Expectations and all the guff that goes with it.

[ReLoad]

Good morning everyone,

I do love the smell of the linament in the morning, the feel of the Sherrin, the reading of monday's papers about how my team has gone over the weekend, so along with that time of year comes the inevitable expectation setting........

Last year I posted after the NAB cup win how in my mind (and not others who clearly disagreed with me link: http://www.woof.net.au/forum/showthread.php?t=7060&page=1 ) how I thought we were getting ahead of ourselves.

So its time to sit down and think about this year, what does this year hold for us? where do we see ourselves realistically finishing? considering all the factors, both internally at the club and the list etc. and externally in what our competition is doing.

And whilst I am the eternal pessimist, I realistically cannot see the pickup of 5-10% that is needed to get over the black and white swine.

I personally think we are capable of getting to the big dance, but winning it, thats a different proposition.

So my prediction is finishing 2nd, and I have to say, I would be stoked to at least make it once in my lifetime.

So more importantly reflecting back on last years thread, will I still book my overseas holiday for grand final week? hell yes, because at least then I can be one of the whining idiots who ring up the radio and complain how they are stuck in the Tahiti and cant get it on TV.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Good morning everyone,

I do love the smell of the linament in the morning, the feel of the Sherrin, the reading of monday's papers about how my team has gone over the weekend, so along with that time of year comes the inevitable expectation setting........

Last year I posted after the NAB cup win how in my mind (and not others who clearly disagreed with me link: http://www.woof.net.au/forum/showthread.php?t=7060&page=1 ) how I thought we were getting ahead of ourselves.

So its time to sit down and think about this year, what does this year hold for us? where do we see ourselves realistically finishing? considering all the factors, both internally at the club and the list etc. and externally in what our competition is doing.

And whilst I am the eternal pessimist, I realistically cannot see the pickup of 5-10% that is needed to get over the black and white swine.

I personally think we are capable of getting to the big dance, but winning it, thats a different proposition.

So my prediction is finishing 2nd, and I have to say, I would be stoked to at least make it once in my lifetime.

So more importantly reflecting back on last years thread, will I still book my overseas holiday for grand final week? hell yes, because at least then I can be one of the whining idiots who ring up the radio and complain how they are stuck in the Tahiti and cant get it on TV.

The extra 5-10% we need is basical down to luck.

There are half a dozen teams who could win it, we are one of them.

If we hit September with a full and healthy list we will be right in the mix. If Collingwood have a shitty run like we had last year they will not be.

You have to be good enough in the first place to be around the mark, from there everything has to go right.

[LostDoggy]

The extra 5-10% we need is basical down to luck.

There are half a dozen teams who could win it, we are one of them.

If we hit September with a full and healthy list we will be right in the mix. If Collingwood have a shitty run like we had last year they will not be.

You have to be good enough in the first place to be around the mark, from there everything has to go right.

Brilliant post.

[Mantis]

If we hit September with a full and healthy list we will be right in the mix. If Collingwood have a shitty run like we had last year they will not be.


Collingwood had a shitty run in 2009 and got walloped in the PF.

No doubt they improved last year across the board, but having their best players fit & healthy come the end of 2010 meant the world of difference.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

We need to manage certain players better though.

Murphy will probably never be fully fit for an entire year - resting him where applicable wouldn't be a bad idea.

Hudson is often burnt out in September. With Minson and Roughead both more than capable, we should be able to rest Huddo a few times during the year.

If players have niggles - I'd rather we rest them. Watching Johnson and Higgins hobble around last year was painful.

But otherwise, luck certainly plays a massive part in it.

[soupman]

Murphy will probably never be fully fit for an entire year - resting him where applicable wouldn't be a bad idea.

Hudson is often burnt out in September. With Minson and Roughead both more than capable, we should be able to rest Huddo a few times during the year.


The bye's may play a crucial role with these two, especially Hudson.

[LostDoggy]

The extra 5-10% we need is basical down to luck.

There are half a dozen teams who could win it, we are one of them.

If we hit September with a full and healthy list we will be right in the mix. If Collingwood have a shitty run like we had last year they will not be.

You have to be good enough in the first place to be around the mark, from there everything has to go right.

Good post Sockeye, last year was a perfect example. We were the 2nd best side last year and the 3rd best side shouldve won it in the end. Out of the top 3 or 4 whoever has the most luck with injuries and fitness heading into the last round has the best shot. The Pies were presented with a near perfect season and didnt have to face any of the hurdles that we faced yet we were only 4 goals from facing them.

The worm has already turned with the Pies facing injuries and with a level playing field come Finals I'm fully expecting us to face them.

[LostDoggy]

We need to manage certain players better though.

Murphy will probably never be fully fit for an entire year - resting him where applicable wouldn't be a bad idea.

Hudson is often burnt out in September. With Minson and Roughead both more than capable, we should be able to rest Huddo a few times during the year.

If players have niggles - I'd rather we rest them. Watching Johnson and Higgins hobble around last year was painful.

But otherwise, luck certainly plays a massive part in it.

As soon as the Beard injured his ankle in Darwin , I said to myself , on top of the the other injuries this is another year with no Grand Final appearance, I was right

The interchange rules will put massive pressure on the No1 Ruckman at every Club, as I see it we need to have Huddo play every second week as the starting ruckman , for us to be a real force when either Minson or Roughhead are getting game time they both need to average 15 possessions and a goal a game

.

[Go_Dogs]

We need to manage certain players better though.

Murphy will probably never be fully fit for an entire year - resting him where applicable wouldn't be a bad idea.

Hudson is often burnt out in September. With Minson and Roughead both more than capable, we should be able to rest Huddo a few times during the year.

If players have niggles - I'd rather we rest them. Watching Johnson and Higgins hobble around last year was painful.

