Jump to content

Featured Replies

We need to win at the Cattery and put together a big streak there. Only way not to be invited back.

 
8 hours ago, Gawndy the Great said:

Only if JVR is sent to the 2nds or the resting ruck is off the ground or behind the ball. 

It wouldn’t be the worst setup and I think will exhaust every forward combination possible that the club could implement.

I really liked Smith in the forward line - it just felt so much more mobile than BBB and TMac. He has to play for the next 2-3 games to work out whether he settles there. 

That was a real added bonus to see some glimpses of Smith play some very good footy. His speed was impressive.  Also seeing Salo back to his best reminded me how important a player his is for our success. Tommo back to his old form , ( he semed bigger and stronger), was some more icing on the game. With Tommo playing like that, it would definitely allow Petty to continue up fwd, where in his last game, he did very well.

It's not to say I don't want Joel Smith playing foward. It would just make a huge difference to our problematic forward line to have Smith and hopefully Bbb vying for a spot. Good call by Goody to give him a run there. Maybe he was our last resort, but he certainly gets another crack.

17 hours ago, forever demons said:

Dont think you understand what Nibbles does for the team

Neal-Bullen

You are correct.

I don’t understand what he does for the team.

It’s been said on this forum he has a ‘great tank’, also you need to be ‘at the ground’ to appreciate his worth.

Ultimately however a player should be judged on their ability to win the ball and what they do with it. 
That is the essence of the game since it was conceived. 

 
4 minutes ago, Abyssal said:

Neal-Bullen

You are correct.

I don’t understand what he does for the team.

It’s been said on this forum he has a ‘great tank’, also you need to be ‘at the ground’ to appreciate his worth.

Ultimately however a player should be judged on their ability to win the ball and what they do with it. 
That is the essence of the game since it was conceived. 

No real need for me to reply you are right in your points ,thanks for supporting me and Nibbler

12 minutes ago, Abyssal said:

Ultimately however a player should be judged on their ability to win the ball and what they do with it. 

Not necessarily.

A defender can have a great game simply by keeping a star forward opponent goalless.


12 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

Not necessarily.

A defender can have a great game simply by keeping a star forward opponent goalless.

Yes was easier back in the day too when punching the leading forward in the back of the head was an acceptable method.

48 minutes ago, leave it to deever said:

That was a real added bonus to see some glimpses of Smith play some very good footy. His speed was impressive.  Also seeing Salo back to his best reminded me how important a player his is for our success. Tommo back to his old form , ( he semed bigger and stronger), was some more icing on the game. With Tommo playing like that, it would definitely allow Petty to continue up fwd, where in his last game, he did very well.

It's not to say I don't want Joel Smith playing foward. It would just make a huge difference to our problematic forward line to have Smith and hopefully Bbb vying for a spot. Good call by Goody to give him a run there. Maybe he was our last resort, but he certainly gets another crack.

With Smith's speed and athleticism he can replace one of the small forwards Petty stays forward. That leaves 2 mediums 2 keys and 2 smalls, rucks rotate as required 

38 minutes ago, loges said:

and athleticism he can replace one of the small forwards

Good point. As a defender he was good enough to go with Charlie Cameron. So yea, your right he could play by taking a smalls position.  Would make for a really interesting mix of forwards. I hope his form continues as I'd love to see the permutation you came up with. 

 

While the defensive aspect of a forward's game is important, so is their ability to crumb and impact around stoppage.  I don't think Smith is going to replace those functions. 

5 minutes ago, Altona-demon said:

While the defensive aspect of a forward's game is important, so is their ability to crumb and impact around stoppage.  I don't think Smith is going to replace those functions. 

Maybe not completely.  ( That tackle of his was wonderful though) But he could go close to replicating a small crumbing role. Perhaps we have been too top heavy with smalls anyway.  Spargo, Kozzie and Chandler haven't really been kicking heaps of goals lately. I also think Fritta crumbs very well so do we really need all the others?

Edited by leave it to deever


2 hours ago, demosaw said:

We need to win at the Cattery and put together a big streak there. Only way not to be invited back.

We ‘will’ win at the Cattery…

(Just fixed a typo, cheers)

15 minutes ago, Altona-demon said:

While the defensive aspect of a forward's game is important, so is their ability to crumb and impact around stoppage.  I don't think Smith is going to replace those functions. 

But are they?

1 hour ago, loges said:

With Smith's speed and athleticism he can replace one of the small forwards Petty stays forward. That leaves 2 mediums 2 keys and 2 smalls, rucks rotate as required 

I’d love to see this structure given a try, as I think it’s very dynamic and could be a challenge for a lot of teams to match up on. 
 

Petty, JVR, Fritsch, Smith, ANB, Kossie, and Chandler. 

1 minute ago, Stu said:

I’d love to see this structure given a try, as I think it’s very dynamic and could be a challenge for a lot of teams to match up on. 
 

Petty, JVR, Fritsch, Smith, ANB, Kossie, and Chandler. 

My thoughts exactly.  Smith in for Spargo still leaves us with plenty of crumbing potential with the smalls you nominated. I often think Friita is a hard match up but throwing in Smith makes it very difficult. 

3 minutes ago, loges said:

But are they?

I think it's pretty hard to argue that Kosi had a good game against Collingwood. Spargo obvs. got subbed, and Chandler was only a bit better.

Nibbler really plays as a hybrid mid-fielder anyway - and all our smalls have room to improve.  But suggesting that Smith can play as a small forward ignores the fact that he is 1.91 m tall and clearly a third tall option.  

