Jump to content

Featured Replies

 

For all the talk of Melksham's defensive game he hardly got a kick. The strategy didn't seem to free up BBB or Fritsch and if it hadn't been for a mercurial performance by Kossie Pickett we would have lost the game.

So we drop a small forward (albeit underperforming) and add no one up forward.

Does this mean Petracca is to be played almost as a permanent forward. Okay but our midfield isn't exactly performing at its golden best and it happens to be the Bulldog's strength

Strange team selection

I cannot see why Melksham is in the side. I would have dropped him and bought Chandler in.

 

If we line up as listed, our forward line looks a lot better (though smalls will need to up their ground ball pressure with BBB and Gawn there when it hits the deck)

Selections as expected and agree that Tomlinson was stiff to lose his spot after his performance last week. Petty will have a bit of pressure on him to maintain his quality of play. It may be that Lever does not come up and then we are looking at Tomlinson in for him.

Our defensive structures and quality list depth for the defensive zone is incredible.

Melksham keeping his pot is a good thing. I was of the opinion he was well pat his best but his game last week was excellent. Good to see both him and Hibberd playing well in the team. a good solid block of experience there at either end of the ground.

The forward 50 looked a bit better last week and not just because of Pickett's 6. I do not mind the fact that we are giving them another week together. Bedford was the least effective of our small forwards and made way for Oliver.

Tomlinson for medi-sub for mine.


42 minutes ago, Smokey said:

Not sure why people have an issue with Tommo out. He played very well last week but Petty is an upgrade no matter what way you look at it.

SO PLAY EITHER HE OR PETTY AS ANOTHER TALL UP FORWARD.... Jahessus H Christmas

Instead of Melksham and in support of a hampred injured BB

Cheezus it aint Rocket Science and happy to revisit late Sat night with a ..... I told u so moment. Hope im wrong but..... Not confident!

44 minutes ago, WERRIDEE said:

Daniel is a big out he always kills us.

He doesn't always kill us.  Goodwin has been known to put the clamp on him 'when it counts'

Edited by John Demonic

1 minute ago, John Demonic said:

He doesn't always kill us. Goodwin has been known to put the clamp on him 'when it counts'

Thank Christ!

 
5 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

For all the talk of Melksham's defensive game he hardly got a kick. The strategy didn't seem to free up BBB or Fritsch and if it hadn't been for a mercurial performance by Kossie Pickett we would have lost the game.

So we drop a small forward (albeit underperforming) and add no one up forward.

Does this mean Petracca is to be played almost as a permanent forward. Okay but our midfield isn't exactly performing at its golden best and it happens to be the Bulldog's strength

Strange team selection

BBB had 8 marks ,2 goals and could've been 3-4, Fritsch 15 disposals 4 scores . Melksham had 7 tackles and contributed to at least 2 goals. Id say he did the job he was asked against port. I've been a big critic of his but he can do a good defensive role on a medium to tall defender , and he is also has the ability to deliver better than most into our forward line. People are upset we are not trying a rookie in jvr and potting Melksham for his game on the weekend really don't get it.

Lose, not happy. Win, not happy. Bring in two first choice players, happy but not happy. I must be looking at the ladder upside down.
 


47 minutes ago, Bates Mate said:

BBB had 8 marks ,2 goals and could've been 3-4, Fritsch 15 disposals 4 scores . Melksham had 7 tackles and contributed to at least 2 goals. Id say he did the job he was asked against port. I've been a big critic of his but he can do a good defensive role on a medium to tall defender , and he is also has the ability to deliver better than most into our forward line. People are upset we are not trying a rookie in jvr and potting Melksham for his game on the weekend really don't get it.

Actually I'd pick Chandler or Weideman but the fact is the forward line still didn't function last week and we were saved by Pickett's performance.

You need to score goals to win and if you weaken an already underperforming forward line it's a strange strategy.

Melksham has rarely performed when selected as evidenced by his two earlier games.

Anyway let's see 

The 3rd week in a row with this forward set up. I’m interested in what metrics the football department is watching that encourage them to persist with it. I felt slightly lucky to get the win last week.

I suppose if we can’t predict where most of our scoring is going to come from, the opposition will be similarly confused.