But otherwise, luck certainly plays a massive part in it.

Agree. Our management of top line players hasn't been great in my humble opinion (because what would I really know!) and needs to be better this year so we have our prime movers playing as close to 100% as possible in September.

Trying to secure a Top 4 spot as early as possible by tucking a lot of early wins away will really help us towards the end of the year and allow us to rest players. If we're still having to push very hard for a spot in the 4, we might not have the luxury.

[LostDoggy]

The extra 5-10% we need is basical down to luck.

There are half a dozen teams who could win it, we are one of them.

If we hit September with a full and healthy list we will be right in the mix. If Collingwood have a shitty run like we had last year they will not be.

You have to be good enough in the first place to be around the mark, from there everything has to go right.

Agree with you SS - we ARE good enough and we just need some luck with injuries...... let's hope the footy Gods are feeling benevolent towards the Dogs this year! ;)

[alwaysadog]

My take is to say yes, SS has pointed to a very important matter and injuries were a major factor, but there were others which not only contributed to a less than satisfactory season which we seem to forget. They contributed to the injury score because as a result we were never in a position to rest players and they need recognising also and fixing if we are to progress.

We need a more complete analysis as to why we struggled against some teams who were not really at our level and why we had some inexplicable losses eg Essendon, and then why late in the season we were all at sea and Rocket declared we had a loss of belief.

Why have we made so much of Hoopers one final’s game because of one goal he scored that has grown out of all proportion. The fact is he hardly did anything on the night and had what, 3 or 4 kicks. But then perhaps the facts are only impediments in the way of great arguments.

There is no malicious intent in this and I’m not having a veiled go at anyone but we need to recognise that just as on field effort is expected to improve so is the management of that effort and I hope that the reasons for the loss of belief have been well and truly analysed and plans put in place to adjust strategies so that it doesn’t recur.

[Dry Rot]

We were the 2nd best side last year .

What alternate universe do you inhabit?

[chef]

Good post Sockeye, last year was a perfect example. We were the 2nd best side last year and the 3rd best side shouldve won it in the end. Out of the top 3 or 4 whoever has the most luck with injuries and fitness heading into the last round has the best shot. The Pies were presented with a near perfect season and didnt have to face any of the hurdles that we faced yet we were only 4 goals from facing them.

The worm has already turned with the Pies facing injuries and with a level playing field come Finals I'm fully expecting us to face them.

How did you work that out?

[The Underdog]

How did you work that out?

Turned off at quarter time of the Geelong game and 1/2 time of the prelim I guess.

[Mofra]

The bye's may play a crucial role with these two, especially Hudson.
They are perfectly timed for us - one month out from the finals is fantastic for the older guys.
Minson & Roughy pushing for selection emans we can rest Huddo mid season if need be, and we can try a Hall-less F50 between Jones/Grant/Resting ruckman.

[LostDoggy]

What alternate universe do you inhabit?

I fully believe we were. If we had the injury list that the Pies had in the Prelim then we would have taken the Saints. Our side was hanging together by a thread and still led the Saints at half time. Picken had Goddard covered he only got on top when the two concussions finally took its toll and he had to go off. Again their Brilliant Blonde so called Match Winner had the luxury of playing on a man with broken bones. We have the best Full Back in the Comp who could hardly walk and finished on the bench. Addison and Wood had broken ribs. Murphy had half a knee left. All in all we had 8 players who required immediate surgury. The result was a mere 4 goals!

Take them injuries away add Cooney and believe me we win simple as that. I'll never agree with anyone who says the Saints were better last year. I dont care what happened throughout the year, we had them covered early in the year and they only snatched the win out of our own stupidity.

Is that a better explanation or am I still from outer space? :)

[Mantis]

I fully believe we were. If we had the injury list that the Pies had in the Prelim then we would have taken the Saints. Our side was hanging together by a thread and still led the Saints at half time. Picken had Goddard covered he only got on top when the two concussions finally took its toll and he had to go off. Again their Brilliant Blonde so called Match Winner had the luxury of playing on a man with broken bones. We have the best Full Back in the Comp who could hardly walk and finished on the bench. Addison and Wood had broken ribs. Murphy had half a knee left. All in all we had 8 players who required immediate surgury. The result was a mere 4 goals!



Picken had to be shifted to play on Hayes in the 2nd half (and curbed his influence) as he was tearing us a new arse which allowed Goddard a free run at it.

[LostDoggy]

Picken had to be shifted to play on Hayes in the 2nd half (and curbed his influence) as he was tearing us a new arse which allowed Goddard a free run at it.

Ta Mantis thought he played on him all night for some reason. :)

[Sedat]

Whilst luck with injuries to key players certainly played a big part in our inability to progress to a GF berth in the last 3 years (especially in 2008 and 2010), that is not the only issue that has prevented us from progressing to the big dance. For the last 3 seasons now we have shown a complete and utter inability to handle the significant lift in intensity from Round 22 to the first week of the finals - Hawthorn frankly embarrased us in 2008, an ailing Geelong limped to September but burst out of the blocks against a fully fit and healthy Dogs line up in 2009, and Collingwood unsurprisingly beat up on us in 2010. Our dreadful QF's should not be glossed over when talking about the September success that has eluded us, and it is highlighted even more by the fact that we invariably bounce back hard the following week against weaker opposition and perform strongly against white-hot opposition in PF week.

For it to have happened 3 years in a row, it is an issue that we cannot sweep under the carpet and pretend doesn't happen - 2010 was understandable considering the injuries to missing key players and those on the field, but 2008 and especially 2009 were unacceptable QF performances from an intensity perspective. If we can snag the double-chance again in 2011, I would like to think that the playing group will come out and absolutely terrorise their opponent the following week and book themselves a crucial week off and a softer PF opponent for their efforts.

