The statistics don't lie.

Melbourne is ranked 10th in marks inside 50, whereas GWS in third-last with 7.5 per game.

So how are GWS averaging 14 goals per game?

The Giants rank 1st in clearances with 46, Melbourne averages 30. On game day, a statistic like that is damning.

It gets worse.

Melbourne is LAST in center clearances, while the Giants average 5 more with 13. They also average 33 stoppage clearances per game, 11 more than Melbourne (!!!)

They also average 7 more rebounds out of 50, with 38 per game. Can you imagine if those statistics remain honest on Sunday? The Giants will win by 8+ goals.

The reality is that a lack of a forward line is not really the issue: it is the team's inability to chase, and its inability to work hard enough to win a ball at the stoppages. Guys like Watts in the middle only make this worse.

The errors are another problem: if Melbourne makes an error forward of center, the Giants are really good at pushing it through the corridor. They did it well against the Swans, and in moments of flash against the Saints. We all saw against the Eagles the amount of errors Melbourne made in the corridor and in the forward line: on the counter-attack, the Eagles ran ran ran, while Melbourne stayed in 1st gear. They gave up.

Melbourne does not need every single tall to be playing to win. It needs to win the damn ball when it matters!

Yeah the lack of forward line is just another excuse for our players to hide behind. It doesn't stop you playing with competitive intent for 100% of the 2.5 hours a week you're expected to. Our players still don't look to be doing this (not to mention the basic skill issues).

The chipping around of the ball might increase our possession count and the players supercoach points but if we don't gut run to create meaningful attacking plays and stop opposition forays by running hard to close their spaces we will continue to get flogged.

Not sure I agree with this.

Against West Coast:

Contested possession: Won 130 v 129. Tackles Won 62 v 56, Centre clearances Lost 13-9 (had been belted early in the game), Clearances - Lost 39 v 31.

Considering the huge advantage that Cox, Nic Nat, Sinclair v Spencer, Fitz/Pedo gave West Coast I think after a really poor start we got our hands on the ball.

Inside 50's - lost 53 v 39.

We only kicked 4 goals from 39 inside 50's. That tells me whatever quality they were we obviously had no one capable of winning up forward.

The first quarter was an insipid effort winning the ball. The remaining 3 quarters were more plagued by not having anyone to kick to.

We need to improve our inside work. And we massively need to improve our ball use around the ground regardless of forwards. But decent forwards will help us do that. The forward line is some panacea but I think it's worth at least 5 goals to how we are playing if we get Dawes and Hogan in for Pedersen and someone else. Plus Gawn for Fitzy.

Stats are funny things and far more complex than ever. Is there anything that is not measured or counted or analysed these days? Keep it simple, just look at the number of goals we have scored over the last year or so.

Until we correct that imbalance, everything else is "noise".

Not sure i agree that we did not have anyone capable of winning up forward, I think our delivery into the forward 50 was pathetic, long kicks to out numbered forwards, crappy little passes into a congested forwards line that went to eagles players more often or not, or high little floating chip passes that were intercepted. our ability to delivery is the issue, we seem to be able to get the ball and take it down 75% of the field ok then fall apart in delivering it to our forwards. It obviously does not help when we end up with the opposition playing a spare man back.

Lies, damned lies and two weeks worth of statistics.

Cudi_420: are you maybe suggesting that had we a reasonably fit Clark and/or Dawes and/or Hogan forward line we may not have done a whole lot better in either game?

Perhaps I am watching the wrong game

I think Ive got this. If we kick more goals than the opposition we stand a good chance of winnig games.

I think Ive got this. If we kick more goals than the opposition we stand a good chance of winnig games.

But our game plan on Sunday seemed to be not to kick into the forward line, that can make scoring difficult!

its no myth...we have no forward line

Roos has pretty well said exactly that

I believe him as he ought to know.

Did we not have the same forward line last year?

We keep hearing from Roos (who ought to know) that Hogan, Dawes and Clark are out and we therefore have no forward line but how many games did they play last year?

