Leaderboard

Go back to harping upon this chestnut on the Mitch thread.

As Roos said, the most basic philosophy is you need to kick more points than your opponent. That does not mean you need to score 10, 15, 20 goals. Do people not remember Sydney's premiership and flying years under Roos? Slow the game, keep possession, and take your chances. Melbourne controlled the play for much of Saturday, but simply never took the chances when presented. A fit forward line and that would have been a 5-6 goal win. It's easy to say it's "ugly" and boring football when you're losing, but if you can stem the scoring, stop the flow and control the game, you will eventually break through. IMO Melbourne's primary directive for Sunday is to stop West Coast's run: imo they can do it. Then, obviously, it is a matter of scoring more than the Eagles, which at this stage looks impossible. When Roos says "you need to score more than your opponent", it's an assumption that you can stop them scoring TOO much. Roos' gameplan has never really been all-out attack like a Malcolm Blight circa 1989. If you can control the game on a consistent basis, the wins will come. At that point it's all about figuring out HOW to win. This team hasn't figured that out yet. But they have figured out how to control the play. I'm not prepared to write this team off yet. They will break through and it will be glorious.

Some thoughts now that i've calmed down a bit: It was truly woeful match and a very poor performance by the dees - what a waste of $25 After the first couple of goals we looked hesitant and nervous, in contrast to the tigers game where we looked much freerer Often we seemed to forget our possession game and went forward when there wasn't a good options, rather than holding it and chipping it around - Jones was the worst culprit at this. This played into their hand with the loose back man they employed Jones played with heart but made some terrible errors in the first half and should have kicked the goal he missed - we desperately need a captains goal Howe was awful and his miss in the third was crucial Roos made a big blue leaving McDonald on - i couldn't believe it. At one point he was remonstrating with a trainer and was clearly distressed I also thought Roos made a blue withe his forward structure. I wondered why he didn't try to isolate Howe deep in the square and just authorize him to fly for speccys. Also even though it would have robbed Peter to pay Paul i would have loved to seen him try Dunn up forward in the last quarter. We needed goals and Dunn is an excellent contested mark and kick and has played most of his football up forward. Yes that would have exposed us up back but as i say we weren't going to win without taking some risks. it also would have brought JKH into the game If Gawn was fit enough to play at Casey he was fit enough to play for the dees. Should have selected him Dunn is a gun - have never understood the bagging he has often received on DL over the years Frawley made two critical errors in particular his missed handball receive at CHF. Yes it was hot but it was straight to him and they practice taking hot handballs all the time. The goal they got gave them the momentum and we never got it back. His helicopter kick to Byres tat got cut off by Reiwoldt was nearly as bad The Toump played well (not great) and did the job asked of him by Roos. Showed courage on a number of occasions and is a smart, natural footballer What did we have to do to get a holding the ball decision? I could not believe they didn't ping Gwilt - cost us a goal (it was 20 metres out) and any chance of winning The other critical umpiring error was the in the back against the Toump on the HFF. He used his body beautifully to get his player under the ball and would have run free into a vacant 50 yet was pinged. Terrible decision. I thought they softened the rule this year to allow more body contact in the marking contest. Perhaps it only applies to Cloke? Watts was as classy as i've seen a Melbourne player for a long time. But yes needs to attack the player with the ball more often. Perhaps he avoids physical contact but i reckon a big factor is his basket ball background. My son took up BB after years of playing footy and really struggled not to go at the player with the ball. His coaches have constantly tried to get him to hold back and corral more. Watts first instinct seems to be to do the same thing. It's hard to retrain that sort of instinctual reaction. Compare that to Viney who's instinct is to always go at the player. It must be said that sometimes corralling works and creates a turnover but there was a couple of occasions where Watts should have gone hard an low and instead allowed another player to do so I'm no Byrnes fan but i reckon some of the criticism of his game is a bit rough. He played his role acceptably. If he is selected again next week we can assume Roos agrees. If not well the opposite is true. Our inaccuracy was appalling - perfect conditions and it 100% correct that poor kicking is poor football Did i say it was a woeful match and poor performance by us? Will i be there again next week? Yes

ENYAW where have you been? We have missed you....