[Cyberdoggie]

It's ok for us and the coaches to say they will rest people throughout the year, or manage their work load etc, but when it comes to the regular season, if your not thrashing everyone you come up against, every game becomes critical. So inevitably you want your best players out there every week.

In my opinion they never rest players pro-actively. It's only if they look absolutely fatigued or they are playing poorly.

You won't see us resting Barry every 3rd week or anything to give him a chance to recover his old bones. He'll get 1 week off on the side of the bye week and that will be it.

Perhaps with some of the veteran there should be a policy in place that every 5 weeks or so they sit out a game mandatory.
Also helps rotate the squad a bit and gives experience to more players in case you get what happened last year where Hooper had to play his first game in a final.

[mjp]

Is that a better explanation or am I still from outer space? :)

We didn't beat anyone in the top 4. You are still from outer space.

[mjp]

In my opinion they never rest players pro-actively. It's only if they look absolutely fatigued or they are playing poorly.


A team will dare to do this soon and will succeed because of it.

One thing though: Any player with incentives in their contract will HATE it and could potentially make an appeal to the AFL about any contract kickers missed...with the full support of the PA.

[Greystache]

A team will dare to do this soon and will succeed because of it.

One thing though: Any player with incentives in their contract will HATE it and could potentially make an appeal to the AFL about any contract kickers missed...with the full support of the PA.

We should just follow the Cricket Australia model, if you are rested in the interests of you and the team then it's considered a match played and payments are made accordingly.

[Mantis]

We should just follow the Cricket Australia model, if you are rested in the interests of you and the team then it's considered a match played and payments are made accordingly.

But with the CA model there is no salary cap to deal with which would make your proposal almost impossible to implement.

[LostDoggy]

We didn't beat anyone in the top 4. You are still from outer space.

Games against top 4 sides.

NAB Final: I know its Pre Season but after the Saints lost the previous year and they havnt had much success as well you cant say that they took it easy. They wanted it as much as us, but they met our Full Side and we smashed them.

Round 1: Collingwood last year when organised and ready near impossible to defeat, we were always going to have a letdown after winning the NAB Final anyway.

Round 6: Dominate the Saints all game bar 5 minutes of complete stupidity. We lost it ourselves lose by 3.

Round 20: Geelong were lucky to get us then. We cant count this we wouldve lost to Wunghnu Seconds that day we were spent.

[Mantis]

Games against top 4 sides.

NAB Final: I know its Pre Season but after the Saints lost the previous year and they havnt had much success as well you cant say that they took it easy. They wanted it as much as us, but they met our Full Side and we smashed them..

But we didn't meet their full side, Hayes who owns us didn't play and S.Fisher went off injured very early on.


Round 1: Collingwood last year when organised and ready near impossible to defeat, we were always going to have a letdown after winning the NAB Final anyway.

Round 6: Dominate the Saints all game bar 5 minutes of complete stupidity. We lost it ourselves lose by 3.

Round 20: Geelong were lucky to get us then. We cant count this we wouldve lost to Wunghnu Seconds that day we were spent.

You missed the 2nd Collingwood game in rd 11 when we were pounded for 3 qtrs... what was the excuse that day?

[LostDoggy]

Enough of that anyway it's a new year and the confidence is high!!!!

[SlimPickens]

Games against top 4 sides.

NAB Final: I know its Pre Season but after the Saints lost the previous year and they havnt had much success as well you cant say that they took it easy. They wanted it as much as us, but they met our Full Side and we smashed them.

Round 1: Collingwood last year when organised and ready near impossible to defeat, we were always going to have a letdown after winning the NAB Final anyway.

Round 6: Dominate the Saints all game bar 5 minutes of complete stupidity. We lost it ourselves lose by 3.

Round 20: Geelong were lucky to get us then. We cant count this we wouldve lost to Wunghnu Seconds that day we were spent.

Some lovely excuses there. Quite frankly i'm sick of excuses!

[LostDoggy]

But we didn't meet their full side, Hayes who owns us didn't play and S.Fisher went off injured very early on.


Them two dont account for 8 or 9 goals.

You missed the 2nd Collingwood game in rd 11 when we were pounded for 3 qtrs... what was the excuse that day?

Fair enough but we didnt lose by much if I remember another 5 mins and we wouldve won by a couple of goals.

I've never said we were better than the Pies but the other two? Yes.

[Greystache]

But with the CA model there is no salary cap to deal with which would make your proposal almost impossible to implement.

We're only talking about a handful of games where players are getting senior match payments that they wouldn't otherwise get had we not rested players. It's not a great deal of money, and no salary cap it cut so fine as to not have some wiggle room, you can't afford to in case every player hit their trigger points for incentives or players win individual awards (eg Brownlow, AA selection etc.)

[LostDoggy]

Some lovely excuses there. Quite frankly i'm sick of excuses!

Yea same here just still cant sit back and listen to Saint supporters crap on still have to walk away :)

[Greystache]

Some lovely excuses there. Quite frankly i'm sick of excuses!

+1

For 50 years we've been hearing excuses why we lose to the top teams.

[Cyberdoggie]

Fair enough but we didnt lose by much if I remember another 5 mins and we wouldve won by a couple of goals.

I've never said we were better than the Pies but the other two? Yes.

I think by law of averages we should of beaten these sides by now.

Will be interesting to see what happens this year, as we've had quite a change in personel.

[mjp]

Games against top 4 sides.

NAB Final: I know its Pre Season but after the Saints lost the previous year and they havnt had much success as well you cant say that they took it easy. They wanted it as much as us, but they met our Full Side and we smashed them.

Round 1: Collingwood last year when organised and ready near impossible to defeat, we were always going to have a letdown after winning the NAB Final anyway.

