Three reasons why we lost

[saka888 54]

1. WATTS - was dead weight as always,

2. PJ - almost worse than Watts

3. Bennell should have done better in the wet

[stuie 7,374]

1. WATTS - was dead weight as always,

2. PJ - almost worse than Watts

3. Bennell should have done better in the wet

You're blaming Watts as the number one reason for us losing? I'm sorry, but you're a fool. What did you expect of him? 6 goals? He had a bad game but was far from the reason we lost. Get off his back, he's been good for alot of the year and is developing at the rate you'd expect of a KPP. Fact.

I understand everyone has their fave players and not so fave players, but blaming those 3 players for a loss is ridiculous. I hope you retract these outrageous over reactions once young Jack fulfills his potential.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

The only thing that is strange is that you cannot see it.

They are strong around the stoppage and have a freak forward. As our bodies get older and bigger those tackles against Sewell, Mitchell and Burgoyne will start to stick. Their forwardline in fact anyones forwardline holds no fear for me with our back 6.

I actually did not think they were that great. Our poor stoppages cost us the game.

Well put Red.

The future is indeed looking good.

I'm getting old but I seem to have a recent memory of doing ok against the maggies this year??

Well done. Missed the point completely.

It often is, but sometimes it's just reality. ......

It isn't reality. Thanks for the cop out.

Any chance you focussed on the clearances and the stoppages and who won them???

[jackaub 1,402]

I agree with you 'speed demon'...

1. Inability to win enough contested possessions around stoppages. Too small physically.

2. Poor defensive set up around stoppages inside Hawthorn's forward 50. Too often they got the ball out goalside of the stoppage with us way behind.

3. Poor leading out from half forward - Watts, Dunn, Jurrah and Green did not present on the lead often enough for the midfielders to use the ball effectively. Way too conservatively minded half forwardline blaming the mids for their cautious approach to the ball.

I have been saying it all season. Melbourne never ever has a small forward goal side for stoppages whether it is in the offensive 50 or defensive 50

Its is simply very poor coaching. Most teams have this as a natural setup

Ohh BTW we scored two good goals kicking long over the zone so it probabaly wasnt a bad move however we should have stopped when we couldnt kick it as long or as accuratly. I thought the hawks were a lil lucky on te day certainly wont go far and melbourne will be beating them regularly from now on

[beelzebub 23,382]

We were doomed as soon as the rain came IMO .

Our game plan is fast and precise movement of the ball , we don't have the mature bodies for a wet slog as yet .

I wouldnt go quite so far as say doomed but definitely it changed the effectiveness of our style to date. Ironic that the official conditions were "fine" geez hate to see a bad day..lol. That aside the Hawks just semed a little more composed this wont always be the case.

The real difference between the two teams on the day to me seemed to be the turnovers. We literally gifted them the game in all reality. Take away half a dozen clangers and the game was ours. But Hawthorn caused or encouraged those clangers. They created the moments where indecision reigned and we delivered.. Bailey would have pulled hair...had he.

We didnt play a bad game... It was pretty good for the most part. Hawthorns was just a bit better. Some late goals belied the real eveness. Some strange umping here and there but isnt there always and wont grant them the game deciding as some might.

We still seemed suprised ( the team it seems ) that they are as competitve as they are and get caught napping. This is mainly the preserve of a handful of players but they will get better or others will take their spots.

Though Jamar probably the most effective ruck Hawthorn were far more effective at getting the ball out of clearances.

But some perspective. Hawthorn had a hard day at the office. They will not be so happy to met us in the future. Hawthorn arent much better than we saw yesterday but Melbourne still has some way to go. They were more battle hardened ( as a group ) and that was the winning trump yesterday. Wont always be the case.

Where we are now compared to where we're expected to be is satisfying.There is much improvement still to come.

we lost because we werent quite good enough to win. That will change

[Crackers 67]

MASSIVE steps forward from round 1, we only lost by 21 points so the bright side to today should be:

1. we were missing 2-3 of our best 22

2. We were a man down for ovwer a half, meaning we only had 77 rotations for the game

3. The player that was injured was Davey which clogged us up rebouding out of defence

4. Brad Green had a shocker - not going to happen to often

5. Our disposal HAS to get better, we actually didnt play too well today. We had flashes of good football, but as been stated on other comments "we got smashed today" in the clearances, etc (and we did)so to loose by 21 points was a great effort.

