58 minutes ago, Gorgoroth said:

A couple of thoughts from my good self.

Watts was very good, Oliver will play round one. Bugg was sloppy in the first quarter but got much better and finds the ball pretty well.

Frost isn't and forward and Salem isn't a defender and both look lost out there, shove Frost to CHB, Salem to a wing. Forst offers very little forward and as nice as it is having a decent kick off half back Salem's opponent will off set that with goals/goal assists.

 

Thought Salem really struggled actually defending and using his body in marking contests. His foot skills are needed but he has a bit to work on as a defender. Maybe he moves to a wing for H? 

I still haven't found the interchange numbers. If we used 130 again while they stuck to 90, then our comeback really does lack merit imo. 

We won, but it was far from impressive. I'm think we played better all game last week. Perhaps the wind was a factor. Maybe the type of pressure the Dogs applied really got to us. One more practice to get things right.

The most promising thing is that, on skill level alone:

Hogan, Brayshaw, Petracca, Trengove, Lumumba should come into the line-up. 

Newton, ANB, JKH, Stretch behind that.

its not all bad.

8 hours ago, SaberFang said:

Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you the "veil of negativity."

Maybe you should start another thread called "We're Still Shithouse" where you can moan about how godawful and culture-destroying all these pre-season wins are. Is it too late to get that Neeld fella back?

What a disgraceful bunch of supporters; having the gall to... get this... celebrate... winning two games of footy.

Hang your heads in shame, Demonlanders.

Or just look at the context of yesterday's game and demand more as a supporter.

 

7 hours ago, RalphiusMaximus said:

 

Seriously?  I think you need to hand back those memberships and go follow Richmond or something.  Why do you bother claiming to be a Melbourne supporter?  If we lose we're a crap team.  If we win we didn't win by enough.  What would you be saying if we'd smashed them by 50?  "Oh, it was just their reserves, it doesn't count, they'll still destroy us in the real season..." 

You can only beat the side that shows up to play you.  It doesn't matter if it's the best their club can field or not.  What we did today was win ugly, and I'll take that over getting cut to pieces any day. 

If we had beaten them by 50 points I'd be really pleased. If we had doubled their score in shots on goal but had kicked mostly points I'd still be happy.

It'd be a sure sign that we're improving across the board. 

Look, you and your merry-men can continue to bask in the glory of a two goal win over a side missing fifteen senior players. I'd prefer to look at the broader context. 

Things like the way we applied ourselves from the start yesterday, the skill level of some of our players, the input of certain experienced players etc etc.

Pre-season games are about signs. And yesterday wasn't a good sign. 

But continue to spin it into a positive. There's no point arguing with people who refuse to see a broader picture.

2 hours ago, Nasher said:

This is the kind of horse bog logic that irritates me.  

When we the Bulldog "ones", we might play a zillion times better than we did.  Their "seniors" might actually play with less cohesion that the young outfit they put on the park today.  Every other possible combination in between could happen.  You cannot transplant a whole different team in to a scenario and assume all the other million variables that affect the result of a game remain the same.  

I'm sorry but this is ridiculous. The excuses just keep coming, it's incredible.

If we played the way we did yesterday against a bulldogs team who were almost at full strength like us, we would have been flogged. They had fifteen starting 22 players missing and we trailed for almost all three quarters and started terribly. 

We are judging our team by it's performance. And it was underwhelming to say the least.

 

Edited March 6, 20169 yr by stevethemanjordan

People take too much notice from practice matches played in isolation.  Last week we beat a team many are predicting will return to the 8 and this week in tough conditions we found a way to win.

I agree that beating a team without their first 15 place getters in the B&F is nothing to crow about.  But I also know that tough windy conditions have a way of levelling teams that vary in talent, especially if you get off on the wrong foot.

So once again you pick a few things here and there that impress you.  Watts is going to have his best year and I'm really glad he hit the scoreboard, which is what I want to see.  Oliver will be as good as Brayshaw.  Oliver is better in close and Brayshaw better on the outside.  Both are good in close and good on the outside.  We are going to have more inside 50's and score more in 2016.  Our structures are far better.  Players, such as Gawn, AVB, Harmes, etc., that have been having good preseasons continue on their upward curve.

