Why would an AFL football even consider kicking across the face of goal deep in defence?

Players will make mistakes when under pressure, tired or when rushed but what Viney did should never happen.

The idea of kicking across the face of goal should not even enter his mind. It's like suddenly deciding that drinking battery acid is a good idea, it just should not ever happen, especially from a free kick with no pressure.

I learnt not to do that in Auskick. And I'm a fat, bearded bloke, 6 beers deep on a couch.

I love these threads after a loss. Rather than posting it in the actual thread you think your thoughts are more important and need a thread of their own.

What the hell do we do at training?

I know one thing is for sure we don't practice kicking or skills in general.

That's what happens when you recruit a lad because his Dad works at the club.

Lets face the truth, he is 5 feet 6, can't mark over his head, can't hit a target with either foot, can't kick further than 30 metres, and is slower than a snail, oh yeh he has a good try, that's redeeming, future of the club, laughable.

Why would an AFL football even consider kicking across the face of goal deep in defence?

Players will make mistakes when under pressure, tired or when rushed but what Viney did should never happen.

The idea of kicking across the face of goal should not even enter his mind. It's like suddenly deciding that drinking battery acid is a good idea, it just should not ever happen, especially from a free kick with no pressure.

...because it's not the 1970's and all clubs/players have been doing it for years. The last time I heard anyone complaint about a kick across goal was when Gubby Allan did it and Gubby is ancient...

The question really is where was his footy smarts and awareness and why kick to a team mate under pressure.

It's just a sick joke following this club.

We put our best side on the park minus 2 or 3 players and can't beat a bunch of delists, rejects and kids that have been training together for only a couple of months.

Matt Jones and Rohan Bail are not even at 'top up' player standard. Constantly overrunning the ball, fumbling, missing targets and giving away careless free kicks.

Jamar and Gawn are ineffective. Gawn has 6 inches on his opponent, comes on fresh and can't get first hands to the ball.

Toumpas is scared and slow.

Just a pathetic bunch of losers.

That's what happens when you recruit a lad because his Dad works at the club.

Lets face the truth, he is 5 feet 6, can't mark over his head, can't hit a target with either foot, can't kick further than 30 metres, and is slower than a snail, oh yeh he has a good try, that's redeeming, future of the club, laughable.

Don't troll dude. If you're serious, then you've just got no idea.

Edited March 20, 201510 yr by rhaz

The idea itself isn't what's bad. Kicking across goal creates space and opens the play. Deep in defense is risky but if it pays off the transition can be deadly.

What was frustrating was that everyone seemed to see the Essendon player there but Viney. He took zero time to assess the area.

Such a risky take must be made with extreme caution and utter perfection. It was a lazy kick and ultimately he deserved to be punished for it.

He let the team down at that moment

He'll learn.

Edited March 20, 201510 yr by praha

That's what happens when you recruit a lad because his Dad works at the club.

Lets face the truth, he is 5 feet 6, can't mark over his head, can't hit a target with either foot, can't kick further than 30 metres, and is slower than a snail, oh yeh he has a good try, that's redeeming, future of the club, laughable.

Don't troll dude. If you're serious, then you've just got no idea.

If you looked at tonights game then he makes some fair points. The thing that really concerned me was that at his size he is getting caught trying to break tackles and do too much. He will really need to change up his game.

To be honest the kick across goal was irrelevant. If we retained possession and won by 5 points would the game have been any better?

To be honest the kick across goal was irrelevant. If we retained possession and won by 5 points would the game have been any better?

Potentially not, but it just symbolizes a lot of the stupid mistakes that Melbourne players make over and over again.

Oh, the club has a history of assembling sheer stupidity. They've turned it into an artform.

Don't troll dude. If you're serious, then you've just got no idea.

I've been reading bluey's opinion for well over a decade and despite his tone he is an astute judge. Hope he is wrong on this one but...........

Edit: spulling

Edited March 20, 201510 yr by Melbman2

I am more concerned with the basic desire to get the ball forward and how that has been seemingly beaten out of the players.

Talk about Footy 101; that is in the mission statement...

Get the ball forward as that is how you score and win the game.

16 more contested possies, 35 more uncontested possies - those are healthy numbers. Then we get to 4 less Inside 50s and losing the game...

This team needs to go forward to go forward.

I am more concerned with the basic desire to get the ball forward and how that has been seemingly beaten out of the players.

Talk about Footy 101; that is in the mission statement...

Get the ball forward as that is how you score and win the game.

16 more contested possies, 35 more uncontested possies - those are healthy numbers. Then we get to 4 less Inside 50s and losing the game...

This team needs to go forward to go forward.

I used to bang on about this in 2007, nothing's changed.

I am more concerned with the basic desire to get the ball forward and how that has been seemingly beaten out of the players.

Talk about Footy 101; that is in the mission statement...

Get the ball forward as that is how you score and win the game.

16 more contested possies, 35 more uncontested possies - those are healthy numbers. Then we get to 4 less Inside 50s and losing the game...

This team needs to go forward to go forward.

We should be aiming to goal off every centre bounce clearance. Which means we'd need cleaner disposal going inside 50.

Salem is our answer, but he is also our answer down back. Vandenberg could possibly fill the role as kicker.

Our kicking is a bit of a worry atm. We have a guy (Vandenberg) who has just came out the NEAFL who looks a better kick - and player - than 90% of our side.

Potentially not, but it just symbolizes a lot of the stupid mistakes that Melbourne players make over and over again.

Theres a time to do things and times you dont.

Dying minutes of a close tussle isnt the time.Footy 101 says guard the ball..kick to safety.

This instant an epic fail.

Laughable if not so costly.

Amateur hour strikes again.

I sometimes wonder if we're making ANY progress at all if this still enters the players thoughts.

Dumb

Don't troll dude. If you're serious, then you've just got no idea.

I disagree. He's right. Viney is too small to play the bullocking game he is trying to play. He is vastly overrated by many mfc supporters because of our memory of Todd. So far (especially in 2014) he hasn't lived up to the hype.

Viney is an ok player so far, hasn't done anything to set the world on fire.

Jack Viney at this point in time is an average AFL player. He has courage, maybe too much

The problem last night was we are also carrying 4-5 vfl players.

Personally i was glad we did not win by a huge margin. That would just create a false representation.

As Roos and Dawes both said when interviewed last night

There is a lot of work to be done

2 weeks to Round 1

Jack Viney is not a gun. He may become one but he has a lot of learning and executing before it can even be thought of

Gee......I remember a few years ago...Posters were complaining about N. Jones doing the same thing

Jack is 20 years old FCS Played 33 games

Essentially, the Bombers still had more star players on the field than we did even with the top-ups.

Essentially, the Bombers still had more star players on the field than we did even with the top-ups.

Agreed. And we probably had far more VFL standard players represented.

Essentially, the Bombers still had more star players on the field than we did even with the top-ups.

Yep, and having X amount of star players (or very good+ players) is directly related to wins.

It's a very simplistic way of viewing a list but 'potential' doesn't win games. The top quality players can carry others but average players (or worse) are always going to be more concerned about their own form. Also, the best players bring others into the game and that's an area where we're sadly lacking.

The Hawks have a stack of top players (14+) whilst we've got less than a handful.

Until we've got at least another 6 players who are as good (or better) than N Jones or Tyson, we can't hope to win 10 games or more. That is an obvious summation but it's a tried and true method of how our game works.

5 or 6 of our players have the capacity to step it up but at this moment in time they're all still at the potential stage.

Edit: grammar

Edited March 21, 201510 yr by Macca