Post Match Discussion - Round 12

[Pipefitter 2,133]

We just need to improve our defence/attack balance and results will come. 3 goals is horrible, but Neeldy would have needed 24 players on the field to keep Collingwood to 8 goals. The goals will come.

[Ted Lasso 18,759]

Defence was good, our composure going forward was ordinary but collingwoods pressure was probably something we haven't seen this year

[drdrake 3,117]

I understand what we are doing but at some stage you have to try to win the game. We played like a team that doesn't want to get thumped rather than a team that whats to win. I can't understand why players 40m out running into the goals decide to pass to a one on one. We just have carry to many dumb players each week. Players that just make the wrong decision they get the footy no problems but just continually make bad decisions. Bail 40m out first quarter, M Jones running 40m out both decide to pass to a 50/50 take the shot at least we score.

There are 6 players that I feel confident with ball in hand, Jones, Jetta, Watts, Dawes, Vince and Dunn the rest some are work in progress the others either lack the skills or lack the smarts.

Yesterday wasn't good, we played scared, we were to scared to loss by a big margin.

[deanox 9,641]

Thank god

You do realise he was taking the [censored]?

[Satyriconhome 10,339]

Why don't we all just take a deep breath and listen to what Roos said, he wasn't happy, assume there are a few in the team who may not be playing next week, he stated "we went slow when we should have gone quick and quick when we should have gone slow" amongst other things, and reading between the lines, instructions were not followed.

Defensively we were excellent, so can't see changes in defence, but midfield and forward, yes

Edited June 9, 2014 by Satyriconhome

[Slartibartfast 16,870]

Jesus, some people are already getting there knickers in a knot about Roosy and his gameplan.

Next week against Essendon you will see a more attacking football side. Mark my words.

I don't agree. I think the game plan will stay exactly the same but the difference will be that different oppositions will manage it differently.

Collingwood are a very good defensive side. We will do better against Essendon because they play a different more free flowing game more in the PA mould. It will be higher scoring all round.

[rpfc 28,045]

I think a couple of the kids are stuffed.

I am hoping Tyson was just done by McAffer and will be back to his form next week but Salem needs a break and JKH might need one too.

[deanox 9,641]

It's a long season rpfc. We are improving and bodily will continue to improve but we will need to recruit well in the off season to add some more depth. At the moment we don't have many changes in the wings that improve the side.

[Slartibartfast 16,870]

It's a long season rpfc. We are improving and bodily will continue to improve but we will need to recruit well in the off season to add some more depth. At the moment we don't have many changes in the wings that improve the side.

We won't look for depth, we already have that.

We will look for class.

[jazza 1,323]

Thought everything PR was going to bring to our club has been on show all year.

We will master this" less than 10 goals per game" plan first,and then go on and develop more plans and ways of opening up the game when we have the skill and the players to execute that skill on a consistent basis.

I got everything i thought we would get yesterday and so far this year.

The really good part of PRs game plan is if you lack in the basics as a player,this plan will find out very quickly.{and trades begin}

On yesterdays game i thought grimes has found his spot,and a few other blokes are slowly finding their spots or they are being found out.

[old dee 23,482]

Thought everything PR was going to bring to our club has been on show all year.

We will master this" less than 10 goals per game" plan first,and then go on and develop more plans and ways of opening up the game when we have the skill and the players to execute that skill on a consistent basis.

I got everything i thought we would get yesterday and so far this year.

The really good part of PRs game plan is if you lack in the basics as a player,this plan will find out very quickly.{and trades begin}

On yesterdays game i thought grimes has found his spot,and a few other blokes are slowly finding their spots or they are being found out.

Spot on jazza

I particularly like your comment on Grimes, I have been saying for Two years he is half back.

Yesterday confirmed in my mind that we have the players to be a competitive side, PR has IMO got the best out of most of the list.

We are still a long way short of having a top class Midfield, we have gone from terrible to competitive.

We also have an average at best forward line, take out Dawes and we truly struggle.

[rjay 24,577]

Defence was good, our composure going forward was ordinary but collingwoods pressure was probably something we haven't seen this year

...and I think that's it. Collingwood are very good at applying pressure and that's what has them where they are on the ladder. They will be a real threat this year because they play good hard football.

[deanox 9,641]

We won't look for depth, we already have that.

We will look for class.

Clarification. We will look for class, you are right but that works two ways; either we bring in ready to go class in which case the current players become depth or we bring in young class through the draft which becomes depth until it develops sufficient to push in.

Either way, at the moment outside of the current 22 we have very few players worth a look; so any player injured, out of form or any young player needing a rest can't really be replaced on a weekly basis.

[old dee 23,482]

I think a couple of the kids are stuffed.

