Red and Blue realist

I was meaning the impact McDonald's leaving had on the whole team for years after, you don't get rid of club champions in that way without causing issues, and Viney going could do the same. I disagree that Viney should be a tagger, more a defensive minded mid, who tries to stop teams getting run ons. A tagger needs to go that role full time and Viney's greatest strength is to hunt the ball, he'd be better to go head to head with the other team bull as compared to trying to stop them.

Yeah, really most positions are redundant now. Your either on the ball, forward or back. Except for the ruckman as they have a specific job. Trac is that guy, but can't do it all game. Oliver has that potential I think, but needs to back himself in more to get clear and then improve his delivery. When brayshaw had that amazing run in 2018, he showed really good signs of being this as well. Viney will never be a line breaker, and that's ok, he's a pack buster then needs to dish it off to a more elite kick.

Those definitions are about right, although they have no meaning in the modern game. Plus Jack would be the definition of the Ruck Rover - Strong and moderately skilled, not fast and skilled of foot. Personally I think Jack is still a weapon but needs the right combination with him, as I said I think he is more a stoppage/defensive mid, I'd put Harmes and Brayshaw in that mould as well, while Oliver and Trac I'd say are more aggressive. If things are going bad for us, I'd put Viney, Harmes and Gus in the middle to try and slow down the speed of the game and when we're on top whack Oliver and Trac in the middle to try and keep the moment going. This doesn't mean they all can't do both roles, but I just see some as being more attacking minded than others.

Talking about letting him go has James McDonald written all over it, no way I'd entertain it, unless he desperately wanted out. The first game against West Coast was great, and he's got to get near to that each week, he doesn't need 30 touches. But needs to make at least 5 tackles, 5 clearances and improve his disposal efficiency by around 10%. Of all out midfielders he should be the defensive beast, not a tagger, but one who can lock the ball in or turn it into a scrap when the game is going against us.

Jackson was the (partial) fix, there was very few tall forwards who moved last year, Patton, Jenkins and Ryder at a stretch. So it's not like there were a heap around, plus there were few tall forwards in the draft.

It's another case of a journalist trying to stay relevant and creating a story out of nothing. We lack scoring, and have issues forward so they'll tie any big forward to us all year round. Nothing in the article actually says we're going after him, all just hypothetical. Melbourne is expected to make enquirers (meaning the journalist expects Melbourne too), we might but in the current environment it's still pure speculation. " It means Melbourne is expected to make enquiries about Essendon free agent Joe Daniher to see if he would be interested in making a move across town at season’s end. The athletic Daniher looms as the perfect fit for the Demons to bolster their forward line if he can overcome his debilitating groin injuries."

I think we're overweight defenders at the moment, with Harmes running through there I count 8, where I think we need the back 6 plus a mid dropping back, such as Harmes. I'd move Salem into a mid/wing role, plus have him drop back if needed, along with Harmes. But my back 6 would be FB: Smith, OMac, Lever HB: Hibber, May, Rivers. Then have both Salem and Harmes drop back when required, but play more mid/wing. I'm giving Smith another go because I actually think he's done pretty well in the last 2 weeks, when he is given a specific role. He kept Danger/Ablett pretty quiet when assigned to them and did alright on Dusty/Riewolt when playing directly on them, he'll still got work to do - giving away silly free kicks etc. but put him on Sexton this week. I don't think we can carry AVB unless he's right to run through the middle as well, but we're stacked at the moment for slowish brute ball winners/tacklers. He's also not skilled enough to deliver reliably into the Fwd50. We also need another tall. Melksham needs to move higher up the ground to get involved more, deep forward only works in short bursts when he sees a mismatch. Out: Lockart, AVB, Hunt In: OMac, Bennell and Weid

This is spot on, I turned over at quarter time and didn't turn back, I know they are allowed crowds so they have some atmosphere as well, but nearly all AFL games this season have been somewhat close (yes there's been a few really dud ones), but none of the close games have had me wanting more, as much as the NRL did last night. The ALF's biggest issue is the ball not moving quick enough. I'd change the following - (1) if the ball is kicked backwards then it's play on, no matter where you are on the ground. (2) The defensive team only has 5 seconds are a mark to move the ball on, otherwise it's play on. (3) Greater rewards for tackles, bring the holding the ball back to what is was a few years ago, and if a ball up is needed it's done immediately, no waiting for rucks to run over etc. (4) When kicking for goal players get 15 seconds, not 30. These are only minor changes but should speed the game up, which in turn will open it up more.

Or they want all those things from him and more, if he's going to be playing as a high half forward one of their important roles is continuous pressure, we saw we got very little of that from AVB and Hannan on the weekend (I'll put it down to rust from both of them, becuase they are normally good in this area, particularly AVB), and with Geelongs game plan it killed us. If we're going to maximise Bennell's talents then he needs to do this as well, or to compensate then you need someone who is manic at it, like ANB. So IMO at the moment you either have AVB and Hannan or Bennell and ANB - Hunt & Kossie do this regardless. It'd be much better for the team if we could have Bennell in the team without providing that defensive cover, and that's what I assume their waiting for, his running to get to a level where it goes both ways.

I wonder if the smaller forward line is to try and force the mids to lower their eyes? If they see a few talls then they revert to the long bomb, while a smaller line up should give them no choice but to try and find a target? I know it's not the type of thing to be working on in season, but it's not like they've had a go at it during pre-season to really practice?? I agree with out contest and pressure, including the defense being very good, but eventually it must wear on the guys if their not getting rewarded when moving forward, which might explain the Carlton drop off and then the slow movement late in the game against the Cats?

