7 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

You weren't happy with the effort?

I was happy with the effort for about half the match. But this is not little league. We are an AFL team who methodically and frequently put in half an effort. I can understand running out of steam with 10 minutes left because we were a man down. But FML our second quarter was pathetic, our skills from the get to were woeful and our game plan is as bewildering as it is dumb. So no, I was not happy with the overall effort and neither should our coach be! 

We are not in development mode anymore ffs. If after so many damn years we are still happy with “effort” that results in a 7 goal loss then I give up. 

We also lack key forwards who can hit the “money shot” on a regular basis. Hogan nor Weeds seem capable of kicking a pressure set shot goal when desperately needed. 

18 minutes ago, GCDee said:

 

Looking at the next 4 rounds I antipate we will win all of them leaving us 6-3 heading into round 10 against the crows in NT. 

 

 

You're a lot more confident than I am.

Essendon are pushing for a top 8 spot like us, and either have stinkers or turn it on.

St Kilda pushed GWS and really should have won.

GC are tough to beat away, even if it's at the Gabba.

Carlton we should beat, but then again...

If we win all 4, we are potentially back on track. If we win any less than 3 we are done.

Just now, america de cali said:

We also lack key forwards who can hit the “money shot” on a regular basis. Hogan nor Weeds seem capable of kicking a pressure set shot goal when desperately needed. 

Maybe Salem should go forward when Viney returns.

1 minute ago, Doodle Dee said:

Maybe Salem should go forward when Viney returns.

Or McDonald.

2 minutes ago, Doodle Dee said:

..when Viney returns.

Edited for clarity.

4-6 anyone

Just now, america de cali said:

Or McDonald.

I just wish we could clone Salem and have him put a clamp on a small forward and protect the crumb out the back, but also be up the other end providing a class inside 50s or presenting like Bruest for an accurate shot on goal.  But TMAC back is great. I hope we play him and weid. Risking being top heavy is better than having ineffective half forwards imo. But then again, etihad next week...

Edited April 24, 20187 yr by Doodle Dee

1 minute ago, america de cali said:

Or McDonald.

Last night answers that other threads question for mine.

Need someone up that end whos MORE than useful.

I actually thought Weed wasn't too shabby. But hes more icing ( if that ) than cake currently.

We simply need goals kicked.

2 hours ago, Rocknroll said:

Questionfor those at the game. Hard to see from overseas but the afl tracker has ANB and strech whith hugh kms and high kms at speed. 

 

Are they runnng around in circles? What is all this running for? Defensive positions? It is not to go get the ball. 

 

Though both were very poor, are they running around like a headless chooks? 

Hey Rocknroll. All of the above! 

Our second tier mids are just nowhere near the level at the moment.

Harmes is not bright, has little awareness, not enough lateral movement, doesn't hit targets, likes to take speccies regardless of whether he flies against his teammates or not (not so much this week)

ANB has been a huge disappointment.  I expected improvement but his intensity at the contest just isn't there amongst other things.  He is fumbly and offers little offensively or defensively.

Stretch can't break tackles, can't stick tackles, is fumbly, and when he does get a possession they are usually dinky little nothing kicks.

Tyson's errors are nearly always costly and while he wins some clearances defensively he gives us very little.

Salem is only just, for a player his size he doesn't have great lateral movement or acceleration and struggles to stick or break a tackle.  Need to persist with him as he has had some good moments.

The problem is that we don't have too many replacements.

Other than the issues with structure this is our most pressing concern.

Edited April 24, 20187 yr by Guest

It’s clear that we are a team of poorly coached spuds. End of story.

Membership department

9 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Its not who we played

Its how we played.

 

So true.  

 

3 minutes ago, GCDee said:

Hawthorn I agree... 

We dominated Geelong for 3 quarters

Fell asleep for a quarter against brissy but responded well at the end 

North was a good battle

Ran out of steam against the tiges also just lacked a little composure with ball in hand. 

 

It just feels our players are slightly unsure exactly what their roles are which is causing a bit of hesitation. I think this will be rectified by the end of May 

Sure thing, Goody and his staff will have it all rectified by the end of May. 

September, October,  November, December, January, February, March, April and all of May.  That's ten months and Goodwin also had April, May, June, July and August to 'explain' or 'show' our players what their roles are.  

Goodwin got lucky.  Said the right things in an interview, presented well, adept at powerpoint presentations, still in shape.  He fooled them.  Nothing special at all.  He has won 15 and lost 15.  

 

Overall I was not upset about the effort last night, the effort was there from most of the players and we had periods in the game where we were well on top. If we'd converted those opportunities it would have been a much closer game on the scoredboard. Who knows maybe it would have given us the confidence to roll them. The problem is that we don't capitalise on our effort and when we are winning the contest. I've been saying it for a long time the ball movement and attacking set up is inefficient. The other main issue with our game plan is that scoring heavily/easily now in the AFL is predominantly about finding space. To find space you need players willing to run hard and fast on the counter attack and take the game on. We don't have those type of players so we pose little threat to teams when they set up defensively against us. We are very easy to defend against because we can't exploit teams on the spread or run to get the ball past a congested area / zone. Where as the opponents find it easy to exploit us in transition, this is a double edged sword.

