2 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

Seriously why would anyone waste oxygen or brainpower on that goose? It was the right deal for us and in any case it was the deal we did.

Cant believe anyone would question tyson/Salem deal.....Both are great pick ups barring injury/illness....

1 hour ago, ManDee said:

Self flagellation not enough for you?

The highlights on MFC site are definitely the way to go. I find watching the highlights every week means no wasted time and well.........why watch the low lights when you can see the high lights in the space of a few minutes. And you know what, we look really good. We have a real chance next week, if we can increase the number of highlights by a factor of 20. I'm pumped for next week! 

3 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

But that's because we lost to them. Had we beat the Saints and Port we'd be 9th and on top of both of them.

Not sure you read the comment I was responding to.

I think the point may have been that if we won every match and were on top of the ladder, then the only teams we beat would be below us on the ladder. How depressing would that be.

Edited August 1, 20169 yr by sue

 

We have a fistful of inside mids but not enough outside runners and that's cost us games against Essendon, Saints (twice) and nearly cost us yesterday, we  will do ok against the slower sides but against quicker sides, we will struggle.

We have Billy and Hunt but that's not enough, we need a couple more and Matt Jones isn't the answer, pace, pace, pace, that is needed and urgently. 

 

 

14 minutes ago, Dante said:

 

We have a fistful of inside mids but not enough outside runners and that's cost us games against Essendon, Saints (twice) and nearly cost us yesterday, we  will do ok against the slower sides but against quicker sides, we will struggle.

We have Billy and Hunt but that's not enough, we need a couple more and Matt Jones isn't the answer, pace, pace, pace, that is needed and urgently. 

 

 

We did well against GWS and despite it being round 1 we managed to defend extremely well. They blitzed us on the transition but we held firm and kept at it. That's the difference between quick teams and inside teams: when the going gets tough and it's close, the inside mids tend to get on top (as ours did yesterday in the final 20 minutes). Our problem yesterday was that we kept playing directly into the hands of the GC, who spread quickly and always had 1-2 players behind the ball in our forward line. Play disciplined football and stay tight defensively and you can beat quick teams. 

IMO quick teams tend to have no plan B. It's run run run, but if it's a bog, they can't get the space and/or overrun the ball. That's when you beast them.

Essendon beat us because they wanted it more.

Saints beat us because we tried to play their fast game and simply couldn't. Must learn how to transition our game onto smaller pitches like Etihad.

5 hours ago, Moonshadow said:

Well..... I played there in the little league in front of 40,000. At the time I remember thinking they were there to watch us!

Yep! Snapped a goal in front of the Dees cheersquad while wearing the jumper. Tick.

2 hours ago, Ricky P said:

Not sure you read the comment I was responding to.

I did but the point I was trying to make was there are some teams who are on part with where we are and we lost 3 games to them. We also beat the Pies and Tiges who are around about where we are but really we're ahead of where they are at the moment 

2 hours ago, Dante said:

 

We have a fistful of inside mids but not enough outside runners and that's cost us games against Essendon, Saints (twice) and nearly cost us yesterday, we  will do ok against the slower sides but against quicker sides, we will struggle.

We have Billy and Hunt but that's not enough, we need a couple more and Matt Jones isn't the answer, pace, pace, pace, that is needed and urgently. 

 

 

Agree

We desprately need another ball carrier & user.

Melksham?

 

Just now, Unleash Hell said:

Agree

We desprately need another ball carrier & user.

Melksham?

 

Melksham and Hibberd will both help

31 minutes ago, Petraccattack said:

Melksham and Hibberd will both help

where does Hunt go ?  just a question

1 minute ago, beelzebub said:

where does Hunt go ?  just a question

To the wing hopefully.  With Salem on the other wing.

1 minute ago, Petraccattack said:

To the wing hopefully.  With Salem on the other wing.

then Stretch ?  see where Im going?  lol

A bit of pressure for positions  never hurt any team bb

The things our team desprately need atm are

Compsure, decision making and experience.

And all all are related to each other

Edited August 1, 20169 yr by Unleash Hell

4 minutes ago, Unleash Hell said:

A bit of pressure for positions  never hurt any team bb

The things our team desprately need atm are

Compsure, decision making and experience.

