Post Match Discussion - Round 5

[Bitter but optimistic 21,238]

Was a tad "too tired" to post last night.

We received a jolly good flogging - love that word. A little perspective is needed though.I have to say Freo looked very bloody good and I am prepared to suggest they will [censored] other teams before year's end and will be deep into serious finals action.

Some observations.

1.They clearly had more players on the ground than us.

2.We showed excellent manners in allowing our guests to always use the ball before us.

Players.

Jamar battled manfully all day and did as well as could be expected against a "Monster" who was simply too bloody big. The hit outs to advantage killed our mids and us.

Pedo did a bit and it will be an interesting selection if Dawes is fit as JW was very poor and a couple of attempts at taking "one handers" will not help his cause at selection.

Garlett did his job well (As did Eddie in Adelaide) so one can only hope that Carlton fans are crying and gnashing there teeth. (Collingwood supporters cannot gnash)

TMac was a standout and looks a big chance to stop the captain's run of Blueys.

The "Hulk" had to chase kicks (due to number 2 above) but McPharlin did him on the day - an excellent learning experience I suspect.

Nothing else to add as I was sitting with a couple of drunken buffoons and spent a large part of the day distracted by their vulgar behaviour. More of that on another thread.

[Biffen 12,323]

We should be giving Gawn Fitzy and

Spencer a run

Don't see the point in playing Jamar anymore.

[chook fowler 18,217]

Was a tad "too tired" to post last night.

We received a jolly good flogging - love that word. A little perspective is needed though.I have to say Freo looked very bloody good and I am prepared to suggest they will [censored] other teams before year's end and will be deep into serious finals action.

Some observations.

1.They clearly had more players on the ground than us.

2.We showed excellent manners in allowing our guests to always use the ball before us.

Players.

Jamar battled manfully all day and did as well as could be expected against a "Monster" who was simply too bloody big. The hit outs to advantage killed our mids and us.

Pedo did a bit and it will be an interesting selection if Dawes is fit as JW was very poor and a couple of attempts at taking "one handers" will not help his cause at selection.

Garlett did his job well (As did Eddie in Adelaide) so one can only hope that Carlton fans are crying and gnashing there teeth. (Collingwood supporters cannot gnash)

TMac was a standout and looks a big chance to stop the captain's run of Blueys.

The "Hulk" had to chase kicks (due to number 2 above) but McPharlin did him on the day - an excellent learning experience I suspect.

Nothing else to add as I was sitting with a couple of drunken buffoons and spent a large part of the day distracted by their vulgar behaviour. More of that on another thread.

Priceless.

At least you didn't have to pay for your flogging yesterday - the Dees provided it on the house.

[Hellaintabadplacetobe 4,089]

Gee only nine pages, Tyson has gone from next superstar to dud, Jones from A to B grade, Van Demon/Newton wrong choices etc etc....gee a week is sure a long time in footy

We were competitive for 3 quarters against the in form midfield in the comp, we had a shocker in the 4th

Take home the positives, Garlett, Grimes on Ballantyne, Brayshaw, Tommy Mc

Grimes was on Mayne

[chook fowler 18,217]

like many others on this forum I think we lost it at the selection table by not including a beast like Spencer to help Jamar.

Our midfield was always going to struggle but with a dominatrix like Sandilands it was mission impossible.

[Devil is in the Detail 880]

Three certain goals by the maggots.

1. When the Freo player was running back to take a kick and got a 50m penalty taking him to the goal line.

2. When Hogan was going for the mark in the 4th and McPharlin had him in a bear hug when the ball was 20m away. Would have been a certainty.

3. Mayne's shepherd in the goal square when he had his back to the ball. Free kick every day of the week.

All had a huge impact in the context of the game at the time.

Newton tackled a guy in the first quarter in our 50 and rolled, landed in his side. Push in the back call, goal to Freo.

[Lucifers Hero 36,998]

Grimes was on Mayne...

