titan_uranus

Spargo has some of the talent that we need in our best 22 moving forward - he runs, he lowers his eyes when he kicks, and he has a bit of goal nous about him. Hopefully he can find some form at Casey because we certainly cannot allow him to stay in the seniors in his current form. I was calling for Lewis to come back into the side. I wasn't calling for him to be played on a wing though. If that's the role the club thinks is his role in 2019, then he shouldn't be playing at all. I'd like to at least see him in a role which he might feasibly be capable of playing before calling time.

I've seen people in here having a crack at Gawn. He might be down on form, but I reckon having a go at Gawn is pissweak and as embarrassing as our current performances are. Got me thinking about our leadership again though. Our 100+ game players are Lewis, Jones, Garlett, Melksham, TMac, Jetta, Hibberd, May, Gawn and Viney. Two of them aren't playing. Of the other 8, none of them are playing as well as they can and only Gawn is playing at a reasonable level consistently (Viney has been OK). Jones can't stop himself from the up-and-under long kicks and is making more skill errors by the week. TMac and Melksham are a big part of our current problem - they're not taking marks inside 50, they're not bringing the ball to ground in a way which helps us, and they're not providing enough defensive pressure. Hibberd is playing so poorly he should be dropped, while Lewis and Jetta have had no impact on our season so far due to injury. We can't stop opposition sides from getting a run on and there's only so much Goodwin can do without a runner to get messages out there (not saying there's nothing wrong with our coaching). It doesn't help that we have no senior players to turn to when we need some leadership.

I’d drop Spargo who has no idea what he’s doing out there defensively. I’d also pretend to “rest” at least one of Hibberd, Jones and TMac.

Hore was excellent. Frost was fine. Hunt is trying. The rest are woeful. Hibberd is destroying us atm.

@Scoop Junior‘s post is excellent but, I think, lets the players off the hook too much. In the third quarter we were significantly outworked around the ground. At a time when we should have been making a stand we eased off in CPs and didn’t transition defensively anywhere near at an AFL level. But the structures aren’t working either. There is just no feasible way that Jones and Lewis work as our wings. Fritsch isn’t working as a defender. We’ve got three marking forwards who are all out of form and made almost no changes to try to spark them into form. And we still haven’t worked out how to defend the MCG. Worst of all though, Goodwin did classic 2018 Goodwin and tried dropping a loose man into defence once we were 5 goals down. Why? Why do that at all, given our flaws, and why do it when it’s too late? Pathetic from Goodwin IMO. We’re also carrying the Wagners and Spargo who just aren’t good enough, plus Lewis and Jones who are past it. Too many passengers. I’d like to see some new faces but more importantly I want to see a changed approach to team defence.

That quarter was a genuine embarrassment. They were +40 or so in disposals but +8 in tackles and they beat us in CPs. That sort of effort is utterly disgraceful.

We’re doing well enough at the contest. IMO what’s more important is our disposal going forward. Stop turning it over and start taking marks inside 50 and I reckon we’ll limit the damage at the other end.

This is everything going wrong that you could have expected. Terrible kicking going inside 50, marking forwards who can’t take a mark and no crumbers when it hits the deck. They’re spreading the ground wide, using the wings and overlap run off half back, and our zone is breaking down completely. Neither Jones nor Lewis are suited to the wing but despite that they’re there and they’re giving us nothing. And we can’t stop them scoring when they go inside. So far, it looks like last week we benefited from the smaller SCG more so than we improved or fixed anything. Oh, and Hibberd is a shadow of his former self and makes more mistakes than anyone except maybe Spargo.

Richmond and Melbourne get 4 day breaks each, so whilst that's a short break, there's no advantage/disadvantage to either club as we're both in the same circumstances. Collingwood get an extra night off than Essendon but were up in Brisbane. If they'd done the Richmond v Collingwood and Essendon v Melbourne thing, both games would have one side with an extra day's break to their opponent. Next year Easter is two weeks prior to ANZAC Day. Easter isn't this late again until 2025.

Port are such a Jekyll and Hyde team. Couldn't beat a Richmond side without the majority of their A-graders last week at home, then back that up on a short break by being the first side to beat West Coast with Darling and Kennedy in the side in nearly two years. The wet didn't help West Coast but Port showed that when you bring A-grade pressure in your front half, even the most composed sides will struggle to get the ball past the halfway mark. What Port did is exactly what we're trying to do, and what we did well at our best in 2018.

If we're able to defend the ground like we did against Sydney at the SCG, we'll win. But if we defend it like we tried to against Port or Essendon, we'll lose, and I suspect the game will look and play out eerily similar to our St Kilda loss last year.

What, because they beat Brisbane? A side which hasn't made the finals since 2009?

