1 hour ago, Billy said:

Goals from the opposition in time on has killed us for 3 years, yesterday again probably 4-5 goals again from GWS.

Howes really struggled on Toby Greene & Coniglio, doesn’t seem to have the intensity for mine

It's been a problem for us since Hibbo has retired and Riv has moved into midfield.

McVee has been a big out for us.

Howes doesn't have defensive instincts.

Just now, YesitwasaWin4theAges said:

It's been a problem for us since Hibbo has retired and Riv has moved into midfield.

McVee has been a big out for us.

Howes doesn't have defensive instincts.

From memory he was a mid and forward in his junior football.

We have tried to make him into a defender. I think he has been ok so far.

To be fair, playing on Toby is no picnic.

11 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Moving the ball quickly and via the corridor is always the answer when you can!

GWS drop multiple forwards deep. Pretty much use them as decoys or for contests at the top of the square (especially when it’s Hogan). Cadman, Brown (when not rucking) Gruzewski and Leake barely touched the footy. Then their half forwards have room to operate.

Brisbane, Geelong, Hawks all do similar.

Salem, Bowey and Windsor all showed good signs, we have to find a way to get the mids more involved in transition to then get it to the half forwards. 

Longer kicks and less risk made sense in the wet but we should dial up the risk against North 

So by playing 3 forwards really deep that creates more space around the half forward area?  Makes sense especially if the ball is moved rapidly to the half forward area

The 3 that are playing and staying deep still have close checking opponents but they are effectively out of the play if they stay put

Do you think that our Match Committee need to adopt this method?  Or have we adopted the method in part?

5 minutes ago, Adam The God said:

We had 9 to 8 tackles inside 50 yesterday. I really don't think we lost because we had "three lumbering forwards".

We lost because we couldn't convert basic chances in front of goal.

0-15m: 4 shots, 4 goals

15-30: 7 shots, 4g, 1B, 2ns

30-40: 2 shots, 1b

40-50: 11 shots, 2g, 4b, 5ns

50+: 5 shots, 1g, 4ns

We gained expected score inside 30. Lost pretty much all of it on shots outside 40.

Shots outside 40 to the Punt road end which were basically attempts at miracles in to a stiff breeze on a wet day. AJ was 50/1 on that last set shot.

They aren’t basic shots, that’s a forward line and midfield that can’t link up in dangerous areas.

The Windsor run across half forward to find a mark inside 50 and even the Henderson dip and cut back that looked like finding Chandler but sailed on him. Thats what good footy to create real set shots looks like. Bomb it down the line to Max or Temu Max and hope they can convert from 45 or even 55 on the boundary isn’t a genuine plan.

6 hours ago, Macca said:

In all seriousness, losing these games we should win is getting annoying

We had their measure yesterday but found a way to lose (again)

And my point about forward line pressure stands.  We were too tall and slow for their runners

On transition, they did it too easily

That was very predictable even pre game Macca.

Not that we had many alternatives with Kozzy out as the first option small pressure forward.  Melk too, but we are still bereft of one more quality pressure small forward who knows where the goals are.

Chandler was it yesterday but just not at the level to impact which has become a fairly common theme now.  He does pop up on occasions but too few and far between.  Time to look elsewhere imho.

Same with the speedier transition teams.  We're getting burned far too often here.  Especially near the end of quarters or a match.

We need a much larger sample size and need to give the boys a chance to turn these aspects on and/or around.

8 - 10 weeks in should give us a decent indication of how we're fairing or whether we're progressing beyond the glass ceiling and disappointments of 2022 - 2024.

22 minutes ago, DiscoStu17 said:

Also, the much vaunted marking of the GWS backline was not able to take many marks either

They don't need to take marks ... just punch it out of bounds will do

Or punch it to ground and then gather the ground ball. No need to worry about our front & square crumbers ... we don't have them

1 minute ago, Macca said:

So by playing 3 forwards really deep that creates more space around the half forward area?  Makes sense especially if the ball is moved rapidly to the half forward area

The 3 that are playing and staying deep still have close checking opponents but they are effectively out of the play if they stay put

Do you think that our Match Committee need to adopt this method?  Or have we adopted the method in part?

