The problem with this thread is that posters keep blaming or crediting Worsfold. If we say Worsfold was brilliant last night, then this licences all the knockers to get on here after a loss, and blame Worsfold.
When an underling does a brilliant piece of work, and the boss says ok we’ll go with that, the brilliance still lies with the underlying. The boss gets some credit for not killing off the idea, but the brilliance lies elsewhere.
The point is we never ever know where the brilliant ideas come from and we know with 100% certainty that Worsfold encourages and delegates to all of the coaches in the team to take responsibility for their portfolios. It’s just laziness when media or posters just talk about the head coach.
So, in bringing together all the team to respond to 2 bad weeks, well done Worsfold. That’s his job, and he deserves credit for that. But the idea that every success or fail within the club is connected back to the head coach is a quaint idea that stopped being relevant 30 years ago.
What about grand finals moments after we win a few on the trot?
■■■■■ gonna be ■■■■■.
Had to quote to see which part of the anatomy you chose.
How the fark are we playing finals, seriously?
I think if we weren’t so happy with the win the week after such a bad loss, there may have been a lot more criticism of the umpiring in Blitz this week
By winning enough games??
And to bring up the oft repeated statement, if not for two badly umpired games on ANZAC day and Rampe climbing, we would be challenging for top 4.
It’s pretty funny. Have we got the worst percentage of a finalist ever?
I have already started my stretching excercises just in case they are needed…
“well considering our injuries and off field turbulence its amazing we even made finals…:”
You have to be in it, to win it. Our spot is sewn up. We would have taken that anyday of the week after the Eagles debacle. Do the players now mentally relax believing they have done enough to ensure they have a ticket to the bigdance? That sort of thinking is what the coaching group need to guard against. l don’t believe that will be the case. The other thing we can’t afford to do is let the opposition off to a flying start, like the Pies do. We can’t afford to play catch up footy in finals. That is why it was gratifying to see Hurley back and taking control in Freo’s first foray forward last night. He set the tone early and the rest of the defence gained a lot of confidence for the way he commanded the air.
Interesting contrast provided by Adam Simpson in his pre game interview on radio. He says he doesnt worry too much about the way they wnt to play, he just thinks about finding a way to win each week.
Refresingly different.
I once consulted to the only lab in the Southern Hemisphere (at the time) that could test for etorphine. Their research showed that it is a strong stimulant at low levels in humans. Allegedly samples from a WA Footballers tested positive to low levels. In any case, whatever it was, many who saw that game reckon something was used.
Even if we hadn’t made the finals, there was no way he would have got the sack.
Interesting. Fair enough, happy to be stood corrected.
As a matter of interest, how much was the low levels? Must have barely been a sniff!
I once played Netball against a guy who was on crack. He certainly put the “attack” in goal attack.
I cannot remember, but it was measured down to 1 ppm by LC-MS/MS. Not even sure if back then etorphine was even on a banned list.
Well he has got us playing better interstate. Last year we won 5 in a row interstate after dropping the first one. This year, after 3 poor efforts we have won the last 3. Won 8 of last 11 interstate trips, reckon pre-2013 we would have won 2 out of 11.
The contested possession anomaly is interesting. We did a similar thing against Melbourne in round 3 where we gave up the contested possession and just smashed them on the outside.
Well it felt that way, stats don’t agree.
Pity it wasn’t his move.