2 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

I certainly agree it's an "between the ears"  thing. Often it requires players of a certain ilk who switch to overdrive and plainly and simply decide that they will win this game, the others follow suit. We really dont have anyone who will do that yet.

Agreed, but as with everything in a team one mind set may not do it. Some people may get nervous, may focus on the opposition too much and forget about their role in the team, others may focus too much on their role and forget the opposition. There is a fine balance that has to be reached and in a team sport you need all members to not only know what that balance is for them individually but also how that fits with the team. 

I am confident it will click at some point but I wont be surprised if it takes a few years for it to be a solid attribute of the team. 

There seems to be a slight adjustment in our defensive Zone.  Looks like we are now ensuring we have at least 1 but most time 2 players  ensuring players don't get behind us and kicking the easy open goal.  Unfortunately on the weekend we controlled so much of the footy in our forward half West Coast just had 3 spare inside our forward 50m arc.  The last quarter we had to win it, we needed to man those loose players up, we had 3 quarters of the Eagles defending with large numbers, I reckon we should have pushed a Tom McDonald forward at least to stop the Eagles Inside their  D50m Marks.

 

44 minutes ago, drdrake said:

There seems to be a slight adjustment in our defensive Zone.  Looks like we are now ensuring we have at least 1 but most time 2 players  ensuring players don't get behind us and kicking the easy open goal.  Unfortunately on the weekend we controlled so much of the footy in our forward half West Coast just had 3 spare inside our forward 50m arc.  The last quarter we had to win it, we needed to man those loose players up, we had 3 quarters of the Eagles defending with large numbers, I reckon we should have pushed a Tom McDonald forward at least to stop the Eagles Inside their  D50m Marks.

 

We also tackled better, with one player in and the rest around the outside....

51 minutes ago, drdrake said:

There seems to be a slight adjustment in our defensive Zone.  Looks like we are now ensuring we have at least 1 but most time 2 players  ensuring players don't get behind us and kicking the easy open goal.  Unfortunately on the weekend we controlled so much of the footy in our forward half West Coast just had 3 spare inside our forward 50m arc.  The last quarter we had to win it, we needed to man those loose players up, we had 3 quarters of the Eagles defending with large numbers, I reckon we should have pushed a Tom McDonald forward at least to stop the Eagles Inside their  D50m Marks.

 

Yes, we seemed to have TMac or similar as an anchor behind play to stop their forward overlap which we've seen so much of this year.

We are a contested ball winning side with limited smarts, foot-skills and running power through the middle of the ground.

There's no doubt the conditions helped us and had it been dry, the scoreline would have been different.

Happy with the effort though and just happy to see more games from our younger guys.

The list will change and still needs to given how heavily contested we are. 

When we start winning at Etihad, we'll know we've addressed this.

32 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

We are a contested ball winning side with limited smarts, foot-skills and running power through the middle of the ground.

There's no doubt the conditions helped us and had it been dry, the scoreline would have been different.

Happy with the effort though and just happy to see more games from our younger guys.

The list will change and still needs to given how heavily contested we are. 

When we start winning at Etihad, we'll know we've addressed this.

We actually got progressively better and more attacking as the conditions dried up. Granted it was very heavy under foot the whole game, but the Eagles' self-proclaimed hard running and tackling was severely lacking throughout. We played better wet-weather and dry-weather footy all day. They just simply defended superbly. I actually think we'd have won had it been dry. For one, Watts and Hogan would have had far more efficient days out. The wet weather conditions seemed to suit there defense. 

2 minutes ago, praha said:

We actually got progressively better and more attacking as the conditions dried up. Granted it was very heavy under foot the whole game, but the Eagles' self-proclaimed hard running and tackling was severely lacking throughout. We played better wet-weather and dry-weather footy all day. They just simply defended superbly. I actually think we'd have won had it been dry. For one, Watts and Hogan would have had far more efficient days out. The wet weather conditions seemed to suit there defense. 

Our efficiency going inside 50 certainly didn't help though.

Need some dangerous kickers to be hitting those inside 50's.

That and some players need to smarten up.

Edited July 25, 20169 yr by stevethemanjordan

On 7/24/2016 at 0:16 PM, beelzebub said:

On reflection yesterday was a tale of two teams. One found a way to win, the other a way to lose.

Im really tired of losing the ones we shouldn't, and didn't have to.

If the coaches are only part to blame it then falls upon the leadership on the field. 

We simply don't have enough, nor the caliber required. This has to change markedly for us to succeed in 2017 onwards.

Otherwise it's groundhog deckchairs.

That will change with the natural development of our playing group (the youngest in the league).

On 7/24/2016 at 0:43 PM, old dee said:

Spot on bb I am dismayed at how so many MFC supporters continue to be happy losing narrowly. 

No one is "happy" we lost, that's just rubbish.

Just now, Dr. Gonzo said:

No one is "happy" we lost, that's just rubbish.

Opinion Dr.

9 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Our efficiency going inside 50 certainly didn't help though.

Need some dangerous kickers to be hitting those inside 50's.

That and some players need to smarten up.

We can't go in efficiently if their defense is tight. If their defense is tight we can't kick goals. We can't kick goals if we're not going in efficiently. And round it goes.

It was always, ALWAYS going to be a battle of the defenses. Theirs simply got on top of us and did the work their midfielders didn't. We found no way around and kept going back to the well. They looked more dangerous going forward and the umpires didn't help, with our defenders walking on eggshells. Ultimately, their defense held up for longer, and ours buckled almost every time they went forward. I think it was less our entries, more their ability to just adapt more efficiently to quick entries.

