I think behind Essendon in 2000 and Geelong in 2007 we had the largest aggregate winning margin (190 points) across a finals series in the AFL ERA. Collingwood had a whopping 11 combined points last year. There was nothing underserved or fluky about our flag, and any side that only loses 4 games in a home and away season is the real deal. Furthermore, the quarters were normal length in 2021.

It doesn't take away the fact the approximately 15,000 MFC members, 10,000 MCC members and 1,500 AFL members were denied the opportunity to attend the experience of a life time, and probably won't any time soon. That's the only wrinkle on the 2021 premiership (outside of Perth people attending) and it has nothing to do with the club or coach. 

 

7 hours ago, beelzebub said:

It may not suit the sensibilities of some but in the minds of many there is definitely an * next to 21.

Wow, what a Troll

On 03/06/2024 at 10:21, ElDiablo14 said:

Well, Buckley was let go by Collingwood in the middle of 2021. They were a competitive team for the most part of his tenure.

After he had been there for what 9 years or so. It was the best decision they made. Look at clubs clinging to their underperforming coaches like Brisbane and Port.

This is Simon's 8th year. We could see something similar?

It wouldn't be all that bad.

Credit to Goody for the work he's done but some fresh eyes and passion could be just the start we need.

If there's an asterisk next to our 2021 flag, there would be a star the size of Rigel against Richmond's 2020 flag, given the shortened quarters and reduced season length. 

Can't believe people are buying into this "your flag has an asterisk" [censored].

If not winning successive flags is a fluke, then what's that make it - 75 or 80% of the VFL/AFL premierships across all history are flukes?  What a stupid suggestion.

7 hours ago, beelzebub said:

It may not suit the sensibilities of some but in the minds of many there is definitely an * next to 21.

The only way some may remove that is for another flag to be won in reasonable succession.  

Let's do that and everyone's  happy 😊 

If anything, the Tigers premiership ‘20 is the mother of all asterisks. That season was completely compromised. 

1 minute ago, Gawndy the Great said:

If anything, the Tigers premiership ‘20 is the mother of all asterisks. That season was completely compromised. 

or, you could argue, the least compromised for quite some time - everyone played each other once!

Just now, whatwhat say what said:

or, you could argue, the least compromised for quite some time - everyone played each other once!

It ls more the length of quarters, and 4 day breaks and hubs etc. 

Things would look a lot better if we could keep the ball at our end of the ground for five seconds. Not saying this would have been the difference between winning and losing on Sunday, but it can't be healthy having the majority of the team running here, there and everywhere trying to defend for the vast majority of the game. Can't help that JVR was injured, but we need players who can a) take a mark at centre half-forward and b) make a contest inside 50. Petty is in all-time dreadful form, Turner is still green, and I'll charitably call McAdam underdone, so no bloody wonder the ball fangs straight back towards the defenders 11 seconds after they've cleared it.

Brown is almost entirely shot, but if there's no other option I'd much rather him than either Petty or Turner. 

7 hours ago, ElDiablo14 said:

Filth supporters are the first ones to call our premiership the "CoVid premiership".

"Advantage paid" 

A lot of calls to revert back to the old game style. Let's play hypothetical and say that we do that, these are the requirements from the fans:

- No complaining when we constantly bomb it in or kick to pockets. Moneyball approach

- No complaining about not moving the ball through the corridor enough. Can't turn over in bad areas.

- No complaining about slow and patient build ups with possession 

- No complaining about long bombs getting cut off a lot when we play a good intercepting side.

- No complaining that our forward line issues are highlighted more.

- No calling for faster ball movement. We tried it, everyone hated it.

We can go back to this style and it may give us a chance, just be prepared to accept what comes with it.

Edited June 4, 20241 yr by layzie

7 hours ago, beelzebub said:

It may not suit the sensibilities of some but in the minds of many there is definitely an * next to 21.

The only way some may remove that is for another flag to be won in reasonable succession.  

Let's do that and everyone's  happy 😊 

and what would you write in the legend next to the asterisk?

normal length season and games. irregular crowd size and location of games?

if that’s it i couldn’t give AF

6 minutes ago, layzie said:

A lot of calls to revert back to the old game style. Let's play hypothetical and say that we do that, these are the requirements from the fans:

- No complaining when we constantly bomb it in or kick to pockets. Moneyball approach

- No complaining about not moving the ball through the corridor enough. Can't turn over in bad areas.

