titan_uranus

I hope so! I was hoping to send it to the [censored] editor of the AFL website who put the old one up and said 'it couldn't happen again...could it?'

This is up now - http://www.melbournefc.com.au/video/2015-06-21/rd-12-jack-viney-postmatch

To be fair, Corey Enright is an extraordinary player and from all reports a great bloke. I don't take huge enjoyment out of ruining his day. However, I can't stand Selwood (he's had unbridled success in his 8 year career, his reactions to losses are so petulant) nor can I stand Geelong supporters, nor Chris Scott. Nor Mackie, Kelly, Johnson, Motlop, Hawkins or Taylor. I'm overjoyed at ruining their days - and if they miss the finals by a game, then I'll enjoy that even more.

Agreed. Hopefully the side now knows it can compete with anyone provided the midfield puts in the required effort. I mean, these stats are unheard of in recent years for us - we won contested possesions 160-131, we won the clearances 53-40, we won the possession count overall 356-299 (Geelong has always been a high possession side and we limited them to under 300). The other exciting things is that the game style we're working towards is the kind of game that stands up in finals. We're playing hard, tough, contested football, but we've scored 113 points. That's phenomenal when you reflect on it. We're trying to slow games down, congest them, tackle hard, get in and under, and yet we're scoring more than we have in previous years. Having watched a few more highlights, ANB's running is AFL-grade. Not just the physical effort but the brains of knowing when/where to run. Watts has improved enormously. Dunn's job on Hawkins was exceptional and is a welcome return to the 2014 Dunn, which we desperately have missed this year (helps McDonald on his off days). Dawes didn't kick a goal but his attack on the ball and his unusually clean hands (e.g. Jones' goal at the start of the fourth quarter) were impressive. The improvement we've seen over the last 6 weeks from Viney, Vince, Garlett, Watts, Toumpas, and now Gawn, is important and exciting.

The worst commentator there is. At least BT knows he's an idiot, and puts it on. Russell thinks he's decent. He has a bunch of cliches he throws out weekly, and is so utterly biased against us (and probably another one or two 'weak' clubs as well). But worst of all, he's just a pathetic commentator. Makes watching the game difficult.

I'm still relatively speechless. I never thought before the game it was going to be some sort of run of the mill belting like many were posting, and I knew we had the midfield cattle to compete there, but I never in a million years could have foreseen us kicking 113 points, especially given Dawes didn't kick one. I haven't been able to watch anything except the highlights, but from what I was able to glean off patches on the radio and the articles written so far, as well as the stats, our midfield is finally coming together. Gawn's presence is no coincidence to this, I'm sure, and we've now got all of Jones, Vince, Viney and Tyson playing together at once. Then when you have a 22 playing together, you can get the job done anywhere, anytime. The future is bright, and today showed that the present (i.e. 2015) does not have to be the dull result last week suggested. I wonder if we may have 'turned a corner' today?

I'll be disappointed today if we can't compete in the midfield. We should have the better tap ruckman and we have our best midfielders in the side. However, we have significant issues at both ends of the ground so I won't be surprised if we struggle to kick goals and lose because of it. The way people are talking on here though, it's like we're taking the Casey seconds to Tasmania to play a full-strength Hawthorn side. Geelong of 2015 is nothing to be afraid of, even in Geelong. If we had our full strength side I'd be a lot more positive.

Really? You want us to be like GC and GWS (if they do become impotent without Mumford) and be wholly reliant on one player? I'd much rather us develop a team that can play week in week out, even with injuries (a la Hawthorn).

If the controlling umpire didn't pay it a touch as soon as it happened then it shouldn't have been changed. Otherwise ether the non-controlling umpire has run in from the distance (and cannot have seen it conclusively), or the controlling umpire has changed his mind. Either of those options is wrong and could have cost Port the game (not that they deserved it, but still). If the controlling umpire called it though, then so be it. As much as the umpiring went against them today, Port's bigger problems are their own making.

I've never seen an umpire pay a mark but another umpire over-rule him to the point where they take the ball and bounce it, either.

Take solace in the fact that they need the best draft picks they can get, so wins like this, which feel good at the time, might come back to bite them if they end up finishing above a few other teams.

As fast as Port climbed the ladder they're falling back down it. They're 5-7 and if Geelong beat us they'll be 2 games and a bit of percentage behind. And they've got Sydney in Sydney after the bye, plus games to come against Collingwood, Hawthorn (away) and Fremantle. Put those four down as losses and even if they win the rest they won't get to 12 wins. No one would have fathomed them missing the finals this year. Mind you, that decision to take that last mark off Port might be a talking point this week.

I'm sure we actually brought Spencer in for Hogan. If Hogan had played I don't think Spencer would have as well. Then once we knew Spencer was in, we brought McKenzie into the emergencies (meaningless selection).

I don't really care if we play Geelong in Geelong or not (I'd obviously prefer not to go there), but there is merit to the argument that there's a degree of unfairness in things. Carlton hasn't been sent to Geelong since 1997. They were a basket case in 2005-2007. They don't pull enormous crowds. Richmond's crowds would be bigger and they were sent down in 2012. Essendon hasn't been since 1993 (one premiership in that time). Collingwood hasn't been since 1999 (one premiership). We don't stop Collingwood/Hawthorn/Essendon/Carlton from playing at Spotless Stadium. We don't transfer home games away from the SCG when a big club is playing Sydney there. We don't even move games from Etihad to the G when the option is available and the crowd is a sell out. Equalisation requires the big clubs to go to Geelong. Geelong isn't a Melbourne club, they shouldn't be hosting games in Melbourne. I recognise that's going to shut supporters out of Simonds Stadium. I don't care. When GWS is pushing for the premiership in the next 3 years the same problem is going to happen in Western Sydney. It's going to happen in Perth too, given Domain Stadium barely holds 45,000.

