I played competitive tennis growing up. And would play in a dominant, scintillating fashion when matched up against better-ranked opponents but more often than not still somehow lose the match (by giving up too many cheap, key points). Meanwhile, I would play horribly against hackers and could never get my [censored] together. The concept of the 'ball not coming on'. It wasn't mental weakness, a disrespect for my opponent, or because I had tickets on myself, but a lack of maturity and the inability to adapt and find my own rhythm.

We have a young team which thrives on intensity - when it's not coming back at break-neck speed in the other direction (or if we're not overcoming a deficit) then we seem entirely flat. This week against the Crows is chocked with the potential to be a rip-snorting game. I'm afraid that we'll struggle to overcome our structural deficiencies, but I think we'll give them a red-hot run. Go Dees.

7 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

We've lost 2 games by less than a kick, one game after being unable to hit the side of a barn and another after leading all game and being overrun in the last with injuries taking a toll.

Explain how each of these games was unwinnable. 

I'm not disputing we could have won all those games or haven't been in them, my point is we lost those games due to inexperience expect maybe Richmond. A side whos average games is up and over the 100 mark would have the experience & composure not to let freo kick 7 in a quarter, wouldn't give up the lead against freo in the last minute, cough up 2 goals in the last minute against geelong in the 3rd quarter, wouldn't come to the Hawthorn game with a poor attitude & get 6 goals behind

13 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Nothing practise couldn't fix. 

 

The same practise that has not transformed his field kicking?

I think what we have done is in covering ruck we have weakened other positions. Tmac is a defender.

8 hours ago, A F said:

As I've said before, we also press too much in the midfield and we get done over the back. Our positioning in the midfield at times on Sunday though was putrid. This is one definite example.

So exactly what are our myriad  of coaches doing about this surely it is basic game preparation and execution

Do the Melbourne players not do what the coaches ask or are they stupid For years our centre square set ups have been poor and even though we keep getting smashed all game THEY MAKE NO DISCERNABLE CHANGES TO THE SET UP maybe the coaches are stupid!

Despite our loss, 2 players made TOW:  Viney and Frost.  I'm especially happy for Frost as this would be (I think) the first public recognitionfor him and I imagine it would be really confidence boosting for him.   http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-05-09/team-of-the-week-r7-did-we-get-it-right

Also Viney got 10 from the coaches ie they both gave him a BOG 5.  Jones got 3 votes and Frost 1.  http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-05-08/aflca-votes-round-seven-the-bont-makes-his-move

Well done guys!

 

5 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Despite our loss, 2 players made TOW:  Viney and Frost.  I'm especially happy for Frost as this would be (I think) the first public recognitionfor him and I imagine it would be really confidence boosting for him.   http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-05-09/team-of-the-week-r7-did-we-get-it-right

Also Viney got 10 from the coaches ie they both gave him a BOG 5.  Jones got 3 votes and Frost 1.  http://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-05-08/aflca-votes-round-seven-the-bont-makes-his-move

Well done guys!

 

Frost has won me over since the moment of his return this year. Happy to admit that I had my doubts (especially after watching him closely from behind the interchange bench in a pre-season match lat year) but I think that he can become a genuine footballer rather than athlete and has a decent amount of upside to come. Competitive, hungry, probably not given much respect by the umps to date, and the coaches have clearly told him to back himself in when we've been down in an effort to break the deadlock. Also a surprisingly steady hand. Well done to him and Viney on making Team-of-the-Week.  

Anyone have the age chart of each team for last round?

1 minute ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Anyone have the age chart of each team for last round?

According to Footywire our average age was 24 years 10 months, theirs was 26 years 8 months.

Average experience was 84.5 games to 134.5 games, too.

Just saw the reply and in the last centre bounce Hawthorn had 2 forwards. 2. All the rest packed into the backline

That would have won us the game agains Free.

Why can't we have leadership / coaching like that.

again, FMD

3 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

According to Footywire our average age was 24 years 10 months, theirs was 26 years 8 months.

Average experience was 84.5 games to 134.5 games, too.

Plus however many premierships and we don't have a ruckman.

I'm annoyed we lost, but think back to four years ago and we are getting a lot better. The results will take care of themselves soon enough.

We went into the game as hot favourites, against a team that lost by 100 the week before to a team Melbourne smashed.

Melbourne loses. Despite this, it has two players in the AFL's team of the week.

Only Melbourne could disappoint everyone and yet still somehow shine.

I find it fascinating and almost amusing how post game a trend is to look to stats and or reasons to substantiate the how and why we lost.

To use slightly different, but more

poignant wording it's really about why we didn't win.

The vast majority , people, media , sports folk expected US to win. 

