Matthew Boyd on One Week at a time. Tonight Jan 6th

[azabob]

Boyd on One Week at a time tonight. One HD at 9.30pm.

What question would you ask Boyd?

[chef]

Thanks azabob.

[Grantysghost]

How does he consistently get so much of the pill?

Ranked # 1 in the league for disposals (30.9 avg).

[immortalmike]

Does he actually look before he kicks the ball?
Does he think about his opponent at all?

[the banker]

Who are the influential on field leaders and what are they doing

[the banker]

What is the dynamic in the leading teams sessions. Is there any dissension? How have the players addressed Brian lake and jarryd grant and Josh hill in these sessions. Is everyone happy with the leading teams approach?

[Ghost Dog]

You're known for having a fairly severe spray.
Do you encourage players as much as you criticize them?

Your disposal has been a bit down. What approaches are you taking on the training track to improve? Give us the specifics.

[Bulldog Revolution]

Whether it makes for interesting viewing is hard to know in advance, but its certainly interesting timing for Boyd given our severe form slump

[azabob]

Whether it makes for interesting viewing is hard to know in advance, but its certainly interesting timing for Boyd given our severe form slump

I don't think Boyd knows how to "spin" so if they ask the right questions should be good.

[LostDoggy]

Did Boyd say anything of interest or did he play a straight bat

I missed it

[Dry Rot]

What question would you ask Boyd?

Is he colour blind?

[AndrewP6]

Did Boyd say anything of interest or did he play a straight bat

I missed it

Mostly straight bat. They showed footage of Hill standing the mark in two games, last year (I think!) and last game against Geelong. Was rather diplomatic, saying they could find fault in all players with video. Talked about Hall being such a strong trainer, and that he still had something to offer. Discussed difficulty in captaining a struggling side. Said he and the players have a good relationship with Eade Talked about the season-defining game this week, and looking forward to the challenge.

[bornadog]

Mostly straight bat. They showed footage of Hill standing the mark in two games, last year (I think!) and last game against Geelong. Was rather diplomatic, saying they could find fault in all players with video. Talked about Hall being such a strong trainer, and that he still had something to offer. Discussed difficulty in captaining a struggling side. Said he and the players have a good relationship with Eade Talked about the season-defining game this week, and looking forward to the challenge.

Both the Hill footage shown were this year.

I thought he answered all the questions well.

He wasn't happy that Matthew Lloyd commented about him being unaccountable. He basically said he follows the coaches instructions, ie the role they want him to play. He also said if he was unaccountable he would expect the coaches to tell him if he was doing something contrary to their instructions.

[Ghost Dog]

Both the Hill footage shown were this year.

I thought he answered all the questions well.

He wasn't happy that Matthew Lloyd commented about him being unaccountable. He basically said he follows the coaches instructions, ie the role they want him to play. He also said if he was unaccountable he would expect the coaches to tell him if he was doing something contrary to their instructions.

Well, I'm glad to hear it. At last we know who to blame.

[Sockeye Salmon]

That was the most pointless interview I've wayched in ages.

Every question was blantantly loaded and Boyd quite rightly gave them nothing.


Is Hall finished?
Should Josh Hill ever play for the WB again?
Are you unaccountable?
Did Aker affect the playing group? (Aker? Seriously?)


etc etc

[The Bulldogs Bite]

That was the most pointless interview I've wayched in ages.

Every question was blantantly loaded and Boyd quite rightly gave them nothing.


Is Hall finished?
Should Josh Hill ever play for the WB again?
Are you unaccountable?
Did Aker affect the playing group? (Aker? Seriously?)


etc etc

I would have thought the bolded was a question most here would love to ask Boyd.

The answer he gave seems to be an interesting one.

[Sedat]

I would have thought the bolded was a question most here would love to ask Boyd.

The answer he gave seems to be an interesting one.
Boyd is unaccountable in the same way Judd is, or Swan, or Gablett, etc.. Of course Boyd is simply nowhere near the offensive weapon that these others are, and that is why it is pure folly to have him as our offensive playmaker in the middle with little defensive regard. If he is being coached this way, I'm disappointed with that approach with him.

