Game Day - R6 Western Bulldogs vs St Kilda

[BulldogBelle]

This is the discussion thread for this Friday night's game at ES against St Kilda.

My predictions are:

The Dogs by 18 points
BOG : Ryan Griffen
Barry Hall to kick the first goal.

[chef]

Dogs by 23
BOG Cross
First Goal Johnson

[Go_Dogs]

Dogs by 7 points.
BOG: Adam Cooney
First goal: Barry Hall

[LostDoggy]

I don't think we will win unfortunately..

But if we did..

Dogs by 11pts
BOG: Coondog
Goal: Murphy

[bornadog]

Dogs by 19

BOG - Griffen - will tear them apart

First Goal - Bazza - Will Kick 8 tomorrow

Go Dogs

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Dogs by 15 points.
Murphy BOG.
First goal to Hahn.

[AndrewP6]

Please Dogs, please Dogs, please Dogs!

Dogs by 8
BOG Griffen
First goal Hahn

[LostDoggy]

Big game!!
Dogs by 3 points in one of the matches of the season!
Griff BOG
Roughead First goal!

[boydogs]

Dogs by 49 points
BOG: Ryan Griffen
First Goal: Brad Johnson

[jazzadogs]

Dogs by 14

BOG: Griffen or Cooney (whichever one Jones doesn't go to)

First goal: Gia

[Remi Moses]

First Goal Barry
BOG Whoever Jones Doesn't hang on to(sorry Tag)
Cooney or Griffin

Dogs by 11

[Scorlibo]

Dogs by 17
First goal to Grant
BOG Higgins

[LostDoggy]

Dogs by 21
First Goal Hahn
Griff BOG

[KT31]

Dogs by 17
Cooney BOG
Bazza first goal.
Roughead rising star

[comrade]

Dogs by 4 points
BOG: Bobby Murphy
1st Goal: Roughy

[mighty_west]

Dogs by 15
1st goal : Hahn
BOG : Cross

[The Pie Man]

Dogs by 28
Griff to be heavily tagged
First goal Hahn
BOG....Gilbee

[LostDoggy]

Dogs by 30
First Goal: Gilbee
BOG; Higgins

[LostDoggy]

Dogs by 7
First Goal - Barry Hall
BOG - Barry Hall

[Bulldog4life]

The Dogs by 20 points
BOG : Crossy
Aker to kick the first goal.

[LostDoggy]

Dogs by 17

BOG Griffin

!st Goal Murphy

[LostDoggy]

Dogs by 35
BOG Griff
1st goal Johnno

GO GRIFF!

[BornInDroopSt'54]

Dogs by 19
BOG Cooney(Jealous of Griff last week)
First goal Grant

[Scorlibo]

Go Jarrad Grant! Play of the Day!

[Scorlibo]

Far out. It's the Prelim all over again. :(

[LostDoggy]

have the sydney swans and st kilda switched jumpers this season? the saints r playing more like the defensive shit of the swans a few yrs ago..............and the swans r playing the exciting style that the saints have played and thrashing teams

[EasternWest]

Far out. It's the Prelim all over again. :(

Such an important game tonight. Such an underwhelming performance again.

[Dry Rot]

When we were clearly on top, we failed to capitalise.

We deserved to lose - we seem incapable of putting teams away.

[LostDoggy]

That was the biggest sucker punch!
Well done Saints. They new they couldn't run a full game with the dogs so they turned it into a one quarter game.

[EasternWest]

That was the biggest sucker punch!
Well done Saints. They new they couldn't run a full game with the dogs so they turned it into a one quarter game.

I think you've got the best username on this board. Thanks for giving me a chuckle on this appalling night of footy.

[Doggy]

SAINTS FOOTY - I'll say no more

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

That was the biggest sucker punch!
Well done Saints. They new they couldn't run a full game with the dogs so they turned it into a one quarter game.

more like a quarter of a quarter.
Hats off to them for taking the opportunities they had though, and on the hand we certainly have to question our inability yet again to take ours.
It just seems to loom large over our playing group that whenever the question is posed as to whether we have the audacity to do what is required when it is required, invariably we answer with a no.

[KT31]

more like a quarter of a quarter.
Hats off to them for taking the opportunities they had though, and on the hand we certainly have to question our inability yet again to take ours.
It just seems to loom large over our playing group that whenever the question is posed as to whether we have the audacity to do what is required when it is required, invariably we answer with a no.

I have said for a few years if you take Brisbane when they were on top or even Geelong now and put a Doggies jumper on them they would find a way to capitulate.

[KT31]

SAINTS FOOTY - I'll say no more

More like Shite Dogs footy.

[GVGjr]

I thought at the start of the quarter that if we got the first goal we would win by more than 20 points but being held goalless was just dreadful.

[comrade]

When we were clearly on top, we failed to capitalise.

We deserved to lose - we seem incapable of putting teams away.

Good to see you back posting. Is it a coincidence that it coincides with a loss?

[Dry Rot]

Good to see you back posting. Is it a coincidence that it coincides with a loss?

Good to see you miss my posts. :) Funny enough I don't post on here when I'm not in front of my Mac.

Thanks for your concern but as I was at course in the city for he Hawks game, and in a pub for the Crows game, it was a wee bit difficult to post during and after the game. Was home for the Lions game and again tonight.

Played with an iPad today - maybe I should get a 3G one to post for you during a game when I'm not at home?

[w3design]

I was back out in the country playing some good old attacking country footy. Thank the lord I wasnt in the city stuck inside watching this tripe. I am shattered at the loss- my housemate is constantly reminding me of the record of the teams we have beaten. We need to turn this around. I don't want to go through my life without a dogs flag, and this is our best chance. I've got alot of years ahead of me but you never know. Pull your heads in, dogs.

[Mantis]

Why did Lake go forward when Kosi went into the ruck?

Why did Johnson go into defence for the last 10 minutes?

Why are our players gun shy?

[Dry Rot]

Why did Lake go forward when Kosi went into the ruck?

Why did Johnson go into defence for the last 10 minutes?

