POST MATCH DISCUSSION - Round 5

[Deeoldfart 8,005]

11 hours ago, beelzebub said:

Coach failed to adjust. Game over

You should've called it quits, and had an early night 'bub.  Hope you're feeling better this morning.

[DeeZee 7,363]

I don't think Garry Lyon was far wrong when he said the injury to Gawn and the suspensions to Lewis and Hogan probably cost us a place in the finals.

[Chris 2,892]

My thought on why we lost.

Lost Smith early which changed structure, Watts seemed to be down back a fair bit, which removed a tall forward.

Lost Spencer fairly early, which removed a tall forward all together and exposed us down back as Watts couldn't cover that either. 

Couldn't use Trac as usual due to injury, putting more on the mids

Had Melksham in the ruck at one point!

Couldn't kick the score we should have as we only had one tall forward.

Completly ran out of puff, was clear as day they had nothing left. 

We also as a team haven't learnt how to win. That sounds absurd but is actually a skill that needs to be learned and at this point we don't have it. 

All in all I wasn't overly disappointed last night, the Tigers are yet again the paper Tigers and will be smashed next week. If not for the above mentioned I think we would have won by 6 to 8 goals. 

[picket fence 17,055]

10 hours ago, praha said:

Injuries have killed us in two games, but ultimately, we've lost 2 games because of poor selection and coaching.

Leaders have also slaughtered us at pivotal moments. Jones has been a let done since round 3. 

Yep, I reckon Jones Mentally  might still be wondering How and why he was replaced and yes I said replaced by Viney who was still to prove himself.

Viney is not a leader, Jones is. Single most damning mistake that Goodwin has made. The leadership at Melb FC has been comprimised! 

[Dr. Gonzo 24,187]

11 hours ago, mrtwister said:

Not having our ruckman wasn't just about the hit outs. We had no target for our kick ins or rebound 50s. We had no controlled possessions or big guy to bring it to ground to the little guys and they just pumped it back in. Then when we finally got it into our forward line and they just kicked it to Nankervis and got it back down their end.

I'm not sure we had trouble rotating Viney back on. It was us who kept kicking it to the other side. Given that we now know he has a knee issue, maybe he was being held for the last 10 minutes of the game? We couldn't get Oliver back on after we took him off and put Tyson back on. I said to my wife when I saw the interchange that we just handicapped ourselves even more with that change. 

Let's hope Essendon write themselves off with a physical game in the wet tomorrow and make the most of their 5 day break. 

Yep every kick out we had in the last quarter went to the southern stand side. Unfortunately straight to Harmes and co who were undersized. Hogan should've been up the ground to make himself a target. Obviously he was hoping we'd get out the back and we'd need him at high half forward but after halfway through the quarter it should've been obvious we were struggling to get the ball out the back.

Anyway I think it was our tactic to play the southern stand wing and limit their ability to interchange as we were already limited. Unfortunately the damage had already been done, we probably should've used that tactic from 1/4 time.

[At the break of Gawn 4,460]

Went to the game and then saw that the replay was on after I got home and kept watching. We lost due to these reasons:

1. Petracca getting injured early. He started on fire. Left to playing ono one leg and could only impact minimally due to lack of mobility.

2. Spencer getting injured. Stuffed us up at stoppages

3. Watts having to ruck full time. Allowed Rance to do what he wanted. It's the antithesis to what any opposition coach would want

4. Smith getting injured. Stuffed up our structure and killed our rotations.

5. Fatigue from all of the above. Lost concentration at stoppages. See the Cotchin to Riewoldt in the last qtr. Cotchin was completely left alone out the back. Jones was just off to the side not directing.

 

 

 

 

Edited April 25, 2017 by At the break of Gawn

[Wiseblood 24,637]

4 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Yep every kick out we had in the last quarter went to the southern stand side. Unfortunately straight to Harmes and co who were undersized. Hogan should've been up the ground to make himself a target. Obviously he was hoping we'd get out the back and we'd need him at high half forward but after halfway through the quarter it should've been obvious we were struggling to get the ball out the back.

Anyway I think it was our tactic to play the southern stand wing and limit their ability to interchange as we were already limited. Unfortunately the damage had already been done, we probably should've used that tactic from 1/4 time.

Re: Hogan - this was a tough one for us.  You throw Hogan up the ground to that kick out contest and we win it, who do we kick to?  Spencer going down robbed us a little of those structures that would have helped us.  The one thing we did right with those kick outs is that we went the opposite side to Nankervis which allowed us some semblance of chance by bringing the ball to ground.

