titan_uranus

It's funny, watching the game live there wasn't a single player I was disappointed with other than Vanders. I can appreciate now, having read the comments on here, that I'm very much alone on that, but I find it interesting that Vanders is being singled out for "exemplifying the way we want to play the game" when all 22 of them did exactly that on Friday. It's not like we lacked intensity or tackling pressure, is what I'm getting at. I don't think he should be dropped (I don't think anyone should be dropped), but for mine he was not only ineffective as to our team offence, he had a negative effect on us given his mistakes, and that stood out to me more than anything. Agree with you on DE%, by the way.

We shut Mitchell down in Round 4 and lost by 11 goals. Mitchell gets a tonne of it but the damage O'Meara, Gunston, Smith, Breust and even Shiels can do is far worse IMO.

I know @Clint Bizkit and I are the only ones who think this, but if anyone should be dropped it should be VDB IMO. In saying that, I wouldn't be making any changes barring injury. I don't think we need to "release" Fritsch, we've been playing him across half-back for weeks now and he's playing that role well. It's tough for Smith, who had that spot, but I wouldn't be changing Fritsch's role up now. Isn't that what everyone said about us vs Geelong? That their experience was going to be a problem for us? I love Bernie but I don't think he makes us better and there's no one who deserves to be dropped to make room for him. Hawthorn would be mad to keep Ceglar in the side. They also know that speed kills us so I expect a runner to replace Ceglar.

Agreed. It's an old take on Melbourne which was relevant 8 weeks ago but less so now. We didn't have the West Coast game on our terms all day, and indeed they fought back and took the lead from us. But we steadied and won. Geelong opened the first quarter with the first 4 inside 50s. We didn't panic, we didn't collapse, we didn't go into any shells, we just steadied and blew them apart. A lot of supporters seems to throw around general MFC-style cliches - we can't play in front of crowds, or under lights, or in prime time, or against experienced sides. We've slowly been debunking each of those, to the point where they're not going to decide the game.

Have to give credit to West Coast, they were one down on the bench from early on but ran over the top of Collingwood. Collingwood still only have one win against a finalist. I don't rate them and on the shorter break against an in-form GWS, watch out. Meanwhile an MCG prelim would have been nice but we've already beaten WC once this year and the trips on the road this year have brought us together. They're beatable too, I think.

If we beat Hawthorn next week, I believe it will be the first time all three of Geelong, Sydney and Hawthorn have failed to make the preliminary finals since 2002.

There's a moment in the first quarter where Scott Selwood leads into someone's hip with his head, (rightly) doesn't get a free, then stops and looks at the umpire whilst the play carries on around him. He's worse than Joel. Absolute [censored].

I thought I might have been the only one to think this. I liked his aggression but I thought he was our worst last night. Good pressure, but we got pressure from all 22, and otherwise he made bad decisions at critical times.

6 - Harmes 5 - Weideman 4 - TMac 3 - Oliver 2 - Gawn 1 - Jetta

What a night. Our pressure was as god as any side's has been all year. We were tackling hard and they knew it, some of their players were just avoiding contact all night (see, e.g., Ablett). The second quarter felt like the Port Adelaide or Sydney game again, wasting opportunities and then seeing our opponent take it down the other end and kick a goal. But we held them at bay largely, including through the third when they lifted, and we put them away in the fourth. Goodwin mentioned the belief we gained from the West Coast win, and I'm sure that includes how we fought back after they took the lead. I reckon the days of us not believing in ourselves are firmly disappearing. I thought Harmes was incredible last night. His development this year has been as important to our improvement as any other factor, IMO. He does defensive jobs but burns his opponent the other way. Weideman is going to be a star for this club. I didn't think we'd see that sort of performance from him this soon, but he clearly now belongs. His tackle on Dangerfield was delicious. Frost did well on Hawkins IMO. Hawkins got into it when we allowed him to lead up into space. His two marks in the third were both a failure by the defence to plug the hole in front of him. I've seen a few posts about VDB. At the game I thought he was our worst by a mile. Yes, he tackled a lot, but so did pretty much every other player and I thought he made more mistakes than anyone else. Might have just been me though. And finally, I've been to plenty of games with big crowds but whenever Melbourne is involved, we're usually dwarfed by Collingwood/Richmond/Essendon supporters. But to be at a 91,000+ crowd where 80% of us were Melbourne supporters was surreal.