This is a good point, the amount that we improved over the season has been far greater than any other club (except maybe the toiges). The dees have a much greater range of improvement to their team physically and mentally/confidence than the Hawks. I am not too worried.much

[Tricky 341]

Bail great, Bruce meh, Jamar great, roving meh, Frawley great, buddy/umpires meh. Bring on 2011.

That's a joke right?

[Guest Yeats_08]

1. Missed Moloney winning the Hard Ball in the middle. We got smashd in the centre. The more I think about it, I can't remember us winning a clearance all day. Needed some hard bodies in there if we were going to match the Hawks

2. Brad Green being played in defence. WHy why oh why, would you take a guy who has been dominating up fwd all year and play him across half back. I couldn't understand the reluctance of Bailey to play Greeny out of the goal square. It worked in the last 1/4 but was all too late. Wonna, Jurrah and Dunn all started well but faded in the 2nd half. Liam was still involved. Liam must work on his defence. Lazy and unwilling to chase. Needs to work both ways. Also, how many times did we bomb it to Wonna, 2 on 1. Joke. Green should have been in the fwd fifty all day.

3. Too mnay MFC players cannot kick. Bartram, woeful. Rohan Bail, sheizen. C. Bruce, standard. C. Garland, shocking. J. Rivers, same old, same old. Really hurts when you waste your kicks with shocking disposal. Happens all too often. Usual suspects as well.

4. Didn't cost us the game, but umpiring was sh'it house. Franklin's back extends to his ribs, the club who caused the 'deliberate behind' rule to be introduced were the beneficiaries of one of the worst calls in history of the rule. You can throw the ball now, as long as you wear brown and gold. Also Osborne was allowed to walk directly over the mark while he was faking some injury in the last. It was 15 metres in 87. But anyway, not going to blame the umps for the loss, but it was ordinary at best. Make noise about it MFC fans. Otherwise it goes unnoticed. The ump who called the deliberate behind should resign or be fired. That was NOT the reason the rule came in. It was a farce

5. Davey. Obvious.

Edited August 15, 2010 by Yeats_08

[Guest Yeats_08]

That's a joke right?

Bruce looks good as he ends up with 30 odd touches every week. However, any genuine supporter who watches every week knows the quality of Bruce's disposals are rubbish

[Jaded No More 68,972]

The rain killed us too.

We didn't have the bodies to fight it out in the wet and dirty contest, not to mention that our playing style really does suffer when it's pissing down and the wind is blowing at 100km an hour.

Put simply, everything went against us yesterday and we still only lost by 20 points. The more I think about it, the more remarkably proud I am of the team. How incredible has our progress been in the space of 19 weeks?!

[Nasher 33,617]

To say that the umpiring was fine is absolutely ridiculous.

Who said, or even insinuated that it was fine?

[Tricky 341]

Bruce looks good as he ends up with 30 odd touches every week. However, any genuine supporter who watches every week knows the quality of Bruce's disposals are rubbish

I do not defend CB ad infinitum however, this post relates to yesterday's performance and CB was undoubtedly one of the BOG. I was there and that was obvious to me and countless other "genuine supports who watch every week".

He had the 4th highest disposal efficiency of anyone in the team in tough conditions against a tough opposition.

[DemonSG 1]

I do not defend CB ad infinitum however, this post relates to yesterday's performance and CB was undoubtedly one of the BOG. I was there and that was obvious to me and countless other "genuine supports who watch every week".

He had the 4th highest disposal efficiency of anyone in the team in tough conditions against a tough opposition.

I'll take issue with you on that one, CB's disposal yesterday was rubbish, you sure you were at the game?

[old55 23,687]

I do not defend CB ad infinitum however, this post relates to yesterday's performance and CB was undoubtedly one of the BOG. I was there and that was obvious to me and countless other "genuine supports who watch every week".