...who had 9 marks, 12 tackles and kicked 4 goals. Not a good day for any of our players but particularly bad for Grimes. 12 tackles for a forward, really! Its no wonder we couldn't get the ball inside 50.

If it wasn't for so many DL's getting stuck into Watts, Grimes and a few others wouldn't be allowed to fly under the radar here and escape scrutiny. Grimes (and Jordie) seriously hindered their cause to stay in the 22 when injured players return. If their cards weren't stamped before they are now.

Edited May 3, 2015 by Lucifer's Hero

[John Crow Batty 8,255]

Grimes was on Mayne

That was Mayne's best game since 2013.

[on the outer 19]

Thought we were respectable for 2.5 quarters, but what a depressingly awful final 20 minutes.

Fortunately the weekend was over by then.

[The Reverend 1,704]

I believe roos lost this game at the selection table last Thursday night

Yeah, sort of with you on this but geez Freo looked several times better than anything we have to offer at this stage. We needed some more size to counter their giants but it would have affected our running ability. In the end Roos made the wrong call but I can see his reasoning. Freo were too big, too fast, too smart. I thought we tried hard for three quarters and were killed by some umpiring decisions but overall we were simply beaten by a much more accomplished team.

[pitmaster 3,063]

This was a defeat that magnified into a thrashing because we did not take our chance to put scoreboard pressure on Freo when we had the chances.

Two, or was it three posters?

Brayshsaw misses everything in the second quarter with an open goal on a 45 degree angle in front of him.

Ditto Garlett (who was otherwise sensational) in the second half.

Although we were five goals down we dominated the first five minutes of the last quarter for the reward of a handful of points. Convert one of those, and two of those earlier posters or misses and we are putting the heat on them.

No we were not going to win it but they would not have played with such wild abandon in the final 20 minutes either. The key message is we are not as bad as the margin implies but we do lack steadiness in the heat of battle. That has been the case all year: six goals 14 points is the most inaccurate we have been all year and it's a reflection of the pressure perceived and real yesterday.

As to individuals, Tyson is still a kid and is allowed to make mistakes (such as blazing away instead of passing to Jamar in the last) and will still improve.

McDonald was good again. Garland brave, Vandenberg still showed stuff. Jamar kept going at an impossible task. Watts continued his run of bad form but good players - and he is - have to be allowed to play through patches of lousy form because he will gain nothing from the VFL and we don't have the depth to replace him.

If any better signal about lack of depth was needed, take a look at poor bloody Jordie's effort which shows endeavour will take you only so far.

[praha 10,270]

I don't buy the "they are the best team in the comp" argument. They have flogged us by 10 goals every game since 2012, which was before they were the league's best team, and in 2013 they were good, but hardly the "best". We continue to get pounded by them in the same area - the middle - and yesterday was as much a flogging in that area as I've seen. Vince, Jones and Tyson didn't give a puff the whole game.

Even if we had have taken our chances, they were still a 10-goal better side, easily. They'd have found a way to still get ahead.

As I mentioned earlier, the biggest disappointment was that the game seemed like an exercise in minimisation right from the opening bounce. We were NEVER in it. They were a 10-goal better side from the opening bounce, and dare I say that by the end of it they were more than an 11-goal better side. It felt more like a 20-goal loss.

We never went out there to win it. It was always a case of, "how do we keep the margin as low as possible", and then when all else failed, everyone lost the plot, as Roos said.

That was a different sort of loss compared to similar beltings in previous years. We didn't have the cattle or experience in 2012, 2013 and parts of 2014. Yesterday, they simply had zero urgency to win.

It was astonishing how much uncontested ball they won. This team simply has no plan B if they aren't able to slow the ball down.

I hate to harp on about Jones as I have in many other threads on here but once again he shows he also has no plan B. He was given a football lesson by players with less experience. I don't expect him to do everything but twice this season he has gone missing as soon as the pressure is on. It's been very disappointing by his standards. Once upon a time he'd simply "go through the motions", but yesterday and against GWS he never took that extra step to at least be commendable in defeat.