Why are our players gun shy?

Presumably that came from the coaching box. What do you think was Eade's rationale?

[GVGjr]

Why did Lake go forward when Kosi went into the ruck?

Why did Johnson go into defence for the last 10 minutes?

Why are our players gun shy?

Perplexing wasn't it? The only thing I can think of is that Rocket was desperate to get a score and thought the forwards weren't going to get it done.

[Mantis]

Perplexing wasn't it? The only thing I can think of is that Rocket was desperate to get a score and thought the forwards weren't going to get it done.

We couldn't get our hands on the ball and our backs were under siege. Might be a good time to get our best defender down there?

Johnson is a forward plain & simple and if he can't get the job done down there it might be time to look at soemone else who might because him going into defence just has not and will not work.

[GVGjr]

We couldn't get our hands on the ball and our backs were under siege. Might be a good time to get our best defender down there?



It's not a move I would have made but I can't think of another reason. Lake can play on smaller guys in the back half if necessary because he has the pace.



Johnson is a forward plain & simple and if he can't get the job done down there it might be time to look at soemone else who might because him going into defence just has not and will not work.

It would be interesting to hear the logic.

[Stefcep]

Eade was out coached. For the saints to play the same game plan for 4 quarters and for us to have no answer is a coaching failure. Too many passes across half back and then going wide hoping to hit a target. IMO we should have set up with Hall and Roughead in the square with a couple of smalls nearby crumbing, and two half forwards out wide to keep their defenders hones, with the instruction for the midfielders to run down the middle and bomb long to the square.

[Mantis]

Eade was out coached. For the saints to play the same game plan for 4 quarters and for us to have no answer is a coaching failure. Too many passes across half back and then going wide hoping to hit a target. IMO we should have set up with Hall and Roughead in the square with a couple of smalls nearby crumbing, and two half forwards out wide to keep their defenders hones, with the instruction for the midfielders to run down the middle and bomb long to the square.

Been on a bender?? You couldn't be straight and honestly believe this?

[Stefcep]

Been on a bender?? You couldn't be straight and honestly believe this?

Its no less a plan than what Eade's was which failed for 120 minutes. Yes failed. You tell me: we score 46 points in 120 minutes when we usually score over 110, who do you think won the tactical battle?

The point of having Hall is NOT that we weren't scoring enough last season, hell we scored more than anyone. Hall is there to take the grab in the square from the hopeful bomb to the square in tight games. Every time I saw him he had two big bodies around him. Make it two on two with Rougie there, bring it to ground and give the crumbs a chance.

What did we get? The half backs waxing it for ages and going nowhere. Epic tactical fail.

[Mantis]

Its no less a plan than what Eade's was which failed for 120 minutes. Yes failed. You tell me: we score 46 points in 120 minutes when we usually score over 110, who do you think won the tactical battle?

The point of having Hall is NOT that we weren't scoring enough last season, hell we scored more than anyone. Hall is there to take the grab in the square from the hopeful bomb to the square in tight games. Every time I saw him he had two big bodies around him. Make it two on two with Rougie there, bring it to ground and give the crumbs a chance.

What did we get? The half backs waxing it for ages and going nowhere. Epic tactical fail.

So you can categorically tell me that our plan was to chip the ball around?

If you can well good for you, but I can't believe that our intention was to play this way. Personally I think Rocket will be disappointed with the way we appeared gun shy in and around out attacking 50.

[LostDoggy]

My heart is broken tonight, so many things couldve or shouldnt have happened and we walk away with the points.

I am gutted, they kicked 3 goals for 3.8 quarters and we let them have 3 in the last 4 minutes.

Harbrow will get big bucks at GC next year.

[Stefcep]

So you can categorically tell me that our plan was to chip the ball around?

If you can well good for you, but I can't believe that our intention was to play this way. Personally I think Rocket will be disappointed with the way we appeared gun shy in and around out attacking 50.

No OUR plan was not to chip it around. It was THEIR plan to make us chip it around. And sit back and hit us on the counter. Thats the problem. Eade allowed the entire four quarters to be played on THEIR terms. Lyons smirk said it all.

In a game like this you sometimes need to let it rip up the guts and hope that your forwards ie Hall and roughhead, grant, hahn will get a contested grab or crumb a goal. Instead of going side to side and backwards waiting to nail the precision pass inside 50. You don't do it for four quarters when you've kicked just 6 goals

[knowitall]

Eade was out coached. For the saints to play the same game plan for 4 quarters and for us to have no answer is a coaching failure. Too many passes across half back and then going wide hoping to hit a target. IMO we should have set up with Hall and Roughead in the square with a couple of smalls nearby crumbing, and two half forwards out wide to keep their defenders hones, with the instruction for the midfielders to run down the middle and bomb long to the square.

I don't know how you can genuinely think this would work. If we had two talls up forward, the Saints would be all over us. The way their defenders run off their direct opponents to take a mark in the defensive fifty (Gilbert, Fisher ect) and help out a team mate wouldn't allow for us to do that.

How do you believe that the Saints didn't change their game plan? The amount of times they took us on through the middle of the ground in the last quarter was atleast 400% up on what it was for the first three quarters.

In saying that, they did also stick to their original game plan at times.

I think what it came down to was skill errors (especially typical fumbling from players, Grant and Gilbee both missing very kickable goals in last quarter), and game sense errors (Gia playing on when he should have settled, gone back, and had a shot, Hahn turning inside to handball to Williams in the last quarter who was under pressure when Addison had spread off to the open wing - resulting in a Milne 'the rat' goal)

IMO, almost everyone who has commented on the game is being a bit harsh. The Bulldogs played some good football against a very good side in St. Kilda, who stuck to their game plan (disgusting, ugly to watch game plan, but very effective game plan). The boys deserved to win this game, if it wasn't for those few fumbles and decision making errors in the last quarter. They'll jump back on the horse and show Melbourne not to get too ahead of themselves next week (like we may have done after NAB cup)

Thoughts?