From what I saw we were completely predictable  going into 50 we  kicked poorly played behind and didnt make space or lead,we made their defence look goodthe fact that we did it all day using the same strategy which wasnt working shows what poor game day coaching we have

Not once did we try something different mix it up be creative It was painfull to watch

On 7/24/2016 at 1:24 PM, PaulRB said:

Never like losing, but prefer this kind of loss to a top eight team than the beltings we've received from top eight teams for the last decade. 

The boys are creating experiences that confirm they belong and can match it with the best, but have more work to do. 

Thats where we're at. 

If we take the angst of these losses and the confidence from going toe to toe with the big boys into the remaining games, then we'll be a chance to win any of them.

Exactly. Some people forget only 2 seasons ago we had this scoreline against this mob who didn't even make finals that years, on our home turf

http://afltables.com/afl/stats/games/2014/111820140330.html

No one is happy with losing, it is bloody frustrating/infuriating, especially when we were easily the better team on the day. But only 2 years ago we would've seen getting within 10 goals as a "good" effort, now we expect to win. I can't fathom how people don't get this.

20 minutes ago, praha said:

We can't go in efficiently if their defense is tight. If their defense is tight we can't kick goals. We can't kick goals if we're not going in efficiently. And round it goes.

It was always, ALWAYS going to be a battle of the defenses. Theirs simply got on top of us and did the work their midfielders didn't. We found no way around and kept going back to the well. They looked more dangerous going forward and the umpires didn't help, with our defenders walking on eggshells. Ultimately, their defense held up for longer, and ours buckled almost every time they went forward. I think it was less our entries, more their ability to just adapt more efficiently to quick entries.

66-37 inside 50's our way.

When you lose a game with in an inside 50 count like that, it's nothing but inefficiency, inaccuracy and poor decision making going forward.

If you look at some of their late goals and quick entries, you'll see it was on the back of a last second turnover or miskick from one of our players. They made us pay as good teams should.

I was proud of the effort, but as everyone has said. We lost the game. They didn't win it.

Edited July 25, 20169 yr by stevethemanjordan

25 minutes ago, old dee said:

Opinion Dr.

How is that opinion? Show me evidence of Melbourne supporters being happy to lose.

2 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

How is that opinion? Show me evidence of Melbourne supporters being happy to lose.

Calm down. My opinion not yours Dr,

4 hours ago, old dee said:

Jones will be gone in a couple of years and Vince has one year left at best.

Who  then to close the Gap?

Jones only 2 years left and Bernie gone possibly this year, definitely next? - Rubbish

Jones likely to play 4-5 further years and Bernie 2-3 further years.  By then each will be 32-33.

1 minute ago, Fifty-5 said:

Jones only 2 years left and Bernie gone possibly this year, definitely next? - Rubbish

Jones likely to play 4-5 further years and Bernie 2-3 further years.  By then each will be 32-33.

I never cease to be amazed  why so many people have to have a confrontational   attitude when they don't agree with someone.

It is only opinion You might be right and I hope you are.

                             MFC     WC      diff
Average Age        23.2    25.5    -2.3    
Average Games    66.7    107.5    -40.7

4 minutes ago, old dee said:

I never cease to be amazed  why so many people have to have a confrontational   attitude when they don't agree with someone.

It is only opinion You might be right and I hope you are.

Rubbish opinion is rubbish.

13 minutes ago, stevethemanjordan said:

66-37 inside 50's our way.

When you lose a game with in an inside 50 count like that, it's nothing but inefficiency, inaccuracy and poor decision making going forward.

If you look at some of their late goals and quick entries, you'll see it was on the back of a last second turnover or miskick from one of our players. They made us pay as good teams should.

I was proud of the effort, but as everyone has said. We lost the game. They didn't win it.

I think a lot of that was repeat entries which caused issues. We weren't good enough when the forward line was open and we were almost to good a locking it in our forward half. This meant our forward line was rarely open and was mostly blocked full of WC players. We do need to find a way around this though, maybe being more patient around the middle and working from side to side to draw out their players and then going back in when it opens up a little. We seemed to just bomb it back in once we got it back. Being patient isn't our strong suit normally though and with our mistakes could have been costly. 

Just now, Fifty-5 said:

Rubbish opinion is rubbish.

Little need for me to say any more all is proven

1 minute ago, old dee said:

Little need for me to say any more all is proven

Mate, I changed my user name to avoid being confused with you.

7 minutes ago, Chris said:

I think a lot of that was repeat entries which caused issues. We weren't good enough when the forward line was open and we were almost to good a locking it in our forward half. This meant our forward line was rarely open and was mostly blocked full of WC players. We do need to find a way around this though, maybe being more patient around the middle and working from side to side to draw out their players and then going back in when it opens up a little. We seemed to just bomb it back in once we got it back. Being patient isn't our strong suit normally though and with our mistakes could have been costly. 

They just realised our Mids were smashing them and they just sat players behind the Footy and tried to catch us on the rebound. We defended our forward half the best we every have, was that because the Eagles allowed us to do that because we continued to turn the ball over going inside 50m and they knew if they stick with us at some stage they will get through.  I just think at some stage we had to look at stopping the Eagles intercept marks, the way around this to me was send on of our tall defenders forward in the last. 

23 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

Mate, I changed my user name to avoid being confused with you.

No need. Its pretty obvious