Our first five minors were all gettable.  Should have been 40--50 up.  Horrible second half.  Forward 50 entries into the pockets doing my head in.  Mind you when we did enter front and centre we were smashed in the air and had [censored] all down. 

Fairy dust has washed off  Nibbler well and truly.  

Still though, great to be in and amongst it this time of year.  Im staying positive.  What else is there to do.? Ive never drawn belief looking at Melbourne players from the perspective they are a reigning premier.  Obviously this is my first time.  But they've won a flag this group.  They'll want another one.  Comp is frighteningly tough. We just weren't accurate enough and they  had the rub.    The [censored].  But we are not out of it yet. 

 

Continually our coaching team and senior coach have failed to be able to make game plan adjustments during a season, if at all. 

As has been said a few times above, time to concede our best is no where near good enough to be a contender. 5 or 6 losses in almost identical fashion against other top 8 teams and we've changed nothing. Infuriating. I don't trust this team again.

9 hours ago, McStaff said:

If we could fix our forward half game we’d be unstoppable!

Just so much wasted effort for such a poor return. 
 

Work it out Footy Department!!

A lot on here have pointed out forward line problems so I won't bother, that coupled with worst performance by defenders for ages and there's the game right there. One really has to question the forward line coaching. Had the opportunity still even late but we just butcher chance after chance.

1 minute ago, Deenooos_ said:

Okay interesting. But why is it that we are implementing new tactics into our gameplay in a must win game to secure a top 4? Surely it's far too late in the season to make any significant changes.

Its a good question. 

Maybe goody thinks we need to win the flag?

Whatever the reason, the changes are evident.

3 minutes ago, bobby1554 said:

Fair enough, you are entitled to your opinion. And if we were beaten in the keys stats I would have agreed with you. But we weren’t.

And that makes the loss even worse.

When you dominate possession and inside F50 you don’t lose.

This is undone, by poor coaching and disgraceful kicking for goal.

3 minutes ago, adonski said:

Get Howes or Bowey on the wing and play Jordon in whatever 'role' Sparrow is supposed to be playing 

Howes is nowhere near ready for AFL particularly a game like last night or a final - he was only just ok last week in the VFL against the worst team in that comp 

 

4 minutes ago, binman said:

Its a good question. 

Maybe goody thinks we need to win the flag?

Whatever the reason, the changes are evident.

I’d say he is looking at tweaks because every other team in the comp has done their homework on our strengths and a few have found a way to beat us (Collingwood being one) 

Normally a team will win that game with the dominance we had - we are incredibly wasteful given the number of F50 entries we have (it’s not just this game) and atm if teams are prepared to run and take risks to move the ball quickly our much lauded back six frankly look pretty [censored] 

57 minutes ago, binman said:

I was sitting on the city side wing, and in the amount of times we ignored free players inside 50 at tbe punt road end was crazy. 

They are going inside 50 as of we have our two tall set up. But is that set up possible?

It hard to see weed coming back in again this season.

But if they dont pick JVR next week, maybe they have no choice but to pick weed as Smith won't be ready you wouldn't have thought. 

They are playing maxy up forward to cover the missing tall a bit, but to my eye he looks as if he is still carrying an injury. He was amazing lsdt night but doesn't seem to be able to elevate.

Binman I know you are very keen on Jordan, but he is so slow kicking the ball forward, always gives other team time to get all players back. If he took first option in front of him, would be significantly more positive and enable us occasionally to get into forward half quickly!

1 minute ago, D4Life said:

Binman I know you are very keen on Jordan, but he is so slow kicking the ball forward, always gives other team time to get all players back. If he took first option in front of him, would be significantly more positive and enable us occasionally to get into forward half quickly!

JJ is not the reason we lost and far from it.