[Stefcep]

I don't know how you can genuinely think this would work. If we had two talls up forward, the Saints would be all over us. The way their defenders run off their direct opponents to take a mark in the defensive fifty (Gilbert, Fisher ect) and help out a team mate wouldn't allow for us to do that.


Hall was mostly ineffective and whenever I saw him he had two tall bodies around him. Not saying play with two talls all night, but give Hall some help and go long down the middle.

How do you believe that the Saints didn't change their game plan? The amount of times they took us on through the middle of the ground in the last quarter was atleast 400% up on what it was for the first three quarters.

That WAS their game plan. Stifle our scoring, as they knew they wouldn't win in a shoot out, hope for a goal on the counter but come back to win it at the death.

What did Eade change up?


In saying that, they did also stick to their original game plan at times.

Yeah for about 110 minutes.


I think what it came down to was skill errors (especially typical fumbling from players, Grant and Gilbee both missing very kickable goals in last quarter), and game sense errors (Gia playing on when he should have settled, gone back, and had a shot, Hahn turning inside to handball to Williams in the last quarter who was under pressure when Addison had spread off to the open wing - resulting in a Milne 'the rat' goal)


yeah all true. but 46 points..


IMO, almost everyone who has commented on the game is being a bit harsh. The Bulldogs played some good football against a very good side in St. Kilda, who stuck to their game plan (disgusting, ugly to watch game plan, but very effective game plan).


Now you've confused me


The boys deserved to win this game, if it wasn't for those few fumbles and decision making errors in the last quarter. They'll jump back on the horse and show Melbourne not to get too ahead of themselves next week (like we may have done after NAB cup)

Thoughts?

They won it when it matttered. Without their best player.

[AndrewP6]

IMO, almost everyone who has commented on the game is being a bit harsh. The Bulldogs played some good football against a very good side in St. Kilda, who stuck to their game plan (disgusting, ugly to watch game plan, but very effective game plan). The boys deserved to win this game, if it wasn't for those few fumbles and decision making errors in the last quarter. They'll jump back on the horse and show Melbourne not to get too ahead of themselves next week (like we may have done after NAB cup)

Thoughts?

Can't agree with this. To have a team on toast, who has struggled to score all night, and to have a 23 point lead in a low scoring game and cough it all up in about 8 minutes, is pitiful. To lack any semblance of finishing ability in the F50, and be unable to capitalise on errors made by opponents, is shocking. We deserved to win the game apart from the only time that counts - at the end. We had them on toast, and GAVE them the win. Disgraceful. At this rate, we'll struggle to beat Melbourne.

[KT31]

IMO, almost everyone who has commented on the game is being a bit harsh. The Bulldogs played some good football against a very good side in St. Kilda, who stuck to their game plan (disgusting, ugly to watch game plan, but very effective game plan). The boys deserved to win this game, if it wasn't for those few fumbles and decision making errors in the last quarter. They'll jump back on the horse and show Melbourne not to get too ahead of themselves next week (like we may have done after NAB cup)

Thoughts?

How so we squandered opportunities , turned the ball over and kicked to fewer numbers.
And worst of all we lost.

[knowitall]

Hall was mostly ineffective and whenever I saw him he had two tall bodies around him. Not saying play with two talls all night, but give Hall some help and go long down the middle.

That WAS their game plan. Stifle our scoring, as they knew they wouldn't win in a shoot out, hope for a goal on the counter but come back to win it at the death.

What did Eade change up?

Yeah for about 110 minutes.

yeah all true. but 46 points..


Now you've confused me


They won it when it matttered. Without their best player.


Eade didn't change much up at all, because we seemed to be controlling the game very well, until a few costly errors from players I've mentioned. What we did was working the whole game.

I meant they also stuck to their game plan in the last quarter, instead of just going down the guts which they did a fair bit in the last, and didn't do any of in the previous three quarters.

They won when it mattered, you are right, but at the end of the day, we handed it to them on a platter because of simple fumbling and decision making errors.

[knowitall]

Can't agree with this. To have a team on toast, who has struggled to score all night, and to have a 23 point lead in a low scoring game and cough it all up in about 8 minutes, is pitiful. To lack any semblance of finishing ability in the F50, and be unable to capitalise on errors made by opponents, is shocking. We deserved to win the game apart from the only time that counts - at the end. We had them on toast, and GAVE them the win. Disgraceful. At this rate, we'll struggle to beat Melbourne.

I agree completely.

By saying we deserved to win this.. I meant that the loss didn't have anything to do with a lack of effort or workrate, and that is all is asked of the players week in and week out.

In modern day AFL football, we can't afford to have as many costly errors as we did in the last quarter against a top 4 team in the competition. But atleast the players gave 100% and that is all we can ask as supporters.

[AndrewP6]

I agree completely.

By saying we deserved to win this.. I meant that the loss didn't have anything to do with a lack of effort or workrate, and that is all is asked of the players week in and week out.

In modern day AFL football, we can't afford to have as many costly errors as we did in the last quarter against a top 4 team in the competition. But atleast the players gave 100% and that is all we can ask as supporters.

And perhaps we have to accept that their best simply isn't good enough. Sounds bad, I know, but when the game is there to be won, we don't win.

[Stefcep]

Eade didn't change much up at all, because we seemed to be controlling the game very well, until a few costly errors from players I've mentioned. What we did was working the whole game.

OK well we'll agree to disagree. IMO 6 goals to three quarter time warrants a change in game plan, and doesn't constitute a winning position. Leon cameron said so at three quarter time, yet no changes were made. doesn't make sense to me for a coach to be happy with that when we usually have 12 or 14 goals by then.

[knowitall]

OK well we'll agree to disagree. IMO 6 goals to three quarter time warrants a change in game plan, and doesn't constitute a winning position. Leon cameron said so at three quarter time, yet no changes were made. doesn't make sense to me for a coach to be happy with that when we usually have 12 or 14 goals by then.

Let's agree to disagree, but IMO, a team being 3 goals up at three quarter time in a VERY low scoring affair should not warrant any change in game plan..

Why does it matter the amount of goals we've scored against other teams up to three quarter time? Big deal! Every game is different.

