POST MATCH DISCUSSION - Round 21

[praha 11,240]

57 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

Yes I did

Nothing that happened 50 years ago has any bearing on the next 2 weeks or the path this group at the club is taking over the next few years.  Jesse Hogan didn't miss easy shots on the weekend because Simon Eishold missed in the 87 Prelim and we didn't narrowly miss the finals last year because Bobby Skilton's team did in 1976.

There is a whole new regime at the club - President and Board, CEO and staff, Coach and Football Department, playing list. - creating their own history. And I am very confident we're in the start of a very successful era.

You don't have the self-awareness or perspective to understand that the stereotype that has clouded the club for 50 years is you and supporters like you.  That the only place that there is a link between Norm Smith's sacking and what happened on Sunday is in your mind.  And the only concern I have is that you and supporters like you could actually be close enough to the club to infect it with your losing culture.

We are a young club that is learning to win big matches the hard way.  You would be well served to actually listen to what Simon Goodwin says instead of the voices of doom in your head.

I'm not saying any one thing in particular. And I don't buy into the Norm Smith [censored]. I'm talking about stereotypes that linger and have lingered *over* 50 years (not 50 years ago, you keep returning to that). I'm highlighting that for us to make finals we have to break the chains. These are chains the football public has had shackled to the club for 50 years. I'm not making this up. It's everywhere for you to see.

They have to change the narrative to play finals from here. that would be doing something it hasn't done in a long time, and that'd consistently beat good teams. It's not a secret, or my opinion. You can deny that the narrative and stereotypes exist. I'm sorry though but they do.

I never suggested that things that happened 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago influence today's team's outcome. I am simply saying that collectively as a club it continues to struggle to turn that corner, feeding into hysteria around stereotypes and an expectation of failure.

The only way to prove "supporters like me" wrong is to win games like the weekend. That loss was distinctively Melbourne in how it transpired. It ticked all the boxes for the quintessential Melbourne loss, in line with those stereotypes.

Edited August 14, 2018 by praha

[Superunknown 4,223]

16 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Hawks supporters were calling for Clarkson's head early in his coaching career. Food for thought.

Sure, not disagreeing with any of that, and time etc etc etc.

I guess my broader point, poorly made, obviously, was what is the level of confidence in Goodwin.

I guess your response is give it time. Which is cool, I get that.

As others have put, though, he's been in the system for a while and had a big head start.

I just have a really low level of confidence, but I can't quite put my finger on why. It's not anything to do with vibe and Mabo, though. And I might be way wrong, because I have no link to the club beyond 32 years as a supporter.

[Red and Blue realist 2,058]

Haven't checked this whole thread because I've tried to avoid too much negativity, but just had a look at the stats from last week and one which is completely controllable by the coaching staff has me perplexed a little.

The interchanges made by the Swans were naturally well below the 90 allowed, they had 71 but were 2 down early on.

We only made 74 interchanges, so when I thought we might run over the top of them with fresh players, that wasn't really the case. I know Hogan spent a lot of time off the ground in the 3rd quarter, but why weren't other guys getting a decent rest? Surely we should have been coming into the last being a heap fitter and fresher than them???

[old55 23,699]

12 minutes ago, praha said:

I am simply saying that collectively as a club it continues to struggle to turn that corner, feeding into hysteria around stereotypes and an expectation of failure.

 

You just don't get it that you are the embodiment of the failure stereotype and your poisoned attitude feeds the hysteria.

I'm not just referring specifically to you, in fact there are far worse cases who regularly post misery here.

Edited August 14, 2018 by Fifty-5

[Superunknown 4,223]

Jake Niall: it's cultural.

Caro: "I don't know how they lost it."

https://www.theage.com.au/podcast/the-age-real-footy-podcast/could-bringing-in-tom-lynch-backfire-on-richmond-20180813-p4zx93.html

[Dee Zephyr 19,269]

8 minutes ago, Red and Blue realist said:

Haven't checked this whole thread because I've tried to avoid too much negativity, but just had a look at the stats from last week and one which is completely controllable by the coaching staff has me perplexed a little.

