Why We Lost

WayneJudson42 · Mon 28 Jul 2008 11:23am

And when has Blake played forward successfully?

He's mobile, and can mark. I'd rather put him up there as opposed to an untried kid IMHO only.

After all, he IS Mr Fixit

saintbob · Post: # 611027Post **saintbob** » Mon 28 Jul 2008 12:18pm

Simple the West Coast aren't as bad as their form suggest, still had 14 premiership players running around on Saturday.

Worsfold might just have learnt from Ratten "The Art of TANKING", he has made no secret of the fact that he is very keen on the two WA players who are both predicted to go in top 3 players at this years draft.

bigcarl · Post: # 611325Post **bigcarl** » Mon 28 Jul 2008 4:43pm

WayneJudson42 wrote:And when has Blake played forward successfully?

He's mobile, and can mark. I'd rather put him up there as opposed to an untried kid IMHO only.

After all, he IS Mr Fixit

blake's kicking for goal would be my only concern. then again, roo's not always a superstar in that department either.

nothing wrong with a bit of lateral thinking like this.

i think there is a fair degree of pigeon-holing when it comes to certain players,

gram's ability to slot in as a midfielder is a case in point.

we have many possible options for an extra forward marking target (should kosi ruck or roo be called upon to play wing) including (in no particular order) gehrig, allen, bj, gilbert, mcevoy, ferguson, c. gardiner. s. fisher, blake ... and there are probably others i've overlooked.

with kosi out, any one of them could have played a valuable role in at least stopping the double-team on roo on saturday. hopefully we live and learn.

WayneJudson42 · Mon 28 Jul 2008 4:47pm

The way the game is going, you need a more mobile forward. Even LLoyd is playing up the ground.

At least Kosi gives our crumbers a chance.

Thing with Blake is that he has size, mobility and ticker. Would be interesting to see his goal kicking stats btw.

With such a big ground, they'll eat you up on the turnover.

Obviously, form didn't warrant it, but Charlie would have been an option also.

Bottom line is that no one stepped up to fill the gap.

bigcarl · Post: # 611490Post **bigcarl** » Mon 28 Jul 2008 8:54pm

WayneJudson42 wrote:Thing with Blake is that he has size, mobility and ticker. Would be interesting to see his goal kicking stats btw.

he's kicked 6 goals 4 behinds this season, which isn't a big enough sample to give you any idea of his accuracy. i don't know how to get his career stats, but i wouldn't think they are that flash.

but it is an interesting thought.

putting him alongside riewoldt at the half forward line would certainly be a handful for most oppositions, particularly with kosi down there as well.

bigcarl · Post: # 611541Post **bigcarl** » Mon 28 Jul 2008 10:16pm

it's got me thinking a bit, this thread.

many of our taller players ... blake, max, bj, gilbert, sam fisher, are in the backline.

that's five "talls" regularly in the back half, not counting ruckmen.

in the forward line, however, we regularly have only two talls, roo and kosi, and on saturday we had only one (one that we kicked to anyway) ... roo.

is this the correct balance, do you think?

would it be to our advantage to have another couple of tall forward marking options and would that make it easier for riewoldt and kosi?

thoughts?

WayneJudson42 · Mon 28 Jul 2008 10:27pm

The problem as I see it is that we lack a kpp back. Never had one since Penny.

So with Max and Goose out, we have use others to fill their place. Which in turn robs us being more flexible up forward.

Add to that.. Gtrain is done, and it gets worse.

We need to get moew mids and flankers kicking goals. We have X, and Schneids and Milne. The first injured, the 2nd out of form.

bigcarl · Post: # 611548Post **bigcarl** » Mon 28 Jul 2008 10:31pm

WayneJudson42 wrote:The problem as I see it is that we lack a kpp back. Never had one since Penny.

maybe gilbert once he gets a bit of upper body strength. doesn't lack anything in closing speed.

he's going to have to get good pretty quick though because max is coming to the end of a very good and under rated career.

The_Dud · Post: # 611558Post **The_Dud** » Mon 28 Jul 2008 10:43pm

we basically lost this game at the selection table

we had no forward line when Roo wasn't up there, and when he was we couldn't get it down there cos we needed him up the ground

Ferg impressed me earlier on in the year playing forward before he injured himself, he should be given another crack in the forward line as a mid-sized lead up player

plugger66 · Post: # 611562Post **plugger66** » Mon 28 Jul 2008 10:46pm

The_Dud wrote:we basically lost this game at the selection table

we had no forward line when Roo wasn't up there, and when he was we couldn't get it down there cos we needed him up the ground

Ferg impressed me earlier on in the year playing forward before he injured himself, he should be given another crack in the forward line as a mid-sized lead up player

The problem is none of the Casey forwards are in form and it will not magically happen in a better side that is obviously why RL punted on MG which was a big mistake. Doesnt matter this week as Kosi is back. the big question is does MG hold his spot because if he doesnt that may just about signal goodbye.

