Jump to content

Featured Replies

2 hours ago, Salems Lot said:

I wonder what they are saying over at Linda Crescent, Glenferrie....

They haven't  been there for decades SL.

Edited by old dee

 

Feel like we're due for a shock loss against a bottom team. Hawthorn always seems to come to play against us.

Teams like Carlton underperform. Hawthorn always performs exactly as you'd expect. They're getting Bruest back and their midfield is doing okay.

Should be at least a 7-8 goal win.

Thanks for the considered responses on Petty. Happy to be proved wrong at the moment I think we are below where we should be at both ends of the ground. If we get it right we will be very hard to beat.  

 
3 minutes ago, praha said:

Feel like we're due for a shock loss against a bottom team. Hawthorn always seems to come to play against us.

Teams like Carlton underperform. Hawthorn always performs exactly as you'd expect. They're getting Bruest back and their midfield is doing okay.

Should be at least a 7-8 goal win.

From Big Footy 

 

There’s not much to be happy about forward of centre.

17th for inside 50’s
14th marks inside 50
17th shots on goal
18th goal efficiency from inside 50’s
18th goal accuracy
17th for contested marks

6 minutes ago, jnrmac said:

From Big Footy 

 

There’s not much to be happy about forward of centre.

17th for inside 50’s
14th marks inside 50
17th shots on goal
18th goal efficiency from inside 50’s
18th goal accuracy
17th for contested marks

That's Hawthorns stats right!?


I like Petty back.  I think Petty can be ok as a forward but ultimately is better as a key defender.  

Our success has been with Petty in defence over the past 2 years and he’s a key part of the defence.  

Last week we saw Lever having to man up more on Chol and our defence wasn’t as effective without Lever’s interception marking.   Other club want Lever to be static and defensive rather than come across to spoil or intercept.  Moving Petty forward helps other teams achieve this.  

48 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

knowing how the FD think.

Are you sleeping with one of them, you scamp?

There's another reason why Petty might be playing forward. Goodwin might be playing him there to make Brown and McDonald work harder to get their spots back. When there's little competition for spots, players might become a bit lazy; when they aren't guaranteed a place, they probably work on all aspects of their game better. 

 
4 hours ago, jnrmac said:

Against Geelong he would probably play Stewart and against the Pies probably Mihocek.

Petty wouldn't be playing on Mihocek unless we sent him to the backline.

You probably meant another "M" Collingwood defender.  Murphy or Moore perhaps?

1 hour ago, spirit of norm smith said:

I like Petty back.  I think Petty can be ok as a forward but ultimately is better as a key defender.  

Our success has been with Petty in defence over the past 2 years and he’s a key part of the defence.  

Last week we saw Lever having to man up more on Chol and our defence wasn’t as effective without Lever’s interception marking.   Other club want Lever to be static and defensive rather than come across to spoil or intercept.  Moving Petty forward helps other teams achieve this.  

Petty WAS a member of a Premiership defence, the line from which you win flags.

I understand why the MC have played him forward, but that's over now. Flriting with danger to continue what is really just an experiment based on a few minutes in hte dying stages of the Lions final last year.


11 minutes ago, Demon17 said:

Petty WAS a member of a Premiership defence, the line from which you win flags.

I understand why the MC have played him forward, but that's over now. Flriting with danger to continue what is really just an experiment based on a few minutes in hte dying stages of the Lions final last year.

Reckon this is all just some mud thrown at the wall to see if it sticks?

4 hours ago, Sydee said:

Hmmm and how exactly have you landed on that assessment?

Probably based on his historical body of work, which has shown he gets completely lost in the defensive zone and often gets caught on the wrong side of his opponent. Don't want to speak for TU, but there you go.

55 minutes ago, Demon17 said:

Petty WAS a member of a Premiership defence, the line from which you win flags.

I understand why the MC have played him forward, but that's over now. Flriting with danger to continue what is really just an experiment based on a few minutes in hte dying stages of the Lions final last year.

Not sure about that I think there is more to it 

Our lack of talls in the F50 that can physically compete and bring the ball to ground remains an issue. It probably explains in part why we are so keen to make sure a 6 gamer doesn't get suspended for something that wasn't reportable. Its not like he has been kicking huge bags of goals - its the work he's been doing to compete hard which has kept him in the team.

