What went wrong?

[Bloody Hell]

The game was on at 12pm here...and some of us have to work!

What went wrong? The abbreviated version appreciated.

[Rob-bloods]

Simply put, in the third quarter with the game wide open we decided to follow our usual appalling kickout tactics, pass inside instead of playing on and moving the ball upfield, give away stupid goals and there goes the season.

If Leo Barry plays on next year I for one do not want to watch. The most penalised defender in the league needs to be told.

[Swansinger]

How about the simplest answer of all?

"We were beaten , fairly and squarely , by a better team."

[Alison]

I think we ran out of legs in the end. I thought Leo Barry's first half was awesome. You can't win games if you can't kick straight. Missed too many goals! Vespa looked out of his league.

[barry]

You aint going to win a game when you have twice as many behinds as goals.

We needed to apply score board pressure early. Kick 6 straight from the get go, and dogs would have rolled over.

We werent the best team last night, but we still could have snatched a win if things went our way.


Anyway, how about that umpiring? I had a glimpse of what its like to be an Essendon supporter in the 1st half when lots of calls went our way!

[Nico]

I think we ran out of legs in the end. I thought Leo Barry's first half was awesome. You can't win games if you can't kick straight. Missed too many goals! Vespa looked out of his league.

Gee if Vespa was out of his league then what were some of our experienced boys. I thought he played manfully and with any luck could have snagged a couple. Pity on a couple of occasions we didn't have players running to help him.

We were simply outplayed and clearly went in with a host of injured and sore players.

[sharp9]

Actually it was refreshingly simple to see what happened. it was the exact reverse of last week. Last night we could not win contested ball AT ALL in the second half 9well i only watched till ALke kicked his goal) but to that point we had not won a SINGLE clean contested ball, except for Jude's clearance which gave Marty a chance to score. In fact we did not even mark in the forward half...AT ALL. We had one scramled kick forward from the first clearance, one run through the centre which Amon bombed to an unmarked Defender and one free kick to Hall which led to a throw in and our "score." That was the ENTIRE output in the attacking fifty for more than half a quarter of football. Meanwhile they scored 4 goals and 4 points. They won EVERY SINGLE other contested ball. We did not win possession from a single long kick to a contest....unlike last week when we won nearly every one on one or two on two contest. In the first half we at least won a bit of the ball in close and in contests (goodes was looking dnagerous in these type of situations. to the point in the 3rd quarter where i stopped watching he did not have a possession and, in fact, had only been IN one contest (pack mark attempt which led to Marty's point).

So, in summary, they won the contersted ball...EVERY contested ball...for half an hour of football and scored 7 unanswered goals.

That is to say CLEAN contersted ball. In the first half they won more contested ball, but not a great deal of it was clean...hence the close score line.

Simple game, footy. That's why I like it. Win clean ball, move it quickly, you win...us last week, them this week.

[mcs]

yeh couldnt believe it barry with the umpiring. Really thought that it could be our night when some of the calls went our way for once! But yeh we had to apply scoreboard pressure while we were dominating the play. And we didnt, and they made us pay. If we had of been able to get away in the 2nd term like we should of and got say a 3 goal margin going into the break instead of being down by 4 points, I reckon it would of been a far different game.

[hot potato]

Dogs ran faster, checked their men closer, play good instinctive footy and know where the goals are.
When The Smiling Assassin did his Lazarus impersonation, it was game over, he is inspirational.

[RogueSwan]

Either we were tired or lazy. In the second half the Dogs were allowed to much space, whereas in the first half we were able to man up across the field and create contests.

[Chow-Chicker]

In hindsight, we should have done a West Coast this year. We are an aging unit with a prospect of slooooooooooooooowly slipping down the ladder over the next few years. West Coast recognised that they have lost a number of their stars and decided to bottom out so that they can blood youth immediately, and also be in a position to get good draft picks in the last uncompromised draft before GC and West Sydney come into the competition.

What have we achieved this year? We were never going to knock Geelong off who are a killing machine. We are in decline, not on the way up like Hawthorn or Bulldogs. We need a rebuild.

[Matty10]

We really just looked tired in the 2nd half and stopped running / leading.

The Dogs filled the space and our ball carriers couldn't / wouldn't run to clear the congestion - plus our forwards couldn't / wouldn't lead through the congestion and stood still waiting for the ball to be kicked on top of their heads.

Conversely, the Dogs ran and ran (even though their disposal / skill often let them down - it was their repetition of run that got them to the ball and open space more often).

[Dogzbody]

How about the simplest answer of all?

"We were beaten , fairly and squarely , by a better team."

Well said!

The dogs are a very good unit when they play to their abilities...and they lifted, we couldn't match it.

[lwjoyner]

for a starter

Playing Paul Bevan on Murphy is a start. Murphy would and did play him on a break. What were the coaches thinking.

[dimelb]

yeh couldnt believe it barry with the umpiring. Really thought that it could be our night when some of the calls went our way for once! But yeh we had to apply scoreboard pressure while we were dominating the play. And we didnt, and they made us pay. If we had of been able to get away in the 2nd term like we should of and got say a 3 goal margin going into the break instead of being down by 4 points, I reckon it would of been a far different game.

I think the umps tend to give the benefit to the team that's first to the ball. We got it in the first half mostly, when many of us thought we could see a repeat of last week, and the Dogs got the benefit in the second.