titan_uranus

I suspect much of it is psychological. Tonnes of inside 50s, but the longer we go without scoring a goal the more pressure builds every time we take a shot that we convert it.

This is a terrible take. This is better. There was no need whatsoever for Jetta to pin both of Smith's arms and drive him head first into the ground. There was no need for him to take Smith to the ground at all. The tackle should have been penalised because it was dangerous. The suspension is the right decision, the free kick on the night was incorrect and it had a material impact on the game.

When discussing this game there are two non-umpiring issues to bear in mind: 1. By my count West Coast had 2 best 22 players missing (Barrass and Naitanui), whereas we had at least 8. 2. They lost Venables late in the second but we then lost ANB early in the third, and also later lost T Smith and Salem in the fourth, finishing with one on the bench. 1 exacerbates 2 - it’s harder to cover for injuries mid-game when the players trying to do the covering are already reserve/back up players.

Let's be fair though, most people on here had written us off before the game, so the fact we led for 80%+ or something like that and should have won should be a positive to the same people who thought we were in for a 10-goal loss or a repeat of the prelim.

I see Fritsch's problem as being fumbles. He seems to make a number of errors when going for the ball or handpassing. He nailed some kicks today though.

Garlett's miss, when he had entire 50 in front of him but lazily kicked it from 40 instead of running in, was the worst one.

I've only seen the second half and that was clearly the best football we've played all year. We lost this game because we dominated the third quarter but barely scored. We were playing top 4 football at times, other than in respect of shots on goal. We were tough at the contest, quick on the spread, we hit targets by foot, we had players leading up at the ball, but when we needed to kick the goal we missed or fluffed the mark or didn't make the distance or dropped a soda of a mark. We should have been 5+ goals up at three quarter time, not 2. Key umpiring mistakes in the fourth didn't help. I'm pretty sure Petty touched that first goal, there was the non-call on the throw, but the biggest one was Jetta's sling tackle on Tim Smith which should have been called a dangerous tackle. Each of those cost us a goal and the third one was when our confidence broke. The crowd found its voice, they had their confidence, we were a runner down on the bench and on a six-day break with too many VFL level players we hit a wall. We should have had a nice 5 goal buffer though, so that we could afford those things to happen. Play like that for the rest of the year and we can improve significantly and do far better than our current record suggests.

Feels like we have one too many tall defenders - do we really need all three of OMac, Frost and Petty?

Yes we do - McDonald, Weideman, Preuss, Petracca are in the former group, and Spargo, Garlett, Hunt, Petracca and Melksham are in the latter group. The ability is there, the form is not.

Agree. The OP says games are "harder to watch" because there are fewer instances of a team scoring 100 points. The Melbourne v Essendon game had lots of goals but no skill, turnovers galore, and no defence from either side. I don't accept that made the game enjoyable. The scoring debate is taking over from the real debate, which should be about what we are actually watching. Goals do not make the game enjoyable in all circumstances.

Did he? I read that he first went off in the third quarter, but the break happened in the fourth quarter. A 15-player injury list is sizeable. On the AFL's website (which is not up to date), St Kilda has 14 players listed but most other clubs are 10-12, and some are much less (e.g. Brisbane has three). More importantly, of the 15, 8 are first choice 22 (Lewis, Lever, Melksham, Hannan, May, Hibberd, AVB, Jetta) and a further 4 (Weideman, JKH, J Smith, KK) who are on the fringe, if not actually best 22. It's tough going for us on this front at the moment.

Haven't seen anything other than the last two minutes. But I know that we had three injuries, including to Melksham who appears to have been one of our better players in the first half. And I know that GC are a better side than in 2018 (seems many don't realise that). And I know that GC haven't been involved in a high-quality football match all year, bringing most of their opponents down to their level (I think only Adelaide has looked strong against them, even West Coast at home last week struggled to get out of second gear). And from the sweat levels I saw on the players in the final two minutes, I wouldn't be surprised if humidity/dew played a role in the fumbling. And the tackle stats, particularly tackles inside 50, were at an elite level. And then on Sunday they side we beat last week dominated GWS. I'll take the win in those circumstances. Let's see if we can build on this.

