Why do the bulldogs under achieve during the finals ?

[DTR]

I would like to hear from some of you regulars as to why you think the bulldogs have under achieved during the last few finals campaigns when they have done well during the season.

Honestly, I don't think Dunstall has got it right on our height in defence!

I feel that the last two years we have been unlucky to strike our nemisis, Brisbane on their turf. Also during both series, we either had injuries to key players or they had just come back from injury and were under done.
Dimatina really add to our runners and has been out.
What about Craig Ellis at CHB, when he is fit and in form he is great, but that is too rare. Cox should be in the forward line!

DTR.

 

[JUBJUB]

whats Dunstall got to do with it ?

------------------
"Hillbillies are people too"

 

[DTR]

JUBJUB, Great name !

Dunstall: About 15 months ago he said that the Bulldogs were not a serious threat in the finals because they lack height in their backline.
Hunter, Ellis, Croft, Curley, Southern & Scott Wynd floating defender ? Are none of these guys tall ?

PS. I don't know any hillbillies, so I really can't comment!

DTR.

 

[Westy Boy]

JubJub,
Dunstall wrote an article in the Herald Sun just before the 99 finals, writing the Dogs off, saying that he didn't think the doggies had the goods in defence etc. I didn't understand why he singled out the dogs (who were third at the time), as any other team could have just as easily been criticised for their deficiencies, but for some reason, he thought it appropriate to just single out one team out of the eight (us) as the only team who would be unable to go all the way.

DTR,
Our under-performance can be atrributed to many things. We have NOT been that far off. Disregarding 97/98 for a moment (which despite the end result, we did have a couple of solid wins in those finals series', the week break, then heart breaking losses), luck (an easy cop out maybe) has been a major player in the 99/2000 permormances (or lack thereof).

I might be being pedantic here, but if the 2000 finals system had of been in place in 99, we would have played against Essendon (who we lost to by only 4 points during H&A) in round one, and even if we had of lost, we would have had a HOME match against a lower ranked team. Vice versa, if the previous system ad of been in place this year, we would have played an injury ravaged Carlton in round 1, although sudden death for us. Another factor which could have been regarded as unlucky, was the fact that one less win would have left us with a Colonial match against Geelong, a much more attractive prospect!. Could u have imagined our first finals match at our new stadium? It would have been huge! Sorry, just dreaming again

But despite this, you have to play each finals match on its merits, no excuses. It's a fact, we don't match up well against the current Brisbane outfit, and a couple of incidents have added to this rivalry (bad blood). I don't think losses against bribane away are 'chokes', although these losses will always add credence to the "finals failures" tag.

I agree with you, that a lot of players were underdone in this years match. The possibility of it being Scotty's last match added (unwanted IMO) pressure, and to tell u the truth from interviews before the match, it was as if everyone expected it to just happen. Blatant over confindence!- as strange as that may sound. Last year, the loss against WCE really hurt, and left us with the same Brisbane scenario. ONE goal the other way, and the finals could have been a whole different story for us. but that's life.

So, all i'm pretty much saying, is that I think this perception of finals chokers (other than 97-Adelaide- possibly 99-WCE) is more 'myth' than true. We have NEVER played a Melbourne team in the finals (in the past four years), which I think would be REALLY interesting to see our performances on a level playing field (i.e not interstate). It would be good to see another 'dimension' added to the matches. But as I said, you play where you are alloted under the system of the time, and strictly speaking, we haven't done the job. If we get to play teams we have beaten convincingly during H&A, i have a feeling it would be a different story.

 

[teddy3]

Westy,
Why do you write such long messages mannnnn
lol

Anyways the doggies just have bad luck with who they get matched up against in ths finals ( I could blame it on the Brisbane Liars ) However, if we finished stronger before the finals, maybe we'd have more of a chance in the finals.... Anyway just some more useless dribble from the mouth of teddy3 lol

C'mon the Mighty Western Bulldogs
Bring on Season 2001!!!!!!

 

[JUBJUB]

I now remember the article DUNGHEAP wrote about the Dogs.
Every Geelong supporter also hates the fat bastards guts after the criticism he keeps giving Geelong.He bags every team but Hawthorn.That may explain why he has been sacked from THE GAME and replaced by Tiiiiiiiiiiimmmmmmmmmyyyyyyyyyyyy,the former StKilda coach [not then ******ed South Park character]

------------------
"He is a loathsome offensive brute,yet I can't look away".