[dogman]

Boyd is unaccountable in the same way Judd is, or Swan, or Gablett, etc.. Of course Boyd is simply nowhere near the offensive weapon that these others are, and that is why it is pure folly to have him as our offensive playmaker in the middle with little defensive regard. If he is being coached this way, I'm disappointed with that approach with him.

I agree but who are better options? Cooney is injured, Higgins hasn't lived upto expectations, Sherman doesn't get enough of it. Griffin can only do so much in this roll on his own. If Cooney can discover his 2008 form then yes, play Boyd as a tagger.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Darcy this morning on the Hot Breakfast (Triple M) said the Dogs should play Hill this week to give him a chance to rebound and show his determination after the 'On the mark' incident last week! Is he serious? Did he not see Josh do the same thing a month ago against Collingwood? The guy has had his second chance already! He is finished

[dogman]

Darcy this morning on the Hot Breakfast (Triple M) said the Dogs should play Hill this week to give him a chance to rebound and show his determination after the 'On the mark' incident last week! Is he serious? Did he not see Josh do the same thing a month ago against Collingwood? The guy has had his second chance already! He is finished

He can still show is determination at Williamstown for about 6 weeks, then we will see how much he wants to play AFL.

[Bulldog Revolution]

Sockeye sums up the questions well


I would have thought the bolded was a question most here would love to ask Boyd.

The answer he gave seems to be an interesting one.

Boyd's answer gave some insight into the issue.

My take is if you have a player that has shown he will do pretty much whatever it takes to make it, whatever it takes to get fitter, stronger, quicker etc then if he is not being accountable enough it is because he is not being well instructed and coached. Now maybe being coached means he gets dropped, gets completely defensive assignments, gets video feedback etc etc

Now I'm not entirely blaming the coaches, but I really find it hard to believe that Boyd would not attempt to do whatever it was that was asked of him. If he is making mistakes then he needs coaching etc.

I believe our midfield coaching strategy/game plan has been on the nose for at least 18 months. I dont believe our group is physical enough, nor do they shepherd, block, or tackle hard enough.

[Sedat]

Darcy this morning on the Hot Breakfast (Triple M) said the Dogs should play Hill this week to give him a chance to rebound and show his determination after the 'On the mark' incident last week! Is he serious? Did he not see Josh do the same thing a month ago against Collingwood? The guy has had his second chance already! He is finished
Hill was disgraceful on the weekend but I feel as though the wider public (ourselved included) are searching for reasons for the malaise that we are currently in and want to make an example of the nearest scapegoat(s). A strong club is also united in tough times, so I would hope that the footy club don't go out on the public record and hang Josh Hill out to dry - there are many and varied reasos for being non-competitive and it doesn't start and end with 1-2 players.

Fact is he is the 21st/22nd player selected in our team - there are far bigger issues that need to be addressed than Hill. He is for all intents and purposes finished at the Dogs but does that really matter? We have problems that run deeper than Hill that need urgent attention.

I'm sure that James Fantasia is already sounding out that long list of clubs who are oh so willing to part with a top 20 pick for Hill's services in 2012 :rolleyes:

[LostDoggy]

I believe our midfield coaching strategy/game plan has been on the nose for at least 18 months. I dont believe our group is physical enough, nor do they shepherd, block, or tackle hard enough.


Couldn't agree more.

[bornadog]

Boyd is unaccountable in the same way Judd is, or Swan, or Gablett, etc.. Of course Boyd is simply nowhere near the offensive weapon that these others are, and that is why it is pure folly to have him as our offensive playmaker in the middle with little defensive regard. If he is being coached this way, I'm disappointed with that approach with him.

When we are winning and Boyd gets 30 plus touches but Judd still gets 30 or Ablett 30, we never ever mention that Boyd is unaccountable. When we lose, we all wonder what Boyd was doing.

[always right]

The difference with Judd, Ablett and Swan is that they are almost always tagged. Accountability is not the same challenge when you know your opponent is never going to be far away.