The interchanges made by the Swans were naturally well below the 90 allowed, they had 71 but were 2 down early on.

We only made 74 interchanges, so when I thought we might run over the top of them with fresh players, that wasn't really the case. I know Hogan spent a lot of time off the ground in the 3rd quarter, but why weren't other guys getting a decent rest? Surely we should have been coming into the last being a heap fitter and fresher than them???

I think @Redleg asked the same question earlier in the thread.  

I’m not sure this played a part in the limited rotations but this is what I noticed at the start of the third and maybe someone else can confirm.

The first 2 goals of the third came within the first 4 minutes. I didn’t see any interchanges in that time. I think Tyson and Hunt were two of the players on the bench. The next goal didn’t come until the 11minute mark or so and in that time Hunt and Tyson were pacing up and down waiting to come on and we simply couldn’t get a rotation. Now, that’s 11 minutes that have elapsed without a change, this could have occurred a couple of more times throughout the match. 

Edited August 14, 2018 by Dee Zephyr

[layzie 34,011]

2 hours ago, Jaded said:

I don't deal in Ifs and Buts. What if Betts kicked that goal 3 weeks ago? 

The facts are, we have lost too many close games and have not learnt from those. We also lost to St Kilda who are rubbish and we haven't won a single high-pressure game.

We have improved significantly, no doubt, but not making finals in 2018 is a big big failure. 

My thoughts exactly. Geelong twice, Port, Sydney, St Kilda. I don't believe I'm asking for the world when I say we only needed 1 of these, that's it. If we were talking about just one game then I can understand it being a bit rough but we now have a critical mass of data here to show we've had several stabs at it and come up short. Hey if we want to be a 9th to 12th team then that's fine because invariably you'll find that they lose close games too, its not just us. 

[praha 11,240]

45 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

You just don't get it that you are the embodiment of the failure stereotype and your poisoned attitude feeds the hysteria.

I'm not just referring specifically to you, in fact there are far worse cases who regularly post misery here.

I'd argue that the losing and constant failures fuel the stereotypes but sure, blame the supporters who fork out $600 a year lol

[Dr. Gonzo 24,302]

15 hours ago, A F said:

A good coach has a back up plan. If you're failing to kick straight, why would you also not try to prevent easy exits from your forward 50?

I don't understand why you wouldn't try to fix areas of your structures that are not working. On this point, I'd also argue that preventing easy exits from our forward fifty would further contribute to our want to lock the ball inside 50/get repeat inside 50s. If we're pressuring those exits, there's more likelihood we can set up defensively down the ground and be ready to counter straight back inside 50.

Yeah, Goody didn't lose us the game. Our kicking did, but he still hasn't addressed how to play teams on the MCG when they play us that way. Yet, it's been happening pretty much all year against good opposition. 

Because the gameplan is working it's only the execution which is lacking. They believe the players will turn it around with better execution and win the game. When we played Essendon we kicked 4.7.31 to half time then 12.5.77 in the second half. The coach didn't panic and had faith the players knew what to do they just needed to fix how they did it. They knew that the gameplan worked and sticking to the gameplan gave us the best opportunity for success not just now but in the future

[3Dee 1,153]

On 8/12/2018 at 9:35 PM, Wolfturdo said:

That’s just crap.

Apology accepted m8

[jnrmac 20,188]

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Because the gameplan is working it's only the execution which is lacking. They believe the players will turn it around with better execution and win the game. When we played Essendon we kicked 4.7.31 to half time then 12.5.77 in the second half. The coach didn't panic and had faith the players knew what to do they just needed to fix how they did it. They knew that the gameplan worked and sticking to the gameplan gave us the best opportunity for success not just now but in the future

The game plan isn't working against the good teams. It's irrefutable.

There are also something like 18 times this year when a team has won the i50 count by more than 10 and lost. Melbourne are I think 5 or 6 of those. Our game plan sucks and falls apart under pressure. There is a reason why the best defending teams win flags. Until we can defend properly we are nowhere.

