Jump to content

Featured Replies

14 minutes ago, Jaded said:

Ummm he missed last week and this week and has another 7 days until our next game. How is that not equal to 2 weeks?

It was named in this week's injury report that he will miss the next two games. Sydney and Carlton. 

It's a foot issue, with his history they'll be extra precautionary with it. Wouldn't be surprised if he missed 3 all up.

 
Just now, BLWNBA said:

Harmes for Sparrow. 
 

Unfortunately for Harmes he’s a liability. He mad some atrocious errors at some pivotal times in the game and how he was rewarded ahead of Sparrow is beyond me. 
 

I’d rather Jones out there, he offers more and his form has overwhelming been better. 
 

I understand it won’t happen, but that’s what I’d like to see. 

Harmes’ worse was dreadful and overall it wasn’t a good game. I agree it’s staggering he was picked ahead of Sparrow.

But....his work rate is good, his tackling is strong and in the second half he put away the desire to break 7 tackles and gave a few more first options. 

We need midfield fitness and experience with Viney out. And the ability to swap mids and forwards on ball remains a key part of our game. Now that Harmes is in I’d stick with him for another week.

Bring Sparrow in for Melksham and rotate Harmes and Petracca through the forward line more to keep the legs fresh. 

Does this make sense to you now @wizardinoz...

Or are you facepalming because you couldn't understand a simple logic on why I said Viney would miss 2?

Screenshot_20210508-233523_Chrome.jpg

 
1 minute ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Does this make sense to you now @wizardinoz...

Or are you facepalming because you couldn't understand a simple logic on why I said Viney would

Never saw that. Perhaps you are right. Don't get upset, we shall see next week.

11 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Harmes’ worse was dreadful and overall it wasn’t a good game. I agree it’s staggering he was picked ahead of Sparrow.

But....his work rate is good, his tackling is strong and in the second half he put away the desire to break 7 tackles and gave a few more first options. 

We need midfield fitness and experience with Viney out. And the ability to swap mids and forwards on ball remains a key part of our game. Now that Harmes is in I’d stick with him for another week.

Bring Sparrow in for Melksham and rotate Harmes and Petracca through the forward line more to keep the legs fresh. 

I thought Hames was actually pretty good. Hard and tough. Not sure about petty though.i suppose he needs a few weeks to be judged. Just looked fumbly, again to me. 

Edited by Wizard of Koz


1 hour ago, MurDoc516 said:

Sparrow for Harmes.

I'm sorry, but apart from 2-3 good moments in that game, Harmes was doing everything we shouldn't be doing. He just plays like old Melbourne.

U must be joking. Sure he buggered up a few times but overall, he was terrific. Have a look at his last quarter  

25 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Drop Melksham for being a pea heart. You don’t get to play if you don’t respect the jumper.
 

Start a go fund me for Nasher’s blindness. 

God, you are insufferable at times. 

I have an inkling that Fritsch is a front runner with little defensive capability but I won’t call him a ‘pea heart.’

Do people think as they post or are they just flopping it on the keyboard and hoping for the best?

1 minute ago, rpfc said:

God, you are insufferable at times. 

I have an inkling that Fritsch is a front runner with little defensive capability but I won’t call him a ‘pea heart.’

Do people think as they post or are they just flopping it on the keyboard and hoping for the best?

Fritsch is poor defensively but he flies for his marks with rare courage.

Melksham can’t take a chest mark in 20m of space. Not the first time and unless something is done about it, won’t be the last.

We need his skills in the side but the coaches aren’t doing him or the team favours if they don’t set basics standards on intensity and courage. 

 
8 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Fritsch is poor defensively but he flies for his marks with rare courage.

Melksham can’t take a chest mark in 20m of space. Not the first time and unless something is done about it, won’t be the last.

We need his skills in the side but the coaches aren’t doing him or the team favours if they don’t set basics standards on intensity and courage. 

Total marks: 

Melksham: 3

Fritsch: 2


Goals from marks:

Melksham: 1

Fritsch: 0

It’s obviously not true that Melksham doesn’t fly for marks. It’s rubbish. The mark he took for a goal was sandwiched in between two players and perfectly judged - taken at the highest point. He very nearly took a speccy where the kick completely favoured his opponent but dropped the slippery ball when he hit the ground. You had decided Melksham sucked before the ball had even been bounced so everything you saw automatically confirmed it. There’s no point in reading anything else from you on this topic. 

46 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Drop Melksham for being a pea heart. You don’t get to play if you don’t respect the jumper.
 

Start a go fund me for Nasher’s blindness. 

You’re one of my favourite posters. You’re above this crap.


No change for me.

Harmes is on the fringes and I don’t think we’d lose anything by swapping him for Sparrow but on merit I don’t think you can make a strong enough argument for a change.

Would love to see Sparrow and Weideman in the team but can't see any changes being made unless they are forced.

Fritsch and Brayshaw probably our worst tonight but can't see either being dropped and nor do I want them to. They have enough credits in the bank though and can't see Sparrow playing the wing better than Brayshaw.

Petty needs some continuity and I have great belief that he will be a staple in our team for a long time to come. He's important for our defensive structure, allowing lever to intercept and McDonald to play forward.

Edited by Nascent

12 minutes ago, Nasher said:

Total marks: 

Melksham: 3

Fritsch: 2


Goals from marks:

Melksham: 1

Fritsch: 0

It’s obviously not true that Melksham doesn’t fly for marks. It’s rubbish. The mark he took for a goal was sandwiched in between two players and perfectly judged - taken at the highest point. He very nearly took a speccy where the kick completely favoured his opponent but dropped the slippery ball when he hit the ground. You had decided Melksham sucked before the ball had even been bounced so everything you saw automatically confirmed it. There’s no point in reading anything else from you on this topic. 