Really surprised that ANB got dropped. I suppose it's a positional/rotational thing, maybe Petracca/Melksham will play more minutes in the forward line to compensate and Viney takes their midfield minutes, but I thought ANB's running and pressure were good last week and that's what we want from him. Viney has declared himself fit multiple times in the past and proved on game day to have been wrong. I hope this time he's got the call right.

Interesting stuff. Roos' explanation in the linked article for why the stat is important makes sense and ties into our form - we're probably still doing very well with CPs in the clearances, but we all feel like too often we lose one-on-ones at either end of the ground and rarely win those 50/50 contests outside of stoppages.

Yes but you were an advocate for getting rid of Hogan. You're appalling. Where did the club do this?

https://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2019-05-07/injury-update-preuss-a-test-to-return- Promising news for Lever and Hannan. May's position seems unclear. J Smith going nowhere, unfortunately.

I can't stand Barrett but I'm closer to his opinion than the opposite. If it had been Joel Smith having the beer, not May, this story and thread wouldn't exist.

Keilty was OK, nothing special. Happy for him to get another game as I'd prefer us to give new players more than just one game before sending them back to Casey, but if Preuss or Weideman need to come back in then Keilty's had his taste and knows what's required. Other than that one potential change I don't think we'll see any others. Surely Viney needs more than one week with his history of injuries and we have a six-day break into a second consecutive road trip after this week, so I don't want to see half-baked players running around on the GC and then trying to back that up in Perth.

In Hore's case, might be a good reminder not to write players off after one or two games, @dazzledavey36? Hore's kicking needs work but he reads the play as well as any defender at our club since Jared Rivers. He looks to me to understand defending really well.

Disgraceful attitude. Men in this country think punching is OK. If the Melbourne supporter couldn't deal with someone (whether disabled or not) knocking his beer out of his hand without resorting to violence, he's an embodiment of a cultural problem we have. If your response is "who cares", you're not helping.

At the time I thought the umpire might have called him to play on before his 30 had expired, arguing he and Lockhart were wasting time. The umpire would have been right to do that I reckon, I’m not sure you can take the 30 then kick sideways and expect to say “oh no this time I’m actually going to take the shot”. Well if you also say things like Harmes was terrible yesterday because of his two 50s then don’t be surprised if people don’t listen to you.

That was mainly Oscar’s fault. Just waited for the ball to come to him, allowed O’Brien to cut it off.

6 - Harmes 5 - Salem 4 - Gawn 3 - Oliver 2 - Hunt 1 - Lockhart

Much stronger performance in many ways. Their accuracy in the second half is the only reason they stayed in it (plus some bad 50m penalties - the second one to Harmes shouldn't have been paid IMO but if that was 50 then they missed one on ANB late in the third, plus there were two in the fourth that should have been paid to us). We've definitely relaxed the forward press and we're better for it. We kept defenders deeper, playing a sweeper like Richmond did last week. We also kept forwards deeper in our forward line (@Clint Bizkit would have liked that I reckon) and had someone to aim at. As a result, we defended the ground so much better. We weren't getting cut up on the switch and we didn't have as many bursts out the back of our zone. Harmes was incredible, the two 50s notwithstanding. O'Meara was dominant early but he took him out of the game, got 31 of his own and kicked an important goal. Gawn played much better (despite a few bad errors), Oliver's defensive running was notable, and TMac worked his way into a bit of form. Hore does so much right, he just needs to improve his kicking. Lockhart has talent too - a really good runner and not as fumbly as previously. Still plenty to work on but we were clearly the better side after half time and hopefully can develop some confidence from this.

I agree with @Moonshadow - I expect to see the Hawks switching across half-back, opening up the fat side of the ground, and trying to move the ball down the wings with pace. Three things I really want to see today (other than a win of course) - the forward press not being as high (which we saw steps towards vs Richmond), some marks inside 50 (or at least contests which bring the ball to ground), and more forward pressure from the mid/small forwards (Garlett, Hunt, Melksham, Petracca).