Post Match. Pies down to Bombers. All comments, please.

[RudeBoy]

After a few days mulling it over, I'm convinced that Buckley's coaching was in no way responsible for our loss to the Bombers. The simple fact is our playing list lacks depth, and in the absence of De Goey, Elliott, Howe, Greenwood and Mayne, we filled the side with a bunch of kids in Macrae, McCreery, Rantall and Kelly, as well as a 3 game veteran in Murphy. Despite us hitting the front in the last quarter, these kids, especially the midfielders, completely ran out of legs and we were simply overrun towards the end, as we were against the Lions.

Until we get games and some physical strength and conditioning into these kids, we are going to struggle to win many games, regardless of the opposition, and regardless of who our coach is.

[David]

^ That's a great point, Rudeboy. For me, there's not much point in posters demanding that Buckley "play the kids" every week and then turning on him when he does and we lose a relatively close game mostly on account of it. Even with the players we had out through injury, we could have fielded a more experienced team on Sunday and, who knows, might have ended up with a different result if we had done so.

[thesoretoothsayer]

Essendon also have significant injuries.
They are also playing some young, inexperienced players.
They won. We lost.
A couple of weeks ago we played fewer kids against a really inexperienced team (GWS) that had travelled interstate.
They won. We lost.

I'm not claiming those losses are Buckley's fault.
What I am saying is, let's not start excusing every loss with "but we're playing the kids".

[David]

[jatsad]

To say that Buckley's coaching was not to blame is taking a very limited view.
I'm not saying it was solely to blame but taker just these 2 factors into consideration:

1. Madgen on Tippa
2. Strict refusal to man up allowing the bummers to waltz their way out of the backline constantly. Cost us the game against Brisbane if you remember. This has happened all year. Zone defence is dead now thanks to the on the mark rule. But clueless can't see it.
3. His constant favourites playing when offering nothing - Thomas - Brown - Madgen - Hoskin-Elliott - Mayne. None of these would be considered at any other club yet all 5 play in our team. Mayne was out this week injured or he would have played.
4. Too hesitant to take the game on - this must be an instruction otherwise why wouldn't they
5. This hesitancy breeds a lack of confidence in skills therefore could be a reason the kicking was so poor

Just my views.

[K]

...
Your comments about Grundy always focus only on the thing you say he didn't do. The comments are so unfair to him that it would be impossible for a reasonable person to conclude that you are doing anything other than trolling him.

I very rarely make any negative comments about any of our players on this bulletin board. But if all one can say about players is happy clappy stuff, then it all becomes unhinged from reality.


I also agree with Niall that when a player signs a huge contract, he's asking for scrutiny. He has to be judged against the size of his contract.


There's stuff a player like Madgen does from time to time that alarms me. I have not talked about it here... 'Cos what would be the point? We know his talents and his salary are more limited than some other AFL players. He's trying his best.


You pretend that Grundy is perfect in every way. It's so crazy that someone needs to counter it. Your Grundy fantasies motivate you to trash everyone else: oppo ruckmen, teammate mids (Treloar is just the start), teammate ruckmen, the coaches, the umpires. You have to destroy everyone in order to build up Grundy. Madness.

e.g. here's what you said about our second ruck pre-Anzac game.

It is not actually possible to under-rate Darcy Cameron.

If the game's any indication, Cameron is a far superior mark to Grundy.

[Pies2016]

The classic fall out from playing a very young team is to not run the game out.
I don’t think you can have it both ways. You either play kids and accept the team will likely fall away at the end of every qtr and particularly the last qtr.
Or you play those mature age players who continue to disappoint but can at least still cover the ground in the last qtr.
Either way, we are a fair way off it. Although, at least one of those options does have some light at the end of the tunnel.