Can't agree with the notion that Roos was outcoached. In what way exactly? The fact that he kept Tom acDonald on the park when he was injured? What else could he do? Take us down to a bench of 2? He tried to keep him in position and then shifted him to FF to see if he could take a couple of grabs. I don't see any bad coaching in that. You can't possibly be claiming that the terrible kicking for goal was a result of his coaching? That rests entirely with the players who failed to kick them. Tell me exactly what you think he did or failed to do that contributed to this loss. As for the opposition, their tactic was to flood the backline and look to Saint Nick once they got the turnover. Amazing tactical mind at work there. The wrist-slitters need to open their eyes and take a breath here. We lost solely because we couldn't kick straight. There was no great coaching move that made a difference to the game. The injuries were not a deciding factor, nor were the umpires or the coaches. We played with a little too much timidity, which as has been said repeatedly will be alleviated as players get more comfortable with the plan and their teammates, but even that was not a decisive factor. We won the possession count, the tackle count the inside 50 count and broke even on the contested possessions. That in itself s gold given what we've done the last few years. We had 6 players with a disposal efficiency below 75%. Again, we would have killed for that last year. We could go further and say only 2 had less that 60%. We even had more marks inside 50. This was a good night for us. Honestly, the only bad here is that it might cost us a spot or two on the ladder, and I don't see that as all that important right now. It's not like we're aiming for the 8 this year, and going up a couple of spots in the draft order never hurts.

We do this over and over again. Keep eating our own. He effed up. He was reluctant and he never should have agreed to do it, but sh!t happens at footy clubs and he was a great servant and is a great fan now. And I can confirm he watches games and I can confirm he trudges out of the G with the same look of frustration and anger that us 'real' fans do. But keep sticking the knife in - self defeating BS.

Nineteen asked me to post this Volunteer telemarketing has been going for a couple of weeks Tonight "drum roll" we beat the all time record of 65 signups Intrepid diallers were Geoff x 2, Steve, Sarah, Patricia, Perrin, Peter x2, Julian, Tim,Judith, Catherine x 2, John and Heather, I think, you should see the piece of paper Nineteen gave me, so apologies if wrong I also checked every cupboard in the offices, couldn't find a spare tall forward anywhere, although did get to shake Rod Grinter's hand

Are you that clown Chris from Camberwell who rings up SEN with outlandish claims of doom??? If your not find him and sit together at the footy you will be perfect company for each other

So did Gysberts, twice and he's developing out at Norwood. Who would have guessed?

One game and one loss is all it took to bring posts like this out of the woodwork. Sometimes our supporters are too embarrassing for their own good.

Ok, let's look at it unemotionally. You don't seem to understand that his salary is non-negotiable, as there is a contract in place. As such, he is an extremely high value investment and you'd think it's in our best interests to get maximum value for that investment. That will come by getting Clark in the best physical and mental condition possible. That's what giving him time off is aiming to do. Or you could look at it like a rational human being with some semblance of decency, and you'd end up coming to the same conclusion.

It's the bill and teds excellent adventure conundrum isn't it. Bill: Ted, while I agree that, in time, our band will be most triumphant, the truth is, Wyld Stallyns will never be a super-band until we get Eddie Van Halen on guitar. Ted: Yes, Bill, but.... I do not believe we will get Eddie Van Halen before we have a triumphant video. Bill: Ted, it's pointless to have a triumphant video before we have decent instruments. Ted: Well, how can we have decent instruments if we don't really even know how to play? Bill: That is why we need Eddie Van Halen! Ted: And that is why we need a triumphant video! Both: [think for a second] EXCELLENT! (guitar riff)

On a positve note we are 11th on the ladder. Best position we have been for a very long time. I know it won't last but hey u gotta take what u can get when u get it.

All those players named would be dying to come to the Dees, if nothing else, just to add a few flags to their CV. I think our first task is to get rid of sub standard players, adopt the Roos recruiting philosophy of adding a few more good hard players, by trading an early pick for a lower pick and a player for example and starting to climb up the ladder. When we start that climb and show we are on the move, then we can go after a star player or two.

The Spencer hate from last night's game is a historical one. People just remember him being unco and therefore can't recognise what he did. He was excellent last night rucking basically unchanged thanks to Fitzy's injury. Did very well and worked hard. I agree that Gawn should come in, but I think that Pederson may play back if McDonald can't play. I'm not a fan of just plonking a ruckman in the square full time, but it's clear that we need at least some form of target for a long kick inside 50. If it doesn't work then sub him out.

Actually didn't play.

I think more often than not you will find it is not necessarily the difference of opinion, but the way that opinion is expressed.

