titan_uranus

Certainly we are getting Adelaide at about the best time. They have a stack of A-graders missing. But even so, the side they’ll field will be the best we’ve faced since Richmond. IMO, we should win this game.

You’d assume those are the 5. Personally I’d have the other four well in front of us, until we show that we are capable of beating stronger sides than North.

Forgive us for not all being ex-AFL players. Seriously this is one of the most infuriating things anyone can say on a football forum. Bugg’s doing the right thing by playing well at Casey but he was woeful in the seniors this year and whilst he was in the right spot often enough, he too regularly either didn’t want the ball or turned it over. We are also “unsociable” enough without him. He won’t be getting a game for being “unsociable” alone, either.

Garlett only comes in for Spargo if the MC think that will actually make us better. Not because it’s indigenous round. Weideman deserves to get his spot back when fit. But I wouldn’t be rushing him back for an interstate trip and I have no problem with Bull getting another game.

@Demonland, @Nasher - help? This thread deserves an update!

If Gawn had kicked straight, we’d have a win over Geelong under our belts and at least some of the discussion about our credentials wouldn’t need to occur right now. But he didn’t, and so valid question marks remain. Adelaide is the first chance to test ourselves, but they’ve been absolutely belted by injuries. The real tests will come post-bye. Our opponents are better, and we have repeat travel (Adelaide x 2, Geelong, Perth, Darwin) - that’s 50% of our post-bye games out of Melbourne.

Win this week and we’ll have won 5 in a row for the first time since 2006 (rounds 10-15).

It genuinely feels odd to see a scoreline in which we won by 100+ points. And I love it. The big tests are still to come, starting with Adelaide. But, when we were 2-3 we all knew we needed to win these four games, and build percentage, to set up our season. We’ve done exactly what we needed to.

What, 4 years ago or whenever it was? He’s been an incredibly good value pick up for us and Carlton were incredibly stupid to let him go for the price we paid. He’s out of form currently but that doesn’t suddenly mean Malthouse knew what he was doing. He needs to get his workrate and defensive pressure back up to where we know they can be. I don’t expect Spargo to hold his spot all year so when Garlett gets his chance I want to see gut-running, chasing, tackling and harrassing. Goals wil flow from that.

Many are expecting TMac to relief ruck. But Carlton’s relief ruck is McKay. 3 hit outs last week (McKernan, a perennial spud, got 8). So why can’t Smith relief ruck? He’s done it before. And it keeps the forward set up the same as the last three weeks, with Smith playing Weid’s role. As for Tyson being dropped, a good call both for structure and to tell Tyson to work on his disposals.

Disagree. The charge was intentional, they both argued at the Tribunal that it was careless, the Tribunal agreed and found them guilty of careless only (and not intentional). Careless is, AFAIK, a charge worth a fine if found guilty, so fines were handed out. My concern is that neither of the two in incidents could be anything other than intentional. They were both, clearly, intentional acts from the respective Curnows. Yet the Tribunal concluded otherwise. Given the guidelines automatically refer intentional conduct to the Tribunal, my understanding is that the minimum penalty if guilty must be a week, and not a fine - no idea if I’m right though. But this is where the debate about the consequence of the action kicks in, and I’m more than comfortable with the AFL’s position being that if you intentionally make contact with an umpire, you miss a week (with additional weeks given to more forceful actions).

But that’s not the issue. Hawkins pleaded guilty to intentionally making contact with an umpire. The Curnows were both charged with the same offence. Both then argued it wasn’t intentional, just merely careless. As you note, careless contact with unpires happens all the time (eg running through one because you’re not paying enough attention). The issue here is that there is no reasonable way to characterise what either Curnow did as anything other than intentional. Once it is accepted that both intentionally made contact with an umpire, both should be suspended for a week as the general principle ought to be that players should not intentionally make contact of any sort with an umpire.

I feel far less comfortable about this game than any of the previous three. We just seem to struggle against Carlton. I expect a win, and a solid one at that, but if Cripps, Curnow x 2 and McKay play well, it might not be easy.

My frustration has nothing to do with us playing Carlton this week. In fact, I’d prefer we get a full strength opposition to ensure we approach the game seriously. My frustration is that the MRO/Tribunal system is dishing up inexplicable and inconsistent decisions on a far too regular basis.