And that's about it.  The conditions meant we weren't great, but I'm not going to sweat over that and I also won't get much satisfaction from beating a team without their best 15 players.

In 8 weeks time I'll hardly remember this match.  It was virtually inconsequential.

Edited March 6, 20169 yr by ProDee

The wind affected our performance in the first quarter. We were kicking into a strong wind that had a difficult cross breeze to it. 

We were ahead on most of the key stats in that quarter yet our disposal off the backline, delivery into the forward 50 and shots at goal were pretty bad. I think the conditions played a big part in that. And no - they were not the same for each team, certainly not withi each quarter. The scoreboard reflects this.

I am content with what I saw over 4 quarters. Particularly the endeavour and contested ball stats.

 

It was a practice match in hot conditions in a swirling wind. 15 of the 18 goals were scored at the one end, with the wind. The Doggies scored 3 points for the whole match kicking the other way (we scored three goals there).

Yes, we didn't set the world on fire. There were skill errors. Tom Mcdonald made some blunders, But please remember that while the Dogs had a 'young team', so did we. Salem, Viney, Tyson, Gawn, Kent, Frost, Harmes, vandenBerg, Michie and Kennedy have played 50 games or fewer. Oliver, Hunt and Wagner haven't played any. That's half yesterday's team.

Some or most of these guys need to get to the 100+ games level to set the basis for a premiership. Until then, try complaining with a realistic perspective.

Hey Steve, just because we see the outcome of the game in a different light doesn't mean we don't see the broader picture.  

Our skills were poor in windy conditions, we turned the ball over out of the back half and struggled at times to find a way past our half forward line.  But once the players adjusted we saw what happened - we kicked away and made them look like a second rate side.  It took probably 2 quarters too long to get there than most of us would have liked, but we got there.  Our fitness is excellent and we stuck at it.  As others have pointed out we got rolled in games like these in the past, but we found a way to win this time.

2 wins in a row is a positive for the team.  In fact, wins are still a positive no matter how we get them.  We aren't Hawthorn, nor are we a club like Sydney who could for years treat the NAB with almost contempt.  We need every positive we can get, and a win is just that.  We might not have looked good getting it, but we got it.  Yes, we still have improvements to make and we still need to gel as a team with changes to the gameplan, but I'm confident we'll get there.

38 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Has anyone else noticed how comfortable Goodwin is as coach?  Hasn't put a foot wrong in terms of getting the boys motivated to play and several times in the last few weeks to come back from behind.  Regardless of the opposition, we could easily have thought: 'this is only a practice game' and not played the game out and gone back to lazy days.

He also looks really comfortable in the press conf.  Gives real answers, is calm and really looks in control. 

To be able to motivate the troops and to manage the journos are great pluses (not to mention the game plan is looking pretty good) for our coach-in-waiting

Roos is doing a great job of staying in the background and exposing Goodwin (in a good way).  So much so that in watching yesterday's press conf I had forgotten about Roos. 

Regardless of the number of games we win this season the coaching transition will be a success.

Agree Hero regarding Goodwin. His press conference is completely controlled. He is not going to be caught saying the wrong thing or creating a headline. 

Just now, hemingway said:

Agree Hero regarding Goodwin. His press conference is completely controlled. He is not going to be caught saying the wrong thing or creating a headline. 

He does look good, but the NAB Cup press conferences haven't exactly put him under the pump with 'hard' questions.  Winning games means he has had things pretty easy, so I think we need to assess him once he coaches a loss or two.

Having said that he has done a terrific job so far.

33 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Or just look at the context of yesterday's game and demand more as a supporter.

 

If we had beaten them by 50 points I'd be really pleased. If we had doubled their score in shots on goal but had kicked mostly points I'd still be happy.

It'd be a sure sign that we're improving across the board. 

Look, you and your merry-men can continue to bask in the glory of a two goal win over a side missing fifteen senior players. I'd prefer to look at the broader context. 

Things like the way we applied ourselves from the start yesterday, the skill level of some of our players, the input of certain experienced players etc etc.

