Jump to content

Featured Replies

Here's a huge speculative jump...

Going by @kev martin's training report, I'd say Hibbo is going to be managed again this week and Petty will replace him down back, which means we get another look at Smith forward to see how that goes. If it's successful, maybe Tomlinson loses his place to Petty the following week.

So I'm going to adjust what I'd do given those players. I'd go really tall, despite the likely weather. 

Tomlinson to Hawkins, Petty to Cameron, May to Rohan, Lever to Henry, McVee to Stengle and Salem to Close.

Hibbo doesn't provide a great deal of run anymore, although he had some impressive burst moments against Collingwood, so I don't think we'll sacrifice too much by playing the 4 talls. May to take a more offensive role this week, and Gus dropping back too.

If the 4 talls aren't working, we could swing Petty forward and rest one of the rucks more, but who knows what Selwyn Griffith would think about that. He would be trying to manage loads, so that last move may not work.

 
34 minutes ago, A F said:

I'd say Hibbo is going to be managed again this week

Hibbo has prepared like this before and still found himself in the team. 

Bowey would also be out of concussion protocols. 

Petty was doing a little bit of forward work today at training. There wasn't much backline preparation out there, though May spent a fair bit of time working with D.Turner. 

44 minutes ago, A F said:

Here's a huge speculative jump...

Going by @kev martin's training report, I'd say Hibbo is going to be managed again this week and Petty will replace him down back, which means we get another look at Smith forward to see how that goes. If it's successful, maybe Tomlinson loses his place to Petty the following week.

So I'm going to adjust what I'd do given those players. I'd go really tall, despite the likely weather. 

Tomlinson to Hawkins, Petty to Cameron, May to Rohan, Lever to Henry, McVee to Stengle and Salem to Close.

Hibbo doesn't provide a great deal of run anymore, although he had some impressive burst moments against Collingwood, so I don't think we'll sacrifice too much by playing the 4 talls. May to take a more offensive role this week, and Gus dropping back too.

If the 4 talls aren't working, we could swing Petty forward and rest one of the rucks more, but who knows what Selwyn Griffith would think about that. He would be trying to manage loads, so that last move may not work.

Is Petty ready after such a long absence?

 
23 hours ago, Redleg said:

I can't see May playing on Cameron.

May is not going to be chasing him up and down the ground at kitty litter stadium.

May will go to the big sook who usually stays close to goal.

I agree with Dee Spencer that it is Rivers or Hibbo or both at different times on Cameron.

Tommo will probably get Rohan and Lever will get Henry.

Salem and Judd will get Miers and Stengle.

I agree

cameron is an aerobic fwd who works up the ground

that doesn’t suit may

didnt Bergman play on cameron?

Bergman has a tank

tomlinson has the tank

 

7 minutes ago, dino rover said:

I agree

cameron is an aerobic fwd who works up the ground

that doesn’t suit may

didnt Bergman play on cameron?

Bergman has a tank

tomlinson has the 

I think May will get Hawkins.


33 minutes ago, leave it to deever said:

Is Petty ready after such a long absence?

No idea. 

I suppose there's an alternative world where May plays on Hawkins, Tomlinson on Cameron and Lever on Rohan, and we rest Hibbo for Oliver.

That way we can keep another small in Spargo for our pressure game.

8 minutes ago, A F said:

No idea. 

I suppose there's an alternative world where May plays on Hawkins, Tomlinson on Cameron and Lever on Rohan, and we rest Hibbo for Oliver.

That way we can keep another small in Spargo for our pressure game.

I don’t get the idea that x plays on y in a zone defence system 

is it hybridised in some way?

Edited by dino rover

Petty will go back into the forwardline when he returns. We are a better side with Petty forward if Tomlinson keeps up his good form. It makes us much more likely to win a flag. 

 
35 minutes ago, dino rover said:

I don’t get the idea that x plays on y in a zone defence system 

is it hybridised in some way?

You still need to be accountable to a 1v1 opponent in a zone, it's just it can change. Most full backs and CHBs play on the same player throughout. At least in our system.