Consider this

Schache - not great at physically competing in air or ground IMO 

BBB - see above

TMac - seems to be laboring with some sort of injury or just terribly out of form

Joel Smith - injured and only just now coming back and according to @titan_uranus is not smart enough to be a forward (sorry mate couldn't resist)

Fritta - not really a contested beast

JVR - will he play? - does compete well but he is a 6 game player and will struggle if gets defender #1 each week

Matt Jefferson - a long way off being ready

Given the above we have done pretty well to date - having Petty in the F50 has helped IMO not sure how things would have panned out if he had stayed back

Edited by Sydee

1 hour ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

There's another reason why Petty might be playing forward. Goodwin might be playing him there to make Brown and McDonald work harder to get their spots back. When there's little competition for spots, players might become a bit lazy; when they aren't guaranteed a place, they probably work on all aspects of their game better. 

Perhaps, although I reckon it's more likely that Petty is just better at ground level than either of them.

17 minutes ago, Sydee said:

Not sure about that I think there is more to it 

Our lack of talls in the F50 that can physically compete and bring the ball to ground remains an issue. It probably explains in part why we are so keen to make sure a 6 gamer doesn't get suspended for something that wasn't reportable. Its not like he has been kicking huge bags of goals - its the work he's been doing to compete hard which has kept him in the team.

Consider this

Schache - no great at physically competing in air or ground IMO 

BBB - see above

TMac - seems to be laboring with some sort of injury or just terribly out of form

Joel Smith - injured and only just now coming back and according to @titan_uranus is not smart enough to be a forward (sorry mate couldn't resist)

Fritta - not really a contested beast

JVR - will he play? - does compete well but he is a 6 game player and will struggle if gets defender #1 each week

Matt Jefferson - a long way off being ready

Given the above we have done pretty well to date - having Petty in the F50 has helped IMO not sure how things would have panned out if he had stayed back

Couldn’t get past the bit when you compared Brown and Schache…


19 minutes ago, rpfc said:

Couldn’t get past the bit when you compared Brown and Schache…

short attention span 😃 ? or do you think one of them is strong in contested ball situations. 

btw not sure this contested ball stuff if legal anymore 

2 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

There's another reason why Petty might be playing forward. Goodwin might be playing him there to make Brown and McDonald work harder to get their spots back. When there's little competition for spots, players might become a bit lazy; when they aren't guaranteed a place, they probably work on all aspects of their game better. 

I observed he covers lots of terrain according to the tracker

its the lead up work to get kicks out of defence at the hbf and then getting back to be an option in offence

also his defensive pressure in the fwd line will be superior to what bb offers

finally Goody gives things a chance to succeed

being a fwd takes timing craft and connections with ball carriers and that might take a few more games to get to work

A dubious  statement I know, but I reckon I might get more satisfaction in getting JVR  off than a 30- 40 point win v the hawks. Theres probably a tipping point where that changes, maybe a win over 60 points? I hope the players dont feel like I do though! 

How the worm has turned since 2017 when we beat the top of the table hawks and it was THE best dee feeling I'd had for years. 

3 hours ago, jnrmac said:

From Big Footy 

 

There’s not much to be happy about forward of centre.

17th for inside 50’s
14th marks inside 50
17th shots on goal
18th goal efficiency from inside 50’s
18th goal accuracy
17th for contested marks

Geez they’d wanna try harder. 14th for marks inside 50 is not good enough. Should be pushing for 17th/18th

7 minutes ago, Wells 11 said:

A dubious  statement I know, but I reckon I might get more satisfaction in getting JVR  off than a 30- 40 point win v the hawks. Theres probably a tipping point where that changes, maybe a win over 60 points? I hope the players dont feel like I do though! 

How the worm has turned since 2017 when we beat the top of the table hawks and it was THE best dee feeling I'd had for years. 

Couldn't agree more!


 

Bruest returns for Hawks, he’s always good for a few goals against us. Hibberd hopefully fresh for the big task. 
Mitchell Lewis will be a handful for our defenders - in saying that May should be up for his 200th and maybe the whole defensive group will be up for him! Dees by 39pts. #godees #freeVanRooyen


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
    • 34 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
    • 248 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