I'll preface this post by saying that i really. really, really wanted us to win Saturday night. I also believe contrary to some others we should have won - we were the better side but our inside 50s really let us down and when we pushed we gave up some easy/lucky goals that meant we couldn't get a 2 goal buufer.

But i'm not gutted we didn't win.

Why? One, as Roos has said whilst wins are important this year they are not the main thing. Development, building a successful, strong culture, competitiveness and learning the Roos game are the the main things. The game would have helped those things and were certainly evidence of them.

Second , it will help us next time we are in a similar position. It would have stung the players and they will perhaps learn more from the loss that a win, particularly how to deal with the Dogs niggle.

Lastly (and i'm preparing for the attacks) whilst wins are always best we will be battling with 2-3 teams for the bottom rungs of the ladder, including Dogs. A loss might mean we end up with the 2 or 3rd pick in in the draft not 5th or 6th. That has double meaning if Frawley goes as if we get say pick 2 we would also get pick 3 as compo. No i'm not advocating tanking and wins are what build culture but higher picks won't hurt.

I am not going to attack you, but I think that it is misguided to worry about Draft places after Rd 8 (if at all) if we want to be the kind of club Roos wants to build.

Pick 9 last year was pretty good...

Get a top 10 pick and you should pick up a player.

I am not going to attack you, but I think that it is misguided to worry about Draft places after Rd 8 (if at all) if we want to be the kind of club Roos wants to build.

Pick 9 last year was pretty good...

Get a top 10 pick and you should pick up a player.

Me too

It does not seem to worry the better sides that they don't get a pick till late in the first round.

They seem to stay up in the top half dozen.

IMO it is way more important to pick well when your turn comes around..

BBPowell -" It was the loss we had to have" ???

Haven't we had enough already?

Hey Saty when u r at training next can u ask Frawley if he has seen signs of improvement yet and if so when will he bloody sign on the dotted line???

The longer this goes the less chance we r of keeping him IMO

The longer this goes the less some may care if he walks!

Can't say I actually like free agency but hey each to their own.

T Mac's contract is also up isn't it?

Any word on him or Dunn for that matter?

If we lose all three that will hurt.

Surely TMac isn't FA though - were he to want to leave there would be big dealing going on, and we aren't likely to give him away for free.

Dunn, whilst he has really thrived this year under Roos, may given his up and down history under other coaches not be a highly attractive prospect for others who do not know him. I hope he stays and it does appear that he is enjoying playing for us and being given more responsibility and specific rôles under Roos.

Well we must be watching a different Nev Jetta.

Can you explain his 8 touches despite playing high half back or is that just part of his role as well?

There is a difference between trying too much and being overly attacking from the backline and aggressively running (often unrewarded) to help spread and get the ball moving. Everything I've seen in games and training tells me Roos doesn't want the first but he certainly wants the second.

Especially if Grimes and Howe stay in the backline and there are minimal injuries then I'm predicting that some time in the next couple of months despite good defensive footy Jetta will return to Casey if he doesn't increase his ability to find the ball.

8 touches playing another great blanketing rôle shows that stats aren't everything. I seem to remember maybe Danny Frawley playing on maybe Dunstall being named BOG with ZERO possessions !!!

Edited May 14, 201411 yr by monoccular

It was the loss we had to have.

Because we were getting ahead of ourselves?!

On Grimes, I thought his defensive job was great. Griffen did nothing offensively.

However, in doing this job we suffered two significant negatives which outweighed the positive. The first negative was not having Grimes in the backline. We lost one of our best players from the Adelaide game. We lacked his presence in defence. The second negative was having Grimes in the middle. We all know he's not a midfielder. Whilst Griffen gave them nothing offensively, Grimes also gave us nothing, and our depth is worse than every other side's. We can't afford to carry midfielders who do nothing but tag (McKenzie being exhibit A).

Has to return to half-back for mine.

Chap, as we keep getting told, it is a forum, so I have my opinions, like everybody else does, except I and a few others don't seem to be allowed to have them, especially if they are contrary to the more vociferous on here........If I think somebody is wrong, I will express that opinion......reasonable debate is very thin on the ground on this forum.....

I hope you reflect on this post at some point.

If nothing else, to understand why people find some of your posts abysmal.

Lastly (and i'm preparing for the attacks) whilst wins are always best we will be battling with 2-3 teams for the bottom rungs of the ladder, including Dogs. A loss might mean we end up with the 2 or 3rd pick in in the draft not 5th or 6th. That has double meaning if Frawley goes as if we get say pick 2 we would also get pick 3 as compo. No i'm not advocating tanking and wins are what build culture but higher picks won't hurt.

I really do not like this bit.

We've had this debate on here already, so no need to have it again, but I don't like the drafting-oriented thought process that we have at Melbourne and I'd much rather we acknowledge what you said at the end regarding wins building culture. That must now trump drafting the next big thing.

We're not going to end up much higher than about 12th anyway, and that's being ridiculously optimistic given our draw. We should be hoping to win every game we can from here. If that means pick 10 instead of 2, then so be it. We'll do fine with pick 10.

Look I just don't believe Watts didn't lead because he is a good for nothing lazy footballer, it just doesn't make sense. And if he was lazy then I'd expect him to be dropped this week because Roos won't put up with that. It also doesn't sit comfortably with the rest of his game which contained two memorable run down tackles that saved goals and a load of off the ball running.

