titan_uranus
Life Member
-
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by titan_uranus
-
I found our losses interesting this year. They were either close games, which we largely botched, or they were large scale losses. From 6-2 onwards, when we went 5-10, our losses were by 1, 2, 5 and 5, and then by 35, 38, 56, 50, 51 and 92. Six times we couldn't keep the margin below 6 goals. The other four were botched close games. Nothing in between after Round 5. Edit: so were our wins, too. After Round 5, our wins were by 3 and 8, then 17 to Essendon (but that was 40+ with 10 minutes to go), and otherwise were 38, 43, 54 and 54. One game after Round 5 that wasn't decided by a single digit or by 6+ goals. -
A lot of clubs have bogey sides. Right now Collingwood and Fremantle are that for us. It'll be partly in our heads, I'm sure. It's also talent. Collingwood are smarter and faster than us, whilst Fremantle match us at contest and are too strong defensively for us to score against. There was a thread going around the other week asking when we know our season was shot. For mine, it was King's Birthday. Losing to a half-strength Collingwood by 6 goals told me we were no good.
-
Sadly, he's just not good enough. He didn't deserve to be dropped after the GWS game, which was arguably his best, and maybe some continuity would have helped, but the rest of his performances didn't warrant ongoing selection. I've never seen it, and I still don't. The decision to give him the contract extension was baffling given the lack of faith we showed in him.
-
Well, so it ends. From the Oliver trade story 11 months ago, into Joel Smith, into copping a fixture that we now can see was as difficult as could be, into Gus, we had an off-season we all wanted to believe we'd put behind us, but which ultimately wrecked us before we even set foot onto the SCG for Opening Round. At the absolute least, the capitulation from 6-2 and 4th on the ladder after Round 8 to 11-12 and in the bottom 6 with a sub-100% percentage tells us that we do not have the right list, coaching staff and general approach to contend, so it forces us to change. We can't sit still, make list changes at the fringes, and go again. Already seen a stack of posters going on about getting a key forward. That's not the number one issue. The number one issue is, and has been all year, our midfield. Even assuming Trac and Clarry get back to their peak levels next year, we don't have enough depth or support through the middle, nor do we have anywhere near enough quality ball users. We need a complete re-think of how we approach the midfield in 2025. After the midfield, I don't want an A-grade forward as much as I want a cheap third tall who can ruck and therefore allow us to stop rucking JVR. It's wasting his development. I don't hate Petty as a forward as much as others (although I find it hard to run that argument when we gave him 20 games this year for 9 goals) but if the consequence of getting a proper second ruck is that we have to play Petty back, that's not exactly a bad thing. And the other thing I care about? Our fitness. We didn't have repeat soft tissue injuries but we also didn't look fit enough for most of the year. We won just 10 of our 23 fourth quarters, which is a shadow of the side we were in 2021-23. Whatever approach we took to fitness this year failed IMO. Let's celebrate the wins of the year (getting Windsor, Rivers in the middle, McVee again (but not as a mid), Gawn's hopeful 7th AA jacket) but acknowledge that on most measurements this was a failure.
-
-
It's either 0 or it's 2-3+ (2 if they grade it as high impact, 3+ if they grade it as severe). Can't be 1 if he was concussed. If it's anything it will be careless and high contact.
-
It shouldn't be a suspension. The bump would have been fine had Moore not gone to ground. Having said that, and whilst I hate conspiracy theories, I can't help but feel he'll cop 4 weeks.
-
If Geelong thump West Coast, as I expect they will, they could finish 2nd (requires GWS and Port to lose, which are both possible, and to make up 7% on Port, which they could do themselves by beating West Coast by 120 at GMHBA). If they had lost to Fremantle two weeks ago, they'd be 9th right now and no guarantee to even make finals. They will IMO be one of the weakest top 4 sides we've ever seen, and if they finish 2nd undoubtedly the worst top 2 side we've ever seen. This has been the season for it.
