42 minutes ago, Redleg said:

Several of us called for Frost in when Lever went down, with Billy and one of Jeffy or Charlie to add strength, pace, crumbing and better disposal skill. Instead IMO we got a completely unbalanced top heavy and less skilled side and lost two close games. IMO the Coaches need to accept some responsibility for those losses and effectively putting our finals chances on a knife edge. Win both and we are probably safe in the eight.

Yes it appears that way with Frost vs Petty and I was pleased for Frost, but I can't say that with 100% certainty.  Frost may have been torched against St.Kilda and Petty may have played well last night - taking into account what happened further up the field and the quality of the opposition.

Billy was very good and played with uncharacteristic confidence.  His biggest problem previously has been hesitation with the ball but he really took the game on.  If he can sustain that it will be great.

I admire ANB for getting the most out of himself, but his lack of football skills could cost us a flag.

That goal review when CP was close to the post and then JG kicked it off the ground through the goals.  The ump called it a goal but wanted a review to see if the ball had hit the post earlier.  I cannot for the life of me see how the video review showed that it contacted the post and certainly not enough to overrule the original call. 

6 minutes ago, sue said:

That goal review when CP was close to the post and then JG kicked it off the ground through the goals.  The ump called it a goal but wanted a review to see if the ball had hit the post earlier.  I cannot for the life of me see how the video review showed that it contacted the post and certainly not enough to overrule the original call. 

No the umpire (incorrectly) thought it hit the post so that is what the video evidence needed to contradict - I thought it did contradict it but apparently not.

Edited July 8, 20187 yr by Fifty-5

Hard to know what to think after last night. 

We won, as we should have. 

We made changes, as we should have. 

But we're without doubt the biggest enigma within the AFL. Aside from winning it at the contest and trying to play a 'forward half game', do we actually have system when moving the ball forward? Or from a defensive kick out? 

We're extremely erratic in the way we play. 

4 hours ago, loges said:

Jeffy? I'd give him another week or two to show something, else back to Casey.

What more were you wanting to see exactly? He provided the forward pressure we were lacking with 6 tackles and kicked an opportunist goal. It would’ve been two goals if not for an incorrect overturn on video review.

We are a more dangerous side with Garlett in the forwardline. 

21 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

No the umpire (incorrectly) thought it hit the post so that is what the video evidence needed to contradict - I thought it did contradict it but apparently not.

That's not my recollection. I thought I heard him clearly say 'goal'.  Anyone know exactly when it happened to check the video?

Edit: 7:42 in Q2. Umpire clearly says goal, just want to check it didn't hit the post

Edited July 8, 20187 yr by sue

Just now, sue said:

That's not my recollection. I thought I heard him clearly say 'goal'.  Anyone know exactly when it happened to check the video?

Umpire said "umpires call is a goal', meaning the review had to be 100% clear it hit the post (on the disposal BEFORE the goal, which is weird).

I was alert to it because i backed Jeffy to kick most goals and that would have given him 2

I think anyone critical of this win hasn't taken into account the very tough conditions the game was played under. The heat, the humidity, and dampness caused a lot of fatigue, and more importantly, fumbles and missed marks. I thought it was a terrific effort by Melbourne.

Derm gives me the sh*#s. I wish he’d shut up!

4 minutes ago, binman said:

Umpire said "umpires call is a goal', meaning the review had to be 100% clear it hit the post (on the disposal BEFORE the goal, which is weird).

I was alert to it because i backed Jeffy to kick most goals and that would have given him 2

Not weird, but unusual, and not as reason to over-ride the usual review procedure like Dermie (or maybe another commentator) seemed to imply.  By calling a goal the umpire was of the view it had not hit the post earlier, but wanted to check that it hadn't so that the ball was still in play when the goal was kicked.  

In my usual generous attitude to the turkeys that run the AFL, I must assume there was another camera angle that we didn't see which clearly showed the ball touched the post.  I also have a group of fairies at the bottom of the garden.

15 hours ago, Rusty Nails said:

Jeffy

jeffy's set shots are not too hot. he is better on the run

difficult conditions they may have been, but Freo managed to kick 7.6 so the did not seem to find kicking for goal as hard as our lads did.

14 hours ago, Dee Zephyr said:

Apologies if this has been mentioned already but did anyone catch the replay of this?

Match review officer Michael Christian will monitor the down the ground replay closely on Monday after Jesse Hogan's jumper punch on Lachie Neale behind play in the first term. It left Neale gasping for air

just like clarrie last week

78 inside 50s to 28! Surely that is some sort of record.