Round 6: Dominate the Saints all game bar 5 minutes of complete stupidity. We lost it ourselves lose by 3.

Round 20: Geelong were lucky to get us then. We cant count this we wouldve lost to Wunghnu Seconds that day we were spent.

NAB Cup doesn't count and losses to the other 3 sides make us the 4th best side.

What you say might be true - they got lucky, whatever - but we lost. To say we were better than Geelong and St Kilda when they beat us and we couldn't beat them is just dumb.

[chef]

Fair enough but we didnt lose by much if I remember another 5 mins and we wouldve won by a couple of goals.

I've never said we were better than the Pies but the other two? Yes.

No. The results speak for themselves. Unlucky with injury or not we were still only the forth best team last year.

[LostDoggy]

+1

For 50 years we've been hearing excuses why we lose to the top teams.

Because we go out there calling them the top teams. “We just want to put up a good showing against Geelong, Collingwood, etc”

In our minds, we should be the top team. Our football should be reinforcing that reality until it becomes so.

[the banker]

Great to talk this talk a month before the season. By and large, we are realistic about what what we have failed to achieve in the past few years while recognising the achievements. I can't help feeling that the Club and its supporters have matured to the point where we have an understanding of how we will do it. Every premiership winner needs their bit of luck with injuries. We have the talent. We have the will. There will be a phase pre finals when everything has to start to take shape. When we achieve a top four place and our list is fit. We will have every chance to win it all. We have the talent and we have the will to go all the way. Our best will be good enough.

[Go_Dogs]

Great to talk this talk a month before the season. By and large, we are realistic about what what we have failed to achieve in the past few years while recognising the achievements. I can't help feeling that the Club and its supporters have matured to the point where we have an understanding of how we will do it. Every premiership winner needs their bit of luck with injuries. We have the talent. We have the will. There will be a phase pre finals when everything has to start to take shape. When we achieve a top four place and our list is fit. We will have every chance to win it all. We have the talent and we have the will to go all the way. Our best will be good enough.

Great post.

[Sedat]

There will be a phase pre finals when everything has to start to take shape. When we achieve a top four place and our list is fit.
Sounds like 2009 to me, and we all know what happened in the first half of that QF (against a tired and sore opponent who should have been ripe for the picking).

I cannot question our efforts in week 2 and week 3 of the last 3 finals series, but I want to see our team come out in week 1 and turn it on from the get-go. Geelong, St Kilda, Hawthorn, Collingwood have all done this but we have failed to do so for 3 years in a row.

[Ghost Dog]

that extra 5-10% is more a tactics issue? We leaked easy goals last season. Watching a collingwood game, felt they were several steps ahead of us but not just in cattle. In their work ethic and game plan. To play them in the final last year, we would have been given a drubbing.
Luck is a factor, but unless we have the speed to get through their zone its going to be hard to pip them in the big dance.
. Do we have the brains in the box to get us there. I think so, but a lot of players are going to have to stand up tall. Minson, Hill, Stack, these kind of blokes who promise a great deal. If they can't give their best game on the day then at least we need the ferocious tackling that has become a must for finals contenders.

[Mantis]

that extra 5-10% is more a tactics issue? We leaked easy goals last season. Watching a collingwood game, felt they were several steps ahead of us but not just in cattle. In their work ethic and game plan. To play them in the final last year, we would have been given a drubbing.

We played them in a final last year and copped a drubbing so what is your point?


Luck is a factor, but unless we have the speed to get through their zone its going to be hard to pip them in the big dance.
. Do we have the brains in the box to get us there. I think so, but a lot of players are going to have to stand up tall. Minson, Hill, Stack, these kind of blokes who promise a great deal. If they can't give their best game on the day then at least we need the ferocious tackling that has become a must for finals contenders.

If Hill, Minson & Stack played in a final they would be 19th, 20th & 21st picked - these guys while having to play a part don't win you finals.

[Mofra]

If Hill, Minson & Stack played in a final they would be 19th, 20th & 21st picked - these guys while having to play a part don't win you finals.
If the Saints had anyone useful to pick as the 19th, 20th & 21st players they would be the reigning premiers. Most clubs don't have too much seperating their top 10 players, it's the role players that can seperate teams.

[Desipura]

We played them in a final last year and copped a drubbing so what is your point?



If Hill, Minson & Stack played in a final they would be 19th, 20th & 21st picked - these guys while having to play a part don't win you finals.

Finally some sense! Roughy needs to take over the number 2 ruck position and provide a valuable option up forward. He is extremely important in our overall set up IMHO.
Playing Minson & Huddo in the same time robs us of some flexibility as they are only one position players.

Slightly off topic, if we can beat the likes of Collingwood and St Kilda this year, I will personally feel more confident about our chances at the business end of the season.

[Mantis]

If the Saints had anyone useful to pick as the 19th, 20th & 21st players they would be the reigning premiers. Most clubs don't have too much seperating their top 10 players, it's the role players that can seperate teams.

More like players 12-18.

[Ghost Dog]

We played them in a final last year and copped a drubbing so what is your point?





If Hill, Minson & Stack played in a final they would be 19th, 20th & 21st picked - these guys while having to play a part don't win you finals.

not a final
The final

It would have been like Port V Geelong in 2007

It only takes one player to run, chase and lay a great tackle to inspire a team at a critical moment in a game.

St Kilda, without too many big names but a do or die ethic have shown what it takes to get to the final.
Collingwood got the most out of Brown, even Davis with the same demand / higher expectations of defensive and second efforts. 1 % ers. Dick for example, not a player you would expect to be a defensive machine but made some great chases when fit. Hill could take a leaf out of his book.

