Would've liked to be at the ground to get some kind of understanding as to how they managed to get so many players free when streaming forward. The amount of times we were outnumbered in defence was unfathomable, and was chalk and cheese from last week. You will cop a few out the back with the attacking game plan and if you can't trap it forward then you're in trouble. But today was crazy. If it was simply work rate then there seemed to be a lot of culprits.

The feeling is confusion more than anything. The best thing you can say is that it's another lesson learned, but we need to react better when the game is up for grabs.

3 hours ago, olisik said:

Should've played Oliver and Trenners

We are slow... Trenners and Oliver won't help this. Saints buzzed all around us and we couldn't keep up. Need some outside run desperately 

There seems to be alot of hate for the defenders here and I get that....zoning off Riewoldt is asking for trouble in my book and I was staggered how long it took to lock down on him.   But I think we're letting our midfielders get off scott free for the lack of pressure they applied.  It's not T Mac, Jetta and Dunn's fault that there are four Saints streaming downfield by themselves....it's because our mids either haven't applied enough pressure or won't run back the other way  Nate Jones got 31 touches today but laid one solitary tackle.  Jack Steven had 25 touches and 11 tackles!  Their frontal pressure when we got it in the backline was exceptional and we didn't handle it at all.  When they got it we weren't prepared to run back with them.  It just felt like after the first 5 mins we thought we were going to have a field day and had too many blokes running ahead of the ball.  

Saints have plenty of talent...I'd love to have a few of their lightning outside runners and small men, their speed killed us.  

This game was lost purely from poor work rate from our midfield. Today was possibly the worst two way running I've seen from a Melbourne team since the Neeld days. Watching Melbourne mids jog through the center when their opponents were already 30 meters ahead of them and waiting for the ball in their forward 50 was maddening. It's up to our senior players out there to lead by example and demand the younger guys follow. There was none of that today. Jones and Vince need to verbally engage guys like Kent and Tyson and Kennedy and Harmes to make sure they run back to help out. 

 

Nothing the the coaching staff could've done today other than give them a spray. If the players don't try then the coaches can try all the moves in the world but nothing will work.

47 minutes ago, Chewie said:

Thanks to everyone, lots of great, generally level-headed commentary on here. We still have a way to go, and although we lost today folks comparing it in any way to the Essendon game need to have a cup of tea and a lie down.

My observation: when we did manage to score, it was frustrating how many times we allowed them to score back almost straight away, especially from centre clearances.

 

 

I disagree.

I think patches of today's game without doubt resembled the Essendon game.

Namely our entire defence setup. I don't need to go through tapes or stats to know that so many of their [censored] goals were almost entirely coast-to-coast. 

What completely baffles me is that we didn't do anything about it. And the question has got to be asked to Roos. How was this allowed to happen?

Why on so many occasions were they able to completely slice us open? With nobody on their man?

Are our players still getting used to a zone defence? And if so, why? Are they not smart enough to play it? I want an answer. 

Yet again, we were made to look like complete amateurs. It's a huge concern.

The other major problem I see is the difference in best and worst football from particular individuals. When you have more than half your entire 22 playing their worst football, it's a concern. 

Dunn, Gawn, Tyson, Lumumba, McDonald, Vince, Harmes, Pedo etc etc.

We need and must demand consistency in performance. A couple can have down games every now and then. But they can't all be playing their worst football on the same day. It just absolutely kills us.

Edited April 30, 20169 yr by stevethemanjordan

Also, not sure if anyone remembers my post from during the week but I've noted when Jones gets into a decent scrap the boys get fired up together and win.

Todays match; no scrap, no fire in the boys, no win. The stat remains!

29 minutes ago, KrazyJay said:

I must say that after watching the entire game on Foxtel here in Adelaide, I am disturbingly calm 

I went in supremely confident that we would destroy them and yet I feel a sense of calm and belief that it was another blip on our inevitable upwards journey.

Petracca will be a lot better for the run and I have all faith that the selection committee will demote/promote as required based on certain performances.

Probably the most frustrating thing from today is that every time I type Petracca it autocorrects it to Patricia 

I hate autocorrect and predictive text. Spent the last 5 minutes of the third quarter figuring out how to turn them off on my phone. At least that was more productive than watching the game.

Had a perfect view of the match centre wing today.

I knew we were in trouble at half time only 2 goals down. A lot of our players looked  absolutely spent late in the 2nd qtr. Stkildas pressure was impressive and the run destroyed us. I dont think i have seen so many loose forwards in a game and nothing done about it, how the coaching box could not manage to negate this was extremely poor.

So many effortless goals to The Saints, we seemed to have played a totally different game plan to the last 3 weeks. One can only hope that it was the short turnaround between matches that hurt us, it is the only explanation I have for how tired we looked so early in the match.

 Having been at the game today these are just some points I picked up

That was Dunn's worst game I have ever seen

My god any chance someone could have taken Riewoldt. At times Dunn took him then Lumumba and even poor Jetta and Salem had to take him because Tommy was nowhere to be seen

Any chance we could lay a tackle. We just couldn't stick them today

Man up on the players. The amount of times the saints were just out on there own especially going into there 50. I think I heard on the radio they had 18 uncontested marks in there. 