There's no doubt Roffey's email was disingenuous. It's Christian Porter-esque, to be honest, and insulting to members as a result. Over the last few years I've generally found myself disapproving of Peter Lawrence's actions. As much as you and his other supporters on here seek to characterise his push for change as noble and in pursuit of best practice, it has always, and IMO reading the judgment clearly remains, also in push of his selfish desires. However, the judgment makes relatively clear enough that the club ultimately couldn't resist most of what he was asking for, because the majority of his proposals were clearly fair and reasonable. For that, the failure to work this out prior to litigation is a failure which sits as much on the club as anyone else. At its core, I continue to think that his selfish desires got in the way of a better and more important message. Even with what should be considered largely a success, I doubt he would ever be elected to the board, and I think that's something he should accept responsibility for. Related to that, I noticed the following parts of the judgment: The judge accepted that the board acted bona fide and without collateral motive, balancing the club's interests against Peter's. That is contrary to what I believe Peter has argued, and what I know some on here have argued (i.e. that the board had ulterior motives, designed to protect them or their boys/girls club) Peter persisted with the litigation because he wants the club to allow candidates for election to be able to go on radio and TV and give interviews in which they are permitted to disparage not just the current board, but members, players, the club at large and other candidates. The club's board and governance is important, but not important enough that we should be having candidates running a Trump v Harris style debate in public, bringing the club to the forefront of the media where we've been spending far too much time of late Both the club and Peter were faintly criticised by the judge for comparing the club's rules to other club's. The judge made it clear that is irrelevant. There's no doubt the club's election rules are in a better place now than they were 2 years ago, and for that Peter deserves credit, but the ends do not always justify the means. PS: there's also no doubt the board has failed in a number of its own KPIs (so to speak). The home base situation is a debacle.
Obviously not important but there’s no [censored] way McKercher, Wilmot or Rachele are better players than McVee. It’s amazing to remember how young Gulden is though.
So are you saying that if we were 1-6 on the ladder, or no chance of finishing 9-10, you wouldn’t be in favour of it? If we’re saying 8/18 isn’t enough, but that we’re rewarding the top 6, isn’t that inconsistent? Why not just reward the top 8? Using the outcomes of an H&A season where there is no wildcard to justify how good it is also doesn’t make sense. Teams would likely do things differently in the lead up rounds if they’re targeting 10th instead of 8th. But if you want to do that, go the other way. Would Fremantle v Port have any interest this week if Fremantle were already locked into wildcard round? Would there have been any excitement over Carlton’s final fortnight if they were already locked in?
I watched that video on instagram and didn’t think there were issues…
That’s twice you’ve run an “ends justify the means” argument. I don’t agree. We’d get bigger crowds with a whole host of bad or annoying ideas. That doesn’t stop them being bad or annoying. At any rate, we will see crowds and viewership diminish if we keep playing more games. Scarcity is an important concept and one the AFL doesn’t appreciate.
Yes. I hate that we’re in the bottom half of the competition after 22 games and yet would, if there was a wildcard round, still get a chance to play finals. Talk about rewarding mediocrity.
I always liked how we looked when Brown was in the side and playing well. He never gave anything other than 100%, even when his body and/or his limitations held him back. Obviously integral to the flag, for which he will always be a Melbourne immortal. But also should be remembered for being a great person and, I suspect, an under the radar key leader. Go well, Ben.
He’s also earned it off the back of his form since returning, IMO.
On radio this morning Morris played two grabs from interviews Viney gave last week. The first was given on Thursday but wasn’t aired until last night. He was strong about loving the club and said “I love the Melbourne footy club…no plans to not be a one club player”. The second was the post-match with Lynch where he says “nah” straight away and then the “we’ll see how the year plays out”. Morris argued this shows a change in Viney’s thoughts. I disagree. I think it strengthens the argument that the “nah” was his true answer and the rest is contract negotiation talk. Two days earlier, which was well after the North target story broke, he sat down and said he has no plan to leave. I might be wrong but I’m not at all concerned.
How are Adelaide and St Kilda not numbers 1 and 2? David King had written us off prior to the Carlton pre-season game, whilst he talked St Kilda up all summer. Adelaide was supposed to be the next big thing and are going to finish bottom 4.
@DeeSpencer again ruining what could be a good debate with unnecessary guff like this: Criticising his leadership by signing on at a time when commitment to the club has never been more important from our leaders is an absolutely awful take that somehow surpasses your other awful takes. Is there a debate to be had about signing him for another three seasons, instead of perhaps two? Possibly, yes. But as is so often the case you launch with ridiculous OTT stuff like this and put people off side. FWIW I’m with @Gator - lesser rucks have recently played to age 35+, and Gawn is not only the GOAT but he is physically gifted. Age shouldn’t constrain him.
So did Trac…
Correct. Fremantle’s destiny is out of their hands. They may be eliminated by the time they play, if those three sides all win. But if any lose, they will pass the loser(s) with a win because of their draw. Collingwood effectively eliminated (mathematically alive but need 150+ point swings or something).
Pretty sure the pressure stat came up on screen in the third and theirs was high, and higher than ours. It definitely felt like their intensity lowered as the game went on but IMO it was only the fourth quarter where it felt like they truly stopped. In the third I felt like we put a gap on them when they were still up and about.
Currently the four required outcomes for Collingwood to make it are all favourites (WC and St K over Carlton, Port over Fremantle, them over us). It’s increasingly frustrating that this would be us if we had held on last week. Just that one game changes, all the rest stay the same (ie keep the Freo and Dogs floggings, the other three close losses etc), and next Friday is almost a playoff for 8th.
