Ability to score as 2009 progressed.

chook23 · Post: # 834967Post **chook23** » Sun 27 Sep 2009 8:24pm

Early part of season defensive pressure but we scored heavily

latter part of season when opposition tested the defensive structures of our game we appeared to have concentrated on this to the detrement of scoring.........

we became more and more (I hate saying it SYD/WC 2005/6)

and got caught out.

kicked over a 100 many times but fell away

the bloody wet weather then hurt our best avenues as well

3rd generation saint · Sun 27 Sep 2009 8:27pm

Ross got the defence structure right, now he has to get the offence right.
We have got the tools and players, don't need to be the best, but need to be top 4.
The third medium size forward is required, Lynch, Heyne and possibly someone in trade week who can help as we can't expect two boys who are yet to play an AFL game to become stars.

Milton66 · Post: # 834979Post **Milton66** » Sun 27 Sep 2009 8:30pm

Yes, it had it wrong all year.

Some people are grasping at straws for excuses.

Our scoring potential dropped off because teams worked us out, and certain people went missing in action during the finals.

Have another look at the replay of the last quarter. Geelong choked off just about every opportunity inside our 50.

chook23 · Post: # 834980Post **chook23** » Sun 27 Sep 2009 8:31pm

3rd generation saint wrote:Ross got the defence structure right, now he has to get the offence right.
We have got the tools and players, don't need to be the best, but need to be top 4.
The third medium size forward is required, Lynch, Heyne and possibly someone in trade week who can help as we can't expect two boys who are yet to play an AFL game to become stars.

agree..........we did not maintain both

Hamill type (3rd fwd) would have been so important.

eel33 · Post: # 834991Post **eel33** » Sun 27 Sep 2009 8:36pm

I think there is a real opportunity for Geary next year. He's not the third tall we're looking for, but it's noticeable that as a younger body his form has dropped off over the second half of the year in 09 and 08. With another preseason under his belt, he has the opportunity to contribute all year - and he does know where the goals are.

Legendary · Post: # 834994Post **Legendary** » Sun 27 Sep 2009 8:38pm

I think as the year wore on, teams got themselves "up" for St Kilda a little more, and it meant the pressure/intensity of our opposition was perhaps higher than early in the year?

We were extremely efficient moving the footy forward rounds 1-10 ... the most efficient team in the AFL.

That dropped off to the point where our efficiency was very low in the second half of the year.

Averaged a similar number of inside 50's ... so we still got out hands on the footy and moved it forward.

Just didn't convert that to scoreboard pressure, which we desperately needed to.

chook23 · Post: # 834999Post **chook23** » Sun 27 Sep 2009 8:39pm

Milton66 wrote:Yes, it had it wrong all year.

Some people are grasping at straws for excuses.

Our scoring potential dropped off because teams worked us out, and certain people went missing in action during the finals.

Have another look at the replay of the last quarter. Geelong choked off just about every opportunity inside our 50.

Your first sentence..........

not grasping at straws

just indicating a fact that our scoring dropped away.....

if it was being worked out ...part of my question is did we work hard enough on the offensive side whilst maintainig the defensive side.

saint66au · Post: # 835002Post **saint66au** » Sun 27 Sep 2009 8:42pm

Yep...agree

Roo is not going to take every contested mark that he goes for..x 10 in the weather we had yesterday. We needed blokes permanantly front and square if we were gonna look for him constantly...but too often the only blokes at the fall had Geelong jumpers on. We had the same problem last week too but Roo's marking saved us

Kosi..make your own space mate, stop running to every spot Roo does.

Delivery inside 50 MUST improve and the options there must increase

Its plain the coaching staff know this...weve tried Dempster, Gwilt, McEvoy and BJ in the 3rd forward role this year and none of them worked. Its been disguised a bit by by cameos from Schneider and Milne during the season but neither were effective during the finals...and by effective I mean kick goals that HAVE to be kicked

Tommy Lynch...with a big preseason..your time is night son

SainterK · Post: # 835071Post **SainterK** » Sun 27 Sep 2009 9:27pm

Are we sure it was Ross though, sometimes when things aren't going so great, it's a natural instinct to play it safe...

hAyES · Post: # 835085Post **hAyES** » Sun 27 Sep 2009 9:35pm

I think it had something to do with losing the contested ball count. We weren't getting first hands on the ball, and I think we have a problem when teams go one-on-one. We need to find a way to score more when teams do this because I'm sure we're going to see a lot more teams doing it to us next year, particularly in finals.

