titan_uranus

6 - Jetta 5 - TMac 4 - Hunt 3 - Hogan 2 - OMac 1 - Oliver

Absolute and complete rubbish. Weideman was appallingly useless today. It's not for a lack of talent, it's fitness, and I'm a fan of his and look forward to him being a mainstay of our side in 2017 and beyond. But due to him being completely incapable of getting to contests, Carlton was able to sit on Hogan all afternoon. He was forced to run up the ground to give us an option bringing the ball out of the backline. He worked hard all day, and other than his goal-kicking his disposal was fine. The anti-Hogan crap on this board is getting out of control.

The problem was Weideman. He wasn't capable of doing anything because his body wouldn't allow him to. It meant we only had one option when going inside 50 and Hogan had to be both the link at CHF and the target at the end (especially when Watts was in the ruck). He couldn't do both. We should have known better, given Weideman blew up fitness-wise in the second quarter against Hawthorn.

No. The umpiring was horrendously one-sided but made no difference to the result (save to say that the free kick paid against Vince for an "arm chop" at the end of the second quarter was a disgrace and cost us momentum and a goal).

The thing about our losses to poor sides or when we are favourites to win is that we never lose them in a thrilling, high-quality contest. We always, always, lose them because we aren't switched from the first bounce, we look slow, lazy and disinterested, and we are jumped by a lower-quality side who tries harder than we do. Every time. You could tell from the opening contest that we weren't switched on. Just like last year. And just the Essendon game, both St Kilda games. Similar to the second GC game too. Leadership was woeful today. We don't have many leaders but Vince and Jones were both horrendous today. Vince has a disgusting habit of lairising and taking the easy/quick option when we are playing lesser opposition. Viney and Gawn are leaders and neither player anywhere near their best. All three selection decisions were questionable at the time and with the benefit of hindsight were all wrong. Weideman should never have played, he wasn't fit enough when we played Hawthorn to get through a half, let alone the whole game. With a finals spot on the line this was not the game to be giving a friendly run to a kid with an eye on 2017. He wasn't up to it in any way today. His future looks bright but today was not the day to play him. Pedersen would have made a huge difference as he would have been able to compete where Weideman couldn't, and it would have in turn provided Hogan with a chop out. As it was, Hogan was forced up the ground and had no options closer to goal when he was making it at half-forward. I hope the embarrassment of this loss is some sort of motivation for 2017. Hogan took 14 marks, ran all day, and was forced by reason of Weideman's lack of fitness to play both CHF and FF. He played a good game in circumstances where he had no support and the majority of his teammates were playing woefully. Poorly directed criticism, IMO.

We are playing with 21 players as Weideman physically can't compete (that last goal wasn't his fault though, the kick was too high). And of the 21, Michie is a total liability, whilst ANB cannot convert his VFL form to the AFL in any way. Looks and feels like every other game we play as favourites or against bad sides. No intensity, look slow, players taking the quick or easy options and not playing the way we do when we are underdogs.

Rubbish, he should be playing instead of Weideman. Hogan is working hard, Weidema is physically incapable of competing.

Weideman already looks exhausted.

Whilst the game itself would be good for Melbourne to be a part of, Essendon can go jump. They deserved a rubbish fixture this year and still got given a Friday night. They deserve a rubbish fixture next year. Melbourne, the Dogs, North and St Kilda have to earn their fixtures, well so does Essendon. Round 15, 2010. Before then it was Round 1, 2005 (the Troy Broadbridge game). So since Round 1 2005, we've had 12 games for 1 home game, 11 away games. What's a bigger disgrace is that Essendon's clash jumper this year is red. How they can be permitted by the AFL to have a red clash jumper and no white/grey alternative, when we have repeatedly been told we're not allowed that jumper, is beyond me.

Firstly, there's no guarantee or rule which says 9th gets an "easier" fixture than 8th. The AFL currently does fixturing by using three groups of 6. The second band is teams 7-12. So both 8th and 9th fall into that band (which dictates which clubs we get twice in 2017). Secondly, making the finals this year will almost certainly mean we get a Friday night game next year. That is immensely important for our club. Finally, every year some clubs do better or worse than expected. At the time the fixture came out, any club which had Fremantle twice would have considered that a tough draw but it turned out to be a goldmine. So in no way do I see any fixturing advantage to finishing 9th.

