Post Match Discussion vs GWS

[45HG 1,539]

Such an interesting game to dissect. 

A lot has (rightfully) been made of GWS's terrible kicking for goal and how they will lament the loss. I'd have to say though, given the general feel of the game and looking at the stats, we'd have been equally as livid if we had've failed to get the job done.

GWS looked handy in patches but mainly on the counter attack. I don't think this is a great strategy and it's one of the areas we fell down in last year and already seem to have rectified. While they turned the ball over in our 50, we are aiming to turn it over much closer to goal. 

Their dinky little goals with no one around them look like effective ball movement but certainly is not a viable, September-minded plan IMO (and I certainly don't claim to have the strategies of the game figured out). Obviously they were also influenced by Cameron being out.

Seeing St Kilda yesterday dominate in the middle and also rely on counter-attack goals yet still get blown away shows the dangers of this style.

It's hard to conclude whether we turned the ball over on their terms and we were lucky to get away with the win as it was played on their terms.

Or if we simply had to adjust the way we used the ball inside 50 and we would've trashed them. 

I suppose the answer may lie somewhere in the middle but I'm on the whole happy with how we seem to be moving the ball, playing pretty tough at stoppages and tackling well.

If Max Gawn stays fit and we can get a functioning half-forwardline, this could be a pretty enjoyable season.

[Binmans PA 25,894]

1 hour ago, 45HG said:

Such an interesting game to dissect. 

A lot has (rightfully) been made of GWS's terrible kicking for goal and how they will lament the loss. I'd have to say though, given the general feel of the game and looking at the stats, we'd have been equally as livid if we had've failed to get the job done.

GWS looked handy in patches but mainly on the counter attack. I don't think this is a great strategy and it's one of the areas we fell down in last year and already seem to have rectified. While they turned the ball over in our 50, we are aiming to turn it over much closer to goal. 

Their dinky little goals with no one around them look like effective ball movement but certainly is not a viable, September-minded plan IMO (and I certainly don't claim to have the strategies of the game figured out). Obviously they were also influenced by Cameron being out.

Seeing St Kilda yesterday dominate in the middle and also rely on counter-attack goals yet still get blown away shows the dangers of this style.

It's hard to conclude whether we turned the ball over on their terms and we were lucky to get away with the win as it was played on their terms.

Or if we simply had to adjust the way we used the ball inside 50 and we would've trashed them. 

I suppose the answer may lie somewhere in the middle but I'm on the whole happy with how we seem to be moving the ball, playing pretty tough at stoppages and tackling well.

If Max Gawn stays fit and we can get a functioning half-forwardline, this could be a pretty enjoyable season.

I agree. Fascinating statistical game that one. We dominated all the stats in the first half and were down, then in the second half we ended up winning, while they ended up closing the statistical gap. Very odd.

[Gorgoroth 12,307]

45, I think they were more counter attacking than normal due to no real forward for them.

[Good Times Grimes 2,396]

Garlett charged by the MRP and can accept a $1000 fine with an early plea. Good result for us.

[45HG 1,539]

7 minutes ago, Gorgoroth said:

45, I think they were more counter attacking than normal due to no real forward for them.

Agreed, but I still don't love the idea. With such a powerful midfield, I think they'd have been better served trying to lock the ball in their forward line. I think they knew they needed to flood back because leaving Hogan one out would be suicide but I think we forced them to play beyond what they'd hoped by controlling the midfield.

[daisycutter 28,458]

1.  FOX SPORTS News Retweeted

   Neroli Meadows ‏@Neroli_M_FOX  25m25 minutes ago

   #MRP: Steele Sidebottom can accept 2 matches. Pavlich, Crouch & Robinson all cleared. Details - #AFLTonight 6:30pmEDT @FOXSportsNews

   3 retweets3 likes

   Reply

    

   Retweet

    

   3

    

    

   Like

    

   3

    

   More
2.  FOX SPORTS News Retweeted

   FOX FOOTY LIVE ‏@FOXFootyLive  27m27 minutes ago

   MRP: Steele Sidebottom can accept two games for rough conduct on Dan Hannebery. Penalty impacted by bad record.

   2 retweets2 likes

   Reply

    

   Retweet

    

   2

    

    

   Like

    

   2

    

   More
3.  FOX SPORTS News Retweeted

   FOX FOOTY LIVE ‏@FOXFootyLive  27m27 minutes ago

   MRP: Matthew Pavlich, Mitch Robinson and Matt Crouch cleared. Jarryn Geary, Jeff Garlett, Tom Lynch can accept $1000 fines.

