8 hours ago, Undeeterred said:

Geelong, Brisbane and the Bulldogs, AKA the rest of the top four, haven’t been able to. Or Richmond

Not sure we can read too much into that early form Geelong game. We obviously played very well and beat them systematically. But they'll be a different proposition with Jeremy Cameron. They're the in form team of the comp and building. It would be a ripper of a prelim. I think I'm more afraid of them than the Tigers at this stage. Toss of the coin game. Our defense would really have to have their best match of the season to nullify them forward of centre, when they get going on their fast ball moving momentum swings. 

Edited June 14, 20214 yr by John Demonic

2 hours ago, John Demonic said:

Not sure we can read too much into that early form Geelong game. We obviously played very well and beat them systematically. But they'll be a different proposition with Jeremy Cameron. They're the in form team of the comp and building. It would be a ripper of a prelim. I think I'm more afraid of them than the Tigers at this stage. Toss of the coin game. Our defense would really have to have their best match of the season to nullify them forward of centre, when they get going on their fast ball moving momentum swings. 

There's almost no substitute for sustained pressure. I would imagine our pressure rating peaked in the 3rd quarter and it wouldn't have really hit our season average. Pressure means that midfielders aren't able to spot up leads and execute their kicks properly, the Pies mids were given an embarrassing amount of time and space, especially when you consider how small the SCG is.

In all of our big scalp wins the opposition were barely able to allowed to have the ball for a split second before getting swamped, it's actually really frustrating to see us drop that intensity against "lesser" teams. We have been made to pay against Adelaide and the Pies, we didn't respect the opposition and brought only 50% of what we've brought for the crunch games.

I'm starting to wonder if we will see a 4 quarter effort at all this year.

The centre tap outs and clearances were mostly their way. They constantly had multiple players standing in space to whom an easy kick could be sent with no MFC player within cooee of them. Apparently this is zone defence. Surely when the coaching staff and players noticed that the opposition was taking multiple uncontested marks they would consider manning up more, especially in the last quarter when it was still possible to win. This was a very poor performance against a bottom four team.

7 hours ago, John Crow Batty said:

Average pressure acts for all MFC players today, 13 each.

Thanks for that … but what is the average over the year and over the competition?

 

Strangely I was far more confident trailing badly against the Bears at half time than when we briefly hit the front yesterday.   There just seemed no intensity or excitement in the playing group.  Much like 16 points up on the Crows with minutes to go.  

8 hours ago, Demonsone said:

We got smashed in centre clearances x 5 , clearance x10  marks inside 50 x 9 & tackle x 10 plus tackles inside fwd 50 x 10

There was a very good reason for that which almost needs its own thread. Max Gawn was feeding the ball down Collingwoods throats at centre bounces! Watch the replay just put to better positions than Deemon Midfield. Two issues with that.

1 Is he aware of where our on ballers are?

2 Are our on ballers in good positions?

Jackson still a work in progress but will get better, maybe even at Centre bounces than Max!

Hey, whaddya know?!

The sun DID rise this morning!!!

Now on to our next assignment...

To smash the mouth-breathing bottom-feeding scum in 11 day’s time. 
❤️?❤️?❤️?

13 hours ago, Alex Flood said:

When we beat Essendon in a couple of weeks I don’t want to hear from any of the “supporters” who overreacted today.

big if?

Great first half of the season, beyond all our wildest dreams I imagine but yesterday stank of arrogance imo.

The amount of players who looked disinterested and were moving at what looked like half-pace was just really disappointing.

Collingwood are bog ordinary atm and are missing a host of top players. It was eerily similar to the game back in Goodies first year where they knocked us off last round to kill our finals chances. 

 

Gawn again was just really disappointing and I'm of the view that he needs to be more of a physical presence for us on-field as a captain. I listen to those guys who do the 'deebrief' podcast every now and then and I remember the host having a dig at some posters on the forum for some of the feedback posters like myself have given Gawn over the past month or so.

Goes to show how differently supporters of the same club watch a game.

Obviously yesterday's loss was not about Gawn per se, but I'm using him as an example because he is our captain and I just thought from the get go he did nothing to assert himself on a game that was clearly going to be hot given the week Collingwood had.

Max starts in the middle and it's where he needs to make his presence felt from the first bounce. He was up against a three gamer who is 8 cm shorter than him and Max was comprehensively beaten in the first half, was marginally better in the second half. That's disgraceful as far as I'm concerned. He was moving through mud after ruck contests and on top of all of that he was missing marks again and going up when he didn't have to in our D 50.

I don't care what he's done in the past, as the host of the podcast keeps banging on about. We live in the now and Gawn needs to bring his absolute best effort and attitude weekly and that includes bringing a physicality to the team that we're now lacking due to Viney being out. He plays way too nice in my view and only gets angry if a player like Nankervis starts antagonising.

