Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 04/03/2018 in all areas

  1. 9 points
    This thread needs a mercy killing from the mods. Some dingbat will bump it every week to either bemoan or cheer his departure. Talk about self flagellation. He’s gone. Can we not end the obsession now?
  2. 7 points
    I won’t be convinced this team has what it takes to make the 8 and then do some damage until it can mercilessly Hammer a team instead of just creating a 5-8 goal buffer and then doing enough to fall across the line.. I get more nervous when we are 6-8 goals in front. Because I know we’ll take the foot off the pedal.. Better than when we couldn’t get to this stage, but it’s time this team/club grows up.
  3. 6 points
    Interestingly, North have the second youngest list in the competition and second least experienced from a 'games played' point of view. That said, if North go with an unchanged line-up the tale of the tape is quite similar and they're not nearly as youthful as their list demographic suggests. They had a more experienced side than St Kilda on the weekend. They will also have less sub 50 game players than us and more 100 plus game players. Their average age was the same as ours last round and games played is close with them averaging slightly more. Average Attributes North Melbourne Attribute St Kilda 187.0cm Height 188.1cm 87.4kg Weight 88.4kg 25yr 5mth Age 24yr 10mth 96.4 Games 82.9 Total Players By Games North Melbourne Games St Kilda 7 Less than 50 7 6 50 to 99 7 2 100 to 149 4 7 150 or more 4 Average Attributes Brisbane Attribute Melbourne 188.6cm Height 187.6cm 87.9kg Weight 87.6kg 24yr 1mth Age 25yr 5mth 77.1 Games 92.4 Total Players By Games Brisbane Games Melbourne 8 Less than 50 9 7 50 to 99 6 6 100 to 149 3 1 150 or more 4 With that said there will be no excuses if we can't get the job done. It shapes as one of the more important matches we've had since this late 2013 rebuild began. We simply cannot afford to lose this game and I'll have some concerns if we do. Hoodoos aren't easy to break, so a one point win will suffice (even though I think we should be a six goal + better side), but a loss will prove the doubters have had justifiable concerns and it will show me that we're not as advanced as I'd hoped and expected. We have a way to go to be as defensively organised behind the ball as Hawthorn, but I want to see a team that is hard to score against and one that has no mental lapses for 4 quarters. Dees by 27 points.
  4. 5 points
    i was listening to the commentary too at the game (which, by the by, is regularly the best blockbuster this side of queen's birthday and anzac eve) - he was super scathing about the constant staging for free kicks and complaining to the maggots i couldn't believe how much energy the geelong players expended on demanding free kicks / complaining about lack of free kicks geelong irritate the bejesus out of me
  5. 5 points
    Well, given HIS name is actually BRENTON Speed, I guess we are gonna have to cut him a little slack...! LOL
  6. 5 points
    I can’t believe some people are suggesting Melksham be dropped. Like, what? On another day he’d have kicked three goals and was in the top 6 for contested possessions behind Jones, Oliver, Trac, Hogan and Garlett. If you include the end of last season in his form line he’s been of our best players. Amother pearler is Weideman coming in for Pedersen off the back of two goals in what was essentially a training drill against Frankston.
  7. 5 points
    It's well known that "top" teams get better treatment from the umps. The umps, like any spectator, seem to know who is "supposed" to win and conform to the script. So if (eg) last year's grand finalists play last year's cellar dwellers, the cellar dwellers can expect the rough end of the pineapple in the important 50/50s. (They might get some cheap evener-uppers later.) Not the rule, of course, but it is the trend. This applies to individual players too. Champion players get away with more because they're better players so naturally less likely to infringe ... aren't they? The very best attain the legendary status of "good bloke" and can do no wrong at all. I mean a "good bloke" like Hodge wouldn't callously shove a bloke into a goal post, would he? A "good bloke" like Judd wouldn't eye gouge another player. A "good bloke" like Selwood wouldn't spend a career bending the rules to his advantage. A "good bloke" like Ablett wouldn't approach the umpires at quarter time and give them some friendly advice unless he really had their best interests at heart. (Imagine if Clarry tried that.) The umps have a really hard job, made harder by the conflicting direction they receive from above. Classic example: the protected zone. Hard policing of it this year. Red hot! Strictly by the book! For an entire round. By round two, forgotton. Because the chumps at AFL house have realised that the wording is too strict! What is the intent of the law? By the end of round 2, the player with the ball was again being crowded, or the man on the mark harassed, which are the very reasons why the rule was brought in. And these amateurs (literally) have to adjust to this change of direction. Add in deliberate out of bounds, ducking, sideways kicking for goal (moving off the line of the mark) ... they end up umpiring to a set of rules that exist only in someone's head. (This year it's Hocking's.)
