titan_uranus

You can react however you want. But you've chosen a pessimistic reaction, which is par for the course for you. An alternative would be to consider 2019 in the context of 2014-2018. Given the changes the club implemented and the progress we made over those five years, alongside the capabilities this list showed in 2018, I don't believe the only reasonable reaction is to say we're back to 2007 (or back to 2014, or back to anything really). I'm more than happy to say I believe we can turn it around in time for 2020. And before anyone misinterprets, this doesn't mean I think we will turn it around. It means I think we can turn it around.

Given our percentage we're not moving up with one win anyway. If Carlton and Sydney can both beat St Kilda (doubtful, but possible) then we could win both games and still not move up from 17th.

So we're not even in the bottom four worst performers of the round! (GWS, GC, Essendon, North)

So I've gone and taken a look. All four of Mihocek's goals are in the highlights video on the AFL website. The first one, which it seems is the one you're referencing, Lever had the front position covered but the kick, cleverly, went behind them allowing Mihocek to run back with the flight. The second one was a panic-hold from Lever. So that's definitely one against him. The third one Lever slipped and Adams' kick was perfectly placed. The fourth one Lever wasn't in the contest. And how do you say the tackle stat is relevant? For context, Scharenberg, Mayne and Howe (all playing in key defensive posts for Collingwood) had 0 tackles. Hibberd, JKH and May also registered donuts. So it's not like Lever was on his lonesome on that front. One - watching the replay I don't think that's a fair summation of it at all. Two - agree Three - doesn't look lost to me, looks like he slipped and Mihocek got off him. Granted, I think one of Lever's problems is he's not particularly quick, so he's going to get caught on leads a bit I think. Anyway, certainly one he gave up, maybe two, but not all four, and if these are the sorts of goals he's giving up then I'm not as fussed as it seems others are.

Sure, Mihocek kicked 4, but at the game I never felt like that was because he was beating Lever (e.g. I didn't see him beating Lever in one-on-one contests, or leading him to the ball). Again, I might be wrong about that. Do you recall (or can you find video of) Mihocek's goals being a direct result of poor play by Lever?

I genuinely don't understand the Lever criticism, which I suppose might mean I'm on my own in thinking he was OK. He could be better, and we all want him to be an AA-defender week in and week out, but I thought he was pretty good today. There are so many other parts of our game today that stood out to me as problematic rather than Lever. As I said, maybe I'm on my own on this, but I really think too many have stupidly high expectations of him, the more so when the commentary around someone like Preuss is generally far more positive.

Not by Clint Bizkit's standards. Like praha and BBP, it's glass half empty, always. IMO saying our list isn't good enough and that we need to start again, aside from being pure pessimism, just isn't a reasonable position to take based on this year in the context of the last five years. If we struggle again in 2020 then that will change things, but given what we did with our list and culture from 2014-2018, I don't accept that 2019 is enough evidence to say we're cooked and we need to rebuild.

I've read somewhere that May barely had a soft tissue injury at the GC. He's now had four (three hamstrings and a groin) in 6 months here. I've also read that the GC wanted him to carry more weight than we did, so when he arrived we wanted his skinfolds lower. I'm not an expert (@Webber might be able to comment?) but I can't help but query whether the way we've managed May's body since he arrived has impacted on him in a way that has exposed him to soft tissue injuries.

6 - Petracca 5 - Fritsch 4 - May 3 - JKH 2 - Lewis 1 - Salem

I'd be most keen to see one of Viney, Jones or Brayshaw out of the side, to see what that does to our midfield mix. But I doubt that will happen. We'll probably just see Hore replace May and maybe Wagner or Baker get dropped for another fringe player.

Yep I agree with you. They need the percentage and they need to build form for their final two 8-point games. I reckon people saying they put the cue in the rack are just looking for things to be negative about.

Our fixture this year gave us home games against Essendon, Collingwood, Richmond and Hawthorn, along with a Friday night vs Sydney. We'll get ANZAC back next year and then every year we'll get one of them as a home game guaranteed. The risk was that the Collingwood, Richmond and Sydney games were in the final month which meant that we needed both sides to be going well (particularly us) in order to draw big crowds. The rain at both the Richmond and Collingwood games didn't help but the fault rests almost entirely with us for failing to be competitive when the big home games came around.