Pre-season games are about signs. And yesterday wasn't a good sign. 

But continue to spin it into a positive. There's no point arguing with people who refuse to see a broader picture.

I'm sorry but this is ridiculous. The excuses just keep coming, it's incredible.

If we played the way we did yesterday against a bulldogs team who were almost at full strength like us, we would have been flogged. They had fifteen starting 22 players missing and we trailed for almost all three quarters and started terribly. 

We are judging our team by it's performance. And it was underwhelming to say the least.

 

Context...practice game.

You're reading too much into it 'steve'...

Viney on SEN just now.  Said:

-Fewer rotations this weekend to get as close to match conditions as possible but didn’t say how many.  Interestingly, he said he feels the effects most at the beginning of each quarter when the game is most intense rather than end of quarter or end of game. 

-Club has had a terrific preseason and list looking healthy.

-Enjoys receiving from Big Max.

-High praise for Clarrie.

-Watts had one of the more impressive pre-season at the club

-Petracca is a powerful unit…Viney has him for strength now but Petracca will out gun him in a few years.  Sounds like he will definitely spend some time at Casey.

-Roos stepped back, more observing, watching behaviours, contributes broader ideas etc.

At the end Ox said Viney stood in for Bugg who has no voice because he has caught a bug.  Yes, poor pun but it makes Bugg's game yesterday look even better because he must have already had some symptoms.

Edit: Here is the interview from mfc website http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2016-03-07/jack-viney-on-sen-monday-march-7

Edited March 6, 20169 yr by Lucifer's Hero

Look at what Geelong did to Essendon on Saturday in similar circumstances (near full strength team vs 2nd 22) - I'm not saying we should've demolished the Dogs to the same extent but to only scrape in by 2 goals....

By the way I don't think anyone is slitting wrists over this - its only a practice game after all. But some of us are trying to provide some rational/realistic counterbalance to those who are jumping for joy over another "come from behind win" and winning "two on the trot". These are practice games and will be all but forgotten in 2 weeks. But if the team brings the same effort from yesterday against ANY team in the season proper we will get pantsed even by the Blues and Bombers.

They may only be practice games but Roos stated from the outset that we Intended to field a near full strength side during the series. How other coaches respond to that is their business and what suits them for the development of their own lists. I am happy for Roos/Goodwin's strategy on this and happy for our young list to experience a winning culture going into the season proper. Now I am just waiting for Petracca and Trengrove to have their first run.

How many players in the doggies team yesterday are locks for round one?

Nearly every player would've been playing out of their skins trying to impress and boost their chances of getting a gig come round 1.

We turned up, got the win, went home.

 

33 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Viney on SEN just now.  Said:

-Fewer rotations this weekend to get as close to match conditions as possible but didn’t say how many.  Interestingly, he said he feels the effects most at the beginning of each quarter when the game is most intense rather than end of quarter or end of game. 

-Club has had a terrific preseason and list looking healthy.

-Enjoys receiving from Big Max.

-High praise for Clarrie.

-Watts had one of the more impressive pre-season at the club

-Petracca is a powerful unit…Viney has him for strength now but Petracca will out gun him in a few years.  Sounds like he will definitely spend some time at Casey.

-Roos stepped back, more observing, watching behaviours, contributes broader ideas etc.

At the end Ox said Viney stood in for Bugg who has no voice because he has caught a bug.  Yes, poor pun but it makes Bugg's game yesterday look even better because he must have already had some symptoms.

Jesse Hogan wasn't mentioned!?

Loved seeing Roosy and Macca on the bench giving instant feedback to players! 

9 hours ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Cause it's demonland bro.

There's even a thread going around at the moment celebrating our 'two nab challenge' wins.

I like that you named 15 of the dogs starting 22 players who missed today, yet people still howl you down for pointing it out.

Comedic really.

Today again highlighted the weaknesses that have existed and haunted us for years. Lack of quality senior players and a lack of kicking skills and decision making skills all over the ground but in the backline especially. How many goals came from turnovers in our back-half?

 

Cheers for that Steve.  Can I get you half a glass of anything?

The positives and negatives of individual players and the skills has been done so I don't need to add to them.

The positives for me...

