Leaderboard

A bit of a surprise packet in this, especially in the second half of this year, seems to be James Harmes. When we're down, he consistently seems to dig in and try to break lines, throwing himself at tackles etc. Not always successfully, probably due to a ceiling on his skill level, but he does have a go. Tried hard on Sunday.

Remember the ridiculous hype over NicNat's so-called 'point of the century'? Well what about this ripping goal by Robbie against Richmond at the 1.50min mark of this tribute video? He's out of position in a marking contest in the centre of the ground, effects the spoil and prevents a certain Tigers mark, keeps his feet and is first to the ball, sharks it over an opponent, streams through CHF and dobs it from outside 50m. As Bobby Skilton says in the commentary, it's football at its very best. NicNat sharked his ball from the ruck - look at where Robbie was in the contest, and how quickly he regains his balance. Amazing.

From all reports as good a footballer as he was, he was also a top bloke. in The words of Bernie Quinlan Retired champion goalkicker Bernie Quinlan met Flower on a 1978 playing tour of Ireland and maintained a very close friendship with him thereafter, which even extended to Flower accompanying him to Brownlow Medal counts late in his career as his nominal "date". "It enhanced my life unbelievably," Quinlan said of their friendship. "I don't think he had a bad bone in his body, Tulip. And if he didn't like someone there was a very good reason – they must have been a terrible person if Tulip didn't like them. "He was my hero, not because of his football but because of the way he was as a person. He was a magnificent human being. He just embraced everybody, he had time for everybody."

But why make the same comment every time there is an interview? Personally I just cringe and reach for the off-button whenever I hear an interview because all that the players can trot out are the standard cliches. We all know that action is what we want and that there is no correlation between talk and action. But we also know that these days players and coaches have to give interviews or the AFL goes tut tut or worse. Blame the AFL and media, not the players and ignore threads about interviews (though they are usually more interesting than the interview itself!)

His Heart Left Melbourne long before he walked out the door ? Same with Frawley, both of them can get F....

Woa slow down Col, maybe reserve that one for when we win a final.

I always donate $10 to the Salvo guy outside the MCG. I was aghast when I could not find him on Sunday. I assume they didn't want to take away from the BCNA tin rattlers. If we win on Saturday I will donate $100 to the Salvos the following week.

Disappointed Gawn was talking whilst being interviewed on the radio.

The way I see it, we have a choice. Approach the last two games with the old (Ped) - who comes with some risk, as not all of us are convinced that he has what is needed, or that he'll even be here next year. Has he lit things up when he's played this year? I have liked Ped in the past, but I'd argue that he hasn't, or at least hasn't to the extent that contemplating the second option is out of the question, which leads me to option 2... Approach the last two games with the new (Weid) - who also comes with some risk, but his VFL form is decent enough to warrant a go (although admittedly not Earth-shattering). Look, 2 goals would be a great outcome. Hogan has kicked 47 goals in 20 rounds this year, almost all of them against bottom-feeders (I like Hoges, for the record). I'd gladly take 2 against the Eagles. The kid needs to add mass, but he has good hands, reads the ball well and is a good kick. So, we either go with what we know (but have not been impressed with this year), and miss an opportunity to develop talent. Or look to the future. If we don't play the Weid, we just won't know. If we do, and we make the finals, we will have a kid with some confidence, and options for the future. Adding Kent, Melksham etc. will add goals/goal contributions anyway. Option 2 for me.

100 times this season a team has had a plus 10 inside 50 counter this year. 84 times the team with more inside 50's have won, 1 draw and 15 defeats. Melbourne have lost 5 games this season with 10+ inside 50's. If Melbourne miss the 8 they will officaly be the worst best team in AFL history.

All the talk has been about our tall forwards. To me the biggest problem has been our smalls - Spargo is not ready and Jeff goes missing far too often. Kent must come in along with Melksham and maybe Hannan.

Yesterday I saw a woman wearing blue and yellow socks walking across the road, she tripped over the gutter and landed on her stomach. Pretty sure she was awarded a free kick. Good sign or bad sign?

120 uncontested marks for the Swans shows massive holes in either the game plan, Goodwins lack of nous or stubbornness shows up once again and he should have put a lock on it early in the game.

