Dogs' problems run deep

[BulldogBelle]

Interesting article....

Dogs' problems run deep (http://sportal.com.au/afl-news-display/dogs-problems-run-deep-54871/page/1)
Sportal
Paul Gough
17/08/08

The Western Bulldogs might still be assured of a top four finish despite their recent form slump but unless there is a dramatic turnaround in the club's form and quickly, forget about the Dogs breaking its 54-year premiership drought this season.

The Bulldogs are limping into the finals and history shows that teams that do that simply don't measure up when the pressure and intensity rises in September.

With four losses in five games, the Dogs are going as badly as any team in the competition at the moment - even including struggling teams such as Melbourne, West Coast and Port Adelaide.

Hardly the sort of form to challenge arguably the best team in the history of the game in Geelong - which has now won an incredible 38 of its past 40 matches - and looks more unbeatable and certain to win back-to-back flags for the first time since 1952 by the week.

The Bulldogs have had little motivation for weeks - given it has been obvious for some time now that the team will face Hawthorn in the qualifying final in the first week of September - but it is a big ask to expect the Dogs to just turn their form on like a tap come the first week of September.

Premierships are won by teams that take form and momentum into September as we saw last year when the Cats won 19 of their last 20 matches to claim their first flag in 44 years and in 2001 when Brisbane won its last 16 matches on end to claim the flag.

Essendon in 2000 and Carlton in 1995 were other teams that maintained their form and momentum right throughout the season to win premierships while even in 2005 and 2006 when little separated Sydney and West Coast, both teams were in form when it counted with the Swans winning 10 of their last 12 in 2005 while in 2006 the Eagles won eight of their last 10 matches.

The one exception was Brisbane in 2003, which won only three of its last seven heading into the finals and then lost its first final to Collingwood before recovering to thrash the Magpies in the grand final.

But that team was one of the most experienced in finals' history and virtually willed itself over the line to become the first club since Melbourne in 1957 to win three successive premierships.

In contrast young sides on the up, like the Western Bulldogs - who have played just one finals series since 2000 - need everything going for them to perform well in September.

Again history is littered with similar sides on the rise performing well early in the home and away season only to lose momentum late in the season and bomb out in the finals.

West Coast in 1991, back then a young team on the up under Mick Malthouse, looked unbeatable when it won 19 of the first 21 games that season only to lose all momentum when it suffered a shock loss to bottom side Fitzroy in the last game and then lost a home final to Hawthorn the following week, who went on to beat them in the grand final.

And in more recent times Melbourne in 2004, who like the Bulldogs this year were desperate to end a long premiership drought, sat on top of the ladder in round 18 only to lose the last four games and then bow out of the finals in the first week to Essendon.

The Dogs do have three good players to return to the side in veteran midfielder Scott West, key defender Tom Williams and classy goalsneak Shaun Higgins but just how much difference that trio - who have all missed the bulk of the season due to injury - can make come finals time is debatable.

Unfortunately for the Bulldogs their problems are at both ends of the ground.

After scoring over 100 points in all of the first 12 rounds, the Dogs have only reached three figures in three of the past eight rounds as their lack of key forwards compared to the likes of Geelong and Hawthorn begins to bite.

And in defence - where the club is badly missing the injured Williams and is over-reliant on Brian Lake and the undersized Dale Morris - the Dogs have conceded more than 100 points in three of the past five matches after doing so just four times in the first 15 matches.

That decline both in attacking and defensive output suggests the Dogs' problems run deep and begin in the midfield - which is not protecting the defence or generating scoring chances - and it doesn't help that experienced players such as Jason Akermanis are badly down on form.

It's not over for the Bulldogs yet but Friday night's clash against a struggling Essendon side now out of finals contention is the last chance for the club to revive it season.

A loss there and it may be too late for the Dogs, given they face a tough trip to Adelaide in the final round, before fronting up to the Hawks, who remain the number one threat to Geelong despite their shock loss to Richmond on Sunday.

But considering the Cats have just beaten the experienced Swans in Sydney without Matthew Scarlett, Darren Milburn, Paul Chapman and David Wojcinski and it's hard not to think the premiership battle is a one-horse race this year - just as it was last year when the Cats beat Port Adelaide by a record 119 point margin in the grand final.

[Bulldog Revolution]

This is the kind of article that was probably always going to be written when we started losing. That said I cant help but wonder if some of it isn't scarily on the money:




The Dogs do have three good players to return to the side in veteran midfielder Scott West, key defender Tom Williams and classy goalsneak Shaun Higgins but just how much difference that trio - who have all missed the bulk of the season due to injury - can make come finals time is debatable.