   2 retweets5 likes

   Reply

    

   Retweet

    

   2

    

    

   Like

    

   5

    

   More

[binman 37,785]

Yes. Great way to finish my weekend. Top job dees

[Dwight Schrute 16,722]

Hearing a lot of people say that if GWS had kicked a lot better they would have been 7 goals up at 3/4 time and put us out of it, but i really think that goes both way, there were multiple patches where we clearly dominated the game, and our disposal was just off and we got burned on the rebound, i feel we are good enough to beat them more often than not.

[DeViney 13]

22 minutes ago, Peter Griffen said:

Hearing a lot of people say that if GWS had kicked a lot better they would have been 7 goals up at 3/4 time and put us out of it, but i really think that goes both way, there were multiple patches where we clearly dominated the game, and our disposal was just off and we got burned on the rebound, i feel we are good enough to beat them more often than not.

Agreed. I re-watched the game today and we missed about as many gettable shots on goal as they did (counting a "gettable shot" as a set shot inside 50m or a shot on the run inside 50m under minimal pressure).

A lot of their misses were due to their poor decision making, rushing snapped shots or good defensive pressure from us.

I would say a bigger difference was us making a handful more difficult shots count, eg. Vanders' dribbler in the last or Kennedy's from deep in the pocket.

[titan_uranus 22,220]

Quick shout out to the 28,505 of us who got down to the ground on Saturday.

North vs Adelaide was a game between two of last year's finalists, one of whom some say is a top 4 contender, at night (i.e. "primetime"), but only drew 25,485.

WB v Fremantle was also a game between two of last year's finalists, both of whom people considered to be top 4 contenders (though to be fair was played in the dead-zone of 1.10pm on Easter Sunday), and drew 27,832.

We also pulled a bigger crowd than in Round 1 last year vs GC (despite last year's game being played in glorious sunshine all afternoon).

I'm quite proud of our effort this week and I hope we see a decent portion of MFC supporters this week to try to deafen the crap coming from the Essendon morons.

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

19 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

Quick shout out to the 28,505 of us who got down to the ground on Saturday.

North vs Adelaide was a game between two of last year's finalists, one of whom some say is a top 4 contender, at night (i.e. "primetime"), but only drew 25,485.

WB v Fremantle was also a game between two of last year's finalists, both of whom people considered to be top 4 contenders (though to be fair was played in the dead-zone of 1.10pm on Easter Sunday), and drew 27,832.

We also pulled a bigger crowd than in Round 1 last year vs GC (despite last year's game being played in glorious sunshine all afternoon).

I'm quite proud of our effort this week and I hope we see a decent portion of MFC supporters this week to try to deafen the crap coming from the Essendon morons.

don't let stuie see this, he reckons the crowd will be 80% Essendon

[Binmans PA 25,894]

3 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

Quick shout out to the 28,505 of us who got down to the ground on Saturday.

North vs Adelaide was a game between two of last year's finalists, one of whom some say is a top 4 contender, at night (i.e. "primetime"), but only drew 25,485.

WB v Fremantle was also a game between two of last year's finalists, both of whom people considered to be top 4 contenders (though to be fair was played in the dead-zone of 1.10pm on Easter Sunday), and drew 27,832.

We also pulled a bigger crowd than in Round 1 last year vs GC (despite last year's game being played in glorious sunshine all afternoon).

I'm quite proud of our effort this week and I hope we see a decent portion of MFC supporters this week to try to deafen the crap coming from the Essendon morons.

And how loud were we? Brilliant stuff! There's a few of them coming out of the woodwork, which I always struggle with, but I hope we see some really big Melbourne crowds this year. We are one of the louder supporter bases given we don't have as many bums on seats as the Collingwood's or Carlton's. 

Just on another note. I just finished watching the replay for the first time and Oscar McDonald had a pretty solid game. Even the moment he got injured was a result of falling down after a really solid spoil. He's come on a lot quicker than I thought he would and that's a credit to him and the coaching staff for backing him in. I reckon he'll be able to cement a spot in the side come Round 1 next year. And I will now eat some humble pie for saying prior to the match that he wasn't ready based on his NAB form and his first game or two last year. Well done, Oscar. And he should have received a few more plaudits on here than he has for his performance.

