Autopsy Round 8 vs Adelaide Rant Thread

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Peete, I'm not going to quote you as it's a bit of a dog's breakfast.

Main points I got were:

* Resentment about salary: Highly speculative and not worth addressing. Not even sure where it comes from.

* Give Ellard and Robinson 10kg and you probably end up with Brock McLean in terms of speed lost.

* Judd not doing the work for Murphy and Carrazzo. I know those two get plenty of contested possessions, but they are not pack contested possessions, they are usually one on one contested possessions where as Judd is still doing most of the bullocking work trying to rip his arms free while being tackled by 3 opponents. You need only to use your own eyes to see the contested possessions each gets are gained in different ways. Judd gets the ball from those congested situations to players like Murph and Carrots who are on an outer layer of congestion while players like Simmo are on the outside layer. They are still contested situations but the amount of bodies thins out if you know what I mean.

* 13 coaches with their own ideas telling them different things. Gulp, you'd think the assistant coaches are conveying the message the senior coach is sending out. I'd be amazed if this was the case. It would be so ridiculously amateurish as to enter the realms of fantasy. They may not deliver the message adequately enough or may lack the ability to motivate, but I doubt very much the coaches are working against each other.

* Coaching issue if Ellard is a scapegoat for omission. I'm not talking about actually being omitted, I am talking about supporters screaming for players to be dropped based on the amount of times they get the ball, without recognising what role they might be playing. If week after week supporters call for certain heads, I can see scope for them being appeased just to appear to be doing something, even if they are performing slightly better than we give them credit for. McLean for example can be quite serviceable for first game back, but because we see players running away from him, we call for his head. Guess what, players used to run away from Diesel too but he had a crack team around him to apply pressure, turn over the ball and hey presto Diesel gets it back with his opponent dispensed with and he is delivering it on a dime. McLean is no Diesel but we are looking for him to play to strengths he does not possess. Sometimes our eyes deceive us. Not saying he is any sort of answer, just that on the badness scale, he is not always as high up as we think he is.

 

[The Coach]

Five, regardless of whether it is their job to tell the players to do the basics, surely you would have an issue with a player who has made it to AFL level and does not recognise how to help one of his side's gun midfielders shake a tag? A game can be gone in a quarter and players should not need to wait until the coaches address that he needs to help block more. For crying out loud, I have heard Ratten saying it for years now. But people are still saying it is the coaches fault for not coming up with a plan to help break tags. If Ratts has told them (and he has) and they are physically not doing it as much as he would like, where does the responsibility lie? It's not as though we aren't rotating players through the midfield as much as our stocks allow us.

This rubbish about the coach should be motivating them, the coach should be telling them to block, the coach should teach them how to break a tag, the coach should tell them to kick more, less, better etc ... I mean come on, does anybody think none of this has been done? When we were up and about and doing these things, did it happen by accident, and now that they have dropped off, and Ratten is screaming from the rooftops that they need to work for each other, is that not him telling them to do exactly this? Do we need transcripts of every training session word uttered, every team meeting, every private conversation between a coach and a player, between senior coach and midfield coach, between coach and runner, to satisfy ourselves that Ratten actually knows this is a problem and attempts to convey the messsage?

Ratten's responsibility is to motivate and to build a team. If a players is not motivated, it is up to him to discipline them into being motivated or moving on. Ultimately he will take responsibility for building a list that lacks consistency or motivation but jesus, I reckon the guy is tearing his hair out trying to make these guys run untiil it hurts and to show passion for the contest. The fact that we are not on the inside makes us assume none of this is being done. How many of our posters are senior AFL coaches? Ratten will pay the price in the end for what is not working on field, whether he tried to fix it or not, and some of the players that cost him his job will still be there.

The last point is extremely valid. Carrazzo's role was as a tagging midfielder who gets his own ball. I'm not saying he should be the one blocking for Judd, I'm saying that he doesn't. He is one of our best 3-4 mids who is entitled to get the ball. The 5 mid in there should be blocking and sacrificing his game and should be valued as such by our supporters instead of looking at raw stats.