[KT31]

Let's agree to disagree, but IMO, a team being 3 goals up at three quarter time in a VERY low scoring affair should not warrant any change in game plan..
Why does it matter the amount of goals we've scored against other teams up to three quarter time? Big deal! Every game is different.

Unless the oposition has a game plan to be within three goals at three quarter time and has a plan to step it up in the last ten minutes of the last quarter.

[macca]

I hate losing to st kilda, especially after last years prelim. And losing like that tonight when Grant should've get that goal and Gia's got smothered really is shocking. They just have to want it. Grant has to believe he can kick it 40m in front on angle.

Hahn should've went back and had a kick in the 2nd quarter when he was 40m infront.

We need to execute these goals. Eade was out coached and played into Lyon's hands tonight. Lyon swapped Milne onto Hargrave, and let Arimtage to be unmarked.

Harbrow was BOG for the doggies. He has real dash, and some amazing balance going through traffic and knows how to find the ball. Gives us so much on the rebound.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

My biggest concern is our inability to win when it matters against quality opposition. See: Hawks QF 08, Cats PF 08, Cats QF 09, Saints PF 09, Pies 2010 Round 1, Lions 2010 Round 4, Saints 2010 Round 6. I know we won in Rounds 20-22 last year and at that point I thought we'd finally grown as a group, but we simply haven't.

When we're up against quality opposition who pressure us to the core, we inevitably find a way to crumble. (IE. Missing goals, turning it over, fumbling etc.). The mental toughness of this group really has to be questioned because it's happening far too often. The 3 sides we've beaten so far have won 1 game between them. Pies, Lions and Saints are all challengers and we've lost them all. We set ourselves for tonight and again we fell short.

Should have won tonight by 4-5 goals but we relaxed, chipped it back and fourth, turned it over and then hardly gave a yelp once the momentum shifted. Why can't we stifle sides who get a run on? Every time a side hits momentum against us, we cough up goals very quickly. Tonight was a prime example.

Cross has had a terrible year. He might be finding the ball but his hands are shocking, he fumbles and misses targets far too often. Morris hasn't had a good season either so far. Too much is being left to too few. When Griffen goes out of the game, we look slow through the midfield. Cooney isn't damaging enough with his disposals, Higgins doesn't do nearly enough and Murph/Hahn/Gia can't spark us when we really need them to.

I thought Harbrow was sensational - one of the few players who tried to make something happen tonight. Gilbee was pretty good although I'd like to see more dare. Grant showed good signs but he missed a crucial goal when he should've played on a drilled it from 15m. Addison did OK and hit the contest hard.

Overall though - we're a frustrating side. Glimpses every now and again to make you believe they can match it with the best, but when it really counts - we find a way to lose.

[Chicago1]

I wasn't able to watch the match live on ESPN3 this morning, so I decided to watch the replay as if it were live. Just finished a few minutes ago and I'm devastated. I hate close games, especially when we lose. That last quarter almost gave me a heart attack.

I haven't given up yet, but it sure is looking like just another season where our hopes are not fulfilled. This was our biggest test so far this year and we failed. I am wounded. Almost fatally.:(

[Sedat]

When we're up against quality opposition who pressure us to the core, we inevitably find a way to crumble. (IE. Missing goals, turning it over, fumbling etc.). The mental toughness of this group really has to be questioned because it's happening far too often. The 3 sides we've beaten so far have won 1 game between them. Pies, Lions and Saints are all challengers and we've lost them all. We set ourselves for tonight and again we fell short.
To be honest, this has been our lot since the mid 80's - we invariably find new ways to kick ourselves in the teeth :(

We've now limited the Saints to 15 and 14 scoring shots in each of the part 2 matches and have absolutely nothing to show for our efforts - this is clearly a mental issue with this playing group. If we are to go deep in September and we again find ourselves in a winning position with 10 minutes to go in a prelim, I'll unfortunately fully expect our team not to be able to finish the job. Gee it's hard barracking for this team sometimes.

[Rance Fan]

We have no killer instinct!

[alwaysadog]

I hope that by this morning some of the acute disappointment felt by fellow posters has dissipated. It certainly was a roller coaster ride emotionally and left us all feeling shattered. That said for me at least that was an improvement.

I’d better explain that comment. On the form we’d shown in the first 5 weeks I didn’t expect us to win, what’s more I couldn’t believe the hype that built up during last week over our prospects seeing as how the only two decent sides we’d played had beaten us convincingly.

On the way to the game when my partner said she hoped we would win I told her I didn’t think we would and that I thought we would lose narrowly. Earlier in the week I had also said to GVG that while I knew the reasons we were playing inexperienced talls I didn’t think it would be an asset in a game that would be so intense from start to finish.

The point of this post is not to pump up my own tyres but to say that firstly it was a much better effort than previously and while on the one hand as Terry Wallace so famously said “you don’t get diddly squat for effort“, we weren’t blown away, in fact for three quarters we were the better team and it was after all a loss by less than a kick.

On the other hand there were the same unmistakable signs of the issues that have lead us to fail in the past and I’d like some focus on those, which I’ll express as a series of questions, with an implied what should be done about it.

1 How can we dominate sides and not put them away, what is missing?

2 Why are we so shockingly inaccurate in kicking for goal in the tight games? (This may be a subset of 1)

3 Why can’t we manage a centre clearance at the critical times or even lock it in, while the opposition get it out so well?

4. I haven’t watched a replay nor did I listen to a commentary so this point may need modifying and incidents may have evened out but as a biased supporter watching a close game I ask about a series of incidents to do with the umpiring.
a What did Brian do wrong in the marking contest that gave Kosi a free kick that lead to St Kilda’s first goal?
b Why was the free kick to us directly before St Kilda’s second ignored ?
c Why were the two deliberate high contacts by St Kilda players ignored? Both were at times when the ball was dead and directly in front of the umpire; the most obvious being Raf Clarke’s on Johno, when at the same time a mark or free kick (I can’t recall which) within scoring distance had been reversed for a similar more dubious incident by BBB.