Fwiw I quite like the look of Petty, Van Rooyen, Smith - and I hope they give it a crack at some stage.


9 minutes ago, Stu said:

I’d love to see this structure given a try, as I think it’s very dynamic and could be a challenge for a lot of teams to match up on. 
 

Petty, JVR, Fritsch, Smith, ANB, Kossie, and Chandler. 

That's all fine for the forward 7, but who goes out for Oliver? Please give me the 22 that this 7 fits in. I think you'll find a midfielder misses out that you want in.

With Smith and Petty both playing forward it also gives us a choice if one should need to go and play in the back half. They are both desperately needed marking options forward as well.

2 hours ago, Demonstone said:

Not necessarily.

A defender can have a great game simply by keeping a star forward opponent goalless.

Robert Klomp won the Rank Arena TV, in an Escort Cup I remember. 3 possessions I think. 

1 hour ago, Demonstone said:

Not necessarily.

A defender can have a great game simply by keeping a star forward opponent goalless.

Absolutely, I well remember Southby, Dench, Moore, etc, not only keeping their direct opponent goal-less but also winning the ball and clearing it with great effect.

However, a defender who has had little or no disposals himself yet kept their opponent goal-less IMO would have needed to beat his opponent “one on one”which would have required many effective spoils.

I include that in the definition of “winning the ball”.

Has a defender who has kept  H. McKay Goal-less , 8 behinds and 20 disposals had a Great game ?

 

Maybe team selectors bring back Bowey and thats about it. One small fwd omitted but JJ Smith Tomo stay put. Tbey've earned it. Petty shouldnt return after a  long stretch out and then play at that dreadful Kerak ground down the crusader hwy.

Not even convinced Oliver plays. We can and have beaten  cats  at the cattery.Crowd wont be much of a factor as there wont be many in attendance.

If Oliver insists on playing so be it just dont let his hand get anywhere near Hawkins boot. He'll kick it off.

Edited by Deebauched


    I got to thinking, this will be Grundys first game at the cattery. He first played in 2013 and collingwood havnt played there this century.

So who plays at the cattery, well we have won another one, most down there.

The following is the list from most AFL favoured to most hated. 2000-2023

collingwood.... 0    essendon....2    carlton.....3      hawthorn.....3     gold coast.......7      gws......7      richmond.......8

st. kilda.......11      pt adel......13    fremantle.....14    w.coast........14      w bulldogs.......15     adelaide.....16      sydney.......16

brisbane......17     n. melb.......18         And folks you guessed it MELBOURNE.....19.      In looking this up I noticed that round 14  2015   adelaide  vs  geelong  match was cancelled, can anybody remember why?

Edited by ex52k2
add

Just now, Deebauched said:

Maybe team selectors bring back Bowey and thats about it. One fwd small omitted but JJ Smith Tomo stay put. Tbey've earned it. Petty shouldnt return after a  long stretch out and then play at that dreadful Kerak ground down the crusader hwy.

Not even convinced Oliver plays down there either. We can and have beaten  cats down there. Crowd wont be much of a factor as there wont be many in attendance.

LOL at Oliver not playing if fit.

Why not just drop Trac while we are at it. 

14 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

No

Geelong puts in a list of those teams it wants to play at the MCG.

We're not on it

In simple terms if you can't guarantee 70k at the MCG they're not interested.

Essendon is an anomaly this year due to their unexpected good form.

Going forward if Geelong falters they may well elect to play a few more down there.

Some of the clubs at Docklands could make a fortune if they had a similar stadium deal. Unfortunately the commercial in confidence aspects means we'll never know

My understanding, and I may well be wrong, is that Geelong want all 11 home games at GMHBA, but the AFL rejects that and "makes" them play two home games per year at the MCG against "bigger" clubs to maximise attendances (Collingwood, Richmond, Carlton, Hawthorn, Essendon). 

IMO, Geelong should play all 11 home games at GMHBA and that should therefore require those bigger clubs to go down there. Hawthorn is arguably a smaller club than us these days, and if it weren't for the Easter Monday game should be down in Geelong most years, particularly through this current rebuilding phase. Carlton and Essendon have been down there recently too whilst they've been weaker on-field.

For so long as the AFL refuses to send those five "bigger" Melbourne clubs down there, Geelong will continue to get home games against us, the Dogs, St Kilda and North (in that order) because they can't just host interstate sides (they have to play some of those sides away and don't play them all twice) and regardless they want some Melbourne clubs down there for bigger crowds and better atmospheres.

 
2 minutes ago, ex52k2 said:

    I got to thinking, this will be Grundys first game at the cattery. He first played in 2013 and collingwood havnt played there this century.

So who plays at the cattery, well we have won another one, most down there.

The following is the list from most AFL favoured to most hated. 2000-2023

collingwood.... 0    essendon....2    carlton.....3      hawthorn.....3     gold coast.......7      gws......7      richmond.......8

st. kilda.......11      pt adel......13    fremantle.....14    w.coast........14      w bulldogs.......15     adelaide.....16      sydney.......16

brisbane......17     n. melb.......18         And folks you guessed it MELBOURNE.....19.      In looking this up I noticed that round 14  2015   adelaide  vs  geelong  match was cancelled, can anybody remember why?

That game was cancelled due to the death of Phil Walsh.


Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

Featured Content

  • 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
  • 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?

      • Haha
    • 528 replies