You need a lot of things to go right to get to a final. Each play counts.
1st or 21st in the list, it has to be ramped up in this area for us. Feel confident it will with more people pushing for spots

[FrediKanoute]

I fully believe we were. If we had the injury list that the Pies had in the Prelim then we would have taken the Saints. Our side was hanging together by a thread and still led the Saints at half time. Picken had Goddard covered he only got on top when the two concussions finally took its toll and he had to go off. Again their Brilliant Blonde so called Match Winner had the luxury of playing on a man with broken bones. We have the best Full Back in the Comp who could hardly walk and finished on the bench. Addison and Wood had broken ribs. Murphy had half a knee left. All in all we had 8 players who required immediate surgury. The result was a mere 4 goals!

Take them injuries away add Cooney and believe me we win simple as that. I'll never agree with anyone who says the Saints were better last year. I dont care what happened throughout the year, we had them covered early in the year and they only snatched the win out of our own stupidity.

Is that a better explanation or am I still from outer space? :)

I'd say we were the third best side....the Catters were still better.

[Mantis]

St Kilda, without too many big names but a do or die ethic have shown what it takes to get to the final.

St.Kilda's best players are better than our best players, especially in the 'big moments'. They are no more fierce at the ball or man than we are.



Collingwood got the most out of Brown, even Davis with the same demand / higher expectations of defensive and second efforts. 1 % ers.

Is that why Davis was dropped for the 2nd GF?

Brown did bugger all in the finals series except against us when he touched up Hahn.



You need a lot of things to go right to get to a final. Each play counts.
1st or 21st, it has to be ramped up in this area for us.

There has been nothing wrong with our effort over the past 3 finals series (except the 3QF's as explained by Sedat). We just haven't been good enough when it counts whether it be kicking the crucial goal or winning the vital clearance.

[Ghost Dog]

They are no more fierce at the ball or man than we are.

With a few exceptions, don't agree. Check the tackle count.

Is that why Davis was dropped for the 2nd GF?

A grand final is the culmination of a season's effort. Bodies and minds pushing each other and competing for places, training as a team to to do a job. You can knock Davis for his finals but he laid many great tackles during the season. It sets a standard

Brown did bugger all in the finals series except against us when he touched up Hahn.

Same as above.

There has been nothing wrong with our effort over the past 3 finals series (except the 3QF's as explained by Sedat). We just haven't been good enough when it counts whether it be kicking the crucial goal or winning the vital clearance.


Haven't been noted for being a tackling powerhouse or lock down defensive unit like other top teams.

[Mantis]

With a few exceptions, don't agree. Check the tackle count.

??

So they smashed us 79-49 in the tackle count in last years PF, did this win them the game? ... I don't believe it did and can think of a number of more valid reasons why we lost this game including carrying underdone & out of form players and skill errors (goal kicking especially).



A grand final is the culmination of a season's effort. Bodies and minds pushing each other and competing for places, training as a team to to do a job. You can knock Davis for his finals but he laid many great tackles during the season. It sets a standard

So why is it that a player who sets the standard is just about the worst performer in finals ever?

Davis while being a good performer in regular season games has never been able to reproduce this form in games that count and Collingwoods performances in big games have been worse for it.



Haven't been noted for being a tackling powerhouse or lock down defensive unit like other top teams.

Because we don't play this way per se, but we have shown we are capable of this when we change our plans and focus on playing a 'negative' style.

[Sedat]

If the Saints had anyone useful to pick as the 19th, 20th & 21st players they would be the reigning premiers. Most clubs don't have too much seperating their top 10 players, it's the role players that can seperate teams.
People forget that St Kilda didn't lose the GF, even though they had a more than fair sprinkling of spuds in their team - in simple terms the bounce of one ball ultimately determined the end result of that match, irrespective of the number of Eddy's McQualter's and Peake's they had running around having precious little positive influence. To counter this, Collingwood didn't lose the GF either, and they had a far more even spread of talent accross the 22 players than St Kilda (and they then proceeded to beat up on the Saints the week after).

So I'm still undecided as to which camp I fall into - the superstars or the spread of talent winning you finals. What I do know is that none of our 'superstars' and influential players (with the notable exceptions of Griffen and Lake) have enhanced their reputations over time in finals, and some of them have had 11 chances to do so since 2006. I know it's harsh and I hate writing it, but it is very difficult to counter this argument.

[Mantis]

So I'm still undecided as to which camp I fall into - the superstars or the spread of talent winning you finals. What I do know is that none of our 'superstars' and influential players (with the notable exceptions of Griffen and Lake) have enhanced their reputations over time in finals, and some of them have had 11 chances to do so since 2006. I know it's harsh and I hate writing it, but it is very difficult to counter this argument.

Sometimes the truth is harsh.

[Ghost Dog]

??

So they smashed us 79-49 in the tackle count in last years PF, did this win them the game? ... I don't believe it did and can think of a number of more valid reasons why we lost this game including carrying underdone & out of form players and skill errors (goal kicking especially).



So why is it that a player who sets the standard is just about the worst performer in finals ever?

Davis while being a good performer in regular season games has never been able to reproduce this form in games that count and Collingwoods performances in big games have been worse for it.



Because we don't play this way per se, but we have shown we are capable of this when we change our plans and focus on playing a 'negative' style.

You make some good points and those I raised are minor. In general I was really proud of the way the boys carried themave selves through injury, illness. But, it is minor things that get you there in the end. It's that extra edge that alot of posters have alluded to on these forums. I don't know where you get it or how, but I suspect youth will bring it, deeper list so we can rest certain players, new leadership perhaps. settled foward line.

Cite their Half backs, blocking the man on the mark for eg. When talking about tackles, you can look at that across a season and get a little bit from it - across the season.