Hogan - 0

Clark - 4

Dawes - 12

Granted we were equally [censored] last year but didn't we have the highest conversion rate for inside 50's in the comp? We also kicked decent scores in a number of games and this is with no midfield. Remember the fears about having too many forwards with Fitzy and Howe in good form?

I didn't watch the game last week but if you ask me it sounds like too much importance has been put on the 3 big forwards by those who ought to know and the other guys who were decent in the forward line last year have been forgotten about because last year is irrelevant due to a percentage of 54. All this talk then leaves the players with a boosted midfield and improved clearances and inside 50's but in doubt about who to kick it to because those who ought to know won't shut up about having no forward line. Hence the sideways and backwards ball movement leading to turnovers.

Why and how Pederson gets a game is bewildering. We'd be better off fusing off Freddy Cook in his current state. Even ask FEV if he wants a contract. Pederson!! Can't kick, can't run, good hair, can barely mark and terrified of kicking a goal. Would be better off selecting our most exciting goal hungry small . Not rapt in the side but GWS will have big pressure being the clear favourites. Upset could happen.

Did we not have the same forward line last year?

We keep hearing from Roos (who ought to know) that Hogan, Dawes and Clark are out and we therefore have no forward line but how many games did they play last year?

Hogan - 0

Clark - 4

Dawes - 12

Granted we were equally [censored] last year but didn't we have the highest conversion rate for inside 50's in the comp? We also kicked decent scores in a number of games and this is with no midfield. Remember the fears about having too many forwards with Fitzy and Howe in good form?

I didn't watch the game last week but if you ask me it sounds like too much importance has been put on the 3 big forwards by those who ought to know and the other guys who were decent in the forward line last year have been forgotten about because last year is irrelevant due to a percentage of 54. All this talk then leaves the players with a boosted midfield and improved clearances and inside 50's but in doubt about who to kick it to because those who ought to know won't shut up about having no forward line. Hence the sideways and backwards ball movement leading to turnovers.

no question Dees look better this year even though we are getting flogged. nearly beat Saints round one don't forget. You forget one big win V GWS where Mitch Clark dominated till he got injured. Sylvia was in consistent form as well with Jamar playing most games. Granted Jamar not the best Ruckman going round but he could do Fitz and Spencer Solo.

Not sure i agree that we did not have anyone capable of winning up forward, I think our delivery into the forward 50 was pathetic, long kicks to out numbered forwards, crappy little passes into a congested forwards line that went to eagles players more often or not, or high little floating chip passes that were intercepted. our ability to delivery is the issue, we seem to be able to get the ball and take it down 75% of the field ok then fall apart in delivering it to our forwards. It obviously does not help when we end up with the opposition playing a spare man back.

don't know bout that. Recall one passage of play where Howe was out marked in a one on one by a small guy. Pedo can hardly move and when he does move and mark then he can't kick. He then parades around knowing he'll get picked the following week cos he's a tall (189cm). Kent's not scared of kicking one or Blease for that matter so hopefully both will play. As for our number one ruck man Spencer? has anyone ever seen him take a contested mark and kick a goal or actually run with the ball??

The constant criticism of Pederson is obnoxious. I was at the G on Sunday and Pederson added physicality when others were tame. He threw himself at the contest, particularly after half time, and because of what had gone before, I stood and applauded him. He is fit and he is able to back up week to week. He has played at both ends, can pinch hit in the ruck and is giving 100%. Not everything he does comes off, but at a time when we are decimated by injuries to other fragile talls, he is an important commodity. If the coulda-been-champions on here could find a way to actually support those in red and blue, instead of indulging in character assassination, we might create an environment (culture) that encourages players to be loyal..

The constant criticism of Pederson is obnoxious. I was at the G on Sunday and Pederson added physicality when others were tame. He threw himself at the contest, particularly after half time, and because of what had gone before, I stood and applauded him. He is fit and he is able to back up week to week. He has played at both ends, can pinch hit in the ruck and is giving 100%. Not everything he does comes off, but at a time when we are decimated by injuries to other fragile talls, he is an important commodity. If the coulda-been-champions on here could find a way to actually support those in red and blue, instead of indulging in character assassination, we might create an environment (culture) that encourages players to be loyal..

