My view - we have a very good top 6, after that, it drops off considerably, hence our inconsistency, multiple changes each week.  Finalists bat way deeper than us

20 hours ago, america de cali said:

It was a football crime to play an ageing player on a 4 day break, who is obviously past it, injured, slow and plays with zero defensive pressure in a must win game. This is an old boys club for one particular player. Selections at this club is done by idiots.

And the seven changes the following week highlight the lack of urgency in addressing our clear need for pace as shown by the inclusions of Hunt and Baker.

The tackling or lack thereof is an interesting discussion.  Hearing many of you say you can "tell" by our start we are going to put in a stinker.  I feel the most important stat in footy nowadays is the pressure gauge.  This comprises 6 areas of the game.

 

Physical Pressure - Any time physical contact is made on a disposal or a tackle is laid.

Closing Pressure - Coming at a player just as he is about to dispose the ball. (includes smothers)

Chasing - Running with intent to catch the opposition with the ball.

Corralling - Can't lay a tackle but can still pressure player with ball into a more confined situation, or wrong foot them, etc

No Pressure - Can't see opposition player on Tv screen vs ball carrier.

Set Position - Basically manning the mark stat.

Would love to see this stat throughout the season and the differential to our opponent in each game.

Can remember the vs Carlton game where our first quarter had pressure up over 200 which is where Geelong was first half last night.

We seem to fall off a cliff though when it comes to putting pressure on the ball carrier or next possession and i believe this is reason why supporters can see we are having another off day.

Hawthorn is an example of a team that put very little pressure vs us when we played and we looked amazing.

Vice versa we make other teams look amazing when we put on very little of this thing called pressure, perceived or actual!

15 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

The Sydney loss wasn't just a lack of skill, there were workrate issues on display.

The main reason I'm furious at the Sydney loss is that from the start our intensity/workrate were off. Just like the Port game.

Except we've got two wins over the current top 8, with an opportunity to win a third before the season's done. 

Two wins over the current top 8 is the same number that the Dogs, St Kilda, Collingwood and even Richmond have.

Indeed, no one has more than three wins over the current top 8 except Brisbane (five).

I stand corrected on the Sydney game. However, I would strongly argue that the work rate issues to do with Port and Sydney games were largely due to the short turnarounds. As you know, I have been strong that the coaches haven't made enough changes in the compressed fixtures.

I still maintain this is nothing to do with culture and DNA, noting that lot of other sides have had some shockers after short turnarounds.

5 hours ago, NeveroddoreveN said:

The tackling or lack thereof is an interesting discussion.  Hearing many of you say you can "tell" by our start we are going to put in a stinker.  I feel the most important stat in footy nowadays is the pressure gauge.  This comprises 6 areas of the game.

 

Physical Pressure - Any time physical contact is made on a disposal or a tackle is laid.

Closing Pressure - Coming at a player just as he is about to dispose the ball. (includes smothers)

Chasing - Running with intent to catch the opposition with the ball.

Corralling - Can't lay a tackle but can still pressure player with ball into a more confined situation, or wrong foot them, etc

No Pressure - Can't see opposition player on Tv screen vs ball carrier.

Set Position - Basically manning the mark stat.

Would love to see this stat throughout the season and the differential to our opponent in each game.

Can remember the vs Carlton game where our first quarter had pressure up over 200 which is where Geelong was first half last night.

We seem to fall off a cliff though when it comes to putting pressure on the ball carrier or next possession and i believe this is reason why supporters can see we are having another off day.

Hawthorn is an example of a team that put very little pressure vs us when we played and we looked amazing.

Vice versa we make other teams look amazing when we put on very little of this thing called pressure, perceived or actual!

The pressure gauge can be a bit misleading IMO as the style of ball movement of the team in possession influences the rating. When opposed to a kicking team, the defending team will tend to have lower pressure rating than we they are facing a handballing team.

I am sure our pressure rating against St Kilda was very low, although we defended really well by covering space. Conversely, it would have been high against the Bulldogs, who are a handballing team, although we defended poorly.