We had no standouts yesterday. Garlett kicked three goals, but when? The delivery was shocking, granted, but they all felt like junk-time goals, even if they were so early in the contest. He's not damaging enough. As soon as we got a run, he missed two sitters. But he kicked them when we were 25-30 points down.

We also didn't get a single goal, coast-to-coast off the rebound. Granted Freo are a very well-drilled, disciplined side defensively but our key players lacked concentration. Jones missed a handball target from 5 meters away on our defensive 50 when we had Tyson alone on the wing, Vince in the middle and Hogan alone across half-forward.

That's a lack of effort and concentration. Twice now we have regressed back to the same sort of "we're not going to win so let's just wing it" mentality that we saw in round 2 against the Eagles last year.

Freo gave us a football lesson. When it was 10 points they were dominating, and eventually the final margin normalised and reflected the actual story of the game.

Edited May 3, 2015 by praha

[poita 3,573]

Watching Freo play yesterday makes me wonder whether the game has moved on again whilst we are still playing catch up to the last trend. Our contested football was okay yesterday, but Freo murdered us with their run and spread. The number of uncontested possessions that the Pearces in particular had was phenomenal. We looked slow and disinterested in comparison.

Roos has filled the team with guys like Michie, Cross and Tyson who work hard around the stoppages but who move like treacle. When the opposition has players the calibre of Mundy and Fyfe who can get the ball out to the runners in space, we had no chance.

Roos had a poor day yesterday too. His initial matchups were poor and the decision to play McKenzie as sub was mind boggling. The guy has no place in the team if he is not tagging the opposition's number one playmaker, ie Fyfe. Bail and M.Jones would have been more selections than McKenzie and Michie, although Viv would have been unlucky to have been dropped. Still, we needed run, and he doesn't provide any.

Lumumba is not coming close to justifying his pay packet, and watching him trail 5 metres behind Fyfe time and time again was embarrassing. Pedersen was better value than Jamar yesterday, and should be kept in the side. Tyson, Jones and Vandenberg do not defend well enough. Newton needs a spell at Casey. Brayshaw showed more heart than most of his teammates combined. Ditto Hogan, although I hate to see him chasing kicks on the half back line. JHK needs to work on doing the basics well before bringing out the party tricks. Garlett needs to do more than kick goals, although he is a vast improvement on what we've had previously.

Edited May 3, 2015 by poita

[jackaub 1,402]

Why do Melbournes' players bodies look so small and weak compared to many other teams this year.

We were well and truely out muscled yesterday. We had no body as strong as Fyfe or Barlow. its a bit concerning when so early in the season we appear to be so weak. Is the the fact that we dont draft strong bodies or dont we train for strength

No body in the MFC could tackle Fyfe.

[Devil is in the Detail 880]

Why do Melbournes' players bodies look so small and weak compared to many other teams this year.

We were well and truely out muscled yesterday. We had no body as strong as Fyfe or Barlow. its a bit concerning when so early in the season we appear to be so weak. Is the the fact that we dont draft strong bodies or dont we train for strength

No body in the MFC could tackle Fyfe.

Completely agree. But who in the AFL could tackled Fyfe in his current form.

[The Chazz 4,077]

My irrelevant points from the game, for anyone that can be bothered reading them;

- Roos definitely outcoached. McKenzie isn't a sub - he should've been sent to a player for the entire game and told to totally shut them down. That's his strength, possibly his one and only. You need a sub that can come on and make an impact in a short amount of time. JKH should've been this. Regardless of Roos' view on the sub rule, fact is it's a rule that you have to follow. Get over it.

- When they realised Dawes was going to be out, Spencer needed to come in, not Pedo. I would've had Spencer playing ruck, and Jamar full forward, then rotating through. Nothing against Pedo - he did some good things.

- Nathan Jones is clearly injured, as is Tyson. Sadly, we can't afford either to sit out, especially over the coming weeks, so they have to play. Some weeks they will play well, some it will hinder them.