[Sedat]

When we are winning and Boyd gets 30 plus touches but Judd still gets 30 or Ablett 30, we never ever mention that Boyd is unaccountable. When we lose, we all wonder what Boyd was doing.
In some games Boyd gets 30 and Ablett/Swan/Hayes get 40 - we lose by 10+ goals. It's a really tough one because Boyd has many outstanding attributes but the reality is that many opposition clubs are happy to go head to head with Boydy because their player will impact the game far more. If that happens, Boyd's numbers don't really matter. I don't have a solution by the way (even less so with Coons out of the team) but I found it disappointing that Boyd was called into question on lack of accountability and chose to take the 'playing under coaches instructions' line. I'd say some responsibility lies in both camps.

[Topdog]

When we are winning and Boyd gets 30 plus touches but Judd still gets 30 or Ablett 30, we never ever mention that Boyd is unaccountable. When we lose, we all wonder what Boyd was doing.

BS, we were winning last year and there where plenty saying Boyd is not accountable enough.

[LostDoggy]

There comes a time that your need to realise that as the captain, you need to do something to change what is happening on the field.
I realise he wasnt captain at the time but last year in Rd 20 when were getting bent over by Geelong and getting reamed around the ball that he & Cross, did not play closer on their opponents but continued to play wide.
If the coaches feel that he is as damaging as some of the others mentioned, they are seriously flawed in their judgement.
Similar to other posters, I feel that the other teams allow Boyd to get it 25-35 times as he doesnt hurt you enough. I would rather see 20 damaging possessions as opposed to double the amount that do result in too much.
I love Boyd & Cross's commitment but I question their ability when compared to a lot of other midfields.

[LostDoggy]

One concern from my observations is that Boyd is one of the few we have who can break free from the contest from inside it from a stationary position. Cross does not have the speed/power to break loose, Griffen and Ward are strong through the hips but seem to need a run up to build momentum.

Of the regulars only Boyd and Cooney seem to be able to really break away from a standing start, potentially Moles and Djerkurra can do this as well but not at a high level. This ability to break free with the ball is what sets the better contested midfielders apart and is common to Judd, Ablett, Swan etc. It requires an elite combination of power in the legs and through the core, preferably coupled with good burst speed. Boyd is not super fast but he accelerates pretty well, he is also very strong.

Until we get Cooney back then Boyd has to play this role alone and it exposes his lack of polish on occasion with the ball, his fatigue in bearing the brunt of this work may also effect his ability to execute the skills required. If we task him to a tagging, ie play the player not the ball role, we lose attacking potential from the stoppage and this is why it makes sense that he is playing to instruction.

For the last few seasons our midfield has greatly depended on two things, Cooney to help us spread, and Hudson to help us win first possesion in close or force a second stoppage. It is not surprising that with these two players either absent or below their best this year we have struggled. Minson as a ruck does not bring the ball in tight, he looks to spread it with a tap to position. Our midfield, Boyd included have seemingly struggled to transition their style of play to adapt to the players we have available.

One thing is clear, without Hudson and Cooney in form we cannot expect our midfield to deliver the same stoppage dominance as in previous seasons unless we change up our structures.

[Desipura]

Thats one stat I would like to see, metres run with the ball (a little different to running bounces). With our lack of pace, I would imagine Griffen is the stand out.
We are seriously lacking Cooneys ability to run and carry, not to mention Harbrow.
Its why Wood is highly rated.

[Sedat]

One thing is clear, without Hudson and Cooney in form we cannot expect our midfield to deliver the same stoppage dominance as in previous seasons unless we change up our structures.
Interesting post, SOLB. Huddo's big form drop is a factor probably underrated. We went from bottom 2 clearance team to top 2 as soon as Hudson came to the club and we've stayed at or near the top until this season. Unfortunately Huddo is cooked and we've lost this impetus and drive at the stoppages.

