titan_uranus

It sounds like someone's mail here is off? FWIW, if Joel Smith is on the plane...I'm not impressed.

The general point you're making is a valid one (i.e. our pressure has fallen back the last few games) but then it gets all hyperbolic. What has our reduced pressure got to do with the valid question to ask anyone right now (i.e. would you have been happy with 12-3 if you'd been offered it before the season)? In relation to whether it's being addressed, as you've pointed out we've already seen two casualties (Melksham and Weideman) but otherwise it's not surprising at all that we haven't seen masses of dropped players - it's only been three games, and one of them was before the bye. It's no surprise to me at all if the FD wanted to give players like Spargo, Pickett, ANB, Jordon and Sparrow at least two games post-bye to lift their intensity, the more so given we won the first one vs Essendon. It's also fair to note that despite the lower pressure rating, our last two opponents have struggled to score against us. Much more of the loss to GWS can be attributed to what we did with the ball, not what we did without the ball.

Prime time games played by Melbourne this year: Saturday night vs St Kilda - win ANZAC Eve vs Richmond - win Saturday night vs Sydney - win Friday night vs Bulldogs - win Friday night vs Brisbane - win Queen's Birthday vs Collingwood - loss Saturday night vs Essendon - win I don't think prime time TV has been a problem for us, with two of our three losses on Fox.

Spargo's 60% from snaps but only 44% from set shots. And the data does go back to 2018. But you're right, last year he kicked 8.1, with the only miss being a set shot.

Some news now coming out about our Round 18 clash vs Hawthorn: https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/crowd-caps-set-to-increase-for-afl-games-in-victoria-20210706-p5875x.html This article says that: Fremantle v Geelong is likely to be on a Thursday night (if true, that will be five of their six games post-bye on a Thursday/Friday night and the following week they play Richmond so gear up for another one) Richmond v Brisbane is likely to be Friday night, but apparently our game vs Hawthorn is also being considered for that timeslot All clubs have agreed to one five-day break during the season I suspect they are considering our game for the Friday night because that round has three MCG games (Collingwood v Carlton is the third) and so one has to be on a Friday night, barring any double-headers. And with Richmond on Sunday this week it uses up their only agreeable five-day break, whereas we're on Thursday and Hawthorn's on Saturday. I reckon this means we'll be Saturday afternoon, with Collingwood v Carlton on Sunday afternoon.

https://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/973058/injury-report-jones-brown-and-laurie-to-miss-again Poor Bailey Laurie only just got back and is now out for an extended period with a shoulder injury. M Brown - heel - 2 weeks Laurie - shoulder - 4-5 weeks Jones - calf - TBC Hore - knee - 7-8 weeks Nietschke - knee - season Tomlinson - knee - season

True but look at the progression in those first five games: Round 2 (his first game) - 66% Round 3 - 73% Round 4 - 82% Round 5 - 79% Round 6 - 79% He's come back and started at 74% vs Essendon and now 77% vs Port, so based on prior trends I'd be expecting him to scale up and play around 80%, or hopefully a touch more, of the Port game.

According to the stats I can find on Stats Insider, that's not actually correct. Not even in our top 5. Stats Insider has data on all set shots from Round 1 2018 to Round 6 2021. I've gone through and here are all the players on our list who have a set shot accuracy of at least 50% (minimum 10 shots in the time period): Daw - 71% (14 set shots) TMac - 63% (104 shots) Jones - 63% (19 shots) B Brown - 61% (178 shots) M Brown - 60% (52 shots) ANB - 59% (32 shots) Hunt - 57% (35 shots) Weideman - 56% (55 shots) Petty - 55% (11 shots) Gawn - 52% (42 shots) Fritsch - 51% (92 shots) Melksham - 51% (65 shots) Tomlinson - 50% (18 shots) And then below 50%: Brayshaw - 48% (27 set shots) Spargo - 44% (18 shots) Petracca - 42% (60 shots) Harmes - 41% (29 shots) Langdon - 36% (28 shots) Viney - 36% (11 shots) Pickett - 36% (14 shots) Oliver - 24% (25 shots)

Dr D prior to the Essendon game - we'll lose to Essendon and beat GWS. Dr D after the GWS game - I'm always right.

Brisbane started the year 1-3. The Dogs just finished a 4-3 patch (i.e. one game different to what you're proposing). Geelong also had a 4-3 patch (one of the wins was the Brisbane game where the late missed free kick cost the Lions the win). Port Adelaide had a 3-3 patch, with one of the wins being over Collingwood by 1 point. Also I can't see a single poster on Demonland who has said "the flag is in the bag". Some, though, have said the chance of us winning a flag remains.

That's an odd way of measuring the TOG stat - looks like the total is percentages, so they add up the TOG percentage figure each week, meaning Lever has missed 9 percentage points of game time across 15 games. Anyway, it is an interesting point to note. Each week we have Lever, May, Gawn and Langdon doing big hours on the field, and then we have players like Sparrow and Jordon who regularly are in the 50s and 60s. Do we have a core group of players who are genuinely so fit as to be able to run games out with more TOG, which then lets us rotate the remaining players more? Or, are those other players unfit and unable to run out games and so we feel compelled to not bring the key defenders off, keep Langdon on a quiet wing for five minutes, and rest Gawn at FF, to keep bench spots free? Chicken and egg thing. Petracca, Oliver and Langdon three of only four names on that list who aren't talls (the fourth being Crisp). It's an anomaly, that's for sure.

In response to the OP: no, he isn't. I don't follow Casey as closely as others but hasn't he been playing ruck this year?

