Jump to content

Featured Replies

10 hours ago, Roost it far said:

How bad was AJ’s shot at goal. Thankfully Melksham got it to Langdon who tried to miss. There’s a few bottom 6 players who can’t kick under any pressure. I also thought Tracc’s last quarter miss was pretty poor. Still I ain’t complaining tonight.

Mate that was a shocker. To think he looked to his right, saw an unguarded Trac streaming past & decided to go himself was a terrible moment that we’re all glad we weren’t made to pay for…

Melksham, take the wheel

 

Viney for sharp

Spargo stays in because of lack of alternative. He’s on thin ice. Offered nothing yesterday.

(been a long time supporter but 2021 was 4 years ago. Has to rediscover his mojo to justify his list spot. I sincerely hope he does)

 

Spargo is the weakest link atm. Viney comes in for him. Sharp provides pace and defensive pressure.

Spargs seems to be always running on the spot and only comes into games in the last quarter when the opposition are tired and the game opens up.

1 goal in 10 games is not good enough for a modern day small forward.


The discussion around AJ, Sharp and Spargo exposes one of our biggest flaws, which is depth. Our list is fit yet there's no kids banging down the door for a spot.

Assuming we keep Pickett, Petracca and Oliver, we'll really need to trade future picks to get back into the 2025 draft.

If we beat Brisbane by 11 points, and Brisbane beat Sydney by 60 points in last year's grannie, then we've got this one by at least 12 goals.

No change.

Except Viney for Sharp.

1 hour ago, Nietaphart said:

Spargo is the weakest link atm. Viney comes in for him. Sharp provides pace and defensive pressure.

Spargs seems to be always running on the spot and only comes into games in the last quarter when the opposition are tired and the game opens up.

1 goal in 10 games is not good enough for a modern day small forward.

His shot at goal and pass to Fritta could have been better.

His goalscoring has decreased each year, would be curious to see what shift (if any) there has been in his heat maps.

I don't think it was a drop worthy performance given the Casey performances last 2 games. But he should start getting nervous in a week or two IMO.

Sharp definitely has pace on Spargs but assume he'd probably be the one to make way for Viney.

Chuck/Sharp were pretty equal in pressure acts (11v10) but did note Chuck had 3 tackles to 0.

Edited by roy11

 

Lever and Viney are clearly in our best side but it leads to some tricky decisions this week.

Lever looked like Lever in the VFL and played well (admittedly a much slower game) and I think he will be right to come back.

On finding a spot for Lever, Turner looks like he could be an elite AFL defender and he is probably the best match up for Heeney this week. I am not sure swinging forward and back every game is great for his development. May looks like he is almost finished, injured or a bit out of form but I don't think we will give up on him just yet (plus he is signed for another year). I thought TMac made a few errors but he has been very good this season. Maybe Plugger will make a comeback up forward.

On Viney, I would probably push Rivers back to find the midfield minutes, but Rivers was our top rated player against the Lions and was very good. This means we need to reassign one of the small defenders (probably Windsor). The other option is Kossie/Petracca play more forward. I think Sharp or Spargo is most at risk.

Fritsch can have another strong game as sub to earn his spot back in the 22. (I would like to see him nail his set shots again.)

We are getting close to being able to field our best 23.

16 hours ago, Random Task said:

Sharp for Viney would just about do it.

Spargo probably gets a reprieve with the dees win but first half wasn't great.

Fritsch to start now as long as he keeps bringing that intensity.

Edit: forgot Lever, will he need another run at Casey? If not it will probably mean Turner forward and Johnson out.

I was thinking the same, but then there is no coverage to give Max a rest. So I think AJ will probably retain his spot. It was a nice goal – who said the soccer training was a waste of time?


10 hours ago, Jjrogan said:

……

So how does JV make this centre square balance better. Maybe Oliver should get the tagging role again, it makes him accountable and he's actually really good at it. He didnt give a free kick away and totally blanked Neale's effectiveness. Oliver had 5. Neale had 4. He kept lNewcombe to 19 touches last week. Who will get Heeney. Warner is tough to tag, he's a bit like Trac.

I think Viney will go to Heeney. He may not be a good match in the air, but he will give him pressure all over the ground. Heeney is more damaging when he goes forward and needs someone with a more defensive mindset than Clarry, who will probably go to Warner.

Spargo and Sharp are not receiving much love here, but I wonder if their pressure in the forward line was instrumental in Brisbane not kicking their way through?

Selection pressure is good

16 hours ago, Random Task said:

...

Edit: forgot Lever, will he need another run at Casey? If not it will probably mean Turner forward and Johnson out.

We need AJ to relieve Max. Apart from the fact that he's significantly a better ruckman than Petty or Turner, Petty is too prone to copping a cookie or similar when rucking.

Viney for Sharp. Disco forward. Petty back - far more accurate than Petty.

BTW I was disappointed with Sharp's performance. Three dropped marks albeit that included a contested overhead.

Sharp was replaced quite early by Fritsch which suggests Goodwin was more displeased than usual to make that tactical move when he did. However, if the Match Committee want to pick Viney and play Fritsch from the outset rather than as sub, I would swap Viney for Spargo. I think Sharp makes a better sub option than Spargo. (I wouldn't be averse to both Sharp and Spargo being dropped, but only if there is someone worth the opportunity).

