Our worst back effort for the year - time for the decision.

[perfectionist]

It's a bit obvious when you lose and have more than 100 kicked against for the first time. However, the problem was organisation more than anything.

Here are a few points:

1. We were leaderless on the backline, no-one seemed to know who was where or what the best match ups were at any time.

2. After our oldest player dropped a sitter for an easy opposition goal and then proceeded to go for the punch at every contest, none of the rest went for marks either, or even the ball on occasions, preferring to watch their opponent. We will never win any final unless we take contested marks on the backline.

3. Because they played one on one, we had no obvious runner from back. We could have sent someone back, but I guess they would have manned him up too.

4. We forgot some basics in tackling - like go low or wait to they stand up.

Most played their worst game for the year. Easily Zac's worst, Max has had two shockers in three weeks, Sam Gilbert played like last year not this year, Sam Fisher continued his below average (for him) year. Jason Blake, Raph and Steven Baker had fair games.

The backline composition (barring injury) will need to be settled this week.

These are the six we should pick: Jason, Zac, Steven, Raph and the two Sams. We can rotate Brendon, Jason Gram and Farren through half back to provide some respite to the others. Max will have to be our fallback rather than our fullback.

[matrix]

lol
im not getting into this deabte

[Trojan]

To be fair to the backline....


We were slaughtered out of the middle in the 2nd and 3rd quarters. When they piled on those goals, they were taking every single clearance. We were second to the ball every time in the middle.

Jobe Watson was getting way too much footy, you can hardly blame the backline for that...

[terry smith rules]

To be fair to the backline....


We were slaughtered out of the middle in the 2nd and 3rd quarters. When they piled on those goals, they were taking every single clearance. We were second to the ball every time in the middle.

Jobe Watson was getting way too much footy, you can hardly blame the backline for that...

correct

[saintlee]

Getting smashed in the midfield was the problem, not the backline

[Thinline]

Getting smashed in the midfield was the problem, not the backline

Absolutely.

[bozza1980]

Getting smashed in the midfield was the problem, not the backline

Absolutely.

100% spot on.

We were massacred, you can't expect to restrict scoring when the ball is continually being pumped into the scoring zone.

Our midfield copped a hiding, they'll pick themselves up, dust themselves off and I'm expecting some carnage over the next two weeks.

[Young Georgie]

Getting smashed in the midfield was the problem, not the backline

Absolutely.

100% spot on.

We were massacred, you can't expect to restrict scoring when the ball is continually being pumped into the scoring zone.

Our midfield copped a hiding, they'll pick themselves up, dust themselves off and I'm expecting some carnage over the next two weeks.

Yes we were smashed in the midfield and the ball came down too quickly particularly in that 2nd qtr but the backline has to take some responsibility for the ballooning scoreline as do the coaches for leaving the situation last as long as it did. Having said that, our midfield did not back up our defenders in the back 50 and were far too loose when they needed to close check and apply pressure.

We were too tall down back for the opposition and need to be able to adapt more quickly if/when required. Everyone flew for the punch. Decision making was often poor. The run out was pressured and stodgy. This tall approach obviously works well against a tall forward line but was badly exposed against a fired up brigade of mids/smalls, not unlike that of Collingwood.

IMO both midfield and backs were not quite up to it yesterday.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

As much as I love Maxie, yesterday was indeed a shocker. He'll want to play very well in the next two weeks (if he plays seniors), to keep his spot. He seems to be trying too hard.

[spert]

It was a team performance issue, to a certain degree and not a group of individuals. It was pretty clear from the body language that after the first few goals, that we thought it was another win coming up and the foot was taken off the accelerator..it was bound to happen at some stage this season, and made worse by the fact that bringing players back after a break doesn't guarantee they will automatically be switched on. Next week will be a different story.

[saintsRrising]

Guys were flat...most likely due to having to training extra at present....and perhaps also for having been up for so long.


Leadership is fine....just need to get the boys to lift their workrate again for the finals.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

8 of our starting 18 just had a week (or in Gilbert's case 2 weeks) off. It's hard to imagine how they'd be "flat" after that, especially after seeing how well the guys who took their places went. I just reckon they underestimated them big-time and weren't prepared to work hard enough, for long enough. Just thought they had to show up, I reckon.

[Moods]

I agree with OWTS. They didn't look flat to me. In fact we came out firing. I have seen us look far flatter than that this year - finally a team is capable of taking advantage of it though. Against the Kangas last time we were terrible in the 1st half.

Many of the players who had below average games, were players who missed last week though. Joey, Lenny, Gilbo, Fisher, BJ, Bakes, all played below their best. Probably chuck roo in there as well - although he always puts in in my opinion.

I think the bombers surprised us with their intensity, and surprised us even more that they kept it going. Perfect wake-up call.

[meher baba]

Maxie didn't play as badly yesterday as Zac. I know Zac has a lot of fans on here, and why not? we all love fairy stories.

But, for me, yesterday confirmed yet again that - when push comes to shove in September - Zac will miss out barring injuries to others. Max's experience is critical IMO: he has vast experience at dealing with pressure which results when we lose control of the midfield and are subjected to wave on wave of rapid attacking movements. Zac looked all at sea in that situation yesterday. He didn't know where to position himself (ie, further back rather than trying to play in front), had no plan B if the ball was kicked over his head to favour his speedier opponent, etc.

Blake was not much better than Zac yesterday, but he has the runs on the board over the past few seasons and I think he is a certainty.

Baker will need to lift, but I assume he will do this.