Ellard cops a raw deal on raw stats, so does Armfield.

Most of these boys are coming to us from TAC as teenagers. I could ask our Northern Blues coach (a TAC legend) but I would bet a considerable amount that the kids we draft have not been taught how to help a team-mate beat a tag and many other things. For a start I would think the drafted kids were the ones being tagged and the lesser kids were generally given the job of tagging. Splendini could answer better than me as I haven't really followed TAC and way back when I showed some interest I am not even sure tagging was prevalent. I remember Brock as an underage TACer getting a run with role in a TAC grand final but that was a GF and he still had another year of TAC before he would be eligible for the draft and become the hunted himself

TAC is not everything it is cracked up to be - take Ben McKinley. He was allowed to play exclusively as a FF - physique wise was he ever likely to really nail this posn - shouldn't his juniour coaches have been doing more to give him a rounded development

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

We are not talking first year midfielders though Five. Do you really think none of these guys have been told how to block or help a teammate break a tag in the time they have been here. I'm talking about the here and now. Surely they are not sitting by wishing they could help but not knowing how as the play unfolds?

 

[The Coach]

Peete, I'm not going to quote you as it's a bit of a dog's breakfast.

Main points I got were:

* Resentment about salary: Highly speculative and not worth addressing. Not even sure where it comes from.

* Give Ellard and Robinson 10kg and you probably end up with Brock McLean in terms of speed lost.

* Judd not doing the work for Murphy and Carrazzo. I know those two get plenty of contested possessions, but they are not pack contested possessions, they are usually one on one contested possessions where as Judd is still doing most of the bullocking work trying to rip his arms free while being tackled by 3 opponents. You need only to use your own eyes to see the contested possessions each gets are gained in different ways. Judd gets the ball from those congested situations to players like Murph and Carrots who are on an outer layer of congestion while players like Simmo are on the outside layer. They are still contested situations but the amount of bodies thins out if you know what I mean.

* 13 coaches with their own ideas telling them different things. Gulp, you'd think the assistant coaches are conveying the message the senior coach is sending out. I'd be amazed if this was the case. It would be so ridiculously amateurish as to enter the realms of fantasy. They may not deliver the message adequately enough or may lack the ability to motivate, but I doubt very much the coaches are working against each other.

* Coaching issue if Ellard is a scapegoat for omission. I'm not talking about actually being omitted, I am talking about supporters screaming for players to be dropped based on the amount of times they get the ball, without recognising what role they might be playing. If week after week supporters call for certain heads, I can see scope for them being appeased just to appear to be doing something, even if they are performing slightly better than we give them credit for. McLean for example can be quite serviceable for first game back, but because we see players running away from him, we call for his head. Guess what, players used to run away from Diesel too but he had a crack team around him to apply pressure, turn over the ball and hey presto Diesel gets it back with his opponent dispensed with and he is delivering it on a dime. McLean is no Diesel but we are looking for him to play to strengths he does not possess. Sometimes our eyes deceive us. Not saying he is any sort of answer, just that on the badness scale, he is not always as high up as we think he is.

The question might be:

How many of these have any real input? Are they working harmoniously?

I sometimes wonder how many Ratts selected as 'non threats' to his position? Browne and Richardson were not his appointments. Just a fairly unsubstantiated feeling I have - mostly based on Ratts only being second to Terry Wallace when it comes to spin. Maybe unfair but this is only a footy forum

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Harmony is a different issue. I doubt assistants are sabotaging us by giving the players another message. It would be pretty easy to detect in a one on one conversation with the player.

 

[The Coach]

We are not talking first year midfielders though Five. Do you really think none of these guys have been told how to block or help a teammate break a tag in the time they have been here. I'm talking about the here and now. Surely they are not sitting by wishing they could help but not knowing how as the play unfolds?

