To Tiers

Yes, I was at the match.

I'm glad you're happy (we're all happy), but if our first half is replicated on Saturday you'll cease to be happy.

More importantly, it sounds like you'll have no clue what happened.

To Prodee

Whether or not you were at the match was not questioned and is irrelevant to this discussion.

Whether or not I am happy is for me alone to decide and also irrelevant to this discussion.

Whether or not if our first half is replicated next week will cause me to cease to be happy and/or whether or not I'll have a clue about next week's match will only be determined during and after the match.

I do attempt to foretell the future. Being a longstanding demon supporter, I prefer to always live in hope.

Go dees.

Kennedy and Darling vs Frost and OMac.

That's the worry for me. OMac is very variable in his one-one work. 

Much comes down to controlling their delivery into those guys.

Neville get LeCras

To Tiers

I mentioned that I was at the match because you needlessly pointed out the obvious, i.e. we were ahead at half-time.  In fact, I could have been in Egypt and known that.

I assumed you wouldn't be happy losing, but it's possible I'm incorrect and that you're agnostic.

Either way, we were [censored] in the first half against Hawthorn, whether you recognise it, or not.

Edited September 15, 20186 yr by ProDee

4 minutes ago, ProDee said:

To Tiers

I mentioned that I was at the match because you needlessly pointed out the obvious, i.e. we were ahead at half-time.  In fact, I could have been in Egypt and known that.

I assumed you wouldn't be happy losing, but it's possible I'm incorrect and that you're agnostic.

Either way, we were [censored] in the first half against Hawthorn, whether you recognise it, or not.

I don’t think we were [censored]. We were playing against a good team with an excellent coach. They were absolutely playing the game on their terms and I expected nothing else from Clarkson. 

What impressed me more this week than last week, is that we wrestled back momentum multiple times and found a way to win and win well in the end. That is worth a lot for a young team. 

Having said that, next week is a different ball game. Each game will get harder and the challenge greater. We did beat West Coast just 4 weeks ago, but with Kennedy and Darling its a different proposition. We will need to be better at the contested ball to ensure we limit their forward supply. 

 "Hawthorn, if they had taken their opportunities, they’d have been three or four goals in front at half-time and it’s a whole different ball game then,”

And if my auntie had balls she'd be my uncle.

Edited September 15, 20186 yr by Moonshadow

West Coast is a Clarko Footy disciple and currently play better Clarko Footy than Hawthorn. 

Kingy is right. We got away with the game last night. If the Hawks were on their mettle we would have been skewered.

If West Coast is on their game on Saturday we will be in trouble simply because they are comparatively better than Hawthorn and we most definitely struggle against Clarko Footy.

Nevertheless, we beat the Hawks despite being quelled around the contested footy, which is usually our long suit.

Last night's game was weird in so much as it was like Melbourne playing against Melbourne. The Hawks kept taking the ball into our forward line, but we were able to hold them out and score on the breakaway.

We can't tempt fate and allow West Coast the same territorial ascendancy, simply because they will operate better than Hawthorn.

With luck and good management we will play the game in our forward half and put the slows on their sling shot and stop Kennedy and Darling getting clear chances.

Fingers crossed we don't play tennis against a brick wall. No matter how well we play the ball keeps coming back.

ALL OF YOU SHEEP that ARGREE WITH KING ARE JUST MFCSS DROP KICKS, THE ONES THAT HAVE TO FIND A NEGATIVE IN EVERY THING THAT GOES GOOD. STAT WATCHERS have no idea about footy, Richmond did not play that much better then us against the hawk, the hawks miss even easier shots against Richmond then against us, but no one is saying they played poorly, and king said we went backwards, so anyone of you who agree with him  agree we took a step backwards, you really  know nothing about football.

They were missing a couple of players.

Add Jack Viney to the mix this time.

Omg. Enough already. We were good last night other than 8-10 field kicking errors.  That will get sorted.   Enjoy this.   

Goodwin said “first half didn’t look like us”.  The only other time I’ve heard him say that was when we were awful against Hawthorn the first time around. It’s a clear catch phrase the coach puts out there if you’re ever in doubt about how we played.

We won though and won comfortably despite that. The thing about being a good side is that sometimes you’ll get away with an imperfect game and live to see another game. History says this version of the Melbourne Football Club can get its stuff together between matches. We won’t be having this discussion next week.