Unfortunately for the Bulldogs their problems are at both ends of the ground.

After scoring over 100 points in all of the first 12 rounds, the Dogs have only reached three figures in three of the past eight rounds as their lack of key forwards compared to the likes of Geelong and Hawthorn begins to bite.

And in defence - where the club is badly missing the injured Williams and is over-reliant on Brian Lake and the undersized Dale Morris - the Dogs have conceded more than 100 points in three of the past five matches after doing so just four times in the first 15 matches.

That decline both in attacking and defensive output suggests the Dogs' problems run deep and begin in the midfield - which is not protecting the defence or generating scoring chances - and it doesn't help that experienced players such as Jason Akermanis are badly down on form.

[Mantis]

You would have to think it's real close to the time where Robert Walls writes a scathing critique on our players. He'd probably be on the mark too.

What do you think he might say?

[The Coon Dog]

What do you think he might say?

Something akin to what you might, I think.

Too many experienced players not working hard enough to present, run & be prepared to take on the lines & a complete lack of defensive pressure from the forwards & midfielders.

[Mantis]

Too many experienced players not working hard enough to present, run & be prepared to take on the lines & a complete lack of defensive pressure from the forwards & midfielders.

And he would be on the ball.

My parent's were at the game on Saturday night amongst the Bulldog supporter's and they couldn't believe the amount of abuse being directed at our senior player's from our own supporters. My dad is a pretty harsh critic of our performance (wonder where I get it from ;)), but even he was surprised that so many of our diehard supporters (people who are willing to shell out good money to follow the team around the country) are getting peed off by a perceived lack of effort from our leadership group.

[LostDoggy]

Something akin to what you might, I think.

Too many experienced players not working hard enough to present, run & be prepared to take on the lines & a complete lack of defensive pressure from the forwards & midfielders.

Not only that he also belted out a few home truths to some of our more senior core of players the walls were rocking. might see a very different fired up team this Friday.

[Sockeye Salmon]

And he would be on the ball.

My parent's were at the game on Saturday night amongst the Bulldog supporter's and they couldn't believe the amount of abuse being directed at our senior player's from our own supporters. My dad is a pretty harsh critic of our performance (wonder where I get it from ;)), but even he was surprised that so many of our diehard supporters (people who are willing to shell out good money to follow the team around the country) are getting peed off by a perceived lack of effort from our leadership group.

We're worse than Richmond when it comes to slagging off our own players.

[Mantis]

We're worse than Richmond when it comes to slagging off our own players.

I just think that many of our supporter's are fed up with watching us fall down in the same area's time and time again.

[LostDoggy]

We're worse than Richmond when it comes to slagging off our own players.

Our supporters are far worse than Richmond's when it comes to slagging off players which pains me to admit.

[Rocket Science]

C'mon...en masse we're nowhere near as feral as the Punt Road faithful, but I'd agree we've got some crook ones...tell me who doesn't?

I've also never subscribed to the theory that supporters who express anything but blind faith in their team are unworthy turncoats of some description.

[LostDoggy]

Agree with the Rocket Scientist, Richmond fans first, daylight second. I think we are okay, or at least, constructive in our criticism of players. It seems to me that Eade is more likely to cop more aimless spleen-venting than the players.

As far as the op goes, I'm phlegmatic about the current form. We've exceeded my expectations this year and we are going to play two finals. Two better than none.

[Go_Dogs]

As far as the op goes, I'm phlegmatic about the current form. We've exceeded my expectations this year and we are going to play two finals. Two better than none.

Good point to remember. I doubt many if any of us realistically expected a top 4 finish this year...yet for some reason, it seems a few are disappointed at this stage.

[Pembleton]

It may well be that the Dogs are in serious trouble. I think it is fair enough to write an article saying that. However, I think the manner in which the journo has tried to add the weight of historical example to his argument is bordering on dishonest.

He has gone back to '91 to come up with one dicey example. The Eagles didn't collapse after losing in round 22. They still won 2 finals that season, and were only beaten in September by one team, which happened to be the Hawks, who at the time, knew a fair bit about how to win flags.

The '04 Demons might be a better fit, but they were never secure in the top 4 like the Bulldogs are this year. The Demons lost games that mattered, and dropped from a home qualifying final with a double chance, to an elimination final. The Bulldogs of '08 can drop n further than they have, and thats from wearing blue shorts in an MCG qualifying final, to wearing white shorts instead.

Some different examples that mught be relevant to the importance of momentum going into the finals...