And I bet crows fans thought the same when they took Dangerfield ahead of rioli, or brad ebert. Hell I bet tiger fans thought that about Cotchin when palmer won that years rising star. The same posters wanting a quick fix on here is getting tiresome. St kilda wouldn't even have wanted Dunstan to play had their midfield been fit. What about the 11 players picked between Salem and Dunstan? Better slag them off too

I was very young at the time but we had been to a lot of matches that year at the G but I can't remember why we were not at the final, nor did we listen to it. The only thing that comes to mind is that we were skiing! Very cliche I know but the family went skiing every September in those days to Smiggins Holes in NSW on the cheap, we stayed in a shearers hut on a farm just out of Jindabyne. I remember I loved the farm more than the skiing. I can even remember the Jindabyne valley and old township before the valley was flooded for the dam. The family was obviously blasé about MFC premierships, we assumed the team would be successful for evermore I suppose.

Come on Lord, wasn't Johnny Cash mentioned in the Bible?

Which is huge improvement on last year where we accumulated no possessions and got nowhere.

Off JKH so quickly? And the constant barrage of Pedersen and Byrnes is a muscle memory. I will let Roos decide how they fulfilled their roles. And Bail had 22 touches and worked very hard. For any of them to be thrown out after 1 game - 3 of them for good - isn't reflective of good player management.

West Coast are quite a big team, we have been depleted of our tall stocks and may have further injuries to Fitz, TMac and maybe Howe. I think it is the perfect time for Stephen Gough and his team to undergo extremely thorough irrigation training at the MCG - All week, hold their calls.

Clint Jones & David Armitage say hi. Yeh, both B-grade. But their midfield has played together much more than ours has, so they combine much better, especially at stoppages. Our midfield (as a combination) will only improve as the season goes on.

you're attitude is disgusting, 1. stop being so entitled, Mitch has issues, we let him deal with them, if he is getting paid during that time has absolutely nothing to do with you, that's between Mitch and the MFC, 2. if we throw Mitch to the wolves now we might as well fold and move to Tassie because it will destroy any culture we have built. 3. Stuie wasn't saying their injuries are similar, he was saying not paying Mitch is setting a precedent that if you are going through tough times you won't be supported by MFC.

In: anyone who can take a mark inside 50 Out: kicking backwards and slow ball movement

Yeah NicNat might pull off an amazing almost mark or almost goal to go with his handful of touches and general confusion about what to do...

Funny about all the scrutiny Jack gets but Kreuzer flies under the radar.

I would say 12 disposals, 40 hitouts, and 9 tackles is better than what we would have got from a fit Jamar last night, so it's not like we have a better option.

we generated 12-13 genuine goal scoring opportunities without our key forwards, smashed them in disposals, it was the injury to Tommy causing the burst from Roo and our indecision, poor decision and finishing that cost us, not a massive error in our structure, and not a lack of effort on our part which is a big step forward

Bit hard on Matt Jones I reckon, he was very good in the second half.

OUT: Pederson (dont slam the door on the way out buddy) JKH (simply not ready, deer in headlights) Byrnes (offers so little it's not even funny) Bail (could one player butcher so many opportunities? Apparently so) IN: Gawn (play him at FF as a stopgap, Maxy's pretty good up forward) Blease (green vest) Viney (give him the 'forward opportunity' you talked about Roosy) Kent (replacement for Bail in the midfield rotation, offers similar disposal but more run)

why do people keep insisting on including jamar in their list of key players missing??!!, FMD, you guys have short memories! can you not remember his string of 0 and 1 posession games last year with 20 hitouts to nobody. the guy is a dud who fluked 1 good season FOUR years ago! jesus christ guys!! also, why is grimes not copping flack in this thread? he was deplorable saturday night. countless occasions of poor skill errors adn selling teammates in to trouble. the biggest liability of a captain in the league. is VFL standard and am sick of seeing him listed to play. Get Clisby in there and get some experience in to him. That [censored] handball to frawley at CHF that resulted in a turnover and goal to the saints sums up grimes for me. should not be captain and should def not be an automatic inclusion.

Actually it was. But I know what you mean.

I think that once our midfield structures improve he will find an "outlet" with a little more ease. However I squirm when Jones is described as elite as this is the one knock on his game. I will not criticise his endeavour, his heart, his continual ability to leave nothing on the park - he is an absolute gem. Watch an elite footballer called Pendlebury - in heavy traffic his hands are pure magic - they are ultra quick and on most occasions when he grabs the ball he has got it out in a split second. Jonesy will often try to bullock his way through the congestion and get wrapped up causing a secondary stoppage. I love Jonesy with a passion and if he can improve this area of the game ( and to a certain extent he needs good outlets to help him) then he will rise to the next level.