So you think they are not doing it and yet they know how to and have been instructed to do so?

 

[The Coach]

Harmony is a different issue. I doubt assistants are sabotaging us by giving the players another message. It would be pretty easy to detect in a one on one conversation with the player.

Not talking sabotage - I am talking about being a cohesive and skillful group of coaches who are all able to contribute to their potential under the regime/coaching structure we have in place. There is an assumption that they are all skillful

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

So you think they are not doing it and yet they know how to and have been instructed to do so?

Precisely. Do they know to make body contact with an opposition tagger to try to put him off his task? Yes, but most of them don't have the instinct. Robbo does it occasionally, he hasn't been around any longer than the others. Do they know to get their body in the way of opposition players at stoppages? Yes, but a lot of the time they are ball watching wondering if they can get it themselves. This might be a lack of faith in our ruckmen to hit it to advantage though. All parts working together. Ruckmen indicates where he is hitting it, nominated mid goes for it, other mid steps in between him and opponent. Then you are in the next circle, having to beat the next layer of mids and your other mids like Murph are trying to get free while a longer over the top option in Simmo is spreading fast as you get possession. If they get a hand in, you have the original blocker trailing the play to make the tackle with one other also coming in fast on the defensive side to cover their spread.

We just lack instinct and judgment and it is bloody hard to teach. We may just have the wrong balance in there. An instinctive, inside hard bodied mid with skill needs to be found, and disposal skills are secondary if he doesn't already have them.

Gibbs has the instincts and the judgment and the skills, he is just not inside or hard bodied.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Not talking sabotage - I am talking about being a cohesive and skillful group of coaches who are all able to contribute to their potential under the regime/coaching structure we have in place. There is an assumption that they are all skillful

That's fine, there is a cross over conversation happening here.

Peete quoting me, me quoting Peete, you quoting me. Peete suggesting our coaches are imparting their own message, not the coaches, me suggesting this isn't happening, and you buying in questioning the skill set of those coaches.

1. The assistants are unlikely to be giving a different message to what Ratten wants conveyed.

2. No doubt not all assistants necessarily have the ability to teach or to work on player deficiencies to the extent they can pull off what they are asking. On the same note, not all players have the ability to learn what is being taught or the ability for that matter. It becomes a race to see whether it is player, coach or assistant coach that gets cut loose to see who is not holding up their part of the bargain.

Take Gibbs for example. We know he has the skills, we know he has the smarts. If you had to take someone to task for him not attacking the ball consistently enough, would it be Gibbs or would it be the coaches for not giving him the incentive to do better? It's a tough call. No doubt if Gibbs was dropped, there would be a healthy percentage of our supporter base calling it a stupid decision. Add to that he is out of contract this year and we are waiting on a signature. It's ridiculous that a coach may have to take stuff like that on board, but in this climate it's a reality. So fringe players get dropped in the hope that the safe players get worried about their own position.

 

[The Coach]

Precisely. Do they know to make body contact with an opposition tagger to try to put him off his task? Yes, but most of them don't have the instinct. Robbo does it occasionally, he hasn't been around any longer than the others. Do they know to get their body in the way of opposition players at stoppages? Yes, but a lot of the time they are ball watching wondering if they can get it themselves. This might be a lack of faith in our ruckmen to hit it to advantage though. All parts working together. Ruckmen indicates where he is hitting it, nominated mid goes for it, other mid steps in between him and opponent. Then you are in the next circle, having to beat the next layer of mids and your other mids like Murph are trying to get free while a longer over the top option in Simmo is spreading fast as you get possession. If they get a hand in, you have the original blocker trailing the play to make the tackle with one other also coming in fast on the defensive side to cover their spread.

We just lack instinct and judgment and it is bloody hard to teach. We may just have the wrong balance in there. An instinctive, inside hard bodied mid with skill needs to be found, and disposal skills are secondary if he doesn't already have them.