You'll get smashed on here for suggesting OMac, but I completely agree, and really think it should be a horses for courses policy with him and Smith all year. With 2 big strong Omac gets to stand the deepest while May can go the other, allowing Lever to he does best. Smith is great athletically, so is better suited to teams that play with a medium sized 2nd tall, or alternatively he's kept in and someone like Lockhart or Rivers is dropped, and Smith goes to Dusty everytime he goes forward (he did a pretty good job keeping Danger quiet when he went forward).

Weid has done pretty well in the ruck in the past, not necessarily as a tap ruckman but his follow up work, sometimes I think he does better when he has a little run in there just so he has to compete and gets crashed into. Similar to how they used to throw Hogan into the center bounces when he'd been quiet. Maybe a combination of both of them depending on how the game is playing out?

Wasn't having a go at Brown OD, just saying that if all he did all day was kick 2 goals and nothing else well then it's not much to get excited about. Thanks also for filling me in about Bennell, I hadn't seen the numerous threads or news conferences in which this was discussed.

It's really hard to tell who played well with just the vision on the MFC website, for instance Bennell looked pretty classy with 3 of his goals and another was a handball over the top, but he also involved with some of the other goals, so he looked good (in the 30 seconds of him), while Browns goals came about a beautiful pass from Bennell, which it looked like he could have let go through and another from a horrible Geelong error. on the vision, you couldn't tell if Brown had a good game or just one where he got on the end of a couple of goals?? Chandler's goal did look pretty good, off the back of some nice work from Spargo, and Jones looked ok at the contest, but again it's so hard to tell who played well or not.

While the opponent might make a big difference, and I loved his first game, I'd be leaving Rivers out this week. Having Rivers, Hibberd and Salem in the team was 1 player too many who are to similar. None are real lock down small defenders, more creators and I thought Hibberd took the game on a lot better. Without knowing the opponent or having much info from the scratch match also makes it hard to give really good ins/out, but I'd be looking at: In: Weid and either Bennell (if he's right and played well) or ANB (he was badly needed against Geelong) Out: Rivers and AVB

I hope we deploy melk as a lock down forward again, I reckon one of their big strengths has been stewards intercepting or at a minimum interrupting forward movement. I'd get melk to take him deep and away from contests as much as possible, without Taylor I think this is an area we could exploit

Happy with Harmes starting down back, but wish they'd use him in bursts on the middlemen things aren't going well. Not only can he take care of a player but wins his own ball too. Maybe as soon as the opposition gets a run on, then throw him in for 5 minutes then send him back

My changes for the bombers would be: Weid for Jackson - I liked what I saw from Jacko but he's still a bit raw, and weid will create more contests. Kossie for Jones - ANB had a real impact early as a small forward early but we got nothing all day from Jones. We needed more spark. I'd leave Smith in, only because the bombers play with a small forward line, if it was the cats this week I'd bring in omac. Melk and tmac get by only just on past performance at this stage. I'd give both AVB and Hannan another run before considering them. I'd also consider Lockhart for Jetta, again gives a bit more spark, for me it's a bigger call than dropping Jones.

May said before he came to the dees that he played his best when he had Rory Thompson on the last line playing a goal keeper type role, which I think Omac gives us. Allows May to be an attacking CHB, which is where he's played the best games of his career. The reason we have so many flying in packs is the make up of the player, Jetta I think overestimates how good he is in the air, and getting played on Mackay didn't help that mindset, while Hibberd has always been an aggressive back. Smith was the wrong move yesterday as we had 3 aggressive talls, we needed one to hang back, which is not in his make up. I love his athleticism and aggression but if the opposition has multiple talls we need omac to play goal keeper. A small forward line and I think he'd work better.

Also add May, lever and Smith who've all played less than 20 games for club the combined. So that's 8 of our guys who've played less than 20 games for the club, plus training has been limited so cohesion will be an issue, but should improve quickly

That terrible game made me more excited about our selections, clearly we're going for speed and burst. No point playing a dour, slow and defensive game if you can only muster 5 goals. If we go all out attack and it fails, then chances are we'll only be a goal or 2 down anyway and then have the better chance of quick goals.

I just feel a continuous season has a bit more merit, playing 1 week, in particular as there were games played when they knew the season was put on hold, then having such a huge wait doesn't seem right to me. If it was only a break of 3 or 4 weeks then I don't see much change, but this has really been like full pre-season break, we're potentially going to put out 6 or 7 different players than that last game and we won't be the only ones. If we miss the finals by 1 games, or percentage, will we always be thinking - if only we had our round 2 team? By restarting it gets rid of that. It's only my opinion but the first round seemed like a careless pre-season game but it's now counted along with games that matter.

There's really no point in comparing teams from round 1, and this week. Naming ins and outs is useless, best to just name the team. Guys like Bennell, Salem, Jones, Smith and VDB weren't able to be picked in the first game, while the young guys have got an extra 3 months or so training behind them so might be more physically able. Personally I think they should have wiped the first round and started again.

Anyone know if they are planning on doing this again, given it only worked for the 1 game? Sorry if it's been converted in another topic.

I think he was talking about a return to training then, not games. Games still won't happen until June (at the earliest).