I'd say a lot of our problems at the moment come from a physical immaturity of most of our players.Who do we have that have that really have a bit of size about them? Back line Frawley, midfield Moloney, forward line Sylvia.Wow thats 3 whole players and our biggest player Jamar not playing through injury. No wonder we struggle against the better sides Collingwood & Geelong are huge compared to us!

Ha - would love it if that's true.

I suppose he would ignore Gold Coast's 8 losses at an average of 77.5 points. They really gave it a crack when they had 15 goals kicked on them in a record breaking 1st quarter against the Bombers... The last two weeks we've had a younger team in terms of games played than GC. They fought back against West Coast and were pounded by the powerhouse North Melbourne at home. We beat Essendon and had a shocker against the reigning premiers.

Richmond have been talked up no end. They've beaten North in a close one, Brisbane (who we beat), Freo after their bye and the Bombers. They were obliterated by the Pies and smashed by the Hawks (sounds familiar, hey). Richmond have also lost to Port Adelaide and a Bulldogs side seemingly in a world of pain.

Obviously we haven't had an ideal season but I score it at 3 good wins, 4 bad losses, 1 average win, 1 average loss, 1 well fought draw and a fought out loss.

In terms of our age and players lost through injuries, I think that's about to be expected - in terms of player output anyway.

He didn't say these teams were necessarily better or having better seasons necessarily did he.....

I thought he just made reference to the fact that they fought harder and longer than we do. And frankly and despite our place on the ladder it's a little hard to argue with that at this point.

Now there are reasons why we get beaten, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't at least fight while we go down. And that my friends is an accusation that has been made here many, many times.

Edited June 17, 201114 yr by QueenC

That's my point though.

Too many journalists use the latest match to propogate a generic theory. I don't believe the Gold Coast fight out harder than we do. I don't believe Richmond or North do either. I didn't see the interview but by reports here, he's saying that othery young(er) teams in our position fight harder. I disagree.

Again, we've had 3 good wins, 4 bad losses, an average win, an average loss, a fought loss and a fought draw. I think, given the injuries we've sustained to key players we've fought at least as well as these other teams.

If anyone disagrees on North, compare our stats against top 8 sides over the last two years to theirs, ouch!

I'm with you on this one.

I agree that it can be a good tactic, but it seems to be the only tactic.

It seems so far this season the opposition is set up for this play before Melbourne are, because it is employed for what seems to be 90 per cent of kick ins. It is almost always to the right hand side. How about they mix it up? Move into position, then use Watts speed to move to the middle or across to the other side and kick there. Or try and get Sylvia or Morton one out one the left hand side and kick there. Try to get the on ballers to rush forward to create options or clear out of the back fifty to make space to run. And then when no other option, go long right to the ruckman and hope for a 50/50

One constant play cannot work. If the other team know we have 3 or 4 set plays, they can't stack the right hand side.

The problem is there is one tactic, and it is clearly not working because it is so predictable. Melbourne are really struggling to clear the ball from defence, and they are persisting with a plan that is obvious to the opposition. I don't see how using a predictable tactic that turns possession into a 50/50 contest is smart coaching.

Agree 100%. In theory there is alot of sense in kicking it to the taller targets on the flank, but it shouldn't be the only option and certainly not always to the one side. It is also by no means a guarantee that the ball will be spilled over the boundary against a good team like Collingwood who play with desparation. Our predictabilty was completely exposed against the Pies who were able to set up in time to get players around the contest, win the clearances with ease and clock up the repeat i50s.

That's my point though.

Too many journalists use the latest match to propogate a generic theory. I don't believe the Gold Coast fight out harder than we do. I don't believe Richmond or North do either. I didn't see the interview but by reports here, he's saying that othery young(er) teams in our position fight harder. I disagree.

Again, we've had 3 good wins, 4 bad losses, an average win, an average loss, a fought loss and a fought draw. I think, given the injuries we've sustained to key players we've fought at least as well as these other teams.

If anyone disagrees on North, compare our stats against top 8 sides over the last two years to theirs, ouch!

It is true to a point IMO. I think the leadership situation is an example. Junior Mcdonald would do whatever he could, on hands & knees or risk his body to get us up & over the line. I don't see the same level of commitment from our newer leader. He was starting to go towards that direction of Juniors, last year & the one before that, But has sadly fallen away this Year Big Time, Not committing his body to the crushing contest, and only pointing and abusing some for his mistakes.

So this is one area where that criticism Is warrented.

any comments from Pickering today or is he waiting for our next loss

what about the rest of you any changes in your outlook

any comments from Pickering today or is he waiting for our next loss

what about the rest of you any changes in your outlook

Not me.

Not me.

+1

Plus two.

That's cheating HT, you didn't post! B)

I'm pretty happy with my contribution to this thread still.

There'll be more big losses at times, but we have a system / gameplan that can be very effective & will work more consistently as the kids grow together.

Pretty simple really.

Gee , Wallsie had a bit of a crack at us on ONE WEEK at a TIME saying we have been the greatest celebrators for 30 years ! Ok it might have been a bit excessive after the Dons game but i suspect as a self confessed football punter he may be whingeing through his pocket !

Fwiw I now have our season at 4 good wins, 4 bad losses, an average win, an average loss, a fighting loss and a fighting draw.

What helps Rogue's view from the other thread is that, unsurprisingly, our 4 bad losses have come against 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th. Which probably helps our run to the finals, but is still an unfortunate trend.

I agree that it can be a good tactic, but it seems to be the only tactic.

It seems so far this season the opposition is set up for this play before Melbourne are, because it is employed for what seems to be 90 per cent of kick ins. It is almost always to the right hand side. How about they mix it up? Move into position, then use Watts speed to move to the middle or across to the other side and kick there. Or try and get Sylvia or Morton one out one the left hand side and kick there. Try to get the on ballers to rush forward to create options or clear out of the back fifty to make space to run. And then when no other option, go long right to the ruckman and hope for a 50/50

One constant play cannot work. If the other team know we have 3 or 4 set plays, they can't stack the right hand side.

The problem is there is one tactic, and it is clearly not working because it is so predictable. Melbourne are really struggling to clear the ball from defence, and they are persisting with a plan that is obvious to the opposition. I don't see how using a predictable tactic that turns possession into a 50/50 contest is smart coaching.

Bump my own post.

Good to see Melbourne mixing up the kickouts the last two weeks, looks like the kick it to Jamar 60 metres out on the right hand side is the fallback option, not the first and only option. I think it has been the biggest difference in the form of the team (as well as McKenzies work rate in the packs)

Bump my own post.

Good to see Melbourne mixing up the kickouts the last two weeks, looks like the kick it to Jamar 60 metres out on the right hand side is the fallback option, not the first and only option. I think it has been the biggest difference in the form of the team (as well as McKenzies work rate in the packs)

Or having McKenzie playing.

Jeez we missed him.

Edited June 25, 201114 yr by Striker475

Or having McKenzie playing.

Jeez we missed him.

Yeah, that's what I meant, one of the most important players in the team, adds grunt to the class.

Or having McKenzie playing.

Jeez we missed him.

You hardly saw Jordie Mckenzie against Richmond....He was always at the bottom of a pack!!!

Jonesy was just as good today....People call Jones a C Grader.....