Jump to content

POSTGAME: Rd 10 vs Yartapuulti

Demonland
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

I'm starting to think that anyone who comes in here or the gameday thread making a big statement like "Wow you'd think from reading this thread we lost by 100 points" doesn't actually watch the game and just sees the scores in the paper.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Thanks 2
     
    1 minute ago, YearOfTheDees said:

    That final throw in. Why was the umpire moving towards the Port goals as he threw the ball in. And moving at speed.

    I was hoping that would be questioned in the media.

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    1 minute ago, Redleg said:

    I was hoping that would be questioned in the media.

    Unlikely, they were all in on the narrative.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
     
    7 minutes ago, Clintosaurus said:

    Fox are trying to get Hunter and Viney suspended. Outside of Kath ❤️, they can all get [censored]. Even Garry.

    Interestingly they mentioned the Jonas tackle on TMac may be scrutinised, yet the ump paid HTB. What a joke the maggots are. Cheats plain and simple.

    Brereton on radio this morning supported Hunter then turned on Viney. He's still a [censored].

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    4 minutes ago, YearOfTheDees said:

    That final throw in. Why was the umpire moving towards the Port goals as he threw the ball in. And moving at speed.

    There were quite a few throw ins, esp the latter half of the final quarter that can only be described as 'odd' in terms of the way they were "MANAGED" ..   ODD 😉

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    Just now, beelzebub said:

    There were quite a few throw ins, esp the latter half of the final quarter that can only be described as 'odd' in terms of the way they were "MANAGED" ..   ODD 😉

    I will watch closely today. I thought they threw it in then turned and moved one way or the other. Maybe he just knew it was a bad throw and moved that way. Not saying we could have won but it took any chance out of the equation.

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    1 minute ago, wizardinoz said:

    Port 7 - 1 frees in the F50. Umpires obviously couldn't resist Port's juicy odds.

    Don't want to push gambling but the early odds for next week are a bit much.

  • Quote
    • Haha 2
     
    1 hour ago, dazzledavey36 said:

    Yeah I'm not sure what ANB is adding to the team.

    Should have been dropped last year for some of his insipid games and yet is still getting a green ticket by Goodwin this year.

    When the pressure cooker goes up against quality top sides you can bank your house on ANB becoming a fumbling mess.

    I look at Collingwood and Brisbane and don't see them carrying a ANB type player in their half forward line. 

    The fact that Brisbane don’t have an ANB type player in their forward line is one major reason they have been found wanting in recent years. 

    They lack role players. ANB in form is a critical role player for us. His lack of impact last night is part of the reason we struggled. Not enough forward half pressure, not enough of his link up play. 

    1 hour ago, dazzledavey36 said:

    The whole "backing our brand" notion should have been thrown in the bin straight after the Collingwood loss last year on Queens Birthday.

    To hear Goodwin say that they knew Butters was pretty much smashing us but then refusing to mitigate the damage just proves that not only is he stubborn, but hasn't learnt anything over the off season.

    Who exactly do you think in our 23 last night could have run with Butters?

    And don’t tell me we should have picked Harmes. How many times this year have you said Harmes is cooked?

    1 hour ago, Redleg said:

    There is nothing wrong with backing your system and players, but when it’s not working, there is a lot wrong with not adapting or changing what is happening.

    It would not be stupid to suggest, given the 4 point margin, that putting a hard tag on Butters for the second half would have won us the game, despite everything else.

  • Quote
    • Like 3

    Yes it stings.

    But not worried one bit.

    We have been in darker darker places.

    Salem had a run.

    No injuries

  • Quote
    • Like 5

    3 minutes ago, gOLLy said:

    Yes it stings.

    But not worried one bit.

    We have been in darker darker places.

    Salem had a run.

    No injuries

    Bowey?

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    23 minutes ago, gOLLy said:

    Yes it stings.

    But not worried one bit.

    We have been in darker darker places.

    Salem had a run.

    No injuries

    I guess it's just that it would be a shame to waste this premiership window.

