titan_uranus

That’s right, there’s no such thing as a dead rubber. As Goodwin has repeatedly said, we’re leaving no stone unturned, and we’re in a hurry to improve. So why are we not using this as an opportunity to give him a week off and give his spot to Laurie, or Brown, or Woewodin, or to increase Rivers’ or Langford’s or Windsor’s centre bounce rotations, etc? We have an unfortunate recent history of players playing poorly only for it to be revealed post game that they were sick or injured. It just happened with Trac. It happened with Gawn earlier this year too. We also have a history of players leaving the club due to a lack of opportunity and becoming best 23 players elsewhere (Jordon, Bedford, Harmes, Baker, Corey Wagner). Playing Viney on the basis that he can just “deal with the pain” is inconsistent with “leaving no stone unturned”.

He actually did say this, which stood out to me. He said “we get another opportunity this week against a football club to show - not talk - show what we’re about”. I’d say that concept, of doing what we need to do and not just saying we’ll do it, came up internally this week, as that’s often what ends up coming through in his pressers.

Great to see Culley get a game. Dropping Spargo absolutely the right call. But we’re sticking fat with the same core players, as is this FD’s way. Meanwhile Viney has a broken wrist. Perhaps we rest him and give someone else a go? Nah, of course not. (Sigh).

Winning 4 of their last 5 games is the worst thing that could happen to St Kilda IMO. They are going nowhere, having beaten just us (twice) over the last 12 weeks, and in one of those games finding themselves 46 points down to us. They were, as you say, rubbish for 75% of the game. Late season wins against bottom 4 sides might feel nice but will paper over the cracks, and Ross Lyon will yet again escape scrutiny for another failed year. At the very least, our collapse is forcing the blowtorch onto us.

Probably worth noting the club is leaking again, given the “senior Melbourne” sources Gleeson cites in the article. In this instance I doubt any of us mins though.

Some important parts of this article: “Melbourne is determined to make significant changes this year after another season that has spiralled into misery. There is a harder edge to Melbourne’s decision-making this year and the potential of a payout for Goodwin or other contracted staff will not be an impediment to change should they decide it is required. Goodwin’s position remains under serious threat at season’s end, and possibly sooner should the club lose to bottom of the ladder West Coast at the weekend... Board member Steven Smith, who will take over as club president from Brad Green later in the year, joined the meeting by conference call from Europe. While the board did not settle on what its next course of action will be, it was agreed that significant changes to the football department are needed. The timing of decisions on those changes will not be reliant on the handover of the presidency. Senior Melbourne sources said the board would analyse the football department and performance again, look at Shand’s review conducted at the end of last year and examine whether changes recommended then were properly implemented this year. They will consider Alan Richardson’s role as the club’s head of football, the broader coaching panel as well as the senior coaching position, and most pointedly, consider whether changing the senior coach is necessary to prompt cultural and seismic change at the club, or simply the easiest and most symbolic change to make… Melbourne believe they could cover the impact on the soft cap of paying out the final year of Goodwin’s contract, or other contracts, if it came to a decision to part ways… The only certainty, as a senior Melbourne figure said, was that all options were on the table for the football department, with the board agreeing the status quo was not working. The dissatisfaction and resignation of members and sponsors is not lightly dismissed. While all options are on the table for the broad football department and strategy, the same does not apply to the playing list, as players such as Max Gawn and Kysaiah Pickett will not be up for trade… Melbourne refused to trade Oliver to Geelong last year, believing the return offered was insufficient, and shutdown Petracca’s restlessness for a move. The club still believes it would need a significant return to entertain moving any of its players, including that pair, on. The Demons do not have a first round draft pick this year. As a senior Melbourne figure observed of their season, doing nothing is not an option.“

Want to know what Tom Morris thinks? No? Fair enough. But anyway: Tom Morris’ massive trade update on 25 AFL players — SEN “Similarly, significant change is coming at Melbourne on and off the field. “Clayton Oliver’s huge salary works against him now if he wants to leave, which I believe he still does. There’s Bayley Fritsch and even Jake Lever there too. They’re two players to keep an eye on.”

I don’t watch Geelong as closely as us, obviously, but I’ve never thought Danger is a good set shot, or kick in general. If the data backs you up, fair enough, but I still think Trac can be an elite forward if we made a few really important list and coaching changes.

