deanox

To be honest, it used to be worse! But I think it's part of the game plan: win every contest/clearance then handball clear. I don't think the coaches intend to get us sucked inside but they do intend us to make sure the contest is at least neutralised and this is a logical yet unfortunate outcome of what can go wrong. I honestly think this is why we other teams often clear quickly and in the crowd you think "how can they have free players on both sides of the contest and a spare man in defence?". I do think that given a bit of age, experience and size our midfield will evolve a bit further such that we can rely on less numbers in their.

Personally I don't think leg speed is an issue. It is about where you are positioned, where you run too and how you move the ball that determines how fast a team looks. Last week we looked slow because all our players were inside competing for the ball. Every stoppage and contest we had the inside players and we always got sucked into the ball. We were trying to win the footy, but what happened was when the ball came out they were already away. When we won the footy and could get it out it largely wasn't clean, because they could close down our first receiver quickly (they were outside of us remember). This is why players like Oliver can make us better - because they extract cleanly and other players can stay further out of the contest. Add to this, for most of the day we played 5 forwards and 7 defenders, but one of the defenders always ran straight into the guts as an extra mid. This extra player didn't stay loose around the stoppage but actually got involved in the contest, and I think that congestion hurt us around the ball. It definitely hurt us once we'd won the ball and we had no one to kick it to. Spread and pace are two different things.

Nah I'm happy he said them. Set us something to aim for for once. I'm trying to tell everyone else to cslm down. That we are on the right track and that it will take time. Try rereading my post!

MFCSS at its finest. We are playing the youngest team in the comp week in week out. We gave up 18 months and 30 games experience to the saints. Did anyone envisage that after 3 years of Roos we'd have the youngest team? I doubt he did. I doubt Jackson did when he said we were aiming for finals. This year has proven one thing only: we were worse that anyone thought. After 3 years we still have senior payers who are affected by the past decade. After the years we are still relying on the kids to win the games. I know we are success starved and want instant results but it is another couple of years before our list gets to that point. Have patience and see it out.

Agreed RE McDonald. I love him, he is a good player. And maybe he'd command close to that on the open market, but if he wants success he won't get it. I remember reading someone like Gibson at Hawthorn was on $400k. If he wants silly coin, he'll have to move on.

Unfortunately i think the only answer is time, patience and off field consistency combined with significant list turn over. In some ways we are half way there. Under Roos we have virtually culled the whole list in 3 years. We now have the youngest "best 22" in the comp. I think we were on average 12-18 months younger and 20 odd games experience less than St Kilda. I think I also read this was the closest we've been to an opponent in terms of average age all year. So we've done the "hard" part. Bitten the bullet and restructured off field and culled the list. Now the "easy" part should be continue list turn over while waiting out the development. Over the next 3 years the cream will rise (hopefully Petracca, Salem, Bayshaw et. al.) will begin to challenge for spots in our top 10. That means our top 10 changes and probably gets more consistent and our next 5-7 gets better defined. They may still be inconsistent but hopefully they won't be a relied on. Sticking out the course without panicking is the ONLY thing we can do now. What good could a new board or coach do? Nothing. Let them develop the list all the way before final judgement. We've been bad so long and we dont the benefit of qualify senior payers to see us through a rebuild like hawthorn did so we have to take the long path.

Our depth is fine. Yeah it can improve but it is fine. It is our quality and middle tier that was the issue today. Our top 10 are inconsistent. Watts and Viney have been relatively consistent this year. But Jones, Vince, Hogan, Tyson, McDonald, Gawn, Garlett and Jetta have been up and down. After those 10 who are the next 5? We have a real pack of players after that who may not make it long term. That's the issue, not the bottom 5 or the players at Casey.

Anyone playing at home? How touched was that?

I really think that is it. When we give up the insideball easily everything else falls apart.

Our midfield is getting killed. That's the problem.

With half his career goals against Melbourne, Membrey has joined the Kent Kingsley club.

A bit of both. It has also been lack of space. Saints have worked harder this quarter to tighten the contest and we instinctively look for a handball if not in the clear. It's an experience/decisive thing; were playing too strictly to the game plan instead of adapting. In particular, they've gotten on to of the midfield contest this quarter.

Ok maybe I'll take that back. How was that not holding the ball?

How was that not 50 in the centre? St Kilda player was inside the 5m zone.

Disagree, I reckon it's been pretty even. Yes we've been tackled but we've gotten rid of it legally, despite the calls from the crowd.

It is long odds to make it but being better than just "mathematically" in the mix this late in the season is a great feeling. We'd need to win two more than north and one more than port and hope we make the percentage up in the process. I they'll both win at least 2 more (North: Collingwood and Saints, Port: suns and Brisbane). If we manage to beat Gold Coast, Carlton and Port (the game for 9th), we'll go close but still may need one more from hawthorn/geelong/west coast. I can't see ithappening. And I expect to read a lot of "the essendon game cost us finals". And they may be right.

Is it an easy train from the Whitten Oval to Spencer Street?

Mate if that is your attitude towards modern football tactics, I predict that if you played today you would likely get an absolute bath! Footy has been moving on for years. You can't punch people and we have zones. It's not the 70s anymore PF!

I'd love essendon to beat the saints so they don't get the no.1 pick this year. But I'm not sure I want to be paying the saints coming off a loss. Thoughts?

Make that three...

Well that didn't last.

With the Casey bye there is no reason for him to stay in Melbourne, so I doubt there is much in it.

You mean before his concussion? Also I'd be surprised if Dunn gets a game. I only saw the forest half but wasn't impressed. He lost a number of key contests in the back line that I saw, luckily only cost us 1.3 due to poor kicking.

We have a young list, the youngest when considering the 22 playing each week, in terms of both games and experience. Other young improving sides over the years (the dogs the past couple of years, PA in 2014, hawthorn on the way up, etc) all had a core of senior payers with age, experience and leadership that even out the inconsistency and enabled them to win those close games. We have Jones, Jones, Dawes and Vince older than 26 and 11 months. After that is Garlett, Jetta and Watts older than 24 and 6 months. Everyone else is a baby. Only Gawn, VDB and TMac were older than 23 and 2 months. 12 players yesterday aged just on 23 or younger. Only five 100 game players in the side. And seven 50 game players. That's 10 with less than 50 games experience and 8 less than 40 (ie in their first 2 or 3 seasons). The best part is we finally have 25 players we are happy to let play AFL footy each week. And it is a young group and apart from Vince we won't lose anyone to retirement in the next three years and apart from N Jones (apologies to Dawes and M Jones) we won't lose anyone valuable to retirement in the next 6 years. When the team matures and gets experience we will turn the corner and win those games. I'm expecting it to happen next year but it may happen the year afterwards. But it will happen with the list we have.

Because that's not what DE% means. The total effective disposals divided by total disposals. Effective disposals are made up of effective long kicks, effective short kicks and effective handballs. An effective long kick is one that is 40 metres to a 50/50 or better for the team. An effective short kick is one that results in a teammate's possession who was the intended target of the kicker. A handball to a teammate that hits the intended target to the team's advantage is recorded as an effective handball. Every kick can be turned over if it goes greater than 40m. I think he may have done that 4-5 times today. Hardly a sackable offence.