We have too many players of the same type and probably too many players outside of our top 12 players whose skill and running ability or willingness to work hard just does not seem to be there. Maybe that is an over exaggeration about willingness to work but we don't have enough speed or hard runners. I'm amazed at the ease at which other teams are able to transition the ball against us. It is tiring to watch when it happens repeatedly each week. Meanwhile we can barely manage to move the ball out of our back 50 and consistently choose to kick to a contest down the line over and over again. It's dumb footy.

The club has assembled a list with a good spine. Admittedly I think I was wrong about OMac, he has come good. He still has brain farts occasionally but overall he is developing well. The other parts of the spine are looking good with Lever, Gawn, Hogan & TMac. We have developing talls in Weid and Petty who I have high hopes for. The starting midfield of Viney, Oliver and Petracca will serve us well for a decade. 

What I am concerned about is the lack of genuine hard running wingers and flankers on the list at the moment. This is what we are lacking. But I have hope that we can get this right. We have built the list around contested footy which I think is the right thing, from the contest out. So next in my opinion is for the club to focus on finding  some genuine hard running skilled players who are hard workers and will complement our inside grunt.

For mine the difference last night was Richmond had a couple of better distributors, more pace and run on the outside as well as more efficiency in attack. Their efficiency in attack was probably partly to do with having a tried and true method to move the ball forward and confidence in that method. Richmonds attacking players were also willing to run hard/contest and they weren't relying on anyone in particular. They all filled their role and capitalised on the loose balls when present to them, overall their forward players are faster more skilled and hard working than ours. In comparison our structure forward of the ball is a bit of a shambles at the moment and it seems we don't have the forward players to play the game style Goodwin is attempting at the moment. 

 

45 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

Its not who we played

Its how we played.

 

Correct.

Early on I said that “this could get ugly” and that’s when there was only a couple of goals in it.

The fumbles, missed tackles, lack of composure and overall apparent lack of a game plan was they for all to see last night.

1 hour ago, beelzebub said:

Actually Red i totally agree with ADC

You're missing the point entirely. Camps arent about skills or gameplans... they're about mindsets, building resilience, building a relationship between themselves . The comradery, the trust , the belief is borne out of these experiences. 

Here we have a group aloof from such ideals and they play like it.

We're a rabble and we'll never be any good...well..not quite but almost.

Not quite but almost ??? Sums up our Brand absolutely. NQR should sponsor us as that's us to a T

We're an absolutely embarassing shambles.

Skills ? Plan ? Cohesion ? Nous ?

We can't win a Premiership to save ourselves, hell we couldn't take a trick at a Bingo night  playing like that. Think we're favourite to win the Laughingstock of the League trophy though.

We just pretend we play footy. We go and get supposed Coaches. We get all these 'talented' players and put on colourful garb and dance around like the Easter Bunny at a kindergarten. Can we be more inept with a ball ? 

How many fresh-air kicks does it take to make a team ? How many Too-many up for a mark does it take to make a circus ?

We must be the best team at Spotting up opposition...i mean fair dinkum we excel at it. About the only thing we do.

We're Pretenders. We have Coaches pretending they have the slightest idea of what they're doing coupled with players who pretend they have ability. 

Had Richmond been on target earlier we'd have been annihilated instead of simply dismissed.

I don't mind losing. That is if you've applied yourself to the task 100% .

We just turn up....to turn it up.

Houston, we have a problem.

I agree with you when you say " can we be more inept with the ball". That is what's wrong not camps or effort. Our effort was there and I wish people would stop thinking a two day camp would have given us a game plan and put skill into ANB, Vince, Harmes, Hunt etc. 

The sad fact of life is that we are the worst skilled side in the AFL, lack pace,  lack the Cyril/Breust type of magic to make something happen from nothing, are poorly coached and selected which hampers the thing we are good at which is contested footy. 

17 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Correct.

Early on I said that “this could get ugly” and that’s when there was only a couple of goals in it.

The fumbles, missed tackles, lack of composure and overall apparent lack of a game plan was they for all to see last night.

It's definitely how we're playing more than our opponent, but to be fair we have to give credit to Richmond whose pressure is better than anyone else's.

It's hard to know whether we would have been as fumbly, for example, if we didn't continually expect to be immediately gang tackled every time we go near it.

3 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

Correct.

Early on I said that “this could get ugly” and that’s when there was only a couple of goals in it.

The fumbles, missed tackles, lack of composure and overall apparent lack of a game plan was they for all to see last night.

It seemed , to this humble observer, that our game style ( note i haven't said plan...as i can't discern one ) was simply pressure on the ball/man. 

