stevethemanjordan

I don't think he was terrible, even though some posters would like to think I hate the guy. I dont. I just don't see what he adds. Posters like @A F and co thought he was needed. And it seems Goodwin rewarded him, but at what cost? He just floated through the game and was mostly insignificant. We took a high pressure, crafty and creative small forward out of our side and replaced him with Tyson? Tyson should replace an inside mid and nobody else. I questioned the decision at the time and I'm still questioning it now. If he comes out this week after one game, Goodwin will look very silly.

Would love to know what the Tyson lovers thought of his super strong 16 disposal, whopping 3 clearance game on the weekend. Weren't people saying we were bringing him back to help with clearances? There was zero point in bringing Tyson back imo. We were always going to respond in the middle of the ground, with or without him.

No, that is your gross misinterpretation and exaggeration and is a reason why so many posters find you infuriating. Do you understand that a club can acquire players whilst retaining others? That is all posters are saying. That we need to add some balance. It's really easy to understand.

Yeh we will. By continually adding to and tweaking our list. Players like Gaff will help. Overlap run is a super important skill and would help immensely in our quest to move the ball more freely and effeciently. Keep living in the Neeld era though mate, it's done your reputation wonders.

Here's a question. If the players had 'learnt' from bombing the ball long against stronger sides who apply strong pressure, then we'd have rectified it after round 1 when we beat Geelong 64 to 41 in the inside 50 count yet lost the game by 2 points. What's your answer? Against Hawthorn we won the count 54 to 53 yet lost to them by 67 points. Against Richmond and Collingwood we were comprehensively beaten up around the ball being smashed in clearances and possession chains out of stoppages resulting in scores due to opposition heat. We nearly always gave the ball up under pressure. Against Port, we smashed them in inside 50's yet lost the game by 10 points. Again. Pressure. Like you, I can see a lot of positives within the group and I know there's a lot of growth and potential there with our core group of 23-24 year olds. But unlike you, I'm completely aware that these patterns emerge because of a team deficiency that can only be changed by additions to our squad that will give us a better balance and blend of attributes.

Spargo played midfield, Jeff is a small forward at almost all times. So those stats are understandable. Unfortunately, Jeff will rarely have a day out at VFL level given the type of footy that is played and the smaller grounds that are played on. It's widely recognised that some players are better suited to AFL football and their strengths will stand out at that level. Sure Jeffy has been given some instruction whilst playing in the twos, but he'll be back in the senior side without having 'dominated' at VFL level. I imagine it'll be next week.

You're missing an extremely obvious point as to why we found it easier to score against those lesser sides. Opposition pressure. It never ceases to amaze how black and white you think football is. Sometimes it's okay to admit that there can be fundamental flaws in an individual's game or even in an entire team. But for whatever reason, you refuse to look at detail. Heres the thing Satyriconhome. There's a pattern. We struggle to remain composed or use the ball effectively when under heat from the opposition. It's a pattern that has emerged whenever we've come up against a strong side who apply huge pressure. Yeh of course every side will struggle with pressure. But some more than others. And that's the point here. We struggle with it more than other sides and that is directly related to the skill sets our players have. And we have many who find it hard to use the ball well under pressure. Lo entiendes?

Was average last night. Dixon didn't get a look in due to our immense pressure around the ball and the fact the game was played mainly in our forward half. I don't buy that he beat Dixon at all. His mistakes were extremely costly on the other hand and whilst he made a few standard spoils and one contested intercept mark, I thought he was quite poor generally.

I highly doubt it.

Frost will always look okay at VFL level. The bloke is not an AFL level defender and never will be which is clearly evidenced by Goody's refusal to name him as an emergency. I don't care if he plays the greatest VFL game of his life, he is not AFL quality. We've seen enough.

Don't really understand the Tyson for Spargo change. We lose pressure in our forward half and haven't exactly addressed our lack or run/speed through the midfield. Yeh Tyson is in form but what have we done in regards to match ups? The run of Polec, Ebert and Motlop on the wings? If Tyson plays wing I won't be happy. Essendon played it perfectly in the coaches box with match ups last night and sometimes I wonder whether Goodwin is too headstrong for his own good. I await with interest.

Challenge him. Ask him to aim for 8 tackles and to pressure the oppo like crazy. If he does, he stays in the side.

Vince and Harmes have both been poor in big games. Harmes is so bad defensively, looks great on the counter but had no appetite to work hard the other way. Vince has been serviceable at best in our string of wins and we can't play both him and Lewis in the same backline. I'd rather bring in another tall. And I've stated my reasons for Pederson. Something has to change. We've played a very similar team and set-up for a while. Port are another tough challenge. I want to see some players challenged. Too many are in cruise mode.