Edit - just to add to this, Smith going down also robbed us of a target as well.  He might not be the tallest out there but he can certainly play tall.

Edited April 25, 2017 by Wiseblood

[picket fence 17,055]

20 minutes ago, DeeZee said:

As much as out forward efficiency is severely lacking, our defense seems to be a problem too.

The amount of times a Riewoldt or Rioli were standing on their own and kicked goals as a result was really disappointing.

i know we have some sort of zone defence, but it doesn't work, and opposing forwards always have a field day against us.

What happened to manning up on a dangerous forward.Other teams seem to do it to us as Hogan is always double teamed, and we can rarely seem to find space in our forward line.

I have been a huge critic of our so called Zone defence for several reasons

1 Our defenders don't become accountable when turnovers occur

2 Our defenders make stupid under 12 Schoolboy defensive errors

3 Our defenders are not overly skilled!

Nailed it!

[Dr. Gonzo 24,187]

11 hours ago, Colin B. Flaubert said:

We have got some work to do.

Our issues relate to finishing these days. 38 inside fifties should have resulted in a 4 goal lead going into half time.

Effort is fine. We need the killer instinct.

We need composure. Too much bombing away. One of the rare times I can remember us lowering our eyes ANB picked out Petracca in traffic and he dobbed a goal. Too many times we just kicked it on top of the forwards heads, making the defenders job the easiest in the world. Plus no crumbers at the foot of the contest or out the back meant we didn't get reward for effort.

The effort is there though and the rewards will come. I wouldn't rule out finals this year just yet. It will be hard but it's only round 5.

[Dee Zephyr 19,267]

Never have I been prouder to support the MFC than last night. Their effort was unbelievable. Richmond knew of our situation with the men down by constantly forcing the play to the southern stand side for majority of the last quarter hence limiting what was left of our rotations even more. I watched Watts pace the boundary for 5 minutes trying to get on. 

Hunt's 100 metre sprint to provide support/block for Harmes on that run was amazing. It didn't get us the 4 points but it gives me belief of where this club is heading. Not even a quarter of the way into the season and we have used almost 3 quarters of our list through rotten luck and sheer stupidity. 

I will never give up on this club and I'm certain the players won't either, there's plenty left to salvage.

 

[Dr. Gonzo 24,187]

11 hours ago, Grapeviney said:

Absolutely shattered, but how good is it to be back playing in front of 85,000 people?! 

What do you reckon the split was? Felt like 25-30k Melbourne and 55-60k Richmond. I was in the southern stand though so surrounded by Tigers supporters.

[JV7 2,350]

Not sure if anyone has mentioned this on here, I'm sure they have but the midfield group led by our 2 skippers have a lot to answer for in that final term... How many times did Nankervis flip the ball out the back into the corridor at a stoppage, only for Richmond to swoop on the uncontested ball.. After the 2nd time you'd think you would make an adjustment.. This is a prime example of our lack of leadership. Couldn't imagine it happening with Lewis in the side

[DubDee 25,667]

It was hard to have perspective last night. I was gutted. 

Goody was great in the post match. No excuses but proud of his boys. 

I'm proud too but annoyed I'll have to be patient again to see finals

[Dr. Gonzo 24,187]

11 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

Boy there is some absolute dross being posted on here tonight.

There's no doubt the injuries cruelled us. We were two down on the bench but Jones, Viney and Petracca were all injured and stayed on the park. It was 17 vs 22. Also, does Richmond have a single player missing due to injury? It was best 22 vs not close to best 17. The fourth quarter was nothing other than a byproduct of the players having given it 100% all night and running out of energy. The fact we were still in front with 5 minutes to go says volumes about how good we were.

However...

We should have been way, way more than 20 points up at three quarter time. IMO we lost this game in the first quarter, not the last. That first five minutes, the ball didn't cross into Richmond's forward half, yet we had nothing but 3 points on the board. We should have been 20 points up at quarter time and 40 points up by three quarter time, which would have made the fade-out in the last quarter manageable.

This is the story of our season. I think we've been the better side for longer in all 5 of our games, but when we are on top with momentum we aren't scoring goals, whilst we concede too many when the momentum isn't with us. So we end up playing better football, for longer than our opponent, but losing 3 games. 

Of the 17 fit players, a few of them were passengers, none more so than JKH. An absolute waste of space and I refuse to believe that he met any "KPI" that was satisfactory. Yes, rusty after 1.5 years out but no, tonight was not good enough. 