5 Does last night’s inability to post a decent score under extreme pressure put to bed forever the notion that the solution to our forward line problems was to acquire a “Power Forward” and cause us to ponder more broadly about where our attack is, and has been for some years, falling down in such circumstances?

[LostDoggy]

Great questions alwaysadog and I won't pretend for a second to say that I have the answers.

1 and 2) We dominated the game but our skills and goal kicking let us down at the critical times.
We have all been educated about how fatigue impacts skills but I don't think that is the answer. Do we have the players with sufficent self belief?

3) At a guess I don't think we switch between attack and defense well enough.

4) I haven't seen the replay either.

5) I don't think there is a problem with our scoring power but we didn't handle the ultra defensive style of the Saints. Hall has changed our forward line up but it wasn't a power forward problem. For the sake of one more straight kick at the right time we could have won by 20 points because we would have broken their spirits.

[Stevo]

We dominated the game in my opinion but just didn't kick the goals when it counted. I think this is a chronic problem for teams that aren't playing right at their best.

[bornadog]

Like everyone I am dissapointed with the loss and I couldn't get the damn game out of my head over night.

I know people are going to think I have gone mad, but the effort and the intensity last night was the best in all 6 games. If not for the costly misses on goal and the few errors, I can see we are a genuine chance this year. If we can repeat this against less ugly sides, we will win many games

[Stefcep]

Harbrow was BOG for the doggies. He has real dash, and some amazing balance going through traffic and knows how to find the ball.

yep he does. What do you think of his final pass though? I seem to see him take the extra 2 or three steps at full pace to get around another man resulting in a a hurried kick/turnover.

[LostDoggy]

more like a quarter of a quarter.
Hats off to them for taking the opportunities they had though, and on the hand we certainly have to question our inability yet again to take ours.
It just seems to loom large over our playing group that whenever the question is posed as to whether we have the audacity to do what is required when it is required, invariably we answer with a no.

I wanted to say "Half a quarter" but was worried that the realm of the maths world to implode into a black hole.

We are on the same page though.

[LostDoggy]

I'm just MAD :mad: :eek: Can't believe it!

[G-Mo77]

When I saw St. Kilda were paying $5.40 to win going into the last quarter I felt like calling and placing a small wager. Sounds horrible I know, I just have no confidence in winning these type of games and as soon as they got within 9 I kind of knew we were going to drop it.

I really wish I made that call now. :o

[Sedat]

I know people are going to think I have gone mad, but the effort and the intensity last night was the best in all 6 games. If not for the costly misses on goal and the few errors, I can see we are a genuine chance this year. If we can repeat this against less ugly sides, we will win many games
I don't think anyone could have any qualms about the Dogs' intensity at the contest last night and the previous week - we have clearly turned the corner in this aspect from the first 4 rounds.

[LostDoggy]

I agree, if we can keep our intensity at that level and become more confident in getting the ball into 50 ,so the likes of Hall can do what he is getting paid for. In that stuation last night 17 points up, dominating play,another goal would of been enough. we just didn't show confidence in getting it in there.When you put it in 50 things happen.

upset with the manner we lost but i believe this will kickstart our season. WE ARE GOOD ENOUGH!!!!

[LostDoggy]

Too true. being a lifelong supporter, we always seem to find a way to lose. lets hope we can finally learn from this and figure out how to land the knock out punch.I'm confident we can go all the way this year. i feel we are just starting to work into the season.

[Jasper]

Agree we are a good chance this year, no finals played in April.

Interesting to see two weeks out of three Hall has made high contact. This weeks it cost a goal in a low scoring game. Is Hall ok??

[Go_Dogs]

Interesting to see two weeks out of three Hall has made high contact. This weeks it cost a goal in a low scoring game. Is Hall ok??

It's got to be becoming a concern.

[LostDoggy]

I know people are going to think I have gone mad, but the effort and the intensity last night was the best in all 6 games

Agree. The tackling and pressure applied was unbelievable in the first half. The first quarter we just came out with the intensity we haven't seen yet this year.

Also believe it will help us in the short term to get back on our feet, but you gotta feel kind of vulnerable playing Melbourne next week after a loss like that though.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Agree we are a good chance this year, no finals played in April.

Interesting to see two weeks out of three Hall has made high contact. This weeks it cost a goal in a low scoring game. Is Hall ok??

There is no doubt that Hall gets marked differently to other players.

Where are all the Riewoldt defenders? Hall was getting bumped off the ball far more heavily than the pissy little tap Riewoldt almost died over.

[LostDoggy]

I think personally the coaching staff is to blame..
We had alot of momentum, but kicked the ball backwards which was frustrating for everyone!
No risks were taken all night, and the only reason why StKilda won the match, was because they were prepared to take risks in the last 5 minutes.
That gameplan was so soccer-like it isnt even funny.
Possession football sucks, it achieves nothing if you lose, like last night..

[Mantis]

I think personally the coaching staff is to blame..
We had alot of momentum, but kicked the ball backwards which was frustrating for everyone!
No risks were taken all night, and the only reason why StKilda won the match, was because they were prepared to take risks in the last 5 minutes.
That gameplan was so soccer-like it isnt even funny.
Possession football sucks, it achieves nothing if you lose, like last night..

Isn't it up to the individual to determine where the kick goes?

I know for a fact that the coaching staff were disappointed with our use of the ball especially in the 2nd & 3rd quarters when we went into our shells.

[Doc26]

Isn't it up to the individual to determine where the kick goes?


To a point but also depends on what's expected of them after instruction. They were obviously trying to stick tight to a game plan by switching back and forth to stretch out the Saints zone to create an opening. Can lead to overuse when trying to setup that 'perfect' option which simply may not come. Assuming our forward line is appropriately structured and functioning we should at times ease up a little on the risk with more emphasis on the reward.



I know for a fact that the coaching staff were disappointed with our use of the ball especially in the 2nd & 3rd quarters when we went into our shells.

They weren't alone. Also in the last quarter where they didn't take the Saints on.