[G-Mo77]

Darcy this morning on the Hot Breakfast (Triple M) said the Dogs should play Hill this week to give him a chance to rebound and show his determination after the 'On the mark' incident last week! Is he serious? Did he not see Josh do the same thing a month ago against Collingwood? The guy has had his second chance already! He is finished

I brought up the same thing in the Round 12 Selection thread. I don't disagree or agree with it.

[bornadog]

BS, we were winning last year and there where plenty saying Boyd is not accountable enough.

I wonder what his role was during those wins? All out attack, or tag your man?

[bornadog]

Thats one stat I would like to see, metres run with the ball (a little different to running bounces). With our lack of pace, I would imagine Griffen is the stand out.
We are seriously lacking Cooneys ability to run and carry, not to mention Harbrow.
Its why Wood is highly rated.

I wouldn't be relying on Wood till he gets 50 plus games under his belt. He still lacks experience to influence a game.

[Desipura]

I wouldn't be relying on Wood till he gets 50 plus games under his belt. He still lacks experience to influence a game.
Im not relying on Wood, I merely stated that is why he is highly rated due to his ability to run and carry.

[LostDoggy]

Interesting post, SOLB. Huddo's big form drop is a factor probably underrated. We went from bottom 2 clearance team to top 2 as soon as Hudson came to the club and we've stayed at or near the top until this season. Unfortunately Huddo is cooked and we've lost this impetus and drive at the stoppages.

It is an alarming diffrence isn't it. The question is do we try and develop our ruck stocks to play in the same way as Hudson, ie defend the tap win the ball on the deck, or do we work to the strengths of the younger ruckmen?

From what I can see all of Minson, Roughead and Cordy will be tap ruckman rather then ground ball winners. That being the case we are going to need to chage the ball winning/defending mix we use in the middle.

[mjp]

I would have thought the bolded was a question most here would love to ask Boyd.

The answer he gave seems to be an interesting one.

Yeah - but (and absolutely no disrespect intended) anyone who would ask this question has not been paying attention.

- Consistent high finishes in the B&F (voted on by the match committee)
- Elevated to leadership group (players + match committee)
- Elevated to captain (players + mc)
- Plays the same role in the midfield every week (mc)

If he was not following team instructions/playing to the plan, then none of the above would be true. If the coach says 'I keep telling him...' but continues to select him in the same role, award him b&f votes etc then his actions are overiding his words..."I cannot hear what you are saying because your actions are ringing loudly in my ears".

[Topdog]

I wonder what his role was during those wins? All out attack, or tag your man?

In all honesty if Eade is deploying Boyd in 100% the role / style of footy that Boyd is playing than he deserves to be sacked for that alone.
Boyd is no where near good enough to play that role and it is an area that we have been smashed in for years.

[LostDoggy]

I like Boyd but needs a role not just let lose to play as an offensive player.

Question: If you were the opposition coach would you tag Boyd?

His efficiency is so low that tagging him would be counter productive.

[bornadog]

In all honesty if Eade is deploying Boyd in 100% the role / style of footy that Boyd is playing than he deserves to be sacked for that alone.
Boyd is no where near good enough to play that role and it is an area that we have been smashed in for years.

What role is that?

[AndrewP6]

Both the Hill footage shown were this year.

I thought he answered all the questions well.

He wasn't happy that Matthew Lloyd commented about him being unaccountable. He basically said he follows the coaches instructions, ie the role they want him to play. He also said if he was unaccountable he would expect the coaches to tell him if he was doing something contrary to their instructions.

Oops! I confess, I was only half-listening.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Yeah - but (and absolutely no disrespect intended) anyone who would ask this question has not been paying attention.

- Consistent high finishes in the B&F (voted on by the match committee)
- Elevated to leadership group (players + match committee)
- Elevated to captain (players + mc)
- Plays the same role in the midfield every week (mc)

If he was not following team instructions/playing to the plan, then none of the above would be true. If the coach says 'I keep telling him...' but continues to select him in the same role, award him b&f votes etc then his actions are overiding his words..."I cannot hear what you are saying because your actions are ringing loudly in my ears".