It was very British Bulldogs really...just stacks on the mill and with a fairly inventive copy of a rolling scrum we got it ti our end and got a bit lucky...scored a try.

Then, Richmond working intelligently utilsed our desire to concentrate manpower and used the resulting open spaces, and lack of effective opposition to run amock.

We were still playing a very dumb game. It works for at best a quarter.

Why were we not switching ? That HAS to be instructed. Why do we often have the wrong players on at crucial moments ? That's direction.

Why do we continually have poor structure. Why do we just bomb away?

Why do other teams find it so easy to score out the back door ?

Why are we going backwards ?

Leaving the ground last night I was thinking of that old eunuch joke:                                 the one about the eunuch in the harem - he knows what to do and how to do it, but when it comes to the crunch.....

Such is the Melbourne Football Team.

5 minutes ago, beelzebub said:

It seemed , to this humble observer, that our game style ( note i haven't said plan...as i can't discern one ) was simply pressure on the ball/man. 

It was very British Bulldogs really...just stacks on the mill and with a fairly inventive copy of a rolling scrum we got it ti our end and got a bit lucky...scored a try.

Then, Richmond working intelligently utilsed our desire to concentrate manpower and used the resulting open spaces, and lack of effective opposition to run amock.

We were still playing a very dumb game. It works for at best a quarter.

Why were we not switching ? That HAS to be instructed. Why do we often have the wrong players on at crucial moments ? That's direction.

Why do we continually have poor structure. Why do we just bomb away?

Why do other teams find it so easy to score out the back door ?

Why are we going backwards ?

If you go back and read Satys or others training report, that’s exactly what we trained to do, Hunt the opposition. That’s why it’s a coaching issue, if we hunt the BALL instead we don’t have to play catch-up or chase. It’s beyond ridiculous the way this side is being coached. Effort aside, this is one of the poorest performances I’ve seen for a while. Meat and potatoes football won’t get us far.

The 3rd quarter cost us. We totally dominated them for the first 15-20 mins,  inside 50s at one stage were around 12 -3 our way for 2 goals to 1. We were all over them. 

We worked so hard for our goals only for Tiges to stroll in for easy goals against the flow,  deflating us mentally,  you can see it in their body language.

Season still alive though in my opinion, our contested ball is as good as anyone in the comp,  we just need some polish 

 

54 minutes ago, Stretch Johnson said:

Our second tier mids are just nowhere near the level at the moment.

Harmes is not bright, has little awareness, not enough lateral movement, doesn't hit targets, likes to take speccies regardless of whether he flies against his teammates or not (not so much this week)

ANB has been a huge disappointment.  I expected improvement but his intensity at the contest just isn't there amongst other things.  He is fumbly and offers little offensively or defensively.

Stretch can't break tackles, can't stick tackles, is fumbly, and when he does get a possession they are usually dinky little nothing kicks.

Tyson's errors are nearly always costly and while he wins some clearances defensively he gives us very little.

Salem is only just, for a player his size he doesn't have great lateral movement or acceleration and struggles to stick or break a tackle.  Need to persist with him as he has had some good moments.

The problem is that we don't have too many replacements.

Other than the issues with structure this is our most pressing concern.

Spot on SJ. And it was no more evident than when we kicked the first goal in the fourth, got the ball out of the centre straight after and he halted all momentum by same brain numbing sideways stop and kick on the wing that went about 15 metres. By that stage, the opponents were all back. Did not grasp the state of play whatsoever.

Lest We Forget this game. 

2 minutes ago, Hell Bent said:

The 3rd quarter cost us. We totally dominated them for the first 15-20 mins,  inside 50s at one stage were around 12 -3 our way for 2 goals to 1. We were all over them. 

We worked so hard for our goals only for Tiges to stroll in for easy goals against the flow,  deflating us mentally,  you can see it in their body language.

Season still alive though in my opinion, our contested ball is as good as anyone in the comp,  we just need some polish 

 

It’s the same every single week v every opposition and nothing is being done to stop it, it makes me sick, rabbit in the headlights crap. Last night we twice gave up 4 in a row, that’s now 22 from 27 games, surely Goodwin must recognise this by now? It’s a structural/coaching issue I feel, we shouldn’t be this bad with the back 6 we have.

1 hour ago, Stretch Johnson said:

Selection each week baffles me.

Fritsch is clean, chooses attacking options and more often than not hits them. 

Someone like Stretch is the opposite in every way.

 

Fritsch needed a rest and would have been a liability in the heavy wet conditions last night.

Stretch was brought in to counter some of Richmond's pace. The problem is his game has gone backwards for at least two years and he doesn't want the football.

Each time he got it, instead of taking off, he stopped and went back over the mark.

I question our development with Stretch. We tried to turn him into a contested player when we needed a speedy outsider. Now all he does is second guess himself and fails to play on instinct.