I'll try to join this year - I regularly miss a week or two early and then fall behind/drop out, but I'll try to keep up this time! Titans, Steelers, Rams

We're actually 1-7 (all losses bar St Kilda, we scored under 100). Still, that's 14 games where we scored 100+ points. Who'd have thought that imaginable back in 2015? As to the argument, of the 7 losses two were the Geelong games which we should have won, one was the Port loss (should have won), one was the Sydney game (we weren't terrible) and one was the Richmond game (we were better than them for significant periods). Flip the Geelong games and our record is 3-5 and not that much of an issue. From memory, in the fourth quarter in Geelong they dominated in the middle, and that's where the game turned around. But in general, you're absolutely right - their defence is their strong suit and they'll be banking on mopping up our inefficient inside 50s and turning them into scoring chains. The work we did vs West Coast and GWS to get more efficient going inside 50 and setting up our zone defence to lock the ball in our forward half will hopefully stand up against Geelong. Agreed. Setting up 6-6-6 is still an important tactical change from us, though. We've seen the 7th forward running in off the back of the square at centre bounces pretty much every week until last week. IMO we looked better without it - Gawn and our midfielders are more than capable of generating clearances and inside 50s without that running player and it means we're down 6-7 and not 5-7, as is often the case. We're 3-3 in night games this year, and of the losses one was the Port loss (we should have won) and one was the Geelong loss (we should have won). In the second half of the year alone, we stood up and played solid football against Port (Friday night on the road in hostile territory), Geelong (Saturday night, road, hostile) Adelaide (Saturday night, road, hostile), Sydney (51,424 crowd) and West Coast (55,824 crowd, road, hostile).

Bit of debate in here about whether the top 6 or bottom 6 matter more. Across the home and away season, I think the bottom 6 are as important as anyone else. Teams who fall away and have a weak bottom 6 I think struggle to win enough games through 22 rounds. But when it comes to finals, I think the top 6 become more important. In one game, where everything is on the line, the teams with absolute stardom at the top tend to shine through. As for our bottom 6, assuming Hannan and Viney replace Tyson and Kent, I'd consider them to include JKH, Spargo, Weideman, Hannan, VDB and Frost. These are our fringe players, the ones who have been in and out of the side (VDB due to injury of course, and Spargo's been more in than out). They're good, and can be match-winning (e.g. Hannan vs West Coast, Frost vs GWS), and I think they stand up with most other sides' bottom 6. But there's always room for improvement and in players like JKH and Spargo, plenty of room.

Macrae not being in the side and Franklin being named captain are baffling.

Stanley beat Gawn lasts time, but I don’t think Stanley will be fit for this final. We also get Hibberd and hopefully Viney back, both of whom missed last time. Need to keep their star mids as quiet as possible and take our opportunities when they arrive. They likely can’t be as accurate and as fortuitous as they were in the fourth in Geelong but they mightn’t be as slack as they were for the rest of that game, either.

If Kent and Tyson both miss then Viney and Hannan replace them, and that actually holds up quite well. The difficulty comes if either or both of Kent/Tyson are fit to play. I think Tyson was doing well enough today, and in the last few weeks, to hold his spot even when Viney returns, but that starts to affect team balance a bit. Do we drop JKH, who plays up the ground, to keep Tyson and bring Viney? If Kent is fit do we give him another crack and risk him struggling with injury?

