Post Match Discussion - Round 14

[Gunna’s 1,799]

5 minutes ago, timbo said:

Now very seriously thinking about ratetheumpire starting with last nights culprits

If you start a ‘go fund me’ I’ll donate. 

These pricks need to be made accountable.

[Ethan Tremblay 28,343]

The umpires ruined what could have been a really good second half of football. 54 frees in a game of football is unacceptable. That said, once again we didn’t capitalise on our inside 50’s, which is where we lost the game. 

Edited June 23, 2018 by Ethan Tremblay

[rolling fog 1,146]

Goodwin is up next on SEN crunch time

[DeleteUser 638]

5 minutes ago, the rolling fog said:

Goodwin is up next on SEN crunch time

Talking points

game of margins

brand

effort

culture

not talking points

"The state of umpiring in this game is [censored] and ruining this once great game"

[deanox 8,560]

1 hour ago, Grand New Flag said:

...

What I saw which did not come out on tv was Ports defensive tactic.  Many here are complaining about continuous long bombs into our forward 50, however the case is that Port defended excellently and quickly ran in numbers into our forward 50 once we had possession. Our f50 was always super crowded with Port players. Sometimes all 18 of them. They made it almost impossible to short pass. A long bomb to the top of the square was the best percentage play. 

...

 

45 minutes ago, Gunna’s said:

Is there a reason why we cannot take a contested mark in our f50? 

We bomb it in long but only on a few rare occasions does TMac hold the mark (which is usually juggled). Hogan doesn’t compete, don’t see TSmith fly, weideman and pedo are at Casey.

Many other posters have stated the above, but why are coach content with this being the game plan?

One of our "secrets" this year has been our focus on shots from within 30m which has resulted in high accuracy. As supporters we often get nervous when we "give off" to someone in a better position due to the risk of fumble but the increase conversion % has been worthwhile. 

I think Port targeted this. They knew that from any possession from 45-70 m out we would look to pass off instead of take a shot, so they defended deeper instead of pressuring the ball carrier. 

We didn't adjust: with a crowded deep forward line we needed to look for long range scoring opportunities. That isn't a strength of ours from set shots but on the run Trac, Hannan, Oliver, Jones, Melksham are all more than capable to hit from 50.

This is a really good lesson. When we talk about having a plan B, we can't have a complete different structure, but we can have tactic variations.  Shots from longer when they defend deep, or sharking the opposition ruck when Gawn is nullified, are two tactic shifts we could have used in the last two weeks. 

Hopefully we've recognised this and add to our repetoir.

[Demon Dynasty 15,356]

1 hour ago, Grand New Flag said:

I was at the game sitting at height. What I saw which did not come out on tv was Ports defensive tactic.  Many here are complaining about continuous long bombs into our forward 50, however the case is that Port defended excellently and quickly ran in numbers into our forward 50 once we had possession. Our f50 was always super crowded with Port players. Sometimes all 18 of them. They made it almost impossible to short pass. A long bomb to the top of the square was the best percentage play. 

Regardless we played better and deserved to win. Our biggest disappointment was not putting the game to bed in the 3rd when we had them on toast.  The crowd got very involved and the umpires were certainly influenced by the crowd. It is rare that umpires influence the outcome of a game, but on this day we were murdered by the maggots.  Port were continuously awarded soft free kicks in front of goal, where at the other end our players were blocked, pushed in the back, and illegally held without one free kick (from memory). The 50 meter penalty awarded to win the game for Port was disgraceful.

Nice work GNF.

Port were able to get so many numbers back so often as our transition off HB is way too slow now with Lever AND Hunt out.

Joel sluggish and nowhere near AFL pace ATM.

Add Vince & Lewis (pedestrian slow) in the same side and Port's defensive line coach must have been licking his chops in the review sessions.

Vince's last 3 weeks have seen his form drop even further.  His last decent game was against the Crows (where pretty much everyone dominated) and even his previous game against the Blues, where we also dominated for much of the game, was super ordinary.

Along with other key outs/ins and tweaking of the mid field, Hunt and Frost need to come in for Vince & Smith or this season may well be over in a flash!

