05-22-2017, 12:34 AM
It cracks me up a bit to read some of the reactions.
To hear the slow play hurt us, when it effectively was shelved after the first quarter for a more run and gun style because Freo negated the short kick by manning up and the disposal efficiency dropped off.
The other thing that really hurt was losing Rowe. Killed our structure. Docherty started playing his role in the aerial contests, meaning we had one less competent rebounder once the ball hit the deck bringing the game back to Freo.
Losing Thomas workrate cannot be underestimated either as he is a cool head under pressure when others tend to go missing i.e. his checkside kick goal in the first quarter.
We are still a young developing output, that relies heavily on older bodies and heads to compete, and the youngsters do well when there is less pressure on them to perform. It was a dirty day, but its no insult to get beaten by a mature side, on their own paddock, whom the umpires gave a bit of an armchair ride from quarter time to three quarter time.
Gibbs, Murphy, Simpson, Docherty and Kreuzer are drawing a lot of criticism, but they were some of our better players. Ed Curnow's workrate was massive.
If we had regained our composure and played that keeping off style a bit more we would have absolutely won. I think our changing structure meant we had to change tact to something less suitable to our teams current skillset and that was ultimately the difference between winning and losing besides 5 marks inside 50 to the umpires.
To hear the slow play hurt us, when it effectively was shelved after the first quarter for a more run and gun style because Freo negated the short kick by manning up and the disposal efficiency dropped off.
The other thing that really hurt was losing Rowe. Killed our structure. Docherty started playing his role in the aerial contests, meaning we had one less competent rebounder once the ball hit the deck bringing the game back to Freo.
Losing Thomas workrate cannot be underestimated either as he is a cool head under pressure when others tend to go missing i.e. his checkside kick goal in the first quarter.
We are still a young developing output, that relies heavily on older bodies and heads to compete, and the youngsters do well when there is less pressure on them to perform. It was a dirty day, but its no insult to get beaten by a mature side, on their own paddock, whom the umpires gave a bit of an armchair ride from quarter time to three quarter time.
Gibbs, Murphy, Simpson, Docherty and Kreuzer are drawing a lot of criticism, but they were some of our better players. Ed Curnow's workrate was massive.
If we had regained our composure and played that keeping off style a bit more we would have absolutely won. I think our changing structure meant we had to change tact to something less suitable to our teams current skillset and that was ultimately the difference between winning and losing besides 5 marks inside 50 to the umpires.
"everything you know is wrong"
Paul Hewson
Paul Hewson