View Full Version : McDougall against the Bombers
wimberga
23-02-2008, 01:49 PM
would like to hear some opinions of his game last night. I dont think we could question his intent or effort. He does seem like he lacks a little bit of confidence?
Being forever the optimist i will start with some things i saw that were encouraging.
1) on a few occasions he seemed to take on some defenders. albeit it didnt always work, but he did do it.
2) he was getting physical. Something we lack, he was pushing players around and getting in there face. maybe it was frustration, but i dont mind seeing some physical force being exerted against the opposition.
Opinions?
hujsh
23-02-2008, 02:13 PM
I'll give him a few tips
Brain fades don't work in defense. Handballs to opposition in the square are generally frowned upon. Playing on and trying to bump a player in the defensive 50 often gives a free kick to the other team. Other than that...still not great actually
Dry Rot
23-02-2008, 02:34 PM
Playing behind your forward and losing the flight of the ball wasn't flash either.
OK, Lucas is good but McDougall was terrible.
Hasn't he been in the system since the 2000 draft?
bornadog
23-02-2008, 03:16 PM
McDougall is a confidence player and needs to run into form. (and quickly)
GVGjr
23-02-2008, 03:47 PM
He did some good things (tackling and long kicks to position) but was soundly thrashed. I'd preserver with him a bit longer but not much longer.
hujsh
23-02-2008, 03:59 PM
Play him forward before Wight. He showed more in his NAB games last year than what Wight has shown so far this NAB cup
Go_Dogs
23-02-2008, 04:02 PM
I thought McDougall showed some great signs towards the end of last year, but it's becoming increasingly frustrating that he can't consistently reach the standard required.
He'll be persisted with, and should be. However Williams and Everitt will both probably be better KP defender options come years end. (fingers crossed).
hujsh
23-02-2008, 04:06 PM
I thought McDougall showed some great signs towards the end of last year, but it's becoming increasingly frustrating that he can't consistently reach the standard required.
He'll be persisted with, and should be. However Williams and Everitt will both probably be better KP defender options come years end. (fingers crossed).
Even our shining light isn't looking good. Let's find his cut off dreadies and give then to Minson
LostDoggy
23-02-2008, 06:37 PM
To me, he looked incredibly slow...... and seemed to have completely left his opponent whenever i saw him :S I didn't like what i saw last night.
LostDoggy
23-02-2008, 07:26 PM
To me last night, he was one of our worst, and thats saying something.
Bulldog Revolution
23-02-2008, 09:25 PM
He did some good things (tackling and long kicks to position) but was soundly thrashed. I'd preserver with him a bit longer but not much longer.
Pretty similar to my view. Lucas did kick a couple of incredible goals off a couple of steps.
And personally I was far more disappointed in the performance of Lake who was playing on far inferior player.
wimberga
23-02-2008, 09:41 PM
Pretty similar to my view. Lucas did kick a couple of incredible goals off a couple of steps.
And personally I was far more disappointed in the performance of Lake who was playing on far inferior player.
Totally agree BR. I did not even notice Brian Lake playing, and maybe as a defender that means something, but it just seemed as thought Mcdougall was giving it all, and although beaten most times, he tried. Lake was invisible and had no impact on the game what so ever. Since we are commenting on some other players, worth a mention that i believed both Addison and Hargrave played decent through the middle on a night we were being smashed.
Sockeye Salmon
24-02-2008, 06:50 PM
He got thrashed by a seriously good player.
Pembleton and I were discussing him before the game and agreed that the one player in the Essendon side he couldn't play on was Lucas.
Seeing Lake didn't get the job on Lucas at any stage, I think Eade wanted to have a long look at him on a good player (and I doubt he would have liked what he saw).
LostDoggy
24-02-2008, 09:50 PM
Lucas is very good but McDougall was very poor. Lucas is not fast but he turned Mcdougall inside out numerous times and he was made to look slow. Look asleep and had no confidence.
Agree Lake would have been a better option but would Lake would get Lloyd normally?
As least we now know McDougall should not be in the starting 22.
FrediKanoute
24-02-2008, 09:55 PM
He got thrashed by a seriously good player.
Pembleton and I were discussing him before the game and agreed that the one player in the Essendon side he couldn't play on was Lucas.
Seeing Lake didn't get the job on Lucas at any stage, I think Eade wanted to have a long look at him on a good player (and I doubt he would have liked what he saw).
I can't comment on what Eade saw as I haven't seen the game. I will concur though that leaving Doog's on Lucas the whole game sounds like a calculated decision by Eade, maybe to see how he would perform against class forwards and also as part of Doog's learning experience. Players only get better by playing on good players - would be worth having Doog's review the tape with Peter Dean and have pointed out to him what did and didn't work!
The Underdog
25-02-2008, 08:39 AM
Lucas is very good but McDougall was very poor. Lucas is not fast but he turned Mcdougall inside out numerous times and he was made to look slow. Look asleep and had no confidence.
