2022 R2 Review vs Lions

[Bacchusfox]

Geelong were very good, and they had a day out, and played like little leaguers.

Brisbane were not that great and we lost it with poor kicking and mistakes, and pisspoor tactics of not tagging Neale. Reckon we should just play all the young boys and see what we have, as we already know what we have got with Smith, Ham, Stewart, Cutler and Heppell

[Deadly]

Could we at least tag the oppo’s best mids when inside our D50, number of times they get free runs at balls from throw in’s etc. is ridiculously predictable

[handypoint]

@Anabelle

Brisbane were gettable last night, we had them on the ropes.

Even North would have comeback into that game, we fall away badly and this hasn’t been addressed which was identified last year.

Yep but that’s a good thing. Brissy played reasonably well.

We aren’t winning a premiership this year. Well not on form. But to put together the pieces feels good.

Our best players are kids and new draftees. Thats super promising.

[Henry_s_Angry_Pills]

Madness.
Even numbered year = fighting 9th on percentage.
Next year, 8th on percentage.

[StealthBomber]

@BacktoHenryRollins

My boys are now 11&12.
We’re from the country and only get to a couple of games a year and they have never seen a win.

I know. Mine are 9 and 12 and couldn’t care less. Not really sports kids anyway but the oldest one went to the FC loss last year with me, saw me being upset and saying bad words, and decided it wasn’t worth it.

“Why does Essendon always lose, Dad?”

I haven’t seen a win in the flesh since I moved back here 2.5 years ago.

[djfinn]

We were more accountable in defensive 50, at least our starting positions. Problem seemed to be Drapers poor follow up work which allowed too much space between himself and opposition mids and dangerous forwards

[karmabomber]

Cutler and Smith or Guelfi to the pine!

[Scorpio]

Fletcher would have launched himself.

[Scorpio]

@Magic_Touch

Cox-This kid is not a wingman!, way too slow with decision making gave teams defence to much time to get back.

This. Number a times we had the run on, and he got the ball and just stopped.

[Finding_Nino]

We seem to have a real problem with that.

I saw a few times yesterday in Brisbanes forward line with no Essendon players on the goal line when there was a F50 stoppage

[Scorpio]

Shiel is just another player who hasn’t lived up to the hype. We have a team full of them.

We have probably 4 players who would walk into another side, after that it drops away fast.

And if professional footballers can’t kick set shots, they shouldn’t be footballers. The aim of the game is to kick goals.

[Scorpio]

Don’t tell blitz. Tell the development staff at the hanger. They’re the ones who don’t seem to understand.

[Houli_Dooli]

@Scorpio

We have probably 4 players who would walk into another side, after that it drops away fast.

Perkins
Wright - most clubs would take except dees as have Jackson as fwd/ruck
Parish
Merrett
Stringer
Ridley

McGrath maybe as a back pocket.

[Scorpio]

“ yes stringer can but he’s not captain material.”

I think Stringer is exactly captain material. Exactly the type of player we need. Someone who has picked himself up after personal issues and being dropped by his former club, worked hard to get himself back, and can engender excitement when the chips are down.
He is a leader whether he thinks he is or not.

[Scorpio]

Merrett
Parish
Ridley
Stringer

[AD_Don]

@user_name

@Klawdy

Had to work during game time yesterday so I’m watching the replay now. Wtf was Stewart thinking when just trotting after the ball bouncing for goal???

He gets dropped for that alone. He could have got a hand on that 3 meters out from the line.

If Stewart had just run rather than jogged the ball would have hit him on the body before it crossed the line.

[BakerWasAStar]

What to add after all these posts watching the game from the FP, northern end?

As we wasted opportunity after opportunity - and not just set shots - in Q1, there was an inevitability it would prove costly and we would probably fade anyway given the experience in the Brisbane line up and the fact that Stringer would fade.

