Jump to content

Featured Replies

Posted

AFL news: Max Gawn on playing injured in finals, Brodie Grundy and what Lachie Hunter will add to Melbourne

Article in today’s Herald Sun tells the story of how Max Gawn was initially ruled out of last year’s semi final vs Brisbane due to a painful hip injury – only to win a last-minute reprieve. A couple of scans on the day before the game earned him a reprieve just as Jacob Van Rooyen was poised to make a shock finals debut against the Lions in his place.

After feeling good and playing well in the first half (the Dees led by 22 points at the main break), it all “came caving in during the second half” and Max struggled to see out the game.

“It was certainly in my head space as the game wore on. But I tried to stay in the moment as much as I could,” Gawn said.

“I was doing quite well to stay in the moment in that game to make sure our team didn’t know there was anything wrong. We had five or six guys in the same position that game.”

We knew that the Demons were in dire straits on the night and it’s been debated and discussed before but we knew we were going into a cut throat final at way under full rat power. We rolled the dice and lost.

 
10 minutes ago, Whispering_Jack said:

We rolled the dice and lost.

Unfortunately if there were 5 or 6 guys in the same position we didn't have the dice to roll.

Edited by rjay

By now we'd all guessed as much that something was wrong with Max, but that sounds really quite harsh.  Not that there was much choice around finals.  Glad we're treating Max and his aging body more carefully this year

 

And yet we had a dominant Casey team full of competent  AFL players that our coach had no faith in.

Sydney also failed dismally at selection  by selecting players on one leg for a grand final.

From various reports the 5-6 probably were:  Fritsch (knee),  Max (back), Petracca (broken leg), Oliver (thumb/hand), Langdon (ribs),  Brown (knee).   Maybe Lever?   All very difficult to replace with someone from Casey. 

To go into a final with 3-4 injuries is risky.  Imv with 5-7 is downright foolhardy and inviting trouble.

Perhaps we compounded the injuries by also selecting players that weren't necessarily best 22.  Would Bowey/JVR have been a better choice than Melksham/Hunt/Rivers (and change some positions).  Would we have not got value bringing on our sub:  Joel Smith (whose selection had to be cover for one of the injured).  Momentum swung early in the last when the injured were spent; no Joel!  No idea why we almost never use our sub!!

Oh, and btw, it would have been helpful if Jackson had played a half decent game to help Max.  A very  poor effort by him in a vital game for his team. 

Not whitewashing the result but imv we beat ourselves in that semi mainly from poor player management decisions before and during the game.

 

Sorry to bring up some 'old chestnuts' but hopefully it doesn't encourage 'whipping boy' posts. 🥺


In 2021 we had a great side and a good run with injuries. Unfortunately in 2022 we had a poor run with injuries.

It takes a good fit side to win a premiership which means that there is always an element of luck involved…..unfortunately.

Fingers crossed for 2023.

39 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

From various reports the 5-6 probably were:  Fritsch (knee),  Max (back), Petracca (broken leg), Oliver (thumb/hand), Langdon (ribs),  Brown (knee).   Maybe Lever?   All very difficult to replace with someone from Casey. 

To go into a final with 3-4 injuries is risky.  Imv with 5-7 is downright foolhardy and inviting trouble.

Perhaps we compounded the injuries by also selecting players that weren't necessarily best 22.  Would Bowey/JVR have been a better choice than Melksham/Hunt/Rivers (and change some positions).  Would we have not got value bringing on our sub:  Joel Smith (whose selection had to be cover for one of the injured).  Momentum swung early in the last when the injured were spent; no Joel!  No idea why we almost never use our sub!!

Oh, and btw, it would have been helpful if Jackson had played a half decent game to help Max.  A very  poor effort by him in a vital game for his team. 

Not whitewashing the result but imv we beat ourselves in that semi mainly from poor player management decisions before and during the game.

 

Sorry to bring up some 'old chestnuts' but hopefully it doesn't encourage 'whipping boy' posts. 🥺

Thanks Luci.  Nice ‘balanced’ assessment and summary.

We beat Brisbane so easily during the year....Let's risk it in a do or die final with quarter of our best players under massive injury clouds.  We are sooooo much better than Brisbane.  We got their measure~!

Dumb coaching, dumb for players to put their hands up to play when under done.

