And they needed to.

We were horrible on Saturday - I try very hard to remain positive and the only glimmers I took out of the game was Viney and Riley and we managed a shutdown job in the second half.

The other thing I would like to refute is week in week out I hear - "if they had kicked straight we would have been done by 100 points". I took note of the first quarter where they kicked 3.7 - we rushed 3 behinds. One kick was well outside 50 and touched . Two were from tight angles - one only was a gimme that was missed. To OD - sometimes the scoreboard ain't all it seems to be.

Nut bean four were directly in front at about 30 metres not one of them went close.

I stay with we were lucky they kicked poorly or it would have been 15 goals.

The game was over half way through the second quarter.

Edited July 14, 201411 yr by old dee

Nut bean four were directly in front at about 30 metres not one of them went close.

I stay with we were lucky they kicked poorly or it would have been 15 goals.

The game was over half way through the second quarter.

It was over by the second quarter but watch the first quarter again - there were definitely NOT four directly in front - i took note as I keep hearing the same thing week in and week out - if only they had kicked straight.

Nut bean four were directly in front at about 30 metres not one of them went close.

I stay with we were lucky they kicked poorly or it would have been 15 goals.

The game was over half way through the second quarter.

They missed more easy shots in the second quarter - but the first quarter of 3.7. there was one that should not have missed.

They missed more easy shots in the second quarter - but the first quarter of 3.7. there was one that should not have missed.

Sorry nutbean I did not mean in the first quarter but over the four quarters.

Sorry nutbean I did not mean in the first quarter but over the four quarters.

I have said elsewhere but the one thing that ( for most of the season) Roos has got us doing - is not giving up the corridor - we failed at that on Saturday. Lots of points have been scored against us but we are making teams take long range shots or shots from difficult angles.

My point was based on the premise that if we were down by 59 points at half time over the past 5 years then the resultant margin would have been significantly greater than a further 7 points.

If I'm incorrect perhaps you could point out the games I have overlooked.

I can understand your frustration however I refuse to be ultra negative when IMO the second half on Saturday was quite a good effort.

Re a good second half gss I bristle at these comments like the one about an honourable loss.

the game was over at half time and we lost by 11 goals.

Just another poor performance against Geelong who have been pounding us for a decade.

We are now competitive with the bottom six sides so I guess it is better than the last two years.

We are destined to finish last or second last there is still a very long way to go IMO.

Re a good second half gss I bristle at these comments like the one about an honourable loss.

the game was over at half time and we lost by 11 goals.

Just another poor performance against Geelong who have been pounding us for a decade.

We are now competitive with the bottom six sides so I guess it is better than the last two years.

We are destined to finish last or second last there is still a very long way to go IMO.

We have miles and miles to go - and it was not an honorable loss - it was a hammering.

But the simple truth of it is - last year if we were 60 points down at half time it meant a 100 point smashing at the end of the game.

yes...lets cherish those missing 34 points....oooh yeah !!

yes...lets cherish those missing 34 points....oooh yeah !!

Not cherishing - its nothing to hang our hat on - did we stop the bleed after halftime or not ?

Not cherishing - its nothing to hang our hat on - did we stop the bleed after halftime or not ?

stop? No...slow ? yes

We played one qtr of footy....shame theres 4

stop? No...slow ? yes

We played one qtr of footy....shame theres 4

you don't get an argument from me - but taking your point of playing 1 out of 4 on Saturday - for most of last season we played none out of 4.

Edited July 14, 201411 yr by nutbean

you don't get an argument from me - but taking your point of playing 1 out of 4 on Saturday - for most of last season we played none out of 4.

sad but true

Really guys?

I seriously hope i don't see him at all this year and they wrap him in cotton wool, getting him back to 110% fitness between now and pre season. With our luck, if he does play his first game later this year, he'd likely go down in a screaming heap with some freak of an accident like a broken ankle, something only the MFC seems to be able to pull from the mire with anyone looking like they might be a potential superstar.

A full pre season to gain some extra strength, fitness and confidence in his bod and offer some hope to the others who might be left to play with him next year if he makes it.

A full clean out of most of the present list at year's end... ie., pretty much a new "Roos" derived list for 2015 to begin the new rebuild of a rebuild of a rebuild (and yes i realise this would take more than one pre season, but hey, at this point Roos wont be there to coach in the 3rd year....ughh)......and....you never know....we might finally see a new side playing consistent AFL standard footy. Who knows, we might then start kicking a half decent score that might worry the opposition a few more times than the 4 we've seen so far.

Regardless, i would be extremely surprised (and dissapointed) if Roos made such a dumb decision as to play him for one or 2 matches later this year given where Hulk is coming from injury wise and the present state (losing mentality) of this group. If he does, it would be for purely selfish reasons and not in the short or long term interests of Hogan IMO.

Chris Dawes thought that it would be a good idea for his mental well being to get on the park after all the hard work he's done.

You're right though, some bloody injury will curtail his 2015 knowing our luck!

stop? No...slow ? yes

We played one qtr of footy....shame theres 4

why do people make statements that are so incorrect and so easily verified?

we lost the second half by 7 points. That equates to TWO quarters, not one, wouldn't you agree

I am not a happy demon right now but for the love of god why do so many posters overdramatise and plainly misrepresent the truth

we pretty much broke even in a half with the side placed 4th. It IS something to put some stock into.

why do people make statements that are so incorrect and so easily verified?

we lost the second half by 7 points. That equates to TWO quarters, not one, wouldn't you agree

I am not a happy demon right now but for the love of god why do so many posters overdramatise and plainly misrepresent the truth

we pretty much broke even in a half with the side placed 4th. It IS something to put some stock into.