No Hogan, Salem, Garland, Kent, vandenBerg, Frost, JKH, Pedersen or Grimes. This is a bad team. We have our core midfield though (Jones, Vince, Viney, Tyson, Brayshaw, Cross, Toumpas) so I'd hope we are able to compete through the middle. I'm worried about the forward line and I'm worried about defensive match ups though. Really? He's played all year in defence. He's also mainly struggled as a forward at AFL level. Given we've got a half-baked Dawes in the side without Frost or Pedersen, it's no surprise at all we've gone with Spencer as the other 'forward' instead of Fitzpatrick.

As much as I genuinely think the competition is more even this year than last, the fact that it's Hawthorn and Sydney as the best two sides (Hawthorn's 7-4 record doesn't stop them being the best side in the comp), again, and could well be the third time in the last four years they play the GF together, is incredibly dull.

They're 1-2 this year and the only win they had only happened because GC continued to miss easy shots on goal despite dominating the run of play. They should be 0-3. We shouldn't be writing this game off because of where it's being played, or because of the opponent. This is the worst Geelong side since 2006, by quite a margin, and they are eminently beatable at any ground. Doesn't mean we'll win of course, and Enright's 300th will be a massive game for them which doesn't help. But unlike 2007-2014, this shouldn't be considered a complete write off.

He was asked 'what's the pressure gauge', he said 'It's really simple actually, it's just a measure of seven different statistics, it's quite complex how they're brought together...' or words to that hilariously ridiculous effect. He's one of the biggest flogs in the AFL.

It's a shocking bench, let's be honest. The upside is that at full strength that entire group of seven would be at Casey. I don't think we can play Spencer with Gawn, I don't really want to see what Terlich looks like at AFL level when he's not even coming off VFL form, so of the remaining five I'd drop Riley who gives us nothing. That leaves us with Bail, M Jones, MIchie and ANB, any of whom could be the sub tbh.

I would assume that if we are able to get a top-20 pick, we'd be hoping to use it in a trade. I'm not sure I'd be happy with trading Howe and getting back a kid, given we're going to be getting our own top 10 pick anyway. But if we can get a top-20 pick which may have use for us in negotiations to secure a more established player, then that could be something quite useful. FWIW, I like Howe and at his best I think he is important to us and makes us a better side (whether it's providing run off half-back or providing a difficult match up forward). I'd prefer to keep him unless there is a truly decent option on the line (i.e. something we can use a pick on). I'm open to losing Howe, but Yarran's so mediocre, that would be a ridiculously bad decision.

I like them too. I don't like wearing them when there's no need, though. The current jumpers are fine, there's nothing wrong with them. It's the times we're required to put them on that are the problem.

I'm not excited about Terlich being in the side at the best of times, let alone when he's not really in strong VFL form. If we can avoid playing him, I hope we do. Pedersen going down means we need to play someone who can play second ruck. Dawes is going to be borderline fit enough just to play CHF. If he comes in, we'll need someone else to do the second ruck work. That may mean Fitzy comes in and runs with Blicavs, for example, defends him when he goes forward maybe. I'm not sure if that will work, but Dawes can't ruck. The only other option would be to play Spencer or Jamar instead of Dawes, rotate between FF and the ruck. But I don't like the thought of that, we'll have pretty low forward pressure with one of Gawn and Jamar/Spencer permanently in the forward line. I don't see anything in Riley other than tackling, but I see a more rounded footballer in Michie (even though the two were both equally terrible on the weekend). If we're going to drop one (I'm not sure we will), I'd hope it's Riley before Michie. Swapping Riley/Michie for Bail/M Jones doesn't really do anything for the side long term though, we may not bother.

I feel really bad for Grimes. I've rated his performances since he came back into the side (didn't deserve to be dropped IMO). I also feel bad for Pedersen, although he was poor on the weekend I've liked his endeavour and his work in conjunction with Hogan. As has been said, the continued growing of the injury list has multiple negative effects - we don't get to have the players consistently playing together, which for us is hugely important (also why it doesn't hurt Geelong as much, as they've still got their core players who know each other back to front). Roos made the point on the weekend that we still don't function as a team 100% of the game, and that's not going to improve if we keep having key players get into form and then disappear from the side due to injury. We also have to swap players around into different positions to cover for the gaps, which doesn't help their personal development.

Even if we assume the players didn't know it was only 40 seconds remaining, why did they need to be told? Howe's goal was the first of the quarter. If not 40 seconds, the players should have known it was nearly finished and someone needed to stand up on field and lead. And how did St Kila's players know? They don't get secret messages, their runners must have been out there telling their players - we didn't listen? If the truth is that we didn't have our runner out there during Howe's set shot telling them how long was left, that's an embarrassing fail from the club. But regardless, our lack of instincive understanding and leadership from our players is just as concerning.

True, and I think the time in possession statistic would say more about the tackle discrepancy, but the point is still valid(-ish). You continually berate Toumpas for being soft. Did you see Dunn's 'effort' which led to the Lonie goal in the second quarter? The exact sort of effort you'd castigate Toumpas (or Watts) for. I agree that mark was a good one, standing up when we needed it, but the rest of his game, and season to date, has been sub-standard, especially given he set the bar so much higher last year.