This week will be good. The no 1 team for efficiency inside 50s vs the 4th worse team for defending i50s. If you think the false dawn of winning 6 in a row against poor opposition is something to crow about you are sadly mistaken. Bombing the ball ito an outnumbered fwd line is just insanity yet we start every centre bounce with an outnumbered fwd line. But hey we have the no 1 clearance side in the comp. So we win clearances and turn it over in our fwd 50. Great game plan.

 

 

[SaberFang 7,151]

Agreed, the gameplan is heavily flawed and Goodwin is too stubborn to admit his plan is easily nullified, doubly so on our own home ground.

The good teams (with good players who can follow instructions from competent coaches) have long-since worked out our gameplan and know exactly how to nullify it. So much so, they don't even care about us racking up inside 50s en masse because they know how soft we are under pressure. +30 inside 50s against Port Adelaide and we still lose by 2 goals! You couldn't write this [censored].

I'd be laughing hysterically coaching against Goodwin. He's so predictable and slow to make obvious positional changes. Chris Scott and Hawkins must still be laughing about Goodwin's clueless inaction during the last quarter against Geelong.

Edited August 14, 2018 by SaberFang

[DubDee 26,120]

The main reason we lose the important games?  selection, game plan?  No. 

Its all between the ears - the players choke. there was zero communication on the field, remember ANB trying to take a mark over his shoulder in the middle of the park when Hunt was running towards the ball? Spargo running off his man to take the man T Mac was running to. TALK LADS! This is under 12s stuff. When pressure hits, the simple things no longer happen. Not to mention everyone missing easy shots. if we are playing Carlton we finish with 18.10, no question in my mind.

I am most disappointed in Jones, Lewis etc the older blokes that should be standing up in these games

[Wiseblood 24,637]

1 hour ago, SaberFang said:

Agreed, the gameplan is heavily flawed and Goodwin is too stubborn to admit his plan is easily nullified, doubly so on our own home ground.

The good teams (with good players who can follow instructions from competent coaches) have long-since worked out our gameplan and know exactly how to nullify it. So much so, they don't even care about us racking up inside 50s en masse because they know how soft we are under pressure. +30 inside 50s against Port Adelaide and we still lose by 2 goals! You couldn't write this [censored].

I'd be laughing hysterically coaching against Goodwin. He's so predictable and slow to make obvious positional changes. Chris Scott and Hawkins must still be laughing about Goodwin's clueless inaction during the last quarter against Geelong.

I wouldn't say it's heavily flawed - if it was, then we wouldn't currently be in the position we're in, which is in the Top 8 with a big chance of playing finals if we win one of our last two games against sides who also have their own injury concerns.

I'd argue that we have flaws that come to the fore against the better sides, although there is also a trend to suggest that our ability to hit the scoreboard properly is a large issue as we tend to kick more points than goals when we play sides inside the eight.  Earlier in the season the Hawks and the Tigers were able to pick us apart a bit, as were the Pies, but we still generated enough inside 50s and opportunities to score to suggest that we created the issues as much as the opposition found them.

I know we've discussed this in the past mate, and I respect your views, but I do think we are still trending in the right direction IF we can fix our composure in bigger games and fix the gaps in our gameplan when the opposition run the ball out of defence.  No Lever and Hibberd hasn't helped in that regard either.

[old55 23,699]

4 hours ago, Fifty-5 said:

You just don't get it that you are the embodiment of the failure stereotype and your poisoned attitude feeds the hysteria.

I'm not just referring specifically to you, in fact there are far worse cases who regularly post misery here.

Exhibit A your Honour.

[Rogue 585]

On 8/13/2018 at 10:52 AM, Lucifer's Hero said:

I repeat no-one has alluded to alcohol or being out really late.

So if you are not suggesting they were out too late (whatever that time is) and/or boozing, why are you even bringing it up?

The backpedal when someone else challenged you about this was pretty amusing.

Either you're suggesting that they did something wrong - like getting drunk or being out 'too' late - or it's of no relevance to the match.