Seriously? They had Riewoldt, Dempster and, well, now I'm struggling. They had a rookie upgrade tear us a new one. That's like us bringing Jetta and him having 20 touches. We should have given them a bath and the fact that we were so close when we were so absolutely rooted cattle wise, and still should have won, is enough for us all to drop the excuses. Flat out, we should have won.

The one point of the argument I don't get is the money aspect. So he is taking $35K a week personal leave. If he was on $1K per week that would be ok ? $10K ? What actually is the dollar value cut off point where taking personal leave due to issues is acceptable ?

What makes St Kilda garbage? They had experienced Grand Final players, a Hall of Famer, and the knowledge of the ground. They play more than half their games there for crying out loud! The players went into their shells at the most inappropriate times. TBH I really think it was as simple as that. The two errors across the middle that led to goals, they came when a Melbourne player refused to just bomb it long. There are many variables involved in that scenario. Good and bad response to a lacking forward line. Melbourne had to control the play, keep possession, it did for a majority of the time, but then one error in the worst possible spot and you're on the other foot: making an error at Etihad is costly. It is at every ground, but especially Etihad. I don't understand why Melbourne was favourite. It was a pity bet. The Roos factor. Romanticism. Melbourne has done NOTHING to deserve going in favourite against a team like the Saints. This team will come good.

Cross - never stopped tackling

We had 75 interchanges. 75. We had 20% more I50's than St Kilda. We had more marks inside forward 50. We won the hitouts by 14 with our second or third string ruckman, and a VFL player backing him up. We won the tackle count despite having more of the football than St Kilda. It doesn't lessen the pain, but I have absolutely no doubt that with one forward we would've won that game. With Fitzy playing the whole game, I truly believe we would've won. But that's footy. Our biggest mistake was over possessing the football, too many times the straight running kicker was running through a gap, yet stopped to look to handball to someone. It's basic errors that are made by a team just not 100% in-line with the game plan. St Kilda have it easy, they hit pressure and put it on Roo's head. We never had that easy option and I'm excited to see the difference when we do have a structured forward line whenever that is. Not sure if it would have been able to see on the TV but especially in the first half it was very impressive to watch the game open up when we effectively switched the ball from half back through the middle and watching player's in the MFC jumper spread hard and line up with space in front of them. It was great to watch. Bail was working hard side to side, Watts was general in the middle and Fitzy was presenting well up the line. The overlap we were creating was the best football I've seen Melbourne play since 2010 when we spanked Sydney with hard run. I was absolutely distraught last night, and I got sick of telling myself the same excuses that with a forward line we coulda, shoulda, woulda. The realistic nature is last year we were the worst team and minus Michael Evans having the best quarter of his life we would have won the spoon. You lose your second best key defender and your best key forward, and you're already playing short- you're cooked. Doesn't help our sub was 160cm and weights 70 kilos either. People will tell me all week that Fitzy and Tom Mc are nobodies and them going off shouldn't have impacted the game. Let me be clear, I don't particularly rate Jack F but as soon as he went off, **** did I notice how much we needed him for structure. Never thought I'd ever say I missed him, but he was one of about 4 players we couldn't have lost, and we did. TMac was giving Riewoldt a bath, sadly Nick went on the give Frawley a bigger one. Frawls is a great defender but he's not as athletic as Tom and it showed. I'm upset we lost to the worst team on paper I've nearly ever seen. Hindsight tells me that the signs are there that this football team will be competitive. Round 16 last year I wouldn't dream to be where we are now, we were climbing Everest blind. We've taken a small body blow with this loss, but I won't start worrying until Round 16 this year and the same problems. Come on Melbourne, let's start the climb.

