Finally watched the game and was not as disappointed as I thought I would be.

We were up until the last minute of the 3rd. A last quarter fade out is nothing to worry about when you have nothing to play for.

Impressed with K. Brown, Verrall and Windsor.

The commentators were terrible it's like they didn't know who the VFL players were. Still don't know who no 10 is and he got a fair bit of the ball.

Glad to see Clarry and Salo back.

 

6 hours ago, demon3165 said:

Well one would have thought you try different things when teams get run on's that's what practice is for.

Maybe we thought other things were more important.

6 hours ago, BangBnagBang said:

We know McVee can do that job, moving him onto Bolton would have shown us nothing. Now Goody knows Howes is a long way off it and Howes know what he needs to do to play on a player like Bolton.

This is a good point.

He certainly struggled, be interesting to see if he gets another shot against Carlton.

With Brayshaw & Salem back yesterdays performance puts him further down the order.

8 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

The 2 Windsor kicks that hit targets were lucky shanks that wobbled on to chests, otherwise he missed pretty much every target on the run and some in slow play too.

His role in the side is to take it on at pace and gain metres, plus he’s adapting to the pace of afl footy. In his career to date he’s almost always been able to gain a gap and then steady, he won’t have that luxury at afl level. 

He’ll adapt to the pace and hopefully get more cohesion with his team mates but everything I’ve seen at training has been a lot of missed kicks. Yet reports from Casey days has him lacing it out? 

A really good result for Windsor would be something like a less prolific version of Langdon’s 2020 season where his run was obvious but his radar and cohesion lacking. Or a bit of a Jayden Hunt season where there’s brilliance mixed in with some errors.

The reason why you reckon he can't kick but everybody else can, is because, you're a person that thinks your opinion matters more than fact.

7 hours ago, stinga said:

With Turner injured, Thomlinson, Hore, Adams and Howes not showing much, and Tmac just avarage.   Would it be possible for Verrall to take the tall defender spot and then do a turn in the ruck.

Hmmn interesting scenario!😋

Anyone writing McDonald off will have egg on their face. He will do the same as he did in 21 when he made CHF his own this time it will be at CHB.

5 hours ago, binman said:

It might have felt that way, but its not the case that virtually every ball was bombed in.

If it was the case it would be reflected in the shots at goal data (also in the charts that show inside 50 entries and where goals were kicked from, which I've seen but couldn't find with a quick search).

Given how infrequently we jagged pack marks in those games (or any games really, given how hard it is to take a pack mark these days) and factoring in goals from free kicks and pings from 40 -60 metres, if we bombed it long to a pack say 90% of the time, logic suggests the numbers would be something like:

• 70% of scores from general play (eg crumbing packs, stoppage goals, running shots etc) 
• 30% from set shots (marks, usually one out or on the lead, and frees).

In the blues finals loss we were aprox 50% from general play and set shots.

In our loss to the Pies, a game that was high pressure and slippery, we were aprox 40% from general play and 60% from set shots.

Shots at goal

Team	Shots	G	B	T	Acc.
General Play
Melbourne	15	4	9	33	26.7
Carlton	8	3	2	20	37.5
Set Position
Melbourne	13	5	6	36	38.5
Carlton	13	8	4	52	61.5

 

Team	Shots	G	B	T	Acc.
General Play
Melbourne	9	3	3	21	33.3
Collingwood	4	2	2	14	50.0
Set Position
Melbourne	14	4	5	29	28.6
Collingwood	11	7	3	45	63.6

 

The bottom line is our method works. 

Which is why other teams employ it, just at the tigers did yesterday - which is no surprise since they are the originators of the when in doubt get territory strategy that, with pressure, is the foundation of the game circa 2024. 

It was our accuracy that failed us in the finals not our method. 

Would be curious to overlay set shots from corridor vs pockets during those two games. 

 

 

 

14 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

The 2 Windsor kicks that hit targets were lucky shanks that wobbled on to chests, otherwise he missed pretty much every target on the run and some in slow play too.

His role in the side is to take it on at pace and gain metres, plus he’s adapting to the pace of afl footy. In his career to date he’s almost always been able to gain a gap and then steady, he won’t have that luxury at afl level. 

He’ll adapt to the pace and hopefully get more cohesion with his team mates but everything I’ve seen at training has been a lot of missed kicks. Yet reports from Casey days has him lacing it out? 

A really good result for Windsor would be something like a less prolific version of Langdon’s 2020 season where his run was obvious but his radar and cohesion lacking. Or a bit of a Jayden Hunt season where there’s brilliance mixed in with some errors.

Having a split second less takes some getting used to no doubt.