6 - Harmes 5 - Gawn 4 - Brayshaw 3 - Salem 2 - Oliver 1 - Frost

IMO that was our best performance all year. Two down on the bench, coming back from Perth after a hot game and one fewer day's break than our opponent, at a ground we've at times this year struggled at, against a side which plays football the way which usually troubles us. And we didn't just win, we dominated for all bar maybe 15 minutes and won by 7 goals. The development of Harmes this year has been out of this world. I doubt anyone on here saw this from him. His one-handed pick up at full pace on the members' wing in the third was special, he works harder than anyone and he does it all whilst defending key mids from the opposition (Selwood, Kennedy, Shuey and now Kelly all have lost to him). We were on the back foot a bit early, both in the clearances and across half forward, but I was incredibly pleased to see us learn and adjust. Bodywork at the contest got better, our spread improved, and we wore them down (despite losing Tyson for a half). Most interesting to me was that we started 6-6-6, instead of having one forward run off the back of the square. They dropped a defender behind the ball so they had the extra man, but I was intrigued with us coming into the game not using that runner. Looked good, I thought. Frost, Oscar and Weideman all played with more confidence than I've seen from any of them. If Frost keeps playing like that he's going to become a key weapon. Weideman is playing better than most would have expected and his marking and leading up at the ball are getting better. Still have room to improve - Spargo is struggling IMO, and we still make some poor errors at odd times. Petracca's set shot kicking is getting worse, not better, unfortunately. But IMO we're peaking at the right time of year, and I cannot wait to take on Geelong for some redemption.

If we win today, we'll finish the season one win behind Collingwood. We'll have one more win against the top 8 than them, but we'll also have two losses to the bottom 10 (Port Adelaide and St Kilda). Collingwood had 14 games against the bottom 10 and won them all. If we hadn't dropped the St Kilda game then a win today would put us in front of them (and we'd be the side finishing 2nd or 3rd, not them).

I see better contenders in the bottom half of the 8 than the top. I view Sydney, GWS (at their best), us and Geelong as equal to, if not better than, each of Hawthorn and Collingwood. West Coast and Richmond are gettable, albeit still the best two sides in it this year. If they win their two qualifying finals and Collingwood and Hawthorn are hosting two of Syd/Mel/GWS/Geel, I see two highly competitive semi finals and at least one upset. Hawthorn struggled to put away Sydney without Franklin or Parker and which actually sucks at the SCG this year. Collingwood struggled to put away one of the least competitive sides in the comp and only got there due to said uncompetitive side committing horrendous skill errors at key times (e.g. Wilson's turnover, then that player in the forward half failing to kick it and getting caught). Rubbish. Geelong had a horrendously tough fixture this year, repeating against Richmond, Hawthorn, Sydney, us and GC. That's four of the top 8 (if we win, it will be four of the top 6). We repeated against Geelong, Adelaide, St Kilda, the Dogs and GC. That's three of the bottom six. It's a 22-game season. You qualify based on your 22-game result, not your last two. Geelong didn't make it because of their last two games, or their percentage. They made it because their 22-game result is better than 10 other sides. Trying to remove "top v bottom" games at the end of the season would have robbed us of the Richmond v Dogs game yesterday, which was an absolute belter. Try telling Macrae, Hunter or Naughton that they had nothing to play for. Not at all. Geelong is as good an opponent as I can see in the 8, IMO.

Can't wait to see how we play without the pressure of having to make finals. I'd like to think that frees us up to play at our best and I would love to see us flex our muscles before the finals. I'd also like to think there's a degree of extra motivation the players get knowing that if we win we get another crack at Geelong. No chance IMO. They have the chance to perfect their game on the G (first game here in five months) and if they win, they get to play us again in two weeks with a stronger side at their home ground.

Sounds a bit like Collingwood vs Melbourne, Round 23 2017. I'm sure some West Coast board last year had a thread hoping for a Collingwood win so they could make it, and someone on there was like "there's no chance Melbourne lose this game to a team with a coach about to get fired".

I have such vivid memories of Round 1, 2007. I strongly recall how excited I was to go to the game. We were the first game of the year, Friday night at the G, we'd just beaten them the Elimination FInal and because we'd finished 2006 as the best Victorian club and the previous 5 premierships had been won by interstate sides the media was all over us as the next big thing. We were never in the game and by the time we could blink we were 0-9 and everything had completely changed.

No change IMO. But with Viney hopefully ready to come back for the first final, pressure squarely remains on the fringe players (Spargo, Hannan, Kent, Tyson, Weideman).

There was a worse one IMO - VDB got caught early in the game (first quarter I think) near the boundary line, got given an eon to handpass it, should have been holding the ball. I think it led to a goal, too. That's not fair, Wiseblood. He also talks a lot about getting back behind the mark.