2 hours ago, bing181 said:

I wouldn't be too critical of Brayshaw - Tom Phillips has been huge for them all year, but Brayshaw shut him out of it today. But then that cost us as we lost Brayshaw's drive.

 

That's a good point. Brayshaw has been amongst our most important players out of the centre over the last month of footy. Disappointing that they would use one of our most influential players out of the middle in a negating role. 

5 minutes ago, deanox said:

Agree 100%. You could see the frustration in Max as well. 

A number of times Grundy initiated holding of Max's jumper but the holding free would go against Max. No idea why. 

Simple........umpires really dislike max for  strange reason.

11 minutes ago, Jaded said:

Where do we find pace though?

Our midfield is good but very one dimensional. Good fast hands. Can get a clearance. Can gut run. Slow as the day is long. 

Every time we play teams who pressure us and have good outside pace (Richmond, Hawks), we get pantsed. 

Brayshaw nullified Phillips. Fritsch was on Mayne. So the problems weren't outside.

The concern on the inside is Pendles, Sidebottom, Wells and then more so DeGoey, Adams and Treloar, are those guys really that much quicker than Oliver, Jones, Viney, Harmes and Petracca?

He's not at his best but there's not many more explosive than Viney when he is and he's often been sent to Treloar to limit his breakaway run. Jones can run the lines at a good clip. Clarry can read the play and burst. Petracca is meant to do the same. Those guys should be able to keep track of De Goey.

Looked to me like the spread was way out of whack and when we got the ball we couldn't do anything to make them chase us. All backwards handballs and inviting pressure. 

I think we need more speed in the flanks, we couldn't catch their half forwards or run off them at either end of the ground. In the guts we need smarts and a better plan or to execute the plan better.

1 minute ago, Earl Hood said:

Well we certainly missed Lever coming across to spoil Cox. Not sure if J Smith failed there but someone did. Poor Oscar was manning Cox but we often had Jetta as the roving spoiler, instead of a 194 cm back. 

We did but I think Frost and Hunt may well have offered more than Pedersen and Smith. Still Collingwood played at their absolute best which we didn’t.

1 minute ago, Bonkers said:

That's a good point. Brayshaw has been amongst our most important players out of the centre over the last month of footy. Disappointing that they would use one of our most influential players out of the middle in a negating role. 

He played wing against the Dogs as well. Personally I'd rather Gus on ball and Harmes given the negating wing job. Or bring Stretch or Bugg in to the wing defensive job and use both Gus and Harmes elsewhere, we could've done with allowing a good midfielder to either go forward or back.

17 minutes ago, Jaded said:

Where do we find pace though?

Our midfield is good but very one dimensional. Good fast hands. Can get a clearance. Can gut run. Slow as the day is long. 

Every time we play teams who pressure us and have good outside pace (Richmond, Hawks), we get pantsed. 

It's the quality of the inside work.  We've been bullying teams, but today we were not only matched but bettered.

When you're beaten inside you make their outside run so much easier.

Imo, we overdid the handball in close.  We were too fancy.  There was too much finessing.  Which was due to their pressure.

We can correct a lot of this.  And then you seem quicker.

Can't understand why Brayshaw was not in the middle he has dominated in there last 3 weeks couldn't Harmes play on Phillips.

A side issue though very important as it goes to the integrity of this so called competition.

Afl draw is a disgrace as MFC don't play against WC or GWS until last 2 rounds & yet have played other teams twice!

Some teams advantaged by playing bottom sides twice & helps making finals or even finishing top 4

Playing poor teams 4 weeks in a row vs other teams playing better teams so not as challenged & cannot gauge correct form ( maybe us??)

Solution either play each other twice which is not viable or play each other once & make it an even competition not governed by TV rights!

1 minute ago, DeeSpencer said:

He played wing against the Dogs as well. Personally I'd rather Gus on ball and Harmes given the negating wing job. Or bring Stretch or Bugg in to the wing defensive job and use both Gus and Harmes elsewhere, we could've done with allowing a good midfielder to either go forward or back.

We got touched up in the clearances against the Dogs as well. Two weeks in a row we've been shown up. I'm more concerned about that area of our game than the defensive 6 players. I thought the defence did a reasonable job when the midfield allowed the ball in there so easily all day.

I have a question, what did every one think of the umpires today?

20 minutes ago, ProDee said:

It's the quality of the inside work.  We've been bullying teams, but today we were not only matched but bettered.

When you're beaten inside you make their outside run so much easier.

Imo, we overdid the handball in close.  We were too fancy.  There was too much finessing.  Which was due to their pressure.