Gibbs has the instincts and the judgment and the skills, he is just not inside or hard bodied.

I am not sure. I reckon Army and Ellard would carry out to a T anything they were told to do. I wouldn't think Curnow stupid enough to blow his career by not following coach's instructions. But you may have a point about instinct - the best just do it naturally. The argument against that however is how do some teams seem to improve out of sight at it without really changing personnel.

That last paragraph almost sounded like you wanted AB back

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Not AB. A Jobe Watson type who can extract the ball but couldn't kick to save himself until recently. I'd imagine such a player would drop down the draft order due to their lack of kicking skill, but then Rhys Palmer can't kick and he isn't exactly a gun inside mid either.

 

[The Coach]

That's fine, there is a cross over conversation happening here.

Peete quoting me, me quoting Peete, you quoting me. Peete suggesting our coaches are imparting their own message, not the coaches, me suggesting this isn't happening, and you buying in questioning the skill set of those coaches.

1. The assistants are unlikely to be giving a different message to what Ratten wants conveyed.

2. No doubt not all assistants necessarily have the ability to teach or to work on player deficiencies to the extent they can pull off what they are asking. On the same note, not all players have the ability to learn what is being taught or the ability for that matter. It becomes a race to see whether it is player, coach or assistant coach that gets cut loose to see who is not holding up their part of the bargain.

Take Gibbs for example. We know he has the skills, we know he has the smarts. If you had to take someone to task for him not attacking the ball consistently enough, would it be Gibbs or would it be the coaches for not giving him the incentive to do better? It's a tough call. No doubt if Gibbs was dropped, there would be a healthy percentage of our supporter base calling it a stupid decision. Add to that he is out of contract this year and we are waiting on a signature. It's ridiculous that a coach may have to take stuff like that on board, but in this climate it's a reality. So fringe players get dropped in the hope that the safe players get worried about their own position.

An interesting one. Say it has been identified as a weakness in his game.

1. Has he been left in no doubt what has to be addressed?
2. Has he an assistant coach or mentor working with him on it? (a la Aaron Hamill, who is working one on one with a couple of St.Kilda players)

If these things have happened and he fails it can be no fault of the coach. You then decide how/if you are going to use the player otherwise.

Do we think this scenario and 1+2 have happened? I am not sure they have

 

[Graffy4242]

Play Kreuzer in the midfield. Drop warnock/hampson.
Curnow up for the ruck contest. Room for one more onballer.

Wont skew current clearance trend. If anything it should go up.

Pretty harsh dropping someone who hasn't played a game this year yet

Are we dropping him to Auskick?????

 

[Blues_FC]

Haven't read through this thread much so forgive me if I'm re-hashing the obvious.

Against Collingwood, Kreuzer and Hampson destroyed Jolly and Wood. We got first use of the ball at most stoppages and won convincingly.

Since then, we have looked pathetic. Essendon destroyed us in the clearances and made us look silly. We were poor against Fremantle and only just got home with 4 points. We played terribly against GWS, got beaten soundly in the clearances (from what I remember at the game) and only won because they're inexperienced. St Kilda destroyed us in the clearances with B-grade ruckmen that we should have stomped all over and Adelaide shamed us.

The games are being won and lost at stoppages. Since the win over Collingwood, I've been watching Carlton get outplayed at the stoppages consistently. I'm not sure if this is a tapwork issue or the result of our structure at bounces/throw-ins, but there is definitely something wrong. It always seems like the ball falls to the opposition, sometimes this is just pure luck, but when it happens this often you have to chalk it up to something being fundamentally wrong with our team.

I just don't understand what's changed since the Collingwood game. It's not like we've been playing teams with the best ruck divisions in the league. Sandilands was out for Freo, McEvoy was out for St Kilda, Giles is impressive but still a first year player and Jacobs is a Blues discard. I'm wondering whether Warnock might make a bit of a difference with the extra height he brings at stoppages? I really hope he's fit soon.