That you Cam? ;-)

I agree WW. That Paul Roos seemingly also does adds credibility to the view that you've expressed above.

The constant criticism of Pederson is obnoxious. I was at the G on Sunday and Pederson added physicality when others were tame. He threw himself at the contest, particularly after half time, and because of what had gone before, I stood and applauded him. He is fit and he is able to back up week to week. He has played at both ends, can pinch hit in the ruck and is giving 100%. Not everything he does comes off, but at a time when we are decimated by injuries to other fragile talls, he is an important commodity. If the coulda-been-champions on here could find a way to actually support those in red and blue, instead of indulging in character assassination, we might create an environment (culture) that encourages players to be loyal..

Two games, 20 touches, 8 marks for 3 behinds.

If that presents the depth within the list for this season we are screwed.

You can be as physical as you like but if you don't get the pill and hit the scoreboard it means SFA.

Pedo needs to snag a couple at least this weekend to start justifying the 3 years he's been given.

We got our hands on the footy but didn't move the footy quickly because we looked up and saw a barren landscape with Shannon Byrnes as the most dangerous forward.

Tying it back to losing the clearances is a leap.

The constant criticism of Pederson is obnoxious. I was at the G on Sunday and Pederson added physicality when others were tame. He threw himself at the contest, particularly after half time, and because of what had gone before, I stood and applauded him. He is fit and he is able to back up week to week. He has played at both ends, can pinch hit in the ruck and is giving 100%. Not everything he does comes off, but at a time when we are decimated by injuries to other fragile talls, he is an important commodity. If the coulda-been-champions on here could find a way to actually support those in red and blue, instead of indulging in character assassination, we might create an environment (culture) that encourages players to be loyal..

He might be fit but he's barely AFL endurance. He's not AFL speed or skill in any position.

I noticed he lifted his physicality in the second half. But the game was almost over at quarter time. And his physicality didn't leave any Eagles on the ground in his wake or result in goals.

Let's see him attack the game against a bunch of kid opponents from the first minute.

Preseason I was impressed by Pedersen on the track. But nothing has translated on field so far.

Hang on... Don't you need to win the clearance to get it inside 50? Wouldn't it be the kicking for goal and positions we mark inside 50 that is the problem seeing our inside 50s are good?

Talk to Geelong about how important clearances are to winning if it's not what your game plan is about...

We could score a lot more if we changed our mindset, stopped trying to pinpoint passes inside 50 to useless targets with pathetic kicking and had more cracks from long range. I know we've been taught a methodical approach, but we just need to try and blaze away and stand out. Just have a crack from long range. Dunn, Jones, Vince especially who are all capable of it but struggle to hit targets close to goal

The statistics don't lie.

yeah they do.

Watching the games IMO the following is obvious. We are getting are hands on the ball sufficient number of times but are butchering it and when we get it near or inside 50 we don't have a forward line capable of kicking a score. ( let alone a winning one).

What stats never tell you are the quality of the stat. The quality of our entries into the 50 are reflected by our poor scores.

Forward line or none, every game we name 6 players to take the field in the forward line. Why don't we keep a couple of them there? Then maybe, just maybe, we might have options to kick to (tall or small). If tall we can risk a high kick in now and then, if small, well these are meant to be AFL players who are earning an AFL wage, let's see some skill for a change and have them hit targets (ain't that bloody hard, it's done in high school grade footy).

No quality talls? That's ok. Put Pederson in the forward line, sure he's just about as good as a tree, but he's as big as one too. I don't expect him to mark the ball, but bring it to ground, where our smalls can crumb.

Footy is not a hard sport to figure out, plus with our lot at the MFC it needs to be as simple as possible.

I'd rather a quick kick to the forward line that results in a turnover, than trying to play keepings off and it resulting in a turnover in the midfield or most likely, the half back line.

No point having a sh!tload of the ball, if you don't do anything with it.

Forward line or none, every game we name 6 players to take the field in the forward line. Why don't we keep a couple of them there?

Because no team plays that way. Defensive football dictates that forwards push well up to crowd the space into your opponents forward 50 when they have the ball. Our problem is that when we get the ball we don't push back hard enough or quick enough so it always looks like we don't have a forward line.