    We already wasted 2022, and this year is not looking particularly positive.

    The competition is getting tougher and we may want to take our chances ,while we still have them, with the current list.

  • Quote
    • Like 4
    • Thanks 1
    56 minutes ago, layzie said:

    I'm starting to think that anyone who comes in here or the gameday thread making a big statement like "Wow you'd think from reading this thread we lost by 100 points" doesn't actually watch the game and just sees the scores in the paper.

    I think you miss the point. It’s not that we just lost by 4 pts, it’s we lost playing a poor brand for 3 quarters and made to look 2nd rate. It’s a brand that many know deep down won’t cut it in September. That’s why I’m seething. 
     

    When the Pies put everything on the line they continually find a way - it’s not a coincidence that they have won so many close games- their method holds up and we have seen It time and time again for 18 months. 

    The game plan still looks suspect and now teams have not only worked us out defensively but are now working on our stoppage and midfield game. 

  • Quote
    • Like 6
    • Thanks 1
    1 hour ago, layzie said:

    I'm starting to think that anyone who comes in here or the gameday thread making a big statement like "Wow you'd think from reading this thread we lost by 100 points" doesn't actually watch the game and just sees the scores in the paper.

    Yes.  You can't just look at the margin.  We were well beaten in the first half and in the last quarter we couldn't move the ball

    Edited by one_demon

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1

    2 minutes ago, Gawndy the Great said:

    I think you miss the point. It’s not that we just lost by 4 pts, it’s we lost playing a poor brand for 3 quarters and made to look 2nd rate. It’s a brand that many know deep down won’t cut it in September. That’s why I’m seething. 
     

    When the Pies put everything on the line they continually find a way - it’s not a coincidence that they have won so many close games- their method holds up and we have seen It time and time again for 18 months. 

    The game plan still looks suspect and now teams have not only worked us out defensively but are now working on our stoppage and midfield game. 

    You’ve undone your own argument by referring to Collingwood. 

    Collingwood get beaten in key areas for 1-3 quarters many weeks. But they win because of their system and belief. They often only need one quarter (often the fourth) to get the job done. 

    That was nearly us last night. Our system is such that we held up well enough defensively despite the ball living in our back half, and whilst they missed some shots, 8 of their behinds were from 45+ metres out. They were taking low-ish percentage shots. 

    Like the GC game, the general vibe amongst non-Melbourne supporters is that last night’s game was a good game of intense, finals-like footy. Many of us on here have set their expectations so high that seeing us in an arm wrestle and struggling to dominate equates to non-competitive or incapable of winning the flag. I don’t agree with that argument. 

  • Quote
    • Like 5
    • Thanks 1
    • Clap 1
    2 hours ago, DeeZee said:

    Our back line just doesn’t seem to be as dependable this year.

    I really think Petty is the key to that as he frees everyone else up to do their thing.

     

    We are allowing far more inside 50’s as well as marks. Midfield and forwards not applying enough pressure when oppositions run hot and losing too many centre clearances. Then again we appear less defensively minded and scoring far more freely this season. This game thought the ball seemed camped in their forward line too often. Despite the wet conditions we couldn’t keep it bottled up when we had it forward. 18 to 6 tackles inside 50 tell a story. Astounding we were still in the game at the death.

    Edited by John Crow Batty

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
    58 minutes ago, titan_uranus said:

     Many of us on here have set their expectations so high that seeing us in an arm wrestle and struggling to dominate equates to non-competitive or incapable of winning the flag. I don’t agree with that argument. 

    So much this. I blame the 2021 finals series.

    Lots of posters can fathom that other teams have good players and structures, its lazy criticism to just blame down performances on effort or structural issues at our end. Port were very good 

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    3 hours ago, DeeZee said:

    Our back line just doesn’t seem to be as dependable this year.

    I really think Petty is the key to that as he frees everyone else up to do their thing.

     

    With the amount of time they spent in their forward line our backs did just fine.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
    1 hour ago, titan_uranus said:

    You’ve undone your own argument by referring to Collingwood. 