IMO they didn't beat us, we beat ourselves. When we limited turnovers we were on top (first and fourth quarters). When we turned it over we gave up score after score (second and third quarters). And we couldn't hang in there because we kept missing easy shots. We're clearly trying to move the ball differently, with far more kick-mark than playing on and handpassing. The problem is that too many of our players aren't good enough at this gameplan for it to work for four quarters. Hibberd, Viney and Jones are a massive part of our current problem. All three turn it over by foot far too much, Hibberd destructively so. Viney isn't adding enough as a midfielder and Jones is really lost out there position-wise. Hunt shouldn't be played in the backline again. He's either a forward or not in the side. Ditto Fritsch - what a waste of a season by playing him back/wing for so long. There's some really terrible commentary about some individual players in this thread though. JKH was one of our best, Lever was actually quite good, and although I don't like OMac at all he did a better job of a tall forward/second ruck than pretty much everyone else we've tried there recently. Gawn was down on his best but Grundy didn't dominate at all. They sort of nullified each other but that's not an unreasonable result when the two best ruckmen play each other.

The only reasonable explanation I can think of for OMac getting a game along with Frost, Lever and May is that one of them is going to play forward/ruck. That does not sit well with me. Hore should be playing, OMac shouldn't, and we should still be able to find someone to relieve Gawn.

I don't agree with them getting pick 2 but I don't know that this is a decent argument against it. Those three wins were vs the Dogs, Carlton and Fremantle, and the loss was to St Kilda. Not exactly a taxing month. Since then they've only gotten within 4 goals of their opponent three times in 15 games (vs us, St Kilda and Essendon).

Good research. TMac/Weid's drop in form is certainly a part of our problem but it's not as simple as the OP's analysis suggests. We didn't play a single repeat game until West Coast a few weeks ago. They're in a five week stretch from Round 18-22. The season was shot by Round 18. The double up games have pretty much played no role, at all, in our season.

Interesting stuff, thanks @fr_ap. The TMac/Weideman stuff is interesting but I'm not sure it's as simple as analysing the specific defenders each one has played on, given the quality of ball coming at them. The handball receives stat is a pretty good indicator of one of our big problems.

Why the bump? Some sort of news?

Is it only Melbourne supporters who think that if someone finds a positive in a loss then they're "happy" with it? Three of the clubs you've then picked out to apparently contrast with us (Carlton, St Kilda, the Dogs) lost. Sounds to me like you're suggesting they might be "happy with supposedly honourable losses". I also love the comment that the final margin flattered us. Of course, when the final margin flatters our opponent (e.g. because we're horrendously inaccurate, or down to one on the bench), that argument never goes the other way. And 39 tackles is pathetic, but Richmond's 45 isn't? That's barely one more tackle per quarter than us. None of this is to say I'm "happy" with losing. I'm not. I hate 2019. I hate the promise that we were given after 2018 and having had all the excitement for this year get ripped out from under me. I hate that I'm back to going to a near-empty MCG to watch low-quality football. I hate that we've been thinking about the draft since Queen's Birthday. But that doesn't mean I can't look at a game and analyse where things are maybe working well, or improving, or even just changing from week to week in a way that suggests the FD is trying to change us for 2020. Agree wholeheartedly. Of course, that makes us one of the dreaded "apologists" (FWIW, I detest the phrase "wrist-slasher" as much as "apologist").

Did he say that? Far out.

I didn't say you did. It's just a trend that pops up from posters who are down about 2019 and are trying to make 2018 sound like less than it actually was.

There's a really good pinned thread at the top of the board.

What a ridiculous and unfair thing to say. You don't like the Lever deal. Fine. I did, and still do, so apparently I accept mediocrity? I hope he plays incredible football for us, because it will make us a significantly better side and because I will remember this post of yours.

A bit like the revisionism that says we "fluked" making it to a prelim because we hit a "purple patch" over Rounds 22-23 and the first two finals.

Some stats which catch my eye: 2nd for inside 50s 4th for inside 50 differential (i.e. only three clubs get more ball inside their forward 50 compared to their opponent than we do) 4th for clearance differential 14th for rebound 50s 17th in opposition rebound 50s 17th in rebound 50s differential Validates what we're seeing on the ground. Too many entries inside 50 are wasted - they're not marked (TMac, Weideman struggling, Melksham and J Smith not playing, Fritsch not playing forward) and when they hit the ground we can't lock it in (Spargo, Garlett and ANB all struggling, Lockhart playing in fits and starts). I am of the view that the stats relating to rebound 50s derive significantly from the stats relating to inside 50s - I would like to see a stat showing how often our opponents' scoring chains start from within our forward 50 or forward half. Interestingly though, this is not how we lost vs St Kilda. Though I've still not seen the game, we had fewer inside 50s than the Saints and I understand we were turning it over a lot in our back half, rather than our forward half. Not sure if that signifies a change in how we tried to play (which we obviously failed at) or not.