The best players and captains play with an edge every week and Max is almost the biggest guy on the field every week. 

Gawn's game was emblematic of the way our team has functioned over the last month or so, (aside from the Dogs game). When our players decide it's game on, they seem to go from zero to hero at some point within a game. But too many of them are only just going for periods of a match which is something that we need to address for the second half of the year.

Obviously this is a glass half-empty lense I'm looking through, but it's a long year and I just saw some worrying signs yesterday against a really ordinary Collingwood outfit missing some of their best.

 

Huge second half to the year coming up, I really hope Max can get some consistency going and start playing really good games weekly rather than one great game/one poor game. And bring some [censored] attitude Max. You're the captain and you get the first contest of every game. Make the most of it.

I'll be watching our response with great interest against a testy bombers outfit after the bye.

Go dees.

12 hours ago, bingers said:

In the pocket is part of the team plan. The idea is that if the mark isn't taken, there will be a stoppage. And presumably a repeat entry if the ball is kicked out by a defender.

That I know but it's predictable and as Petracca and Brayshaw's ootf efforts yesterday showed, has limited room for error. We need to be less predictable and we need someone leading elsewhere to create options which the Weed did not do that I could see.

20 minutes ago, RigidMiddleDigit said:

That I know but it's predictable and as Petracca and Brayshaw's ootf efforts yesterday showed, has limited room for error. We need to be less predictable and we need someone leading elsewhere to create options which the Weed did not do that I could see.

Agree with this.

Sometimes there are clear and free leading options closer to centre 50 and we still seem to ignore them as a means of sticking to our game plan. 

Need to get that balance right. 

Should be kicking to pockets if there are no obvious and clear options elsewhere, not kicking to pockets and disregarding all else. 

Edited June 14, 20214 yr by JimmyGadson

10 minutes ago, JimmyGadson said:

Great first half of the season, beyond all our wildest dreams I imagine but yesterday stank of arrogance imo.

The amount of players who looked disinterested and were moving at what looked like half-pace was just really disappointing.

Collingwood are bog ordinary atm and are missing a host of top players. It was eerily similar to the game back in Goodies first year where they knocked us off last round to kill our finals chances. 

 

Gawn again was just really disappointing and I'm of the view that he needs to be more of a physical presence for us on-field as a captain. I listen to those guys who do the 'deebrief' podcast every now and then and I remember the host having a dig at some posters on the forum for some of the feedback posters like myself have given Gawn over the past month or so.

Goes to show how differently supporters of the same club watch a game.

Obviously yesterday's loss was not about Gawn per se, but I'm using him as an example because he is our captain and I just thought from the get go he did nothing to assert himself on a game that was clearly going to be hot given the week Collingwood had.

Max starts in the middle and it's where he needs to make his presence felt from the first bounce. He was up against a three gamer who is 8 cm shorter than him and Max was comprehensively beaten in the first half, was marginally better in the second half. That's disgraceful as far as I'm concerned. He was moving through mud after ruck contests and on top of all of that he was missing marks again and going up when he didn't have to in our D 50.

I don't care what he's done in the past, as the host of the podcast keeps banging on about. We live in the now and Gawn needs to bring his absolute best effort and attitude weekly and that includes bringing a physicality to the team that we're now lacking due to Viney being out. He plays way too nice in my view and only gets angry if a player like Nankervis starts antagonising.

The best players and captains play with an edge every week and Max is almost the biggest guy on the field every week. 

Gawn's game was emblematic of the way our team has functioned over the last month or so, (aside from the Dogs game). When our players decide it's game on, they seem to go from zero to hero at some point within a game. But too many of them are only just going for periods of a match which is something that we need to address for the second half of the year.

Obviously this is a glass half-empty lense I'm looking through, but it's a long year and I just saw some worrying signs yesterday against a really ordinary Collingwood outfit missing some of their best.

 

Huge second half to the year coming up, I really hope Max can get some consistency going and start playing really good games weekly rather than one great game/one poor game. And bring some [censored] attitude Max. You're the captain and you get the first contest of every game. Make the most of it.

I'll be watching our response with great interest against a testy bombers outfit after the bye.

Go dees.

Not an unreasonable post: I'm one of those fans who thinks the criticism of Gawn is usually too harsh but I didn't like his game yesterday, particularly given the vanilla-ness of his opponent.

One issue I do have with your post is the double reference to Collingwood missing players. They were actually missing only three of their best 22: Adams, Grundy and Howe. Good players all of them, obviously, but this wasn't a decimated Pies outfit. Doesn't really change much but still.

8 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

Not an unreasonable post: I'm one of those fans who thinks the criticism of Gawn is usually too harsh but I didn't like his game yesterday, particularly given the vanilla-ness of his opponent.