[Binmans PA 25,894]

3 hours ago, Curry & Beer said:

don't let stuie see this, he reckons the crowd will be 80% Essendon

You watch after the first few rounds though. Those Essendon fans will drop off like they did when Matthew Knights was coach. They had a lot of bandwagoners in the 90s and were never really uninvolved in the finals for 20 years under Sheedy, but since he's gone (and he was past it), their supporter base has been shown to have a bit of a soft underbelly. 

Even when we were down and out, and we've obviously had years in the wilderness, we always stuck around. As soon as things got tough for Essendon under Knights they all nicked off. 

[Hiram Cowfreak 75]

Really good win, somewhat tempered when a guy in front of me started telling everyone a new Dee who played well was one of the Collingwood 11...and it wasn't their cricket team

[Sir Why You Little 34,414]

Pedo played a great last Q

He doesn't get enough credit!!

[Akum 2,660]

Was it a coincidence that our worst periods of the game were when Watts (because of his corkie) & Oliver (because he was being saved for the last quarter) were off the ground?

And in the (all-too-brief) parts of the game when we got our F50 entries right, we smashed them. For the other parts, I'm sure I heard a comment on the replay (just before Kent's goal in the third) that we'd had about 25 F50 entries for a score of a few points (or something of that order).

[RalphiusMaximus 5,993]

34 minutes ago, Akum said:

Was it a coincidence that our worst periods of the game were when Watts (because of his corkie) & Oliver (because he was being saved for the last quarter) were off the ground?

And in the (all-too-brief) parts of the game when we got our F50 entries right, we smashed them. For the other parts, I'm sure I heard a comment on the replay (just before Kent's goal in the third) that we'd had about 25 F50 entries for a score of a few points (or something of that order).

They also got well on top when Gawn was off the ground.  Pedersen and Frost aren't good enough back-up. 

[P-man 13,154]

On 26 March 2016 at 0:25 AM, KingDingAling said:

I thought we had the play most of the day and should've pumped GWS. They looked sub par to me. The fact we won IMO was largely due to GWS being an average side. Sure they could've kicked straight. We just didn't play consistent football today. It wasn't our worst game, but we can do a lot better. GWS are overrated. They aren't much chop.

You're underselling them big time. The Giants have a ridiculous amount of top end talent and it showed. Their ball movement was superior to ours and at times they cut us up with relative ease. As they will do to a lot of other teams. Thank god for Tommy Mac.

What they lacked was the willingness to work hard enough to get the win. They are a fairly lazy side defensively. If they can rectify that, and get their forward line actually working together as a unit, they can certainly play finals this year. 

Stevie J needs a serious talking to by the coaches after that performance. There's no way he could've been instructed to be that selfish.

i do agree that we can play a lot better. The fact we weren't near our best for large portions and still managed to win against (what I consider to be) a quality opponent is a big step forward.

[Nasher 33,047]

9 hours ago, AdamFarr said:

There's a few of them coming out of the woodwork, which I always struggle with...

 

Why do you struggle with it?  I think we should not lose sight of the fact that at the end of the day, football is entertainment, and people have the right to invest as much or as little as they want in it.  I'm like you - I sign up, I watch and support even when we're [censored], and am 100% completely emotionally invested in it, but I don't extend my own investment in to a requirement for others to have the same investment.  It's purely personal choice.

I say if people want to blow in and enjoy the MFC when we're going well, we should welcome them with open arms.  It should not become a competition about who managed to hang on during the grimmest periods, which is what seems to happen at times.  

[Sir Why You Little 34,414]

1 hour ago, Nasher said:

 

Why do you struggle with it?  I think we should not lose sight of the fact that at the end of the day, football is entertainment, and people have the right to invest as much or as little as they want in it.  I'm like you - I sign up, I watch and support even when we're [censored], and am 100% completely emotionally invested in it, but I don't extend my own investment in to a requirement for others to have the same investment.  It's purely personal choice.

I say if people want to blow in and enjoy the MFC when we're going well, we should welcome them with open arms.  It should not become a competition about who managed to hang on during the grimmest periods, which is what seems to happen at times.  

Spot on. Watching the Demons is entertainment & the last decade has been far from that. It's been a slog. 

If 30-40,000 come back this year to enjoy Demon Victories The MCG is big enough. 

Hopefully most of them sign up as members

Wonder how many of the original "Lost 12,000 members" we have got back so far?