- No complaining about slow and patient build ups with possession 

- No complaining about long bombs getting cut off a lot when we play a good intercepting side.

- No complaining that our forward line issues are highlighted more.

- No calling for faster ball movement. We tried it, everyone hated it.

We can go back to this style and it may give us a chance, just be prepared to accept what comes with it.

The issue with the new game plan is that it has somehow been worked out by opposition after watching it for the first half and now employing some counter measures. 
 

but it all stems from effort and work rate. We are not losing CP diff and clearances due to the game plan. That is wholly work rate and effort. It was the same against WC. It’s the fact we have dropped away in that area that everything is falling apart. Now is that a result of fitness, depth, form, culture ? Who TF knows, but effort and work rate should be main discussion this week. If we get done let’s not let it be as a result of losing CPs and clearances it’s our 1 wood and engrained in every players DNA. Especially against a VFL side + Daicos. 
 

 

19 minutes ago, layzie said:

A lot of calls to revert back to the old game style. Let's play hypothetical and say that we do that, these are the requirements from the fans:

- No complaining when we constantly bomb it in or kick to pockets. Moneyball approach

- No complaining about not moving the ball through the corridor enough. Can't turn over in bad areas.

- No complaining about slow and patient build ups with possession 

- No complaining about long bombs getting cut off a lot when we play a good intercepting side.

- No complaining that our forward line issues are highlighted more.

- No calling for faster ball movement. We tried it, everyone hated it.

We can go back to this style and it may give us a chance, just be prepared to accept what comes with it.

I’d prefer to play for the future. Work out who will carry us forward and who we need to cut from the list. There is a certain style of play this year and list profile to execute that style. We don’t have it and I’m not sure our 2021 version with this list would stack up. The current style of play reminds me of what Dean Bailey was working towards. 

@layzie

“No calling for faster ball movement. We tried it, everyone hated it.”

We want the fast ball movement.  
We want the fast ball movement.  

We want attacking entertaining footy  

that’s not what we are getting right now 

 Tried it … hardly!!’ our current style is 

1- miss target by foot … turnover footy when under zero pressure 

2- over handballing until the 4th handball in a row is missed or the opposition predicts it 

fast ball movement involves kick handball kick handball run handball break lines break tackles etc etc etc. 

its making quicker decisions 

it’s not standing for 7 seconds then wondering why all options are covered 

play on 

create opportunities 

 

2 hours ago, ElDiablo14 said:

I never mentioned questions marks or asterisk 🤷🏻‍♂️

I wish question marks and asterisks were what you’ve mentioned because compared to your relentless contemptuous bashing of Goody, question marks and asterisks would be very welcome.

Also, just curious… have you known our club under a coach other than Goody? Iirc you’ve been in Australia for a relatively short time so I’m guessing you haven’t. I’m not making a point here, I’m genuinely curious. 

 

22 minutes ago, spirit of norm smith said:

@layzie

“No calling for faster ball movement. We tried it, everyone hated it.”

We want the fast ball movement.  
We want the fast ball movement.  

We want attacking entertaining footy  

that’s not what we are getting right now 

 Tried it … hardly!!’ our current style is 

1- miss target by foot … turnover footy when under zero pressure 

2- over handballing until the 4th handball in a row is missed or the opposition predicts it 

fast ball movement involves kick handball kick handball run handball break lines break tackles etc etc etc. 

its making quicker decisions 

it’s not standing for 7 seconds then wondering why all options are covered 

play on 

create opportunities 

 

I'm with you @spirit of norm smith. My post is merely based on the hypothetical scenario that we change back tomorrow mixed with a bunch of sarcasm of course 🙃

I personally didn't have us top 4 this year and was impressed with Goody implementing the new style. I too think we've hardly seen enough of a sample size yet, I would be disappointed if we didn't stick with it and I'd be happy to persist with it at the expense of a perfect performance or 2 to be honest. 

There will be times when we will still go with a forward half contest game. As Binman said on the pod I also think we could see that this week due to the nature of the game. But at very least the gameplan needed tweaking and I hope we stick with it.