1 hour ago, bobby1554 said:

I am going to be quite bullish about this. Collingwood played about as well as they possibly could have. Their ball movement and pressure were outstanding. We lost by 7 points and led for the vast majority of the game. Do you think Collingwood before the game would have said “ let’s give them 24 more forward 50 entries, 95 more possessions, 14 more centre clearances and 24 more contested possessions, she will be right mate!” As Goody said, we left the door open by not converting the dominance in the first half. Something that can be quite easily fixed as we saw just under a year ago. Do you think we would be all hand wringing this morning if in that first half our forwards had the same accuracy and luck that Collingwood did? 
 

The players will respond in the next two weeks. Play them again in September? Yes please.

 

The question is do great or even good teams, squander the opportunity:- right on the eve of finals, lock in top 4, everything to play for, and we couldn’t handle the moment. 
 

You’re tall Max but you’re not a [censored] Harlem Globe Trotter. Stop spinning the ball in your hands on your set shot routine. Much harder to hit a moving target. 

Notwithstanding that we were not allowed to play the game, why does one team have as long as they like to get rid of the ball when the other gets constantly called play on?

I thought we played better than Collingwood, we just couldn't maintain it for four quarters

36 minutes ago, binman said:

The pies pressure was incredible in the last quarter. Finals like pressure is a cliche, but that is what it was.

By far best pressure we have faced tgis season.

And we couldn't go with them, which is a shock.

They deserved to win. If they can sustain that level of pressure through a finals campaign they are a real show of winning a flag. 

But from our side it was such a perplexing game tactically.

It was so much like the dogs game in that we didnt control the tempo like we normally do. We allowed it to be a run and gun for the entire first half. Which was working, except we didn't capitalise.

There was only one period- in the first few minutes of the third, where we looked to lock it in, but that was more about stopping their tempo, not us going slow deliberately to take the heat out of the game

And there were other weird things. The crazy number of handballs. That wasn't a pressure thing, at least not in the first half. It was clearly a tactic. We almost doubled their handball count.

And we went next level with our new long clearing handballls forward  into space. So many of them

Then there are the other departures from our template - one tall, melk as a defensive forward (though he played that role in a few games late last year), Gus into the middle, harmes as a sub, Jackson and maxy almost 50 50 in the ruck, may only taking 70 odd percent of kick outs and kicking out less often to the one area (no doubt influenced by not having g a second tall forward).

It looks like they are trying implement some prety significant changes to the game plan, or at least adding some pretty major tweaks.

Lots of people have been calling for less predictability from goody. Well, goody had answered that call.

That unpredictability was a factor in tbe ladt I tgought. Yes their pressure was a huge factor, but we often looked unsure of what we were trying to implement.

 

Melksham on Moore looked a big fail to me. Often Melk was where a KF should be positioned. And the players kicking inside 50 looked confused:- do I kick to an undersized forward, on a gun back, in the best position, or do I kick to someone near the boundary?  
 

5 minutes ago, Sydee said:

I’d say he is looking at tweaks because every other team in the comp has done their homework on our strengths and a few have found a way to beat us (Collingwood being one) 

Normally a team will win that game with the dominance we had - we are incredibly wasteful given the number of F50 entries we have (it’s not just this game) and atm if teams are prepared to run and take risks to move the ball quickly our much lauded back six frankly look pretty [censored] 

Lots of talk about our forward line, but we scored enough to win, even with the ridiculous number of gilt edge opportunities we burnt.

But as you say, our defence was the real problem.

They were clever how tbey spread our talls, and they moved it quickly - though not crazy quickly i didn't think.

Someone on this thread made the excellent point tbat Elliot stayed deep  which stopped may being an anchor, but it also dragged hiibo deep and we got no bounce from him. And Elliot killed him for good measure.

But leaving their tactics aside, all our defenders had mares.

May has been out of form for weeks and Lever looks injured (though I thought he did well on ginnivan). Hibbo had his worst game since coming back in, rivers look flat footed and Salem is nowhere near his best.

 

10 minutes ago, binman said:

Its a good question. 

Maybe goody thinks we need to win the flag?

Whatever the reason, the changes are evident.