Need to improve going into our fwd 50 with turnovers resulting in Hawks counter attacking & luckily they messed it up.....

We rush it in too quickly & need to lower the eyes & find targets....

Good problem to have & may take another season to iron this out.

Disspointing that you used a sensationalist title for the thread. He said they will belt us if we played like we did vs the Hawks

28 minutes ago, Hogan2014 said:

Need to improve going into our fwd 50 with turnovers resulting in Hawks counter attacking & luckily they messed it up.....

We rush it in too quickly & need to lower the eyes & find targets....

Good problem to have & may take another season to iron this out.

That wasn’t our problem against Hawthorn.  First quarter we kicked 3.1 from 6 or 7 inside 50s.  We were down in contested ball.  Full credit to Hawthorn though.  They went taggers on our mids and backed Mitchell to beat Harmes.  Went ok first half but we found a way to overcome it. To win when below our best is a huge step up. 

 

7 minutes ago, david_neitz_is_my_dad said:

Disspointing that you used a sensationalist title for the thread. He said they will belt us if we played like we did vs the Hawks

Only in first half as well.  We hardly ever lose contested ball and we lost it first half.  WCE have not been great on contested ball.  If we win +20, and it’s fine conditions, we’ll beat wce

That handpass from Shiels back to Sicily was a step backwards!

A glorious step backwards

I hate all these comparisons across games, particularly the negative ones. The team plays their own brand adjusted against the game that is in front of them on the day. Against the Cats we were wasteful but we totally dominated with our pressure game. Against the Hawks we were far more efficient in the forward 50 but we were much less efficient around the contest, we weren’t flogged, but we weren’t as dominant as we were against the cats or GWS the week before.

We just have to play the game that is in front of us against West Coast. There is no point in saying things like “If we play like that agains xxx then we will lose”. It will be a different game next week, we will stick to our brand adjusted by the game that is in front of us. I think it will be enough to get us over the line.

15 hours ago, ProDee said:

To Tiers

Yes, I was at the match.

I'm glad you're happy (we're all happy), but if our first half is replicated on Saturday you'll cease to be happy.

More importantly, it sounds like you'll have no clue what happened.

I seem to remember that u almost always say the something after every win, it goes like this, if we play like that against a good side we will get smashed, its getting tied the same posters seem to post the same negative post again and again, example grinter riot squad wrote the same post 3 times after the win, I think people like you and him have a copy and paste post.

 

56 minutes ago, FlashInThePan said:

I hate all these comparisons across games, particularly the negative ones. The team plays their own brand adjusted against the game that is in front of them on the day. Against the Cats we were wasteful but we totally dominated with our pressure game. Against the Hawks we were far more efficient in the forward 50 but we were much less efficient around the contest, we weren’t flogged, but we weren’t as dominant as we were against the cats or GWS the week before.

We just have to play the game that is in front of us against West Coast. There is no point in saying things like “If we play like that agains xxx then we will lose”. It will be a different game next week, we will stick to our brand adjusted by the game that is in front of us. I think it will be enough to get us over the line.

The posters that post that, often post the same thing after every win, they are copy and paste posters with no insight just negative MFCSs members. I like SWYL he is often negative but never after a win, there is a time to be negative and a time to be happy, MFCSS member have to be negative every time. Just be glad you like me can enjoy a win, those that can't maybe should stop following football.

I disagree 100% with King on this. For various reasons and if we play like we did against the Hawks we will not lose by 12 goals against the Eagles.

49 minutes ago, don't make me angry said:

I seem to remember that u almost always say the something after every win, it goes like this, if we play like that against a good side we will get smashed, its getting tied the same posters seem to post the same negative post again and again, example grinter riot squad wrote the same post 3 times after the win, I think people like you and him have a copy and paste post.

You've made the accusation now prove it.

If you can't or won't then retract your accusation.

David King is right, even if it comes from a place of hurt. King is hurting right now - big time. He is a North Melbourne supporter, and he has had to watch Melbourne collect a raft of quality draft picks (something North didn't do) and march into the finals. But its more than that, he knows we have a dynasty list. This is hurting King really badly at moment. I can see it in his write ups with the little "if Hawthorn had Birchall and co we will be telling a different story". Well David, what about Hogan and Lever? What are they chopped liver?