Legendary · Post: # 835091Post **Legendary** » Sun 27 Sep 2009 9:41pm

hAyES wrote:I think it had something to do with losing the contested ball count. We weren't getting first hands on the ball, and I think we have a problem when teams go one-on-one. We need to find a way to score more when teams do this because I'm sure we're going to see a lot more teams doing it to us next year, particularly in finals.

Agree, but we won the contested ball count yesterday.

We had 25 shots on goal yesterday, if you count a couple that went over the boundary line ... that should be enough to win you a game of footy.

Thinline · Post: # 835179Post **Thinline** » Sun 27 Sep 2009 10:35pm

Milton66 wrote:Yes, it had it wrong all year.

Some people are grasping at straws for excuses.

Our scoring potential dropped off because teams worked us out, and certain people went missing in action during the finals.

Have another look at the replay of the last quarter. Geelong choked off just about every opportunity inside our 50.

Our delivery into fwd 50 in the last was panicked I thought. Hacking it fwd without system. Exhaustion, nerves, lost structure. Call it what you will. Fact was - I think - we could have done with an X Clarke/Gwilt sized player leading up, or if not that, tried somehow to hit a lead rather than hope for the pack mark.

saint66au · Post: # 835193Post **saint66au** » Sun 27 Sep 2009 10:41pm

Thinline wrote:
Milton66 wrote:Yes, it had it wrong all year.

Some people are grasping at straws for excuses.

Our scoring potential dropped off because teams worked us out, and certain people went missing in action during the finals.

Have another look at the replay of the last quarter. Geelong choked off just about every opportunity inside our 50.
Our delivery into fwd 50 in the last was panicked I thought. Hacking it fwd without system. Exhaustion, nerves, lost structure. Call it what you will. Fact was - I think - we could have done with an X Clarke/Gwilt sized player leading up, or if not that, tried somehow to hit a lead rather than hope for the pack mark.

RL has admitted he told the team in the later part of the last qtr to bomb it long and put the Geelong defence under pressure. Has also admitted he might have got it wrong

Thinline · Post: # 835198Post **Thinline** » Sun 27 Sep 2009 10:43pm

saint66au wrote:
Thinline wrote:
Milton66 wrote:Yes, it had it wrong all year.

Some people are grasping at straws for excuses.

Our scoring potential dropped off because teams worked us out, and certain people went missing in action during the finals.

Have another look at the replay of the last quarter. Geelong choked off just about every opportunity inside our 50.
Our delivery into fwd 50 in the last was panicked I thought. Hacking it fwd without system. Exhaustion, nerves, lost structure. Call it what you will. Fact was - I think - we could have done with an X Clarke/Gwilt sized player leading up, or if not that, tried somehow to hit a lead rather than hope for the pack mark.
RL has admitted he told the team in the later part of the last qtr to bomb it long and put the Geelong defence under pressure. Has also admitted he might have got it wrong

There you go. Whatever. Academic. Just an observation. Could have bombed all we like had we kicked 3 of the 7 we shoulda kicked.

Bernard Shakey · Sun 27 Sep 2009 10:50pm

Two little guys were rubbish.

One big guy played his heart out.

Another big guy just doesn't have it.

Thinline · Post: # 835217Post **Thinline** » Sun 27 Sep 2009 10:54pm

Bernard Shakey wrote:Two little guys were rubbish.

One big guy played his heart out.

Another big guy just doesn't have it.

Two little guys kick 2.1 and 4.1 and things are different, Bern...

Woulda coulda, I know, but they were there when the chances fell, they simply didn't pick em up.

As for the sledge on Kos...well I saw two blokes smashing into packs all day and neither really have much luck or hope of grabbing a bar of soap...

Maybe you simply expect too much.

SainterK · Post: # 835219Post **SainterK** » Sun 27 Sep 2009 10:57pm

Thinline wrote:
Bernard Shakey wrote:Two little guys were rubbish.

One big guy played his heart out.

Another big guy just doesn't have it.
Two little guys kick 2.1 and 4.1 and things are different, Bern...