I also think Brayshaw shows really positive signs of being a game influencer. Wins consecutive contests/clearances and has confidence in traffic to burst forward with momentum and penetration.

Not a name you’d expect to feature as a ‘ follow me type of player’ but in my opinion Melksham has the ability to turn a tide with his precise kicking for goal or passing. Often when we struggle with delivery going forward the Snake bobs up with a goal from nowhere and is really good at lowering the eyes. Maybe more of a ‘Game Breaker’ forward of centre.

Really? The game plan is working? Was it the game plan to: - to let Sydney score 7 goals in a row? Or 6 goals each in the 2nd and 3rd quarters? - or let Sydney with 2 men down control the ball and smash us in uncontested marks because we were too lazy to close them down or control the ball ourselves? - continually kick the ball to Aliir? - let Heeney sit unattended in the backline during the last quarter and clean up every ball that came his way? - let Geelong score 80 points in the first half of round 1 with 20 scoring shots from 24 entries into their fwd 50? - win the i50 count against Hawthorn and lose by 63pts? - get 5 i50s against the Tigers in the 2nd qtr and turn a 12 pt lead into a 20 pt deficit? - let an average player like Mason Cox kick 5 goals? - to win the i50 count against Port by 30. Yes 30! And still lose the game? - to smash St Kilda by 12 in the i50s yet lose the game? - to smash Geelong in the i50 count by 12 and lose the game? As I said. It is irrefutable that the game plan doesn't work against the top sides. Bombing the ball inside 50 to win the i50 count is fools gold. Great you are happy with it but I find it infuriating because we will never go anywhere when we can't defend or stop teams getting a run on. 5 games lost by 10 points or less will be held up high by some as proof we are doing things right ('oh that's what happened to the Tigers last year'). That stat hides a huge amount of rubbish football where we let teams get run ons and kick 5, 6 or 7 goals in a row. The game plan sucks. You can find excuses for every one of the games we have lost against top sides. But they are just that, excuses. We repeat the same stupid mistakes time and time again when under pressure.

I wouldn’t be picking Weed with so much at stake. Completely unproven at AFL level. Pedo can get it done. In: Hibberd, Melksham, Kent Out: Hunt, Hogan, Spargo

Was picked in same draft as Oliver. Roos was all over him. Play the lad. Next year he will break it open.

It's funny that our strength is our ruck/midfield dominance/ability to clear the ball forward, yet we love to play a lose behind play somewhat limiting our dominance by allowing the opposition to outnumber us in our forward line. If i was a coach i would be evening the numbers up in our forward line most of the time, to give our dominance the best chance to be successful (i.e., quick tap to a midfielder at a center bounce and long kick long to an even numbered forward line).

Next time one of our players are interviewed they should refuse to speak and instead break into drills and practice goal kicking.

Sadly that is never going to happen Jones will not be the captain when we win the next flag.