One issue I do have with your post is the double reference to Collingwood missing players. They were actually missing only three of their best 22: Adams, Grundy and Howe. Good players all of them, obviously, but this wasn't a decimated Pies outfit. Doesn't really change much but still.

 

Greenwood, (Treloar and Stephenson from last year also meant that they played a bunch of kids who have barely played 10 games).

I'd say that's a fairly different looking Collingwood side from last year. Maybe not decimated by injury, but a lot of talent and experience missing.

Yesterday's loss was completely attitudinal from us. On paper, we should have comprehensively beaten them.

Edited June 14, 20214 yr by JimmyGadson

1 minute ago, JimmyGadson said:

Greenwood, (Treloar and Stephenson from last year also meant that they played a bunch of kids who have barely played 10 games).

I'd say that's a fairly different looking Collingwood side from last year. Maybe not decimated by injury, but a lot of talent and experience missing.

Yesterday's loss was completely attitudinal from us. On paper, we should have comprehensively beaten them.

Not sure Greenwood is best 22 for them, and who cares who they don't have from previous years.

But yes, I agree with your overall point. This was attitude/work rate from us more than anything. Collingwood are a bottom 4 side for a reason. 

11 hours ago, The heart beats true said:

I’m so over this argument on this forum. Every difference of opinion diverts to ‘how long have you supported the club for?’, instead of debating the facts.

In this case so called ‘supporters’ taking pot shots at the club even when we are doing well. When you call them on their childish reactions to ONE loss, it somehow becomes about how they’ve been a supporter for longer than you.

It’s garbage. It’s not supportive to use any opportunity to try and rubbish us when we are on top of the ladder. That’s by definition not ‘support’, and if you’ve been doing it for a long period of time you need to ask yourself some hard questions about what you think you’re ‘supporting’.

And I don’t care how old you are. If you’re acting like a child you’re never to old to be called out for it.

Garbage???  If you aspire to being a premiership contender, losses such as this one are simply not acceptable.  My reference to age and length of support of this club has nothing to do with me trying to take the higher ground here.  Rather, it means I have seen it all over time and as such, I know what it takes to get to the top of the hill. 

Given the significance of the 'event', Neale Daniher's quest, his length of service with our club, his life membership with the MFC and the blood, sweat and tears he shed for us, I cannot think of a much greater incentive to get the job done.  By any measure and under the circumstances, yesterday's performance was just not good enough, for a team that seeks to put its hand on the holy grail.

I am not rubbishing this club and I never will.  I am just calling a spade a spade.

19 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

Not an unreasonable post: I'm one of those fans who thinks the criticism of Gawn is usually too harsh but I didn't like his game yesterday, particularly given the vanilla-ness of his opponent.

One issue I do have with your post is the double reference to Collingwood missing players. They were actually missing only three of their best 22: Adams, Grundy and Howe. Good players all of them, obviously, but this wasn't a decimated Pies outfit. Doesn't really change much but still.

So you don’t rate Mason Cox?

13 hours ago, Swooper1987 said:

Does anyone know the forward half defensive pressure stats up to round 6 and then since then?  Brown, then Weidemann came into the side from round 7 and it doesn't look like we have quite the same defensive intent or impact since the introduction of the extra tall.  I'd be tempted to drop Weidemann for Viney and bring back Melksham for Sparrow and see how that looks.  We got three goals out of Jackson and Gawn today, McDonald and Fritsch should be enough as tall targets.  

Good call. The problem is Fritsch's defensive efforts are few and far between, so if we play a genuine tall alongside Jackson and McDonald, we end up having two non tacklers.

When Fritsch said a week or so ago that his game is based around defence I almost laughed. Maybe it's based on scoreboard pressure, not on physical pressure.

21 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

Not sure Greenwood is best 22 for them, and who cares who they don't have from previous years.

But yes, I agree with your overall point. This was attitude/work rate from us more than anything. Collingwood are a bottom 4 side for a reason. 

He is when fit and I think the fact they are without Treloar and Stephenson this year is important to note when comparing sides. It meant they were younger, more inexperienced and makes the loss more surprising and uncomfortable.

 

Edited June 14, 20214 yr by JimmyGadson

24 minutes ago, Antioch said:

So you don’t rate Mason Cox?

Nope. And neither does Collingwood, given he's fit but not playing.

10 minutes ago, JimmyGadson said:

He is when fit and I think the fact they are without Treloar and Stephenson this year is important to note when comparing sides. It meant they were younger, more inexperienced and makes the loss more surprising and uncomfortable.

Actually, that's not correct:

Look, I'm with you on the uncomfortable part of the loss. The Collingwood side who played yesterday was not the 2018 GF team or the dominant 2018-20 Pies side. We can't keep losing games to weak sides.