As for the positives, HIbberd was incredible, Oliver again a beast, Hunt is a gem, Watts was superb, Jetta is one of the league's premier small defenders, and I thought Melksham and Vince both played their best games for the season (says a bit more about the first few than tonight).

We are one of the better 2-3 sides I've seen in recent years (and Richmond possibly the worst 5-0 side) but at the end of the day it doesn't matter. There is sufficient evidence to say we should have won all 5 games and that's why it is reasonable to be upset with the 2-3 start, despite the circumstances.

Agree on both counts. People act like we got demolished by 10 goals. We got pipped by 13 points after being overrun due to running out of legs due to injuries. They battled manfully but couldn't hang on.

[titan_uranus 24,974]

1 minute ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

What do you reckon the split was? Felt like 25-30k Melbourne and 55-60k Richmond. I was in the southern stand though so surrounded by Tigers supporters.

From the MCC it sounded like around 55k Richmond and 30k Melbourne, but I suppose the MCC is where the Melbourne voice sounds loudest.

1 minute ago, JV7 said:

Not sure if anyone has mentioned this on here, I'm sure they have but the midfield group led by our 2 skippers have a lot to answer for in that final term... How many times did Nankervis flip the ball out the back into the corridor at a stoppage, only for Richmond to swoop on the uncontested ball.. After the 2nd time you'd think you would make an adjustment.. This is a prime example of our lack of leadership. Couldn't imagine it happening with Lewis in the side

I suspect exhaustion had something to do with it, to be fair.

Jones couldn't run in the fourth and Cotchin went straight by him more than once.

[jane02 3,741]

Any news on Tim Smith's injury this morning?

Edited April 25, 2017 by jane02
Spelling

[titan_uranus 24,974]

A stat which, I think, gives weight to the argument that we're doing more right than wrong, but failing to put that dominance onto the scoreboard, is the quarters won stat.

We've won 12 quarters this year (out of 20, being 60%). That puts us 5th in the league (today's game can't change that).

Only Adelaide, Port, GWS and Geelong have won more quarters than us, and those four clubs combined have lost 3 games).

[beelzebub 23,313]

At the risk of being that "loon"  I can only think the loonier thing is to persist in a folly that results in failing.

Without doubt there were mitigating circumstances about our loss to the Tiges. I for one still believe that game was winnable .

Despite my thinking  that the FD did us no favours at selection the players out there, even those left with any capacity to play  stil lmight have pulled it off  had the Box seen fir to adjust  more to what was out there instead of persisting with a tilt at a windmill.

Arguably our best ball user ( Watts ) was locked into a role where essentially he never got to use it. Whilst he probably had to shoulder much of the rucking...all of it ??

We let Richmond dictate the game. They had shut down Hogan very effectively to the point of sooking. Why wasnt he brought in to chop out Watts and give Jack a spell at half forward ? This would have required the Tiges to restructure. What did we do ...NOTHING.

The first role of any forward is to score. Take a bow JKH...doughnuts !! He , for mine , added nothing to or selection. .

I chalk that up as another game we effectively lost as opposed the opposition win.

Some of our decision making is just attrocious. If that doesnt iron out with more games we will never climb as we want.

[drdrake 3,162]

I'm highly critical of the performance last night and the last 4 weeks.  We have put ourselves in strong positions to win games but have had massive mental lapses that kept sides in the game and in the last three weeks us losing the game.

 

I can cop the last qtr fade out but Richmond stayed in the game because we allowed them to through errors and mental lapses.

Our last 3 bnf winners have been woeful this season, add Tom McDonald, the guys are the leaders of our club and have let the young players down.  You can't fault the endeavour of most our young players, Jack Watts and Nev Jetta.

Really stand by comments last night with injuries and current form of senior players I can't see a win any time soon, and with don't have any depth at Casey to cover 

[Wiseblood 24,637]

1 minute ago, beelzebub said:

At the risk of being that "loon"  I can only think the loonier thing is to persist in a folly that results in failing.

Without doubt there were mitigating circumstances about our loss to the Tiges. I for one still believe that game was winnable .

Despite my thinking  that the FD did us no favours at selection the players out there, even those left with any capacity to play  stil lmight have pulled it off  had the Box seen fir to adjust  more to what was out there instead of persisting with a tilt at a windmill.

Arguably our best ball user ( Watts ) was locked into a role where essentially he never got to use it. Whilst he probably had to shoulder much of the rucking...all of it ??

We let Richmond dictate the game. They had shut down Hogan very effectively to the point of sooking. Why wasnt he brought in to chop out Watts and give Jack a spell at half forward ? This would have required the Tiges to restructure. What did we do ...NOTHING.