Yep - definitely agree with you.

Just think that the question itself is not a bad one, even if the answer is one we already know. If the right questions start getting asked, eventually something has to be done.

At least, I hope.

[Greystache]

Yeah - but (and absolutely no disrespect intended) anyone who would ask this question has not been paying attention.

- Consistent high finishes in the B&F (voted on by the match committee)
- Elevated to leadership group (players + match committee)
- Elevated to captain (players + mc)
- Plays the same role in the midfield every week (mc)

If he was not following team instructions/playing to the plan, then none of the above would be true. If the coach says 'I keep telling him...' but continues to select him in the same role, award him b&f votes etc then his actions are overiding his words..."I cannot hear what you are saying because your actions are ringing loudly in my ears".

I believe that's true, I've previously pointed to the very same individual rewards he's been given as proof. Which makes me ask the question, why does Eade and his MC value attack so much more highly than defence? Why are we so happy to let the opposition's best players make such an impact on games just so we can have our own players left to play their own game.

In all of the finals we've played against top 4 teams we've found kicking goals very difficult, so why haven't we tried to turn ourselves into a strong defensive team that can attack when we need to? Surely that style of game would better suit the type of players we have on our list.

I watched a lot of our preseason match simulations and practice matches and couldn't understand why we seemed to only be working on a slightly tweaked version of how we played the past 3 year. We couldn't beat any of the top teams when it mattered when we had all of our experienced players, yet we seemed to think we could with some addition kids added to the mix. That's the reason I was pessimistic about the upcoming season, and the reason why I thought even back in round 1 Eade had run his race at AFL level.

[Jasper]

FWIW I think Boyd handled the question on Hill exceptionally well, and sounded very level headed.

It appears that, as MJP has outlined, the club is rewarding Boyd for the role he plays in B & F voting, selection and captaincy, so the option that Boyd is not doing the right thing in the club's eyes is incorrect. Therefore either:

1 - The club does not have the players to play the attacking role Boyd is being asked to do and for which he is ill suited - which is a failure of the club to build a balanced list
2 - The club does not regard Boyd's turnovers and low defence as costly, and values what he does bring ie ball winning ability - which is hard to imagine

Either way, I am disappointed in the club's use and management of Boyd.

[Topdog]

well put Kelvinator.

[Before I Die]

FWIW I think Boyd handled the question on Hill exceptionally well, and sounded very level headed.

It appears that, as MJP has outlined, the club is rewarding Boyd for the role he plays in B & F voting, selection and captaincy, so the option that Boyd is not doing the right thing in the club's eyes is incorrect. Therefore either:

1 - The club does not have the players to play the attacking role Boyd is being asked to do and for which he is ill suited - which is a failure of the club to build a balanced list
2 - The club does not regard Boyd's turnovers and low defence as costly, and values what he does bring ie ball winning ability - which is hard to imagine

Either way, I am disappointed in the club's use and management of Boyd.

Boyd is currently third in the Marmo and well within range of the leader Murphy. He was also third in the WOOF captain poll last year. Is the view of WOOF that much different to the view of the MC?

[jeemak]

It was disappointing for me when Boyd started talking about the belief within the group when a question was directed to him regarding the current defficiencies we are exhibiting.

Boyd had an opportunity to honestly comment on areas that require immediate improvement, such as:

- Spreading from the contest to provide numerous hand and short kicking options once possession is gained

- Innability to quell opposition momentum by changing the short term tactics the team employs within a short segment of the game/quarter. For instance, a more man on man oriented approach at stoppages or modifying zones to put more pressure on loose receiving players across our half forward line when the opposition controls the ball

- Skills under pressure being improved and an avoidance of high handball ratios when moving the ball out of defense


It's clear to the garden variety half wit that maintaining belief is not going to turn our short, medium and long term fortunes around. The members and general supporters of the club deserve more when its captain is provided an opportunity to openly discuss some of the things the club needs to improve on.

The delivery of his answers to a lot of questions were not confident, but I'm not going to get stuck into a newly appointed captain in respect to that. As long as the overall message has thoughtful content.