Melbourne has one stand out weakness. And it is not our game plan. Though it certainly negatively impacts on the effectiveness of our game plan. We have had the weakness for 25 years. And it is not mental fragility. Though it certainly creates mental demons and our ability to execute in big moments. Our recruiting philosophy in the last 5 years has exacerbated the weakness. The weakness is that, with a very small handful of exceptions, we are a terrible kicking side and almost all of our players have woeful kicking techniques. Of our top 30 players i would only rate the following players as being above average kicks (and unsurprisingly all have strong techniques): Fritsch, Salem, Melksham, Lewis, Vince, Weiderman, Omac, Oliver, JKH, Hibberd (just), Spargo (but only up to 30 metres) and Tmac (but only when shooting for goal). That is simply not enough players who can be relied on to: hit a basic target, kick clutch goals under pressure, kick a ball to a designated spot, kick to a forwards advantage (put it in front of them, put it on their side of the contest!!!) and critically be trusted not to break scoring chains through basic turnovers. And of the 12 players noted above only 3 are anywhere near elite kicks. Again not nearly enough Our recruiting in recent years has empahsised players who are strong at the contest at the expense of skilled kicks. The best coach of the last 50 years, Alistair Clarkson has recruited all sorts of different players - talls, silky skilled, outside and inside. But there is one skill he has has empahsised throughout his career as coach - kicking. And won 4 flags. We have more talent than the current Hawks side and are certainly stronger at the contest. They are equally inexperienced, albeit with some senior players with much finals experience. And they are also down key players. Yet they are above us on the ladder. In large part because they have more players who are above average kicks. The stat about our goal kicking accuracy against top 8 sides mentioned on Footy Classified was fascinating. It is too easy to say the cause is mental weakness or choking - but not surprising so many so called experts go there given the shallowness of most analysis. Yes mental strength, inexperience and not playing in enough big games are factors. But the real cause is poor technique. Kicking technique is tested by 3 key external variables: environmental (wind, rain, dew, humidity etc), fatigue and most critical of all pressure (big moments, big games etc) The golf swing of professionals (and amateurs for that matter) is a good analogy for kicking technique. The best golfer's swings stand up under those same 3 variables and in particular pressure. Poor techniques don't. Not often enough anyway. Which is why so many brilliant players, like Adam Scott (whose putting technique has always been poor)do not win more often. Perhaps the best example is Greg Norman who was so often unfairly accused of choking. He had technical flaws in his game that were exposed under pressure - namely blocking drives. Tiger Woods is perhaps the most mentally strong player in the modern era but when he had to retool his technique because of his back injury he could not execute under pressure because his swing could not stand up under the variables noted above. Love him or hate but Jack Watts would have nailed his shots if he played in Sunday. And we win that game. Which is why i wanted to keep him. Yes i understand and respect the decision to trade him but i would have kept him simply because he was the best, most reliable kick in our side with a technique that holds up under pressure. And as i said above we simply do not have enough of that sort of player. And please don't throw Fritisch up. We could have traded one of our rubbish kicks - hunt for example - and had both of them in our forward line.

This is, or should be, Sam’s big opportunity and if he grasps it he has a huge future. He reads the ball well, marks it at the top of his flight, and is an excellent kick at goal. Also can give a good team handball. Hope he gets the gig and proves the critics wrong.

Talk Talk Talk. Action please!

And if my Aunty had balls she would be my uncle. Sorry doctor but that just screams not good enough to me. Why is it we all like to find reasons why we did not win when the obvious one is staring us in face. Players not good enough to win the games and coaching that is less than wonderful are the reasons

That stat changes all the time depending on who is in the 8. He has kicked 4 against the Cats this year and they've spent most of the season inside the eight.

Equally, though, kicking snags from 35 out should be bread and butter. At least at a better rate than 20% (4.16).

Its the 5% im worried about!!

Still a baby, he shouldn’t be judged yet. 2019 will be an important year for Sam, that may all begin this week. Goodwin has to throw the side around, just tell them to “Go for it”

"We're a high scoring team and that the only thing wrong on Sunday was the goal kicking. No choke, just didn't execute well." Did anyone watch any of the match? We were headless chooks. And that probably affected the goalkicking. And then the multiple muffed chances affected the players' mental state further. Playing catch up in the last flattered us on the scoreboard. "Our game plan is working, we just need to fine tune it." How often have you seen this scenario play out? We're playing well, scoring well, then there's a change of momentum. Suddenly when we have the ball, there's no one to give it to. We end up playing frantic ring a rosie with handpasses until someone long bombs it, either to a contest where we're outnumbered, or to a contest that is to the oppo's advantage. And then when the oppo have it, they seem to be able to move the ball with amazing freedom and we can't lay a finger on them! Why can they do it and we can't? I've seen this over and over this season. Even against GCS there were traces of it in the 3rd quarter. The facts are brutally simple. We don't beat top sides. We cannot compete with the top sides. Even with our suspect game plan, we can score enough to make it close on the scoreboard, but can't get to the finish line. Game plans can get fixed. Look at Richmond. Enter Justin Leppitsch, suddenly they are a fortress in defence. Fragile minds are harder to fix.