 

[HahnPremium37]

I think there has been a number of different reasons. This year it was pretty obvious that injury was the problem. However we did beat Essendon with key players out. In 99 we played the liars who were on a roll at the time. The attitude of players worries me a times. I heard an interview on the radio with a bulldogs player and it seemed as though they were thinking about the grand final too much and not really taking it one week at a time...

Anyway I think it's time to look towards next season. Sooooooo bring on season 2001

------------------
http://www.geocities.com/isdogisgood/index.html

 

[Woofer]

DTR - I think it does has something to do with our "short" defence. We tend to get away with it when our midfield is on top and giving us first use of the ball. If you look at our BAD finals losses our midfield big guns have been beaten - West, Johnno (not beaten in Brissy but hardly played), Romero ,Browny and Dimma has been out.

Even our bad H & A losses this year was to teams with dominant marking forwards - remember Hawthorn (MCG), Brisbane (Bradshaw 7) and Richmond.

Thats not being critical - Crofty, Kretters and Curls are generally VG but are suspect against taller opps.

Hopefully if Penny/Wiggins come on at CHF we could settle Granty at CHB where he nearly won a Brownlow.

 

[DTR]

Woofer,
I also would like to see Grant move to CHB. I think this could extend his career also. Although I dont think he will finish in the forseeable future unless he is struck down by an injury(Touch wood). He has played some great footy in that position.

Then we have to rectify our problems with our key forward positions.

Ohhh what I would give for a Malloy, Hamill, White, Etc.

I would like to see Shane Watson drafted to kick a few goals and take over Hudsons role in the future.

DTR.

 

[S.Robbo]

Am I as an Essendon supporter allowed to put my two cents worth in?

 

[Westy Boy]

Of course S. Robbo!

The main thing I like about this site is that you get a perspective from supporters from other clubs, so please, feel free to express your opinion on any of the topics we have here!

Just don't be to harsh please

 

[Shinboners]

You have to say that the Doggies have had a shocking run with luck in the finals. In '98, the Doggies gave my boys a huge run for their money in round 22 and I was convinced that I was seeing the Grand Final preview. But there was one little incident in the '98 Preliminary Final that showed to me that the Dogs lacked that little bit of mental hardness that could have brought you guys a Grand Final appearance, if not a Premiership. It was during the third quarter and the Doggies were coming back and Chris Grant took a mark about 15m in front of goal. If he got it, you would've been back to within 2 or 3 goals of Adelaide. Instead of going back and taking the shot, Grant tried to handpass quickly to another Doggies player in the square, but the Crows forced it through for a behind. The Crows then set up the play and got a goal soon after and that was that.

So that, in a nutshell, is why I think the Dogs haven't made a Grand Final yet. Mental hardness. Since '97, the Doggies have been a very consistent team. I still rate your win against us in the MCG in (I think) '98 during the H&A as the best win against a Pagan side (it was the game where 4 Roos and 4 Doggies were on the side of the centre square trying to break tags and all that) because it was against a Pagan led North team at the peak of its powers. The skills are there, but maybe the mental attitude isn't.

I was convinced that the Doggies would win the '99 Premiership....history to repeat itself. It was supposed to go like this:

'94 North's heatbreaking PF loss to Geelong.
'95 North get belted in PF by Carlton.
'96 North premiership.

'97 Doggies heartbreaking PF loss to Adelaide.
'98 Doggies get belted in PF by Adelaide.
'99 Doggies premiership.

Anyway, I reckon the Dogs have had their chances and other teams have moved ahead of them. But there is still plenty of experience there and you were the only team to beat Essendon in 2000, so keep the faith and hopefully you'll be rewarded.

Always remember, a victory for the Doggies is a poke in the eye for the AFL.

 

[PREETY_FLY]

2016- year of the dog!

 

[Wizard17]

What is with GC supporters and bumping decade old threads?

 

[HiReception]

What is with GC supporters and bumping decade old threads?

They decided to start BigFooty from the top when they got into the league, just to make sure they got all the inside jokes