8 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

The pressure gauge can be a bit misleading IMO as the style of ball movement of the team in possession influences the rating. When opposed to a kicking team, the defending team will tend to have lower pressure rating than we they are facing a handballing team.

I am sure our pressure rating against St Kilda was very low, although we defended really well by covering space. Conversely, it would have been high against the Bulldogs, who are a handballing team, although we defended poorly.

Against St Kilda we played a style that was almost unrecognizable to every other game.  We "had" a game plan quite simply, it was ugly but it was well thought out.  Our pressure factor would have been higher than in game against Bulldogs by far.

Against the bulldogs i have to disagree.  We had zero pressure from half balk to half forward....very little pressure from centre clearances to their half forward too.  We gave them hundreds if not thousands of meters of uncontested ball....over 3/4 of the field for free!

The pressure gauge is something i am going to analyse in great detail come the end of season.   We look half decent when we pressure across the field...we look and feel utterly useless when we put no pressure on the ball carrier or even try to shut down next options.  Can't just concede ground.  Much like Grid Iron or rugby or even chess, this is a game of territory.   No pressure and it is a cakewalk for AFL footballers.....us included!

7 minutes ago, NeveroddoreveN said:

Against St Kilda we played a style that was almost unrecognizable to every other game.  We "had" a game plan quite simply, it was ugly but it was well thought out.  Our pressure factor would have been higher than in game against Bulldogs by far.

Against the bulldogs i have to disagree.  We had zero pressure from half balk to half forward....very little pressure from centre clearances to their half forward too.  We gave them hundreds if not thousands of meters of uncontested ball....over 3/4 of the field for free!

The pressure gauge is something i am going to analyse in great detail come the end of season.   We look half decent when we pressure across the field...we look and feel utterly useless when we put no pressure on the ball carrier or even try to shut down next options.  Can't just concede ground.  Much like Grid Iron or rugby or even chess, this is a game of territory.   No pressure and it is a cakewalk for AFL footballers.....us included!

I don't have pressure gauge stats, but the other defensive stats paint a different picture.

In terms of total Pressure Acts, we had 277 vs the Bulldogs and only 175 vs the Saints. For tackles, we had 46 vs the Bulldogs and just 36 vs the Saints.

And for context, against the Cats we had 242 total Pressure Acts and 47 tackles. Against the Tigers we had 261 total Pressure Acts and 45 tackles.

My point stands that the conditions, ground size and game style/tempo of the opposition will influence the pressure gauge ratings and that a high pressure gauge is not always equal to good defence. 

2 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

I don't have pressure gauge stats, but the other defensive stats paint a different picture.

In terms of total Pressure Acts, we had 277 vs the Bulldogs and only 175 vs the Saints. For tackles, we had 46 vs the Bulldogs and just 36 vs the Saints.

And for context, against the Cats we had 242 total Pressure Acts and 47 tackles. Against the Tigers we had 261 total Pressure Acts and 45 tackles.

My point stands that the conditions, ground size and game style/tempo of the opposition will influence the pressure gauge ratings and that a high pressure gauge is not always equal to good defence. 

Am going to find these pressure gauge stats they seem to paint a bigger picture of overall defensive efforts than pressure acts, tackles.

The pressure gauge actually includes tackles and pressure acts.  I read somewhere that 80% of time that if you win this statistic you win the game.   I do agree however that ground size and style of opposition influences how high or low this overall rating may be.

Be interesting to see what the pressure gauges on each game vs oppositions pressure gauge.  Apparently is the 1st statistic that players look at in review.  It is valued "that" highly.  It is a bunch of different defensive acts into a scale that is tangible to coaches and players alike.   Looking at 1%ers etc tells you not much at all.

What did those muppets say that hasn't been said on this forum ad infinitum? Absolutely nothing new. Many on here are much smarter and more astute at observing the game and Melbourne's problems. 

