Post Match Discussion - Round 1

[Willmoy1947 4,081]

Bugg on Menzel........we win

[bing181 9,193]

51 minutes ago, rjay said:

Fritsch had 5 tackles...ANB, Melk & Hannan and Garlett had 5 between them.

 

Just not sure what happened with Melksham. For me he was perhaps the greatest disappointment of the day because he's been doing so well in the latter part of last year and the pre-season comp. He seemed to be playing further up the ground and/or not sure of his role/position ... though as always, I could be wrong.

[Wiseblood 24,637]

3 minutes ago, willmoy said:

Bugg on Menzel........we win

Why would we play Bugg, a bloke who spent last year down forward, on Menzel?  Very strange.

[Robot Devil 1,895]

5 hours ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Re the Salem incident.  He seemed to land on his back - did anyone notice if his head also hit the deck?  He looked out cold and didn't move for quite a few seconds.   With his concussion history he should have been taken off and checked.  Given that he had no touches after the incident suggests his head or his back weren't right.  I wouldn't be surprised if he is out vs Brisbane injured/hurt.

As and aside why didn't a trainer go to him to check him or help him up?  Very odd. Doubly odd that none of his teammates went to his aid either. 

I can confirm with absolute certainty that when Salem went down a trainer was almost immediately on the scene. When he failed to move for several seconds the trainer lifted their right arm and signalled to the Melbourne bench. 

The Doctor and Physio then both took off from the bench straight to Salem. The Doctor opened up a fair lead on the Physio despite looking less likely. 

By the time the Doctor arrived Salem was on his feet and walking back to take his free kick. The Doctor stood approximately 5 metres behind Salem over the boundary and then waited for him to kick the ball. Salem ran on after the kick. 

At this stage I was watching the play further up the field and I did not see what happened next. 

I trust the above provides some additional clarity. 

[Willmoy1947 4,081]

1 minute ago, Wiseblood said:

Why would we play Bugg, a bloke who spent last year down forward, on Menzel?  Very strange.

Didn't he come to us as a back, and he likes the contact. Fancy not one backman staying behind the contest more than once

[Wiseblood 24,637]

1 minute ago, willmoy said:

Didn't he come to us as a back, and he likes the contact. Fancy not one backman staying behind the contest more than once

He did, and spent time there at GWS, but that's beside the point.  He's been turned into a defensive forward for us and there would have been zero chance of him playing there had he been picked.

[Robot Devil 1,895]

21 hours ago, A F said:

Yeah, my old man and I were talking about that. Can you imagine down at the Cattery, their ground playing a little package on Oliver or Petracca? Never in a million years. What an absolute joke.

This was my exact thought. 

[old dee 23,770]

6 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

Why would we play Bugg, a bloke who spent last year down forward, on Menzel?  Very strange.

Could not agree more. Bugg is a fill in talent when the injuries mount. 

[old dee 23,770]

1 minute ago, Wiseblood said:

He did, and spent time there at GWS, but that's beside the point.  He's been turned into a defensive forward for us and there would have been zero chance of him playing there had he been picked.

Was not picked probably says it all

[Mt. Dee-Maaan 603]

5 hours ago, Jaded said:

Rawlings is no longer our backline coach and our backline absolutely stunk it up yesterday. Coincidence? 

'Jaded"...coincidence?

[Wiseblood 24,637]

2 minutes ago, old dee said:

Was not picked probably says it all

I think Bugg brings something different to our side, OD.  He's a pest, plays his role well and can hit the scoreboard (although sometimes not in the right column!)  During our best period of footy last year I thought it was no coincidence that he was influential for us up forward.  

Is there a spot for him in the side?  Maybe.  I think he'll get a look in sooner rather than later.

[Willmoy1947 4,081]

1 minute ago, old dee said:

Could not agree more. Bugg is a fill in talent when the injuries mount. 

With the judgemental wrist slashing going on around here i might put some future double taxed super return moulla on Weideman and Bugg for the Brownlow quinella then..........

[old dee 23,770]

5 minutes ago, Wiseblood said:

I think Bugg brings something different to our side, OD.  He's a pest, plays his role well and can hit the scoreboard (although sometimes not in the right column!)  During our best period of footy last year I thought it was no coincidence that he was influential for us up forward.  

Is there a spot for him in the side?  Maybe.  I think he'll get a look in sooner rather than later.

Lets hope he does not punch anyone 

[Wiseblood 24,637]

1 minute ago, old dee said:

Lets hope he does not punch anyone 

I think he's learned his lesson, OD.  Let's hope it's the making of him as a footballer.

[old dee 23,770]

5 minutes ago, willmoy said:

With the judgemental wrist slashing going on around here i might put some future double taxed super return moulla on Weideman and Bugg for the Brownlow quinella then..........

Have never liked either Willmoy it did not start on Sunday. Surely a fan site is about opinions. My opinion is well known on both. It would not have changed if we won yesterday.

[old dee 23,770]

1 minute ago, Wiseblood said:

I think he's learned his lesson, OD.  Let's hope it's the making of him as a footballer.

Lets hope but I still see as a fill in. 

[Willmoy1947 4,081]

3 minutes ago, old dee said:

Have never liked either Willmoy it did not start on Sunday. Surely a fan site is about opinions. My opinion is well known on both. It would not have changed if we won yesterday.

Your right OD, what we like and what we have opinions on are two different things. Although mine would have changed if we had have won yesterday.

[Mono 455]

2 hours ago, Petraccattack said:

Coaches votes

MELBOURNE v GEELONG
9 Max Gawn (Melb)
6 Gary Ablett (Geel)
5 Daniel Menzel (Geel)
5 Joel Selwood (Geel)
4 Christian Petracca (Melb)
1 Clayton Oliver (Melb)

 

 

Gawn may have been one kick away from a perfect 10.