[bornadog]

You make some good points and those I raised are minor. In general I was really proud of the way the boys carried themave selves through injury, illness. But, it is minor things that get you there in the end. It's that extra edge that alot of posters have alluded to on these forums. I don't know where you get it or how, but I suspect youth will bring it, deeper list so we can rest certain players, new leadership perhaps.

Everything has to go right for you, especially injuries and fitness levels and a little luck as well.. You look at all the premiers over the years and basically they had their best team on the ground almost every week of the entire season.

In the 2009 prelim, we showed that we can match it with the best and an elemnt of luck robbed us in the end.

[Ghost Dog]

for sure.

Luck is luck. You can only change what you can change.
My point is there were multiple rounds of ' not taking the game on' for various reasons and some that were not so clear in 2010
I think ( and hope) we won't see it in 2011 with so many changes.

[Mofra]

More like players 12-18.
Touche'

The way the game is played and with the high rotation system teams will still employ, the "weakest" player on the ground is very important as the opposition will try to exploit any differential in ability, and arguably it's the one area we have an advantage over the Saints with (injury raveaged finals team notwithstanding).
It's an area we need to be smarter with, especially when we became predicatble last year for focussing on Bazza with our F50 entries.

[Sedat]

In the 2009 prelim, we showed that we can match it with the best and an elemnt of luck robbed us in the end.
Totally agree, so why didn't we bring anywhere near that level of performance and intensity to the table 2 weeks prior and guaranteed ourselves a week off and a much weaker PF opponent?

[Bulldog Revolution]

Everything has to go right for you, especially injuries and fitness levels and a little luck as well.. You look at all the premiers over the years and basically they had their best team on the ground almost every week of the entire season.

In the 2009 prelim, we showed that we can match it with the best and an elemnt of luck robbed us in the end.

That I agree with,

but the disappointing reality is that over the past three years we have not consistently been able to match it with St Kilda or Geelong, and last year Collingwood beat us three times comfortably.

We were the 4th best team in the competition but we did not eclipse Sydney by much, and in 2011 the Dockers, Crows, and Hawks will feel legitimate challengers to our top 4 status.

We need our best players to have more impact against the best teams. Its hard to think of any of our good players having played well against Geelong over the past 3 years.

[Topdog]

In the 2009 prelim, we showed that we can match it with the best and an elemnt of luck robbed us in the end.

Was it just luck or was it also poor execution when the game was on the line and moments of stupidity?

I don't count those things as luck.

[Ghost Dog]

Touche'

The way the game is played and with the high rotation system teams will still employ, the "weakest" player on the ground is very important as the opposition will try to exploit any differential in ability, and arguably it's the one area we have an advantage over the Saints with (injury raveaged finals team notwithstanding).
It's an area we need to be smarter with, especially when we became predicatble last year for focussing on Bazza with our F50 entries.

Exactly.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Was it just luck or was it also poor execution when the game was on the line and moments of stupidity?

I don't count those things as luck.

This.

Luck plays a part, but that word's getting tossed around far too much here. We weren't good enough - we had our chances, but couldn't do it. There's no excuses.

Even prior to injuries last year, we weren't good enough.

[the banker]

Profound thread. It is clear that in order to achieve the ultimate triumph: OUR NEXT PREMIERSHIP, that on that day our best players will have to rise to a standard maybe they haven't reached before: Cooney, Boyd, Griffen, Cross/Ward, Missy, Grant, Brian, etc. etc. Barry has been there. Our players will fully believe and not doubt - be calm of mind and precise by foot and hand. Coaching staff must pull the right moves and have the right plans for the critical games. Isn't this what we believe they are capable of? Unity of purpose and belief in ourselves will count for much in getting us there- winning it will take something special. I believe we are on track. I will be disappointed if we don't conquer most of our serious rivals in the H&A. This I think will be essential for the belief. Let's start round 6, but make sure the later rounds of the year convince us that we are worthy. And yes Sedat, we need to belt someone in a Qualifying Final.

[Greystache]

People forget that St Kilda didn't lose the GF, even though they had a more than fair sprinkling of spuds in their team - in simple terms the bounce of one ball ultimately determined the end result of that match, irrespective of the number of Eddy's McQualter's and Peake's they had running around having precious little positive influence. To counter this, Collingwood didn't lose the GF either, and they had a far more even spread of talent accross the 22 players than St Kilda (and they then proceeded to beat up on the Saints the week after).

So I'm still undecided as to which camp I fall into - the superstars or the spread of talent winning you finals. What I do know is that none of our 'superstars' and influential players (with the notable exceptions of Griffen and Lake) have enhanced their reputations over time in finals, and some of them have had 11 chances to do so since 2006. I know it's harsh and I hate writing it, but it is very difficult to counter this argument.

I've been saying this for some time but keep getting shouted down by the mindlessly positive types. Looking at it deeper, I can't think of too many of our superstars in my lifetime who you could say have enhanced their reputations in big finals.

[Greystache]

Everything has to go right for you, especially injuries and fitness levels and a little luck as well.. You look at all the premiers over the years and basically they had their best team on the ground almost every week of the entire season.

In the 2009 prelim, we showed that we can match it with the best and an elemnt of luck robbed us in the end.

We had several straight forward chances to ice the game in the last quarter (Gilbee, Gia, etc) and missed them all. We always say after the fact that with a bit of luck we would have won this game or that, but in the end it's our continual inability to deliver fundamental skills when the moment arises. That's the difference between teams who've won premierships and teams that have been "unlucky"

[the banker]

The careers of this group of players is not over. The moment of truth, redemption and triumph, is in front of them. Don't look back to the future.

[Bulldog4life]

I've been saying this for some time but keep getting shouted down by the mindlessly positive types. Looking at it deeper, I can't think of too many of our superstars in my lifetime who you could say have enhanced their reputations in big finals.

