titan_uranus

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".

I do love Demonland sometimes. Before last night, the Preuss trade was a disaster. Now, after one game, the Preuss trade is a masterstroke.

I see the CP count was +31 in our favour in the second half, righting the ship after being -11 in the first quarter and even in the second.

Really interested to see the replay and see how he fit into the side. But looks like there's some concern over his shoulder - said in his interview with Jude Bolton after the game that he'd hurt his shoulder, was strapped, and he couldn't raise it in the team song after the game.

Only got to see a bit of the third and the fourth quarter so only a small sample size, but our defensive press was markedly better. More chasing and harrassing in our forward half, a better and tighter zone through the middle, and when Sydney did get through our last line was in a better position to defend. Then I looked at the stat sheet and saw that we won the CPs 153-133 and clearances 44-37. So it looks to me like we got our "one wood" back again (midfield dominance) and the defensive side of the gameplan improved, and that took us back to something which more closely resembled Melbourne of 2018. Let's hope we've learnt something from what we did to get the game on these terms. Looking forward to seeing the replay, not just to see the win but also to see how we turned it around from the first half.

Last year I would have agreed, but this year I don't think our problem is width that much. As in, I don't think we're being broken down defensively because we can't spread wide. IMO if we play like we did in Rounds 1-3 we'll get opened up on any ground, narrow or wide. One possible benefit to the SCG is that its shorter in length. We love pressing up into our forward half and at the SCG I suppose that doesn't leave as much space out the back as it does at the G or at GMHBA, for example. So maybe there's less space behind us to defend and we won't get caught out as much?

I'd be happy to see us try something new or different with Jones. Whether that's half-back, half-forward, a defensive run-with role, or back in the guts, I don't think we can keep sticking with doing what we've tried doing with him for the first three weeks. He's unfortunately been one of our worst players so far this year.

You don't know that. They might appear fitter or "more prepared" (what does that even mean, anyway?). But the worst team we've played is probably better than the best team they've played - St Kilda, Fremantle and the Dogs is not exactly three games of top flight opposition. It's easy to look fit or "prepared" (still don't know what you mean by that, do you just mean "in form"?) when you're winning.