- Howe looks totally disinterested, almost Frawley-like.

- I thought the small snippets where we took the game on and played our better footy (for the day), we weren't out of the contest. Even at 3/4 time I felt that we were in with a chance - had missed a couple of sitters, we had two posters as well, they were gifted a couple, we needed to make a slick start to the quarter, which we did, but couldn't execute. Personally, I would've gone with Vanders at full forward in the last quarter, not Howe.

- The 50m penalty that gifted Freo a goal was there. First look I was ropable, but when you look at the replay, Garlett clearly took steps toward the player with the ball. He had a chance to get out of the protected area, he didn't. If the role was reversed and we didn't get the 50, I would've been livid. That's not to excuse the moronic decisions that went against us throughout the day. Thankfully, the ones that Freo got close to goal, they missed most of them.

A brief point on the Jack Watts situation. I like Jack, he's not the star that we wanted him to be, it's an unknown if that's his fault or not. However...after the past couple of weeks, and watching the game on TV yesterday, I have come to the conclusion that the best thing for Jack and the Club would be to part company at the end of the season. I don't know of any player, past or present, to have been scrutinised over every piece of their play like Watts is. Everyone has an opinion, which is generally negative. The club can't have this hanging over its head, and the kid can't either to be honest. He is a distraction and I think it is unfair on he, the club, and the other players. We won't get much for Watts in a trade, but that's something we have to deal with.

Bring on Saturday night.

[Dr. Gonzo 22,412]

like many others on this forum I think we lost it at the selection table by not including a beast like Spencer to help Jamar.

Our midfield was always going to struggle but with a dominatrix like Sandilands it was mission impossible.

What's the point in bringing in Spencer, Fitz or Gawn? They MAY give us something in the ruck (I'm not convinced) but would offer absolutely nothing for the rest of the match. We would have been far worse off having any of them in the side over Pedersen or even Mckenzie.

[chook fowler 18,217]

Spencer has dominated at VFL level for a few weeks and has a big body - would have helped nullify Sandilands domination and helped our midfield.

Couldn't have been worse than what we dished up yesterday

[mo64 5,209]

Just watched the replay and can confirm that Grimes WASN'T on Ballantyne apart from briefly at the start of the last quarter. Ballantyne didn't play as a stay at home small forward, and Garland had him for a majority of the first 3 quarters when Ballantyne was in their forward 50. Howe had Mayne until he went forward, and Grimes picked him up on occasions. Grimes was also on Neale when he kicked his goal in the last.

So for anyone to say that Grimes held Ballantyne to 9 possessions is totally false.

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

And was injured for nearly twelve months, he has only played 30 odd games, if he was in his fourth year he would be around 80, get your facts right before you correct someone else

He's correct though, it IS his fourth year. He's played 40 games, not 30, so that's a fact YOU didn't get right.

Just because he only played 13 of a possible 44 in his first 2 years doesn't mean you just wipe them from the record. He was still around the club developing in developing in other ways, the way Hogan and now Petracca did. You can't just say he's on the same page as Salem, for example.

He's gone backwards for sure. I hope it's because he's injured.

[Akum 2,660]

When Freo have it they attack along the flanks, but when they other side has possession they close up the midfield. It's not news, commentators have been talking about it for a while, using terms like "breathe-in-breathe-out". I wondered what they were talking about until seeing it yesterday. It's a bit like the old Collingwood strategy, but also closes up the corridor effectively so that a defender making an interception looking for a fast break through the corridor finds it unexpectedly congested and hard to spot a target. That's how they strangle sides.

It's completely against what footballers have been trained to do since Auskick, which is to attack through the corridor and defend along the flanks. If a side persists in trying to do that all day, it's exactly what Freo expect them to do and it plays right into their hands. The plan relies on their opponent playing & setting up in an entirely predictable way.