No. Scott gave Abblett 5. Beyond words.

[old dee 23,770]

4 minutes ago, willmoy said:

Your right OD, what we like and what we have opinions on are two different things. Although mine would have changed if we had have won yesterday.

Sorry willmoy have I missed something? I seem to have misunderstood!  my error.

Edited March 26, 2018 by old dee

[Willmoy1947 4,081]

4 minutes ago, old dee said:

Sorry willmoy have I missed something? I seem to have misunderstood!

I was making ambiguous mischief OD, and i know that opinions on These Two are not, and have not, just been our domain. Game one frustration to find the intangible difference between a win and a loss.......... 

[BarnDee 287]

On 3/25/2018 at 7:03 PM, Nasher said:

Thought it was a gripping and entertaining game of footy. Props to the usual bunch of drawing long bows from short sample sizes - no, we don't yet know if we are "same old Melbourne". Besides, I thought we showed spirit after half time to get back in the game and nearly clinch it.

Also an honourable mention to the usual "this is going to be a blowout" crew at half time in the match day thread. You guys seriously crack me up. You know who you are.

The Lewis 50 was a disgraceful example of leadership. However I thought his assistance in the back half of the ground was significant in our second half improvement. I don't know how to weigh the two factors off against each other.

The Gawn miss was a huge letdown, but the call above to drop him for it currently leads the race for the most absurd post in this thread. That would clearly be harmful to the team as he was on top all day, and there's no punitive/education benefit either: I suspect he may already realise he might have been better off kicking the goal and doesn't need to be dropped to get the point. Nobody misses on purpose.

Wagner has copped some criticism but I thought he lifted significantly in the second half. His pressure was first rate.

Petracca is going to be a star and Oliver already is.

Overall, very disappointed to have lost, but it hasn't done much to dent my optimism for this season.

 

well said  

[dieter 3,325]

42 minutes ago, Mono said:

No. Scott gave Abblett 5. Beyond words.

Gawn didn't score a vote in the Age...

[olisik 4,060]

3 hours ago, Petraccattack said:

Coaches votes

MELBOURNE v GEELONG
9 Max Gawn (Melb)
6 Gary Ablett (Geel)
5 Daniel Menzel (Geel)
5 Joel Selwood (Geel)
4 Christian Petracca (Melb)
1 Clayton Oliver (Melb)

 

 

Gawn may have been one kick away from a perfect 10.

My guess

Goodwin

5 - Gawn

4 - Petracca

3 - Menzel

2 - Selwood

1 - Ablett

 

Scott

5 - Ablett

4 - Gawn

3 - Selwood

2 - Menzel

1 - Oliver

[Redleg 40,815]

9 hours ago, waynewussell said:

Point of clarification... feel free to enlighten this genuine inquisitor...

16. DISPOSAL FROM MARK OR FREE KICK

16.1 STANDING THE MARK AND TEN-METRE PROTECTED AREA

16.1.1 Standing the Mark
When a Player is awarded a Mark or Free Kick or is Kicking into play after a Behind has been scored, one Player from the opposing Team may stand at the position on the Playing Surface where the Mark or Free Kick was awarded or where the field Umpire otherwise directs the Player to stand. The position on the Playing Surface where the opposing Player stands is known as “the mark”.

16.1.2 Protected Area
The Protected Area is a corridor which extends from 5 metres either side of the mark to 5 metres either side of, and a 5-metre radius behind, the Player with the football, as illustrated in Diagram 2. No Player shall enter and remain in the Protected Area unless the field Umpire calls “Play On” or the Player is accompanying or following within 5 metres of their opponent.

Well it reads as though if you enter the area but leave immediately that is not a 50. The penalty is for remaining.

If I am correct in my interpretation, the umpires have got it wrong consistently as most penalties have involved players entering the prohibited area for a second, or being near the area, but immediately leaving it.

Edited March 26, 2018 by Redleg

[rjay 24,852]

9 hours ago, waynewussell said:

Point of clarification... feel free to enlighten this genuine inquisitor...

16. DISPOSAL FROM MARK OR FREE KICK

16.1 STANDING THE MARK AND TEN-METRE PROTECTED AREA

16.1.1 Standing the Mark
When a Player is awarded a Mark or Free Kick or is Kicking into play after a Behind has been scored, one Player from the opposing Team may stand at the position on the Playing Surface where the Mark or Free Kick was awarded or where the field Umpire otherwise directs the Player to stand. The position on the Playing Surface where the opposing Player stands is known as “the mark”.

16.1.2 Protected Area
The Protected Area is a corridor which extends from 5 metres either side of the mark to 5 metres either side of, and a 5-metre radius behind, the Player with the football, as illustrated in Diagram 2. No Player shall enter and remain in the Protected Area unless the field Umpire calls “Play On” or the Player is accompanying or following within 5 metres of their opponent.

 

3 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Well it reads as though if you enter the area but leave immediately that is not a 50. The penalty is for remaining.

If I am correct in my interpretation, the umpires have got it wrong consistently as most penalties have involved players entering the prohibited area for a second, or being near the area, but immediately leaving it.

Not well written it should be "No player shall enter or remain in the Protected Area"...

The penalty is not only for remaining but for entering the protected area, at least that is how the rule is supposed to be umpired.

Without this rule a tactic was to cut the angle/option of the player with the ball by effectively creating another man or men on the mark to kick over.

I think the intent of the rule is good but as with many AFL umpiring decisions the application is often found wanting...