Jump to content

Featured Replies

1 minute ago, big_red_fire_engine said:

In Petty and Hibberd

Out May and Jordon

Jordon sub. 

Don't mind that Red. But are we losing an extra midfield rotation by dropping Jordon.

 

Melks has to play next week. He wasn;t great today for sure, but there is no point giving someone a run and then dropping them next game. Completely defeats the purpose

 
53 minutes ago, RalphiusMaximus said:

You don't change a winning side unless forced. 

May out

Petty or Daw in. 

Straight swap for another full back. 

 

Except that we made a change after last week's win, and won again?

I've never understood that mantra. 

Clearly, it doesn't add up.

 

Just now, JimmyGadson said:

 

Except that we made a change after last week's win, and won again?

I've never understood that mantra. 

Clearly, it doesn't add up.

That wasn't a change, it was a reshuffle.  We swapped one of the players on the ground for the substitute.  Still the same set of players, just a different one starting with a vest on.  ?


In: Petty, Hibberd 

Out: May, Jetta 

Jordan the sub instead of Sparrow

No chance jetts gets dropped. He was fantastic today.

On a day for small forwards, the type of players that often score the bulk of opposition goals,  none of theirs did any damage.

 
20 minutes ago, JimmyGadson said:

 

Except that we made a change after last week's win, and won again?

I've never understood that mantra. 

Clearly, it doesn't add up.

 

What doesn't add up?

Obviously it happens that unforced changes are sometimes made to winning sides.

For example a clear best 22 player coming back from injury (like buddy or melk this week).

Or perhaps a player breaking team rules, or some other misdemeanour.

Or perhaps after a scrappy win against an easy beat.

Or just coz.

But as a general rule, coaches are loathe to make changes to winning sides. It has always been thus. A mantra if you will.

 

Edited by binman

1 hour ago, Kent said:

Melksham should never have been inCheesy

Yep. You don't have to convince me. He has skills but just doesn't give the required effort.


May will be missing regardless you'd think. Whether it's concussion or something more serious I can't see him being right for the Hawks. Definitely time to bring Petty in, does that mean we shift Tommo as our key defender or have Petty take the main role initially and make sure our zone is well set up for Lever?

Daw could be an option as well, bring him in with BBB and perhaps look at shifting TMac into a defensive role.

Also does Melksham keep his spot, for me he didn't do a whole lot apart from kicking his easy goal. I'd say give him another week to give him a chance to get some form but he got so many chances last year. I think he get's one more week but thin ice.

I thought Jetta was good, didn't do a hell of a lot wrong. The argument keeps coming though are we better with him or Hibberd in?

1 hour ago, Pickett2Jackson said:

Yeah I was still angry after the win when I posted that, have calmed down now.

gary coleman wtf GIF

Seems I was the only one wildly frustrated with TMac today and pleased that Ben Brown was waiting in the wings. I did think that Tomald played reasonably well in round one (with steadily diminishing returns ever since), so now I don't know if it's confirmation bias or not. Out TMac and probably May. In Brown and Majak. 

And no disrespect, but our other 150-plus games veterans in Nev, Nat and Melksham can no longer be relied upon in clutch situations either (e.g. finals), and should probably be transitioned out sooner rather than later. It's not the same at other clubs, but veteran players at other clubs haven't been through the same as what ours have. 

We have coverage for the above-mentioned players, and our maturity is beginning to shine without them. I'm also confident that our next generation of veterans will continue to perform and lead the club and nurture our recruits in a way that our current ones haven't been able to due to a multitude of circumstances.  

IN : PETTY, HIBBERD

OUT: MAY, SPARROW

 

Hibberd the sub.


3 minutes ago, Skuit said:

Seems I was the only one wildly frustrated with TMac today and pleased that Ben Brown was waiting in the wings. I did think that Tomald played reasonably well in round one (with steadily diminishing returns ever since), so now I don't know if it's confirmation bias or not. Out TMac and probably May. In Brown and Majak. 

And no disrespect, but our other 150-plus games veterans in Nev, Nat and Melksham can no longer be relied upon in clutch situations either (e.g. finals), and should probably be transitioned out sooner rather than later. It's not the same at other clubs, but veteran players at other clubs haven't been through the same as what ours have. 

We have coverage for the above-mentioned players, and our maturity is beginning to shine without them. I'm also confident that our next generation of veterans will continue to perform and lead the club and nurture our recruits in a way that our current ones haven't been able to due to a multitude of circumstances.  