The first role of any forward is to score. Take a bow JKH...doughnuts !! He , for mine , added nothing to or selection. .

I chalk that up as another game we effectively lost as opposed the opposition win.

Some of our decision making is just attrocious. If that doesnt iron out with more games we will never climb as we want.

At the risk of being that loon?  You've already got it sewn up with the above comment I bolded.  Did you want Goodwin to go and shave Spencer's head, make him grow a beard and send him back out there to help the situation?  Watts was stuck with the role as Spencer was injured.  Or did you miss that?  Goodwin and co. can't plan for injuries they can't see, and the only adjustment they could make was to have Watts ruck the majority of the game.

And the next comment about re-structure is ridiculous.  Why would they do that when we are just swapping one key forward for another?  It would make little difference.

Your stance on this makes little sense, but we knew that already.

[beelzebub 23,313]

2 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

At the risk of being that loon?  You've already got it sewn up with the above comment I bolded.  Did you want Goodwin to go and shave Spencer's head, make him grow a beard and send him back out there to help the situation?  Watts was stuck with the role as Spencer was injured.  Or did you miss that?  Goodwin and co. can't plan for injuries they can't see, and the only adjustment they could make was to have Watts ruck the majority of the game.

And the next comment about re-structure is ridiculous.  Why would they do that when we are just swapping one key forward for another?  It would make little difference.

Your stance on this makes little sense, but we knew that already.

Restructuring ..foolish ??  They were allowed to get very settled into to restricting our game.  Played right into their hands

Pederson should have been selected.  Its not hard to fathom,

Edited April 25, 2017 by beelzebub

[Webber 10,454]

13 minutes ago, Demon77 said:

Never have I been prouder to support the MFC than last night. Their effort was unbelievable. Richmond knew of our situation with the men down by constantly forcing the play to the southern stand side for majority of the last quarter hence limiting what was left of our rotations even more. I watched Watts pace the boundary for 5 minutes trying to get on. 

Hunt's 100 metre sprint to provide support/block for Harmes on that run was amazing. It didn't get us the 4 points but it gives me belief of where this club is heading. Not even a quarter of the way into the season and we have used almost 3 quarters of our list through rotten luck and sheer stupidity. 

I will never give up on this club and I'm certain the players won't either, there's plenty left to salvage.

 

Perfectly put Demon77. There is a large group on here however who can't see it, don't want to see it, and won't get past their own frustrated petulance to ever have your perspective. Footy's a tough game, and sometimes it's more satisfying to acknowledge the qualities in honourable defeats than easy wins. Last night was one of those times. 

[dees189227 12,373]

Was interested to hear cotchin after the game talking about that little boundary line scuffle that seemed to give Richmond momentum. He said after that all viney wanted to do was fight with cotchin. Basically meaning viney lost all focus.

[sue 9,096]

If 18 players were injured in Q1 some of you "no excuses" blokes would still refuse to accept that as a reason or even a contribution to why we lost. 

[Macca 16,922]

26 minutes ago, Danelska said:

Jack is still classy at times in the ruck/ruck work - look at his flick over the head tap in the lead up to Hunts goal...he is very underrated -

http://www.afl.com.au/video/2017-04-24/hunt-has-tigers-covered-for-pace

 

and although I reckon Clarry would win the B&F on the amount of possessions he gets - Watt's work ethic in these dire circumstances may fly under the radar.

We need Watts elsewhere ... as a high half forward, deep forward and with spells around the midfield (without rucking) as a utility of sorts.  I don't disagree that he's giving his all and is handy (at times) in the ruck - that's not the issue.  Let's face it, Nankervis had a field day last night (56 tap-outs) ... and Leuenberger is better than Nankervis.

But we're now in make-do mode so Jack will almost certainly be required to ruck for at least some parts of the games.  That's not ideal though as we need him down forward working with Hogan. 

It's risky playing Mitch King or even Keilty but if either player were to compete well and not get smashed in the numbers, we could then use Pedersen as the back up which then frees up Jack.  Playing Pedersen & Watts in tandem in the ruck would be a concession in my eyes.  I just can't see it working.  

If we're going to pull the trigger on Mitch King or perhaps Keilty, we may as well do it now. 

The Bombers aren't a great side but if we hand them first use of the ball at bounce-downs & stoppages, they'll beat us.  We can attempt to rove to their ruckman (Leuenberger) but that theory is a lot easier said than done.

All other selection matters pale into insignificance.