It was Stringer’s presence that fired us in Q1 - like it did when he returned in Round 3 against the Saints last year - and the whole team lifted around him. No surprise he finished the quarter with equal high 6 contested possessions. He looked every bit the leader that Heppell is not and Heppell was again woeful. His reaction times seem a split second slower and he no longer commits his body to contests like he used to. As @VanDerHaar mentioned to me in Q3, the game seems to have passed Heppell by, like with Smith.

If ever the numbers tell a tale with a game, it was this one; although there is one odd stat:

• We kicked 5.9 from set shots and the Lions kicked 9.1. The 22 point differential is what the Lions won by.
• We dominated contested possessions by by 14 at qtr time, 22 at half time, got to +25 early in Q3 but as Neale started to dominate that dropped to 18 by 3QT. By the end of the game we won contested possession by only 5. So, after quarter time we lost contested possessions by 9, but we lost them by 20 from early in Q3. Over a whole game that would extrapolate to a 40+ loss in contested possession which is what happened against Geelong.
• We dominated clearances 11-2 at QT with 6-0 centre clearances and stoppage clearances 5-2.
  By HT, the numbers were 18-10 overall with 8-6 out of the centre and 10-4 at stoppages.
  By 3QT it was 25-24 overall with 14-10 from the centre and 11-14 at stoppages (Neale factor).
  At FT it was 30-37 overall with 16-13 out of the centre and 14-24 at stoppages.
  So, after QT, we lost clearances by 16 primarily because we were destroyed at stoppages (9-22). I will provide my reasons further below for this.
• Amazingly, the Lions had 11 more turnovers than we did. By itself that should have seen them lose, but it didn’t. I’ll also provide my reasons below.
• After QT, as we all know, we were outscored by 44 points kicking 6.10 to the Lions 14.6. Aside from the turnover stat, the other stats all lead to the numbers on the scoreboard. Extrapolate the last 3 quarters over a full game and that equates to about a 10 goal loss which is what normally happens when we play a Top 4 side.

So, whilst Stringer has the burst energy to play as a power mid we can match it with a Top 4 side. Once he fades into the forward line because he is more forward than mid, we have nothing close to him to put into the midfield.

So, why the rapid losses on clearance, stoppages and the scoreboard after QT?

There is more than one answer and it is an indictment on Rutten’s coaching:

1. At QT, Fagan moved Berry onto Merrett who had 12 possessions in Q1. I would have had him as second best on ground after Stringer. He had 9 more in Q2. After HT he only had 10. Our best ball user was shut down. How unsurprising that Fagan would deploy a tagger but Rutten won’t on a rampant Neale after HT because “we want to play our game”. How arrogant. “Our game” is actually one of a bottom 4 side so I would be looking to change it ASAP, not defend it.
2. The Berry move had a double effect at stoppage clearances where there is more congestion than in the centre. It was Berry’s tackling of Merrett whenever Draper (who I thought was our best player) tapped it down him. You see this in Neale’s snapped goal from a stoppage in Q4. The ball is deep in the Lion’s forward line and Draper taps it beautifully to Merrett who is immediately tackled strongly. The ball pops out and an unmarked Neale simply picks up the ball and snaps an easy goal. If any one stoppage is symptomatic of the game after QT it was that stoppage. Who was the #1 tackler in what was a low tackling game? Berry, of course (with 5).
3. That wasn’t the only negative move Fagan made at QT. The other was instructing his ruckman to play as an extra tall defender on Wright when we would be moving the ball forward in a slow, handball mad, sloppy way. At one point (I think in Q4), McInerney was actually marking Wright whilst Andrews played as the spare defender. Draper did drift forward but was never a chance of drawing the ball given we never had any intention of moving it directly forward by foot. We forever persisted with sideways handball to a teammate invariably under more pressure.
4. Because we used the ball so poorly going forward - and kicked poorly at goal when we did generate a set shot - we couldn’t punish the numerous more turnovers the Lions had. The Lions didn’t so much score from turnovers as score from stoppages after QT with Neale running increasingly rampant. Unfortunately, I can’t find a site that shows the scoring breakdown.