Teflon · Post: # 611564Post **Teflon** » Mon 28 Jul 2008 10:47pm

The_Dud wrote:we basically lost this game at the selection table

we had no forward line when Roo wasn't up there, and when he was we couldn't get it down there cos we needed him up the ground

Ferg impressed me earlier on in the year playing forward before he injured himself, he should be given another crack in the forward line as a mid-sized lead up player

Doesnt make sense. Wouldnt have said that in qtr 1.......in that logoc we also had no fwd line yet led by 5 goals?

Could it be we simply thought we had this in the bag, gave an underdog a sniff and couldnt stop the slide?

The_Dud · Post: # 611571Post **The_Dud** » Mon 28 Jul 2008 10:50pm

Teflon wrote:
The_Dud wrote:we basically lost this game at the selection table

we had no forward line when Roo wasn't up there, and when he was we couldn't get it down there cos we needed him up the ground

Ferg impressed me earlier on in the year playing forward before he injured himself, he should be given another crack in the forward line as a mid-sized lead up player
Doesnt make sense. Wouldnt have said that in qtr 1.......in that logoc we also had no fwd line yet led by 5 goals?

Could it be we simply thought we had this in the bag, gave an underdog a sniff and couldnt stop the slide?

Roo as the only target in the forward line worked for a while, but when that went wrong, we had no other tall forward option

but that is only part, ur point is valid too

just think we went into the game already on the back foot

also, i think Ferg was playing well enough to keep his spot in the team before he got injured, so he should be given another chance to show that kind of form, and i'd have him in the side before anyone else in the 2's, and Fiora/Schneider

Teflon · Post: # 611612Post **Teflon** » Mon 28 Jul 2008 11:35pm

The_Dud wrote:
Teflon wrote:
The_Dud wrote:we basically lost this game at the selection table

we had no forward line when Roo wasn't up there, and when he was we couldn't get it down there cos we needed him up the ground

Ferg impressed me earlier on in the year playing forward before he injured himself, he should be given another crack in the forward line as a mid-sized lead up player
Doesnt make sense. Wouldnt have said that in qtr 1.......in that logoc we also had no fwd line yet led by 5 goals?

Could it be we simply thought we had this in the bag, gave an underdog a sniff and couldnt stop the slide?
Roo as the only target in the forward line worked for a while, but when that went wrong, we had no other tall forward option

but that is only part, ur point is valid too

just think we went into the game already on the back foot

also, i think Ferg was playing well enough to keep his spot in the team before he got injured, so he should be given another chance to show that kind of form, and i'd have him in the side before anyone else in the 2's, and Fiora/Schneider

I dont disagree re ferg as I was hopeful he was a real chance to take that other fwd spot (and i agree he should/could have been given at least as much ago as Gwilt). I can understand the logic in playing Gardiner...quite often ex players pull out all stops against old clubs....he didnt I spose.

Still a gut wrenching loss to a shyte side....I am still shaking my head at what we lets slide and should we miss the finals/top 4 by a game we know where we can start to look........

WayneJudson42 · Tue 29 Jul 2008 12:58am

I actually agree with both of you

RL rolled the dice with MG and lost.

bigcarl · Post: # 611712Post **bigcarl** » Tue 29 Jul 2008 10:19am

Teflon wrote:Could it be we simply thought we had this in the bag, gave an underdog a sniff and couldnt stop the slide?

yes, there's an element of that as well.

it's never as simple as all structure or all selection. you can pick the perfect team and have the structure spot on and still be let down by attitude and desire ... and vice versa

WayneJudson42 · Tue 29 Jul 2008 10:37am

Whatever the reason, we weren't exactly Robinson Crusoe last weekend.

Teffers may be on to something.

Who knows, maybe they were so pumped for the Hawks match that they couldn't fire up?

Red · Post: # 611735Post **Red** » Tue 29 Jul 2008 11:53am

Our best player had only 10 possessions after quarter time.

Our 3 best midfielders while getting plenty of the ball turned it over

regularly.

We got to the contest second and regularly gave away stupid free kicks.

We missed a number of shots that we should have kicked.

And I can count on one hand the amount of times someone took

the opposition on.