I am hoping Tyson was just done by McAffer and will be back to his form next week but Salem needs a break and JKH might need one too.

100% agreement rpfc

The problem as I see it is who do we use to replace them?

[Scoop Junior 3,395]

A few points:

1) Really bad selection decision not dropping a tall for Dawes. I'm not saying this with the benefit of hindsight as I made the comment as soon as the final teams were in on Saturday. The forward line looked really unbalanced on paper and so it proved on game day with a lack of pace and mobility inside 50.

2) This lack of balance up forward created a double problem. Firstly, we couldn't win a ground ball inside 50, especially in the first half when there were a lot of spillages inside 50. Secondly, we couldnt pressure their exits, as their small defenders ran away and exposed our lack of pace and mobility up forward.

3) Yes the ball movement around the ground was too slow, but I think credit must go to the opposition for stifling our flow. Collingwood defended our ball movement very, very well and just did not allow us any quick flow into our forward line. We also lack line breaking ball carriers off half back, players like Malceski and Shaw who could have broken the game up with their overlap running.

4) I wasn't too disappointed leaving the ground today. For me it was another step in the right direction with our effort and our defence and our competitiveness.

5) Of course 3 goals is not enough to win a game of footy and there's no doubt we need to get the balance between attack and defence right. But Roos has always spoken of getting defence right first and then focusing on other aspects of our game. And boy is he doing a mighty job with our defence. Last year we conceded 120 points against the Pies, this year we halved that to 60. The turnaround is nothing short of amazing. Defence wins titles amd for the first time in a long time I'm seeing a well drilled, well organised Melbourne team consistently giving 100% effort with a sustainable defence-orientated game plan.

6) I cannot believe some of the criticism on here. From where we have come from last year, a side that got pumped by a then-mediocre Gold Coast team at the MCG by 10 goals and a side that lost to Essendon by 25 goals, to a side that is now competing solidly against top sides. We have had competitive losses against the Swans and Pies and should've beaten Port. Of course it is still furstrating to lose but we have come a very long way in a short space of time.

7) If we bring the same effort next week we should be in with a good chance of beating Essendon.

[rpfc 28,045]

100% agreement rpfc

The problem as I see it is who do we use to replace them?

They were promising but their output can be replaced by Riley, McKenzie, Kent, Michie, and maybe even Blease, Tapscott, and Strauss.

Especially their output on Monday.

I think it is time to reward some form and let Salem and JKH earn their way back.

[Slartibartfast 16,870]

Clarification. We will look for class, you are right but that works two ways; either we bring in ready to go class in which case the current players become depth or we bring in young class through the draft which becomes depth until it develops sufficient to push in.

Either way, at the moment outside of the current 22 we have very few players worth a look; so any player injured, out of form or any young player needing a rest can't really be replaced on a weekly basis.

This is where I disagree.

McKenzie, Michie and Riley are midfield depth. They are not class.

Strauss and Clisby are back 6 depth, they are not class.

Toumpas, Kent, Salem and JKH are class, they are not depth, they just haven't developed. Undeveloped class like these guys are not depth players.

We will not draft players who don't have the potential not to be class and we may look to trade out some lower end depth to speculate on class in the draft.

[Slartibartfast 16,870]

A few points:

1) Really bad selection decision not dropping a tall for Dawes. I'm not saying this with the benefit of hindsight as I made the comment as soon as the final teams were in on Saturday. The forward line looked really unbalanced on paper and so it proved on game day with a lack of pace and mobility inside 50.

2) This lack of balance up forward created a double problem. Firstly, we couldn't win a ground ball inside 50, especially in the first half when there were a lot of spillages inside 50. Secondly, we couldnt pressure their exits, as their small defenders ran away and exposed our lack of pace and mobility up forward.

3) Yes the ball movement around the ground was too slow, but I think credit must go to the opposition for stifling our flow. Collingwood defended our ball movement very, very well and just did not allow us any quick flow into our forward line. We also lack line breaking ball carriers off half back, players like Malceski and Shaw who could have broken the game up with their overlap running.

4) I wasn't too disappointed leaving the ground today. For me it was another step in the right direction with our effort and our defence and our competitiveness.

5) Of course 3 goals is not enough to win a game of footy and there's no doubt we need to get the balance between attack and defence right. But Roos has always spoken of getting defence right first and then focusing on other aspects of our game. And boy is he doing a mighty job with our defence. Last year we conceded 120 points against the Pies, this year we halved that to 60. The turnaround is nothing short of amazing. Defence wins titles amd for the first time in a long time I'm seeing a well drilled, well organised Melbourne team consistently giving 100% effort with a sustainable defence-orientated game plan.