I initially had thought that, but I also did think he competed at contests to bring the ball to ground when marking the ball just wasn't going to happen. But he actually did take quite a few marks and played a connector role rather that a forward kicking goals. I think his output needs to be better but 2 good games, one more last week, and one ok-ish today. I think he keeps his spot for next week.

Any word on whether we're going to bring BBB straight in after one Casey match?

Basically we need a replacement for May. That would be Petty for me. Then the Jordan, Swallow and Jetta positions are all up for grabs but do we have suitable replacements? Not convinced. And would love one of our big forwards to come in but don’t believe they are ready yet. Weid didn’t get a kick and BB only played a half in a practice match. 

5 minutes ago, Pates said:

I initially had thought that, but I also did think he competed at contests to bring the ball to ground when marking the ball just wasn't going to happen. But he actually did take quite a few marks and played a connector role rather that a forward kicking goals. I think his output needs to be better but 2 good games, one more last week, and one ok-ish today. I think he keeps his spot for next week.

Any word on whether we're going to bring BBB straight in after one Casey match?

Took the equal-most marks on the ground in a stat that I think is super-important for us. But it's what he does after those marks - and moreso when he's trying to win the ball in tight situations but mostly just gets in the way - that just seems a poor fit with what the rest of our team is doing right now. 

2 hours ago, adonski said:

Think we may go small next week -

Out: May, Jordon
In: Hibberd, Sparrow (as a starter)

Doubt Melk gets dropped but understand the calls for him to go

Sparrow only played 17% less game time than Jordon, somehow. 

I was very outspoken about Melksham getting a Gig today and he is a weak link . Given the way we are playing you cannot have a bloke that is not of that ilk.As iterated he needs to force selectors to pick him. He didn't and to my mind he should not play until he displays the grunt expected!


Given what I saw yesterday BB Is teasingly close very tantalisingly so!

1 minute ago, picket fence said:

Given what I saw yesterday BB Is teasingly close very tantalisingly so!

Goodwin reckons a few weeks away for he & Weid. Wants them fit and in form before throwing them in the team. That's an approach that should let them hit the ground running when they resume at AFL level

 

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

Featured Content

  • GAMEDAY: Collingwood

    It's Game Day and the Demons face a monumental task as they take on the top-of-the-table Magpies in one of the biggest games on the Dees calendar: the King's Birthday Big Freeze MND match. Can the Demons defy the odds and claim a massive scalp to keep their finals hopes alive?

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 719 replies
  • CASEY: Collingwood

    It was freezing cold at Mission Whitten Stadium where only the brave came out in the rain to watch a game that turned out to be as miserable as the weather.
    The Casey Demons secured their third consecutive victory, earning the four premiership points and credit for defeating a highly regarded Collingwood side, but achieved little else. Apart perhaps from setting the scene for Monday’s big game at the MCG and the Ice Challenge that precedes it.
    Neither team showcased significant skill in the bleak and greasy conditions, at a location that was far from either’s home territory. Even the field umpires forgot where they were and experienced a challenging evening, but no further comment is necessary.

      • Thanks
    • 4 replies
  • NON-MFC: Round 13

    Follow all the action from every Round 13 clash excluding the Dees as the 2025 AFL Premiership Season rolls on. With Melbourne playing in the final match of the round on King's Birthday, all eyes turn to the rest of the competition. Who are you tipping to win? And more importantly, which results best serve the Demons’ finals aspirations? Join the discussion and keep track of the matches that could shape the ladder and impact our run to September.

      • Thanks
    • 216 replies
  • PREVIEW: Collingwood

    Having convincingly defeated last year’s premier and decisively outplayed the runner-up with 8.2 in the final quarter, nothing epitomized the Melbourne Football Club’s performance more than its 1.12 final half, particularly the eight consecutive behinds in the last term, against a struggling St Kilda team in the midst of a dismal losing streak. Just when stability and consistency were anticipated within the Demon ranks, they delivered a quintessential performance marked by instability and ill-conceived decisions, with the most striking aspect being their inaccuracy in kicking for goal, which suggested a lack of preparation (instead of sleeping in their hotel in Alice, were they having a night on the turps) rather than a well-rested team. Let’s face it - this kicking disease that makes them look like raw amateurs is becoming a millstone around the team’s neck.

      • Thanks
    • 1 reply
  • CASEY: Sydney

    The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 1 reply
  • REPORT: St. Kilda

    Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
    This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

      • Thanks
    • 4 replies