Melksham‘s mark for goal was a standing uncontested mark. His hanger was nice but he had the sit.

Im talking about flying in contests where his body is genuinely on the line. He doesn’t do it. He doesn’t hit ground balls at pace or chase with intensity either.

Fritsch had a poor game, not sure why he’s been bought in to this. He has to lift his defensive work too but overall he’s had a great season.

I’ve been defensive of Melksham in other weeks. Pretty sure I didn’t want him dropped this week. But his intensity should be lifting and it’s not, and he spilled a simple chest mark that just can’t be tolerated.

We’re playing blue collar team footy that relies on every player rolling up their sleeves. Melksham did that in 2018 but hasn’t since. A week off to set that standard isn’t a huge deal to me. Better to do that now than passively waiting for him to get to a level I believe he can.

55 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Sparrow for Melksham.

Petracca could do with a light week playing forward. The extra predominant mid will help. 

Plus it’s clear we need more pressure and run if we’re sticking with the tall forward line.

Not 100% sure I follow the logic here...

Presumably you're dropping Melksham for lack of pressure, yet you're saying play Petracca there to give him a 'light week'. Then you're saying we need 'more pressure and run' in the forward line.

I would like to see either Sparrow or (fingers crossed) Viney in for grunt/clearances etc, but I don't think Melksham out and Trac forward to 'rest' is much of a chance to happen.

NO CHANGE


I think when we are 8-0 we only make changes on two basis:

1) Injured/forced change (includes overly cautious resting of sore players who are walk up starts)

2) "it's your spot to lose". Once a player is in, and we're winning, you need to play pretty poorly to lose the spot.

 

We didn't get enough from Fritsch or Hunt but neither were dreadful enough to cancel out re ent good form. Others could improve, but not enough to get dropped from someone who didn't play in the VFL.

No change unless forced for me.

They beat us 17 to 4 in center clearances. That is a problem.  Carlton will murder us if we play like that as they actually have forward who will capitilise on center clearances. I would be bringing in Sparrrow. You can take your pick out of Harmes, Melksham and ANB.

I think there will be some sore bodies this week and while Trac is a unit he is human. I think he might be given a week to recover from his nasty corkie. 

Sparrow has to be first in line to come in, he was BOG for me in the VFL last week. Our midfield depth gets tested if Trac is given a week to recover. 

Aside from that, no change.

1 hour ago, Skuit said:

At the risk of sounding like one of our back-in-the-day premiership-witnessing members, Angus Brayshaw needs to quit the podcasts and barbie onions and google machines and concentrate on becoming the best footy player he can be. Trac and Clarry and Salem seem like they've now outgrown him in the maturity-stakes. A spell on the outer worked wonders last time. Is it time for another reminder?

Big problem is, Gus Brayshaw aint Robby Flower's bootlace as a winger.

If he stays he needs to spend time in midfield! 

 

Edited by picket fence

17 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Not 100% sure I follow the logic here...

Presumably you're dropping Melksham for lack of pressure, yet you're saying play Petracca there to give him a 'light week'. Then you're saying we need 'more pressure and run' in the forward line.

I would like to see either Sparrow or (fingers crossed) Viney in for grunt/clearances etc, but I don't think Melksham out and Trac forward to 'rest' is much of a chance to happen.

Sparrow in for Melk would provide 5 primary on ballers - Oliver, Petracca, JJ, Harmes and Sparrow. That way we can keep them all fresher with lots of forward rotations. 

Petracca brings a lot of pressure and spark to a forward line, he can do that whilst still having a week with less miles on the legs. I’m not suggesting anything drastic just taking 10-20% of his game time on ball, same as Harmes. That way you get a fraction more midfield minutes for Sparrow than would’ve been offered to Melk. 


I think labelling Melksham a pea heart is poor form from a generally thoughtful poster. 

He showed better intensity this week getting involved in the hard slog. He played his role well IMO.

 

51 minutes ago, dee-tox said:

I think labelling Melksham a pea heart is poor form from a generally thoughtful poster. 

He showed better intensity this week getting involved in the hard slog. He played his role well IMO.

 

What is a pea heart? I’ve not heard this expression before. 

I’d like to see Harmes play fwd in Melkshams role, and Sparrow to come in for Melksham. Assuming Viney is still injured. Other than that no change. Having said all that I don’t think any changes we make are going to be the difference so not fussed either way.

 

bowey in for hunt he's been down and needs the rocket, been no dash and foot skills for a month now

3 hours ago, Smokey said:

Not wrong. That’s exactly what you sound like 

For once I agree with Skuit Smokey

Gus needs to concentrate Seriously on  his footy not amateur  clowning and podcast presentations.

To see Trac and  others Improve snd compare the 2018 Gus with now is chalk and cheese.

Time for a wake  up call Gus this is a serious business we are getting into and no passengers are welcome! 


Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

Featured Content

  • 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
    • 134 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
  • PREGAME: Collingwood

    After a disappointing loss in Alice Springs the Demons return to the MCG to take on the Magpies in the annual King's Birthday Big Freeze for MND game. Who comes in and who goes out?

      • Thanks
    • 416 replies
  • PODCAST: St. Kilda

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 2nd June @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we have a chat with former Demon ruckman Jeff White about his YouTube channel First Use where he dissects ruck setups and contests. We'll then discuss the Dees disappointing loss to the Saints in Alice Springs.
    Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show.
    Listen LIVE: https://demonland.com/

      • Thanks
    • 47 replies