[Mantis]

To a point but also depends on what's expected of them after instruction.

Instructions weren't to go backwards in the 2nd & 3rd quarters when we dominated general play.


They weren't alone. Also in the last quarter where they didn't take the Saints on.

We were rooted in the last qtr.

[alwaysadog]

Isn't it up to the individual to determine where the kick goes?

I know for a fact that the coaching staff were disappointed with our use of the ball especially in the 2nd & 3rd quarters when we went into our shells.

When an experienced team, not just one individual but the whole team can't find the way to follow instructions, it sounds like a case of being outcoached.

That's OK as long as Rocket doesn't tell himself the rubbish he tells the media and does something about it, because it's getting to be a regular occurrence.

[LostDoggy]

Isn't it up to the individual to determine where the kick goes?


True, but when it happens for 5 minutes without any benefit, it really makes you question the coaching staff and gameplan, aswell as the point of that gameplan itself! Since it didnt even get us the win in the end..

[AndrewP6]

Agree we are a good chance this year, no finals played in April.

Interesting to see two weeks out of three Hall has made high contact. This weeks it cost a goal in a low scoring game. Is Hall ok??

Hall has to put up with a lot from defenders, to me it's only human that he occasionally slips up. He gets held, pushed, elbowed etc, and unlike other high-profile players, gets nothing....So long as it's giving away a free and not belting the bejesus out of them, I can live with it. I'd prefer the free not to be given as we are preparing to kick for goal though...

[AndrewP6]

There is no doubt that Hall gets marked differently to other players.

Where are all the Riewoldt defenders? Hall was getting bumped off the ball far more heavily than the pissy little tap Riewoldt almost died over.

Yes, what he said....

[bornadog]

There is no doubt that Hall gets marked differently to other players.

Where are all the Riewoldt defenders? Hall was getting bumped off the ball far more heavily than the pissy little tap Riewoldt almost died over.

and the little tap that Kosi got and fell to the ground in the first qrt.

[bornadog]

When an experienced team, not just one individual but the whole team can't find the way to follow instructions, it sounds like a case of being outcoached.

That's OK as long as Rocket doesn't tell himself the rubbish he tells the media and does something about it, because it's getting to be a regular occurrence.


I think personally the coaching staff is to blame..
We had alot of momentum, but kicked the ball backwards which was frustrating for everyone!
No risks were taken all night, and the only reason why StKilda won the match, was because they were prepared to take risks in the last 5 minutes.
That gameplan was so soccer-like it isnt even funny.
Possession football sucks, it achieves nothing if you lose, like last night..

Well look at it another way. The players followed the game plan, got the ball into the forward 50, but couldn't kick goals.

Lets see........... Hall, Gia, Grant, Hahn, Murphy, Gilbee and can't remember the others. How can the coach be blamed for players not being able to kick straight.

[LostDoggy]

Well look at it another way. The players followed the game plan, got the ball into the forward 50, but couldn't kick goals.

Lets see........... Hall, Gia, Grant, Hahn, Murphy, Gilbee and can't remember the others. How can the coach be blamed for players not being able to kick straight.

He can be blamed though for the lack of scoring shots..

[alwaysadog]

Well look at it another way. The players followed the game plan, got the ball into the forward 50, but couldn't kick goals.

Lets see........... Hall, Gia, Grant, Hahn, Murphy, Gilbee and can't remember the others. How can the coach be blamed for players not being able to kick straight.

Interesting point you make, when it becomes a regular feature under pressure is there no coaching responsibility? If not why have them?

[bornadog]

He can be blamed though for the lack of scoring shots..

Saints had up to 16 to 18 players surrounding our forward line. Not sure what tactic you can employ to change that. Any Ideas? Saints won 19 games like that last season, they are just a negative team.

[boydogs]

Saints had up to 16 to 18 players surrounding our forward line. Not sure what tactic you can employ to change that. Any Ideas? Saints won 19 games like that last season, they are just a negative team.

17 men running at them and blocking them, NFL style, then Gilbee slotting one from 55 ;)

Seriously though, there were things that we could have done to improve the number of scoring shots despite the Saints' negative setup - move the ball faster, kick long to advantage as opposed to kicking sideways/short to a contest, draw the defenders out by moving the forwards up the ground.

We had as much to do with the way it panned out in not wanting to take a risk and get burnt on the turnover as the Saints did in not wanting a shootout

[LostDoggy]

17 men running at them and blocking them, NFL style, then Gilbee slotting one from 55 ;)

Seriously though, there were things that we could have done to improve the number of scoring shots despite the Saints' negative setup - move the ball faster, kick long to advantage as opposed to kicking sideways/short to a contest, draw the defenders out by moving the forwards up the ground.

We had as much to do with the way it panned out in not wanting to take a risk and get burnt on the turnover as the Saints did in not wanting a shootout

I don't think it was because we didn't want to take risks. We had enough scoring shots to win the game. I think we didn't take the opportunity to ice the game. There were a number of times we could've landed that 'killer blow' but we kept them in the game. They gained confidence, got a run on and a lot of our players got caught out. Had Grant kicked that very gettable goal or Gia slotted his like any leader should do you think the Saints would've won? I don't think so. I think this has been our problem for the last few years. When the heat is on and the game is there to be won, we crumble. Do we lack mental strength?

[The Pie Man]

Possession football sucks, it achieves nothing if you lose, like last night..

Essendon (of all teams) displayed a great example of possession footy that was very effective...though they were very lucky to get away with it.

Third quarter, Dawks have momentum (thank-you McLaren for another amazing bad call) ball in Essendon's defenders hands, and they chip short about 7 times up to the centre square sucking time - I figured they don't have the skills for this, and sure enough there was a 50-50 in the middle, but McVeigh wins it and sends it forward to Gumbleton to mark and it resulted in a much needed goal.

Different circumstances, but I thought it was smart of the Bombers at the time.

[The Pie Man]

Instructions weren't to go backwards in the 2nd & 3rd quarters when we dominated general play.



We were rooted in the last qtr.

