AFL Rd 4 2022 Post Game Permutations Carlton vs Gold Coast

[Baggers]

Just a few meandering thoughts.

When our midfield has favourable access/supply (ruck) removed, and when under those circumstances the aggot hits the grass, we (too easily) lose fight, connection and composure. That, combined with our seemingly inherent folding under intense opposition attention and pressure (being hunted) gives us what we're seeing.

Our % is 11th.  Some pundits say % is a very good indicator of where your club is really at.

Although 'next man up' is an important mantra, the abilities of that 'next man' are critical.

Yes, 'doing your job' is a well established reality for success. But there is also how well you do your job and what more you can do. And on this our past sure did revisit us... player X may have done his job, just, but in effect he was still a passenger.

I have absolutely no doubt we have the personnel but a reality is that our injury list is longer than most. Too many authoritative and influential players are missing.

Our midfield yesterday was very un-Voss like. Timid, fumbly and reactive. Opponents will dine on this brittleness. We sure are a WIP, with plenty to work on.

[tonyo]

Just about everything that could go wrong did go wrong -
* lose Crippa, and cop two broken noses
* both Charlie and Harry (who barely missed a shot for the first three weeks) lost their radar on the two big sticks.  Charlie's kicking for goal was abysmal.
* 2 undisciplined 50s gifted them easy goals to start the third Q when we were still in the game
* once the dew came in, we couldn't hold on to the ball
* we need far more run out of the backline - other than Saad, we are statues who get stuck trying to get it past the wings.  Lachie Weller carved us up going the other way.  This is where McGovern has made a difference this year.
* the Suns' mids were far more hungry than our group - many of their clearances came off the back of pack-based wrestles, and we were out-wrestled big time
* it was just one of those days - every flying kick, every strange bounce, seemed to land in the hands of the Suns.  You can put it down to bad luck, but in reality, we were simply out-worked.
* one very frustrating thing, after the umpires were red-hot on incorrect disposal in the first 3 weeks, they seemed to go ultra-soft in this game.  I lost count of the number of times Anderson/Rowell/Miller did not dispose correctly and play on was the call.  It contributed significantly to their clearance numbers.

Most significantly, the passengers in the side got badly found out, and some of the clangers were so bad I could not believe what I was seeing.

Hopefully there are some serious lessons here, but I would like to think we can't collectively be as bad as that again.

[LP]

* one very frustrating thing, after the umpires were red-hot on incorrect disposal in the first 3 weeks, they seemed to go ultra-soft in this game.  I lost count of the number of times Anderson/Rowell/Miller did not dispose correctly and play on was the call.  It contributed significantly to their clearance numbers.

Yep, the impact of the way the AFL directs umpires to interpret or focus on certain rules has a huge impact. In the first few weeks we would have won lots of frees for effective tackles, yesterday it was play on and I don't get why we see such a change. It's like the umpires wound back the clock, maybe that new interpretation has been given the kybosh!

But this is the fundamental problem with those rules, they don't fix anything, they just change the interpretation which will forever remain variable. Scott(AFL) will claim the interpretation of the rule is being "refined" as players and umpires gain more "experience" under the current playing conditions. But it looked to me like it was back to the future. Should we be surprised, Scott(Geelong) has been one of the major critics which I find bizarre, because if he was prepared to change his game plan the rule actually suits Dad's Army just like it suited our own slower midfield! Just shows how fixed in their ways AFL coaches can be.

Another bizarre one was there were several occasions when GC player's basically tossed the ball in the air when tackled and then punched it, that's incorrect disposal and not one of them got pinged for doing it!

I felt we were too focussed on Levi, and I warned pre-match we didn't have a good match up for Chol which was dismissed by many, and along with Witts he's probably ends up amongst the BoG. For me the ideal player to take on Chol would have been Kemp, and Kemp would have also added some extra run. Fogarty for Pitto was a huge mistake, maybe we were hoping or expecting the rain.

[ElwoodBlues1]

Chol is a big unit, Kemp isn't ready for a player his size.
Losing Jones came back to bite us, Young is handy but still learning the game and I saw Chol out muscle him a couple of times.