4 hours ago, spirit of norm smith said:

Easy.

In. Viney and Lever (if fit)

Out. Sharp (if only he’d taken his chances) Spargo (not AFL standard by a long way)

Fritsch stays as sub. @Demonland Fritta seemed energized surprisingly as the super sub. Kicking for goal still got the yips

AJ stays in as he loves the contest. 2nd ruck work was ok and did some good bullicking work.

If Lever is not fit, bring in Kynan Brown

You want to keep a guy who had 5 possesions and a lucky goal? Nup not up to it! Id go

In Viney, Lever and Brown

Out A.J, Sharp and Spargo,

Petty to do some ruck work where needed and Disco goes forward!

I'm hesitant to drop AJ for Lever. AJ was solid in the ruck yesterday and his aggression will be handy against Grundy next week.

I still remember Gawn getting absolutely trounced by Grundy and Sydney during the opening round match last year. We need to have a solid backup for him.

Otherwise agree with Sharp for Viney. Spargo would want to play well next weekend as I imagine K.Brown is very much in line.


4 hours ago, beelzebub said:

Something along these lines.

There's a a trap we can all fall in of leaning towards picking a list of 24 odd players .... as opposed..... picking the better TEAM .

The team yesterday worked. You probably don't want to change it wholesale so asking myself what might tweak it, just improve a few things ? Something along SONS line up.

Viney about the only 100% obvious.

Lever , super handy if fully fit. A smallish ? hangs over him.

Sharp or Spargo comes out.

I feel many are too quick to caste the scythe towards AJ. He actually provides something. It doesn't sparkle or shine that something, it's quite rustic but very affective. I'd hesitate dropping him.

Fritta seemed quite keen and alive when he came on. I'd do this maybe once more. It worked. I quite like things that work. Prefer them to things that ought to... but don't.

Goodwin is a fella that prefers not to change much. Here's a week to do just that imho.

AJ isn’t the greatest but he wants to compete which puts him ahead of some others. He was 4-5m behind that brisbane defender and made up the ground to kick an important goal, and his time in the ruck wasn’t bad. I think we keep him in.

Along with most of you, Viney for either Sharp or Spargo would be my only change. Lever to play in the seconds again and be cherry ripe for the next game. Most likely Sharp out as he was the one Goody subbed out so appears Spargo stays.

The knock on effects from having our 3rd best 'forward' ruck instead of Petty or JVR was pretty big yesterday. It meant Petracca wasnt needed as much as forward (94 %cba). When Petracca plays full games in the middle we can (and do) beat anyone.

As an aside, has there ever been a full forward that likes a goal less than Petty. He is always looking to dish off, even after that great grab in the last. He needs to embrace he is a goal kicker and thats up to the FD to encourage him to be a little selfish. Go back, kick the goal. Its okay to miss, but the hunger to hit the scoreboard needs to be there if you're playing forward

4 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

There was a few times AJ was able to physically manhandled Hipwood in the ruck when they both got their turns each. Even at centre circle throw ups he managed to actually get clean tap to our mids.

For now, he stays in the team.

Sydney will both have McInerney and Amartey out but Mills and Taylor Adams should return.

Stop Heeney and Warner and it will go a long way to us winning.

From what I've seen AJ is a reasonable ruck.

Keep him in until the MRO rub him out.

It won't take long with the media getting on him as a "mad cut snake"

16 hours ago, old dee said:

Agree only change Viney in Dull out.

Viney in for Spargo

Sharp is not far away worth keeping to improve form

Lindsay will be a gun 200plus player


3 hours ago, Nietaphart said:

Sharp provides pace and defensive pressure.

He really provides neither. His pace is a myth. He can sustain a run at good pace but he doesn’t burst away from a contest. Spargo’s as quick if not quicker over 5. And then he’s too slow to read the play to consistently pressure.

IMG_5807.jpegMonday Monday morning, San Carlos, reading Demonland …perfect

Edited by radar
Spell

35 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

He really provides neither. His pace is a myth. He can sustain a run at good pace but he doesn’t burst away from a contest. Spargo’s as quick if not quicker over 5. And then he’s too slow to read the play to consistently pressure.

Spargo isn’t quick on any metric or distance unfortunately

 

Viney in and play deep defensive forward - has the body to block for petty , melksham and johnson and can kick a goal. Backmen would be looking over their shoulder. Need Johnson in that second ruck role not only for tap but aggression around stoppages, and he's not slow like JVR.

Keep Sharp ahead of Spargo - taller, can kick further than 30 metres, has pace, and actually kicks the occasional goal that Spargo does not.

Not sure what to do about Lever - all defenders going well and we already have 7 who offer different things (Salem, windsor, McVee, Bowey, May, TMac, Turner) 8 if you count Rivers occasionally. Turner makes the others better because he can play tall, great closing speed and is physical We also need him to have continuity in defence as TMac probably retires next year and May won't go on much longer.

37 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

He really provides neither. His pace is a myth. He can sustain a run at good pace but he doesn’t burst away from a contest. Spargo’s as quick if not quicker over 5. And then he’s too slow to read the play to consistently pressure.

Last week he ran at pace and picked up the ball one handed, ran through hawk defenders and kicked the goal


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.

    • 0 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.

      • Vomit
      • Like
    • 134 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? 

      • Haha
    • 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?

      • Clap
      • Like
    • 421 replies