2018 Rd 2: Post Game Prattle: Carlton vs Gold Coast

[LP]

May scares our blokes too, only player I saw mix it with May was Simpson who bounced of him like he was a mattress.....

Apparently if Casboult had played on May, and we'd brought the out of form McKay into ruck, we would have won! :o

[ElwoodBlues1]

Apparently if Casboult had played on May, and we'd brought the out of form McKay into ruck, we would have won! :o

Bringing the out of form undersized Poulsen in sure worked a treat....

[LP]

Bringing the out of form undersized Poulsen in sure worked a treat....

Both ideas are absurd, one of them our MC actually tried yesterday, the other one they've been trying for almost a decade!

When will they learn!

We must have injuries EB1, physical or mental, I cannot believe we seriously made that call for any other reason!

[ElwoodBlues1]

Both ideas are absurd, one of them our MC actually tried yesterday, the other one they've been trying for almost a decade!

When will they learn!

We must have injuries EB1, physical or mental, I cannot believe we seriously made that call for any other reason!

LP..Think they may have thought we might be able to run GC off their feet with our new game plan, Poulsen has worked as tagger
in the NB's and maybe they thought he could lock down on one of the GC quicker mids or small forwards...looks like we were prepared to concede in the ruck and maybe hope Casboult might take a few marks around the ground and get involved in general play a bit more than Witts. Witts surprised with his endurance and had only Day as support so he rucked most of the day....

[BlueAvenger]

I think another problem with the evolution of our game plan from defence to attack is that it leaves the backs exposed more.

Example being we always had a loose man like Doc, Weits or Marchbank intercepting opposition forward thrusts unchecked, thus inflating their marks and disposal count.

Fast forward to 2018 and we are no longer playing the loose man and have lost our General in Doc. Not playing a zone and going man on man when we start to get beaten, and continuing to select players that are simply not up to it. Not going to single out any ne player as there is 22 of them out there.

I honestly believe demoting Weitering would be detrimental to his development and think he should be played as a loose man chopping off and helping whoever needs it most. Reads the play well and is a neat kick when he's got time and space. Lynch should have been double teamed from the get go but hey what would we know right?

Rowe needs to come back and play on the Gorillas and Marchbank could play on a wing. Jones on the second best defender and I would give Macreadie another crack, not as a close checking defender either as I rate his sidestep and willingness to take the game on and he has neat skills. Can play tall or small.

Looking forward to Williamsons return and the inclusions of Lang, Kennedy and I would give Kerr a crack as a FF. The more competition for spots the better as for too long games have been gifted to potato sacks disguised as Carlton footballers.

[flyboy77]

Thanks for making this point.  Twenty of the team that beat us yesterday are battle hardened players where we are relying on twenty to fourth gamers backed up by a bunch of retreads who were given the flick essentially.

Some of them might come good, others won't.

@LP did you watch Gowers today he was pretty ordinary and missed a couple of set shots in Levi fashion.

Twenty of the team that beat us yesterday are battle hardened players where we are relying on twenty to fourth gamers backed up by a bunch of retreads who were given the flick essentially.

Yet Holman, Lyons, Witts are all retreads, so called....surely that alone destroys the argument entirely.

Bolded below - are or will be, post injury, regular 22 players.

Casboult, Levi
Jones, Liam - would get a game in most AFL teams
Phillips, Andrew
Shaw, Matt ®
Mullett, Aaron
O'Shea, Cameron
Lamb, Jed
Kerridge, Sam
Docherty, Sam
Graham, Nicholas
Plowman, Lachlan
Byrne, Ciaran
Cripps, Patrick
Lang, Darcy

Of the others, Kerridge is good enough but Bolts would prefr Dow to wander around lost out there getting 7 (bad) possessions.

Lamb, O'Shea, Mullet - can play a role well enough. Mullet was better than Murphy on the weekend.

Byrne - who knows, he always gets injured but in O'Shea we have a ready made and arguably better player.