The '02 Pies are ommitted as an example, despite being a team, that like the Dogs, was secure in its top 4 spot some time out from the finals. Those Pies lost 3 of 4, and 5 of 8, going into the finals. In week 1 of the finals, they played away to Port Adelaide, who were the top team and had won their last 6. The pies won, and went on to just miss out on the premiership. Pretty insightful example regarding the importance of momentum going into the finals one would think, that is, unless it suits your argument to ignore it.

The '01 Hawks lost 3 in a row and 4 of 5 going into the finals, then won 2 finals and fell just short of a GF spot.

Neither of those were premiership teams though, so here is some more examples...

The '90 Pies only managed 3-3 going into the finals, the Bombers were 5-1 in that period, but the Pies still smashed the Dons twice in the finals to win the flag.

The '93 Bombers lost momentum just as badly as the '91 Eagles supposedly did, losing in round 22 and a qualifying final, and they won the flag with a very young team. They knocked off a Carktin team that had gone 12-2 to make the GF.

The '97 Crows were inexperienced in finals and weren't flying when they got to September, losing 2 of 3, but they won the flag, beating the Saints who won 9 straight to make the GF.

In '98 the Crows didn't seem to have much momentum after the first week of the finals, but still won the flag, beating North, who won 11 straight to make the GF.

Games in the lead up to the finals are indicative of finals performance insofar as the insight they offer as to how good a team is. Perhaps there is enough evidence in our performances of late to suggest that we're not all that good. That is a reasonable argument to make. However, the idea that 'momentum' is very important, and that 'history is littered' with examples that prove it, is a myth.

[Scraggers]

Good point to remember. I doubt many if any of us realistically expected a top 4 finish this year...yet for some reason, it seems a few are disappointed at this stage.

Its not disappointment in our ladder position, I'm ecstatic with where we were in 2007 to where we are now; but its disappointment in the way we are playing footy right now because most supporters know we are better than this !!

Yes we will play in two finals this year ... and like the Australian swimmer [I think it was Seabohm] said you can't buy experience, you can't learn experience, you have to experience experience.

BUT ... if we are there to go out in straight sets, I will be disapppointed

[Sockeye Salmon]

It may well be that the Dogs are in serious trouble. I think it is fair enough to write an article saying that. However, I think the manner in which the journo has tried to add the weight of historical example to his argument is bordering on dishonest.

He has gone back to '91 to come up with one dicey example. The Eagles didn't collapse after losing in round 22. They still won 2 finals that season, and were only beaten in September by one team, which happened to be the Hawks, who at the time, knew a fair bit about how to win flags.

The '04 Demons might be a better fit, but they were never secure in the top 4 like the Bulldogs are this year. The Demons lost games that mattered, and dropped from a home qualifying final with a double chance, to an elimination final. The Bulldogs of '08 can drop n further than they have, and thats from wearing blue shorts in an MCG qualifying final, to wearing white shorts instead.

Some different examples that mught be relevant to the importance of momentum going into the finals...

The '02 Pies are ommitted as an example, despite being a team, that like the Dogs, was secure in its top 4 spot some time out from the finals. Those Pies lost 3 of 4, and 5 of 8, going into the finals. In week 1 of the finals, they played away to Port Adelaide, who were the top team and had won their last 6. The pies won, and went on to just miss out on the premiership. Pretty insightful example regarding the importance of momentum going into the finals one would think, that is, unless it suits your argument to ignore it.

The '01 Hawks lost 3 in a row and 4 of 5 going into the finals, then won 2 finals and fell just short of a GF spot.

Neither of those were premiership teams though, so here is some more examples...

The '90 Pies only managed 3-3 going into the finals, the Bombers were 5-1 in that period, but the Pies still smashed the Dons twice in the finals to win the flag.

The '93 Bombers lost momentum just as badly as the '91 Eagles supposedly did, losing in round 22 and a qualifying final, and they won the flag with a very young team. They knocked off a Carktin team that had gone 12-2 to make the GF.

The '97 Crows were inexperienced in finals and weren't flying when they got to September, losing 2 of 3, but they won the flag, beating the Saints who won 9 straight to make the GF.

In '98 the Crows didn't seem to have much momentum after the first week of the finals, but still won the flag, beating North, who won 11 straight to make the GF.

Games in the lead up to the finals are indicative of finals performance insofar as the insight they offer as to how good a team is. Perhaps there is enough evidence in our performances of late to suggest that we're not all that good. That is a reasonable argument to make. However, the idea that 'momentum' is very important, and that 'history is littered' with examples that prove it, is a myth.

I love it when someone uses facts to prove an article is full of shit.

[Pembleton]

I love it when someone uses facts to prove an article is full of shit.

It's crap like this article that gives punters such a low opinion of the journos that cover footy. The lack of even a cursory amount of research to support the claim made in this article would see a year 10 teacher demand you go back and do it again.