Agree Lake would have been a better option but would Lake would get Lloyd normally?
As least we now know McDougall should not be in the starting 22.
Lake would get Lloyd normally which is a worry, because he got belted by Hille.
Would have been interested to see Everitt have a go on Lucas, but as he was also belted by Lovett-Murray early, not sure it would have helped.
I agree McDougall was very ordinary, some poor decision making, but he wasn't on his lonesome either.
I get the feeling he's our new scapegoat. Maybe we could start a tradition much like Richmond giving No 17 to the captain, and just hand 23 to the season scapegoat :rolleyes:
Mantis
25-02-2008, 08:54 AM
Lucas is very good but McDougall was very poor. Lucas is not fast but he turned Mcdougall inside out numerous times and he was made to look slow. Look asleep and had no confidence.
Agree Lake would have been a better option but would Lake would get Lloyd normally?
As least we now know McDougall should not be in the starting 22.
On Friday night's performance you could say that about 4 or 6 of our 'regular' players. (Not the kids)
easybeat
25-02-2008, 11:56 AM
His performance Friday night was just lame.
I didn't see any positive signs for the coming year from anyone.
Twodogs
25-02-2008, 12:04 PM
Lucas is very good but McDougall was very poor. Lucas is not fast but he turned Mcdougall inside out numerous times and he was made to look slow. Look asleep and had no confidence.
Agree Lake would have been a better option but would Lake would get Lloyd normally?
As least we now know McDougall should not be in the starting 22.
It's a starting 18. The rest are on the bench.
LostDoggy
25-02-2008, 02:30 PM
It's a starting 18. The rest are on the bench.
ok smart arse ;)
Well he isn't starting 18 or the selected 22.
bornadog
26-02-2008, 05:33 PM
ok smart arse ;)
Well he isn't starting 18 or the selected 22.
You can't right off McDougall based on one crappy practise match. He needs to gain some confidence as do some of the other guys like Everrit.
For me its all too early to call.
Go_Dogs
26-02-2008, 06:05 PM
I think we should show some faith in McDougall, especially early. If Williams can't get right, or Lake goes down this year, having McDougall in reasonable form, with confidence will be crucial.
LostDoggy
26-02-2008, 09:46 PM
You can't right off McDougall based on one crappy practise match. He needs to gain some confidence as do some of the other guys like Everrit.
For me its all too early to call.
Well I think you can write him off for round 1 in the named 22 if Williams and Lake are available. Pretty sure Eade said it to TCD.
The Coon Dog
26-02-2008, 10:03 PM
Well I think you can write him off for round 1 in the named 22 if Williams and Lake are available. Pretty sure Eade said it to TCD.
I'm sorry Ern, I can't recall that being said.
The Underdog
26-02-2008, 10:21 PM
As ordinary as he was at times in the game on Friday night, the fact is that if Lake or Williams don't get up for Round 1, McDougall will be a starter in a defensive key position post. I still think he can be a contributor. I doubt he'll ever be a seriously consistent top level player but he may prove an ok depth player. His form in the last few games last year was ok in a very bad team. Here's hoping he can get a bit of confidence up and help the team.
It's certainly too early in the season to write him off completely.
westdog54
26-02-2008, 11:31 PM
I find it perculiar, no that's not the right word, aggrieved perhaps, that although Doogs and Lake both had evenings they'd rather forget, it seems to be Doogs copping more than his fair percentage of criticism. Surely there should be closer scrutiny on the reigning Charlie Sutton Medallist than a player who is not in our best 22?
The Underdog
27-02-2008, 08:07 AM
I find it perculiar, no that's not the right word, aggrieved perhaps, that although Doogs and Lake both had evenings they'd rather forget, it seems to be Doogs copping more than his fair percentage of criticism. Surely there should be closer scrutiny on the reigning Charlie Sutton Medallist than a player who is not in our best 22?
I understand that Lake may have been injured during or for the game but I thought the fact that he was destroyed by Hille was a lot more disappointing than Doogs getting put away by Lucas who is a far more proven forward.
Sockeye Salmon
27-02-2008, 08:37 AM
I'm sorry Ern, I can't recall that being said.
I can.
I asked specifically about Mcdougall and Rodney said "he's a long way from our best 22".
If Lake and Williams don't play Mcdougall plays by default (my opinion, not a Rodney comment).
Sockeye Salmon
27-02-2008, 08:38 AM
I find it perculiar, no that's not the right word, aggrieved perhaps, that although Doogs and Lake both had evenings they'd rather forget, it seems to be Doogs copping more than his fair percentage of criticism. Surely there should be closer scrutiny on the reigning Charlie Sutton Medallist than a player who is not in our best 22?
You do get cut some slack when you need surgery after the game.
westdog54
27-02-2008, 10:13 AM
You do get cut some slack when you need surgery after the game.
Fair point, but Doogs was never going to beat Lucas over the course of the match. Lucas is too damn good for him. Hille vs Lake on the other hand is a different story.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.