In hindsight, we didn't have a chance. That game answered the question of whether it's easier to replace 4 A-grade mids, or 7 of the 8 best talls on your list? (the 7 being Clark, Dawes, Hogan, Garland, Gawn, Jamar, and then McDonald; the only one of our top 8 talls who played was Frawley; Watts played as a mid; our only other talls are Fitzy, Spencer, Pedersen, and King) The answer is: It's easier to replace the A-grade mids, because you replace them with B-grade mids, and as long as you don't come up against an A-grade midfield, you'll get by. But you just can't replace that many of your best talls ... you can only substitute tall-spuds, or not-talls. Either way, it's a loss that simply cannot be made up for. Then Fitzy and McDonald were both injured 15-20 minutes into the first quarter; we were effectively playing two short from that time on. They may well have been our two most critical players in that game - our only remaining half-decent tall forward, and the one man who could nullify the other side's one matchwinner (who ended up winning the match for them). If it was, say, Bail & Byrnes who'd been injured, we'd still have been playing two short, but it wouldn't have mattered so much. And not only did we lose our two most critical players & have to play 2 short - those injuries totally destroyed any semblance of structure. And any switches that Roos tried only made things worse. Watts or Tyson or Vince to the forward line weakened the midfield; putting Frawley or Dunn onto Riewoldt meant that we lost any chance we might have had of attacking from defence. We have gained some very good midfielders, but that doesn't mean we've yet got a good midfield. These guys are just starting to learn how to play together, and it will probably take them the best part of the season. Plus nobody seems to be able to work out yet where Spencer's going to tap it to (least of all Spencer). But it won't take much for the mids to gel. And Viney in as another clearance in-and-under mid will improve the balance. Oh, and St.Kilda's midfielders may have had less polish than ours, but they were fast and tackled hard, so they were able to nullify us to some degree, and limit the damage of having their star mids out. Newsflash - until our mids work it out and it all becomes instinctive instead of having to think about every disposal, they will do better against a skilful midfield like RIchmond's, and will struggle against a hard & tough midfield of whatever quality. The most amazing thing was that with all these obstacles, we still could have - and should have - won the game. We created far more chances, but they were able to simply make the most out of fewer chances. That's what tall forwards allow you to do. I can understand the frustration at losing to the Saints, but when you analyse it (rather than just react out of emotion), it wasn't so bad. A lot of Demonlanders had way too high expectations. We've definitely improved a lot since last year - we've got the foundation (but only the foundation so far!!) of a game plan, the framework is looking promising, and a lot of the building blocks are there to be put in place, but there's still a lot of building to be done. Roos said during the presser that the players are much better than they think they are, and he repeated that it will take until Round 5 to see the total picture of what he's trying to do. We've still got a way to go until we're a good team. But the signs are there.

Parents weren't even born yet, they arrived 9/10 years later. Gotta feel for my old man, been waiting since '73 to see Melbourne win a GF, still wonders if he ever will. I remember watching the 2000 GF on a deck chair in the loungeroom, hadn't even turned 5 y/o yet, and I was still shattered we lost. Can't forget the night we lost against Freo in the finals of '06, I cried that whole night. Still waiting for another finals appearance.

michie out? nah man, theres no one better to replace him. i thought he did quite well

Well he got 12 hitouts total today in a game they won by over 10 goals, but you can keep buying into the Brian Taylor way of watching footy. Woweeee what a leap...

Lot of smart people on this site. How would the wrist slashers have been had we not kicked 10 points straight? Say 4 goals six points instead? After all 2 were posters... With all the injuries we sustained and lack of available rotations I'd be betting some would be hailing Roos a genius....

Good post, but the above is a powerful exception... Give us Riewoldt and we would have won by 6 goals. He was a class above everyone in that game and is the reason we are slitting our wrists right now. Judging how we will go this season on one game is foolhardy, but I have said since Roos came on board that we are still a poor list and that fact is still showing, but the effort and endeavour is up, the game plan is viable and visible, and I now look forward to games than in trepidation.

Those wanting to bring in an 18 year old rookie ruckman have a loose grip on reality.

That is rubbish, his only problem is some occasional poor and costly disposal. No go, he would run through a brick wall.

I saw him limping noticeably early in the match. I wouldn't be surprised if he was carrying something for the majority of the match.

It wasn't that we had no forwards. It was that they hardly moved and when they did either got in each others way or were missed with the kick. Our ability to let StKilda's VFL starting midfield get easy take aways from the centre was deplorable. We couldn't hit the side of the barn forward of centre yet one of our best two disposing mids in Vince played all of the first half in the forward line. Jack Grimes tries hard but is a liability with ball in hand. We played very stationary, predictable football. Watts was excellent as were Dunn and Jones. Those bagging Toumpas need to watch the game and get over wishing for Wines. He works his arse off to make position, is smart with ball in hand and will improve significantly over the course of the season. The key will be to see the learnings from the game, changes made and what they improve next week.