Quote

Anyone who thinks we lost because of our kicking for goal is clueless.

@praha: If we'd had half-decent goal kicking accuracy we would have won.

That's not clueless - it's bleedingly obvious.

Any other criticism of our game is still valid...unless you simply judge the team on the result of the last game (like many emotional 'the sky is falling' supporters).

Edited August 14, 2018 by Rogue

[Adam The God 30,420]

6 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Because the gameplan is working it's only the execution which is lacking. They believe the players will turn it around with better execution and win the game. When we played Essendon we kicked 4.7.31 to half time then 12.5.77 in the second half. The coach didn't panic and had faith the players knew what to do they just needed to fix how they did it. They knew that the gameplan worked and sticking to the gameplan gave us the best opportunity for success not just now but in the future

Completely agree. But within that gameplan, things can still be improved. Allowing easy exits, IMO, goes against the entire philosophy that Goodwin promotes. I'm almost certain they don't want us to allow easy exits from our forward 50. Goodwin has banged on all year about it being 'a territory battle' and if you 'win the territory battle', it goes a long way to winning the game and ultimately placing your opponent under as much pressure as possible.

Yes, this may not have mattered had we kicked straight against Geelong and Sydney, but it wouldn't have helped us against Hawthorn for example. We weren't winning the rest of the battle enough to allow easy exits.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,302]

12 hours ago, old dee said:

I simply don't listen to them Dr. After 54 years in the wilderness all I want to hear is that we won because......

I have heard ever other bit of coach speak more than I need.

Agreed od the only purpose they serve is to make easy work for the journos writing in Monday's paper. A couple of soundbites help pad out an article/talk show.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,302]

11 hours ago, Jaded said:

I don't deal in Ifs and Buts. What if Betts kicked that goal 3 weeks ago? 

The facts are, we have lost too many close games and have not learnt from those. We also lost to St Kilda who are rubbish and we haven't won a single high-pressure game.

We have improved significantly, no doubt, but not making finals in 2018 is a big big failure. 

I agree not playing finals this year is a failure. But the negative hyperbole here is ridiculous the fact is we are two kicks off being 3rd. Of course we aren't 3rd but what it shows to me is we are heading in the right direction just need a bit more experience and composure and we will be a top 4 side.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,302]

9 hours ago, -Ⓥ- said:

Sure, not disagreeing with any of that, and time etc etc etc.

I guess my broader point, poorly made, obviously, was what is the level of confidence in Goodwin.

I guess your response is give it time. Which is cool, I get that.

As others have put, though, he's been in the system for a while and had a big head start.

I just have a really low level of confidence, but I can't quite put my finger on why. It's not anything to do with vibe and Mabo, though. And I might be way wrong, because I have no link to the club beyond 32 years as a supporter.

That's fair enough, I'm not saying people can't have different thoughts on the coach. I just find it irritating when he's blamed for losses like the weekend when really the gameplan he has developed created enough opportunities for us to win (and against Cats x2 and Port too). The issue is the players conversion and execution rather than an inherent flaw in the gameplan. Not saying he's the perfect coach either, he has room to grow and things he needs to focus on developing this offseason.

I'm probably the opposite to you, I have a calm optimism about the coach and the club at the moment. I will be upset if we miss finals again but it's not the end of the club. We have 5-10 years with this group to really try and achieve the ultimate and change the course if the club to what I hope will become perennial contenders (a la Hawks, Cats, Swans over the last 15 years). So missing this year (especially on the back of last year's fiasco) would be upsetting but not disastrous in the larger scheme of things. The main concern I would have is it doesn't give our players the experience of playing in September. Of course the club needs to get to the point where every year we miss finals is unacceptable but we're still on that path that began with Ground Zero 2013.

[Big Carl 333]

7 hours ago, SaberFang said:

Agreed, the gameplan is heavily flawed and Goodwin is too stubborn to admit his plan is easily nullified, doubly so on our own home ground.

