titan_uranus

How much worse does Melksham have to play before he gets dropped? Would have preferred to have given Bugg another game than Melksham.

We didn't lose three games in a row at all last year. I'll be disappointed, to say the least, if we drop this one.

Having calmed down considerably from the game, this sums me up nicely I think. Most of what we're doing is working. In all four games, IMO, we've been on top for longer than our opponents have. When we lose it's because we aren't doing enough damage with our momentum and simultaneously letting our opponents do sufficient damage with their momentum. If we, as you say, convert more when we go forward and can tighten up even 20% behind the ball, we should improve both those problems. Getting Hogan, Lewis and Hibberd into the side and getting important players like Tyson, Kent, Viney, Petracca and Salem up closer to 100% TOG will also hep that happen, I think.

I think we all said that after the St Kilda loss in 2015. You're probably right about Jetta and Hunt covering the half-back space, but we should never have been in a position where we only had three players able to contest the long kick inside 50. Presumably the majority of our mids had pushed up after Vince's poor kick to contest the ball on half-back and as we inched out to the wing, followed the ball instead of hanging back. That will come with experience but to be honest we shouldn't need to learn that. Surely Viney is injured - there is no good reason why he should be missing a quarter of the game otherwise. Also, where do you get this stat from?

Sorry rjay but Frost wasn't "hardly" better, he was significantly better. No worse defensively (i.e. no worse with body positioning or one-on-one stuff) and much, much better offensively. Rusty, that's for sure, and he's no Alex Rance, but an improvement on OMac (btw, I'm a long-term OMac fan. I think he'll make it. But right now Frost is a better option for that spot). Having said that, our defensive issues are not the back six individuals. They are team structures and pressure up the ground. The third quarter was on the half-forwards and midfielders for failing to apply enough pressure, allowing Fremantle to move the ball with ease.

An absolute shambles. Granted, Fremantle were rolling the dice significantly leaving this many players forward of centre, but regardless it's actually strains the realm of credulity to believe that, despite possessing the ball, we would have had 15 players somewhere other than in the defensive 50 with 1.46 left on the clock.

I'm not taking Richmond that seriously yet because they've beaten Carlton, Collingwood, Brisbane and West Coast in the rain. That looks like three bottom 6 teams and whilst West Coast is a quality opponent they got them in the rain and we know West Coast is at least 5 goals worse on the road. Having said that, you're right, they have quality players across each line and they're getting goals out of far more than just Riewoldt as has been the case in recent years. But as is always the case, we can't just rely on our back six stopping their forward six. We need to apply consistent pressure through the middle on their premier ball carriers. Letting Martin, Cotchin and Prestia do what they want will lead to us conceding basic goals. I still favour our forward line (with Hogan) over their backline so, as is often the case, much of this game comes down to the midfield.

I can't help but reflect on the number of games over the last few years where we've struggled to hold onto a small lead in the dying minutes. Obviously there's yesterday. From my memory, there's also: Round 19 2016 vs Gold Coast - had the lead, Vince had the ball, turned it over and Lynch could have kicked a goal after the siren. Round 1 2016 vs GWS - we had a two goal lead with a minute to go, we conceded a goal, then we let them get the simple centre clearance through Shiel. We did, however, flood the backline to prevent a mark but it was close. Round 11 2015 vs St Kilda - we all remember that one. Similar problem to yesterday, failing to get enough numbers into the backline and conceding a frustratingly simple goal out the back. Round 18 2014 vs Port Adelaide - from memory they kicked a late goal to take the game from us. Round 13 2014 vs Essendon - took the lead through Salem but IIRC we let them get it inside their forward 50 in the last minute, but did hold on. Not sure if there's a systematic problem, but too many similar situations with no obvious improvement, IMO. The problem in the 2015 St Kilda game was remarkably similar to yesterday (I still cannot believe we only had three people inside our defensive 50 at that final contest with McCarthy).