Not saying that Kreuzer and Hampson are solely to blame for this, our midfielders have to be held to account too. Judd has been trying hs guts out, can't fault him. Murphy has been struggling with the tag. Robinson has been played out of position - don't ****ing use him as a tagger Ratts you idiot - he's our hardest midfielder and we need him on the ball. Curnow played an impressive game on the weekend.

Other rants:

Jordan Russell needs to be dropped. Sure he was great a couple of years ago, but he's been useless so far this year.

We are seriously lacking a big forward with presence. Having to move Henderson to the forward line on the weekend just proves this. I'm really looking forward to seeing what Luke Mitchell can do, once he gets over his injuries.

We're missing Jeremy Laidler in the backline. He has a cool head and makes smart decisions.

Bryce Gibbs needs to get some direction. I don't really know what his role in the team is, but he's just not contributing enough. He is definitely soft, but I don't care so much about that if he can actually get the ball and use it dangerously. At the moment, he's not helping us at all. I would consider dropping him to give him a bit of a wake up call - nobody in the team should take their spot for granted.

At the end of the day, I really do believe that we're losing because we're not competitive at the stoppages and until we address this, I don't see much changing. It's a good thing that we're playing Melbourne and Port over the next 2 weeks, because we need some time to get our shit together.

 

[Claypigeon]

I am not sure. I reckon Army and Ellard would carry out to a T anything they were told to do. I wouldn't think Curnow stupid enough to blow his career by not following coach's instructions. But you may have a point about instinct - the best just do it naturally. The argument against that however is how do some teams seem to improve out of sight at it without really changing personnel.

That last paragraph almost sounded like you wanted AB back

Winning helps. .. Confidence is a powerful thing. .. It's why the coaches invest so much time in taking steps to motivate the playing group. .. It's partly why Ratts took to the bench. .. As soon as the confidence in the game plan and team mates drops away then players lose the instinct to do the team things without thinking. ..

We have the skill, the structure might need a tweak but only enough to get some of that confidence in the overall structure back and working. .. Hopefully we can do it without Murph and Carrots. ..

 

[harmesy 37]

The vice-like tackle that Carlton players were employing to demonstrate their "toughness" acted in benefit to Adelaide.

Every time a Carlton player tackled a player, not allowing them to move it actually 9 times out of 10 caused a stoppage, which in turn allowed about 20 Adelaide players to crowd the ball. Try and knock the ball out of their hands...don't wrap them up. Keep the ball moving, don't slow it down. You aren't going to get a holding the ball decision if you grab them as soon as they get the ball, wrap them up without allowing them to move.

...give them a second or two and then tackle them in certain scenarios where they want the stoppage. make them have to get rid of the ball instead of wanting to hold onto it. speed is our weapon, get rid of one of our ruckmen out of the team - i don't know who has been worse Kreuzer or Hampson, but you can't carry both, get more speed in the team - lucas, bootsma whoever. run em off their feet.

 

[phoenix69]

The vice-like tackle that Carlton players were employing to demonstrate their "toughness" acted in benefit to Adelaide.

Every time a Carlton player tackled a player, not allowing them to move it actually 9 times out of 10 caused a stoppage, which in turn allowed about 20 Adelaide players to crowd the ball. Try and knock the ball out of their hands...don't wrap them up. Keep the ball moving, don't slow it down. You aren't going to get a holding the ball decision if you grab them as soon as they get the ball, wrap them up without allowing them to move.

...give them a second or two and then tackle them in certain scenarios where they want the stoppage. make them have to get rid of the ball instead of wanting to hold onto it. speed is our weapon, get rid of one of our ruckmen out of the team - i don't know who has been worse Kreuzer or Hampson, but you can't carry both, get more speed in the team - lucas, bootsma whoever. run em off their feet.