I've only watched the first half again and if the incident is the one with about 7min 50 to run in the second quarter I think Watts knew that to kick it to him one out was the wrong play. The MFC player was a long way from Watts, perhaps 65 metres and the chances of hitting Watts was small Watts was one out and the cost of a turnover was high. I think Watts knew it was the wrong option.

The reality is that neither you or I know why he didn't lead. Your proposition is it was because he is lazy. Mine is that it's likely to be something else. I just found it disappointing that in an otherwise positive post you spent so much time and effort criticising DL's favourite kicking boy when there was a lot in his game to like.

Fair point BB. perhaps I have gotten used to some of his previous half efforts, which may have clouded my judgement in this case. Perhaps also the dropped mark he had 35m out had something to do with it. Credit where it is due, he did play better than he has the past few weeks and thats in a game that was tight, contested and pressured.

My only argument with what you say, lets for example say it was dawes or even frawley instead of jack. Do you think they would be have done anything other than put in a hard lead? A turnover would have been costly yes, but contrary to that, how much confidence would jack get from putting in a hard lead, making space and taking the mark?

Lets hope he can continue to build on a solid game this week. I believe our height forward of centre could test the tigers out.

I'll preface this post by saying that i really. really, really wanted us to win Saturday night. I also believe contrary to some others we should have won - we were the better side but our inside 50s really let us down and when we pushed we gave up some easy/lucky goals that meant we couldn't get a 2 goal buufer.

But i'm not gutted we didn't win.

Why? One, as Roos has said whilst wins are important this year they are not the main thing. Development, building a successful, strong culture, competitiveness and learning the Roos game are the the main things. The game would have helped those things and were certainly evidence of them.

Second , it will help us next time we are in a similar position. It would have stung the players and they will perhaps learn more from the loss that a win, particularly how to deal with the Dogs niggle.

Lastly (and i'm preparing for the attacks) whilst wins are always best we will be battling with 2-3 teams for the bottom rungs of the ladder, including Dogs. A loss might mean we end up with the 2 or 3rd pick in in the draft not 5th or 6th. That has double meaning if Frawley goes as if we get say pick 2 we would also get pick 3 as compo. No i'm not advocating tanking and wins are what build culture but higher picks won't hurt.

No. What we want is #18. And the only way to get that is to have a club that never rationalises losing.

Edited May 14, 201411 yr by Carrot Top

No. What we want is #18. And the only way to get that is to have a club that never rationalises losing.

You're right. We should remain as irrational at possible when it comes to losing.

I really do not like this bit.

We've had this debate on here already, so no need to have it again, but I don't like the drafting-oriented thought process that we have at Melbourne and I'd much rather we acknowledge what you said at the end regarding wins building culture. That must now trump drafting the next big thing.

We're not going to end up much higher than about 12th anyway, and that's being ridiculously optimistic given our draw. We should be hoping to win every game we can from here. If that means pick 10 instead of 2, then so be it. We'll do fine with pick 10.

Happy ( or unhappy) to say during the whole "tanking" debate that I for one suggested that there was little point finishing 4th bottom or 5th bottom when you could get the wooden spoon and a nice prize for it.

I will never ever say that again. Every win hopefully adds a little something to the playing group and getting that winning culture flowing through the veins.

What is important - not winning any more games and bagging the last pick or winning 3 or 4 more games and finishing 15th. Not doubt in my mind - take the wins.

Winning from all sections of the club must be paramount no matter what our position is.

You're right. We should remain as irrational at possible when it comes to losing.

And our supporters should be irrational too. I am way ahead of you...

What's taken the heat out of this "concern about draft picks v. aiming to win" is the fact that we now have a recruiting team who have apparently not put a foot wrong from trading our first pick right through to our final rookie pick. Wherever we finish, I have confidence in our recruiters.

I just read that Hayden Kennedy the umpires coach thought the free to Crameri against Dunne was there to be paid.

I have no problem with umpires getting decisions wrong ( well actually I do but realistically the umpires will get decisions wrong). I have a real problem with defending the indefensible. How about you have another look Hayden and say " that was probably nothing to see here - a play on call"

No. What we want is #18. And the only way to get that is to have a club that never rationalises losing.

I agree. I don't want my club to lose and i want my club to play to win every week. But i'm not a player and all i was saying in my original post is that whilst i was disappointed we lost i wasn't gutted in part because we may end with a better pick as a result. But i probably shouldn't think, let alone admit that. It might be the football equivalent of butterfly wings flapping across the other side of the world creating a storm on this side where the losing mentality of a lowly member creates a tsunami of bad losing ju ju which infects the club.

As penance i will refuse to accept a loss this weekend. And by the by i think we are a real show and as such the $4.15 for us to win looks terrific value.

Edited May 15, 201411 yr by binman

I just read that Hayden Kennedy the umpires coach thought the free to Crameri against Dunne was there to be paid.

I have no problem with umpires getting decisions wrong ( well actually I do but realistically the umpires will get decisions wrong). I have a real problem with defending the indefensible. How about you have another look Hayden and say " that was probably nothing to see here - a play on call"

Cut it out. They are going to support their umpires. Its not right and its not fair but it is going to happen pretty much every time.

Dunne

He has played 125 games over 10 years at this club

Surely you have seen it written down by now

His name is DUNN

There is no 'e' at the end

You're right. We should remain as irrational at possible when it comes to losing.

I got straight A's in that back in 2007. I should get my PhD any day now.

He has played 125 games over 10 years at this club

Surely you have seen it written down by now

His name is DUNN

There is no 'e' at the end

its a silent e