Edited June 4, 20241 yr by layzie

1 hour ago, Supermercado said:

Things would look a lot better if we could keep the ball at our end of the ground for five seconds. Not saying this would have been the difference between winning and losing on Sunday, but it can't be healthy having the majority of the team running here, there and everywhere trying to defend for the vast majority of the game. Can't help that JVR was injured, but we need players who can a) take a mark at centre half-forward and b) make a contest inside 50. Petty is in all-time dreadful form, Turner is still green, and I'll charitably call McAdam underdone, so no bloody wonder the ball fangs straight back towards the defenders 11 seconds after they've cleared it.

Brown is almost entirely shot, but if there's no other option I'd much rather him than either Petty or Turner. 

That is correct Super.  Our forward pressure game is presently almost non existent and a big reason why the rest of the lines are suffering.

Our best pressure small forward is presently playing substantial minutes in the middle.  Chandler is struggling also.

Our KFs bar JVR don't bring it either and McAdam was (is?) a long way off the level physically as well.

Might be better to have Turner try and play a fair chunk of Rivers' role.

Allows Rivers to play a fair chunk in the middle.

Just enough to reduce Kozzy's mid minutes to no more than roughly 20% and the other 80% doing what he does best inside 50.

Edited June 4, 20241 yr by Demon Dynasty

Something is missing, yet to see anyone who has nailed what it was. Over four years we have seen pride and effort in the jumper, that is the reality, last Sunday was a confluence of diabolical events that I am yet to understand. Re the gameplan it worked fine against St Kilda, and there have been glimpses of it coming together this season, but there has to be a rational non emotional reason our execution was so abysmal, it wasn't just the game plan that had us playing [censored]. I was ready to sack McQualter after the game, now I'm scared that the team has lost sone unity for some undisclosed reason. I was hoping to hear that they had a bug.

Not an excuse but with the number of new players this year we are actually witnessing a mini rebuild. Painful and never perfect, I just hope it's not going to miss the output of our older stars.

Also it does kill me that Port have 3 mecurial mids: Rozee, Butters and JHF and we have none. Windsor maybe in 12 months + could maybe be that mercurial mid (or McVee but I don't see it). Pickett is impact only and the rest are all broadsword, fierce and proud) but having holes poked in us by the rapiers. Sydney seems to have a fleet as well. Tying this to the gameplan, we have to bring play back to a contested game, our strength, something about our gameplan does not play to our contested ball strength. 

2 hours ago, Supermercado said:

Things would look a lot better if we could keep the ball at our end of the ground for five seconds. Not saying this would have been the difference between winning and losing on Sunday, but it can't be healthy having the majority of the team running here, there and everywhere trying to defend for the vast majority of the game. Can't help that JVR was injured, but we need players who can a) take a mark at centre half-forward and b) make a contest inside 50. Petty is in all-time dreadful form, Turner is still green, and I'll charitably call McAdam underdone, so no bloody wonder the ball fangs straight back towards the defenders 11 seconds after they've cleared it.

Brown is almost entirely shot, but if there's no other option I'd much rather him than either Petty or Turner. 

100...Plus Kozzy and ANB aren't around the F50 to apply pressure 

47 minutes ago, DEE fence said:

Something is missing, yet to see anyone who has nailed what it was. Over four years we have seen pride and effort in the jumper, that is the reality, last Sunday was a confluence of diabolical events that I am yet to understand. Re the gameplan it worked fine against St Kilda, and there have been glimpses of it coming together this season, but there has to be a rational non emotional reason our execution was so abysmal, it wasn't just the game plan that had us playing [censored]. I was ready to sack McQualter after the game, now I'm scared that the team has lost sone unity for some undisclosed reason. I was hoping to hear that they had a bug.

Not an excuse but with the number of new players this year we are actually witnessing a mini rebuild. Painful and never perfect, I just hope it's not going to miss the output of our older stars.

Also it does kill me that Port have 3 mecurial mids: Rozee, Butters and JHF and we have none. Windsor maybe in 12 months + could maybe be that mercurial mid (or McVee but I don't see it). Pickett is impact only and the rest are all broadsword, fierce and proud) but having holes poked in us by the rapiers. Sydney seems to have a fleet as well. Tying this to the gameplan, we have to bring play back to a contested game, our strength, something about our gameplan does not play to our contested ball strength. 

Get what you're saying DEE but while Port might have 3 mecurial mids they don't have the 6 time AA best ruckman of all time, the best full back of the last 10 years or Christian Petracca. 

Re: rationalising the loss to Fremantle I think we need to accept the players gave up. A handfull towards the end of the first qtr and a handful more at half time. 