Swallow my pride and overlook his wastefulness during the year by describing Tyson’s game as: prolific, and valuable

Maybe I'm a pessimist - I think we've only got 4 players that can step up and turn a game - and 'drag the rest of the team along' - those that would be willing and have capacity to do so. Gawn, Oliver, TMAC and Viney when fit. It might be a reductionists way of looking at it - but I still don't think we've got the cattle at this point in time....with all due respect to the 40-60 game players. Again the off season will be exciting to see what/if we can get some silk...

Jeff Farmer

Scott Thompson

There you go... You see I think he does provide a genuine physical contest. What I would like to see him do more of is hold his grabs. Time at AFL now will tell us if he's a keeper or not. Has to come in...

I was simply trying to get behind some of the narrative from our club reps, commentators and DL posters. I wasn't having a go at you - your post provided that vehicle. It wasn't very obvious in my post but I was trying to use 'measures' ie that relate to an outcome which together tell a story, rather than raw statistics which at face value can look good but not say a lot, especially when used in isolation. It took me quite a while to wade thru AFL match day reports to develop the 'measures'. And, as you have a young family there is no need to spend too much time on a response - I accept that you are a constant glass half full person. I don't mind if you don't reply - we will probably only get bogged down in the minutiae or semantics, then agree to disagree or I just let you have the last word ... ?

I'm confident Weideman will make it as an AFL player. It's someone else's (good) idea - if he doesn't make it as a forward he would make a very good key defender - he's strong in the air, clean at ground level for his size and is a beautiful kick. IMO he has to play this week in Hogan's absence. We've got to bite the bullet and give him his opportunity. In the medium term we do have a problem fitting him into the 22 with TMac and Hogan locking in the 2 tall forward spots and barring long-term injury to either (both have had foot troubles) or a move by Hogan back to Perth - he's going to be at Casey and that will not fulfill his ambitions or capability. If Hogan and TMac look good for 2019 pre-season, IMO it would be worth trying him down back over that period. We could retain T.Smith OR Pedo as willing depth in the key forward area In the long run down back we've got Lever, OMac and Frost (who has enhanced his reputation strongly) too, with Petty and Keilty as willing developing depth. We've got one of two promising talls on our list that are likely to be looking for opportunities elsewhere in the medium term - that's a good problem to have.

If we don't think we can play finals, by all means play Weideman for the next two weeks. He is not even close to AFL standard at present, so a decent reality check might be the best thing to spur him to put in a massive pre season. He needs to get fitter, stronger, tougher, smarter - the whole lot. If we think finals are achievable, and I think this week is very winnable, then Goodwin needs to finds the 22 most in form, seasoned footballers he has this week. If that means playing a small forward line so be it. If he wants to replace Hogan with another tall, Weideman's inability to provide a genuine physical contest makes him a liability against good sides.

Dude, check out the date of when those posts were made

Which stats suggest we can more than compete with the 'top sides'? More i50 - the ball often bounces out again. It is often just ping-pong. i50 to score conversion is a better measure. We have been outdone on conversion rate in most losses. More scoring shots - doesn't look so good when 'rushed behinds' are removed because their defence set up better than our forwards or the defence pressure on 'snaps' is so high. Goal/Behind ratio. Can't be bothered redoing the scores but our poor goal/behind ratio isn't just set shot composure, it is also op defense structures/tactics and our forward structures/tactics. They harass, we fumble. High contested possessions - terrific, except when the outplay us with the less taxing uncontested precision kicks/handballs and kill us because we can't get there to create a contest. It is the controlled 'uncontested possessions' that hurt us when we lose. Hawthorn, Sydney and to some extent Collingwood used this to perfection. Note: it is also how WCE beat Rich this year. Hit outs/Clearances - excellent at hitouts, except look at the losses vs Hawks, Sydney, Richmond - they forgo the hit outs and rove Max brilliantly to win the clearances so were able to neutralise our main weapon. (Coll have Grundy who neutralised Max's impact). League high score for this year - Cumulative percentage of 74% against the top 9 teams. Tackling? We have been out tackled in nearly every game against the 'top sides' As that analysis shows, the top side's tactics to beat us have been very very similar: Neutralise Max, control possessions, out tackle us, crowd our forward line, open up their own plus a few other tricks (especially from Collingwood). It is a pattern to which we have not found answers. I've had a look at the games we lost to 'top sides' (and Geelong) this year and the measures I have noted above we have consistently been beaten on. And, just to rub salt into the wound the only club to not beat a 'top side' is Carlton. There are two clubs who have beaten only one 'top side' are Collinwood and St kilda and in both cases it was us. If you truly think a 'fix' here and a 'tweak' there are going to solve our problems against the way the top sides beat us then you are either not paying attention or not giving their team and their coaches enough credit. So please less of the 'faith' and the platitudes and provide some stats that suggest we can more than compete against the top sides (your words).

