stevethemanjordan

His first touch has been average at best. Fumbles first and goes straight to ground. A positive that he steadied in the second half and ended up being one of our best thanks to his ball use. Like so many of our players atm, wildly inconsistent in their performances on game day. We’re an enigma.

One thing I will say is that I cannot stand our aggressive backline zone and I'd much rather we played tighter like other clubs. We simply don't have the players to be implementing that sort of zone. You need super smart and quick reacting key backs for that. Oscar and Frost are a nightmare. Jetta is way down, Wagner needs to close the gap between best and worst and Lever is in no-mans land because of the utter chaos it is back there when the ball come in.

If our first quarter is anything like it was against against North then Hawthorn will be up by 50 at quarter time.

Not sure if serious? Has given away two frees to Brown because he is so slow to react. And aside from the odd ‘good’ handball or good elementary spoil, he’s generally been ineffective when going up in a contest. I can’t understand how and why at this level we consistently bomb the ball inside 50 aimlessly or torp the ball. Torp it why? We have one key forward atm. It is completely and utterly unbelievable. So dumb.

Fkn ridiculous.

First time I’ve genuinely questioned Goodwin’s selections. Completely understand why Pedo was dropped as well as Hunt. Pedo has been pretty much useless, provides very little pressure, gives away silly free kicks in the ruck and his marking has been very average. Hunt just looks really average. Frost as a forward has never worked and I can’t see how he’ll improve on Pedo in that area even though Pedo is down. Brayshaw not even an emergency. Wtf.

It is their full-time job after all brohemian.

100 % I'm dumbfounded by some posters that choose to take little notice of genuine dress rehearsal games. All teams have slightly different agendas depending on what sort of team they put on the park for JLT games. And it was said many times publicly that we'd be playing our best and fittest 22 available. Which also means we'd be playing the way we would during the season. We don't have a new game plan. We play the same defensive zone. Lever was the only new player in that back 6 in JLT 1. Brown was completely ineffective that day due to the way we played as an entire team defence and the way we pressured them through the midfield. Frost wasn't there. He is not needed as another tall. And unless he is a direct replacement for Hunt who has been really poor, he is not needed as a means to "stop Brown".

Revisit JLT 1. Cheers.

The Roos will have Jy Simpkin as the only player to come in to their forward-line. Explain to me why we need Frost given we could have the same 6 defenders playing against the 5 of the same 6 forwards from JLT 1? We don't need Frost. I'm not sure what else needs to be said.

No sure why every second post has Frost as an in? Have posters forgotten about JLT 1 that quickly? We gave North a smacking that day due to an almost four quarter strong team defence game which made life easy for our defenders. Both teams were basically at full strength. Fost is most definitely not needed imo. We just need individuals to start playing high level four quarter footy.

Are they coaching issues though? How do you know? At this level, navigating how to enter the forward 50 in a smart and deliberate way is up to the individual. Bombing it aimlessly forward when your entire team know that the opposition have a loose man sitting back is not the coaches fault. Take our forward running set-play as an example: When we send a half-forward to run in off the square at a centre bounce from the half backline, it obviously means the oppo have a spare defender sitting inside our forward 50. Our players should be fully aware of that so if we happen to win a clearance at that centre bounce because of our extra runner coming through, we need to be entering our forward 50 with purpose and care, not just blazing away. The coach sets these plays. The individuals must carry them out. Tempo footy really isn't a plan B imo. It's just common sense. However, I'm more interested in the part before the "tide had turned", so to speak. I've just revisited the Brisbane game and there are were number of warning signs halfway through the third quarter that are the reason we lost control: - Individuals lost their ability to be clean with the ball in the contest - Some certain individuals lost some critical one-on-one contests at important times - The level of our ball use dropped significantly - We missed some opportunities to kick very easy goals during that quarter It was a matter of Brisbane picking up their contest game and ball use and us dropping away heavily in that area. That was the difference. Had we still been clean around the ball and kept our ball use up, the quarter would have been halved imo.

Astonishingly, I’m in total agreement with this post and your last. The talk of Goody and co needing a plan B, C, D etc is ridiculous. Look at any strong opposition side who have played consistently well over a period of time and you’ll see that they have one game plan and their players execute it to a consistently high level often. Hawthorn, Geelong and Sydney over the years, Richmond last year, Doggies in 16 etc. Our single quarter meltdowns are nothing to do with the way we’re coaching. Go over any of the footage from our second quarter against Geelong or the last 10 mins of the third and first half of the fourth against the Lions and it’s obvious to see that there is a distinct drop off from far too many individual players. Skill errors, decision making errors, fumbles, disciplinary issues, positional etc. They’re the first things that notably drop-off which give the opposition a chance to hit the scoreboard. Momentum comes later when an opposition can sense a swing in the game. Until we get a dozen or so guys playing at a consistently high level for four quarters, nothing will change, no matter who is sitting in the coaches box. Gawn has been playing half games, Lewis is not playing to a high enough level, Jones is not using the ball as well as he usually does, Melksham and ANB have been wildly inconsistent, the contrast of Garlett’s game this round compared to last. The list is endless for so many. It’s player driven. Our game plan is fine. We need more individuals playing high level footy for 4 quarters. Oliver is one. * Would like to make an apology to @Wiseblood for my last few posts directed to him. Supporting this team is infuriating at times.