We're better in the back half with Lewis and Jetta in it and with OMac out of it. I feel for Stretch, only getting one crack at it, but he unfortunately didn't take much of his chance last week.

In Round 1 we hadn't lost yet, we're 1-3 at this point. Round 1 was also a 1.45pm start, this is a 4.35pm start. There are also even fewer trains running from the SE and E suburbs (where the majority of supporters of both clubs would likely be coming from) than there were in Round 1. But mainly, we're 1-3 and barely a shot to make the eight rather than everyone's top four pick.

The vandenBerg news is incredibly disappointing.

Agree, but the problem is the same problems St Kilda exposed last year were exposed by Port, Geelong and Essendon this year. If we play St Kilda like we played those first three clubs, we'll lose. If we can take the form we showed against Sydney and defend the MCG like we defended the SCG, I think we will win.

I'm not sure too much can go into the extra three days break. We'll be planning for the subsequent four day turnaround into ANZAC Eve. We'll necessarily have to rotate/manage our players for that break.

I haven't seen the game and I found this interesting, so I had a look at some other stats from the game. After quarter time WC kicked 5.8, whilst Fremantle kicked 7.9. So that's only three more scoring shots to Fremantle, trying to cover come a 26 point quarter time deficit. I suppose your comment that a side with better skills than Fremantle could have used this plan to win the game, but they only generated 33 inside 50s after quarter time (to WC's 38). Still, will be interesting to see whether this becomes a trend.

I think we're starting to see teams' true colours. GC is 3-1 but they've probably had the softest opening month so far (St Kilda, Fremantle, the Dogs and Carlton). St Kilda is 3-1 but they've beaten GC, Essendon when they hit rock bottom (and still nearly lost) and Hawthorn with a stack of injuries and only two on the bench. Port Adelaide couldn't beat a Richmond side missing the big four plus other A-grade talent. Adelaide is probably just a mid-table side. The Dogs are just a mid-table side (at best). Fremantle is just a mid-table side (at best). GWS, Geelong and West Coast are standing out, whilst Richmond has already knocked off two of its five road trips, will slowly start getting everyone back except Rance, and finishes the year with seven straight MCG games. Watch out. I'd like to say we showed in the Sydney game that we're a threat to push up the ladder, but I'm not convinced. Why is scoring so important (by the way, two sides scored 100, with a further two sides scoring over 90)? Our game vs Essendon, which was two 100+ scores, had no defence from either side to speak of. Hardly any intensity around the contest. GWS vs Geelong was a cracking game showing strong skills and determination from both sides, with a score of 79-75. Scoring doesn't necessarily mean good, or exciting, football. The debate needs to be framed around the spectacle, not the score.

The level of intensity and application Essendon showed against us was at least double what they showed against St Kilda. That was little to do with St Kilda being better than us (which was also true), it was more about how Essendon attacked the contest or generally cared about the game. In the first half of their game, Essendon was non-existent. St Kilda were playing a below-VFL level side. They've beaten a developing young side in GC by 1 point, an Essendon side which played the worst half of footy anyone will play this year whilst struggling to hold them off, and they beat Hawthorn by a kick despite the Hawks having at least 6 injuries and only 2 on the bench for a half. If we're talking their 3-1 record alone, I'm not worried in the slightest. It's not their W-L record which is the thing we should be worried about. St Kilda play a style of game which, when they're on, is our achilles heel. They'll use the space on the G, they'll bring pace, and if we leave too much space behind our press then they'll find it easier to score than they have in the opening four rounds. This is not going to be easy for us, but St Kilda is not a good side.

Massive reality check for Brisbane, getting absolutely pumped by Essendon. We might have given Essendon the opportunity to wake up from what could have been a season-ending slumber.

I like reading positive posts about Garlett. Presumably North isn't much chop, though?

These sorts of post really frustrate me. Do you know anything about Docherty's injury, or his fitness, or his rehab, or Carlton's medical team? Do you have any idea at all about how his rehab would have gone, if all else was equal, at our club? Does him running laps at four months post-ACL mean he's going to make some sort of remarkable recovery? Or are you just posting garbage?

I think the three big benefits we get from playing Preuss are: Better structure - he isn't going to roam up the ground like TMac or Weideman are so we keep him deep. That's good for keeping defenders deep (e.g. Aliir) but also good for our attacks as we don't have all our forwards being sucked up the ground Gawn benefits - I'm sure it's a good thing for Gawn that Preuss can take some of the load off him, but it also allows Gawn to sit outside the forward 50 when we're attacking, which makes our forward press a little stronger Physicality - TMac and Weideman aren't particularly imposing forwards, but having Preuss down there gives us a different physical look. It's a very small sample size so far, but I was encouraged by what I saw and I'd like to see more of it.

Actually I think it was "how re-hard they have to work".