I know it never felt like it but we were in the contest until half time. the decision to not activate the sub as soon as murph went off was costly. Adelaide got 3 goals in that time before the quarter ended. The numbers were stacking up against us because it felt like we were playing with 14 v 18 on the ground. Which means we had some passengers, the weight of numbers eventually led to fatigue factor on the blokes that were putting in. These days it only takes a couple of players not doing the hard/team yards to make the whole team look shite! weed out the loafers, inject some new blood (yes i know they aren't ready) and we'll be a different unit after the bye.

 

[thylacine60]

Have never seen a team look less overwhelmed (?) playing on foreign turf than Adelaide at Etihad.

 

[phoenix69]

Have never seen a team look less overwhelmed (?) playing on foreign turf than Adelaide at Etihad.

Having beaten the swans and cats in the last 2 weeks, their confidence is well up

 

[Wickzki]

Have tried to avoid this thread today. Although I've been off the horse for a while now in regards to us being a legitimate threat this year, a lot longer than Murph's injury, I had a feeling that the mood about the place would go from one extreme "We're right up there with the best in the league" to one of utter despair - even lower than after last Monday. The truth is that we're somewhere in the upper echelon, closer to the top than we feel today but certainly not sniffing it this year.

What this club needs is a great year of recruitment. If we can make some wise decisions trade wise - get a couple of ready to go honest to god midfielders - perhaps try and add a key position player (or pray for health from the likes of Mitchell and Rowe, et al) then we're in with a big opportunity next year.

The team as presently constituted reminds me of the 1991 Carlton team prior to the arrival of Earl Spalding and Greg Williams. Too many high quality players but still a couple of players short. I'm not suggesting that we need a bonafide superstar performer like that team did in Diesel but rather we need an inside midfielder, someone whose not going to give up until the bitter end. We also need an enforcer, somebody who will protect our young bigs much in the same way Spalding extended Kernahan's career.

No, we're not winning the premiership this year. Frankly, I don't care if we even make the finals this year. It likely wont hurt us, as much as we believe that it would, if we didn't as it may provide us the type of tradeability that the team needs in order to attain the couple of players that we require.

On a side note, would absolutely love to see Carlton go with the three rucks when Warnock gets right. Throw Humphrey down back, keep Hammer up forward and put 206 in the middle where he can alter the game.

The nucleus is there. No doubt about it. If you add in the missing ingredients to rid ourselves of the premiership killing flaws in this team and we're more than capable of winning a premiership. The job to do is more off of the field than on it though of course we'd all love to see the "same old victims" of our criticism (including Gibbs) take the next step.

Chin up. It's far from over.

 

[Peete]

Old Dark

My background is Rugby - before I came to Melbourne 20 years ago - a tight head front rower - in fact a contracted player at age 14 - in league - before rugby.

The games are different but also similar in many ways. I love AFL now - and don't bother watching any rugby. Here is what I see at Carlton ( and I don't disagree with most you say)

Preface this with the following really important observation from my point of view...They are significantly smaller than many of their opponent players - again in better teams.

1. The players are not playing with the intensity required to demonstrate a real driving passion to win every contest in big games. So either they arent listening to coach - or they cant deliver (physically) either way not an easy fix and same result.

2. They are definately not playing for each other or as a team - they don't hunt in packs when going for the ball - they don't have a relish for chasing and getting. Ratten calls it selfish play' or non team play - but again - how important in KPI is team play? really? I have noticed some really bad body language in exchanges between various players on field.

I reckon you get what you reward as a Coach most of the time and Carlton have rewarded , promoted and protected a whole lot of flash and dash players.

We have a core of 5-6 awesome game busters. Here is the rub - to support these 5-6 - you also need another 20 hard fast committed players that can be rotated as required.

Apart from Judd we have no bullocking type whose core strength can take on and win or break-even at worst against any opponent. Carrazzo looked like he had arrived as a worthy support - there is no one else I have seen be able to take on and win the really hard ball..