On the one hand, 2-2 was on the cards with St Kilda at Etihad and Geelong in the first month. So in that respect, 2-2 is not that bad. On the other hand, given how the games played out we should be 3-1 and could easily (yes, easily) be 4-0. So in that respect, 2-2 is not good enough. In an even season, every win is crucial, and ultimately I'm gutted we dropped a game to an interstate side at the MCG when we led with 3 minutes to go. Could be the difference between a home final or away final, for example, or finals vs no finals at all.

The differential for CPs and clearances is crucial as I've thought we've been strong in those areas to date. The increase in UPs without a major increase in inside 50s comes from the over-possessing which we need to cut down on. The increase in scoring shots is a positive, though, especially given we've had a lot of shots in the two games without Hogan.

After Viney's goal Watts signalled to the bench to ask whether he should go back or not. The bench signalled to him to stay put. I think we took the view that with 3 minutes left it was too early to flood back. The bigger issue is what happened once we took possession in the back half and, most of all, why, once the ball came out (through Vince) we only left three players in the defensive 50 - Fremantle had a 4-on-3 for the McCarthy goal, that is absolutely inexcusable. Even if not flooding back, it's unfathomable that we were outnumbered. Pathetic? That was the largest crowd we've ever drawn to an MCG home game against Fremantle. Easter is a reasonably decent excuse, by the way. Not everyone or every family forgoes a four-day weekend to stay back to watch a football game, especially when the opponent is Fremantle (not exactly a blockbuster). And unless you were sitting in the Fremantle cheer squad, the crowd was quite obviously more vocal. Pretty weak complaint, IMO.

Will need to see what happens at Casey but I'm currently favouring bringing in Hogan and Hibberd for Weideman and Melksham.

No, you're talking what "would" (in your opinion) have happened if Hogan/Lewis had played. From what happened in both games, we played well enough for long enough to win both. We didn't, but just as I can't say we would definitely have lost both with them, you can't say we would definitely have won both with them. And as for Vince, we are long past the stage where we should be happy with people who win the ball without more. Measuring output based solely on possessions, especially when you're comparing Vince and Jetta, is nonsense. And I'll say it again, Vince is a senior player and doesn't deserve the same leniency with mistakes that we (rightly) afford the kids. Average age: Melbourne 24y 0m, Fremantle 24y 11m. Average games: Melbourne 72.2, Fremantle 85.3. No. Not even close.

Are you defending Melksham or just noting Grimes is long past it?

Tyson's making a lot of mistakes, sure, but who is his replacement. Brayshaw? I'm genuinely serious about this - what was the good Vince did? I was there and I honestly cannot say I felt Vince added anything good to the game. And as for the mistakes, it's one thing to lay off ANB with his backwards turnover last week but not only is Vince a leader, but he made a similar mistake last year against Gold Coast. He should know better and IMO it's completely fair to criticise him for those fourth quarter errors. As to the Hogan/Lewis thing, whilst there's obviously no doubt their absence hurt us, we should have won both games we played without them. We did more than enough today to win the game and, whilst clearly it might have been more of a certainty or easier with them, we should have been 6+ goals up at half time and we should have held onto our lead in the fourth.

I certainly don't expect Weideman to be like Hogan was in his first/second year. But there's dominant, and then there's OK, or even acceptable. I don't want anyone in our forward line who has no ability (whether because they're not fit enough or otherwise) to impact the game once the ball hits the ground. He might learn from Hogan but if we lose games as a result then that's not the right decision. Of course, we're 2-0 with Hogan and Weideman and 0-2 without Hogan. But IMO he's just not capable of doing enough when the ball hits the ground to warrant remaining in the team.

That's all well and good but we can't unring the bell. He's captain now. Whether that's the reason for his form slump or not, he's in a form slump and he needs to get out of it. It's what happens from here that is important.