22 hours ago, Return to Glory said:

The reality is that, too many times, we have gone down to Geelong (whether it be favourites or underdogs) and copped some awful floggings and awful umpiring decisions.

And I'm deeply, deeply scarred.

Really? We've basically never been the better team. The only time we were was 2021 and we won. 


6 hours ago, Red and Bluebeard said:

I have no problem with Geelong playing all home games, without exception, in Geelong. The problem comes when they want to move home games to Melbourne to maximise crowds. That is a bit like Gold Coast moving big-crowd games to the Gabba. It seems Geelong can have their cake and eat it too in this sense.

Fair enough 

On 6/16/2023 at 5:38 PM, Jaded No More said:

You might be right but neither Hibbo or Rivers have the height for Cameron IMO. And I’m not sure Hibbo has the legs to go with him for 4 quarters without blowing a calf/ achilles again. 
 

I would put Lever on Rohan because he is the least defensive forward maybe of all time, which will allow Lever to intercept more freely. Doubt Scott would let that matchup happen tho. 

I'd put Tomlinson on Cameron. He is excellent one on one, has a big tank and will allow May ti play deeper on Hawkins while freeing up Lever to intercept. Hibbo would make sense v Rohan while Lever, Riv and Salo will be able to run off the tip rats.

2 hours ago, Kozzie4PM said:

Really? We've basically never been the better team. The only time we were was 2021 and we won. 

Proves my point. So scarred I can't even think straight.

4 hours ago, kev martin said:

Hibbo has prepared like this before and still found himself in the team. 

Bowey would also be out of concussion protocols. 

Petty was doing a little bit of forward work today at training. There wasn't much backline preparation out there, though May spent a fair bit of time working with D.Turner. 

I think as it looks possibly wet and there could be a lot of ground ball, Bowey should play.

I think we're over-worrying about our defensive match ups on Geelong's forwards.

Port's main weakness is their one-on-one defence and it didn't end up being an issue for them because they got on top in the middle and played the game in their forward half.

IIRC Geelong are bottom 4 this year for conceding either goals or scores (or both) from their opponents' inside 50s. They are not repelling entires anywhere near as well as they did last year, and their transition game isn't as strong.

They will be missing Dangerfield and their 2023 season without (fit) Dangerfield suggests they are not a dominant midfield. Even without Clarry, if we bring the midfield heat that we brought on King's Birthday, I'm confident we can get the ball locked in our forward half for long enough to score enough to out-do whatever their forward line manages from their match-ups against us.


28 minutes ago, YearOfTheDees said:

Even a Geelong playing poorly are dangerous on that dungheap of theirs. If we don't bring our best they will beat us. 

Agreed, this would be a lock if it was at the G

18 hours ago, Kozzie4PM said:

Really? We've basically never been the better team. The only time we were was 2021 and we won. 

Max's break out. game was at the Cattery.

Oh and we beat the Cats 3 times at KP in 2021 including the memorable gaol after the siren after being 44 pts down. I know Geelong are scarred by that!


6 hours ago, jnrmac said:

Max's break out. game was at the Cattery.

Oh and we beat the Cats 3 times at KP in 2021 including the memorable gaol after the siren after being 44 pts down. I know Geelong are scarred by that!

I was the cattery for Max's breakout game!! One of my greatest ever days at the footy! I'm just pointing out the reason geelong mostly beat us down there is because they've been much better than us, not because the ground has some mystical quality. I expect us to win comfortably on thurs.

5 minutes ago, Kozzie4PM said:

I was the cattery for Max's breakout game!!

Was that also the same day that Jake Spencer played a ripper of a game that far exceeded anything he did before or after that wonderful match?

On 6/12/2023 at 7:30 PM, BDA said:

Clarry for Spargo.

Chandler on thin ice but should get another go.

 

Pickett on thinner ice. Cmon Kozzie make this Round your Round. 

 

Steve May, as always, will play on Tom Hawkins. May owes him a broken eye socket and a hamstring.

Edited by Cyclops


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.

      • Thanks
    • 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.

      • Thanks
    • 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.

      • Thanks
    • 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.

      • Thanks
      • 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? 

      • Thanks
    • 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?

      • Thanks
    • 528 replies