And this maybe stating the obvious, but this affects decision making and execution

Wouldn't call it a choke though like some in the media - I only look at the Gia miss now in hindsight, as at the time I thought we would go on to win comfortably anyway.

[alwaysadog]

Saints had up to 16 to 18 players surrounding our forward line. Not sure what tactic you can employ to change that. Any Ideas? Saints won 19 games like that last season, they are just a negative team.

I accept it's not an easy scenario, but being at the top of the AFL isn't an easy place to maintain and the St Kilda kill-the-game style is not easy to overcome but it's going to be unpicked, may be we should have been even more patient, unpopular as that is. It's not me who has to find a way through it's the coaches jointly with the players and someone will do it, perhaps along the lines of a basketball motion offence.

On a side issue I am constantly amazed that a team that moves the ball backwards and keeps probing for openings in the defence gets booed and the media give them hell but a team that sets up all or almost all it's players behind the ball escapes condemnation.

There seems to be a you must go forward at all costs mentality no matter what trap has been set for you or if you like just give them possession of the ball.

[The Pie Man]

On a side issue I am constantly amazed that a team that moves the ball backwards and keeps probing for openings in the defence gets booed and the media give them hell but a team that sets up all or almost all it's players behind the ball escapes condemnation.

There seems to be a you must go forward at all costs mentality no matter what trap has been set for you or if you like just give them possession of the ball.

Didn't hear this, but I've been told someone on SEN said St Kilda should never be allowed to play Friday night footy again after that, and didn't mention our role at all.

[LostDoggy]

There were a few incidents during the game that were mind boggling.

1. Hall giving a free kick away, when Gilbee was lining up for goal.
2. Gia not kicking a goal he should have.
3. Morris shitting himself & trying to kick the ball along the ground.
4. Williams running through the mark, giving away a 50m penalty.

You cut this out of the game completely & we win, these were match changing moments throughout the game. And they weren't because of St Kilda forcing us into making these wrong decisions, they were from our players lacking mental strength.

[LostDoggy]

Just have one additional comment to make on the game but IMHO our forwards got no assistance from the umpires whatsoever!

Happened all night but 2 occasions in particular Murphy and Hall were getting very obviously held and the umpires ignored it.

Probably been an ongoing issue for Hall all season.

Hate to say it, but St. Nick would have gotten 6 frees on Friday night for the same way Hall was treated.

Havent heard even a comment from the club on this but surely it warrants a query with Jeff Geishen??

[Hotdog60]

After cooling down, I read a few post here and my thoughts on the game from a attacking perspective is this.

I think even though the Saints were flooding back, we hesitated to much. If the forwards are making the moves we should move the ball on quickly and honor the leads if the forward gains a couple of metres on his opponent kick it to him. Also I saw a couple of times that players in the clear for a short pass were overlooked for the longer option that was covered by two opponents.

We need to be smarter, look quickly and react. By not moving it on we are then forced to send it backwards.

On another side of things would the result have been different with Ward, Picken, Reid and Boyd in the side. As I think Picken for the stopping power on Montagna, Boyd and Reid for the in and under clearance and Ward for taking the game on and breaking the lines.

[Stefcep]

Interesting point you make, when it becomes a regular feature under pressure is there no coaching responsibility? If not why have them?
I blame Eade. He coaches a team that scores 20 goals per match,(and concedes more than most), so we are an attacking side not a defensive one. Our game plan is therefore to score, a lot. When we get held to 6 goals-hell even IF made the three or four easy misses, its still 50% of what we score, and don't forget they missed three or four sitters as well-IMO its still clearly a tactical failure. To let Lyon play his game for 120 minutes with no real answer of how we get to play our game is indicative of a coach with no answer.
A mate was of the opinion that to beat this system you need the forwards to be very mobile, you need the midfielders prepared to take and beat their men to put pressure on their defense.

Harsh, but Eade has to learn from this, otherwise other clubs will do it to us.
But IMO Eade really needs to look at his role, beacsue Collingwood did it to us last year when we came back but were 40 points down for much of the game.

[hujsh]

I blame Eade. He coaches a team that scores 20 goals per match,(and concedes more than most), so we are an attacking side not a defensive one. Our game plan is therefore to score, a lot.

Not strictly true. Sounds like the late run of the 2005 Bulldogs

We're 7th in the league in score for and 5th lowest in the league for score against this year. So our defence has been strong. Last year we were the highest scoring team in the league and we had the 6th lowest points against which does partially support you but proves we don't concede more than most.

No one kicks 20 goals a match. We haven't done it since round 12 last year.

[AndrewP6]

Just have one additional comment to make on the game but IMHO our forwards got no assistance from the umpires whatsoever!

Happened all night but 2 occasions in particular Murphy and Hall were getting very obviously held and the umpires ignored it.

Probably been an ongoing issue for Hall all season.

Hate to say it, but St. Nick would have gotten 6 frees on Friday night for the same way Hall was treated.

Havent heard even a comment from the club on this but surely it warrants a query with Jeff Geishen??

Agree 100% .... Hall gets a very rough deal, and as soon as he's in someone's face, they're looking for him.

[LostDoggy]

Agree 100% .... Hall gets a very rough deal, and as soon as he's in someone's face, they're looking for him.

They look at what Hall does, not what is done to him!
It really pisses me off!

[LostDoggy]

Agree 100% .... Hall gets a very rough deal, and as soon as he's in someone's face, they're looking for him.

Andrew, will you change your avatar if we win next week?
Im feelin your pain man but your avatar is bummin me out! It aint over till its over!

best,

frank:)

[AndrewP6]

Andrew, will you change your avatar if we win next week?
Im feelin your pain man but your avatar is bummin me out! It aint over till its over!

best,

frank:)

Hahaha... yeah, I probably will! As a number of people have noted, a week is a long time in football. I'm hoping to resurrect BAZZA as the avatar before too long.