Edited June 23, 2018 by Rusty Nails

[KysaiahMessiah 725]

37 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

I don't think we missed him that much last night.  It would have been preferable to have him, no doubt about that, but our defense actually played pretty well.  Oscar, Jetta and Hibberd did a mountain of work, while Lewis provided the leadership and cool head in most situations as well.

The problem was us not converting our chances and Port converting theirs.  That's not down to our backline.

Lever plays we win.  We didn't miss Lever?  Wow. As I said earlier, 39 inside 50's only.   But 62 % efficiency inside 50 is way above the AFL average. 

[wizardinoz 2,015]

Goodwin just admits on SEN that we were a bit short on the back line last night. WELL HELLO. Who would have thought?

[rolling fog 1,146]

17 minutes ago, the rolling fog said:

Goodwin is up next on SEN crunch time

"Something would have to go horribly wrong for TMac to move to the backline"

[DemonLad5 1,637]

There’s zero chance Tom McDonald will be moved back so can we please stop suggesting it

[Deemania since 56 6,131]

3 hours ago, Clint Bizkit said:

 

Summative accuracy with perfect emphases, Clint. The whole game was stolen by the umpires this time and our team components went missing, fearful of what the umpires might do next. The big picture does not point to continued success unless a more valid refereeing process is instigated. Yet again we train under the rules, for the rules and have the rules squash endeavour at the coal face. 

At the player level, we were cruelled by team selections and the manic emphases on player flexibility for our game style. For opposition sides, it is very readable after a few minutes and thus, is shut down. Absolute power in positions does exist for the MFC yet is sacrificed for welfare and arbitrary satisfaction of our player controllers in the FD.

[Engorged Onion 9,254]

13 minutes ago, timbo said:

Talking points

game of margins

brand

effort

culture

not talking points

"The state of umpiring in this game is [censored] and ruining this once great game"

Direct quote from Goodwin??!?

[Engorged Onion 9,254]

1 minute ago, Deemania since 56 said:

Summative accuracy with perfect emphases, Clint. The whole game was stolen by the umpires this time and our team components went missing, fearful of what the umpires might do next. The big picture does not point to continued success unless a more valid refereeing process is instigated. Yet again we train under the rules, for the rules and have the rules squash endeavour at the coal face. 

At the player level, we were cruelled by team selections and the manic emphases on player flexibility for our game style. For opposition sides, it is very readable after a few minutes and thus, is shut down. Absolute power in positions does exist for the MFC yet is sacrificed for welfare and arbitrary satisfaction of our player controllers in the FD.

Can you simplify this for me...I'm a bit slow...:)

[dees189227 10,747]

22 minutes ago, the rolling fog said:

Goodwin is up next on SEN crunch time

Dis they ask him about the umpiring and about the non paid mark to Gus? 

[Undeeterred 2,839]

2 hours ago, Brownie said:

Yep it was fair. Very solid hip and shoulder caught Tom square in the chest as a shepherd. 

We are in some strife if Jetta and Tom don't pull up.

 

It was 'fair' but this is why I hate the MRP.

He went past the ball to bump and made a bloke cough up blood - why is the MRP focussed on impact, not intention?

If he hit him in the head he'd have got 4 weeks, with the same intent to hurt someone.

[D4Life 2,299]

4 minutes ago, Undeeterred said:

It was 'fair' but this is why I hate the MRP.

He went past the ball to bump and made a bloke cough up blood - why is the MRP focussed on impact, not intention?

If he hit him in the head he'd have got 4 weeks, with the same intent to hurt someone.

Went past play took him out - should at least be a free!

Oh that’s right umpires didn’t pay any frees or marks to Melbourne in the last quarter!

[deanox 8,560]

10 minutes ago, Undeeterred said:

It was 'fair' but this is why I hate the MRP.

He went past the ball to bump and made a bloke cough up blood - why is the MRP focussed on impact, not intention?

If he hit him in the head he'd have got 4 weeks, with the same intent to hurt someone.

Because they are scared of long term liability associated with brain damage from concussion. 