As I said, this is the only way he impacts the game, but we have others on our list (Smith and Pedersen) who can bring the ball to ground but can then do more around the ground. It doesn't matter who it is, without Hogan Fremantle was always going to gang up on whoever we had left so he can't be blamed for not taking a stack of marks. But it's what he does otherwise that is the worry - currently, outside of marking contests, it's nothing. And I disagree that we can "afford to carry a few players if it means they develop faster". We are no longer in that phase of our development. We might not be winning the flag this year but there can be no doubt we must aim for finals, and as a result this is not a year for carrying underperforming players.

6 - Watts 5 - Hunt 4 - Garlett 3 - Oliver 2 - Petracca 1 - Tyson

Vince also turned it over against Gold Coast last year when trying to ice the game. We simultaneously tried to ice it too early (beginning with Frost's mark), and then didn't do a proper job of icing it (Vince going short to someone who didn't want it and then not having enough players staying inside defensive 50 for the inevitable turnover). I still cannot believe that, after we worked it up onto the wing before turning it over, that when they brought it back inside it was a 3-on-3. Should have been a 3-on-10.

Does it matter whether it's the captaincy or not? He's really, really out of form. Whatever it is, it has to be fixed.

It's not just the mistakes he made in the fourth (which, IMO, are not defensible for a leader). He played rubbish all day. He's not "finished" but, equally, he was terrible today so to the extent that we're shining the light on him, I say that's fair. Needs to improve, greatly.

Hannan wasn't half as bad as Weideman, Vince or Melksham. What role is Melksham even playing right now? He's not providing run like Hunt does, he doesn't kick anywhere near as well as Salem, he's not strong, he doesn't defend like Jetta does. What is he?

Also, Vince's missed kick was bad enough but how did we end up with three-on-three in that last inside 50 for McCarthy's goal? How did we have so many players up outside the defensive 50? That's appalling.

The rage I'm feeling at this loss is a different kind of rage. We should be 4-0. In an even competition, where there aren't any obvious basket case teams, we need to be winning games where we are on top for longer than our opponents but, for the second week in a row, we failed to capitalise on the times we had the momentum whilst Fremantle got on top for one quarter and kicked 7 goals to 0. Did Fremantle even go inside their 50 in the first 10 minutes of the fourth? Yet we only kicked two goals. Clearly Hogan and Lewis would have helped but we clearly could, and should IMO, have won without them. Vince played a disgraceful game. It wasn't just the missed chip with two minutes left when trying to ice the clock to a player who didn't know it was coming to him (bad), nor was it the long bomb without lowering his eyes with 60 seconds left (also bad). It was the whole game. A whole game of turnovers, long bombs to Fremantle, being out-positioned, lazy in zoning/defending and lacking in leadership. I was really, really appalled with him today. Viney has had a terrible first month. Not sure if it's the captaincy or not, but whatever it is, we're playing one short in the midfield at the moment given what he is capable of and not producing. With Vince and Viney down, and with Lewis and Gawn out of the side, we lacked leadership again today and Jones was off (rolled his ankle I think). There was just no one to stand up and stop the flood in the third quarter, nor were there smarter heads out there to work out what to do with the ball with 2 minutes to go in the last. Thought Harmes and ANB did a lot right but both have disposal issues (Harmes' miss at the start of the third was quite pivotal, as it turned out). Hannan started well but faded. Garlett was great, as was Watts. Frost a huge improvement on OMac but he was rusty. This is 2014 or 2015 talk. We can't afford to be carrying players who need to "put some weight on" and we can't be dismissing poor performances based on the fact that it's a player's "second year". He's simply not impacting the game enough. He brings the ball to ground but he runs out of puff too early (today might have been an injury but it's no different when he's fully fit), he's not strong enough, he doesn't follow up when the ball comes to ground, and he doesn't get enough of the ball as a result. Hogan comes back next week and unless we want to add another tall, he should be dropped for Hogan. And even if we want another tall, I'd still drop him (whether that means Pedersen or Smith, I don't care).