From what I’ve seen at training Chappy is really big on getting at least a couple of forwards deep and in different halves of the field too. Jeffo and JvR were often doing that.

In NFL terms, occupy the safeties with a pair of deep wide outs. Exploit the space underneath.

But the tricky thing is it places more pressure on the mids and half forwards to break through zones. Got to move the ball side to side and with space to find the soft spots now that teams aren’t cramming all 18 up the ground and in one half.

Just watched the replay and I am shaking my head at how many times GWS had someone front and center at the contest and we did not. 

To me that is a basic requirement. You have to have someone there at every contest. 

It begs the question: If GWS players were there, where was their Dees opponent?

5 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

From what I’ve seen at training Chappy is really big on getting at least a couple of forwards deep and in different halves of the field too. Jeffo and JvR were often doing that.

In NFL terms, occupy the safeties with a pair of deep wide outs. Exploit the space underneath.

But the tricky thing is it places more pressure on the mids and half forwards to break through zones. Got to move the ball side to side and with space to find the soft spots now that teams aren’t cramming all 18 up the ground and in one half.

Highly skilled kicking therefore a priority

As an example the Hawks are revisiting how they used to kick the ball in that 3peat era.  Less space to work with these days but nonetheless, still effective with those 25m-30m kicks

Sharp, bullet like passing at a rapid rate to break down opposition defensive structures is what I'd like to see

So where do we sit in that area and can we adapt and adopt? 

The recruitment of Windsor, Tolstrup, Lindsay & Langford the pointer? 

1 hour ago, dazzledavey36 said:

This is poor on Oliver.

 

The first one may not be so bad, he might have expected someone to cover Greene (or maybe not), but the second one will surely be something Goodwin has to focus on in review. That’s the sort of stuff that leads to losing close games. Collingwood’s leaders don’t make that sort of mistake. Granted, they get super lucky with the way the ball bounces to Callaghan but still.

No wonder Langford looked gassed in the final minutes. Bloke ran 22km in a quarter!

 

1 hour ago, DeeSpencer said:

0-15m: 4 shots, 4 goals

15-30: 7 shots, 4g, 1B, 2ns

30-40: 2 shots, 1b

40-50: 11 shots, 2g, 4b, 5ns

50+: 5 shots, 1g, 4ns

We gained expected score inside 30. Lost pretty much all of it on shots outside 40.

Shots outside 40 to the Punt road end which were basically attempts at miracles in to a stiff breeze on a wet day. AJ was 50/1 on that last set shot.

They aren’t basic shots, that’s a forward line and midfield that can’t link up in dangerous areas.

The Windsor run across half forward to find a mark inside 50 and even the Henderson dip and cut back that looked like finding Chandler but sailed on him. Thats what good footy to create real set shots looks like. Bomb it down the line to Max or Temu Max and hope they can convert from 45 or even 55 on the boundary isn’t a genuine plan.

The basic shots I refer to are Max's from 20m out, Tom Sparrow from 40m out directly in front with a near dry ball and seemingly little wind, and Fritta's snap from 20m at the top of second. The latter is a goal Fritta would have nailed at least 30 times in his career, and would surely be 9.5 from 10.

1 hour ago, titan_uranus said:

The first one may not be so bad, he might have expected someone to cover Greene (or maybe not), but the second one will surely be something Goodwin has to focus on in review. That’s the sort of stuff that leads to losing close games. Collingwood’s leaders don’t make that sort of mistake. Granted, they get super lucky with the way the ball bounces to Callaghan but still.

You shouldn't expect.. you simply stay on him until you can communicate the handover with a teammate which he never did

Its the number one rule playing footy. That was poor by him and he's been a well known culprit for the last couple of Howes.

1 hour ago, Macca said:

They don't need to take marks ... just punch it out of bounds will do

Or punch it to ground and then gather the ground ball. No need to worry about our front & square crumbers ... we don't have them

I just don’t think that the GWS back line had it all their own way. Especially considering their domination the previous week.

I think that our forwards competed quite well.
When you throw in a few extra crumbers over the next few weeks - Kozzy, Spargs or Melky - and I think we can be positive about this season.

