Outcoached

Enrico_Misso · Sun 10 Apr 2011 10:40pm

For long periods today Watson went down to full forward and Goddard went with him.

If we were ever going to get back into the game we needed BJ in the play. But Ross refused to rejig the structure whilst I'm sure the Essendon box were very pleased at that matchup.

clarky449 · Sun 10 Apr 2011 10:40pm

Outplayed

degruch · Post: # 1059274Post **degruch** » Sun 10 Apr 2011 10:42pm

clarky449 wrote:Outplayed

Agree. BJ should have been right up to the task, and last week too.

We have the personnel, we have no desire.

Enrico_Misso · Sun 10 Apr 2011 10:44pm

We all know that milestone games can be a factor in team motivation.
They shouldn't, but they often are.
Look at Harve's 350th.
Or Pavlich yesterday.

So what would the margin have been today if it wasn't a milestone game?

FortiusQuoFidelius · Sun 10 Apr 2011 10:46pm

Goddard should have gone deep into the forward line and forced Watson to play a key defensive role. At worst it would have taken Watson our of the play, at best could have given Goddard a few goals.

saint1974 · Sun 10 Apr 2011 10:47pm

Could someone please explain to me why BJ was on Watson and not a tagger, maybe Clint Jones could have just stayed with him all of the game and given BJ permission to have the run of the ground.

degruch · Post: # 1059292Post **degruch** » Sun 10 Apr 2011 10:47pm

Enrico_Misso wrote:We all know that milestone games can be a factor in team motivation.
They shouldn't, but they often are.
Look at Harve's 350th.
Or Pavlich yesterday.

So what would the margin have been today if it wasn't a milestone game?

Sometimes. I remember the team getting up for Stewie Loewe's 300th, but not even so much as a whimper for Burke's. I'm wondering if small milestones are not enough for these guys at the moment...I'm even wondering if careers are enough.

degruch · Post: # 1059294Post **degruch** » Sun 10 Apr 2011 10:48pm

saint1974 wrote:Could someone please explain to me why BJ was on Watson and not a tagger, maybe Clint Jones could have just stayed with him all of the game and given BJ permission to have the run of the ground.

He's belted every tagger we've ever put on him. We have no new surprises.

Teflon · Post: # 1059295Post **Teflon** » Sun 10 Apr 2011 10:49pm

saint1974 wrote:Could someone please explain to me why BJ was on Watson and not a tagger, maybe Clint Jones could have just stayed with him all of the game and given BJ permission to have the run of the ground.

couldnt work that out. It was like we went negative straight up.I reckon Goddard should have gone fwd for longer today.

Saints Angel · Sun 10 Apr 2011 10:50pm

Your spot on there Enrico. Goddard was wasted down back. Need our good players on the ball.

plugger66 · Sun 10 Apr 2011 10:51pm

Teflon wrote:
saint1974 wrote:Could someone please explain to me why BJ was on Watson and not a tagger, maybe Clint Jones could have just stayed with him all of the game and given BJ permission to have the run of the ground.
couldnt work that out. It was like we went negative straight up.I reckon Goddard should have gone fwd for longer today.

Isnt BJ playing on Watson a positive move. A tagger would be negaitive. Yes in hinsight it is negative but if BJ plays well then Essendon have a problem not us.

Saints Angel · Sun 10 Apr 2011 10:52pm

Your spot on there Enrico. Goddard was wasted down back. Need our good players on the ball.

BigMart · Post: # 1059359Post **BigMart** » Sun 10 Apr 2011 11:11pm

Goddard needs to dictate the matchup.........he should have took watson where he would least want to be......in our goalsquare.

Dempster should have played on watson as a hard tag

Why did gwilt end up one on one against ryder 3 times....who dreamed up that match up???

felixleo · Post: # 1059378Post **felixleo** » Sun 10 Apr 2011 11:22pm

BJ is simply not a runwith tagger. He is Mister Versatile but not that. Huge blunder by the Coaching staff. Jones to Watson and BJ head to head with whoever else they wanted to go with.

Red · Post: # 1059382Post **Red** » Sun 10 Apr 2011 11:24pm

I can't believe the complete idiocy I'm reading. As if Watson would have

gone to fullback. Goddard was tring to get onto Watson, not the other way

around.

Munga · Post: # 1059442Post **Munga** » Mon 11 Apr 2011 12:04am

Jimmy Hird has improved the bombers incredibly well very quickly, mainly with the premiership winning Lions and Bombers style of goals from clearances.

joffaboy · Post: # 1059444Post **joffaboy** » Mon 11 Apr 2011 12:06am

Munga wrote:Jimmy Hird has improved the bombers incredibly well very quickly, mainly with the premiership winning Lions and Bombers style of goals from clearances.

Its not Hird, its Bomber Thompson who is doing the coaching. Hird is jsut the pretty face.

Munga · Post: # 1059461Post **Munga** » Mon 11 Apr 2011 12:21am

joffaboy wrote:
Munga wrote:Jimmy Hird has improved the bombers incredibly well very quickly, mainly with the premiership winning Lions and Bombers style of goals from clearances.
Its not Hird, its Bomber Thompson who is doing the coaching. Hird is jsut the pretty face.

Hmm forgot about that, good point

bobmurray · Mon 11 Apr 2011 12:31am

Goddard doesn't appear to be accountable, he wandered too far from Watson
and when he was shifted onto Winderlich he gave him too much latitude as well.The other thing i noticed is when he runs away from his man he points and yells and wants someone else to cover for him ,That would be all right if the someone else didn't already have his own man to mind....

strange game from BJ...he kept the runner busy and ended up on the pine..

i tried to ask the dude next to me what BJ was up to but he was to busy giving it to Dawson..

one of those nights...BJ will lift

Outcoached

Outcoached

Doing it for Roo's 200th

Re: Doing it for Roo's 200th