The reasons for giving up is what we need the coaches to diagnose. 

I think it's a combination

• 3 players nowhere near the standard 
• 5 playing out of position 
• 5+ simply not fit enough/inured 
• No key forward 
• No CHB
• A terrifying realisation that Fremantle were hungry and we simply couldn't go with them. 

It happened against WCE as well but it wasn't as pronounced because the Eagles aren't as good. 

Fluke the flag?? Nah.. people are simply trolling now.

We absolutely deserve, and earned that flag. We timed our run at the most perfect time and the reason we smashed those teams in the finals was because we had a system and game plan that stood up in finals.

We got challenged in the grand final and could have just crumbled under the pressure but we didn't, we rose to the occasion and did the job.

Flags are incredibly hard to win and anything thinking we fluked it can get in bin. 

2 hours ago, spirit of norm smith said:

@layzie

“No calling for faster ball movement. We tried it, everyone hated it.”

We want the fast ball movement.  
We want the fast ball movement.  

We want attacking entertaining footy  

that’s not what we are getting right now 

 Tried it … hardly!!’ our current style is 

1- miss target by foot … turnover footy when under zero pressure 

2- over handballing until the 4th handball in a row is missed or the opposition predicts it 

fast ball movement involves kick handball kick handball run handball break lines break tackles etc etc etc. 

its making quicker decisions 

it’s not standing for 7 seconds then wondering why all options are covered 

play on 

create opportunities 

 

Couldn’t agree any more. We may use the corridor a bit more but there is no fast ball movement. Why??? Because our forwards all push so high up the ground to help out the backline that when we do win the ball we have very few options ahead of the ball. So we wait while our forwards who amble back into position. There is no sense of urgency or spread. It’s chip, chip, chip and turnover the ball in dangerous positions exposing our backline. We don’t have the skill for overuse of the ball or precision slow ball movement down the ground. People used to bemoan JJ for slowing up play. JJ was not the problem. It’s our structures!!! 
 I know it’s the modern game but FFS Simon be a renegade. Have some stay at home forwards creating space up the ground for line breaking runs, run and carry and long direct kicks into an open forward line giving our players a chance one out in dangerous spots and higher percentage looks at goal.

Edited June 4, 20241 yr by Dee Viney Intervention

2 hours ago, WalkingCivilWar said:

I wish question marks and asterisks were what you’ve mentioned because compared to your relentless contemptuous bashing of Goody, question marks and asterisks would be very welcome.

Also, just curious… have you known our club under a coach other than Goody? Iirc you’ve been in Australia for a relatively short time so I’m guessing you haven’t. I’m not making a point here, I’m genuinely curious. 

 

I know what I was able to research.So, I am kind of aware about the story from Neale Daniher up until now. That includes the dark years, and feel sorry for all of those who had to experience them.

As I said before I'm a sports nuffie so Goodwin won't be the first coach in any sports that I may not be so supportive of, not that I want to bash him or anything. It's just my uneducated opinion on the matter.

I am still learning and trying to be more knowledgeable of the finer details of the sport. 

But what we saw on Sunday, the lack of effort, was definitely very concerning. It felt, at least to me, a lack of care and leadership from the most part of the players.

And I know there may be darker days ahead, no team stays on the top forever. But never going to jump off the boat, not from me.

 

3 hours ago, Dee*ceiving said:

Get what you're saying DEE but while Port might have 3 mecurial mids they don't have the 6 time AA best ruckman of all time, the best full back of the last 10 years or Christian Petracca. 

Re: rationalising the loss to Fremantle I think we need to accept the players gave up. A handfull towards the end of the first qtr and a handful more at half time. 

The reasons for giving up is what we need the coaches to diagnose. 

I think it's a combination

• 3 players nowhere near the standard 
• 5 playing out of position 
• 5+ simply not fit enough/inured 
• No key forward 
• No CHB
• A terrifying realisation that Fremantle were hungry and we simply couldn't go with them. 

Thanks for the feedback, I have no argument against anything you say but curious for thoughts on our gameplan. All the players you mentioned are contested animals, our gameplan is not playing to our strengths. Also cannot argue that heads dropped, but the why they dropped is not just personal, and not typical of the last 4 years.

Only Melbourne supporters would wait 57 years to win a flag, and then immediately find ways to poop all over that flag. 
Insanity.