We are continually dominating inside 50s, and while we controlled last night's game and it was a good win, it didn't really answer the questions around the efficiency of our game plan, with Freo scoring from half of their inside 50s. That's what I want to see corrected before I will be confident going into games against decent sides.

 

3 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

The first thing is partly to blame for the second. Not only do we let easy goals out the back when we press so high, we congest the space in our forward 50 meaning it's impossible to pass to a free player and also impossible to get a free shot at goal. How many times do we get the ball inside 50 and have to handball 4 or 5 times to try and get a player with enough space that they can actually have a shot at goal? Push the press back a bit and we will intercept further up the ground allowing us to open the field up more and slice through opposition defences easier.

We're getting so much of the footy but not doing enough with it. It's been our problem all year so I'm not willing to pass it off as bad conditions. That was a 100 point win last night but we left 8 goals on the table. Two set shots from ANB and one from Gawn for starters plus probably at least 2 or 3 each from Hogan and Petracca. Brayshaw sprayed a couple as well on the run. We really should've smacked them although our conversion picked up after half time.

The players looked absolutely stuffed after half time too so of it impacts our ability to run out the game next week I'll be furious. I don't care what benefit we get from these games financially, it ruins our run home when the players can't recover for their next game or 2. I'm not convinced having the bye or an "extended break" before QBD is going to help much either.

The game plan simply does not work as it is. It has failed repeatedly. Combine that with selection blunders and once again we are looking at the prospect of a lost season.

Pity because this list is capable of more.This year we have been relatively free of injury unlike last not to mention that some of our players are starting to slow down. No guarantees that next year will be better.

My thoughts on Darwin are well known but what can one say about a club that sold home games to Brisbane that even the other clubs complained about.

Just watching the replay and have been taking notice of Fritsch around stoppages. His positioning and timing is very very good. When he knows he can’t get the ball, he automatically puts a body on an opponent to take them out of the contest.

Just a very clever player and I love that beautiful kicking action he has.

1 hour ago, P-man said:

What more were you wanting to see exactly? He provided the forward pressure we were lacking with 6 tackles and kicked an opportunist goal. It would’ve been two goals if not for an incorrect overturn on video review.

We are a more dangerous side with Garlett in the forwardline. 

We are a more dangerous side with an in form Jeffy in the side. He's not, people are judging him by what he was,not how he's playing at the moment.

6 hours ago, Deemented Are Go! said:

Fair enough. I’d just check the final score myself. I guess I’m all or nothing. 

That said, after last week I’m now 0-5 for live games attended this year, contemplating going next week (for more punishment!?) ?

Nope.

 

Banned.

9 minutes ago, loges said:

We are a more dangerous side with an in form Jeffy in the side. He's not, people are judging him by what he was,not how he's playing at the moment.

So what more did you want to see from him in a first game back at AFL level?

And if you’re dropping him back to Casey, who are you replacing him with?

Edited July 8, 20187 yr by P-man

First game back- irrelevant, he's an experienced player been playing regularly at Casey. His tackling was ok, I'd like to see him have  more score involvements, after all, we did have zillion inside fifties. 

1 hour ago, Fifty-5 said:

No the umpire (incorrectly) thought it hit the post so that is what the video evidence needed to contradict - I thought it did contradict it but apparently not.

The ump said "I think its a goal but I just want to make sure tha ball didn't hit the post earlier"

There was no evidence that we saw where it shows the ball hitting the post but you could clearly see Tracc's arm holding the ball hit the post.

If I am standing with my back against the post and the ball hits me, its my understanding that this is called a point. Anyone know if this is correct and if this is the basis a point was called?

Melbourne has so many inside 50s it is imperative that they have sweepers for the inevitable loose ball.

Jeffy, Spargo, JKH and even Salem come to mind.

2 minutes ago, loges said:

First game back- irrelevant, he's an experienced player been playing regularly at Casey. His tackling was ok, I'd like to see him have  more score involvements, after all, we did have zillion inside fifties. 

Who are you replacing him with?  

Were you happier with Spargo’s output?

Can't say I'd know who to replace him with at the moment,Baker looked a player at Casey yesterday might be worth a try. Spargo to deemed to me to be more involved in the game.

6 minutes ago, loges said:

Can't say I'd know who to replace him with at the moment,Baker looked a player at Casey yesterday might be worth a try. Spargo to deemed to me to be more involved in the game.

Baker hasn’t been playing forward as far as I know so you’d be asking him to play a role he isn’t prepared for.

The stats say otherwise re Spargo.

Need to judge Garlett on what he does, not on what you know he can do. He’s obviously capable of better, but under conditions that were trying for all the forwards, he played his role.