He had the 4th highest disposal efficiency of anyone in the team in tough conditions against a tough opposition.

Agree, Bruce was very good and his kicking was good - I'm no big fan but he's been excellent the past month or so.

James McDonald was really good also in the crunch. Our vets stood up which was pleasing for them.

I'm not worried about the clearance difference - we'll fix that in due course as we mature.

We do have a problem with physical presence in the forward line that I don't see an easy fix for.

It's a great pity that PJ and Miller are not better players.

[Tricky 341]

I'll take issue with you on that one, CB's disposal yesterday was rubbish, you sure you were at the game?

Yes I was there, and believe the viewpoint from the seats allow a superior viewpoint to the bar.

[Guest Yeats_08]

He had the 4th highest disposal efficiency of anyone in the team in tough conditions against a tough opposition.

Proving my point. It is quality not quantity. You are sucked in, just like the media, at lookng at CB's numbers. Watch what he does with it.

[Tricky 341]

Proving my point. It is quality not quantity. You are sucked in, just like the media, at lookng at CB's numbers. Watch what he does with it.

it's disposal EFFICIENCY not DISPOSAL

Obviously watching different games but you should at least understand the stats that you are refuting as rubbish.

[H_T 3,049]

Who said, or even insinuated that it was fine?

Perhaps those who don't think the umpiring was "clearly disgraceful" and ruined a good day at the footy.

[Guest Yeats_08]

it's disposal EFFICIENCY not DISPOSAL

Obviously watching different games but you should at least understand the stats that you are refuting as rubbish.

agree to disagree. What sis you think of the others I have mentioned; Bail, Garland, Bartram and Rivers. All horrible kicks. Their turnovers killed us. Bartram is the wort of the lot IMO. But Rivers and Garland turn it over in defence, makes it worse. Bail has NFI what to do with it, just like his indecision against The Pies Rd2. He can find it though

[Geddy Lee 582]

Its even worse if you were there and you blame the umpires.

I never said they were the reason we lost. Hawthorn were better, bigger, and more fierce.

Shaun Burgoyne, Luke Hodge and Franklin are all better than anyone in our team by some margin.

I am annoyed when the decisions go one way most of the time though, especially when Frawley works his butt off and gets penalised for non-existent infringements. You know it's a dark day when Franklin gets 4 frees whereas he usually gives away that number.

[Keyser Söze 0]

agree to disagree. What sis you think of the others I have mentioned; Bail, Garland, Bartram and Rivers. All horrible kicks. Their turnovers killed us. Bartram is the wort of the lot IMO. But Rivers and Garland turn it over in defence, makes it worse. Bail has NFI what to do with it, just like his indecision against The Pies Rd2. He can find it though

Careful, your ignorance is showing.

Best cover that up.

[DemonSG 1]

Yes I was there, and believe the viewpoint from the seats allow a superior viewpoint to the bar.

excuse me?? what has the bar got to do with CM's disposal...I believe the bar with it's many modern flash TV sets offer's excellent viewing and the quality of the drough beer on tap is excellent. I find that after a few beers the game becomes much clearer and easier to dissect a players good and bad features, Cam yesterday was found wanting in the disposal area of his game. hic hic

[jnrmac 20,154]

Facts are facts.

Hawks were better at clearances and I50s. However we matched them well and clearly had the game within reach but couldn't do it at the end.

This doesn't excuse the fact that the umpires were a disgrace and ruined what was a tough, hard fought, even game. Full stop.

When you have Dunstall and Quartermain saying the umpires had made major errors in Hawthorn's favour its hard to argue against that!

So my three reasons are:

1. Filthy

2. *********

3. Maggots

There I feel a little better.

[Nasher 33,617]

Perhaps those who don't think the umpiring was "clearly disgraceful" and ruined a good day at the footy.

And who would that be? Name names.

[Tricky 341]

excuse me?? what has the bar got to do with CM's disposal...I believe the bar with it's many modern flash TV sets offer's excellent viewing and the quality of the drough beer on tap is excellent. I find that after a few beers the game becomes much clearer and easier to dissect a players good and bad features, Cam yesterday was found wanting in the disposal area of his game. hic hic