[LP]

Chol is a big unit, Kemp isn't ready for a player his size.
Losing Jones came back to bite us, Young is handy but still learning the game and I saw Chol out muscle him a couple of times.

Regardless, no use making excuses about what would not have worked after the fact when what we went in with was already deficient.

We might not have had someone to go with Chol body on body, in fact we don't, but we didn't have some capable of matching him on or across the ground either in Gov's absence.

At least Kemp could have run off him and made him more accountable, play the intercept role, but yesterday Chol had so much free range people were calling him Ingham's!

[ElwoodBlues1]

Regardless, no use making excuses about what would not have worked after the fact when what we went in with was already deficient.

We might not have had someone to go with Chol body on body, in fact we don't, but we didn't have some capable of matching him on or across the ground either in Gov's absence.

At least Kemp could have run off him and made him more accountable, play the intercept role, but yesterday Chol had so much free range people were calling him Ingham's!

They had control of the midfield and we needed a more seasoned Key Defender imo and not more running types.
Given Levi isn't really a push and shove player we might have been better switching Weitering and Young.
This was Jones forte being able to play on the bigger KP types and both defend and run off. Young is a decent enough player but needs more games and experience.

[madbluboy]

Clearly McGovern and OMac are miles ahead of Young and Plowman.

Dekoning is not ready to ruck full time, probably 3 years away.

[LP]

I think there are many ways to address this problem, given we had no Gov we should have been cutting off supply or forcing Chol further up the ground, you do not have to defeat a player one on one to curtail their influence. Chol got his three goals, but the chaos he created around the fall of the ball inside F50 probably cost us another 3 or 4.

FWIW, I think we failed to run off Levi as well, and De Koning failed to run off Witts, we had advantages that we failed to make use of. For years as Carlton fans we watch opponents dragging Levi up past the Wing or even to the HBF leaving him ineffective as a KPF, yet we failed to do the very same.

[LP]

Clearly McGovern and OMac are miles ahead of Young and Plowman.

Dekoning is not ready to ruck full time, probably 3 years away.

In the first 3 rounds, if De Koning or Pitto stood their ground and defended the fall of the ball at the centre bounce they were getting pinged for blocking, Witts did it multiple times yesterday as De Koning tried to jump over him, especially more so after Witts started limping, and Witts wasn't penalised once.

I'm not saying it would have made a difference, but it's a contributing reason why De Koning's form has tailed off. The kid has to be confused about what he can and cannot do!

In particular, there might be one or two umpires in the AFL that use handing out that blocking free to cover for a shizen bounce! More experienced rucks will leverage that knowledge, but it shouldn't really be the case.

[LP]

Fisher had a Barry Crocker yesterday, Kennedy and LoB had a few fumbles as well, the all ran hard but when they needed to be clean they panicked and it can be demoralising for those around them. I give them credit for doing the work to get near the footy, often first to the footy, but you can't surrender it like that so often like that and still get a pat on the back.

Selecting Fogarty was just a mistake, I didn't expect anything based I what I saw earlier and he delivered to expectation, so we should not be shocked or upset. We can't have Fisher, Fogarty and Boyd all in one team and play a contested ball winning game style. They just do not have enough pace to gain an advantage on the outside, especially when Walsh also appears to be struggling given an interrupted pre-season.

Some fans are dirty on Martin, and no doubt he doesn't get enough of the footy, but he does deliver a different set of skills when he's competing overhead. However, if we play Pitto and De Koning, allowing SoJ to play forward, then I think Martin is a duplication of the SoJ forward play and as a result is redundant.

I thought given the barrage of football coming into our D50 the core defensive setup was OK. None of them failed but they will always be pretty powerless when continually outnumbered given an opponent gets so many deep and easy entries. My only criticism was that our D50 did not attack enough, perhaps that was more plan to keep De Koning rucking longer and not have to push so deep into D50.

When Cripps got injured, given Kennedy was having an ordinary day and Cerra was quiet, should we have given Setterfield a midfield run? Setterfield's certainly been covering the ground so he must be midfield fit.