Jump to content

Featured Replies

 

I’m worried Oliver will come under MRO review. 

 
16 minutes ago, McQueen said:

I’m worried Oliver will come under MRO review. 

What incident?

25 minutes ago, leave it to deever said:

Is there speculation we will play Lions in Sydney?

This is 100%


18 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

What incident?

Garcia

5 minutes ago, McQueen said:

Garcia

Can you give a time stamp @McQueen?

He'll be fine* 

 

*If the AFL see him as in genuine Brownlow contention and thus now protected.

Edited by Engorged Onion

1 hour ago, Lord Nev said:

Not really when you look at it in the context of selection.

Brown dismal at VFL level.

Weid inconsistent but kicked two important goals and has the clear edge over the player competing for the same spot currently.

I don't want to hear anyone calling for Weid out for Brown to ever try to talk about culture or competition for spots.

A couple of things nev.

I meant it is woeful that both of our key forwards apply poor levels of pressure. They both concern me. 

And I understand your point about competition for spots, but by the very same logic it was a strange decision to drop Brown not weed for the crows game. 

Brown was picked first on form. And both had almost identical stats and impact (which was not great) against the blues.

So why drop Brown?

I suspect it was to give weed a run at afl level. And have a look at the set up with him as the go to forward.

I'm not advocating Brown come in. But they wedged themselves a bit.

And bottom line Brown is a better footballer.

Takes his marks. Is stronger in the contest. Is a harder match up that demands more defensive coverage. And is a proven goal kicker. 

Brown has the runs on the board. Weed doesn't. 

Because neither apply enough pressure you can't have both in the same team.

And without question Id have Brown over weed. 

Edited by binman

 
17 hours ago, Nascent said:

I reckon Jordon might be a good fit for a wing. Can play defensively but also seems to link up on the outside well. Sparrow to come in and play JJ's current role.

Jordan is looking good for many things - developing fine. The vacant winger might well open him up with a new array of game tricks and tributes. He'd surely be keen for that! He can run, kick, pass, shepherd, screen and anticipates well. Could be the man for the job in Langdon's absence.

44 minutes ago, McQueen said:

Garcia

I have watched the replay, I cannot see the incident anywhere. 


13 minutes ago, SPC said:

I have watched the replay, I cannot see the incident anywhere. 

I’ll PM you soon with the incident. 

Just now, McQueen said:

I’ll PM you soon with the incident. 

Thanks 

37 minutes ago, binman said:

A couple of things nev.

I meant it is woeful that both of our key forwards apply poor levels of pressure. They both concern me. 

And I understand your point about competition for spots, but by the very same logic it was a strange decision to drop Brown not weed for the crows game. 

Brown was picked first on form. And both had almost identical stats and impact (which was not great) against the blues.

So why drop Brown?

I suspect it was to give weed a run at afl level. And have a look at the set up with him as the go to forward.

I'm not advocating Brown come in. But they wedged themselves a bit.

And bottom line Brown is a better footballer.

Takes his marks. Is stronger in the contest. Is a harder match up that demands more defensive coverage. And is a proven goal kicker. 

Brown has the runs on the board. Weed doesn't. 

Because neither apply enough pressure you can't have both in the same team.

And without question Id have Brown over weed. 

To me it makes sense to frame the whole thing as competition for one spot.

Weid edged out Brown performance wise against the Blues.

Brown did nothing to earn a call up so Weid got another chance and was ok. I feel for Brown that he doesn't get a chance this week to show something. Really; all Brown had to do was kick a couple of goals for Casey and he'd have been in this week but he had a Barry Crocker.

You pick the team on current form, not on form from a couple of years ago so Weid gets the nod until Brown forces the hand of the selectors, that's how good clubs do it.

The pressure question is an interesting one to me though. Sure, everyone should be applying pressure, but maybe that forward role Weid (or Brown) plays is more to stay at home most of the time so we have a target when we rebound?

Fritsch and Melksham both average less tackles than Weid. We seem to let them off because it's 'not their role' to be a pressure forward, it's their role to provide skill and finishing, yet we hold Weid to a different standard for some reason.

Not every forwards role is to be a 'pressure forward' even though all of them are expected to bring that element to a degree.

Edited by Lord Nev

1 hour ago, Engorged Onion said:

Can you give a time stamp @McQueen?

He'll be fine* 

 

*If the AFL see him as in genuine Brownlow contention and thus now protected.

I can but not publicly. 
 

One too many spliffs has got me paranoid. 

1 hour ago, binman said:

A couple of things nev.

I meant it is woeful that both of our key forwards apply poor levels of pressure. They both concern me. 

And I understand your point about competition for spots, but by the very same logic it was a strange decision to drop Brown not weed for the crows game. 

Brown was picked first on form. And both had almost identical stats and impact (which was not great) against the blues.

So why drop Brown?

I suspect it was to give weed a run at afl level. And have a look at the set up with him as the go to forward.

I'm not advocating Brown come in. But they wedged themselves a bit.

And bottom line Brown is a better footballer.

Takes his marks. Is stronger in the contest. Is a harder match up that demands more defensive coverage. And is a proven goal kicker. 

Brown has the runs on the board. Weed doesn't. 

Because neither apply enough pressure you can't have both in the same team.

And without question Id have Brown over weed. 

Well reasoned post. I like Sam. Hes just not as good as Bb. The fact of the matter is Bb is a freak talent. Had a poor year last year but the three years prior was the best ff in the comp easily.

Sam is not a bad player and Id love to see him succeed because I get tge feeling he goves his all. But they are not in the same league so to speak.

