If you want to point a finger, point it at Nick Davis....

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • NMWBloods
    Taking Refuge!!
    • Jan 2003
    • 15819

    #46
    Originally posted by JudesaGun
    Excuses, excuses..

    And I agree MOL didn't have a great game, but what does that have to do with Nick Davis' performance? Or is that what you need to resort to now in his defence: "Oh, yeah, but, what about...."
    Of course it's relevant when you are trying to say who is 'responsible' for hte loss.
    Captain Logic is not steering this tugboat.

    "[T]here are things that matter more and he's reading and thinking about them: heaven, reincarnation. Life and death are the only things that are truly a matter of life and death. Not football."

    Comment

    • JF_Bay22_SCG
      expat Sydneysider
      • Jan 2003
      • 3978

      #47
      Originally posted by #73
      The problem was not Davis or Hall or any of our key forwards. The problem was our delivery into the forward 50. Hall presented well but bottom line is we just didn't get it in there cleanly or with any consistency. Davo is an opportunist goal scorer. You can't expect him to bag goals if he's not getting opportunity.
      The reason why our forwards got such little service is NOT rocket science fellas. When you persist is playing a game where players spend ages chipping it around in the the defensive 50, you don't have to be Blind Freddy to realise that al this forces our opponents to do is all start flooding back to block the short option up forward. Had we been more direct and genuinely attacking coming out of defence (that means KICKING & leading like other teams do ) then we would get more goals from
      -leading forwards
      -forwards in space
      -an open forward line
      -midfielders coming forward
      -goals from open play

      Goodes on HB was a great mood from Roos. He did give us tremendous drive. But he really was the only one. It @@@@ted me to tears seeing us attempt to string 15 often-crazy handballs to each other in the defensive 50 only to have the ball further away from goal than when we started. Brisbane were woeful themselves. Often we'd stuff things up only for them to panic and sent it straight back to us. Yeah, they still got away with it. They were complete rubbish for all but ten minutes during the last quarter!

      I know we were down on players defensively. I know Roos thought that the way to counter this was to slow the game down and make it as low-scoring as possible so that individual efforts would be enough for us to win the match. Bolton was near BOG on Brown until we got hammered with those 3 quick last quarter goals.

      My attitude was that Brisbane were that bad that we didn't need to adopt the chip chip approach ALL THe TIME. The willy nilly handballing is a mental application thing. But if you have enough numbers around the ball, you can still get away with fumbling it a bit (as we did in the 2005 final against Geelong & 2006 GF during the 2nd half). But when you are so slovenly, you can maybe understand why the forwards are so stale and flat-footed at times.

      JF (still ropable after Saturday night! )
      "Never ever ever state that Sydney is gone.They are like cockroaches in the aftermath of a nuclear war"
      (Forum poster 'Change', Big Footy 04Apr09)

      Comment

      • Nico
        Veterans List
        • Jan 2003
        • 11348

        #48
        Roos is saving Davis for the finals. Playing him on the ball is a ruse so he falls off the radar. When the time is right in a final he will switch him back to the forward line with devastating effect.
        http://www.nostalgiamusic.co.uk/secu...res/srh806.jpg

        Comment

        • ernie koala
          Senior Player
          • May 2007
          • 3251

          #49
          Originally posted by general mac
          Anyone with a name like "Judes a Gun" ....

          Well I don't think they really need to have their footballing opinion taken that seriously.

          Jude is not a gun
          Neither is 'General mac'...or 'Ernie koala' for that matter, or any of the other mostly dudious names on here
          Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect... MT

          Comment

          • liz
            Veteran
            Site Admin
            • Jan 2003
            • 16793

            #50
            I reckon those who consistently defend Davis to the hilt would have greater credibility if they occasionally acknowledged a sub-par game. I don't think he exerted much influence at all on Saturday in a game when we needed someone to stand up and make just a modicum of difference. And in contrast to the previous week when he managed to keep Fisher's influence to a minimum, he didn't do the same on Adcock this week.