[Wrecker45 3,378]

4 hours ago, Nasher said:

 

Why do you struggle with it?  I think we should not lose sight of the fact that at the end of the day, football is entertainment, and people have the right to invest as much or as little as they want in it.  I'm like you - I sign up, I watch and support even when we're [censored], and am 100% completely emotionally invested in it, but I don't extend my own investment in to a requirement for others to have the same investment.  It's purely personal choice.

I say if people want to blow in and enjoy the MFC when we're going well, we should welcome them with open arms.  It should not become a competition about who managed to hang on during the grimmest periods, which is what seems to happen at times.  

Spot on Nasher. I encourage every dee or potential dee supporter to get on board.

The one thing i would add is the die hard supporters who have sat through the last 10 (or even 50) years of heart acge will get that bit more pleasure when we become great again.

[Binmans PA 25,894]

4 hours ago, Nasher said:

 

Why do you struggle with it?  I think we should not lose sight of the fact that at the end of the day, football is entertainment, and people have the right to invest as much or as little as they want in it.  I'm like you - I sign up, I watch and support even when we're [censored], and am 100% completely emotionally invested in it, but I don't extend my own investment in to a requirement for others to have the same investment.  It's purely personal choice.

I say if people want to blow in and enjoy the MFC when we're going well, we should welcome them with open arms.  It should not become a competition about who managed to hang on during the grimmest periods, which is what seems to happen at times.  

I'm surprised by this post. I think it says a lot about a person when they give up on their football team. I'm sure not everyone will agree, but for me it's endemic of someone's life.

I was always brought up by my mother to be a loyal and committed person. If I commit to something, I follow it through. This goes for my career, my relationships and funnily enough my football team. Ah well. Each to their own. I guess if you were never that into footy it makes sense, but if you love the game and turn your back on the team you purport to support, don't come back and experience all the glory.

Anyway, I obviously have no problem with the club taking their money though and I hope one day we can do a Hawthorn and sign up 70,000.

[Nasher 33,047]

16 minutes ago, AdamFarr said:

I think it says a lot about a person when they give up on their football team. 

I agree. It says: "not as emotionally invested".  That is all. It is a huge leap, in my mind, to get from "stops watching footy because it stops being enjoyable" to "gives up on everything in their life".  

Like I said, I'm like you, and wouldn't/couldn't/don't even want to quit.  I love it too much and I can't divorce myself from it.  It's ingrained in my life.  I just get that it's not ingrained in other people's lives, so I don't judge others for tuning out when it gets painful.  It is their right. 

With regards to your line "but if you love the game and turn your back on the team you purport to support, don't come back and experience all the glory.", I doubt there are too many people who have jumped off the bandwagon that this actually applies to.

[Pates 9,536]

18 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

Quick shout out to the 28,505 of us who got down to the ground on Saturday.

North vs Adelaide was a game between two of last year's finalists, one of whom some say is a top 4 contender, at night (i.e. "primetime"), but only drew 25,485.

WB v Fremantle was also a game between two of last year's finalists, both of whom people considered to be top 4 contenders (though to be fair was played in the dead-zone of 1.10pm on Easter Sunday), and drew 27,832.

We also pulled a bigger crowd than in Round 1 last year vs GC (despite last year's game being played in glorious sunshine all afternoon).

I'm quite proud of our effort this week and I hope we see a decent portion of MFC supporters this week to try to deafen the crap coming from the Essendon morons.

I was not expecting the crowd to break 25,000 (hell even getting close to that wasn't in my mind). But off the back of a very positive pre-season, a debuting gun, and just that confidence that this could be an enjoyable year, the faithful really showed up. Well done to everyone that was there, the atmosphere, especially at the final siren, was electric and I was extremely jealous I couldn't be there!

[Binmans PA 25,894]

10 minutes ago, Nasher said:

I agree. It says: "not as emotionally invested".  That is all. It is a huge leap, in my mind, to get from "stops watching footy because it stops being enjoyable" to "gives up on everything in their life".  

Like I said, I'm like you, and wouldn't/couldn't/don't even want to quit.  I love it too much and I can't divorce myself from it.  It's ingrained in my life.  I just get that it's not ingrained in other people's lives, so I don't judge others for tuning out when it gets painful.  It is their right. 

With regards to your line "but if you love the game and turn your back on the team you purport to support, don't come back and experience all the glory.", I doubt there are too many people who have jumped off the bandwagon that this actually applies to.

Yep, fair enough.