This. I saw a stat recently (can't find it now) where we score a lot from opposition turnovers. I think this goes to explain a lot as poor opposition teams generally don't have great skills we tend to capitalise on this, but a team like Sydney has good skills so we sat off waiting for a mistake that didn't come.

It's Weed time. Form in the 2's. Taylor made form to step in and grab his chance. He has a strong tackle and is a good grab. If he nails his set shots and does the defensive work he could be the tonic for a rejuvenated side coming into finals. Sink or Swim.

Weid won’t look like a decent player until we clean up our entry into our forward 50.

I'd expect they will pick him above Peds for the last 2 games and finals if we make it (ggaaahhh I hope we do). Get some more games into him, high stakes games. He has shown a little bit for mine, but he really needs to start coming on if given the chance now and coming into next season. Peds has shown he just doesn't cut it at senior level, Weids its time to shine sailor.

I couldn't disagree more. I know you'll fall back on the 'we haven't beaten one yet' argument, but the statistics suggest that we can more than compete with the top sides. We just haven't shown enough composure or the ability to think on our feet enough to execute it properly, nor do we take our chances often enough. We get more inside 50s and more scoring shots in many of those games which suggests the game plan gives us plenty of opportunities to win games of footy. We know that we need to fix the way in which we get the ball inside 50, and we know that we need to fix up the way we set up our defensive 50 when the opposition has the ball, although I think it hurt to lose Lever and then Hibberd for a month not too long after that just as things were ticking along superbly. I won't deny that we need to make some tweaks to the overall gameplan, but the stats suggest that we are generating enough inside 50s to win these games of footy. We just don't take our chances when we are presented with them and this allows those good sides to hurt us on the rebound. I have faith, for the time being, that Goodwin can address this sooner rather than later (and by that I mean the offseason as it's hard to do mid-season) so that these issues occur far less than they do now.

I think we've all been waiting for Petracca to step up into this category, but he's disappointed so far. He has the tools, but maybe lacks the fitness right now, .......... or is he just a tease, and unlikely to meet the lofty expectations we had for him early on? I'm leaning (slightly) towards the latter.

My mistake mate, I should've been clearer, might grab a coffee myself! Here are the stats I put up on Monday in case you missed it. Hogan: Has kicked only 9 goals in 8 games vs the top 10 at an average of just 1.12 goals per game, being goalless twice and kicking 1 on 4 occasions. In contrast vs the bottom 8 he has kicked 38 goals in 12 games at an average of 3.16 per game. That is flat track territory and gives weight to those that are arguing this point. TMAC on the other hand this year missed a few games at the start but in his 4 games against the top 10 has booted 15 goals at an average of 3.75 per game and 27 goals in 11 games vs bottom 8 at 2.45 per game.

What I find difficult to fathom is that you cannot acknowledge the fact that if we had kicked at our usual goal-kicking accuracy, or the league's usual goal-kicking accuracy, we would have won

Had Hogan kicked 3 goals instead of points, TMac converted his relatively easy set shots, Oliver Brayshaw Tyson Spargo all converted relatively easy set shots we would have won easily against the Swans. So the gameplan which gave us the opportunity to take those relatively easy shots at goal is in dire straits and it's not the poor skill execution of the players which missed those shots which is to blame? I understand the frustration and anger over the weekends loss and all the close losses this year but don't let your emotion cloud your judgement. We have been outplayed 3 times this year, 2 of those games occurred in the first 5 weeks. Perhaps we will be outplayed again in the last 2 weeks, I'm not saying the gameplan and coaching is flawless. But I don't think on the evidence you can blame it for Sunday's loss (or the other close losses we've had this year bar maybe the Saints game).