We can correct a lot of this.  And then you seem quicker.

It felt a lot like the Richmond game where they were so clean and slick on the inside while we fumbled and overused the ball.

I totally agree about the outside players struggling as a result. If we were more even in the centre then it would have been a far closer contest, having said that I don't think the quality of our midfield holds a candle to theirs at the moment.

Edited June 11, 20186 yr by Clint Bizkit

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I thought that was the least of our concerns. We were flat footed and behind all day, got smashed in the middle and got hunted around the packs. Our delivery forward was shocking, back to the long kicks down the line albeit not as bad as the Richmond game.

And the only reason for that is knowing Tommy would give them a better than decent contest at the top of the square.

I reckon it was pretty comparable to the Richmond game, mate and certainly the Hawthorn game. But each to their own.

1 hour ago, Wiseblood said:

I can't argue with any of that, Doc.  Their pressure and our unwillingness to work super hard at getting ourselves back in the contest was hard to watch at times today.  I reckon they would have had at least 20 intercept marks during the game, many of them from quick kicks out of a contest.  It wasn't good enough.

Even our backs refused to spread and look for the switch. I'd like to play Collingwood again in a fortnight's time.

We have to be a lot more daring with our ball movement if we are going to win on the MCG. At least, I hope that's clear.

2 minutes ago, deebug said:

I have a question, what did every one think of the umpires today?

No good.

They tried to even up the numbers when the game was over but Collingwood certainly got the rub of the green early.

 

We seriously lack outside class and awareness. We have a plethora of inside mids that all butt heads and fight for the same ball, that we have no outside mids waiting for them to extract it.

It’s like all our hard bulls in Brayshaw, Oliver, Jones, Viney, Harmes are all just sticking their head down trying to fight for the same ball, when the opposition just set up on the outside, waiting for that pinball extraction and then run away with it..

Just now, Clint Bizkit said:

No good.

They tried to even up the numbers when the game was over but Collingwood certainly got the rub of the green early.

 

It was bad they were given some stupid free's. One the throw that resulted in a goal for them, then i think it was Spargo was picked up by his jumper and thrown to the ground. Then the Cox one where he did not mark the ball, he drop it and they payed it.

9 minutes ago, ProDee said:

It's the quality of the inside work.  We've been bullying teams, but today we were not only matched but bettered.

When you're beaten inside you make their outside run so much easier.

Imo, we overdid the handball in close.  We were too fancy.  There was too much finessing.  Which was due to their pressure.

We can correct a lot of this.  And then you seem quicker.

The 5 forwards and spare off the back doesn't stand up to good inside mid pressure. We can't link through the middle so it's a quick kick forward to a spare defender. They went back to 6-6-6 for the 2nd and 3rd which served us far better. Time to go 6-6-6 permanently because it gives the inside mids an out. Plus we don't have the right sort of player coming from the back of the square. ANB from the back of the square is such a waste, he's not skilled or creative enough to be useful.

So back to 6 forwards and then time to get the composition and positioning of those 6 better. A quick kick from the middle should result in Hogan, T Mc, Melksham or hopefully T Smith competing for it and a crumber should be sweeping in front and centre. Do the simple things Melbourne.

2 minutes ago, juzzk1d said:

We seriously lack outside class and awareness. We have a plethora of inside mids that all butt heads and fight for the same ball, that we have no outside mids waiting for them to extract it.

It’s like all our hard bulls in Brayshaw, Oliver, Jones, Viney, Harmes are all just sticking their head down trying to fight for the same ball, when the opposition just set up on the outside, waiting for that pinball extraction and then run away with it..

I disagree, I thought we struggled to win the ball in contested situations and that's why we struggled to get the ball on the outside.

Also, our inside midfielders are a lot smaller than Collingwood's (at least it felt that way) so they get pushed off the ball too easily.

Leg speed in football is a myth.. Yeah each side has a couple of quick runners but it's all about how you move the footy. We have looked slick & quick the last 6 weeks because our ball movement was top notch... Win it in close & spread by hand & foot not actual leg speed

1 hour ago, DeeSpencer said:

There's value in Hogan's game but it's also a worry just how glaring his weaknesses are. Provides little pressure, is a poor field kick, can't run and break lines, can't clunk a grab in a pack or even one on one without the sit. Lots of positives from him so far this year and I understand why the club have sung his praises but his stats overvalue his influence. Beating up on bad sides when it's coming in easy but apart from the North game where he was everywhere he's let us down against good teams.

I disagree mate. His field kicking was on display when he hit Tommy on the chest early on. He's generally a beautiful field kick IMO.