On the OP, it's funny - how many posters bemoan a lack of "mongrel", or complain when the players laugh after a game or look relaxed in the warm up, or play with emotion, but then simultaneously take issue with this?

We were 7-0 with the forward line we used on the weekend before the game. The question is whether there is a causal link between the two. Did those 7 previous wins happen because of our small forward line? I'm increasingly of the view that they were not all brought about by reason of us being small up forward: in other words, had we played Brown or Weideman in those games we still would have won some/all of them. Our ball use going inside 50 was poor but it's chicken-egg - how many times did we bomb it to the goalsquare because we had to stop and wait for TMac/Gawn/Fritsch/Jackson to get back, because they had had to run up the ground to make the play and there was no one else left inside 50 to move it more quickly? How many times did we kick it neatly but the target was ANB, Spargo or Pickett, because we were undersized? That isn't to say that Brown in = win, because as you say our stoppage work was terrible, but there is a completely valid argument that we need another marking forward. By the way, I'd argue our "best" wins were vs the Bulldogs and Brisbane - in both those games we went in with Weid alongside TMac. So I'd argue we've been at our best with two tall forwards (plus Fritsch and Jackson).

I'm not arguing that they're not a good side. I'm arguing that we can still beat them when we play them again. I've been saying for weeks that us dropping games to bottom 10 sides doesn't make us a pretender or incapable of making/winning finals, it jeopardises our shot at a flag because of ladder position. But the prediction we're going to finish 5th comes off the back of assumptions that we'll most/all of the Port, Bulldogs, West Coast and Geelong games. Our form this year suggests that is unlikely.

Hunt might be quick and Bowey might be a half-back but those IMO aren't good enough reasons to make a change to our core back six. We don't have the time to try throwing Bowey into our backline with the challenging opponents we have in the hope he can gel with the others. There are other ways we can re-jig our forward half that don't involve disrupting the back half. Whether it's including Brown, or swapping one of Spargo/ANB/Harmes/Sparrow for someone like Melksham, or rotating Pickett further up the ground, or using Gawn more at FF (and ensuring that those who are running inside 50 like Hunt was on Saturday recognise his presence and kick it to him), there are options to work with.

Agree. The centre clearance issue IMO is one of momentum. By being beaten in there so regularly, we couldn't generate any momentum against GWS. We'd kick a goal but then immediately give GWS a sniff by conceding the next centre clearance. We're good at generating scoring chains from our back half but we're better when the ball is locked into our forward half and it's too hard to keep the ball where we want it if our opponent wins the clearances as often as GWS did.

We don't actually "need" to win, but a win will make it much, much easier. Which one is it? Are we inconsistent or have we stopped? And as to your forward line query, who were the 2016 Dogs' threats up forward? Tom Boyd? Tory Dickson? Clay Smith? Jake Stringer?

There is a huge difference between 1st and 2nd, depending on how confident you are of winning the QF. The loser of 1v4 gets the winner of 5v8. But the loser of 2v3 gets the winner of 6v7. So, if you finish 1st but lose the QF, you'll almost certainly end up with a semi final against 5th. If we're in the top 4, 5th is going to be Port or Geelong you'd think, but not Sydney, West Coast, GWS, Richmond or any of the weaker sides. Point being, it's not disastrous to finish 2nd or 3rd this year. Win, you're into a prelim. Lose, and you'll host a semi against someone outside the top 5, which to date have been the 5 best sides in it this year.

People have suggested Petty and Hunt forward. We won't fix our problems by creating more. Hunt's most consistent football in years has been in the backline this year. He's a game removed from one of his better performances on AMT. He stays right where he's been all year. Ditto Petty, for whom we don't have a good replacement anyway (don't tell me Majak Daw can play his role, he hasn't played FB for Casey all year).

We're not pretenders. Pretenders don't get to 12-3 with wins over the three best sides in it (Bulldogs, Brisbane, Geelong), and a record of 5-1 against the top 8 and 8-1 against the top 12. Pretenders are sides who inflate their W-L record with wins against lowly sides but struggle to back that up against good sides. Like, for example, Port Adelaide (1-4 against the top 8). Losing games doesn't automatically mean we're a "pretender".

Sure. Doesn't mean we can't beat them. We already have.

This is precisely what we must not do. We are where we are because we have developed understanding of roles and of each other. Losing doesn't mean starting again. Daw isn't going to solve our forward problems, he's been playing ruck at Casey. Smith's playing defence at Casey. This much change will make us worse. Selection goal this week is a few strategic personnel changes but the far more important goal is to ensure the 19-20 other blokes who hold their spot improve on the mistakes they were making. This is rubbish, utter rubbish. We're generating plenty of ball inside 50, we're indeed generating enough scoring shots. This isn't a problem of us not being able or willing to move the ball forward (a comparison is Collingwood, a side which actively prefers slow and sideways movement). This is a problem of us falling down at the final two hurdles - finding a suitable target inside 50, and straight kicking for goal.

Yes I was at the game. If your summary of it is “we never gave a yelp” then I’m not interested in your analysis. We did most things right all game, but made the same small category of errors. You talk as if we have fallen apart but the reality is yesterday was a poor stoppage performance with missed set shots. Most of the rest of what makes us a good side was still there, including the defensive work and ability to transition the ball from the back half to a position to score from. If yesterday is the sole determinative factor for the rest of the season then sure, we’re stuffed. Bur it isn’t. Yes. We were screaming out for a marking option forward of centre.

Well, we’ve put ourselves in this situation by not picking Brown after he kicked 5. Now he has this weird “did he play” game and the angst sets in further. IMO it can’t be Weid next week. We gave that an extended crack and it didn’t work.