Woulda coulda, I know, but they were there when the chances fell, they simply didn't pick em up.

As for the sledge on Kos...well I saw two blokes smashing into packs all day and neither really have much luck or hope of grabbing a bar of soap...

Maybe you simply expect too much.

I saw more than two blokes not having much hope....it was not a day for the big guys.

As for the sledge on Kosi...wouldn't have expected different.

Bernard Shakey · Sun 27 Sep 2009 11:55pm

Must have hit a sore point.

The fact is our forwards cost us the game.

No.23 was rubbish. One goal kicked off the ground.
Out on the full in the first quarter, with no pressure from a set shot.
2nd quarter bomb straight to Harry.
What else did he do?

SainterK · Post: # 835291Post **SainterK** » Mon 28 Sep 2009 12:05am

Bernard Shakey wrote:Must have hit a sore point.

The fact is our forwards cost us the game.

No.23 was rubbish. One goal kicked off the ground.
Out on the full in the first quarter, with no pressure from a set shot.
2nd quarter bomb straight to Harry.
What else did he do?

Forwards cost us you say, but you just can't resist being more specific can you?

Bernard Shakey · Mon 28 Sep 2009 12:39am

SainterK wrote:
Bernard Shakey wrote:Must have hit a sore point.

The fact is our forwards cost us the game.

No.23 was rubbish. One goal kicked off the ground.
Out on the full in the first quarter, with no pressure from a set shot.
2nd quarter bomb straight to Harry.
What else did he do?
Forwards cost us you say, but you just can't resist being more specific can you?

You knew who, so you must agree with me.

SainterK · Post: # 835349Post **SainterK** » Mon 28 Sep 2009 1:25am

Bernard Shakey wrote:
SainterK wrote:
Bernard Shakey wrote:Must have hit a sore point.

The fact is our forwards cost us the game.

No.23 was rubbish. One goal kicked off the ground.
Out on the full in the first quarter, with no pressure from a set shot.
2nd quarter bomb straight to Harry.
What else did he do?
Forwards cost us you say, but you just can't resist being more specific can you?
You knew who, so you must agree with me.

You got me there Bernard, I interpreted the cryptic message that was No.23 and came up with Kosi

Go ahead and individualise if it brings you some kind of weird pleasure....

HarveysDeciple · Mon 28 Sep 2009 2:06am

Jarryd Allen

mbogo · Post: # 835442Post **mbogo** » Mon 28 Sep 2009 10:55am

I have to admit to a few nightmares last night - with us continually running into open goal and getting the yips - then losing the GF we should have won.
The last qtr when we could not get an inside 50 possie was just hopeless really - not one goal in the last. We need to face facts that no one actually stood up - in front of goal - when it mattered late in the game.
We need to fix our forward structures and need others, like Geel have Chapman and Rooke - strong players that don't wilt.
Obviously accuracy needs work as well - it happened earlier in the year as well.
Gutted.

Stillwaiting · Mon 28 Sep 2009 11:12am

chook23 wrote:
Milton66 wrote:Yes, it had it wrong all year.

Some people are grasping at straws for excuses.

Our scoring potential dropped off because teams worked us out, and certain people went missing in action during the finals.

Have another look at the replay of the last quarter. Geelong choked off just about every opportunity inside our 50.
Your first sentence..........

not grasping at straws

just indicating a fact that our scoring dropped away.....

if it was being worked out ...part of my question is did we work hard enough on the offensive side whilst maintainig the defensive side.

Good post Chook and I agree, your question is very valid. Hopfully we can improve that part next year.

Thinline · Post: # 835467Post **Thinline** » Mon 28 Sep 2009 11:24am

Bernard Shakey wrote:Must have hit a sore point.

The fact is our forwards cost us the game.

No.23 was rubbish. One goal kicked off the ground.
Out on the full in the first quarter, with no pressure from a set shot.
2nd quarter bomb straight to Harry.
What else did he do?

How many forwards took above head marks on Saturday? From memory all took maybe one or two each?

I agree that early set shot would have been more than handy, but Kosi's work rate was outstanding for a big bloke in the wet. Bustled, hassled and smashed like he should.

But he just ain't the Wayne Carey you want, Bernard.