Ok are we over now for 2004?

[dendol]

Originally posted by Diego
I think we need more than shaubs. We have problems down back.

James was beaten a lot today and rogers looked lost. Bolton is not the solution.

Dont agree. Schaubs is our main defender, and with him back, it at least means our other defenders get the next best player down. So James/Bolton doesnt need to start on a Richo, Gehrig, Neitz. It filters down and just means the matchups start more on an even footing. Our defense doesnt look so undersized with him there and seems to function better with his cool head back there.

Its exactly the same when Mickey O comes back. He takes a better defender and this means good news for Davis and O'Keefe. Today's effort against WCE is not good example though because neither of the two had very good games. Apart from the goal, where was Davis all game?

[Diego]

He was beaten. Yeah sure he will take the best player..but there other areas as well we need to ****en get right.

Plus if he comes back he will be well under done.

[stellation]

Originally posted by dendol
Dont agree. Schaubs is our main defender, and with him back, it at least means our other defenders get the next best player down. So James/Bolton doesnt need to start on a Richo, Gehrig, Neitz. It filters down and just means the matchups start more on an even footing. Our defense doesnt look so undersized with him there and seems to function better with his cool head back there.

Agree totally. It is not just Schauble taking the number one forward from a defensive perspective- it also has a huge effect to our running game... he may not be the guy running the ball out but he really seems to direct the run.

Its exactly the same when Mickey O comes back. He takes a better defender and this means good news for Davis and O'Keefe. Today's effort against WCE is not good example though because neither of the two had very good games. Apart from the goal, where was Davis all game?

Davis really seems to be suffering from a lingering injury. He is in the injured list every week- if we weren't so hit by injuries I wonder if he would have come back so quickly. If he was fully fit he would not be spending so much time in the forward pocket... he also would not have taken that mark just outside 50 and then passed off.

I knew we would lose today when I heard it was Jakovich's last game. We had already had to travel to Subiaco. Then Goodes did his knee. Not as annoyed this week as last week.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by stellation
Davis really seems to be suffering from a lingering injury. He is in the injured list every week- if we weren't so hit by injuries I wonder if he would have come back so quickly. If he was fully fit he would not be spending so much time in the forward pocket... he also would not have taken that mark just outside 50 and then passed off.

If Davis is still injured, and it seems the case, he really should stay out until he is right. Little to gain from playing injured players.

[liz]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
However I still note that we rarely seem to have help when the ball goes inside 50, unlike in our 50, and the opposition midfielders still don't seem to be pressured enough when putting inside 50.

That is essentially what is different about our defence compared to the previous few years. We've been undersized down back for several years, yet the defence has consistently been one of the better ranked in the league. We've lost very few games where we've kicked 14 or 15 goals. Agree that the assistance just isn't happening at the moment.

Schaubs back would make a difference in that regard - he has become very much the general down back - but that can hardly be used as an excuse. No team can afford to rely heavily on any single player, particularly in defence.

[Jeffers1984]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
If Davis is still injured, and it seems the case, he really should stay out until he is right. Little to gain from playing injured players.

Agreed, this was one of Eade's biggest mistakes when he was with us.

[Dave]

Originally posted by robbieando
or an even better idea, wait until Andrew Schauble comes back. You know the guy who did the job well last season and hasn't played yet this season. I can't believe why so many write him off or don't rate him.

You are right there. He did well last year against nearly every forward. Esp Lynch.

[Go Swannies]

Originally posted by Dave
Y
At least not until we get a fullback of Dunkley's ability

We have one - Schauble. But we won't see him until June.

[Captain]

Rogers looked like a fish out of water, he isn't and never will be up to AFL standard.

Even with Schauble back we look short.

[sharp9]

It seems you may be right, Captain. He never worried any of his opponents at all and never came even close to marking the ball (didn't even spoil that I can recall)

[dendol]

Originally posted by Captain
Rogers looked like a fish out of water, he isn't and never will be up to AFL standard.

Harsh. The kid has played two games in the AFL.

Originally posted by Captain
Even with Schauble back we look short.

Especially when we play the Saints and they stick Gehrig, Hamill, Riewoldt, and Koschitske up forward.

[Captain]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Fosdike handballing to Judd who kicks to Cox and goal when the difference is a few points.

That was the turning point where we lost that all important momentum. Fosdike mucks around far too much, it would be fine if he had the skills but he doesn't. Therefore kick it direct.

[Captain]

Originally posted by dendol
Harsh. The kid has played two games in the AFL.



Especially when we play the Saints and they stick Gehrig, Hamill, Riewoldt, and Koschitske up forward.

It is harsh, but still fairly close to the truth.

He just doesn't look like getting to a contest, makes poor decisions and doesn't seem to have a footy brain.

I hope I'm wrong because we sure need his height!

[Mike_B]

Originally posted by Captain
That was the turning point where we lost that all important momentum. Fosdike mucks around far too much, it would be fine if he had the skills but he doesn't. Therefore kick it direct.

Agree there - I remember screaming at the TV "WHY FOSSIE" as soon as Judd took the ball 5m from anyone else. I wondered to myself yesterday if there is a team rule somewhere that says "the ball must not be kicked out of our defensive 50, it must either be handballed our run out". Surely for a guy playing his 100th game he would have the sense to just slam the ball on the boot if he's under pressure inside his own 50 with no options rather than handball???

[sharpie]

How the hell do we have any chance of beating Hawthorn next week? We were beaten for height in the forward line yesterday and the Eagles have no quality tall forwards. Everitt will carve us up, totally outclassing Ball & Doyle (who will have to come back in for Goodes), and guys like Holland will destroy our defenders.

Season over. Give the injured guys a rest, particularly Davo, and just let the others enjoy themselves with no pressure to win games (sound familiar).