Lets not lose sight of that as we clamber upon the excuse train.

 

3 hours ago, dino rover said:

The same practise that has not transformed his field kicking?

I think what we have done is in covering ruck we have weakened other positions. Tmac is a defender.

If Tmac butchers his kicks out of defence, trying to be heroic all the time then he is not a defender.

It is not his job to decide where a scoring chain begins. Tmac's job is to defend an opposition forward line and get the ball out of there.

We leak like a busted roof right now.

17 minutes ago, frankie_d said:

Just saw the reply and in the last centre bounce Hawthorn had 2 forwards. 2. All the rest packed into the backline

That would have won us the game agains Free.

Why can't we have leadership / coaching like that.

again, FMD

Simple tactics aern't they?

strip it back....

5 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

I find it fascinating and almost amusing how post game a trend is to look to stats and or reasons to substantiate the how and why we lost.

To use slightly different, but more

poignant wording it's really about why we didn't win.

The vast majority , people, media , sports folk expected US to win. 

Lets not lose sight of that as we clamber upon the excuse train.

 

Agree BB. Based on some people's rationale, the likes of St. Kilda and GC must be worldbeaters, because they pumped Hawthorn without any premiership players.

It was a bad loss with no excuses. To say that we would have won the game with Gawn is nonsense, because we lost similar games last year against Essendon and Carlton, when we were raging favourites, and Gawn played.

10 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

I find it fascinating and almost amusing how post game a trend is to look to stats and or reasons to substantiate the how and why we lost.

To use slightly different, but more

poignant wording it's really about why we didn't win.

The vast majority , people, media , sports folk expected US to win. 

Lets not lose sight of that as we clamber upon the excuse train.

 

Yep. The club Failed to deliver at a Home Game

That is how it should be viewed, then it must be fixed.

14 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

I find it fascinating and almost amusing how post game a trend is to look to stats and or reasons to substantiate the how and why we lost.

To use slightly different, but more

poignant wording it's really about why we didn't win.

The vast majority , people, media , sports folk expected US to win. 

Lets not lose sight of that as we clamber upon the excuse train.

 

I actually expected us to lose, which is probably evidence of the warped outlook on football and life I have after enduring the hardships of the last decade. The fact that they came so close to actually winning made it even harder.

There's clearly still a culture of mental fragility and an inability to stem shifts in momentum. The latter will hopefully improve with experience. The former... we need leaders who will stand up under duress and shake off the losing mentality that still dogs us.

Looking at it from a money basis we have 4 weeks until our big QB money spinner

our schedule is ... Adelaide (away), North (MCG), Gold Coast (Alice Springs) and bye

Collingwood's is: GWS,(Sydney) Hawthorn,(MCG) Brisbane (MCG), Freo (Perth)

Could be the lowest QB crowd for many years if neither team perform

2 minutes ago, Luther said:

I actually expected us to lose, which is probably evidence of the warped outlook on football and life I have after enduring the hardships of the last decade. The fact that they came so close to actually winning made it even harder.

There's clearly still a culture of mental fragility and an inability to stem shifts in momentum. The latter will hopefully improve with experience. The former... we need leaders who will stand up under duress and shake off the losing mentality that still dogs us.

I actually have no problem with any who thought we might.  I do dilute my view to that if it's nought but MFCSS  shining through.  If however some genuinely thought we'd lose and had reasons..well,   you might well have been right.

I take aim though at the notion we can with hindsight, or a tempted dalliance into revisional interpretation , start including  all these 'reason; why we lost didn't win. Prior to the game it was about about improvement, our game, our form and conversely Hawthorns lack of form and tiring list. Suddenly it's their experience and premierships etc. How convenient.

 

45 minutes ago, frankie_d said:

Just saw the reply and in the last centre bounce Hawthorn had 2 forwards. 2. All the rest packed into the backline

That would have won us the game agains Free.

Why can't we have leadership / coaching like that.

again, FMD

Hunt tried to get Jones to go defensive for the last Freo bounce.  Jones' response was to point to our goals ie attack!  The rest is history.

One wonders tho why the coaches didn't send the runner out!

Hunt will make a very good co capt with Viney (when Jones hangs up his boots). 

Perfect balance of brains and brawn  Both have a fierce desire to win.  Great combo.

4 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Hunt tried to get Jones to go defensive for the last Freo bounce.  Jones' response was to point to our goals ie attack!  The rest is history.

Hunt will make a very good co capt with Viney (when Jones hangs up his boots). 

Perfect balance of brains and brawn  Both have a fierce desire to win.  Great combo.

Is Hunt well regarded in terms of leadership? 

If so, VC might be the spot for him. I'm really just against the concept of co-captains.