6) I cannot believe some of the criticism on here. From where we have come from last year, a side that got pumped by a then-mediocre Gold Coast team at the MCG by 10 goals and a side that lost to Essendon by 25 goals, to a side that is now competing solidly against top sides. We have had competitive losses against the Swans and Pies and should've beaten Port. Of course it is still furstrating to lose but we have come a very long way in a short space of time.

7) If we bring the same effort next week we should be in with a good chance of beating Essendon.

I agree with all of that. The other thing is I reckon that other teams are not taking us lightly now. Carlton thought they could thrash us and left out Waite and Gartlett.

Collingwood took us seriously. We are winning back some respect from where it counts - other teams.

[old dee 23,482]

They were promising but their output can be replaced by Riley, McKenzie, Kent, Michie, and maybe even Blease, Tapscott, and Strauss.

Especially their output on Monday.

I think it is time to reward some form and let Salem and JKH earn their way back.

Yes you are right, during the third quarter I was thinking almost anyone would be giving more than Salem.

However I cannot have the last two, nothing there IMO

[rpfc 28,045]

This is where I disagree.

McKenzie, Michie and Riley are midfield depth. They are not class.

Strauss and Clisby are back 6 depth, they are not class.

Toumpas, Kent, Salem and JKH are class, they are not depth, they just haven't developed. Undeveloped class like these guys are not depth players.

We will not draft players who don't have the potential not to be class and we may look to trade out some lower end depth to speculate on class in the draft.

I would argue that promising kids are always a part of your 'depth' in any given year.

But you are right about what we need, we can't wait to see how Toumpas, Kent, Salem and JKH turn out. We need to get some more help for Jones, Tyson and Viney. Vince and Cross are fantastic but Cross will slow down soon.

Tyson and Viney will be young again next year and we shouldn't just assume they will continue as they are going either.

I would be targeting a 25 year old midfielder who can come straight into the starting 18 and give us some power running and boldness.

But it is going to cost us...

[old dee 23,482]

I agree with all of that. The other thing is I reckon that other teams are not taking us lightly now. Carlton thought they could thrash us and left out Waite and Gartlett.

Collingwood took us seriously. We are winning back some respect from where it counts - other teams.

If I am honest with myself BB we are exceeding my expectations from the start of the season.

I have to keep reminding myself where we have come from

[old dee 23,482]

I would argue that promising kids are always a part of your 'depth' in any given year.

But you are right about what we need, we can't wait to see how Toumpas, Kent, Salem and JKH turn out. We need to get some more help for Jones, Tyson and Viney. Vince and Cross are fantastic but Cross will slow down soon.

Tyson and Viney will be young again next year and we shouldn't just assume they will continue as they are going either.

I would be targeting a 25 year old midfielder who can come straight into the starting 18 and give us some power running and boldness.

But it is going to cost us...

Welcome to the AFL in 21st century rpfc.

Sorry not trying to be smart but that is the situation and we are trying now to rectify the errors of 2007 -10 where we denuded the experienced player stocks.

[rpfc 28,045]

I agree with all of that. The other thing is I reckon that other teams are not taking us lightly now. Carlton thought they could thrash us and left out Waite and Gartlett.

Collingwood took us seriously. We are winning back some respect from where it counts - other teams.

Yes, their fans won't take us seriously but at least their coaching staff are at least.

I agree about the Carlton nonsense - I doubt we will see that from any side this year and hopefully the near-to-medium-term future.

If you want to beat Melbourne - you better play your full strength team and you better be ready to win the footy.

I didn't think I would be saying that this soon.

[grazman 7,263]

A few points:

1) Really bad selection decision not dropping a tall for Dawes. I'm not saying this with the benefit of hindsight as I made the comment as soon as the final teams were in on Saturday. The forward line looked really unbalanced on paper and so it proved on game day with a lack of pace and mobility inside 50.

2) This lack of balance up forward created a double problem. Firstly, we couldn't win a ground ball inside 50, especially in the first half when there were a lot of spillages inside 50. Secondly, we couldnt pressure their exits, as their small defenders ran away and exposed our lack of pace and mobility up forward.

I was hoping with a tall forward line we could have exposed them a little more than we did, but all credit to their key backs who defended very well. Pedo lstarted really well and looked ready for a day out but we just couldn't get a mark inside 50 when it mattered. Interestingly it was Russian who was subbed out. I think Max is definately improving, but it will be interesting to see whether they go with the two ruckmen again for next week.

[Vipercrunch 2,820]

Not enough daring when moving the ball forward.

Forward line didn't work together to make space, block etc.

Not enough run and the things needed to assist run - shepherding and talk.

Happy with the improvements defensively. I just have to be patient with the offensive side of the game which requires better skill and confidence.

I have to give credit where its due - Collingwood's defenders were very good. Tight and well timed punches.