[kruddler]

a)  No.  It was a poor performance.  Our forwardline was terrible.  No space.  No one creating space.  No one leading towards the ball carrier.  Best at this were Curnow, Thomas and Lamb.  Weitering was lost and just got in the way.   Not a forward, however with Marchbank and Jones we don't really need 3 talls.    Struggled for a match up, however for his development I would prefer to play him in the seniors. 

b)  None have really bothered me.    I would have liked to see McKay play much for the same reasons as Weittering.    I don't think he is ready, but the more games he and Curnow play in the same forwardline the better.  Silvagni I love but I not sure what role he plays in the modern game.  Not tall enough/Not quick enough.  Hard to find a similar type in any of the successful sides.

c)  List wise yes.  I like the influx of youth, but it was alway going to bring pain.  We (Carlton Supporters) piss and moan about Gibbs and Murphy, but they are class players and you can't expect the kids to step up and replace a Gibbs.    He will dominate at the Crows with Crouch (x2) and Sloane.    He will make dills like Spanner look silly.  Yeah we are better off without Gibbs and Murphy ;(

re a), been saying the same for weeks, nobody agreed with me (well maybe 1) and now every man and his dog is saying the same.

but....b) you say the selections don't bother you.
So there is no spot for Weitering, which you admit. He is not required, but you have no issue with him being picked every week? For his 'development' it is best? What is more important, his development or the teams?  Playing him is not helping us win. Picking a better suited team will give us a better chance at winning.
Sure, its not win at all costs, but we don't need to try and lose the matches do we?

c) i've got no problem with playing the kids. I've got no problem with much maligned players Gibbs and Murphy playing. I've got no problem with trading out Gibbs and Murphy types for an increased level of talent coming in. I have a problem with a very lobsided list balance. I have a problem with a coach who cannot pick a side on any given day that resembles something that can stop the opposition.
Sure, pick kids. Sure pick talent.
But if your 22 best and talented kids are all key backs, you cannot pick that side, obviously. I'm not sure Bolton and co are following that kind of guidelines.

[kruddler]

LP..Think they may have thought we might be able to run GC off their feet with our new game plan, Poulsen has worked as tagger
in the NB's and maybe they thought he could lock down on one of the GC quicker mids or small forwards...looks like we were prepared to concede in the ruck and maybe hope Casboult might take a few marks around the ground and get involved in general play a bit more than Witts. Witts surprised with his endurance and had only Day as support so he rucked most of the day....

re Kreuzer for Polsen....
I have no doubt they tried to run GC around by playing a smaller side. Basically conceding the ruck.
Not a terrible strategy if you plan to do that from day 1.

However, when you have already brought in an abundance of tall timber to play down back (despite having no matchups) that doesn't agree with the match day strategy. Specifically playing Weitering, allowed them to run around and off us. Playing Casboult in the ruck for the majority of the game helped them too.
If we really wanted to run them around we should've played Curnowfides in the ruck. Due to the ruck rules, he doesn't have to jump into Witts, nor worry about others jumping into him. So all he has to do is be there at centre bounces, and run off him the rest of the game. Leaving Casboult to be the anchor at home.

The club tried to half ar$* 2 opposing strategies at once which meant we were really doing neither.

[flyboy77]

We need to forget the draft pick.

If yuo're not in form and there's a worthy replacement - down you go, up they come.

This should apply to Weiters, Paddy Dow, Polson, Byrne....

Weiters - must go to the 2s. And the psych.

Dow - is he really learning anything being a witches hat in the 1s. gets a handful of useless possessions. Let him get leather poisoning n the 2s first. Too much pressure on the kid. And it shows. Play Kerridge until Dow earns a spot.

Polson - simply should not have been picked. And get rid of the mo kid, that's dumb!

Byrne - Willo the obvious replacement....but a few weeks and game time off.

Lamb - low numbers, needs to convert everythig that comes his way. Lucky Pickett ko'd and Garlett finding his feet. Lang in for Lamb?

Those first three mean we have been playing with 19 players essentially. N ot going to win a local chook raffle doing that...

[shawny]

I have said this time and time again - Matty Kruezer is our most important player by the mile, we have no structure and our groups confidence falls to bits when his out. We were shot from the first bounce against a team that considering our development, we should win at least 8 out of every 10 times we play them. Cripps aside we are small light and weak where the ball is won without MK in there and to replace a player like that with a small light kid is amateur hour and showed our selectors to be fools this week

While i know we should never have such a reliance on one player until we get at least 2 more decent sized midfielders it wont change.

We wont beat any AFL team without him playing this year.