Ralphy (FWIW…) says no interest in Clarry:

Some tidbits here: https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/all-our-talk-is-there-and-then-we-don-t-do-it-gawn-delivers-damning-assessment-of-demons-20250728-p5mibh.html “Melbourne’s board has resolved to make whatever changes are necessary to return the club to the top of the ladder after the Demons’ stunning capitulation to St Kilda on Sunday... Football manager Alan Richardson did not attend Monday’s board meeting as he attended the club’s ultimately unsuccessful appeal against the three-game suspension handed to defender Steven May last week. The Demons have been expected to make significant changes to their football department at the end of this season. Goodwin is contracted for next season... As well as Goodwin, the board also heard from Darren Shand, the ex-All Blacks general manager who reviewed at Melbourne at the end of last year and has been consulting the club on culture and leadership since then.“

My current view is that Trac is good enough to help us with our next finals tilt. His age doesn’t bother me, he trains well and if Dangerfield can be an elite forward well into his 30s, Trac can too. Oliver is the one who IMO the club needs to consider moving on. I’m not confident he can get back to his best as he ages, his worst is worse than Trac, he takes a lot of off field effort to manage and keep in line, and he is taking more of the salary cap. So if we are to move on from one, IMO it should be Oliver and not Trac.

And this is not new. This has persisted for years. The best example is the Carlton semi final. Viney, again, panicked in that fateful final play with his hacked kick forward which landed with Weitering. Our leaders are terrible at sensing how to win and knowing what to do. That is a shared failure between themselves and the coaches. The longer it has persisted, the more of a coaching failure it has become.

When was our prior 6-6-6 infringement? We must have already had the warning. And what precisely was the final infringement?

I'd agree, if I felt like this would spark a response from Goodwin, the FD or the senior players. I'm just not at all confident it will.

Since the Sydney win, when we clawed our way back to 5-6, we're 1-7. Scarily, only three of those 8 games have been against top 8 sides (Collingwood, GC and Adelaide). And they would all be in our four best performances in that 8 week period. The other 5 games were the North win, and then losses to St Kilda twice, Port Adelaide and Carlton. Our fixture this year gave us 10 games against the other 7 members of the bottom 8. We are currently 3-6 in those games, with West Coast to come again next week. Even assuming we beat West Coast, we'll finish 4-6 against the bottom 8. Appalling.

Green bristled in those early-season interviews where he was called an interim president. Well, if he disagrees with that title, he can demonstrate it in the next few weeks.

Hardly the reason we lost though. Whoever the sub was, they weren't going to fix the catastrophic failure through the midfield and across our "leaders" to arrest the momentum or take ownership of the game. FWIW there's no world in which Spargo should ever be the sub, and IMO he shouldn't be anywhere near the 23 anyway, but focusing on the sub selection today is really not at all important.

Gawn should know better, I agree. But he's been coached this way. When the going gets tough, Goodwin has always wanted us to take territory. It's been ingrained in us since at least 2020. So when under pressure, Gawn does what's been coached into him to the point of instinct - he belts it/hacks it/moves it forward. It's not the right play. He should know better. But his coaches should be helping him, and the rest of the side, realise this.

This might all be true but we never should have been in a position where we could have lost. The way we fell apart from 46 points up is a far more significant embarrassment than the final minute, as bad as it was. And not that any of this really matters, but this is another loss where: we "won" on expected score; we had more scoring shots; we had more inside 50s; we lost by under 10 points (that's 0-3 in such games this year, after 3-4 last year and 4-6 the year before. A combined 7-13 since 2023); inaccuracy plagued us (6.2 in the first quarter, then 7.10 for the rest)

The fourth quarter was all between the ears. But we faded late in the other quarters too. We were older and more experienced than St Kilda today. We haven't had our fitness right all year.

I'm not that shocked you went here as your first reaction, but it's still rather striking. Presumably, as you almost always do, you think that our loss today is down in part to our inexperience, and/or our younger players fading? That certainly seems implicit in this post, noting the struggles of two younger players whilst bemoaning the absence of two older/experienced players. Yet the reality is, St Kilda today was on average younger and less experienced than us. So whilst we didn't have Lever or May, we did have in our backline TMac (245 games) and Salem (195 games), whilst in our midfield (where almost all of our losses stem from) we had Gawn (243), Viney (233), Trac (208), Oliver (201) and Langdon (198). Also remember that other than TMac, who was dropped but has nevertheless been fit and available all season, the rest of those 7 players I've just mentioned have missed a combined 6 games all year (Viney's missed 5 and Oliver 1). Turning straight to our two missing defenders to attempt to explain what happened today is really not it.

I want Goodwin and our players to be embarrassed by this. I just don’t have any confidence they will be.

The enormity of what we “achieved” today must not be minimised. Of course we yet again [censored] up a close finish. The final 2 minutes are a checklist of how to embarrass yourself in losing a close game from in front. But to be in that situation at all, or even anything close to it, took such a unique and rarely seen level of disgrace that it has to be properly acknowledged. When it comes as the 27th loss out of our last 44 games, with membership spiralling, with formerly elite players floundering, with no leadership on the field, it cannot be tolerated.

Somehow, despite everything in this club’s history, this is the lowest point. The stench around the club that we tried to mask with the scent of “love” in the pre-season is stronger than ever. I’m [censored] sick of being embarrassed. I’m [censored] sick of being angry. Sticking fat with the same coach, and same players, doing the same things week after week, has ground this club into the irrelevant dirt. We are a laughable embarrassment, and I’m so [censored] sick of it.