1 hour ago, Macca said:

Highly skilled kicking therefore a priority

As an example the Hawks are revisiting how they used to kick the ball in that 3peat era.  Less space to work with these days but nonetheless, still effective with those 25m-30m kicks

Sharp, bullet like passing at a rapid rate to break down opposition defensive structures is what I'd like to see

So where do we sit in that area and can we adapt and adopt? 

The recruitment of Windsor, Tolstrup, Lindsay & Langford the pointer? 

Skills are one factor but I think the bigger thing is transitioning our midfield (perhaps beginning with the periphery around the square then including the centre bounce guys) to include more natural outside runners.

Brisbane's midfield aren't particularly great kickers, but Neale is tireless with the way he'll constantly present for those short 15m kicks or run to get involved in handball chains. Dunkley often runs to a down the line position that utilises his nearly key position height. And McCluggage is a gut running machine, and whilst his kicking goes hot and cold his best kicks are beautiful.

Viney and peak fitness Oliver do an ok job at filling in the gaps to get short kicks. Tracc is more of a half hearted lead then stand and point where he wants it. But none of them are known as great selfless off ball runners who constantly repeat lead for the footy. Their strengths fit the strengths of our flag year, bomb it down the line and let them go to work cleaning up from a pack spillage.

Lindsay and Windsor standout as natural run to receive the ball players as well as good kicks and Kolt has a high work rate too. Plus Langford's running to receive the footy in transition was a standout part of his junior game. But they need time, until then it's a matter for Rivers, Pickett and Langdon to try to supplement the guys we have.

54 minutes ago, Adam The God said:

The basic shots I refer to are Max's from 20m out, Tom Sparrow from 40m out directly in front with a near dry ball and seemingly little wind, and Fritta's snap from 20m at the top of second. The latter is a goal Fritta would have nailed at least 30 times in his career, and would surely be 9.5 from 10.

No team ever nails every gettable chance, agree on Fritta and not Sparrow's best strike. I've given up on Gawn kicking set shots, he's the one guy who's better from 40-55 out but expecting Max to kick goals isn't a genuine plan.

1 hour ago, DiscoStu17 said:

I just don’t think that the GWS back line had it all their own way. Especially considering their domination the previous week.

I think that our forwards competed quite well.
When you throw in a few extra crumbers over the next few weeks - Kozzy, Spargs or Melky - and I think we can be positive about this season.

Not sure on Spargo but certainly Melk & Kozzie will add much needed class up forward.  And Tholstrup when he is healthy (forward/mid)

Kozzie will also need midfield minutes as he can be quite dynamic out of the middle

A forward line that is Medium/Tall is what I'd be looking forward to with just the 2 talls ... and maybe Turner if we can work 3 in an efficient way.  

But it's a big maybe so 2 KPF's would do me if we can have 4 or 5 Mediums & Smalls to complement

Turner I see as a utility forward not a 1 or 2 KPF.  So maybe

So it's JVR and Jeffo (or AJ) but not all 3 (IMV)

Along with Petracca up forward (periodically) once we get our expanded midfield up and running (adding Langford & Lindsay to the mix) 

And lastly, Jack Viney as a defensive forward in his twilight years.  See ball get ball and kick goals.  Why not? I might still have  @Adam The God with me on that call !!

So there's a fair bit to look forward to once we get everyone available

Right now, we probably don't have one forward amongst our best 15 players ... but that can change rapidly

Edited March 17Mar 17 by Macca

@DiscoStu17

I might add that too many tall forwards is going the way of the primarily 2nd ruck position

It's a midfielders game so it's one thing to be outpointed by class/ability but the actual numbers as well? 

So the 2 key forwards have to be able to contribute, not just compete

Edited March 17Mar 17 by Macca

21 minutes ago, dazzledavey36 said:

You shouldn't expect.. you simply stay on him until you can communicate the handover with a teammate which he never did

Its the number one rule playing footy. That was poor by him and he's been a well known culprit for the last couple of Howes.

First one is a dead set shocker. 2nd one I'm a bit torn on, because he's heading towards the contest whilst still corridor side. Get numbers to the footy and most of the time you win it or force a rushed disposal which favours you anyway. Jones' lookaway throw/handball has to beat Oliver, then take a series of fluke bounces that even bend towards Callaghan where had it run out further or more across the ground Henderson either grabs it or likely grabs Callaghan.