20 hours ago, ProDee said:

What a frustrating loss by a group whose arousal levels need to be at high alert all of the time, not just some of the time.  They get too comfortable too quickly.  

As you say, Brayshaw is the disappointment.  In his third year we need the class in the midfield we now expected him to be providing.  I still rate him highly, others don't, but him being the mid we hoped for and expected would make a huge difference.

Selection is just one component, but it's another element that has been a bit baffling over the last couple of weeks.  I didn't mind Weideman early days, or the retention of Melksham, but for the life of me I question Kennedy-Harris and Bugg getting games ahead of Harmes, Stretch, Kent and even what Neal-Bullen was showing in the main.  Harmes isn't perfect, but he's a big fast body who has a crack.  Give me Harmes over Bugg every day of the year.  Kent might have needed a rocket, but gee, he would have provided more than JKH.  Stretch isn't immune to playing in the VFL, but he also offers more, albeit in a different role.

That said, I won't forget the positives.  Being 4th on the 'quarters won' ladder shows we're playing some very good footy in parts, so does the frustrating stat that we've been level or ahead in the last quarter of every game.

I also like using other clubs who have taken the journey before us as a guide, such as the Dogs.  In Beveridge's first year they were 5/5 from 10.  We can still be 5/5 from 10, or 6/5 from 11.  They went on to win 14 games and play finals that year (2015) even though they lost to Brisbane in round 23.  Brisbane went into that match with 3 wins and finished second last with just 4 wins.  So even a Luke Beveridge side that was about to embark on finals lost the last game of the year to a cellar dwellar.  We know what they did 12 months later.

It's bloody frustrating, but I still believe we can win 3 of our next 4 to get back on track.  But we have to turn up to play. 

Good post, hopefully it will provide some perspective to some of those wallowing in hysteria.

18 minutes ago, Luther said:

Is Hunt well regarded in terms of leadership? 

If so, VC might be the spot for him. I'm really just against the concept of co-captains.

To my mind he showed this in his acceptance speech at last year's b&f:  smart, articulate, gracious, humble.  Couple this with his competitiveness and fierce desire to improve and win at all costs spells 'leader' to me.  The way he plays says: 'follow me, guys' (as does Viney).  His suggestion at the last Freo bounce suggests he has the 'footy smarts' to read the play and how to respond.  Hopefully, Jones listens next time.  Have no idea how he is viewed internally, tho. 

I agree - I'm not fond of the co-capt model either.  Bit off topic but maybe - Viney as capt with Hunt and Gawn as VC.  Gawn also has a good footy brain and on-field voice. 

7 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Hunt tried to get Jones to go defensive for the last Freo bounce.  Jones' response was to point to our goals ie attack!  The rest is history.

One wonders tho why the coaches didn't send the runner out!

Hunt will make a very good co capt with Viney (when Jones hangs up his boots). 

Perfect balance of brains and brawn  Both have a fierce desire to win.  Great combo.

Careful LH you might be opening a door to the 'room of truths' 

Funny how we can see some things and go.." f#@! me ...what....why ?? "  What you highlight goes to a notion that I have, and surprise surprise it won't be that popular.  I speak of Jone's leadership qualities.  Without doubt there is more in footy these days to leadership than tossing the coin  ( which as an aside we lose ridiculously often ). There's the 'around the club" stuff. The off field mentoring etc etc. That's all well and good but all I want to see in a football team captain is someone who can instruct, rally, inspire and direct his underlings to step up and /or change  on the day.  In a military analogy , and as this is battle ( of sorts) , why not: I see Chunk as a very capable platoon sergeant. But not it's Captain. Captains get the nuances, the small things that can tip one way or another.. Hunt understood and Jones didnt. Thats not to make Hunt a potential captain but for me it makes questionable why Jones is!!

Jones and Viney are both get in  ggrrrrrrrrr  Me-Break-Lines  gladiatorial types. . But savvy ?? 

I know I speak heresy, lol but we arent clever in leadership...it's all guns blazing type of thing. That only gets you so far.

14 hours ago, xarronn said:

I noticed that the Hawks were again using a tactic that they were finally penalised for late last year. That was having a man move up close to the man on the mark and block him when the player with the ball played on. I didn't think that was allowed and if it is, why the hell aren't we doing it. The Hawks were a bit more subtle this year than they were last year, but it sure pizzed me off seeing them take that advantage yesterday.

I noticed that there also seemed to be blue runners hanging around just outside the Hawks 50 for a long period of time.

Were they Hawthorn runners? As it looked like a tactic to try and make it look like there was less space to run into.

There should be a time limit on how long the runners can stay on the ground for it was ridiculous.