What an utterly irrelevant point. Improved immensely on the road? We are at completely different stages of development as clubs. We won on the road yesterday and lost at home last week to a depleted Geelong? What on earth does it have to do with our single quarter meltdowns? In this case the second half of the third and first half of the fourth. 42 points against the wooden spooners. 37 points against Geelong last week. 30-odd points against the Saints in JLT 2. And last year, 8 times we conceded 30 points or more in a single quarter. How do supporters keep overlooking this? You sure are happy-go-lucky talking up a win on the road against the wooden spooners of last year. Unbelievable, the positives posters try to churn out.

Happy-go-lucky MFC supporters. Gotta love em. What did we give up tonight? 42 points over a quarter of footy? Between the third and fourth? @ProDee, how's that sample going?

I also haven’t commented on any of the other shocking kicks he’s made so far this game under no pressure. So obviously I have no care if he hits one or two.

Oh you mean the target he missed, but luckily there was a player behind who was in great position to mark. That one was good.

Tyson’s goal that one. Handball to a team mate under pressure. Cool.

It’s a non-argument. Their mids are better by foot without question.

I think we'll need to wait for real opposition before determining the true form of any Melbourne listed players vying for a spot in the 22. Obvious? Sure. But I hope posters don't get too excited by numbers etc from this game.

Possibly doesn't need its own thread so to the overwatchers of this forum, feel free to merge. To anyone who has info, what is going on? I heard him interviewed during the week and he gave away nothing to suggest his omission was due to his wisdom teeth being pulled/lack of preparation. I had just assumed it was to do with that. He is a number 3 pick, highly talented and I can't understand why he's been overlooked again when any number of players could have been omitted for this week's game.

Don't know this journo, but she's spot on. https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/how-geelong-exposed-melbournes-focus-on-the-contested-ball-in-the-second-quarter-of-their-round-1-win/news-story/73810e31bcae19690211d0f0ddf77ce7

To both points, no I'm not trolling. I understand that Goodwin and co selected a team based on the form, performance and fitness of players over the entire pre-season. I was willing to back him in with both the Wagner and Maynard selections. But having seen Maynard's game in the flesh and being extremely underwhelmed at his lack of impact in all facets of the game but especially his contested work in close which is supposed to be his strength, they must pick Tyson this week. Tyson at the very least has him covered for impact around the ball. Kicking, spread/speed and defensive accountability are still question marks with Tyson imo but he is more experienced than Maynard and has runs on the board due to the fact that when he's on, he's a very good player. We just don't see it enough. And I understand why he was left out. To @Rusty Nails, depending on who is in that starting group, sometimes our speed is okay. Maynard doesn't cover the ground well and neither does Tyson but Brayshaw isn't slow and I'd like to see Melksham and Harmes play through there more this week rather than Hogan. Speed isn't always an issue if our ball use is clean in tight and we're on. Clearly we're a contested footy team so if our touch isn't right in close, opposition teams can really rip us open if they have a midfield with strong runners which Geelong do. Duncan, Guthrie, Menegola etc.

The two reasons we lost: 1 - Team Defence 2 - Ball use going inside 50 Our entire team defence both in the middle of the ground and forward of the ball was poor on the weekend and our ball use going inside 50 and some field kicking in general was awful. It played right into Geelong's hands. Those two points allowed Geelong to move the ball from defensive 50 to offensive 50 with ease and under very little pressure, which resulted in our defenders being caught out. Lever had some bad moments but was made to look a lot worse because of the break down further up the field. Other contributing factors to our loss/problem areas imo were as follows: Playing Maynard, a lack of foot speed through the middle of the ground, playing Hogan in the midfield and his leading patterns when forward and having a number of players underperforming. These things wouldn't have mattered as much if we'd played with a high pressure team defence and if we were efficient going forward. Selection this week: Having initially understood Wagner's inclusion for the reason that it'd release certain players from half-back and allow for more versatility, I'm now firmly in the opposite corner. Wagner was okay. Some poor moments and some good. Lewis however played his best football as a backman on the weekend and I think Brayshaw needs to come in for Wagner to play through the midfield at this stage and Lewis can stay back. We need natural mids through the middle of the ground with grunt and some run. Brayshaw is quicker than Lewis and can help in that area. Playing Hogan through the midfield on the weekend was an embarrassment as he made barely any impact at the contest and was next to non-existent in his defensive pressure or understanding of how to run defensively with an opponent. Maynard was just way off the pace and it's clear that Tyson needs to be the like-for-like replacement. I like that our side has flexibility and is versatile. But Goody is now flirting with danger playing so many through the middle of the ground who sometimes don't impact. We need synergy, consistency and continuity through that area of the ground. We were almost taking the [censored] on the weekend with how many were running through there. Ins: Tyson and Brayshaw Outs: Wagner and Maynard

Pointing out an obvious flaw in our game that has lingered for some time is a knee-jerk reaction or panic ? Nah. Quite the opposite actually. Especially given how widely recognised it is to those in the industry who continue to talk about it as an issue. I understand why some Melbourne supporters turn a blind eye to it, but I didn't think you were one.