“Nope. And neither does Collingwood, given he's fit but not playing.”

Nonsense.

He’ll be back

13 hours ago, drdrake said:

hought it was going to be easy and it wasn't.  Our kicking skills are still and underlying issue, ok we are in a great spot but will this be exposed when finals pressure us applied.

Exactly. Dropped the ball before the game even started. Mentally absent for most of it.

I thought the boys had matured and I guess they have but yesterday was Dees of old sadly.

Im sure they will turn it around but its not good.

On a plus side we can pretty much conclude weidrman is not the solution to our fwd line. I know the majority were poor but this player has done little in his sixth season now. The zero kick stat is the final straw for mine.

Delevery was poor but hunhry players like Hawkins make their own stats and do whatever it takes to breakout. Never discount passion in determining the future of a player.

Hoping One of the Browns will step up and fill this need.....hoping Bbb.

Never should have been dropped . He was not that bad in the games he played but who knows what goes on onside the club and reasons for selections.

But if sam w gets another game next round it will be a mistake.

Also a shout out to Max who some have maligned....his performance was solid and saved us from being totally pantsed.

And Oliver as much as I worship you....seriously you need to spend a lot more time fixing your goal shots every week. Your set shots are a disgrace.

Not sure if Sparrow is ready yet.

And Goody seemed slow again to make changes when things were not working.

Lastly, we have a total gem in Jackson.

Edited June 14, 20214 yr by leave it to deever

22 minutes ago, JimmyGadson said:

Gawn again was just really disappointing and I'm of the view that he needs to be more of a physical presence for us on-field as a captain.

Clearly our attitude was off in a big way.  Max did not have his best game for sure but it seems he gets judged based on the efforts of his teammates. As captain maybe that’s fair. But he had 1/8th of our tackles yesterday.  He had more tackles than Oliver, Trac, Brayshaw, and Jordan put together. How does that happen? He had the most contested marks on the ground as well.

I found yesterday's loss easier to accept than the Adelaide game.

Whilst we didn't bring the usual defensive pressure in the Adelaide game, we did play good footy at times and a few things conspired against us late in that game.

Yesterday we simply stunk it up and played a lazy game of football and got what we deserved. Unlike the Adelaide game, yesterday's opposition was by far the better side and accordingly lead for about 75% of the game. Our defensive intent was non-existent and our skills were simply atrocious. We were willing to accept the 4 points but weren't willing to work for them.

We've had a fantastic start to the season, particularly against the better sides. However I'm most frustrated that I can't confidently pick us to beat Essendon or GWS.  These games should be regulation wins for an 11-2 side.

A mid season examination needs to be made as to why we can't play a consistent and focused game of footy against the poor sides of the comp.

On a side note, I like it that Lever referenced twice the fact that we've achieved nothing in his post game presser with Gibson. We will be the laughing stock of the comp if we fade away badly in the second half of the year.

Edited June 15, 20214 yr by Bring-Back-Powell

The team had an off-day.  If these sort of days are inevitable (as they often are for the best teams) then the team just has to make sure that we bring our best against the best sides (especially in the finals)

We haven't lost a game to a top 8 team as yet but if that starts happening, we are in trouble. 

We're in uncharted territory as supporters as the expectation can be that we bring our best and win all the time.  I don't believe that is possible with our current list.  We are very good but we're not a superstar team

Collingwood played very well too ... their lesser lights collectively did well, they tackled us with intent all day and we didn't have much time when we had the ball

But nearly all our players were below par ... as previously stated, we had an off-day and those sorts of days will happen unless the team is full of stars

 

Edited June 15, 20214 yr by Macca

The loss to Adelaide and Collingwood and the first half against North has shown just how bad we can be and shows why skeptical supporters like me will remain skeptical. The gap between our best and worst is far too big. I watch a game and I can tell 5 mins in whether we've 'come to play' or not. That shouldn't happen. 

Yesterday, I could tell almost immediately that we were applying no pressure to their team and guys like Maynard, DeGoey and most of their forwards could stroll into the contest and get the ball whenever they pleased. Bloody disgraceful effort on a stand alone clash. 

Edited June 15, 20214 yr by Dr.D

We were poor across most facets of the game, the scoreboard flattered us. The back 6 was way too loose but I think they're good enough to rectify this quickly. At the centre bounce we're simply not getting the synergy that you'd expect from the personnel (talent) that's in there, may take some time to fix - the addition of a match-fit Viney should help. The forward line, in particular the teamwork amongst the KPF's, is way off. Too many times they're all leading to the same spot, dragging their defenders to the marking contest as opposed to one leading in a different direction - which at the very least could create indecision in opposition defences.