titan_uranus

If you don't care then why are you here? You making that statement about not buying a membership is a protest against the club, which means you do care (and you should still have bought a membership).

Having slept on it, I'm still just as livid at our performance now as I was yesterday. But to make me feel better, I read Alan Richardson talking about how St Kilda could not have played better and I think to myself: if that's St Kilda's best, and that was, what, some of our worst, I still know which team I'd rather be supporting. No we clearly had the momentum at the start of the 4th, right up until that free kick against Hogan. Had we taken the lead, who knows what would have happened from there on. But we didn't, they scored the next goal, and our heads dropped.

I don't like saying it, I love him, but he was terrible today. Is it just me or is he physically underdeveloped for someone who's been in the system for 9 years now?

It's both a mention of the reality of St Kilda's list and leadership and a veiled comment at the lack of performance of our leaders today.

West Coast have Kennedy, Darling and sometimes a resting ruckman, otherwise it's mids and smalls (LeCras, Hill, Yeo, Redden). We can afford to have TMac and Frost, drop OMac and not bring in Dunn or Garland, I think. I'm at the point now where I would prefer to pick Spencer (or Pedersen) as a second ruck/resting forward than continue to use Watts in the ruck (the issue with that being the lack of a second target in the forward line while he's in the ruck, more so than his actual output in the ruck). I'd also drop at least one of Grimes and White, too similar and both too poor today to warrant re-selection. Kennedy also struggled whilst Harmes is a bit of a nomad at the moment and I'm not sure what his best place is in the side (i.e. I'm not sure he's adding enough value to hold his spot).

I appreciate that you've gotten off the fence but I can't agree with you. There wasn't enough going right for us to suggest that a few fresher legs would have dragged us over the line. It didn't seem to me like a game where we were doing things right but held back by fitness. We did far too much wrong and I don't think it's a proper analysis of our performance to chalk the bad skills or decision-making down to fitness.

In 2014 Carlton requested more home games at the MCG instead of Etihad. Of course, that wish was granted, and despite them turning in one of their worst seasons in years, it continues. The result? We're forced to have a home game against St Kilda at Etihad, amongst other stupid decisions (e.g. Essendon hosting Geelong at the MCG), so that Carlton gets what it wants. Carlton is not an MCG tenant and should not be hosting so many home games there. Leave the MCG for its tenants (Melbourne, Collingwood, Richmond, Hawthorn). Let them host their home games there (subject to Melbourne and Hawthorn selling them as they choose to). Stop forcing MCG clubs to host games at Etihad when they don't want to (we had one again, Collingwood has two I think, Richmond had one as well, Hawthorn had one last year) and make the teams who signed up for Etihad (Carlton, Essendon, St Kilda, North, Dogs) fill the quota.

6 - Viney 5 - Gawn (but still was well-beaten in the ruck by Hickey) 4 - Watts 3 - Petracca 2 - TMac 1 - Kent

Your posting does not reflect that at all. Not at all. All you have said today is "we lost at selection" or "we needed to pick a faster, smaller, quicker side", no other commentary on the other facets of the game that, regardless of fitness or personnel, were lacking today. Selection is definitely important, and we have made (too many) mistakes this year, but was not the sole reason we lost today.

I don't discount it at all. But I don't agree with your characterisation of it as being a game we won solely because we picked a fast and small team. There were other reasons. Just like today, there was more than one reason for our loss. Based on what we've seen this year, I don't agree that Michie, ANB, Newton or Bugg would have made us faster, and there's also little evidence based on the year to suggest they'd have made any difference with ball in hand, either.

People said the same thing about Adelaide and whilst we didn't win we were a million times better against them than today. I'm quite confident that we'll put in a better performance against West Coast, actually. After the Essendon game we had the then 2-0 North and the same thing was being said, and we should have won that game. After the St Kilda game we went on the road to Gold Coast and spanked them. It's common for us to play awfully in games where there is little to no excuse for being so bad and then flip it the following week in games where we get borderline written off because of the prior week's stuff ups. No way he should be getting a week (or fine) for that. He was being held and was trying to shrug off the player behind. Force nowhere near hard enough to warrant a week. I disagree, and I'm confident the FD too. No way after 16 games like this we are going to all of a sudden drop all the talented kids in favour of Terlich, Dunn and Garland. Wrong message to the kids who are our future and wrong message to the supporters, even if that's what your defeatist mind currently wants.