For those who missed Petracca's debut, don't be annoyed you missed nothing. However he should be played for the next few weeks to get him used to senior footy and give him a go. 

Anyway remember the saints thrashed the pies should have beaten the hawks and nearly best port. They aren't a bad side. 

We missed some easy goals. Frost's was a disaster and still don't know how he kicked it out on the full

Cam Pedersen it's ok to be selfish sometimes. You can go for goal. Instead a couple of times he handballed it off which was 1 to many and we stuffed it. 

Unfortunately we are going to have these ups and downs and I suggest in the future if we do string some wins together we don't get carried away and talk finals. 

2 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

Saints knew it too and they exploited it.  Well played to them.

It's a learning experience for the boys and shows how crucial it is to play your role 100% of the time.  A quick team like the Saints showed us what can happen when we don't.

As long as we learn from it.

2 hours ago, bing181 said:

One of Tom Mcdonald's worse games for a long time. He's supposed to be good at reading the play - not on today's evidence.

Not helped by the lack of pressure further up the ground, but still ...

Let's be honest. Tom's been pretty hit and miss for a few weeks. He took some good marks last week, but handed the opposition momentum time and again with outrageously poor disposal/decision making. He's just not a very clever footballer. That's not to say he isn't best 22, because he clearly is, but he makes some mind-bogglingly dumb decisions at times.

We were beaten by a side who'e best is better than ours. No need to slash wrists. i still think we have more upside than the saints. Hats off, they played great footy today.

3 hours ago, Mac7 said:

This summarizes everything wrong with demonland. 

What did people seriously expect!?!?!?

Its first game, nerves and speed of the game got to him early but he ended up with 16 disposals, 5 tackles and 3 goal assists. 

Bloody spot oj

Just now, Leoncelli_36 said:

Bloody spot oj

Typing on your phone?  I hate small keyboards too.

15 minutes ago, Hell Bent said:

Had a perfect view of the match centre wing today.

I knew we were in trouble at half time only 2 goals down. A lot of our players looked  absolutely spent late in the 2nd qtr. Stkildas pressure was impressive and the run destroyed us. I dont think i have seen so many loose forwards in a game and nothing done about it, how the coaching box could not manage to negate this was extremely poor.

So many effortless goals to The Saints, we seemed to have played a totally different game plan to the last 3 weeks. One can only hope that it was the short turnaround between matches that hurt us, it is the only explanation I have for how tired we looked so early in the match.

Agree 100%. I was there today and was shocked how bad we looked compared to last Sunday night. The Saints were too quick and seemed to have more energy and determination than the Dees. Jesse was the only shining light.

2 hours ago, praha said:

In Roos' defense, the team was flat today. Anyone sitting with 10 rows of the pitch on the wing would have seen that within the first 5 minutes. Major communication issues on the bench with rotations because players were coming off on their own accords because they were spent. I saw it. I saw maybe 10, 11 times when players were screaming out to the bench to come off for a spell. 

When you're flat, you play lazy football. You give hospital handpasses. You give away dumb free kicks. You give your opponents space. You run off your opponent to chase another opponent to make up space that you've *already* lost. 

I know it's a shithouse excuse, but a 5.5-day break, at Etihad, against St.Kilda...well, it was the worst possible match to play after a quick turnaround. 

Roos was outcoached in the Essendon match. Not today. The Saints played Etihad to perfection. Melbourne was flat, and combined with how [censored] we play that ground, nothing the coaches could have done would have won that game.

We also played with an attack flair that has Goodwin all over it. I think Goodwin was heavily influential today. I think the frustration you saw today was him not having any answers, not him not being able to do anything.

That's a load of rubbish, mate. You're a level-headed poster, but to say that there's nothing the coaches could have done to win the game is absolute bullocks. Okay, so they played the ground well, but what's our plan? What are our coaches saying? You don't go into a game without back up plans and we didn't one.

2 hours ago, Django said:

I'm sure it has been mentioned but WHO THE [censored] WAS ON RIEWOLDT IN THE FIRST HALF?

Absolute amateur hour that was. 

And who was on Acres in the third?????

2 hours ago, Biffen said:

That zone defence is a joke and it never works.

Its a cop out, and an excuse and any decent backman would say 

"I'm on Reiwoldt all day".

Tom Mac did not do this in deed or word and the coaches need to stop giving him an out.

The zone defence worked the last two weeks...

I saw the following players on Riewoldt...Salem. ..Jetta. ..Vince... why...have have NFI

It's just frustrating because we could have been in the 8. 

seriously, you don't think tmac would like to go man on man with reiwoldt! It ain't in the game plan! Same height, same tank, same athleticism! Younger and better knees! Different defensive plan won't let him!

Just home and [censored] off. This may not be the thread for a rules question but I would like to under which rule Melbourne defenders are not allowed to go within 20 metres of Nick Reiwoldt?

7 minutes ago, AdamFarr said:

The zone defence worked the last two weeks...

It's interesting.

I mean, I can understand back-men being caught out of position as part of a high press zone defence if there's been a turnover made by one of our players.