            That doesn't mean the finger should be pointed at him alone. There was a disappointing large group of seasoned players who had very little impact on the game - with O'Loughlin, McVeigh, Buchanan, Everitt, Jolly and Ablett right up there with Davis. O'Keefe probably belongs on the list too but he at least scored one very important goal when it was sorely needed.

            Comment

            • NMWBloods
              Taking Refuge!!
              • Jan 2003
              • 15819

              #51
              Davis often plays sub-par games. I also think too much is expected of him. He has great skills, but he's not a star as he is does not get involved in the game frequently enough. However he does play well enough on average to secure his place in the side and he is capable of doing something special in big games.

              The defence of Davis in this thread is specifically in relation to the point that "he lost the game".
              Captain Logic is not steering this tugboat.

              "[T]here are things that matter more and he's reading and thinking about them: heaven, reincarnation. Life and death are the only things that are truly a matter of life and death. Not football."

              Comment

              • AnnieH
                RWOs Black Sheep
                • Aug 2006
                • 11332

                #52
                Originally posted by JF_Bay22_SCG
                The reason why our forwards got such little service is NOT rocket science fellas. When you persist is playing a game where players spend ages chipping it around in the the defensive 50, you don't have to be Blind Freddy to realise that al this forces our opponents to do is all start flooding back to block the short option up forward. Had we been more direct and genuinely attacking coming out of defence (that means KICKING & leading like other teams do ) then we would get more goals from
                -leading forwards
                -forwards in space
                -an open forward line
                -midfielders coming forward
                -goals from open play

                snip...JF (still ropable after Saturday night! )
                B.I.N.G.O.
                Playing kick-to-kick in the defensive 50 costs us big time.
                Wild speculation, unsubstantiated rumours, silly jokes and opposition delight in another's failures is what makes an internet forum fun.
                Blessed are the cracked for they are the ones who let in the light.

                Comment

                • sprite
                  Regular in the Side
                  • Jan 2003
                  • 813

                  #53
                  I don't think Nicks' performance cost us the game.

                  It was a combination of factors.

                  Poor conversion of shots on goal - maybe BH needs his eyes checked again

                  A couple of players down on their previous performances

                  Missed opportunity by ruckmen to dominate their opponent - BL began to rove to our rucks, Jolly sometimes uses the big punch away from the centre to break this up. Something that didn't happen this week

                  The Lions game plan that forced us to play wide and let them get numbers back to block the forward line - how many times did we kick into a forwardline to a two or three on one contest?

                  So rather than accussing or scapegoating our players (I'm guilty of that too), give some credit to the opposition for outplaying us.
                  sprite

                  Comment

                  • hammo
                    Veterans List
                    • Jul 2003
                    • 5554

                    #54
                    Originally posted by sprite
                    So rather than accussing or scapegoating our players (I'm guilty of that too), give some credit to the opposition for outplaying us.
                    Leigh Matthews:
                    "We didn?t play that well but I thought the effort and the persistence were good."
                    "As everyone knows our style of football is defensive and unattractive, and as such I have completely forgotten how to mark or kick over the years" - Brett Kirk

                    Comment

                    • NMWBloods
                      Taking Refuge!!
                      • Jan 2003
                      • 15819

                      #55
                      8 goals in good conditions is pathetic and that's why we lost.

                      Another factor too is the inability of Swans players to keep their feet at critical times - Black beating Kirk and Copeland beating Richards, when both Swans players went to ground, in the last quarter spring to mind and on both occasions Brisbane scored goals.
                      Last edited by NMWBloods; 21 August 2007, 11:35 AM.
                      Captain Logic is not steering this tugboat.

                      "[T]here are things that matter more and he's reading and thinking about them: heaven, reincarnation. Life and death are the only things that are truly a matter of life and death. Not football."

                      Comment

                      Working...