Our outside ( or as you call it further layers) runners are not physically big enough to monster any opponent. Gibbs and Curnow were put on Thompson and Dangerfield in 1st quarter or so...I think the stats quoted were 11 possessions for us - and 31 for them during that period. Gibbs needs time to bulk up and develop on ball kills and reactions if he is to play as a hard inside ball getter - Curnow is way too inexperienced and small to take on the elite monsters of the game - Ellard has the aggro but cant play to a high level for 4 quarters he doesnt have the size - Carrazzo has factor X -a natural menace in his game at times - he likes crunching opponents - he is injured.

I am not having a go at the players per se - the facts are that we have massively under invested in muscle and players who a natural wanna smash my opponent ( fairly) physically every time - with my mates beside me doing the same thing.

Really pisses me off to see how cuddly and friendly we are after each game. Carlton players of better days/ - seeing their old games - nothing friendly or cuddly about them - nope.

People like Sheedy and Bomber Thompson - absolutely hate Carlton - because they remember what awful smashings physically Carlton used to hand out whenever required.

We are a lot of hard bodied genuine top4 AFL players short of what is required to beat teams who have them- Adelaide threw us around like rag dolls. Too much size too well drilled in how to combine effort and keep on doing it. Sanderson - is a very old school hard nut fan - we were never going to be in the game with current line-up.

but it is a long season - and a close competition - very close. With a full team on the ground - playing like they want it? ell we can beat any team on a day.

No one keeps a whole team together for a whole year - and we dont have enough old bulls.

just my 2c

 

[The_Wookie]

essentially while everyone was building muscle, we went athletic. That did us great last year, this year not so much. It took ONE game to figure us out and you cant build muscle over night.

 

[harmesy 37]

Have never seen a team look less overwhelmed (?) playing on foreign turf than Adelaide at Etihad.

All games featuring Carlton at Etihad this year have been boring as it has just become a game of immobile wrestling with 20 players crowded around a stoppage. The game against St Kilda...they locked the ball in Carlton's forward line for about 5-10 minutes without it moving. It was what St Kilda wanted ironically.

If I want to watch a whole lot of blokes wrestling I wouldl watch rugby league-which is without doubt predictable and boring. Endless tackle after tackle.

Work out a way to defeat endless 20-30 man stoppages at Ethihad. That is the key - if they can do that then we won't be forced to watch rugby at Ethihad.

 

[harmesy 37]

Old Dark

My background is Rugby - before I came to Melbourne 20 years ago - a tight head front rower - in fact a contracted player at age 14 - in league - before rugby.

The games are different but also similar in many ways. I love AFL now - and don't bother watching any rugby. Here is what I see at Carlton ( and I don't disagree with most you say)

Preface this with the following really important observation from my point of view...They are significantly smaller than many of their opponent players - again in better teams.



Apart from Judd we have no bullocking type whose core strength can take on and win or break-even at worst against any opponent. Carrazzo looked like he had arrived as a worthy support - there is no one else I have seen be able to take on and win the really hard ball..

Our outside ( or as you call it further layers) runners are not physically big enough to monster any opponent. Gibbs and Curnow were put on Thompson and Dangerfield in 1st quarter or so...I think the stats quoted were 11 possessions for us - and 31 for them during that period.

just my 2c

Fair points. Dangerfield reminds me of Mark Riccuito. He had the nickname the Bull -didn't he?

Yeah, I agree. We need more muscle if it is going to be a high contest, highly packed scrummage. It appears the game is heading in this direction.

Andrew Collins (although not a key midfielder) isn't a shrinking violet- worth a try with him instead of the present passengers, Marcus Davies has a bit of bulk to him. So too Watson. There are some powerful players out there - but just not midfielders and not getting a game.

 

[kickavic]

Dangerfield reminds me of Mark Riccuito.

Everyone could see this in a teenage Dangerfield.. its why he was given Riccuito's number when Roo retired