What I can't understand and couldn't see (thanks to the television) was how they were able to go coast to coast so easily from a kick-out from our forward-line.

I want to know who's to blame in those instances. I'm telling you now, I haven't seen a team defence be so completely disorganised and dysfunctional this year. That's not an exaggeration. Today was again one of those 'Melbourne' moments.

We seemed to be like witches hats at times and I want to know why. Why the drop off? Who is to blame?

How can there be such huge inconsistency in performance?

 

Edited April 30, 20169 yr by stevethemanjordan

1 hour ago, Wiseblood said:

I think this sums up the game.  Considering our small forwards got nowhere near it, to kick 15 goals is still a good effort and shows how far we've come in terms of our offensive game.

Our defence though was an absolute shambles and I'm sure they will make an effort in the coming weeks to seriously rectify that.

If so, I wonder if that will impact upon our scoring capability. Roos has said a number times that we're still trying to find the balance between attack and defence.

Just now, AdamFarr said:

If so, I wonder if that will impact upon our scoring capability. Roos has said a number times that we're still trying to find the balance between attack and defence.

I don't think it will.  Clearly it's worked in the previous rounds, although you could also argue that we have still coughed up some high scores (North and Saints).  I think this year they will tinker with it as we learn how to get the balance right.  

21 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

 

I disagree.

I think patches of today's game without doubt resembled the Essendon game.

Namely our entire defence setup. I don't need to go through tapes or stats to know that so many of their [censored] goals were almost entirely coast-to-coast. 

What completely baffles me is that we didn't do anything about it. And the question has got to be asked to Roos. How was this allowed to happen?

Why on so many occasions were they able to completely slice us open? With nobody on their man?

Are our players still getting used to a zone defence? And if so, why? Are they not smart enough to play it? I want an answer. 

Yet again, we were made to look like complete amateurs. It's a huge concern.

The other major problem I see is the difference in best and worst football from particular individuals. When you have more than half your entire 22 playing their worst football, it's a concern. 

Dunn, Gawn, Tyson, Lumumba, McDonald, Vince, Harmes, Pedo etc etc.

We need and must demand consistency in performance. A couple can have down games every now and then. But they can't all be playing their worst football on the same day. It just absolutely kills us.

Sorry, I should have qualified what I meant regarding the Essendon game. We should never have lost to them- they are barely an AFL standard team. At this stage in our development, I hope that we beat other mid- and lower-table teams, but I don't EXPECT it.

I feel your comparison in the way they scored their goals (although I have conveniently purged the Ess game from my memory) is valid. Other posters have mentioned this already, but in summary I think the 3 most telling factors were:

- we looked flat (or are extremely slow, which would be a greater concern)

- we could not control the ball defensively at the contest (tackle numbers indicate this, the amount of times they were able to release the ball when 'tackled' and then run away with it was very disappointing)

- they were prepared to move the ball quickly, either around or over the press

I think what the last 3 weeks have shown is when the opposition moves the ball slowly enough to allow us to set up defensively we will be very competitive, but quick and skillful teams will cut us to bits. I fear this is part of the journey, and that ultimately the group will be learning from these losses.

And also on players being up and down- there should be no excuse for it with the more experienced guys but I think we will have to grin and bear it with the new guys. I was ready to give up on Hunt (fumbling and missing tackles) at half time, but I thought he kept trying- look at that effort we he went for a run, turned it over and then stuck the tackle- I hope he learnt from that passage of play. Compare that to Lumumba's efforts at about the same stage of the game- do you think he analyzes and learns from those errors? Evidence would suggest not.

9 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

It's interesting.

I mean, I can understand back-men being caught out of position as part of a high press zone defence if there's been a turnover made by one of our players.

What I can't understand and couldn't see (thanks to the television) was how they were able to go coast to coast so easily from a kick-out from our forward-line.

I want to know who's to blame in those instances. I'm telling you now, I haven't seen a team defence be so completely disorganised and dysfunctional this year. That's not an exaggeration. Today was again one of those 'Melbourne' moments.

We seemed to be like witches hats at times and I want to know why. Why the drop off? Who is to blame?

How can there be such huge inconsistency in performance?

I sat on the third level. I usually like to sit quite close to it, but today's vantage point gave us an interesting view of it.

For my eye a couple of things were to blame for the ease with which St Kilda transitioned. 

1) the players seemed to be caught between too minds and hesitant. They weren't sure which contest to go to half the time. So much so that by the third quarter, we were second guessing even attacking loose balls. 

2) our players failed to read the play a lot of the time. It was almost as if they underestimated their opponents across every line. By the time our blokes were reacting to situations it was too late. St Kilda's ball movement was pretty impressive, but as some posters have pointed out, our press was too high. We made it too easy for them. We're not a quick side, so if we leave that much space in behind at Etihad, it seems fast teams will kill us. We need a plan to counter this. Over to you Goodwin and Jennings.

3) our intensity and work rate was hopeless. About half the time we would manage to make a contest out of a loose ball situation, but would fail to stick our tackles and St Kilda banked on their team mates winning the ball and getting the uncontested possession on the outside. It happened time and again.