His answer on Josh Hill's efforts standing on the mark were accurate, in that not one aspect of the team's performance should be isolated as is often the want of football media these days. I'm prepared to give him kudos for that.

I just think it's time for the club to take a step back from its current stance of not identifying its on-field issues openly.

[jeemak]

You've never heard a representative of opposition clubs state their defensive tactics allowed the opposition use the ball too freely? You've never heard an opposition club admit to not providing enough coverage for its ball using midfielders? You've never heard a coach lambaste its players for not following instructions on a continual basis?

Clubs coming clean on these issues, whether it be through their coach, an assistant coach or its captain will not be giving up any ground on a strategic level. Opposition clubs have resources in place to figure this type of thing out and plan ways to exploit it anyway.

I guess what I'm after is a sign from our club that it acknowledges there are clear defficiencies beyond the belief in the process, the talent, or whatever that is directly hampering our ability to compete.

[comrade]

I guess what I'm after is a sign from our club that it acknowledges there are clear defficiencies beyond the belief in the process, the talent, or whatever that is directly hampering our ability to compete.

Do you think the brains trust know what our deficiencies are and do you think they're formulating plans to fix them?

[bornadog]

You've never heard a representative of opposition clubs state their defensive tactics allowed the opposition use the ball too freely? You've never heard an opposition club admit to not providing enough coverage for its ball using midfielders? You've never heard a coach lambaste its players for not following instructions on a continual basis?

Clubs coming clean on these issues, whether it be through their coach, an assistant coach or its captain will not be giving up any ground on a strategic level. Opposition clubs have resources in place to figure this type of thing out and plan ways to exploit it anyway.

I guess what I'm after is a sign from our club that it acknowledges there are clear defficiencies beyond the belief in the process, the talent, or whatever that is directly hampering our ability to compete.

What I meant was in public. Clubs just give spin in public.

[jeemak]

What I meant was in public. Clubs just give spin in public.

I think it depends on the situation, and the club. Clubs bottoming out tend to be open with the areas they're defficient in, those at the top of the ladder are more guarded about what they release (although, there's most likely to be less major issues beyond injury if they're performing well enough to be a top team).

A great way to curb the scrutiny, ill-informed commentary, same old same old inuendo and poorly conceived and timed questions to staff at press conferences is to provide a relevant and measureable issue or area of improvement to focus on.

Rebuilding clubs have it easy, top of the ladder clubs can blame injury, but clubs like ours that have slipped considerably, albeit having the talent to compete and playing poorly need to provide something with substance. Talking about continual belief structures when all indicators point to "shenanigans" makes us look silly.

[boydogs]

Good thread. This comment stood out to me:


In all of the finals we've played against top 4 teams we've found kicking goals very difficult, so why haven't we tried to turn ourselves into a strong defensive team that can attack when we need to? Surely that style of game would better suit the type of players we have on our list.

If you're struggling to kick goals, why would you focus on defense?

The problem of 2010 was undoubtedly our forward line, with Aker going, Johnno at half rat power, Hahn ordinary etc. In 2011 we traded a few in to help, and hoped that Grant & Jones would step up. However, Veszpremi isn't playing, Grant & Jones aren't getting involved enough and Hall is out. The best we have looked all season was when we had Minson and Gilbee on top up forward and were attacking.

The best form of defense is attack - if the opposition have no weapons to cover then they can run off and rebound in the other direction. We need some winners up forward to keep them honest.


Boyd is currently third in the Marmo and well within range of the leader Murphy. He was also third in the WOOF captain poll last year. Is the view of WOOF that much different to the view of the MC?

I think WOOF is currently focusing in on just one aspect of his game, being the fill-in for Cooney. He does a lot of things well and deserves those rankings.

[jeemak]

Do you think the brains trust know what our deficiencies are and do you think they're formulating plans to fix them?

I think our brains trust understands what's going on, and they have probably all thought the same things that have been mentioned in this thread.