Yes, we are a young side. Yes, we will fade over a game over a seasoned and bigger-bodied side. But, right now, we have a coach who refuses to accept you need balance “playing your own game” versus “neutralising the opposition’s best/most dangerous player”. Fagan was prepared to do so but Rutten was not. In a nutshell that is why we lost. My faith in Rutten being a good coach is all but gone. He refuses to learn as a coach and condemns his side to groundhog day defeats as the opposition’s best mids are free to run rampant, “unchecked”, as we “play our game” to a 10 goal (or equivalent) loss against a Top 4 side.

And the time is rapidly coming, if it hasn’t already arrived, for Heppell and Dev Smith to be told the game has passed them by and dropped, Ham to be permanently dropped and Cutler and Stewart to be dropped as me eventually get some players back. It’s also time to put players in their natural. instinctive positions on the ground e.g. Francis back (to replace Heppell), McGrath back to defence (what was he doing as a HF after HT? Had zero impact on the game) or to play as a run with mid on the likes of Neale. And to play a second ruck/forward (e.g. Phillips) so Wright can stay permanently forward like all full forwards do for the top sides (Hawkins, Franklin, Daniher, Lynch, Brown).

Notice a pattern? Top 4 side coaches do a lot of things that Rutten refuses to do, like play a 3rd tall forward who can genuinely ruck, like deploy a tagger on a rampant opposition mid, etc.

Even as we get players back and become more experienced. we will not be a Top 4 side under Rutten as he refuses to adapt the key attributes of other Top 4 sides that help make them a Top 4 side.

[BomberDay]

I totally agree with your assessment, but haven’t lost faith in Rutten.

[Bully]

@BakerWasAStar

What to add after all these posts watching the game from the FP, northern end?

As we wasted opportunity after opportunity - and not just set shots - in Q1, there was an inevitability it would prove costly and we would probably fade anyway given the experience in the Brisbane line up and the fact that Stringer would fade.

It was Stringer’s presence that fired us in Q1 - like it did when he returned in Round 3 against the Saints last year - and the whole team lifted around him. No surprise he finished the quarter with equal high 6 contested possessions. He looked every bit the leader that Heppell is not and Heppell was again woeful. His reaction times seem a split second slower and he no longer commits his body to contests like he used to. As @VanDerHaar mentioned to me in Q3, the game seems to have passed Heppell by, like with Smith.

If ever the numbers tell a tale with a game, it was this one; although there is one odd stat:

• We kicked 5.9 from set shots and the Lions kicked 9.1. The 22 point differential is what the Lions won by.
• We dominated contested possessions by by 14 at qtr time, 22 at half time, got to +25 early in Q3 but as Neale started to dominate that dropped to 18 by 3QT. By the end of the game we won contested possession by only 5. So, after quarter time we lost contested possessions by 9, but we lost them by 20 from early in Q3. Over a whole game that would extrapolate to a 40+ loss in contested possession which is what happened against Geelong.
• We dominated clearances 11-2 at QT with 6-0 centre clearances and stoppage clearances 5-2.
  By HT, the numbers were 18-10 overall with 8-6 out of the centre and 10-4 at stoppages.
  By 3QT it was 25-24 overall with 14-10 from the centre and 11-14 at stoppages (Neale factor).
  At FT it was 30-37 overall with 16-13 out of the centre and 14-24 at stoppages.
  So, after QT, we lost clearances by 16 primarily because we were destroyed at stoppages (9-22). I will provide my reasons further below for this.
• Amazingly, the Lions had 11 more turnovers than we did. By itself that should have seen them lose, but it didn’t. I’ll also provide my reasons below.
• After QT, as we all know, we were outscored by 44 points kicking 6.10 to the Lions 14.6. Aside from the turnover stat, the other stats all lead to the numbers on the scoreboard. Extrapolate the last 3 quarters over a full game and that equates to about a 10 goal loss which is what normally happens when we play a Top 4 side.

So, whilst Stringer has the burst energy to play as a power mid we can match it with a Top 4 side. Once he fades into the forward line because he is more forward than mid, we have nothing close to him to put into the midfield.

So, why the rapid losses on clearance, stoppages and the scoreboard after QT?