I still question whether Goodwin is the right guy.....Most coaches in the AFL would do great with our list.   Seems way too predictable and uninspiring in a number of areas.....Team selection/ team flexibility/game plan/non use of super sub.  

As a team it looked like it was a grind to play and there seemed to be very little flair after the first five games of the season or so. We tried to win every game in the same or similar fashion.  

Hopefully we allow a bit more creative flair this year!   I fear if we continue to play a dour style we will start off the season great but fade as the season goes on .  It looks boring to play our style, it is often boring to watch.....We got so many players with x factor, allow them to use it!

 

 
44 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

From various reports the 5-6 probably were:  Fritsch (knee),  Max (back), Petracca (broken leg), Oliver (thumb/hand), Langdon (ribs),  Brown (knee).   Maybe Lever?   All very difficult to replace with someone from Casey. 

To go into a final with 3-4 injuries is risky.  Imv with 5-7 is downright foolhardy and inviting trouble.

Perhaps we compounded the injuries by also selecting players that weren't necessarily best 22.  Would Bowey/JVR have been a better choice than Melksham/Hunt/Rivers (and change some positions).  Would we have not got value bringing on our sub:  Joel Smith (whose selection had to be cover for one of the injured).  Momentum swung early in the last when the injured were spent; no Joel!  No idea why we almost never use our sub!!

Oh, and btw, it would have been helpful if Jackson had played a half decent game to help Max.  A very  poor effort by him in a vital game for his team. 

Not whitewashing the result but imv we beat ourselves in that semi mainly from poor player management decisions before and during the game.

 

Sorry to bring up some 'old chestnuts' but hopefully it doesn't encourage 'whipping boy' posts. 🥺

Mind blowing the sub wasn’t used.

Great summation.

To be fair, Goodwin has amended his faults every season, consistently improves.

Player management will be prime… so the big question must be: what will be the issue this year?

Are we repeating history? Seems no need to play and risk Lever and his dodgy ankles today. Get him cherry ripe for Round 1.


1 hour ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

And yet we had a dominant Casey team full of competent  AFL players that our coach had no faith in.

Sydney also failed dismally at selection  by selecting players on one leg for a grand final.

Name them...there was no one at Casey that would have made a difference that's why they went with what they had

 

29 minutes ago, NeveroddoreveN said:

I still question whether Goodwin is the right guy.....

… too bad that ridiculous thread is no longer available, huh. 
🙄 

edit: sorry NeveroddoreveN… I was up most of the night working in order to free up time for today’s match, therefore I’m grumpy. 
Note to self: don’t post on DL BEFORE coffee. 

Edited by WalkingCivilWar

1 hour ago, Lucifers Hero said:

From various reports the 5-6 probably were:  Fritsch (knee),  Max (back), Petracca (broken leg), Oliver (thumb/hand), Langdon (ribs),  Brown (knee).   Maybe Lever?   All very difficult to replace with someone from Casey. 

To go into a final with 3-4 injuries is risky.  Imv with 5-7 is downright foolhardy and inviting trouble.

Perhaps we compounded the injuries by also selecting players that weren't necessarily best 22.  Would Bowey/JVR have been a better choice than Melksham/Hunt/Rivers (and change some positions).  Would we have not got value bringing on our sub:  Joel Smith (whose selection had to be cover for one of the injured).  Momentum swung early in the last when the injured were spent; no Joel!  No idea why we almost never use our sub!!

Oh, and btw, it would have been helpful if Jackson had played a half decent game to help Max.  A very  poor effort by him in a vital game for his team. 

Not whitewashing the result but imv we beat ourselves in that semi mainly from poor player management decisions before and during the game.

 

Sorry to bring up some 'old chestnuts' but hopefully it doesn't encourage 'whipping boy' posts. 🥺

Great post, Luci. 👏 

Incidentally, the Fritta knee thing is true. He sustained an injury during a training session when Greg Stafford accidentally flattened him. He had surgery immediately upon season’s end.

7 minutes ago, rjay said:

Name them...there was no one at Casey that would have made a difference that's why they went with what they had

 

With respect rjay, I’d prefer a fit average quality player to an unfit top 22 player for a crucial final any day of the week. At least they will run out the whole game, instead of collapsing in a heap after half time. If we did in fact have 5-6 injured players then that is incredibly bad luck. Playing those injured players in a final is incredibly poor management imv.