Who do you consider to be the superstars in your lifetime?

[ledge]

I think Goddard is a superstar in finals and home and away, but you need others around you who can do the odd stand out thing, thus not a continual of one player but if 5 players do 5 amazing things (one each) its a good chance of a win.

[LostDoggy]

We're not good enough....and won't be until we unearth a CHF who can stamp his authority on the game, a genuine inside outside on baller with elite disposal to replace either Cross or Boyd, and leadership in the middle that results in turning the tide and toughing it out when we start leaking easy goals against the very top sides. We were consistently beaten by the likes of Collingwood (3 times) last year. That should tell you something about where we are at.

[Greystache]

Who do you consider to be the superstars in your lifetime?

Grant, Johnson, Smith, Darcy, West, Cooney. Close- Lake, Libba, Murphy, Boyd, Wynd

Of the superstars I would say only West has played at a level in big finals equal to his H&A record, the others all routinely underperformed. Of the players I'd consider close to superstars (I've probably missed a few too), I'd only put Lake in the category of big final performer.

[Ghost Dog]

Grant, Johnson, Smith, Darcy, West, Cooney. Close- Lake, Libba, Murphy, Boyd, Wynd

Of the superstars I would say only West has played at a level in big finals equal to his H&A record, the others all routinely underperformed. Of the players I'd consider close to superstars (I've probably missed a few too), I'd only put Lake in the category of big final performer.

Given his record, you would have to put Barry in there. He's held a cup aloft.

[soupman]

Given his record, you would have to put Barry in there. He's held a cup aloft.

But wouldn't qualify as a superstar of the Western Bulldogs yet (I'll wait for the Premiership winning performance first).

[Ghost Dog]

But wouldn't qualify as a superstar of the Western Bulldogs yet (I'll wait for the Premiership winning performance first).


Sure, not for us yet, But when you draft a player, their previous finals experience doesn't count because they haven't done it wearing your jumper?? In the dictionary under ' superstar there is this picture of a bald guy called Barry....

[Sedat]

We had several straight forward chances to ice the game in the last quarter (Gilbee, Gia, etc) and missed them all. We always say after the fact that with a bit of luck we would have won this game or that, but in the end it's our continual inability to deliver fundamental skills when the moment arises. That's the difference between teams who've won premierships and teams that have been "unlucky"
I agree with your sentment but we really were unlucky in the 2009 PF. When it was up for grabs, Akermanis was pinged for deliberate OOB that turned a neutral ball on the wing into a quick transition forward and a goal to Reiwoldt. Borderline call IMO and other more blatant ones weren't paid on the night against the Saints. Hudson was given a free kick against in a boundary throw-in when we were pressing forward late on, and the resultant free kick to St Kilda ended up with another goal to Reiwoldt (that might or might not have been touched). On the night, 6 of St Kilda's 9 goals were from frees - some were there some were not. The Lake decision was the first 100m off the ball decision of its kind (they are common place now) and it awoke the sleeping giant (not to mention gift St Kilda a soft goal in a low scoring game and some crucial momentum). It was a wretched decision then and it has not aged any better.

Aside from Gilbee's inexplicable shank (it was such a bad shank that I thought it was smothered at the time), I can't think of too many moments that we bottled it on the night (perhaps there was a little too many long bombs into forward 50 as the match wore on). Very harsh to label Gia's miss a straight forward chance - very tough shot around the corner under pressure on the left peg on a tough angle and from distance, that ended up missing by less than a foot. And probably the unluckiest thing that happened to us on the night was that Raph Clarke pulled a big game out of his arse - had he played to his normal output (like he did the following week), we probably win on the back of a couple of Clarke turnovers and no crucial interceptions from him.

I think your description would better fit the 2008 PF, a game that we performed well above outside expectations in but absolutely wasted a hatful of gilt-edged chances in the 2nd half that would have put us well and truly in the frame late on. Your description also neatly fits the 1997 PF. More often that not, we don't get over the line in tight matches due to lapses in concentration, missing key opportunities, etc... I would class the 2009 PF as an exception that otherwise proves your point.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Good post Sedat.

I do remember Griffen missing at least two shots in the first quarter that he should have nailed. Might have been one in the second too. Whilst we were unlucky with a raft of ridiculous free kicks going against us, I feel we still should have won that game had we a little more composure.

Having said that, the 09 PF is the best I've seen us play.

[Desipura]

We had several straight forward chances to ice the game in the last quarter (Gilbee, Gia, etc) and missed them all. We always say after the fact that with a bit of luck we would have won this game or that, but in the end it's our continual inability to deliver fundamental skills when the moment arises. That's the difference between teams who've won premierships and teams that have been "unlucky"

I don't have to tell you but you are spot on with all of the above .

[Desipura]

Grant, Johnson, Smith, Darcy, West, Cooney. Close- Lake, Libba, Murphy, Boyd, Wynd

Of the superstars I would say only West has played at a level in big finals equal to his H&A record, the others all routinely underperformed. Of the players I'd consider close to superstars (I've probably missed a few too), I'd only put Lake in the category of big final performer.

As you say some of the above also did not deliver when the pressure was on. With all due respect as they were great players for our club however I can recall Granty not wanting to kick for goal (not in finals)and the remaining players finals form was a bit up and down.
It is harsh but true that none of our great players will be remembered as great finals players which coincides with our lack of success.

[LostDoggy]

As you say some of the above also did not deliver when the pressure was on. With all due respect as they were great players for our club however I can recall Granty not wanting to kick for goal (not in finals)and the remaining players finals form was a bit up and down.
It is harsh but true that none of our great players will be remembered as great finals players which coincides with our lack of success.