On 9/6/2020 at 11:05 AM, rjay said:

It's one part personnel and another part coaching I reckon 'Earl'...

I've been avoiding this one for a while but I think it's becoming apparent we need to lose one of Brayshaw or Viney.

My preference would be to lose Viney but I'm not sure of the value there as he's a free agent.

Let's say we could trade Brayshaw for Cerra, would that be a good move?

Thought I would wait and have a look at Cerra before replying to your question, rjay. After that performance, basically BOG I would say yes but doubt Freo will let this kid get away from them. He would bring a number of attributes that our boys struggle with, speed, outside run, elite decision making, goal kicking ability....

I think we will be left trying to make something out of what we have got and I still think a good midfield coach could get this lot working much smarter andmore cohesively. I think we can make use of all of them, Brayshaw, Oliver in the middle with Harmes doing a run with role, Viney more time forward as a defensive forward, maybe Tracc more time up forward and more working on the outside for the receive. And we need to find another Langdon type for the other wing, with better kicking skills hopefully. But I like Langdon’s running, positioning and evasive skills, he is nearly always available as an option on the outside for the ball carrier. 

2 hours ago, Earl Hood said:

Thought I would wait and have a look at Cerra before replying to your question, rjay. After that performance, basically BOG I would say yes but doubt Freo will let this kid get away from them. He would bring a number of attributes that our boys struggle with, speed, outside run, elite decision making, goal kicking ability....

I think we will be left trying to make something out of what we have got and I still think a good midfield coach could get this lot working much smarter andmore cohesively. I think we can make use of all of them, Brayshaw, Oliver in the middle with Harmes doing a run with role, Viney more time forward as a defensive forward, maybe Tracc more time up forward and more working on the outside for the receive. And we need to find another Langdon type for the other wing, with better kicking skills hopefully. But I like Langdon’s running, positioning and evasive skills, he is nearly always available as an option on the outside for the ball carrier. 

no chance we could get cerra for brayshaw

23 minutes ago, Elegt said:

no chance we could get cerra for brayshaw

he's not saying that...it was a proposition I posted.

What if Cerra wanted to return to Melbourne?

There has been discussion in the past, would we give up Brayshaw as part of the deal.

Would we look at another club that wants what we have to get what we need.

Say Carlton or EFC...

On 9/7/2020 at 3:19 AM, Grr-owl said:

We got to get him back into the club ASAP. 

Why would he? He's having a ball in the media, probably earning a fortune. He's probably happy he's left this basket case of a club.

On 9/6/2020 at 9:46 PM, Dr. Gonzo said:

It was a bit of an offhand comment by Dermie which he was called out on and asked to name names. When pushed on it he mentioned Fritsch only because King had said the same thing a couple of weeks earlier. When pushed further he mentioned Salem and Harmes who he didnt know by name initially. It was a bit if typical Derm bravado that he was called on and then just chucked out a couple of names that wouldn't cause too much controversy.

Ah, I see. What an [censored] that man is.

17 hours ago, rjay said:

he's not saying that...it was a proposition I posted.

What if Cerra wanted to return to Melbourne?

There has been discussion in the past, would we give up Brayshaw as part of the deal.

If Cerra wants to come back to Melbourne, a Cerra for Brayshaw straight swap is a fairly even trade.

Brayshaw is clearly better than what he's showing at the moment. He'd suit them as an inside mid to help take pressure off Fyfe, win ball and feed his brother and other runners. He's a proven gun in 2018 when playing an inside midfield role.

Cerra is younger and far less proven, but as a more outside leaning player he'd suit us.

The trade only works if Cerra wants to come home though. I have no doubt Gus would be happy moving to WA to play with his brother and be with the rest of his family again.

On 9/8/2020 at 3:40 PM, Undeeterred said:

Why would he? He's having a ball in the media, probably earning a fortune. He's probably happy he's left this basket case of a club.

Because he isn't very good in the media, and he's got brilliant assistant coach written all over him. it's only a matter of time before he goes to work for some club, better us than another.