No change http://www.afl.com.au/match-centre/2014/14/melb-v-nmfc

No change = STABILITY

I like it, I like it a lot.

Edited June 20, 201411 yr by DemonOX

Really like the fact that Roos makes few changes, backs a player in for a few weeks when they get a chance, and forgives a shocker. Becoming like the Aussie cricket team, hard to get in, hard to get out of.

We can tell the team simply from how they name Casey, no surprises, no late withdrawals, no games being played. Simple straight honest footy.

This Roos bloke is so impressive, and so simple. Hogan about to re sign a nice finish to what started as a ripping week. Sitting at home watching the last quarter again, gotta love that!

I have no idea. He pulled the sub card with him very early. Don't you agree all signs point to Casey?

My real point is, I think Roos values things more than possessions.

Robbie Tarrant out

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-06-21/brown-to-debut-for-north

North will now have 2 debutants

Robbie Tarrant out

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-06-21/brown-to-debut-for-north

North will now have 2 debutants

Kinda wanted to see Trent Dumont in action, I was hoping we either got him or JKH at pick 40.

That was certainly an eternity ago, and the memories of a Melbourne side kicking 132 points in any game has long since faded.

This got me thinking - when was the last time we scored 132 or more?

Answer - last year! Round 4 vs GWS.

The next time was in 2011, a season in which we scored 132+ three times (159 vs Gold Coast, 149 vs Adelaide, 149 vs Fremantle).

Since 2011 we've only scored above 100 four times, though.

According to Champion Data, once inside 50, North score more often than any other team in the competition, therefore this should be a bit of a benchmark game for our newly found defensive unit.

IIRC, Champion Data also says that we concede the fewest points from our opponents' inside 50s, so it should be a great test for both sides.

I hope Blease gets a late call up. Anyone who can kick 5 goals in a game is worthy of another chance IMO.

I think Roos has slightly different benchmarks and standards to you.

I had exactly the same thought. I don't think McKenzie has the speed to go with Harvey and think he'll go to Swallow or even perhaps Dal Santo. Nicholson has the speed and engine to go with Harvey but he's not a tagger by nature and gets drawn to the ball too easily. It would be high risk as if Nicholson doesn't do the job well he is limited in what else he can do.

As for Blease I reckon he's garnish and I don't think Roos likes garnish in his team.

I wonder how many negating players we can carry in one team, without compromising our attacking capabilities? The only way we could ever carry McKenzie, Cross and Nicholson in the one side, is if at least one of them (preferably two of them) played with an inclination for attack. In this instance, the ability to find the footy themselves and hurt their opponents is just as vital.

I'd say this is the beauty of Cross. His disposal isn't as damaging as it could be, but he sure can find it. So he is capable of playing that negating role, but still involving himself in an attacking sense as well.

Much to my eventual satisfaction (and I'm sure yours too, Bob), Jordie managed to get some score involvements last week, which makes him a much more dangerous proposition too. I'd say his tagging game is better than Cross', but historically, he has offered much less than Cross going forward, and less of an ability to find the ball. However, if he can continue to improve his offensive game (which confidence and continuity in the 1's will do), he could still carve out an important piece in the MFC jigsaw puzzle, going forward.

I'd say Nicholson offers something different again and that's leg speed. In his best games for the club, he has provided excellent run and carry off half back, something we severely lack. He, like Terlich, must improve his disposal if he's to be seriously considered in the MFC's future plans.

Finally, I'm cautious to dismiss anyone who has been historically deficient, but is yet to play a game under Roos. Therefore, if Roos and the FD see improvement in Nicholson's game, he should be given the benefit of the doubt. Especially, seeing some of the players that Roos has turned around this year and in his time at Sydney.

Terlich was the only one of the three nominated emergencies who didn't play for Casey yesterday out of our three named so discusion on Blease and Nicholson in reagrds to today's match is somewhat superflous.

Back to back wins for the first time in god knows how long will be an important milestone in our development. If it comes against the Kangas, who have had the wood on us for an eternity, it would be even more significant. It will be a tough match in the trenches, but I'm backing the Dees to make a huge statement, and keep Essendon off the back page of Monday's Herald Sun.

What irks me is that if we win, that cheating scumbag side may creep into the eight thanks to us. If we win we go to 5 and 8 with an outside chance of finals hopes, so a must win for us. Best scenario is we win small so North's percentage does not go down enough for this to happen.

Dees by 14

tipping a tight close contest and us to get the chocolates

Riley as sub, Salem to play his best game for the club, Kent to pick up where he left off and Bernie Vince to play a blinder

What irks me is that if we win, that cheating scumbag side may creep into the eight thanks to us. If we win we go to 5 and 8 with an outside chance of finals hopes, so a must win for us. Best scenario is we win small so North's percentage does not go down enough for this to happen.

As far as I'm concerned there is only one team I care what position it finishes in and that is Melbourne. I want us to smash North by as much as possible.