Bb has proven himself as a star full forward. Sam hasnt. Its not to say Sam wont be great but its a fair assumption that its unlikely he will be as good as bb was. 

I know Sam is young and still developing and has more longevity but bb has an awesome record. Before anyone says records are in the past, its the same reason Fritta wasnt dropped after a few poor games. Its been proven what they CAN do.

I wouldnt drop Weid this week but if he plays again like last night then its move over time. Sure they were two timely goals but its just a pass game at best.As bad as Bb was at vfl level according to reports...its a worry Sam played like he did with his spot under pressure.

Dont get me wrong Id love Sam to be a great player but I prefer Bb. The facts are one has been great and the other not.

if Sam plays better next week, more power to him and more success to us.

Its not about either or for me its about the mfc getting a flag.Im sure we all feel the same.

Edited by leave it to deever


8 hours ago, Jaded said:

The club clearly has their heart set on a Jackson Weideman double act. They brought in BB to replace Tmac. Then Tmac decided to go be a sensational player again and now the plans have gone to [censored]. 

Same thing happened to Jeremy Renner in the Mission: Impossible movies post Ghost Protocol. 

Cruise did a massive TMac.

Replay is on Stan or Prime or something.

6 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

To me it makes sense to frame the whole thing as competition for one spot.

Weid edged out Brown performance wise against the Blues.

 

Agree with the first paragraph. Not the second.

Brown was the incumbent. Both were average against the blues, but if anything Brown was better. So in my view deserved to retain his spot.

Obviously the selectors don't agree, so who am I to say. 

I agree in a general sense with your comments about not needing every forward to be a pressure freak. And that is not what I expect of weed.

But for mine he simply doesn't play with enough intensity and spends too much time at half pace

But his benchmark should be tmac. 

Late in a quarter (can't recall which  maybe the third?) tmac flat out sprinted for 200 metres to apply some pressure to a dogs plsyer running free through the centre square. Didn't quite get there but put enough pressure on for the kick inside 50 to be shanked. And we got an intercept mark.

Even it hadn't caused a turnover the effort was inspiring. They will show that vision to the team.

To be fair to weed they will also show his great run down tackle late in the second. 

But they will also show weed in his review of his half arsed effort near the start of tbe last 'chasing" durea at hb.

Look at the vision at about 18:30. Jogged, where if he had been intense and really focused he would have been able to lay a tackle - or at least been able to disrupt the kick. 

He lucked out because the kick inside 50 was poor and didn't vmcost tbe goal it should have. A goal that might have given them a sniff.

Simply not good enough. And strange from a player fighting for his spot in the team.

2 hours ago, McQueen said:

I’m worried Oliver will come under MRO review. 

What, for being clobbered after getting his kick away that led to the downfield kick to Max ??

Okay so I’ve been able to forensically investigate this incident with Oliver more closely on Kayo slow mo and I’m happy that he’s got nothing to worry about. 
The arm that I thought was Oliver’s fly up is actually Riley Garcia’s. 
The time stamp is 11.56 left on the first. 
 

1 minute ago, McQueen said:

Okay so I’ve been able to forensically investigate this incident with Oliver more closely on Kayo slow mo and I’m happy that he’s got nothing to worry about. 
The arm that I thought was Oliver’s fly up is actually Riley Garcia’s. 
The time stamp is 11.56 left on the first. 
 

One too many spliffs indeed! ?


1 hour ago, Deemania since 56 said:

Jordan is looking good for many things - developing fine. The vacant winger might well open him up with a new array of game tricks and tributes. He'd surely be keen for that! He can run, kick, pass, shepherd, screen and anticipates well. Could be the man for the job in Langdon's absence.

Don't take Jordon away from the contest, especially against Brisbane. He has been an absolute revelation in and under !!

Looks like he's played for 6 years !

5 minutes ago, Fat Tony said:

One too many spliffs indeed! ?

Normal speed it looks like an elbow. 

9E06CCA0-154F-409F-9B84-90EE0EA276AD.jpeg

Edited by McQueen

On Weed.

I understand there are areas of his game that need improvement like his pressure acts as @binmanhas pointed out. Not good enough at times in this area for sure. 

But overall I thought this was his best game by far. The two goals were nice but I thought he was creating terrific marking contests in the first half and imposing himself adequately. He only juuust dropped three or four where he really should have marked them. You could see his frustration (at one stage yelling loudly at himself as he hit the turf). The kid is really competitive and I think he now has the body and when playing with confidence to really impact the game. His decision making is improving as well.

I'm actually in agreeance with a lot of MFC players and coaches who have stated that they believe Sam is building nicely. I think we discount the difficulty of playing alongside three other talls in the forward half a lot of the time competing in the air, knowing when to fly and where to lead/position yourself both offensively and defensively would be difficult. He's three games in and starting to be more involved in games. I think as the second tall option last nights game was great, he played his role and as Jonathan Brown stated post game a performance he won't be dropped for.

It's great that Brown will keep pressure on his position but many on here are in the belief that he will magically become the dominant forward he was 2 years ago. I'm not so sure. Browns inability to separate off his man and his slowness when the ball hits the ground have been a real worry to me and quite possibly a liability in the senior side to be honest. I feel Weid is more agile and there's greater flexibility in his role. If BBB is the player we think he is he should really be kicking bags in the VFL and an imposing force. I hope this happens but until then...

We shall see.

 

Not sure if this has been discussed - but could we bring up Salem to the wing to replace Langers, Hibberd to HBF and Lockhart in to the back pocket.


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.

      • Clap
      • Like
    • 133 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.

      • Like
    • 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.

      • 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? 

      • Like
    • 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?

      • Like
    • 385 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
      • Like
    • 47 replies