The good teams (with good players who can follow instructions from competent coaches) have long-since worked out our gameplan and know exactly how to nullify it. So much so, they don't even care about us racking up inside 50s en masse because they know how soft we are under pressure. +30 inside 50s against Port Adelaide and we still lose by 2 goals! You couldn't write this [censored].

I'd be laughing hysterically coaching against Goodwin. He's so predictable and slow to make obvious positional changes. Chris Scott and Hawkins must still be laughing about Goodwin's clueless inaction during the last quarter against Geelong.

Yes, Geelong’s set play (resulting in the win) in the last 40 seconds was staggering. MFC was clueless!!!

[Dr. Gonzo 24,302]

7 hours ago, jnrmac said:

The game plan isn't working against the good teams. It's irrefutable.

There are also something like 18 times this year when a team has won the i50 count by more than 10 and lost. Melbourne are I think 5 or 6 of those. Our game plan sucks and falls apart under pressure. There is a reason why the best defending teams win flags. Until we can defend properly we are nowhere.

This week will be good. The no 1 team for efficiency inside 50s vs the 4th worse team for defending i50s. If you think the false dawn of winning 6 in a row against poor opposition is something to crow about you are sadly mistaken. Bombing the ball ito an outnumbered fwd line is just insanity yet we start every centre bounce with an outnumbered fwd line. But hey we have the no 1 clearance side in the comp. So we win clearances and turn it over in our fwd 50. Great game plan.

 

 

Had Hogan kicked 3 goals instead of points, TMac converted his relatively easy set shots, Oliver Brayshaw Tyson Spargo all converted relatively easy set shots we would have won easily against the Swans. So the gameplan which gave us the opportunity to take those relatively easy shots at goal is in dire straits and it's not the poor skill execution of the players which missed those shots which is to blame?

I understand the frustration and anger over the weekends loss and all the close losses this year but don't let your emotion cloud your judgement. We have been outplayed 3 times this year, 2 of those games occurred in the first 5 weeks. Perhaps we will be outplayed again in the last 2 weeks, I'm not saying the gameplan and coaching is flawless. But I don't think on the evidence you can blame it for Sunday's loss (or the other close losses we've had this year bar maybe the Saints game).

[Dr. Gonzo 24,302]

2 hours ago, A F said:

Completely agree. But within that gameplan, things can still be improved. Allowing easy exits, IMO, goes against the entire philosophy that Goodwin promotes. I'm almost certain they don't want us to allow easy exits from our forward 50. Goodwin has banged on all year about it being 'a territory battle' and if you 'win the territory battle', it goes a long way to winning the game and ultimately placing your opponent under as much pressure as possible.

Yes, this may not have mattered had we kicked straight against Geelong and Sydney, but it wouldn't have helped us against Hawthorn for example. We weren't winning the rest of the battle enough to allow easy exits.

Agreed but is that a coaching issue or an execution issue? If you agree that the coaches don't want us to give up easy i50 exits then it would stand to reason that that is not part of the gameplan and it is the players failure to execute that pressure and those structures which is the issue.

[Ante_Up 69]

.

Edited August 14, 2018 by Ante_Up

[praha 11,240]

4 hours ago, Rogue said:

So if you are not suggesting they were out too late (whatever that time is) and/or boozing, why are you even bringing it up?

The backpedal when someone else challenged you about this was pretty amusing.

Either you're suggesting that they did something wrong - like getting drunk or being out 'too' late - or it's of no relevance to the match.

@praha: If we'd had half-decent goal kicking accuracy we would have won.

That's not clueless - it's bleedingly obvious.

Any other criticism of our game is still valid...unless you simply judge the team on the result of the last game (like many emotional 'the sky is falling' supporters).

missing shots is part of the game. Saying "If we were more accurate we would have won" is the same as saying "If we'd scored more we would have won". You win and lose based on those metrics, and it may well be that our accuracy is more a reflection of the pressure being applied than it was simply us missing shots. I can't fathom how anyone that watched the second quarter could think we were the better side but simply missing shots. That was an abdolute pasting they gave us in the second quarter, and it won them the game.