These are two absolutely incredulous Tribunal decisions. They make absolutely no sense at all. Both clearly intentionally touched the umpire. Hawkins must be livid he was advised (presumably) to plead guilty, if this is the way the Tribunal assesses things.

Weid is not going to be dropped for Viney. Nor will he be dropped for Pedersen. We’ve clicked the last few weeks and our forward line is functioning better each week. Weid is contributing to that, even if he only got 6 touches. You’ve been hit for this post a few times already, and in some respects I agree with those who’ve called you out. We missed the finals last year in part due to percentage, but in larger part because we dropped games to non-finalists when we should have won (including Fremantle and North x 2). The past three weeks we have been the better side on paper with an expectation of winning, and we’ve strung three solid and largely untroubled performances together. As for the “exception” people are citing, North has beaten Sydney on the road and Hawthorn, and pushed Richmond better than most. Our win over them should be viewed as a strong performance and not merely an “exception”. Yes, some on here have taken our wins over bottom 6 sides as evidence of us being a top 4 contender, when the reality is we have harder games to come in the back half of the fixture. But these three wins are incredibly important for a side like us, and given both 2016 and 2017 and our repeated losses to bad sides.

Nice to finally get a 10+ goal win. The percentage boost is important. With the enormous inside 50 discrepancy though, we should have won by more. That’s not to detract from the positives but +40 inside 50s should result in more than +69 points. Need to keep focused and take the same approach to Carlton and the G. We haven’t been +3 in the W-L ledger since 2011. A win next week puts us at 6-3.

+28 in inside 50s. The Geelong game was +23. Yet again, we should be further in front.

We did well with crowds last year too. Better than St Kilda who still have 3 Friday night games to come. Our current figure is skewed though given we’ve only hosted Vic sides at the G (Geel, NM, Rich). The two NT games plus home games against GC and GWS won’t help. WB, St K and Syd could all draw 35,000+ and if we get a good crowd at QBD our overall figure should be OK.

Let’s just focus on what could be a tricky road trip to Brisbane, followed by a game against a side we invariably struggle against, first.

Cannot agree more. It’s entirely possible for us to have played well but to have disappointed in the last 15 minutes. See above. Why can’t it be both?

This is some MFCSS rubbish. They were awful, truly awful, against Adelaide. They brought GWS down to their level more than anything. And they were losing to Brisbane in time on in the third and were only about 10 up halfway into the fourth (bearing in mind this was at Etihad, not in Brisbane). They were also abysmal against North (again at Etihad). Their skills have been consistently poor all year, worse than anything we've dished up. They don't have A-graders and many of the kids they thought would be A-graders are stagnant or going backwards. None of this is to say we are certainties to beat them. We're not certainties to beat anyone, and we've traditionally struggled against St Kilda. But let's not turn this into a narrative that suggests St Kilda are anything other than a bottom 4 side.

Agree entirely. The game countered Sydney's mid-2000s "ugly" football with the late-2000s/early-2010s skill of Geelong and, then, Collingwood's press. The press was countered with Hawthorn's "web". That was countered with the Dogs' run-and-gun approach. That was countered with Richmond's aggressive mauling around the contest. The game will evolve from this, like it always does. The way the game is being played leaves a huge amount of space. I can easily see teams starting to take a number out of the contest and hang them on the "fat side" of the ground, instructing inside mids to go to that spot with the clearance. We might have been experimenting with Stretch in such a role on ANZAC Eve, possibly. All this talk is just knee-jerk crap (which the AFL loves), OTT media hyping (to fill news columns) or, with the greatest respect, people who yearn for "the good old days". I'd support this. I don't know how much difference it would make, given that most of the time once the player is down then the ball isn't coming out so the same result is achieved, but it might assist in the ball coming out from a tackle more often. At any rate, it is completely unnecessary to have two or three extra players jump on a player on the ground.

Whilst it's always silly to write off certain games and pencil in others, I don't think it's exaggerating at all to say this three week stretch could make or break (but more likely break) our season. Two road trips to Adelaide, road trip to West Coast, road trip to Geelong, road trip to Darwin, plus MCG games against Sydney and GWS makes for an exceptionally difficult final 10 games. To give us the best chance of setting up with confidence and belief for that horrendous final 10 games, we really need to lock in these early season games against bottom 6 sides.

I'd actually have them firmly in the bottom 6. Better than Carlton and Brisbane, but thereabouts with GC, the Dogs and Essendon. Don't disagree with your comment that we can't take them lightly, though.