And all all are related to each other

without doubt.

Stretch was born to run the wing. Im not sure there are even wingers ( true ones  anymore) but someone who can run and carry along the line of the outer square...yep, bring it on

So I haven't been able to watch much of the game but managed to watch the goals on the MFC website. Gotta say if that was the "highlights" then I can't imagine how frustrating watching the actual game was. I also got to see the montage Fox Footy's put together of the mistakes in the 3rd quarter. My god, I don't think I would've been able to last without drinking A LOT of alcohol. 

What a ridiculous game. Was it our worst for the year? If so I guess we can take something from the fact we still managed to win. 

We play like that next week and we're in for an absolute bloodbath.

5 minutes ago, Pates said:

So I haven't been able to watch much of the game but managed to watch the goals on the MFC website. Gotta say if that was the "highlights" then I can't imagine how frustrating watching the actual game was. I also got to see the montage Fox Footy's put together of the mistakes in the 3rd quarter. My god, I don't think I would've been able to last without drinking A LOT of alcohol. 

What a ridiculous game. Was it our worst for the year? If so I guess we can take something from the fact we still managed to win. 

We play like that next week and we're in for an absolute bloodbath.

many of us drank heavily     well you would 

1 hour ago, beelzebub said:

then Stretch ?  see where Im going?  lol

To the stage on Brownlow night to collect his medal

7 hours ago, Redleg said:

Bontempelli doesn't come into it, as we were not taking him. The argument is we passed on Kelly pick 2, for Dom and Salem.

And we did well!

1 hour ago, Pates said:

So I haven't been able to watch much of the game but managed to watch the goals on the MFC website. Gotta say if that was the "highlights" then I can't imagine how frustrating watching the actual game was. I also got to see the montage Fox Footy's put together of the mistakes in the 3rd quarter. My god, I don't think I would've been able to last without drinking A LOT of alcohol. 

What a ridiculous game. Was it our worst for the year? If so I guess we can take something from the fact we still managed to win. 

We play like that next week and we're in for an absolute bloodbath.

Have to say, you sort of can't say that if you have only watched a highlights package and a blooper reel.

Having said that, it was bloody dreadful. Literally the only thing that made remotely bearable was losing my sh!t when Watts kicked the winner.

17 hours ago, Undeeterred said:

 

The point I'm making is being missed. The third man up was often Nicholls himself (ie, the actual ruckman), while another player engaged Gawn, pretending to be the ruck. Not the typical third man up situation.

Watts waved his arms around at the ump in the third quarter, in the pocket at the city end, because he didn't know which of the big blokes standing next to him was the designated ruckman.

It has to be illegal, surely.

Still dominated the hit-outs 67-21....

But yes when this starts to happen, a player needs to shepherd the 3rd man up out of the play and big max will be even more dominant!

 

Yes the Win was very ugly. I'd rather win ugly against someone like Hawthorn than one of the cellar dwellers...

43 minutes ago, low flying Robbo said:

Still dominated the hit-outs 67-21....

But yes when this starts to happen, a player needs to shepherd the 3rd man up out of the play and big max will be even more dominant!

 

Yes the Win was very ugly. I'd rather win ugly against someone like Hawthorn than one of the cellar dwellers...

So if it is happening every week why the hell arent we shepherding the Harry Lime

20 minutes ago, jackaub said:

So if it is happening every week why the hell arent we shepherding the Harry Lime

possibly because it means we have one extra player not jumping in the air?

15 minutes ago, sue said:

possibly because it means we have one extra player not jumping in the air?

And that person is contributing to the congestion that is a major problem at the moment

The coaches must be able to counter it but like a lot of things we just seem to do the same things no matter what. Its like we dont learn or dont think

2 hours ago, low flying Robbo said:

Still dominated the hit-outs 67-21....

But yes when this starts to happen, a player needs to shepherd the 3rd man up out of the play and big max will be even more dominant!

 

Yes the Win was very ugly. I'd rather win ugly against someone like Hawthorn than one of the cellar dwellers...

It was really odd, but I think that even though Gawn was still getting a hand to it, he was a bit overwhelmed with firepower and wasn't directing it all that well.