The reality is we've probably asked too much of Oliver fitness wise in round 1. Which is funny that your autocorrect goes to Howes there because if we didn't have to sub Howes off for stinking up the whole joint we could've kept the extra midfield rotation with Rivers and taken off a tall.

The commentators are also way too generous to Gawn. He wasn't the spare, we didn't have a spare. He was on Keefe and he's failed to go with him.

6 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

First one is a dead set shocker. 2nd one I'm a bit torn on, because he's heading towards the contest whilst still corridor side. Get numbers to the footy and most of the time you win it or force a rushed disposal which favours you anyway. Jones' lookaway throw/handball has to beat Oliver, then take a series of fluke bounces that even bend towards Callaghan where had it run out further or more across the ground Henderson either grabs it or likely grabs Callaghan.

The reality is we've probably asked too much of Oliver fitness wise in round 1. Which is funny that your autocorrect goes to Howes there because if we didn't have to sub Howes off for stinking up the whole joint we could've kept the extra midfield rotation with Rivers and taken off a tall.

The commentators are also way too generous to Gawn. He wasn't the spare, we didn't have a spare. He was on Keefe and he's failed to go with him.

My thoughts exactly 

Learnings ? Goody here’s one stat to share this week 

Melbourne vs GWS. Scores in the first 25 minutes of a quarter vs scores 25+ minute mark 

First 25 mins (all 4 qtrs) Melb 71 GWS 51
After 25+minute mark …GWS 26 Melb 3

Junk time is Dees worst period.  It happens year after year.  Play out the quarter !!! 
 

20 hours ago, Macca said:

With our current forward line woes I can't see us being a threat for the flag.  We might make the finals

Yesterday we had a chance to beat a good team but once again, the lack of marking power and quality up forward cost us

Our midfield strength and backline will always make us competitive but we keep losing games because of a dysfunctional forward line

3 tall forwards not impacting is a recipe for disaster

That was a sample of one! We were probably rusty yesterday. Add to that that was Jefferson's first ever game, Roo had back problems recently and may be 100% soon, Fritta is having terrible patch of form and either recovers his mojo some time or gets replaced perhaps by someone like Disco, we get Kosi back, and if the likes of Rivers, Lindsay, Langford and Windsor can fill in well enough midfield Petracca can spend more time forward.

Right now it's so easy to get stuck in the moment here basing all our expectations on one game/one and a bit rounds. Right now GWS look better than us and other sides had big wins and we're already one loss closer missing the top 2, the top 4 and the top 8. But it's so early! In so many years of following football Melbourne (as well as other teams) after round 1 end up nowhere near my original expectations (good or bad)

 

5 hours ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Learnings ? Goody here’s one stat to share this week 

Melbourne vs GWS. Scores in the first 25 minutes of a quarter vs scores 25+ minute mark 

First 25 mins (all 4 qtrs) Melb 71 GWS 51
After 25+minute mark …GWS 26 Melb 3

Junk time is Dees worst period.  It happens year after year.  Play out the quarter !!! 
 

Do you have stats for previous years? It is quite likely GWS were fitter than us. One of the ways that could show up is a drop-off late in quarters, yes? We should wait for a bigger sample than one.

8 hours ago, Nascent said:

No wonder Langford looked gassed in the final minutes. Bloke ran 22km in a quarter!

 

Wow that's impressive! 🤣🤣🤣 If he can run that in about 30 minutes he could probably run (allowing for exhaustion slowing him down a bit) maybe 75km in 2 hours. If a 19yo can improve and the record for the 42.2km marathon is just above 2hours I think we've recruited the best marathon runner the world will never see!

10 hours ago, CHF said:

Just watched the replay and I am shaking my head at how many times GWS had someone front and center at the contest and we did not. 

To me that is a basic requirement. You have to have someone there at every contest. 

It begs the question: If GWS players were there, where was their Dees opponent?

I noticed this at the game and it was so evident how bad we were at the ground ball in the front half. I guess we matched their tall defenders with our tall forward set up, but our ability to win the ground ball was horrendous. 

I still can't work out why Fritsch is playing so far up the ground. He's still our most dangerous forward a long with Kozzy.