    Collingwood get beaten in key areas for 1-3 quarters many weeks. But they win because of their system and belief. They often only need one quarter (often the fourth) to get the job done. 

    That was nearly us last night. Our system is such that we held up well enough defensively despite the ball living in our back half, and whilst they missed some shots, 8 of their behinds were from 45+ metres out. They were taking low-ish percentage shots. 

    Like the GC game, the general vibe amongst non-Melbourne supporters is that last night’s game was a good game of intense, finals-like footy. Many of us on here have set their expectations so high that seeing us in an arm wrestle and struggling to dominate equates to non-competitive or incapable of winning the flag. I don’t agree with that argument. 

    this

    there was little difference between this game and the filth's narrow win over adelaide at the oval - both ostensibly 'superior' teams had purple patches but otherwise had their strengths negated by a side that played hard, disciplined football in ordinary conditions

    the only difference is a) yaartapulti are a vastly superior team to the crom and 2) the filth won

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    2 hours ago, YearOfTheDees said:

    That final throw in. Why was the umpire moving towards the Port goals as he threw the ball in. And moving at speed.

    That throw in was a joke

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    3 hours ago, The heart beats true said:

    Just watched May’s interview postgame. Certainly implies they got a spray at half time. 

     

  • Quote
    • Thanks 3
    2 hours ago, Gawndy the Great said:

    I think you miss the point. It’s not that we just lost by 4 pts, it’s we lost playing a poor brand for 3 quarters and made to look 2nd rate. It’s a brand that many know deep down won’t cut it in September. That’s why I’m seething. 
     

    When the Pies put everything on the line they continually find a way - it’s not a coincidence that they have won so many close games- their method holds up and we have seen It time and time again for 18 months. 

    The game plan still looks suspect and now teams have not only worked us out defensively but are now working on our stoppage and midfield game. 

    I don't think I missed the point at all and that's precisely what I was suggesting with this post. We literally could not be more on the same page.

    It's the people that come on here and make people like you and I feel bad about complaining because 'it was only a 4 point loss" and we should be grateful that I'm talking about. 

    Edited by layzie

  • Quote
    • Like 2
     
    2 hours ago, titan_uranus said:

    You’ve undone your own argument by referring to Collingwood. 

    Collingwood get beaten in key areas for 1-3 quarters many weeks. But they win because of their system and belief. They often only need one quarter (often the fourth) to get the job done. 

    That was nearly us last night. Our system is such that we held up well enough defensively despite the ball living in our back half, and whilst they missed some shots, 8 of their behinds were from 45+ metres out. They were taking low-ish percentage shots. 

    Like the GC game, the general vibe amongst non-Melbourne supporters is that last night’s game was a good game of intense, finals-like footy. Many of us on here have set their expectations so high that seeing us in an arm wrestle and struggling to dominate equates to non-competitive or incapable of winning the flag. I don’t agree with that argument. 

    Thats much the way i see it. We were completely toweled for much of the game yet were still in it all night and could have pinched it in the dying minutes easily. We haven't been playing on the road as well this year as we have the last couple. I think though that our game plan is now much more suited to the G, where we have struggled in the recent past.

    I will also say that Hinkley is a very, very good coach but until now hasnt really had the team to go with.

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    Those that suggest we didnt go toooooo bad .....after all it was only 4 points , think about the real reason we were within a kick.

    Port couldn't buy a goal early on.  

    Had they...well... it's a different conversation for some. 

     

  • Quote
    • Like 3

    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...
    Go to topic listing

    Featured Content

    • 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.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland

    • 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
      Demonland

    • 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
      Demonland

    • 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
      • 210 replies
      Demonland

    • 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/

        • Like
      • 47 replies
      Demonland

    • POSTGAME: St. Kilda

      After kicking the first goal of the match the Demons were always playing catch up against the Saints in Alice Spring and could never make the most of their inside 50 entries to wrestle back the lead.

        • Clap
        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 330 replies
      Demonland
    View All