Sure, but I don't see why he's left it so late in the season. I'm guessing we're trying to improve our offensive game with these long forward handballs but I wasn't quite aware, were they happening whilst transitioning from HB ?

What I can't understand is why we then pause for 30sec when at HF and basically let all of the Collingwood defence reposition only to bomb it in, usually not to our advantage. I really don't think Goody isn't tactically clever but it makes you wonder.

 

 

2 minutes ago, 1964_2 said:

Melksham on Moore looked a big fail to me. Often Melk was where a KF should be positioned. And the players kicking inside 50 looked confused:- do I kick to an undersized forward, on a gun back, in the best position, or do I kick to someone near the boundary?  
 

Agree.

Which is the risk of playing a defensive forward as it is by definition a role that isn't going to generate much scoring, so if you don't stop the defender intercepting you get little postive impact from the role.

5 minutes ago, Deenooos_ said:

Sure, but I don't see why he's left it so late in the season. I'm guessing we're trying to improve our offensive game with these long forward handballs but I wasn't quite aware, were they happening whilst transitioning from HB ?

What I can't understand is why we then pause for 30sec when at HF and basically let all of the Collingwood defence reposition only to bomb it in, usually not to our advantage. I really don't think Goody isn't tactically clever but it makes you wonder.

 

 

The basic reason is because we want to slow the ball down and create stoppages.

If we don't score but slow the ball down it is a win. Teams are only scoring on us from transition/turnovers or stoppages.

The ball is safe in our F50 unless we allow quick transition, which the pies were able to do in the 2nd half at will at times.

Edited August 5, 20223 yr by COVID Dan

1 hour ago, bobby1554 said:

I am going to be quite bullish about this. Collingwood played about as well as they possibly could have. Their ball movement and pressure were outstanding. We lost by 7 points and led for the vast majority of the game. Do you think Collingwood before the game would have said “ let’s give them 24 more forward 50 entries, 95 more possessions, 14 more centre clearances and 24 more contested possessions, she will be right mate!” As Goody said, we left the door open by not converting the dominance in the first half. Something that can be quite easily fixed as we saw just under a year ago. Do you think we would be all hand wringing this morning if in that first half our forwards had the same accuracy and luck that Collingwood did? 
 

The players will respond in the next two weeks. Play them again in September? Yes please.

 

Credit to Collingwood for getting a win, they have built belief!
 

Agree with your comments above and noticed how dirty Goodwin was in the press conference, could see he felt we blew it!

Another day and same stats would result in a 10 goal win.

Still we’ve lost games to Pies & Dogs in last few games we should have won!

Up to Goodwin and coaching staff to make tweaks to get us back on track.

 

 

Could someone let us know if there has been instances in games that we have played this year where any opposition have openly or guardedly expressed dissatisfaction with umpiring?

17 minutes ago, Dee Viney Intervention said:

You’re tall Max but you’re not a [censored] Harlem Globe Trotter. Stop spinning the ball in your hands on your set shot routine. Much harder to hit a moving target. 

It does my head in

51 minutes ago, Lil_red_fire_engine said:

For those that say they got gifted goals from holding the ball decisions. Maybe we would have if we actually laid a tackle inside 50.

We did. Crisp and Lipinski caught dead cold. No free for either. Inconsistent at best, something else at worst.

2 minutes ago, willmoy said:

Could someone let us know if there has been instances in games that we have played this year where any opposition have openly or guardedly expressed dissatisfaction with umpiring?

Outside of Essendon Fans, who complain every week, I can't think of many.

6 minutes ago, Clintosaurus said:

We did. Crisp and Lipinski caught dead cold. No free for either. Inconsistent at best, something else at worst.

And Pendlebury

6 minutes ago, willmoy said:

Could someone let us know if there has been instances in games that we have played this year where any opposition have openly or guardedly expressed dissatisfaction with umpiring?

The umpires weren't the reason we lost. The free kicks that Elliott got were there. The umpires had a good game barring 1 or 2 errors.