Technique wise he looks very sound in his kicking.

It'll take time but he has time. 

7 hours ago, WERRIDEE said:

Anyone writing McDonald off will have egg on their face. He will do the same as he did in 21 when he made CHF his own this time it will be at CHB.

Ok lock this in the time capsule - a bold call 

14 hours ago, demon3165 said:

Well one would have thought you try different things when teams get run on's that's what practice is for.

and who says we didnt try things and we found out they didn't work or we need more work on them.

PRACTICE GAME for practicing things

10 hours ago, WERRIDEE said:

Anyone writing McDonald off will have egg on their face. He will do the same as he did in 21 when he made CHF his own this time it will be at CHB.

I support your thought.

18 hours ago, binman said:

Sure, agree totally. 

But it never is, or has been under goody. Nowhere near it. 

It certainly wasn't anywhere near 90% yesterday. 

Come the finals last year every team, including the Pies, basically played a variation of the dees game plan, which includes bombing it long into the forward line. But again, none of them do so 90% of the time. 

I reckon Melbourne's much talked about problems with connecting into a 50 has been over blowing, it's no worse than most clubs, it seems to be whenever Melbourne has a problem or a perceived weakness, the media always say and Melbourne most demonlans posters pretty much say where the worst in the competition, which is absolutely not true, there are many myths about Melbourne football club, myth   they seem to stick,  no 1  myth Melbourne is a slow team, another myrh Melbourne has a dysfunctional forward line. Another myth Melbourne is the only team that bombs the ball into the forward line. Demon land is a very bad place to be after any loss even a practice match, the sky is always falling in.

I didn't ask Fullarton (or Spargo) when he would be back, I simply said, "looking forward to seeing you out there", to which both replied, "I'll be back next week". Time will tell, however, I think the injury to Fullarton was not as severe as was reported.

Just a random observation:

In 6 of our last 8 games of footy including the weekend's game, this is how many behinds the oppo has kicked:

Richmond 8

Carlton 8

Hawthorn 6

Collingwood 6

Carlton 7

Richmond 9 (praccy match)

These behinds are below average for a game of footy and it's not helping us win games. Is this just a coincidence or the oppo getting easier shots at goal on us?

 

For those claimed Tmac will go back in defence and possibly take Tommos spot, I wouldn't hold my breath.

In fact I'm not sure Tmac will play much at all this year. I also think it's worth persevering with Adam as he is a good player that just needs more game time and confidence.

Also of Tmac is fit enough to play at all, he would surely be better fwd where we are lacking somewhat.

Edited February 20, 20241 yr by leave it to deever

34 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Just a random observation:

In 6 of our last 8 games of footy including the weekend's game, this is how many behinds the oppo has kicked:

Richmond 8

Carlton 8

Hawthorn 6

Collingwood 6

Carlton 7

Richmond 9 (praccy match)

These behinds are below average for a game of footy and it's not helping us win games. Is this just a coincidence or the oppo getting easier shots at goal on us?

 

I think you would need to look at the dreaded predicted score to see if those teams performed better than expected. Doubt they would have it for the practice match, but definitely would be available for the others.

2 hours ago, marieisademon said:

I reckon Melbourne's much talked about problems with connecting into a 50 has been over blowing, it's no worse than most clubs, it seems to be whenever Melbourne has a problem or a perceived weakness, the media always say and Melbourne most demonlans posters pretty much say where the worst in the competition, which is absolutely not true, there are many myths about Melbourne football club, myth   they seem to stick,  no 1  myth Melbourne is a slow team, another myrh Melbourne has a dysfunctional forward line. Another myth Melbourne is the only team that bombs the ball into the forward line. Demon land is a very bad place to be after any loss even a practice match, the sky is always falling in.

Well I guess you don't watch many games then, even Goodwin has admitted they had problems with connecting with the forward line the last 2 years.

5 hours ago, DistrACTION Jackson said:

I think you would need to look at the dreaded predicted score to see if those teams performed better than expected. Doubt they would have it for the practice match, but definitely would be available for the others.

From memory, on predicted score we were something like plus 20 against the blues in the finals, plus 12 against the Pies and plus 15 against the blues in the home and away game.

Cant recall the others, but in the praccy match just gone i suspect the final score pretty much reflected the expected score.

BBB's questions - just a coincidence or the oppo getting easier shots at goal on us? - are reasonable.

I think the answers are that, no its not a coincidence and no the oppo is not getting easier shots at goal on us (with the exception of the first quarter and a half against the Pies when we lost our defensive shape and they got some easy slingshot goals - hence the high number of set shots on goal they kicked).