Maybe thats why Malthouse likes to recruit players who have big games in their underage finals? Hopefully Wallis changes this and doesnt add to the list.

Im not sure but how many finals has Cooney played when hese fit?

[Sockeye Salmon]

I agree with your sentment but we really were unlucky in the 2009 PF. When it was up for grabs, Akermanis was pinged for deliberate OOB that turned a neutral ball on the wing into a quick transition forward and a goal to Reiwoldt. Borderline call IMO and other more blatant ones weren't paid on the night against the Saints. Hudson was given a free kick against in a boundary throw-in when we were pressing forward late on, and the resultant free kick to St Kilda ended up with another goal to Reiwoldt (that might or might not have been touched). On the night, 6 of St Kilda's 9 goals were from frees - some were there some were not. The Lake decision was the first 100m off the ball decision of its kind (they are common place now) and it awoke the sleeping giant (not to mention gift St Kilda a soft goal in a low scoring game and some crucial momentum). It was a wretched decision then and it has not aged any better.

Aside from Gilbee's inexplicable shank (it was such a bad shank that I thought it was smothered at the time), I can't think of too many moments that we bottled it on the night (perhaps there was a little too many long bombs into forward 50 as the match wore on). Very harsh to label Gia's miss a straight forward chance - very tough shot around the corner under pressure on the left peg on a tough angle and from distance, that ended up missing by less than a foot. And probably the unluckiest thing that happened to us on the night was that Raph Clarke pulled a big game out of his arse - had he played to his normal output (like he did the following week), we probably win on the back of a couple of Clarke turnovers and no crucial interceptions from him.

I think your description would better fit the 2008 PF, a game that we performed well above outside expectations in but absolutely wasted a hatful of gilt-edged chances in the 2nd half that would have put us well and truly in the frame late on. Your description also neatly fits the 1997 PF. More often that not, we don't get over the line in tight matches due to lapses in concentration, missing key opportunities, etc... I would class the 2009 PF as an exception that otherwise proves your point.

Wasn't the Hargrave dropping the ball in that game as well? The one where he kicked it about 15m.

[Mantis]

Wasn't the Hargrave dropping the ball in that game as well? The one where he kicked it about 15m.

Yep, it was right in front of me (I sound like that feral Crows supporter). The ump was blind-sided and didn't see that Hargrave had actually kicked the ball. The resultant bit of play that lead to Dal Santo's goal (their 1st) was shitful on our behalf.

[Mofra]

We're not good enough....and won't be until we unearth a CHF who can stamp his authority on the game, a genuine inside outside on baller with elite disposal to replace either Cross or Boyd, and leadership in the middle that results in turning the tide and toughing it out when we start leaking easy goals against the very top sides. We were consistently beaten by the likes of Collingwood (3 times) last year. That should tell you something about where we are at.
Very few CHFs enhance their reputation in GFs though.
Carey averaged about 1 goal, Buddy had a quiet one, Riewoldt has battled but not been effectual, Brown has a little over a goal per GF as well.

Since the late 80s/early 90s, it has generally been the mids and small forwards that have been the key. We have the mids who have the ability, we just need more than one per game to stand up in the finals.

[bornadog]

Grant, Johnson, Smith, Darcy, West, Cooney. Close- Lake, Libba, Murphy, Boyd, Wynd

Of the superstars I would say only West has played at a level in big finals equal to his H&A record, the others all routinely underperformed. Of the players I'd consider close to superstars (I've probably missed a few too), I'd only put Lake in the category of big final performer.

Griffen has been our best player in finals for the past three years.

[Mantis]

Griffen has been our best player in finals for the past three years.

Which is why he is held in very high regard on here.

The rest?

[Sockeye Salmon]

The theory that the great players are better finals players is, of course, bollocks.

The better players play at a higher level more often, that's why they are better players. It stands to reason that if you have more good days it's more likely that you will have a good day when it matters most.

Conversely, the more finals you play in, the more likely you will have both good and bad performances.


Was Brereton a superstar for kicking 8 goals against Essendon in 85 or a dud for letting Rhys-Jones own him while Rhys was winning his Norm Smith in 87?

Hint: Brereton was a superstar because he played more good games than bad ones over his whole career.

[Ghost Dog]

Which is why he is held in very high regard on here.

The rest?

Adison, ward - granted, not superstars but they had solid finals series.

[Greystache]

Griffen has been our best player in finals for the past three years.

Which is why is was responding to the post- other than Griffen who has enhanced their reputation in finals


What I do know is that none of our 'superstars' and influential players (with the notable exceptions of Griffen and Lake) have enhanced their reputations over time in finals, and some of them have had 11 chances to do so since 2006. I know it's harsh and I hate writing it, but it is very difficult to counter this argument.

[Go_Dogs]

The theory that the great players are better finals players is, of course, bollocks.

I agree, kinda in that I think it's stupid that being a premiership player can suddenly enhance an average player to a new spectrum. However...

When we win the flag this year and Griffen, Cooney, Lake, Morris, Murphy, Higgins, Boyd, Cross etc all play great games, does that suddenly make them far superior players to what they were previously? Not sure it improves their actual skill, but perhaps it does give them greater confidence, experience etc. It certainly increases their 'greatness' in the media and opposition fans' eyes. We already know they're bloody good players, but once they bring us a flag we'll (probably) rate them higher because they managed to get the job done.

Conversely, would anyone here say Leon Davis is a superstar? Proven finals non-performer, but has been very effective in the H&A season. Do we think he's not a great player because of his terrible finals record? Probably.

[Topdog]

No we think Neon Leon is a downhill skier who goes missing when you have to work hard.

[bornadog]

Which is why he is held in very high regard on here.

The rest?

The Rest - can't be bothered going through the rest as we failed to make the GF.