The OP asked why Geelong always gets a home game in Geelong in the final round. Nothing to do with why Melbourne are always sent down there. I agree with you entirely that we are sent down there disproportionately and unfairly and it's time for Richmond, Collingwood, Carlton and Essendon to be sent down there. But given we haven't been asked to travel in Round 1 for 18 years, I'm not sure we can complain about Geelong getting repeated final-round home games.

I'd much rather an even and exciting home and away season, finals series and GF than any of those dominated by a dominant Hawthorn, or Geelong, or Brisbane, etc. There has still been high quality football played this year by each member of the top 8 (except North). St Kilda is -155 in points for vs against, meaning they would have two win their two games by a joint margin of 155 to get their percentage back to 100. North's points differential is 143 so they would have to lose both games by a joint margin of 143 to get their percentage down to 100. Long story short, those are not good odds for St Kilda, the more so given the two margins in the two games so far are 12 and 23.

I'm confident, whether it is liked or not this year, it will be gone next year. The AFL has for years said it couldn't find a way to incorporate two byes into a season. This week off before finals is the second bye round. I suspect we will see a two-bye home and away season next year without this week off. I'm not sure we should be diluting the benefit of finishing top 4. The last thing we need is for 5-8 to just do enough to make the top 8 during the home and away season and lose the incentive to push for top 4. If top 4 isn't as appealing as it currently is, I fear we increase the risk of more meaningless home and away games, not fewer.

Agreed, but their last fortnight has been appalling. They were toothless against St Kilda and they just lost to Brisbane last week which says it all. Doesn't mean we can just show up and get the win but they have fallen in a bit of a hole of late and we should be able to comfortably win this game.

Not sure we are in a position to complain. We have been in Melbourne in Round 1 every year since 1998, 16 out of those 18 games being at the MCG.

If the concern is carrying too many players who mightn't be able to run out much more than 60% of the game, then Weideman shouldn't be in the conversation. Against Hawthorn he was done by half time. The upcoming pre-season will do wonders for him but IMO right now, as you've said, we can't afford to have that many players in the side who are at risk of blowing up before the game's finished. And also agree as to Kennedy vs JKH. No way JKH gets a game off the back of one or two solid weeks when he hasn't played seniors all year. Part of the reason why we are improving the way we are is that the players have learnt to play with each other. Kennedy is in good enough form and has played enough seniors this year to slot straight back in. JKH has not.

If this is the one, what an awful article that is. Opens by saying we don't deserve it but the only argument he advances in support of that statement is that we're "2-5" against top 8 sides. Which is wrong. We're 2-6. So he didn't even get his numbers right. And, of course, he has failed to mention that North is 2-7. And, if we make it and they don't, then we will necessarily be 3-6 whilst they will necessarily be 2-9. Genuinely awful writing.

Second time, first time was against Brisbane.

From what I'm reading online and hearing on the radio, the general consensus is that we would be a more dangerous opponent in an elimination final than North. Who'd have thought anyone would say that a month ago?

It's about 60 points. If we win both games and they lose both games, then that's an average of 15 point margins for each game. If we beat Carlton by 30 and they lose to Sydney by 30, then I think that will have our percentages roughly equal going into Round 23.

I read somewhere that Geelong want an additional home game in Geelong next year (i.e. 9 of their 11). That's an extra Victorian club going down there, if it happens. It's time the AFL sucked it up and sent Essendon, Carlton, Collingwood and/or Richmond down there. Hopefully this end-of-season form translates into a reprieve at the fixturing table for us.

It'll be at the G. There is no chance of a final between two Victorian clubs being held anywhere other than the G. Let's just focus on beating Carlton next week and see what happens.

GWS' choke was incredible, they had the ball two or three times in that final 60 seconds but couldn't close it out. Steve Johnson going for a kick off the ground instead of putting his head over the ball to win a contested possession didn't help. Only ourselves to blame, Redleg. If not in the North game then in the West Coast and Essendon games. If we don't make it this year, I hope those three losses drive us to finals in 2017.

Broke a bunch of records last night that I can think of: Three wins in a row Beat Port Beat Port in Adelaide Make it through a season without 3 consecutive losses at any point (this, for mine, is as big as any of them. No losing patches. No extended drop offs in form).

Haven't been able to watch any of the game yet, so I didn't know before coming on here that there were negative aspects of a 40-point win interstate against a side we haven't beaten for 5 years or in Adelaide for 16 years. The fact there are negatives, or perceived negatives, shows how far we've come. Being excited about football, both short-term and long-term, is how it should be.