.

Haha. I could give them a piece of my mind but they'd probably just refer it to Dodoro.

 

[resurrector]

Hopefully it's an early wake up call and we don't see that kinda capitulation again. Not optimistic about that tho

 

[mike ross]

Scott playing our most experienced side because he doesn't have any patience, he like the club are desperate to win now, all that happens is we outplay our true position of bottom 3 and finish closer to 10th.

I truly believe playing our best 23 is dumb, we keep playing players who don't have a future, I'd rather we play guys who 'could' have a future.

3-20 >>> 11-12

All our coaches preach patience, but they're in win now mode. Hayes, Roberts, Bryan and Tsatas are ready enough to play every week absolutely zero doubt about it. And Caddy is very likely ready to come in as well.

That's the pressure of the industry.

 

[Snake Charmer]

I’d love to know why continued to let Rozee do as he pleased and not one Essendon player put there hand up to try and go with him at the contest at least. Are we selfish, dumb, lazy or all of the above?