So why the differential? 

Applying Occams' razor, the answer is our kicking skills are below AFL average.

This is exacerbated by our three best players - Oliver, Trac and maxy - all being woeful shots at goals.

By contrast the Pies three best players Nick Daicos, Degoey and Sidebottom/Pendlebury are all brilliant kicks for goals, as is their ruck, Cox.  

Kicking is our Achilles heal (foot?) and has been for 15 years at least i reckon. 

Edited February 20, 20241 yr by binman

I saw none of Sunday’s match bar the last 10 minutes of the seventh quarter. So I just watched the replay, and my biggest concern is that someone named their kid Steely. Steely Green… sounds like it’s come straight off the Haymes colour chart. 😝

22 hours ago, BangBnagBang said:

 

We know McVee can do that job, moving him onto Bolton would have shown us nothing. Now Goody knows Howes is a long way off it and Howes know what he needs to do to play on a player like Bolton. Who by the way is one of the hardest match up going. This is what practice games are for.

 

Your assuming we tried to lock them down

Last year we put McVee on Dusty in the practice match. It seemed to show him what’s required .

This year we gave Howes the unenviable assignment on the brilliant Bolton.

wouldnt it be great if history repeated itself!

4 hours ago, leave it to deever said:

For those claimed Tmac will go back in defence and possibly take Tommos spot, I wouldn't hold my breath.

In fact I'm not sure Tmac will play much at all this year. I also think it's worth persevering with Adam as he is a good player that just needs more game time and confidence.

Also of Tmac is fit enough to play at all, he would surely be better fwd where we are lacking somewhat.

Tomlinson is 30 and has played 170 games, how much more game time does he need? 

Im not saying T Mc is going to be any better but I’m very keen to see if a move down back does unlock some form for him. 

1 hour ago, Jumping Jack Clennett said:

Last year we put McVee on Dusty in the practice match. It seemed to show him what’s required .

This year we gave Howes the unenviable assignment on the brilliant Bolton.

wouldnt it be great if history repeated itself!

That was surely the coaches plan but quite clearly it didn’t repeat itself 

Being at the ground I thought Billings did some nice things.

He was even better on the replay.

Good inside 50 entries, took a courageous mark when he was expecting heavy contact and just looked like a smart and composed footballer who respects his disposal/puts a premium on his ball use.

I would be shocked if he's not in the round zero side and ticks a box that we needed over summer. I'd expect him to get a lot of his ball between the arcs rather than as a small forward that plays deep.

7 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Being at the ground I thought Billings did some nice things.

He was even better on the replay.

Good inside 50 entries, took a courageous mark when he was expecting heavy contact and just looked like a smart and composed footballer who respects his disposal/puts a premium on his ball use.

I would be shocked if he's not in the round zero side and ticks a box that we needed over summer. I'd expect him to get a lot of his ball between the arcs rather than as a small forward that plays deep.

Agreed. Was his first hit-out with us so should get better as he understands his role better and gets the cohesion going with other players.

8 minutes ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Being at the ground I thought Billings did some nice things.

He was even better on the replay.

Good inside 50 entries, took a courageous mark when he was expecting heavy contact and just looked like a smart and composed footballer who respects his disposal/puts a premium on his ball use.

I would be shocked if he's not in the round zero side and ticks a box that we needed over summer. I'd expect him to get a lot of his ball between the arcs rather than as a small forward that plays deep.

Competing for the high half forward role.

Am I right in thinking he is regarded as having a good tank/is good aerobically?

Perhaps I'm imagining that.

Nibbla has one of the two HFF roles (maybe 3 if you include an interchange player rolling that role, and perhaps wing too) leaving Spargo, Laurie, Billings, Brown (though he could play closer to goal too) and maybe the colt fighting for let's say two spots. 

23 minutes ago, binman said:

Competing for the high half forward role.

Am I right in thinking he is regarded as having a good tank/is good aerobically?

Perhaps I'm imagining that.

Nibbla has one of the two HFF roles (maybe 3 if you include an interchange player rolling that role, and perhaps wing too) leaving Spargo, Laurie, Billings, Brown (though he could play closer to goal too) and maybe the colt fighting for let's say two spots. 

Fit enough but Billings historically hasn't done the hard stuff was my impression. As soon as the Saints stopped allowing passengers on defense he struggled to get a game.  Personally I'd give up the extra 4 pressure acts and 2 tackle a game as the 2nd HFF if he can hit McAdam or BF inside 50 once or twice a game.  We kick 1 more goal per game last year we have a percentage of 130+ and the number 1 offensive team, the margins are that slim.