Actually, given that it's causing distress, I might change it before then. :)

[Sockeye Salmon]

I blame Eade. He coaches a team that scores 20 goals per match,(and concedes more than most), so we are an attacking side not a defensive one. Our game plan is therefore to score, a lot. When we get held to 6 goals-hell even IF made the three or four easy misses, its still 50% of what we score, and don't forget they missed three or four sitters as well-IMO its still clearly a tactical failure. To let Lyon play his game for 120 minutes with no real answer of how we get to play our game is indicative of a coach with no answer.
A mate was of the opinion that to beat this system you need the forwards to be very mobile, you need the midfielders prepared to take and beat their men to put pressure on their defense.

Harsh, but Eade has to learn from this, otherwise other clubs will do it to us.
But IMO Eade really needs to look at his role, beacsue Collingwood did it to us last year when we came back but were 40 points down for much of the game.

That's crap.

St. Kilda's game plan makes it almost impossible to score - both for them and for us. Eade made sure we didn't cough the ball up and give them the chance to burn us on the rebound. With 5 minutes to go they had kicked 4 goals (including a dodgy free to Kosi and a 50m against Williams). Had we taken even half of our chances it's game over.

You don't have to kick 20 goals a game, just just have to kick more than them, and had we not shot ourselves in the foot with our finishing we would have doubled their score.

[LostDoggy]

I blame Eade. He coaches a team that scores 20 goals per match,(and concedes more than most), so we are an attacking side not a defensive one. Our game plan is therefore to score, a lot. When we get held to 6 goals-hell even IF made the three or four easy misses, its still 50% of what we score, and don't forget they missed three or four sitters as well-IMO its still clearly a tactical failure. To let Lyon play his game for 120 minutes with no real answer of how we get to play our game is indicative of a coach with no answer.
A mate was of the opinion that to beat this system you need the forwards to be very mobile, you need the midfielders prepared to take and beat their men to put pressure on their defense.

Harsh, but Eade has to learn from this, otherwise other clubs will do it to us.
But IMO Eade really needs to look at his role, beacsue Collingwood did it to us last year when we came back but were 40 points down for much of the game.

Were you at the game Stefcep, or did you watch on TV? From where I was sitting Saints had so many players back i honestly dont know what else we could have done. IMO eades game plan worked, but we didn't take our chances. we will get them next time though!

[Sedat]

That's crap.

St. Kilda's game plan makes it almost impossible to score - both for them and for us. Eade made sure we didn't cough the ball up and give them the chance to burn us on the rebound. With 5 minutes to go they had kicked 4 goals (including a dodgy free to Kosi and a 50m against Williams). Had we taken even half of our chances it's game over.

You don't have to kick 20 goals a game, just just have to kick more than them, and had we not shot ourselves in the foot with our finishing we would have doubled their score.
100% accurate Sockeye.

I've been amazed at the gullibility of media commentators who have commented about how the Dogs were lured into some sort of evil St Kilda web. I'm sure it was in Ross Lyon's plans to be two and a half goals down in time on in the last qtr :rolleyes:

IMO our team was extremely disciplined in not succumbing to our natural attacking instincts and bombing it into an area where we would have been outnumbered 3-1 by opposition players. That's not to sat we were perfect on the night - we did fail to spot up some free targets on occasions and our uncontested kicking skills in a couple of notable times were below par. But the reality is that we would have been lured into the St Kilda trap had we blindly raced forward and kicked the ball quickly to the numerical disadvantage.

[Mantis]

100% accurate Sockeye.

I've been amazed at the gullibility of media commentators who have commented about how the Dogs were lured into some sort of evil St Kilda web. I'm sure it was in Ross Lyon's plans to be two and a half goals down in time on in the last qtr :rolleyes:

IMO our team was extremely disciplined in not succumbing to our natural attacking instincts and bombing it into an area where we would have been outnumbered 3-1 by opposition players. That's not to sat we were perfect on the night - we did fail to spot up some free targets on occasions and our uncontested kicking skills in a couple of notable times were below par. But the reality is that we would have been lured into the St Kilda trap had we blindly raced forward and kicked the ball quickly to the numerical disadvantage.

Agree with your comments Sedat and those of SS.

Thinking back one of biggest frustrations was that we didn't pull the trigger in and around the 50 when we had 1 on 1's further afield, especially with Hall. Hall was brought to the club to help us in these sitautions and our unwillingness to kick to him directly when he had some advantage was dissappointing. We chipped it back or sideways which allowed the Saints to flood back and the opportunity was lost.

The number of times we missed simple targets when kicking up the line was poor as well (as mentioned). Johnson missed quite a few (as he has before) which played into St.Kilda's hands in that they were able to force a ball-up or throw in which allowed them to further clog up our space.

[bulldogsman]

I thought we needed to take them on a bit more, then there wouldn't be as many Saints players back. I'd really like to see us look for Griffen a bit more.

[Bulldog4life]

Agree with your comments Sedat and those of SS.

Thinking back one of biggest frustrations was that we didn't pull the trigger in and around the 50 when we had 1 on 1's further afield, especially with Hall. Hall was brought to the club to help us in these sitautions and our unwillingness to kick to him directly when he had some advantage was dissappointing. We chipped it back or sideways which allowed the Saints to flood back and the opportunity was lost.

The number of times we missed simple targets when kicking up the line was poor as well (as mentioned). Johnson missed quite a few (as he has before) which played into St.Kilda's hands in that they were able to force a ball-up or throw in which allowed them to further clog up our space.

This is something that I was watching closely for on Friday night and there were multiple times if we had played on quickly we could have kicked it to a one on one contest closer to goal but ended up kicking it backwards 30 metres. Apart from the easy misses at goal this is what I found so frustrating. I would have liked our guys to back themselves in more when the opportunity was there.

[BulldogBelle]

Yes it seemed the only time they kicked long into the forward line the Saints marked it - needed to deliver better to a one on one I guess.

Just repeating this in case it is reply worthy [from closed thread]

I thought Jarryd was easily BOG but it was weird that on the Dogs site they had Gia as our best; and in the Hun, although Gilbee was named only our 6th best, his stats looked better than Jarryd's, esp the 'metres gained' - 774 v 441 - and he got 153 points to Jarryd's 104, however they work that out.