[Jezza]

To say that Buckley's coaching was not to blame is taking a very limited view.
I'm not saying it was solely to blame but taker just these 2 factors into consideration:

1. Madgen on Tippa
2. Strict refusal to man up allowing the bummers to waltz their way out of the backline constantly. Cost us the game against Brisbane if you remember. This has happened all year. Zone defence is dead now thanks to the on the mark rule. But clueless can't see it.
3. His constant favourites playing when offering nothing - Thomas - Brown - Madgen - Hoskin-Elliott - Mayne. None of these would be considered at any other club yet all 5 play in our team. Mayne was out this week injured or he would have played.
4. Too hesitant to take the game on - this must be an instruction otherwise why wouldn't they
5. This hesitancy breeds a lack of confidence in skills therefore could be a reason the kicking was so poor

Just my views.

Well said.

I'm astonished people are absolving Buckley's coaching from being a cause or factor to the loss.

[Geek]

After a few days mulling it over, I'm convinced that Buckley's coaching was in no way responsible for our loss to the Bombers. The simple fact is our playing list lacks depth, and in the absence of De Goey, Elliott, Howe, Greenwood and Mayne, we filled the side with a bunch of kids in Macrae, McCreery, Rantall and Kelly, as well as a 3 game veteran in Murphy. Despite us hitting the front in the last quarter, these kids, especially the midfielders, completely ran out of legs and we were simply overrun towards the end, as we were against the Lions.

Until we get games and some physical strength and conditioning into these kids, we are going to struggle to win many games, regardless of the opposition, and regardless of who our coach is.

That's fine and dandy but you have to also accept that we lost to a team that was 15th on the ladder and that the only real firepower of note that we were missing was Adams, Howe, Elliott and Degoey. Neither of those players would have improved the truly lamentable kicking that our midfield displayed. Howe wouldn't have improved the kicking much down back, on account of his replacement in Murphy actually going alright with his disposal (what little of it he got).

Essendon were also missing Ridley, Shiel, Hurley, Draper and Caldwell from their best 18 as well as Stewart and Clarke who I dunno but I think they are thereabouts. Pretty sure they'd all get a run in our 22.

They also fielded a young team. 4 or so players with under 10 games of experience I think.

So all things were pretty much equal. But "Buckley's coaching was in no way responsible for our loss"? I admire your loyalty.

As to the Brisbane loss, well it has been well covered I think. If we have been in the similar position as the Bears that week, you would have had no problems in justifying us getting spanked. And most would have agreed with you. I know I would have.

Instead, it was us who crumbled. We couldn't put away a weakened opponent when given the chance. Just like we can't put them away on those rare occasions when we get 4 or 5 goals up these last few years.

That's mindset. That's the coach.

Finally, our least experienced 'kid' playing in that Brisbane game was 21 year old Tyler Brown, followed by John Noble (24yo, 28 games). Cal is only 23 but has 54 games and is no longer a newbie. None of 'the kids' were playing and so we weren't overrun for being too callow.

Sorry for being a downer Rudey

[Abdul The Bull]

To say that Buckley's coaching was not to blame is taking a very limited view.
I'm not saying it was solely to blame but taker just these 2 factors into consideration:

1. Madgen on Tippa
2. Strict refusal to man up allowing the bummers to waltz their way out of the backline constantly. Cost us the game against Brisbane if you remember. This has happened all year. Zone defence is dead now thanks to the on the mark rule. But clueless can't see it.
3. His constant favourites playing when offering nothing - Thomas - Brown - Madgen - Hoskin-Elliott - Mayne. None of these would be considered at any other club yet all 5 play in our team. Mayne was out this week injured or he would have played.
4. Too hesitant to take the game on - this must be an instruction otherwise why wouldn't they
5. This hesitancy breeds a lack of confidence in skills therefore could be a reason the kicking was so poor

Just my views.

Well said.

I'm astonished people are absolving Buckley's coaching from being a cause or factor to the loss.

Agree with you both. Add to that the coach's backflipping on moving Moore back - after he said that his stint as a forward would need to be given time - was puzzling. Why Moore wasn't thrown back forward when the Bomber's biggest defender went down in the second half was also another puzzling (non) decision. There are too many questions over his tenure to suggest that the individuals that make up the team are alone responsible for the win/loss record. No, game plan and in-game positional changes are indeed a significant factor.