I've changed my mind re: changes this week. I think we need a couple more talls to come in this week. Smith wasn't bad, but we desperately need some more height in our backline. Oscar could be rag-dolled by Dixon if Port get easy ball. Pederson just doesn't do enough for me. Sure he can take a clunk, but everything else he does is so average. Doesn't provide pressure, doesn't use the ball smartly and just doesn't have footy smarts. I'd like one of Smith or Weideman in. I'd like to try Petty as another tall defender and I want Garlett to come in to our side with a really defined role. Ins: Petty, Smith and Garlett Outs: Vince, Pederson, Harmes I thought Harmes was very very poor in a few key areas against Collingwood. It would allow for Tom Mac to play more on the wing and become a threat. I think we could worry them with our height. But again, it'll all come down to who gets on top in the midfield. We need to come out breathing fire.

True, worth the question I believe anyway. Will be interested to see how his body is toward the end of the season.

I'd have him playing half forward over ANB any day for a couple of years. I imagine Vince will finish up at the end of this year with Lewis finishing the year after. The talk of him being injury prone is a bit of a furfy. This year he's had plantar fascitis and can't take a trick. Last year he was very good. I think some supporters on here still underestimate the importance of having senior players around to continue to teach and lead our young group. Murphy is the same age as Jones and if he was to replace Vince as another senior member, I'd be all for it. Adds skill, composure and class which are three things we're dying for.

Hahaha. You really are ridiculous.

Great post @Rusty Nails Witnessed much of that myself. Pederson is a really limited player. Some of his decision making in regards to positioning, contest work, who to tackle, when to chase ball etc is very very poor.

I'd be happy to trial that, but not against Port. Ebert, Polec and Motlop are too fleet of foot for us to risk playing an inside mid on the wing.

Incredible resume, huge get.

Both Petracca and Brayshaw have had to face some adversity early on which has most obviously had an impact on their development as players. I don't really care for comparing them at this stage. Gus had his breakout couple of games for us this year and Trac has shown glimpses of what he's capable of. As long as we continue to nurture and educate these boys, they will both be big time contributors for the MFC. Trac missed all of his first year and Gus pretty much missed all of last year. It put them both back. The exciting thing in my eyes is that they're both so untapped along with some other players and we're still sitting 5th at the halfway point. As I've said a number of times, greater consistency in performance will come once these guys reach 80-100 games. And from then on it'll be a hell of a watch if we can keep our core together.

Calm your [censored]. We're fifth on the ladder half way through a season. Plenty to work on, plenty to look forward to.

Yeh, clearly he was dominant. My question has always been around where he plays in our 22. I'm assuming Goody knows now that he's not a wingman. So if that's the case and he's been playing in the guts at Casey, who does he come in for against Port? One of Viney, Jones or Oliver? No thanks. If he replaces Harmes, the problem remains. Harmes only pinch hits in the midfield. Tyson has no positional versatility. He is like Viney in that sense but no where near as important.

I've tried hard not to post since Monday's loss, allowing for some time to view the game on TV, (having been there live) and to watch closely on what went on at the coal face which is where the game was lost. First off, it's clear as day that Buckley went to town on the first quarter of the bulldogs game and would have shown his players and said, "look what happens when you pressure Melbourne to this level". Props to him, we couldn't handle it at all and they maintained that level of intensity for the entirety of the game which was impressive. Why were or levels of intensity and pressure not at theirs given its what we've built our entire brand on? Buckley also exposed us in a couple of areas within the midfield. Having a contested heavy, one dimensional midfield group who are all natural ball chasers/inside players can be a double edged sword. When we're on, playing with intensity and most importantly are 'clean' in the contest, we look really good. If the opposition put pressure us at the coal face and nullify Gawn's taps then we look slow and reactionary given the types of players we have playing as half forwards and wings. As an example, if you watch Harmes closely in patches when he's on the wing, you'll see how hard he finds it to sit back from the contest and trust that a team mate would win the ball. Some of his efforts when he decided to chase the ball were very poor as he had no impact and it allowed for his opponent to sit back on the outside and become an option in space. Too many times this happened, and Collingwood had a much better spread of midfielders both inside and outside. Sometimes I wonder what instruction is given to players like Harmes and Brayshaw when they play on the wing and or if they're listening? Both players played their under age years as inside mids with Harmes having rests forward. Unfortunately at this stage, if the opposition get on top in that area, we don't really seem to have another plan due to our personnel through through the midfield. I noticed Goodwin tried to throw Hogan in there again and for me, that's just clutching at straws as he is not a midfielder and cannot play that position effectively. Watch some of his efforts and you'll see. Whilst there are other areas of the ground we can tinker with, like the Vince and Lewis in the same backline conundrum, I thought I'd concentrate on the midfield as it's our strength. Bringing Tyson in is not an answer for me. Unless you're taking one of our starting mids out which there's no need yet imo. We need to get back to starting the game with real intensity and being clean with that first possession. Pederson whilst strong in the air, doesn't provide the same defensive pressure as Smith or Weideman. I would bring Smith back in. Other than that, keep the same side. The only way we beat Port over there is by playing to our strength and smashing them at the coal face. Oh, and Petracca needs to start in the middle. Needs a rocket.

Would love to package Tyson and pick 25 to move up the draft order. Carlton or St Kilda would bite.