  8. 4 points
    Haven't read the whole thread but I see people clamouring for Frost. Is this a case of absence makes the heart grow fonder? Not saying he can't/won't improve but on what I've seen in his career to date he is nothing special, OK 1:1 has speed but also a tendency to run into trouble, no lateral movement/peripheral vision and poor disposal. He is like Hunt but taller so if he comes in for Hunt I guess that would be a like for like but give us more flexibility in matchups but no way he should come in at the expense of someone who would reduce our midfield rotations.
  9. 4 points
    Zero chance Lewis gets dropped
  10. 4 points
  11. 3 points
    Probably need to get over yourself first....
  12. 3 points
    A thought occurred to me about us this year just thinking about 2017. I remember just before we were due to play the tigers last year I was very unconvinced by them. They limped across the line a couple of times and got some serious luck early but things clicked for them. I’m not suggesting that we’re going to do the exact same thing but early form isn’t necessarily an indicator for the entire year. Look at the Swans. 0-6 but managed to storm home. I guess what I’m saying is we didn’t play well over the weekend but we got the 4 points. We played well for 3 quarters last week and were very unlucky (shooting ourselves in the foot) to not win. If we can ride this early form fluctuation and get more wins than losses than our hopes of finals and more will hopefully come to fruition. We just HAVE to beat North this weekend.
  13. 3 points
    LMAO at Guthrie turning it over twice in the last minute to cost Geeloing any chance of winning, loved it, what's he got to say now, Karma
  14. 3 points
    He cheats and it will diminish his footballing legacy after he retires..
  15. 3 points
    A couple of points: To you it's good info, to everyone else it's information from somebody called "Beetle" and we have no way of judging the veracity of it other than your word. It's not personal, but people are entitled to be sceptical. We have seen a *lot* of this type of information before and it varies from correct, to a mangled chinese whisper, to an outright lie. Often the poster could be correctly relaying what they heard but their source got the wrong end of the stick. Secondly, people will be doubtful about this particular item because it just sounds unlikely after the year he had. On top of that, it beggars belief that no other club would be interested. There's no need to get pissy about it when people question your post, it is inevitable and perfectly reasonable for that to happen. Try to understand a little bit where people are coming from.
  16. 2 points
    Start of last season, the AFL put on their web site some videos illustrating how certain frees would be "interpreted". And guess what, one of them was the Selwood-style ducking. New interpretation: no free kick will be paid if the player ducked into or caused high contact. And guess what again, under the "good bloke", "champion of the game" interpretation, the rule has been forgotten and Selwood can again do it freely. The AFL has the memory of a goldfish. And their laws are a mess.
  17. 2 points
    Hawthorn’s style of play relies on good skills and a brilliantly coached system. We rely on pure grunt and effort. If we can get a bit more of the way Hawthorn play then we will be a much better and more well-rounded team.
  18. 2 points
    Not that big on most stats, especially in isolation (watching the game always a better option!) but a few interesting ones in comparison to last week.... We doubled our contested marks from 7 to 14 We had 7 more marks inside 50. Up from 10 to 17 Tackles inside 50 more than doubled from 8 to 17 Intercepts were up a little from 72 to 79 We reduced our turnovers by 1 !!
  19. 2 points
    Well they noticed and played slow motion footage of him lifting his arm and for once in eternity not getting a free kick (probably because the umpires are jack of it). The panel then said things like “you’ve been doing it since you were a junior so it’s not your fault” and “it’s not ducking” during which Selwood looked visibly uncomfortable even with all the excuses being made for him. Selwood then stumbled through a series of unconvincing and unrelated words that barely formed a sentence. I suppose watching himself play for a free kick on national TV would be enough to stun him into gibberish.
  20. 2 points
    Haven't watched much non MFC footy this year so it was the first time I've seen Dermie. [censored] me, is that hairstyle some sort of April Fool's joke? The poor [censored] looks like a billy goat turned upside down. FMD , what a buffoon.
  21. 2 points
    “What are you thinking, Leigh?” ”About the game?” Nah, about how the [censored] pyramids were built...
  22. 2 points
    Truly never stops. Every stoppage one or all of them begging for some bull [censored] free.
  23. 2 points
    How interesting: who told you? Another player! Well that’s interesting because unless it was someone who had an in with the selectors (maybe Jones or Viney) they wouldn’t know. The club tried to trade him and we heard nothing! With a couple of dozen reporters desperate for any football news in the off season, such a story as this would have been sensational. No one would be able to keep it quiet: but we heard nothing! And of course if the club tried to trade him - he would be gone!!! There are maybe a dozen clubs who would (figuratively) lick their lips at the thought of snaring Jesse Any way - thanks for the prank!
  24. 2 points
    Abuse is not allowed, it is the rules. It's like saying "I wish someone punched Selwood in the face because it is what I wanted to do at the time that he tunnelled Salem". It is pathetic leadership from Lewis, who should learn to shut up and stop costing us games. He cost us dearly through suspension last year, and he potentially cost us the game on the weekend for lashing out. Lewis is in the team primarily for his leadership. Some leadership giving away 50m penalty because you're a hot head.
  25. 2 points
This leaderboard is set to Melbourne/GMT+11:00