Raph plays a specific role better than any other player at the club. If the role continues to exist, then Raph will continue to be selected in the backline if his form warrants it (and it surely does ATM).

Dempster is a defensive tagger who needs to play on an opponent who has similarly high aerobic capacity and isn't blindingly quick. He'd be ok on a Didak or a Medhurst, but I'm not convinced that he can do the job on Stevie J (although I'm also far from convinced that Stevie J is currently fit enough to play finals footy).

So Dempster's role depends on whether or not there is a tagging job for him. I keep reading on here that Dempster is a running back, "clearance player from the half back line", etc. but I can't see any signs of this and the game stats don't support the proposition. If the long run he went on yesterday without remembering to bounce the ball is any indication, he doesn't have much experience at this activity!!

I didn't think Farren Ray was all that terrific yesterday either but, like Raph, he plays a particular sort of role in which he has few viable rivals.

[older saint]

Forward pressure except for last quarterwas worst for year also. Badly missed CJ and McQ.
This then combined with being smashed inthe clearances in 2 and 3 left the back line sitting ducks.

Backline form is a result of the quality of the delivery from the opposition, the same way the forward line was ordinary as the delivery from StKilda was poor.

This same backline really didn't need too many changes for the last 19 weeks

[Solar]

I actually thought ray was alright in a backline under seige.

I would take zac over blake as his positioning is better defensively. Blake worries about the man to much when attacking the ball with a spoil is so much more productive. Zac wasn't helped by other saints players jumping up in packs and spoiling when they needed to keep their position and feet.

[Animal Enclosure]

The sky is falling down Henny Penny.

Fair dinkum, I'm glad none of you sooks are on the coaching panel, the players would probably be urged to take September off as we're as good as cooked.

[The Sainter]

We were thrashed at centre bounces with Watson never under any pressure from Dal plus our backline put in their worse performance of the year yet even after all that plus a few poor umpiring decisions we were only beaten by 2 points not 10 goals like some seem to make out on this site by a team who look like just about making the finals and let's not forget it is also their home ground too.
Yes a lot of our players were very ordinary but we still ended up kicking 16 goals and with 2 hard at it players like Jones and Maqualter plus perhaps Macca to come back in place of King who may be too slow now and past it we can only improve.
Also would like another look at Steven in the next 2 games as he seems to have pace and knows what he is doing.

[groupie1]

I reckon if people look closely they'd realise Zac Dawson has done ok but is no superstar. He'll end up being a decent player for us, but if I were to choose between Hudghton on Zac Dawson ON ABILITY ALONE, not considering Max's long term service and his deservedness to be selected, I'd go with Max.
He's a better defender - a better pure stopper.

[plugger66]

I reckon if people look closely they'd realise Zac Dawson has done ok but is no superstar. He'll end up being a decent player for us, but if I were to choose between Hudghton on Zac Dawson ON ABILITY ALONE, not considering Max's long term service and his deservedness to be selected, I'd go with Max.
He's a better defender - a better pure stopper.

That is totally correct but he is a poor decision maker and is a very average disposer of the ball. IMO its a toss up out of those 2 if RL thinks we are to tall down back.

[Moccha]

Guys were flat...most likely due to having to training extra at present....and perhaps also for having been up for so long.

How do you know thet are training extra?

All teams have been up for the same amount of time!

I think you're clutching at straws.

[maz1685]

Ok, I'm not making excuses for loss or blaming anyone or anything like that, I'm just curious if anyone else noticed how many times the ball was punched out of a contest rather than taking the mark. This was frustrating to watch cos everytime the ball spilled to ground you knew Essendon were going to pick it up, a couple of those punches could have easily been marks. Now I know that this is sometimes done in the back (esp by Fisher & Hudgton) but is it just me or was it done more often last night, usually Gilbert will take those marks??

[saint66au]

Ok, I'm not making excuses for loss or blaming anyone or anything like that, I'm just curious if anyone else noticed how many times the ball was punched out of a contest rather than taking the mark. This was frustrating to watch cos everytime the ball spilled to ground you knew Essendon were going to pick it up, a couple of those punches could have easily been marks. Now I know that this is sometimes done in the back (esp by Fisher & Hudgton) but is it just me or was it done more often last night, usually Gilbert will take those marks??

Good point, BJ did it too in the second quarter....punched the ball back into play when he could have taken the mark....straight to an Essendon crumber...goal

We seemed tohave more blokes flying to spoil too..how many goals did Essendon get from crumbing a marking contest cos too many of our blokes were in said contest?

[maz1685]

Ok, I'm not making excuses for loss or blaming anyone or anything like that, I'm just curious if anyone else noticed how many times the ball was punched out of a contest rather than taking the mark. This was frustrating to watch cos everytime the ball spilled to ground you knew Essendon were going to pick it up, a couple of those punches could have easily been marks. Now I know that this is sometimes done in the back (esp by Fisher & Hudgton) but is it just me or was it done more often last night, usually Gilbert will take those marks??

Good point, BJ did it too in the second quarter....punched the ball back into play when he could have taken the mark....straight to an Essendon crumber...goal

We seemed tohave more blokes flying to spoil too..how many goals did Essendon get from crumbing a marking contest cos too many of our blokes were in said contest?

Yeah I noticed that too, so many spoiling no-one left to pick it up. I wonder what was going on there?? Maybe Rossy was just getting them all to spoil to see who could jump highest...lol?? I dunno, seemed strange but I hope it's not a continuing trend.

[jay young]

Essendon were a 10 goal better side only thier injuries kept it to 2 points . could be the start of a decline for us