[LongWait]

I think that Boyd was in an incredibly difficult situation which he handled very well. Boyd cannot tell the truth about every on-field, tactical and gameplan issue the club is confronting and he had to be careful not to pour petrol onto the already volatile situation at the club.

I liked Matthews' diplomatic handling of the questions relating to Rocket and Smorgon's tenures. Overall an 8/10 for Boyd. I am not a fan of the decision to appoint Boyd as Captain but he deserves credit for his diplomacy and mental agility in handling a potential hiding with aplomb.

[bornadog]

I am not a fan of the decision to appoint Boyd as Captain but he deserves credit for his diplomacy and mental agility in handling a potential hiding with aplomb.

Who was your choice?

[Topdog]

What I meant was in public. Clubs just give spin in public.

The only one that has recently was Laidley and he was reprimanded rather heavily by Port for doing so. So I agree with bornadog, no club does it in public.

[The Underdog]

I was actually really glad to see him doing something like this. He hasn't done a huge amount of press this year from what I've seen and I think he needs to especially given the situation we find ourselves in.
He was in a bit of a no-win situation and handled himself fairly well.

[LongWait]

Who was your choice?

I didn't have a choice.

I was however concerned about whether Boyd will really set the tone in the defensive aspects of the game which are so important in the modern game and which are a major deficiency of ours. I thought you could make a case for a few players, but don't feel that supporters such as myself see enough of the off-field persona of the cadidates to be certain about the choice.

[LostDoggy]

In hindsight we should have appointed a new captain at the start of 2010 so he would have got at least 1 year with Johnno helping him out.

[Curly5]

In hindsight we should have appointed a new captain at the start of 2010 so he would have got at least 1 year with Johnno helping him out.

Agree with that. Hindsight's a wonderful thing, isn't it? But who knew it would be Johnno's last year? He looked as if he would go on forever. Maybe there should be a limit on how long anyone can be captain for.

[Doc26]

btw Just in case it hasn't been mentioned elsewhere there was mention of an interview this week on The Game Plan with Libba and Wallis. They showed a brief promo of it where Libba was asked to reflect on his father's career to which his response was along the lines, Dad used to come home with blood all over him.

[G-Mo77]

I didn't have a choice.

I was however concerned about whether Boyd will really set the tone in the defensive aspects of the game which are so important in the modern game and which are a major deficiency of ours. I thought you could make a case for a few players, but don't feel that supporters such as myself see enough of the off-field persona of the cadidates to be certain about the choice.

Good response to the typical defensive questioning.

My choice was Morris because on field I don't think we have a more inspirational leader. Off field the players seem to speak highly of him as well.


In hindsight we should have appointed a new captain at the start of 2010 so he would have got at least 1 year with Johnno helping him out.

Agree with that but we'd all like to have a crystal ball. Didn't Chris Grant step aside before he retired?

FWIW I'm happy to have Boyd as captain. I believe he and Cooney were in the mix and don't think Adam is captain material at all.

[bornadog]

Good response to the typical defensive questioning. .

My question was not defensive, I just wanted to know who LW would have picked.

[LostDoggy]

I heard he said that this week against StKilda was a "season defining game". I must say I threw up in my mouth a little when I heard this.
What is it? The fourth one this year????

[LostDoggy]

When we are winning and Boyd gets 30 plus touches but Judd still gets 30 or Ablett 30, we never ever mention that Boyd is unaccountable. When we lose, we all wonder what Boyd was doing.

I cant agree with that statement Bornadog. These threads have many posts calling for both Boyd and Cross to be eased out due to their inability to hurt the opposition with their disposals.

It simply looks worse when we are losing.

[Topdog]

so do we disregard the fact that people were saying it while we were winning?

[Mantis]

so do we disregard the fact that people were saying it while we were winning?

Not at all, but the quality of opposition needs to carry some serious weight.

[jeemak]

The only one that has recently was Laidley and he was reprimanded rather heavily by Port for doing so. So I agree with bornadog, no club does it in public.