I didn't ask you to name replacements, I asked you to name the players at Casey who would have contributed to us being a faster, smaller, quicker side. You might not have explicitly said "it's the only factor" but your posts certainly read like it (e.g. "we lost it on Thursday night"). It just sounds like you think if we'd picked a different side we'd have won, and I do not agree with that at all. The one game we've won at Etihad was against a side with no finals hopes in a dead rubber. We didn't win it solely because of being a small and/or quick side. I agree with the learnings point but that extends beyond selection and into a lot of other things, none of which you have discussed.

I once started a thread called the "Darwin Effect", or something like that, so I've had my fair share of misgivings. I'm still not sold on it as a location to be selling games, but so long as we are behind the 8 ball on football department spending and we need quick cash, it's going to keep happening. I'd prefer to reduce it to one game, in Alice Springs, against rotating opposition, but the harsh reality is that a better side doesn't drop every single game at Etihad, every single game against St Kilda, or every single game after an interstate trip.

A win would be nice.

I can't believe how similar this game was to Round 6, which is immensely disappointing on so many levels. We jump them early, get out to a 3 goal lead, then in the second quarter they lift and we disappear. Our leaders are nowhere to be seen, our kids have off days without any guidance, and the same bloody St Kilda players get their heads up (Membrey, Montagna, Steven, Riewoldt, Gilbert, Armitage). Hickey nullified Gawn again. They took the game on again. They hounded and pressured us again and we didn't respond again. Our forward structure disappeared again, our half-backs started bombing it away without lowering their eyes again. I'm not sold on Harmes. Grimes and White both played shockers (at least White is young). Garlett and Kennedy are out of form. N Jones couldn't lift. Vince wasn't fit enough. Brayshaw in some respects played his best game for the year but was caught by the speed of AFL too many times. Tyson went missing after half-time. Gawn appeared to have learnt nothing from Round 6. I'm looking for some changes to the team this week for the trip to Perth. Not sure I like all of Grimes, White, OMac, Wagner, Harmes, Kennedy and Garlett in the team right now. And I think I'm done with the Watts-in-the-ruck portion of the year. He's not that bad at it, but when he's not in the forward line we have so little to aim for other than Hogan. We need another permanent target down there and when he's in the ruck we have to aim for Petracca or Kent and whilst both are good marks that's not sustainable. You can't say that this was the key to winning and then refuse to nominate the players you would have brought in to make that happen. Not only are players like Michie, ANB, Bugg and Newton not quick, they've been shown this year to add little to nothing by way of run when at AFL level. I don't actually doubt that Darwin has some sort of effect on us. But there is so much more to our loss today than simply selection and tiredness from Darwin. I cannot believe you don't see that. Here we go again, the baby goes straight out with the bathwater. First, we hadn't improved because we haven't beaten anyone other than teams we beat last year. Now we haven't improved because we only beat teams who are "slightly worse than us". As we improve, more teams become "slightly worse than us".

True, but Brayshaw had enough time and a clear option to release but didn't take it. The fact we were out tackled in the first is indicative of our work ethic and mindset, given it wasn't fitness.

Definitely touched. Just a classically perfect effort from Riewoldt.

Stuie, see Brayshaw gettig caught there? Not fitness, game sense. See also how we ran that quarter out better than them? Not fitness, work ethic and confidence. Our opponent is worse than us. The game is there if we want it.

Plenty of run right at the minute, if you've noticed. Did you also notice we were out-tackled in the first quarter despite having 20 or so more touches? No tiredness that early.

Yes I am wathing, thanks very much. We look exactly like we did the last time we lost to St Kilda, and we didn't play in Darwin that time. In fact, we look similar to every time we lose this year. No leaders. Lazy (not just tired). Dumb. Error-laden. Kids having down days at the same time. Going backwards 40 metres when we should be playing on. There is so much more to this than fitness. You make it sound like another 1 or 2 personnel changes would fix all the problems.

Do you seriously think this is fitness only? No leadership. Vince turns it over ever kick. N Jones is selling teammates under pressure. Gawn has learnt nothing from the first game. If we look cooked in the 4th then that will be a clear sign of fatigue. But right now there are a million other things also going wromg that are not simply fitness related.

What would your solution be? We made two changes, how many more should we have made? And who specifically looks out of puff? It's far more than just fitness.

Rubbish. Their best is no better than ours, let alone 6 goals. That, in many respects, is the problem. We are yet again getting slaughtered by a side who is worse than us.

Appalling quarter. Slow, lazy, poor structures, and two simple set shots missed. Gawn getting murdered by Hickey for the second time this year. So similar to the previous St Kilda game. Could not be more upset right now.

I see absolutely no reason why we would pour 8 years into Spencer and then ditch him for Nankervis who is on no metric any better than Spencer.