They got 10.4 in the second half, while we got 1.10. With all our deficiencies, and for all their absolute domination in possessions (esp uncontested), they only had slightly more scoring shots than last year's 16th side. They did not like physical pressure, and they didn't like it when we played them one-on-one, because they're the situations their game plan tries to avoid. Once a smart strategic coach of a good team works this out, it will be interesting to see if it stands up when they find themselves unexpectedly under pressure and the other team anticipates what they're going to do. On the other hand, if, like Collingwood in 2010 or whenever it was, if no coach can work it out, they'll go close to the flag this year.

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

Gee only nine pages, Tyson has gone from next superstar to dud, Jones from A to B grade, Van Demon/Newton wrong choices etc etc....gee a week is sure a long time in footy

We were competitive for 3 quarters against the in form midfield in the comp, we had a shocker in the 4th

Take home the positives, Garlett, Grimes on Ballantyne, Brayshaw, Tommy Mc

Funny that your analysis of the game differs greatly from Tommy Mac's - who was visibly filthy and stated in no uncertain terms that we were terrible yesterday

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

I don't buy the "they are the best team in the comp" argument. They have flogged us by 10 goals every game since 2012, which was before they were the league's best team, and in 2013 they were good, but hardly the "best". We continue to get pounded by them in the same area - the middle - and yesterday was as much a flogging in that area as I've seen. Vince, Jones and Tyson didn't give a puff the whole game.

Even if we had have taken our chances, they were still a 10-goal better side, easily. They'd have found a way to still get ahead.

As I mentioned earlier, the biggest disappointment was that the game seemed like an exercise in minimisation right from the opening bounce. We were NEVER in it. They were a 10-goal better side from the opening bounce, and dare I say that by the end of it they were more than an 11-goal better side. It felt more like a 20-goal loss.

We never went out there to win it. It was always a case of, "how do we keep the margin as low as possible", and then when all else failed, everyone lost the plot, as Roos said.

That was a different sort of loss compared to similar beltings in previous years. We didn't have the cattle or experience in 2012, 2013 and parts of 2014. Yesterday, they simply had zero urgency to win.

It was astonishing how much uncontested ball they won. This team simply has no plan B if they aren't able to slow the ball down.

I hate to harp on about Jones as I have in many other threads on here but once again he shows he also has no plan B. He was given a football lesson by players with less experience. I don't expect him to do everything but twice this season he has gone missing as soon as the pressure is on. It's been very disappointing by his standards. Once upon a time he'd simply "go through the motions", but yesterday and against GWS he never took that extra step to at least be commendable in defeat.

We had no standouts yesterday. Garlett kicked three goals, but when? The delivery was shocking, granted, but they all felt like junk-time goals, even if they were so early in the contest. He's not damaging enough. As soon as we got a run, he missed two sitters. But he kicked them when we were 25-30 points down.

We also didn't get a single goal, coast-to-coast off the rebound. Granted Freo are a very well-drilled, disciplined side defensively but our key players lacked concentration. Jones missed a handball target from 5 meters away on our defensive 50 when we had Tyson alone on the wing, Vince in the middle and Hogan alone across half-forward.

That's a lack of effort and concentration. Twice now we have regressed back to the same sort of "we're not going to win so let's just wing it" mentality that we saw in round 2 against the Eagles last year.

Freo gave us a football lesson. When it was 10 points they were dominating, and eventually the final margin normalised and reflected the actual story of the game.

nail on the head

[What 18,810]

Funny that your analysis of the game differs greatly from Tommy Mac's - who was visibly filthy and stated in no uncertain terms that we were terrible yesterday

you will never hear TDI say a bad word about a players performance

And he also said we were competitive til 3 quarter time. when in reality we were smashed and the scoreboard flattered us

[deeflog 679]

like many others on this forum I think we lost it at the selection table by not including a beast like Spencer to help Jamar.

Our midfield was always going to struggle but with a dominatrix like Sandilands it was mission impossible.

be careful chook, you will have people saying you want Roos sacked saying what you thought about our ins and outs