I'm not talking about high level tactics, just some frank comments on some of the areas that we are clearly lacking in. The stats that have been shown from our last four to six weeks have been damning, so rather than Boyd engage spin relating to strong belief it would be nice to hear him acknowledge our clear deficiencies and admit they need addressing.

I've seen other club captains do it, as well as coaches and assistant coaches. Anyway, I don't think I need to bang on about it further. The thread has moved on.

[Topdog]

laidley said they were losing because the players are mentally soft. That isn't high level tactics.

the only thing I ever hear is "we aren't ticking to our structures"

[Greystache]

laidley said they were losing because the players are mentally soft. That isn't high level tactics.

the only thing I ever hear is "we aren't ticking to our structures"

St Kilda have held that view for the past few years.

[azabob]

St Kilda have held that view for the past few years.

Past few? I think they have thought that since early 2000's.

[Topdog]

Laidley was of course talking about his own team Port Adelaide.

[Greystache]

Past few? I think they have thought that since early 2000's.

Probably, but I know for a fact that the past 3 years they discuss in the lead up to a game against us that we're a really mentally weak team, and even if they're struggling they just need to try and keep within touch on the scoreboard, because when the game comes to the crunch we'll fold.

I guess our usual missing of easy shots on goal at pressure times further enhanced that belief tonight. :mad:

[bornadog]

I guess our usual missing of easy shots on goal at pressure times further enhanced that belief tonight. :mad:

We can't blame those easy misses at goal for losing. The Saints also missed several easy shots. Schiender missed two gettable shots for example.

[azabob]

We can't blame those easy misses at goal for losing. The Saints also missed several easy shots. Schiender missed two gettable shots for example.

Not sure that is the point Stache was making. Again basic skill levels are letting us down.

[Greystache]

We can't blame those easy misses at goal for losing. The Saints also missed several easy shots. Schiender missed two gettable shots for example.

Not when the game was there to be won. It's all about momentum, we kick those goals the scores are level and we have the momentum, but instead we miss two sitters, St Kilda rebound and kick the pressure goal and the game's over.

We miss those goals everytime, it's not about bad luck, it's not about just not getting it right that time, it's an inability to step up when the moment comes. We did the same thing against Collingwood earlier this year, in the 2009 prelim and qualifying finals, in the 2008 prelim final, it happens time after time and it's just not good enough!

[bornadog]

Not when the game was there to be won. It's all about momentum, we kick those goals the scores are level and we have the momentum, but instead we miss two sitters, St Kilda rebound and kick the pressure goal and the game's over.

Schnieder missed one in the last 30 metres in front, when the pressure was on and another Saint (can't remember who) ran into an open goal and missed. Look I agree ours were more vital shots.


We miss those goals everytime, it's not about bad luck, it's not about just not getting it right that time, it's an inability to step up when the moment comes. We did the same thing against Collingwood earlier this year, in the 2009 prelim and qualifying finals, in the 2008 prelim final, it happens time after time and it's just not good enough!

Can't argue with that, but why why why, how can we turn this around?

[Greystache]

Can't argue with that, but why why why, how can we turn this around?

The man that works that out will be a very wealthy man.

For me it comes down to belief, our players hope to win rather than expect to. They hope their shot goes through rather than believe it will. The players that kick the pressure goals want to be the one with the ball in their hands because they believe they are the best person to do it. Despite our weekly "we have great belief" speech in the media, I don't think there is belief amongst the playing group.

The only way it's likely to change is if we happen to stumble onto a Wayne Carey type player, a bloke with an arrogant swagger who wants to be the player at the centre of attention and will deliver so he's on the front page of the paper the next day. Unfortunately I don't think our leadership style would tolerate a person like that.

[Desipura]

The only way it's likely to change is if we happen to stumble onto a Wayne Carey type player, a bloke with an arrogant swagger who wants to be the player at the centre of attention and will deliver so he's on the front page of the paper the next day. Unfortunately I don't think our leadership style would tolerate a person like that.

Easier said than done getting a Wayne Carey type. Where were our leaders last night? Boydy was the only one that resembled a leader