And I wouldn't say running is a weakness of his either. He's not quick, but he's not slow either.

He brings others into the game and will most likely be AA.

The only thing I would agree with you on is the little pressure comment. He needs to improve in this area. He doesn't lay enough tackles.

58 minutes ago, deanox said:

@bing181 Yeah he played well but Collingwood seriously exploited his lack of pace by dragging him deep and his kicking from HB is much better than from deep. 

@Demonised Agreed, this set up their win by negating our strength. Gawn got the wrong end of the umpiring stick today and it cost us. 

@olisik Agree 100%. We need to adapt our game to this quickly. Now that we have had 6 weeks of successfully implementing our preferred game style, we can be sure that losing today requires actual tactical changes, and isn't just poor implementation. 

@Clintosaurus I think we would have been deliberately testing our prefered, successfully implemented game plan and trying to win our way. 

If ever I agreed about the Plan B conversation, it's this.

We need to learn that when Gawn isn't have a day out, sit him in the square and try and make him into a headache for the opposition.

We actually did this today, but our midfield was so insipid that it didn't matter who rucked for us, we weren't going to shark enough of Cox or Grundy's hit outs to win.

Lots of talk so far about how we were getting smashed in the clearances, but I reckon our decision-making and execution going forward was putrid.

So many times we failed to hit a target or even kick to advantage when going forward. Adding insult to injury, at times we were too selfish instead of spotting up someone in a better position - something we've been so good at lately. I can't count the number of times we burned guys who were alone inside 50, and you could see them express their frustration. McDonald could have had another 2-3.

I also reckon we lost confidence and weren't keen to go for the slightly dangerous kick that would open up the field, instead kicking it around the boundary.  The antithesis of last round's Melksham kick from defensive side of the wing into the forward half of the centre square vs the Bulldogs, which was some vision that got highlighted a bit during the week.

55 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

There's value in Hogan's game but it's also a worry just how glaring his weaknesses are. Provides little pressure, is a poor field kick, can't run and break lines, can't clunk a grab in a pack or even one on one without the sit. Lots of positives from him so far this year and I understand why the club have sung his praises but his stats overvalue his influence. Beating up on bad sides when it's coming in easy but apart from the North game where he was everywhere he's let us down against good teams.

You've got to be kidding ? He's field kicking is elite. He is one of the best field kicks in the team... I honestly can't remember him missing a target. I wish I could find stats on it but I'm sorry he is an elite field kick

Goody made the same mistake he made against Hawthorn by using our best ball winners and users as taggers.

In effect that takes them out of the game as well.

2 minutes ago, Clint Bizkit said:

I disagree, I thought we struggled to win the ball in contested situations and that's why we struggled to get the ball on the outside.

Also, our inside midfielders are a lot smaller than Collingwood's (at least it felt that way) so they get pushed off the ball too easily.

Honestly I felt this was about the set up and the ruck contest.  Before the dogs we were dominating out of the middle by winning the ball from the tap. Today we constantly seemed out of position when the ball dropped, but worse one of Collingwoods mids dropped halfway out of the contest once the ball went to the "far side" meaning they always had a player outside ours (if we won the first ball this "outside" player shut us in so we couldn't get the clearance, and if they won they could get it out that bit easier). 

We were too close into the pack today, a bit more like last year, less space.  I think we lacked Brayshaw's outside link today. Unsure if this is our set up problem or the way Collingwood made us play. 

I’m actually expecting us to beat Port. We tend to like Adelaide Oval and will be fresh after the bye. We’ve then got St Kilda, Freo and then the Bulldogs to follow.

Poor day today but not the end of the world

2 minutes ago, A F said:

I disagree mate. His field kicking was on display when he hit Tommy on the chest early on. He's generally a beautiful field kick IMO.

And I wouldn't say running is a weakness of his either. He's not quick, but he's not slow either.

He brings others into the game and will most likely be AA.

The only thing I would agree with you on is the little pressure comment. He needs to improve in this area. He doesn't lay enough tackles.

 

When he's in the middle or around half forward he doesn't take the game on enough for a good player. He loves taking little backwards stutter steps. I know he's not slow nor quick but I think he has to add more go forward. He got a handball on the forward flank today, 3rd quarter I think and just danced around backwards. 

Sometimes his field kicks are very good but it's all across his body which means unless he marks and can swing wide and stick a 30m kick he has little confidence. He won't weight it over a defender or change the flight or angle of his kick.

In fact I think it's a huge weakness of the team. So few players who can really run with the ball and execute on the run.