1. Just winning for the team  - Beating any team that is put on the field is very good for this young team. Even though it is a practice match, it builds camaraderie and confidence in each other. Contrast this with how deflated the team must have been losing to Essendon and Carlton last year when there had to be an expectation  of us winning. There was an expectation that we would beat an undermanned bulldogs side yesterday and we did.  I am under any no illusion on how much we need to improve.  But winning is always good for team building
2. Winning for supporters and membership - again, I am not booking finals tickets - but winning these encounters must help with memberships and getting supporters to games. A positive for a club like ours that has been down for so long.
3. Goodwin - how comfortable does he look ? I have no idea on him whatsoever except what is mentioned by Roos and the players but I can't help but be impressed. It is early days, and it was much easier for Roos to pass on the nucleus of a really good mature team to Longmire, than the youngsters Goodwin will receive but i am liking what i am seeing.

Edited March 6, 20169 yr by nutbean

12 minutes ago, Peter Griffen said:

Jesse Hogan wasn't mentioned!?

Loved seeing Roosy and Macca on the bench giving instant feedback to players! 

No mention of Jesse. 

Isn't it good that the media has more to talk about than Jesse's contract or criticise Watts. 

We are becoming a well rounded club/team in more ways than one.  Slowly earning back respect.

Thought we held back this game compared to the second half we played last week. That may have to do with few rotations but I think there are a few aces up our sleeves we are holding onto till the real season. 

Edited March 6, 20169 yr by ILLDieADemon

4 hours ago, Nasher said:

This is the kind of horse bog logic that irritates me.  

When we the Bulldog "ones", we might play a zillion times better than we did.  Their "seniors" might actually play with less cohesion that the young outfit they put on the park today.  Every other possible combination in between could happen.  You cannot transplant a whole different team in to a scenario and assume all the other million variables that affect the result of a game remain the same.  

No two games are the same and no two teams ever play the same way twice.  There's a good reason why a lot of people say "you can only beat the team the opposition put on the ground"; all you can take from a game is that your team might have the ingredients to win matches, which we can clearly take from this game given that we did actually win it.

also, this:

Round 8 2015
Sun 24 May 3:20pm     
v Bulldogs     
MCG     
Win 103-64

Or, this:

Round 20 2015
Sun 16 Aug 2015 3:20pm
v Bulldogs
Edihad Stadium
Loss 153-55

Edited March 6, 20169 yr by Fork 'em

4 hours ago, Nasher said:

 

No two games are the same and no two teams ever play the same way twice.  There's a good reason why a lot of people say "you can only beat the team the opposition put on the ground"; all you can take from a game is that your team might have the ingredients to win matches, which we can clearly take from this game given that we did actually win it.

It always amuses me...

" had they kicked straight...."

"if xxx had played we would have been beaten.."

"if we play that way against Carlton or Essendon  ..we would get beaten "

It is all playing out scenarios that didn't happen or crystal balling on what might or might not happen in the future. You take the positives from the game and highlight them to the team and then also analyse and work on the deficiencies. 

16 hours ago, Clint Bizkit said:

I don't understand Hunt getting a game ahead of Stretch and ANB.

I do.  It is a practice match and they need to see what Hunt can offer   

9 hours ago, Fork 'em said:

We won ugly over the Bulldog twos.
We'll lose ugly when we meet the Bulldog ones.

And no bouncing up and down here will change it.

Great to see true supporters taking positives out of a gutsy come from behind win in difficult conditions.

I hate to imagine the response had we not done what we should have done -- win!!!

You can only beat those who the opposition send out there.  

Edited March 6, 20169 yr by monoccular

25 minutes ago, Curry & Beer said:

also, this:

Round 8 2015
Sun 24 May 3:20pm     
v Bulldogs     
MCG     
Win 103-64

 

13 minutes ago, Fork 'em said:

Or, this:

Round 20 2015
Sun 16 Aug 2015 3:20pm
v Bulldogs
Edihad Stadium
Loss 153-55

or this

Round 3 1962

Sat 5 May 1962 2:10pm

V Bulldogs

MCG

Win 94 -35

Maybe this is Nasher's point ?