Either way, the result will probably decide if we bring back the 2nd permanent tall or take this setup into September.

Great to see Petty back in the side. I hope we can keep a settled defence for the rest of the season. Tough on tommo. did nothing wrong last week

Clarry is a beast. Watch out bulldogs

Melks plays game 202. He keeps proving me wrong. Good for him

2 hours ago, picket fence said:

SO PLAY EITHER HE OR PETTY AS ANOTHER TALL UP FORWARD.... Jahessus H Christmas

Instead of Melksham and in support of a hampred injured BB

Cheezus it aint Rocket Science and happy to revisit late Sat night with a ..... I told u so moment. Hope im wrong but..... Not confident!

Might be time to accept that Goody does not share your view of significantly changing our forward structure pre finals 

 

Edited by Smokey


1 minute ago, Fat Tony said:

Time for May, Salem and Gawn to find some form. 

May has been fine. Salem and Gawn definitely 

7 minutes ago, Smokey said:

May has been fine. Salem and Gawn definitely 

My view is May has been mediocre since returning from suspension. Not hopeless but not at his best. Looks like Frankenstein bending over, missing short kicks and fumbling too often. 

3 hours ago, picket fence said:

SO PLAY EITHER HE OR PETTY AS ANOTHER TALL UP FORWARD.... Jahessus H Christmas

Instead of Melksham and in support of a hampred injured BB

Cheezus it aint Rocket Science and happy to revisit late Sat night with a ..... I told u so moment. Hope im wrong but..... Not confident!

Stilton or Pecorino with that Shiraz Mr Fence?

4 hours ago, old dee said:

We have no replacement for Tmac and it has been shown since his loss that we are struggling for a taller player to take marks. Last week Tomlinson played well and deserved his spot this week. Why not play Petty in the forward line where he has shown on a few occasions he can mark and kick goals. Surely it is worth a trial. We have one key forward  in Brown then no one else. Why not try a player who can mark and kick accurately? 

Might be none Mr Old.  What's happened to BB's foot anyway?  Didnt see anything during last week's game.


4 hours ago, Jaded No More said:
 

Also harsh on Toby. Melksham must be doing something that I can’t see. 

He laid 7 Tackles and kicked 2 goals and gave 1 off

Played a solid game 

We're the number 1 side in the competition for using the least amount of players....

We've had one debut player this year in Daniel Turner off the back of having two debutants last year in Bowey and Jordon.

Not even sure if this is a good thing or bad thing. 

I mean, I look at our line up and still scratch my head in why we see fail to address the big concern around our forward line set up. 

Edited by dazzledavey36

1 hour ago, Smokey said:

May has been fine. Salem and Gawn definitely 

May has had at least 5 out on the full since his return, also the shocking turnover where he missed Bowey 15m away that led to the goal against Brisbane. He’s not been terrible, but by his lofty standards his kicking and poise are well off. He needs to get that back.
Jackson needs to lift also, hasn’t been taking marks since his return.

 
4 hours ago, picket fence said:

SO PLAY EITHER HE OR PETTY AS ANOTHER TALL UP FORWARD.... Jahessus H Christmas

Instead of Melksham and in support of a hampred injured BB

Cheezus it aint Rocket Science and happy to revisit late Sat night with a ..... I told u so moment. Hope im wrong but..... Not confident!

Can’t understand why you’re not coaching the Club. After all, you know better than everyone else.

4 hours ago, wisedog said:

The 3rd week in a row with this forward set up. I’m interested in what metrics the football department is watching that encourage them to persist with it. I felt slightly lucky to get the win last week.

I suppose if we can’t predict where most of our scoring is going to come from, the opposition will be similarly confused.

Either way, the result will probably decide if we bring back the 2nd permanent tall or take this setup into September.

What do you mean 3rd week in a row? Against Geelong we played Brown, Jackson, Fritsch, Bedford, Spargo, ANB and Harmes. Against Port we brought in Melksham. And this week we've dropped Bedford and kept Melksham.

By forward set up you mean Brown and the resting ruck? 


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

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?

      • Haha
      • Like
    • 66 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.

    • 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.

      • Haha
    • 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.

    • 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.

    • 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? 

    • 4 replies