Their legal strategy is to suspend every player involved in a concussion where there is even a of breaking the rules.  That way when they are eventually sued by former players they will argue that it isn't their fault, they've done all they could to protect the players. 

They don't have the same risks from broken ribs or punctured lung. 

[Return to Glory 7,709]

1 hour ago, Call Me What You Will said:

Max has tweeted this morning that at least we didn’t “trash the brand” as we have done in the past. Wow, that is such a relief. I can get on with life, snap out of my anger and depression about last night and thoroughly enjoy the rest of the weekend knowing that our “brand” is secure. I absolutely love Max, but fair dinkum.......

Max is right. I can handle a loss when the players have had a crack.

[Watts the matter 1,235]

2 hours ago, Redleg said:

ANB 4 possessions at 42% for the last 3 quarters. Give me a break. Misses from 10 metres. Handballs hard into Jones' face. Drops marks. Spargo dropped and Garlett not considered. No crumbers and no pace, yet we bomb it long all night.

Notice the little chip kicks to a loose man inside 50 by Port, after a quick short run, something we were incapable of last night.

Despite that and the umpires, we butchered the ball and cost ourselves the game.

 

How is this possible statistically?

[KingDingAling 3,592]

Quite happy with their efforts last night. I vaguely remember playing in games where the umpiring was extremely one sided and its soul destroying and hard to remain upbeat. I thought all things considered the boys battled on well. 

[old55 21,227]

Very proud Melbourne supporter.  Love Simon Goodwin:

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/video/2018-06-23/rd-14-simon-goodwin-postmatch

We were super hard at it and just weren't able to convert our opportunities.  We were terrific in a hostile environment and the players committed to the contest incredibly bravely.  We can correct the problems connecting with the forward line and we learn more from the losses in the long run.  We do need an extra bit of class and experience.  Marc Murphy would be a very good pick up for us.

[DeeZee 6,727]

What pees me off about losing a game like this is not the way we played , but mainly not getting the four points.

You can bet your bottom dollar that even if we win next week the media noise will be something like “Flat track bullies at it again”

[Redleg 37,549]

14 minutes ago, Watts the matter said:

How is this possible statistically?

Sorry, you are correct the 42% was for his entire game. The 4 possies after 1/4 time was correct. If it was the same % throughout the game he could have had 1 effective possie for 3/4. He is a mid or small forward. That is pathetic. He also seems to have no feel for the game. See his miss from the goal square and his handball from 2 metres,  hard as hell into Jones’ face. 

I cant believe a tired Spargo wouldn’t have been much better for us. 

Edited June 23, 2018 by Redleg

[Undeeterred 2,839]

1 hour ago, deanox said:

 

One of our "secrets" this year has been our focus on shots from within 30m which has resulted in high accuracy. As supporters we often get nervous when we "give off" to someone in a better position due to the risk of fumble but the increase conversion % has been worthwhile. 

I think Port targeted this. They knew that from any possession from 45-70 m out we would look to pass off instead of take a shot, so they defended deeper instead of pressuring the ball carrier. 

We didn't adjust: with a crowded deep forward line we needed to look for long range scoring opportunities. That isn't a strength of ours from set shots but on the run Trac, Hannan, Oliver, Jones, Melksham are all more than capable to hit from 50.

This is a really good lesson. When we talk about having a plan B, we can't have a complete different structure, but we can have tactic variations.  Shots from longer when they defend deep, or sharking the opposition ruck when Gawn is nullified, are two tactic shifts we could have used in the last two weeks. 

Hopefully we've recognised this and add to our repetoir.

This is the most insightful thing anybody has posted thus far.

[Docs Demons 1,658]

We keep the endeavour showed last night and finally get a bit of polish around the ball with proper disposal we will beat most teams in back half of season. I mentioned in pre game discussion that it is simple solution for us. See ball, get ball and dispose of ball to advantage. We killed them in two of those. Just need some calmness when we win the ball. Umpires aside we absolutely killed Port in all aspects so keep it up and finals is for us. When opposition flood our back line we must have some spares some where, so look for them even if we kick it to the side or even back until something opens up.