Thought it was obvious for a few weeks players were sore, even Kozzie was in a knee strapping. Not sure players from Casey had the quality. Player management needs to be better this year 

1 hour ago, Lucifers Hero said:

From various reports the 5-6 probably were:  Fritsch (knee),  Max (back), Petracca (broken leg), Oliver (thumb/hand), Langdon (ribs),  Brown (knee).   Maybe Lever?   All very difficult to replace with someone from Casey. 

To go into a final with 3-4 injuries is risky.  Imv with 5-7 is downright foolhardy and inviting trouble.

Perhaps we compounded the injuries by also selecting players that weren't necessarily best 22.  Would Bowey/JVR have been a better choice than Melksham/Hunt/Rivers (and change some positions).  Would we have not got value bringing on our sub:  Joel Smith (whose selection had to be cover for one of the injured).  Momentum swung early in the last when the injured were spent; no Joel!  No idea why we almost never use our sub!!

Oh, and btw, it would have been helpful if Jackson had played a half decent game to help Max.  A very  poor effort by him in a vital game for his team. 

Not whitewashing the result but imv we beat ourselves in that semi mainly from poor player management decisions before and during the game.

 

Sorry to bring up some 'old chestnuts' but hopefully it doesn't encourage 'whipping boy' posts. 🥺

you bet it does😆

4 hours ago, rjay said:

Unfortunately if there were 5 or 6 guys in the same position we didn't have the dice to roll.

That's not true. It didn't just start in the Finals but about Round 13. Some smart tinkering and rolling of dice in the rounds for say 3/4 positions out of our injured crew might have given the team greater run  and carry. 

Agsin in the article in the Sun  today I hope we play McVee today on HBF and use Angus in the midfield along with Sparrow Jordon Harmes and Pickett plus cameo for Rivers as well. We know we can switch mid game so give our younger players a go including Chandler on the HFF as well. JVR needs a better option with less others KPF  just to alienate his chance of all of them  going up together which is a very Melb thing. Refer to first goal for Saints  last week !! 

Don't play injured players in finals or anytime for that matter. By the semi final last year we only lasted 20 mins into the first quarter and then on we were done.


4 hours ago, rjay said:

Unfortunately if there were 5 or 6 guys in the same position we didn't have the dice to roll.

I remember talking about this last year and a few on here were lambasting me for suggesting that the club would be playing injured players.

Happens all the time and we had too many of them and should have looked at who could be replaced. 

I hope the FD sees the depth in a better light this year.

1 hour ago, Wodjathefirst said:

In 2021 we had a great side and a good run with injuries. Unfortunately in 2022 we had a poor run with injuries.

It takes a good fit side to win a premiership which means that there is always an element of luck involved…..unfortunately.

Fingers crossed for 2023.

Agreed.  We had a very good chance to win the semi but doubt we would have won a prelim given our injury list.

Nonetheless, a win in the semi would have saved a straight set exit and stopped the run of third/fourth quarter fade outs.

1 hour ago, Lefty said:

Are we repeating history? Seems no need to play and risk Lever and his dodgy ankles today. Get him cherry ripe for Round 1.

Agree just was thinking the same thing . 
Give McVee a full game and try another youngster. Jake should be ok for Round1 but if he goes off early with another leg/ankle/ knee  type issue and returns to the field it is insanity. Repeating itself AGAIN. 

 
2 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Agreed.  We had a very good chance to win the semi but doubt we would have won a prelim given our injury list.

Nonetheless, a win in the semi would have saved a straight set exit and stopped the run of third/fourth quarter fade outs.

And  rest for injured players does wonders !! 

So easy in hindsight. I was one who advocated that we try and rest more players during 2022, but in the end we were fighting for top4 and couldn’t risk a loss. Geelong got it tight, but are gifted wins at home in the lead up to the finals versus mainly [censored] Victorian sides or disinterested interstate teams - who they could probably beat with most of their senior backline, Hawkins or Cameron and rest from VFL.

All teams would have injured players in finals and would roll the dice to some extent. Sometimes it works (ie Brisbane in 2003) and sometimes it doesn’t.


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?

      • Vomit
      • Love
      • Like
    • 719 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
      • Like
    • 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