That been said, King is right. I thought we were pretty ordinary in the first half, and we still have a lot of work to do. Thankfully Hawthorn were as bad as we usually are at converting opportunities to results. 

Edited September 16, 20186 yr by KingDingAling

15 hours ago, don't make me angry said:

ALL OF YOU SHEEP that ARGREE WITH KING ARE JUST MFCSS DROP KICKS, THE ONES THAT HAVE TO FIND A NEGATIVE IN EVERY THING THAT GOES GOOD. STAT WATCHERS have no idea about footy, Richmond did not play that much better then us against the hawk, the hawks miss even easier shots against Richmond then against us, but no one is saying they played poorly, and king said we went backwards, so anyone of you who agree with him  agree we took a step backwards, you really  know nothing about football.

The people who refuse to find a negative because things are going good appear a little sheepish too.

1 hour ago, don't make me angry said:

example grinter riot squad wrote the same post 3 times after the win, I think people like you and him have a copy and paste post.

Balls Grinter was one of the only people not emotively blaming the umpires after the game and actually discussing the tactical nature of how Hawthorn played.

I agree though that how we handled the situation when things weren't going our way tactically was a step forwards.

Edited September 16, 20186 yr by johndemonic

People seem to forget a few things. The first is that both Cats and Hawks got visibly tired sometime in each of the third quarters. They both got tired because of, amongst other things, their game style of obtaining continuous position to retain possession.

We don't have to be D King to figure it out. Statistics in that sort of bare indicative totality are not the whole answer. You play any opposition on their merits and West Coast do not play anything like Hawthorn. Their style with their personnel is so much more direct and control in the middle will create the necessary pressure into their F Line, so don't be surprised by any ensuing frenetic activity thereabouts from this game onwards. The opposition all know what to do, but they cannot, to date, do it!!  

23 minutes ago, johndemonic said:

The people who refuse to find a negative because things are going good appear a little sheepish too. I agree though that we did not take a step backwards. A step forwards in fact.

No I can came up with a lot of negative, very easy no sheep. How come when people say, If this happened and that happened they only refer to 1 team, king would sound smart if he also said, " if Melbourne  had hit more forward 50 targets in the first Qtr, they would have had a three goal lead in the 1st qtr" because we mlssed at least 3 targets in the 1st QTR under no pressure. What ifs go both ways, I think king does not even believe what he said, he just wanted to sound different from what most said about the game.

2 hours ago, don't make me angry said:

I seem to remember that u almost always say the something after every win, it goes like this, if we play like that against a good side we will get smashed, its getting tied the same posters seem to post the same negative post again and again, example grinter riot squad wrote the same post 3 times after the win, I think people like you and him have a copy and paste post.

 

The posters that post that, often post the same thing after every win, they are copy and paste posters with no insight just negative MFCSs members. I like SWYL he is often negative but never after a 

I may have wrote similar things on different threads, didn’t write the same post three times, nor copy and paste once. Prove your accusation or stop being a liar.

We played better in the win over Geelong, for sure. But what we did manage in the win over Hawthorn was sheer weight of effort, and that is what got us over the line.

King didn't say 'Demons will lose to Eagles', he said, in effect: 'Eagles are better than Hawthorn' + 'Demons didn't play their best footy against Hawthorn' = 'Demons will need to play better against Eagles'.

It's not rocket surgery. And it is a fair call. If you added two really strong key forward targets and a truly outstanding centre-half-back to the Hawks line up for the semi, they would've been right in it. Ha ha, bad luck Hawthorn.

Sheppard out is good news for us. And I'll be interested to see who Harmes goes to. Yeo would seem obvious but for all his considerable strengths his disposal is a 50/50 proposition. Wont complain if he stuffs up and hands us another cheap late goal again! I'd expect Harmes would try to clip one of the more tag-vulnerable Sheed or Redden while Viney goes more or less head-to-head with Shuey. Overall, surely our mids will be right on top, unlike Collingwood's which didn't manage to break even overall and got solidly beaten in the last quarter.

I wonder how we'll handle McGovern? McGovern's incredible start against Collingwood was THE reason the Eagles were up a couple of goals at quarter time. His eyes would be lighting up at our wild and crazy inside-50s, it may even be worth putting a full time defensive forward on him. Is this the next test for Weideman?