There is more than one answer and it is an indictment on Rutten’s coaching:

1. At QT, Fagan moved Berry onto Merrett who had 12 possessions in Q1. I would have had him as second best on ground after Stringer. He had 9 more in Q2. After HT he only had 10. Our best ball user was shut down. How unsurprising that Fagan would deploy a tagger but Rutten won’t on a rampant Neale after HT because “we want to play our game”. How arrogant. “Our game” is actually one of a bottom 4 side so I would be looking to change it ASAP, not defend it.
2. The Berry move had a double effect at stoppage clearances where there is more congestion than in the centre. It was Berry’s tackling of Merrett whenever Draper (who I thought was our best player) tapped it down him. You see this in Neale’s snapped goal from a stoppage in Q4. The ball is deep in the Lion’s forward line and Draper taps it beautifully to Merrett who is immediately tackled strongly. The ball pops out and an unmarked Neale simply picks up the ball and snaps an easy goal. If any one stoppage is symptomatic of the game after QT it was that stoppage. Who was the #1 tackler in what was a low tackling game? Berry, of course (with 5).
3. That wasn’t the only negative move Fagan made at QT. The other was instructing his ruckman to play as an extra tall defender on Wright when we would be moving the ball forward in a slow, handball mad, sloppy way. At one point (I think in Q4), McInerney was actually marking Wright whilst Andrews played as the spare defender. Draper did drift forward but was never a chance of drawing the ball given we never had any intention of moving it directly forward by foot. We forever persisted with sideways handball to a teammate invariably under more pressure.
4. Because we used the ball so poorly going forward - and kicked poorly at goal when we did generate a set shot - we couldn’t punish the numerous more turnovers the Lions had. The Lions didn’t so much score from turnovers as score from stoppages after QT with Neale running increasingly rampant. Unfortunately, I can’t find a site that shows the scoring breakdown.

Yes, we are a young side. Yes, we will fade over a game over a seasoned and bigger-bodied side. But, right now, we have a coach who refuses to accept you need balance “playing your own game” versus “neutralising the opposition’s best/most dangerous player”. Fagan was prepared to do so but Rutten was not. In a nutshell that is why we lost. My faith in Rutten being a good coach is all but gone. He refuses to learn as a coach and condemns his side to groundhog day defeats as the opposition’s best mids are free to run rampant, “unchecked”, as we “play our game” to a 10 goal (or equivalent) loss against a Top 4 side.

And the time is rapidly coming, if it hasn’t already arrived, for Heppell and Dev Smith to be told the game has passed them by and dropped, Ham to be permanently dropped and Cutler and Stewart to be dropped as me eventually get some players back. It’s also time to put players in their natural. instinctive positions on the ground e.g. Francis back (to replace Heppell), McGrath back to defence (what was he doing as a HF after HT? Had zero impact on the game) or to play as a run with mid on the likes of Neale. And to play a second ruck/forward (e.g. Phillips) so Wright can stay permanently forward like all full forwards do for the top sides (Hawkins, Franklin, Daniher, Lynch, Brown).

Notice a pattern? Top 4 side coaches do a lot of things that Rutten refuses to do, like play a 3rd tall forward who can genuinely ruck, like deploy a tagger on a rampant opposition mid, etc.

Even as we get players back and become more experienced. we will not be a Top 4 side under Rutten as he refuses to adapt the key attributes that other Top 4 sides that help make them a Top 4 side.

Thanks again baker, your analysis is always the best on here and you are spot on, i thought ruttens coaching was pathetic yesterday too. I did start to have concerns with his coaching with his team selection for last year’s final but yesterday’s team selections and statue like performance in the coaches box sent red flags off everywhere for me.

[Scorpio]

Great analysis. I was disappointed in us appointing Rutten as it seemed like we hadn’t gone through a rigorous process to find the best available.

Maybe we did and he’s it, but if we are going to have more of what we got from Worsefold then it’s just a waste of time.

We need a bit of creativity, because that’s what all the good successful coaches of the past twenty years have had.