No i dont because the scoreboard only tells half the story

We actually won a qtr.. when for whatever abberation ( collectively ) it was decided to bring their game heads to contest

The last qtr where they only kicked 2 5 to our solitary scoreboard entry was really about a handful deciding they would BE Melbourne..god knows where the others were.

We , as a team...only played ONE qtr.. youre entitled to your view

No i dont because the scoreboard only tells half the story

We actually won a qtr.. when for whatever abberation ( collectively ) it was decided to bring their game heads to contest

The last qtr where they only kicked 2 5 to our solitary scoreboard entry was really about a handful deciding they would BE Melbourne..god knows where the others were.

We , as a team...only played ONE qtr.. youre entitled to your view

That's funny, you say we only played one quarter, I say we DIDN'T play for just one- when they kicked 8 goals.

It's a matter of perception.

Did anyone actually expect us to win, the margin was not huge compared to the poundings we took last year. I think it was not so much the size of the loss but the fact that Geelong did make us look pretty poor that irritated me the most.

I guess its been brought up by the unfortunates I dont read, but yet again we get smashed after returning from playing in the Northern Territory.

Did anyone actually expect us to win, the margin was not huge compared to the poundings we took last year. I think it was not so much the size of the loss but the fact that Geelong did make us look pretty poor that irritated me the most.

Exactly! Freo just zoned off against us, knowing that we'll turn the ball over.....

Geelong just 'played' - not much rigour on their part...

I guess its been brought up by the unfortunates I dont read, but yet again we get smashed after returning from playing in the Northern Territory.

Rubbish we get smashed by Geelong no matter when or where we play them.

Did anyone actually expect us to win, the margin was not huge compared to the poundings we took last year. I think it was not so much the size of the loss but the fact that Geelong did make us look pretty poor that irritated me the most.

No

anyway it was not 186 so I guess we should be all really happy and shouting the bar

Edited July 14, 201411 yr by old dee

No any it was not 186 so I guess we should be all really happy and shouting the bar

Yeah you're correct OD - it was only your standard everyday 10 goal flogging!

FMD. Will I live long enough to see Melb become a decent competitive team?

Yeah you're correct OD - it was only your standard everyday 10 goal flogging!

FMD. Will I live long enough to see Melb become a decent competitive team?

I sincerely doubt I will Bbo.

I sincerely doubt I will Bbo.

We'll drink to that OD!

And they needed to.

We were horrible on Saturday - I try very hard to remain positive and the only glimmers I took out of the game was Viney and Riley and we managed a shutdown job in the second half.

Nutbean the game was well and truly over at half time.

Pretty much any half decent team knows that they will always outscore us relatively easy in the first half of a match if they put their foot down early on and go really hard at our obsessive lateral/backwards possession game in defence and across the middle of the ground when we do occasionally hit targets there. They know we are so poor at finding our way up the ground by foot, with so many clanger turnovers, that once ahead by a decent margin early (say 5 to 6 goals or so) they probably relax a touch in the second half knowing we are a non-threat and at any stage they can turn up the wick again if we do happen to get it under 4 goals or so. That's how easy we are to beat atm.

The thing is we might be ok at defending in our back half and to a lessor degree through the middle when we have our "ideal" player set-up and structure (ie., very few key players out injured, like Cross, and most in very good form like Vince, Jones and Tyson). Some of these guys able to push back and help out in defence to rebound (Vince and Tyson were very good at this earlier in the year).However, most teams know they will also win the majority of center clearances against us fairly easily. I don't believe even the best defence in the league would handle the amount of ball that comes into our defensive 50 week after week.

The bulk of the game is played in "our defensive half". There's very little overlap style gut running and quick 'play on' from our guys compared to most clubs as they seem unable or unwilling to play forward of their opponent, possibly because they don't have much faith that the next player will more than likely beat his opponent or that the guy who has the ball is likely to get accurate disposals to them for the receive...who knows? So we also don't stretch or tire out our opponents as much as other clubs by making them chase us up the field. We continually play a stop start very slow ball movement style game, giving the opponent a nice easy jog to their next set up/wall up the field or on the mark while we take forever. As you know we often just can't hit a target anyway, resulting in a turnover in the worst places on the ground and easy goals from turnovers again and again.

In short we might be fairly good at defending given the number of times the ball comes into our defensive 50, but we are also very easily defended against at the wrong end of the ground (for us), namely through the middle where the walls are built and even down back with weight of numbers as our backs get worn down with the continual entries.

We will lkeep getting smashed by anyone outside of the bottom 6 until we can find....

1. Some new on ball tallent who (collectively with say Jones, Cross, Tyson, Vince) can win more clearances than our opposition on a regular basis (Edit: in future years this should include Viney of course)

2. One or two pacey/agile outside runners who can spread and deliver the ball lace out on a regular basis coming i50 (eg Burgoyne/Pendels types)

3. At least two pacey running players off HB who can also use the ball and hit targets on a dime (eg Shaw/Malceski types)

4. A decent lead up forward who can receive the good work from up the field and kick clutch goals (Buddy/Hawkins types... Hogan maybe ? ).

5. A decent alternative overhead mark as an alternative to the lead up forward so we can go deep if the lead is shut down (Roughhead/Cloke types)

6. A very quick, agile, classy crumber who knows where to get to to take advantage of the spills off the deep forward entries to the overhead target (Cyril/Milne types...JKH maybe?)

Can i see us finding the above anytime soon (ie., within the next 5 to 10 years) given the way the AFL has sucked the lessor clubs dry with the new start ups (priority picks etc), the AFL rigged fixture, our pitiful performances in the last decade etc? Well, failing a minor Roos driven miracle, that would be a big fat nope i'm afraid.

Edited July 14, 201411 yr by Rusty Nails