Deemania since 56

Saw Maxxie resting to full advantage on one knee during the Power game. He looked sore, requiring a short rest with arms on his knee. Looked buggered, actually - so we need to worry. The likelihood of injury for him is ever-present based upon the way we overwork him.

Well, no need to overlook these two talented and promising recruits for their first games, is there? Deer in Headlights is a real hoofer, from what I am told - and as for Flora Extra Soft in waiting, I saw him leave a big mark on the BBQ table when tackled perfectly by a 4 year old grandson. It's just great that you can 'scout' so quickly because the existing options just 'aint working.

And drop OMac, Salem, Harmes replacing them with muscle and pace - who are hungry for the game.

Too late in the decision-making is a critical consideration. Are we to recruit the equivalent of out Team at the end of Goodwin's contract? Could that be possible? Hell, no! In the interim, we lose the bank balance. We sit back to watch the talent that we have - and the depth - rot on the vine under Goodwin and his compliant associates, including the mysterious Club Chairman. They're doing alright, Jack, bugger the Club and its short-to-medium term future. (Melbourne is experienced at a decade-long re-build, it can do it again); however, this is not what the fans, supporters and members desire. This scant success must frustrate the players who once looked forward to successful footballing careers, albeit that such careers have mixed -- but early - termination points. All that hard work, personal endeavour and team co-operation, the wasted lives and aspirations. It is a stark reminder that the players' efforts were only essential in a drawn-out process of making up the numbers for the greater good of a series of coaches, their footballing lieutenants and advisors, and the fans who invest more than money alone into the Club. Worse than this is the product of such non-development of players to perform at their peak with consistency. If I was a footballer at this time, I'd be looking for an exit point from the MFC as there is no pot of gold at the end of this rainbow. To start with talent and promise, and end up as an 'also ran' is simply not fair or justifiable. Rant, rant, rant.

Pathetic game for TMac. OMac was bloody useless, again. For OMac, just too slow for the one-on-ones on six occasions in the first quarter, alone. Four of these were goals to Port. Scaredy Cat in four contests as well in the same quarter and again, outside the packs to be out of harm's way without physical danger. GET RID OF HIM!

So, who's been a naughty boy, then?

Aggression is imperative for this match. Take no prisoners, Dees.

I expect May to flatten Dixon (accidentally). Port flattened Max, last time.

This tendency to bash Max is more prevalent than ever. It would be hoped that the umpires have discussed it during the last few days as it is now a blight on our game. People come to see a champion play, not to watch him crumple into a heap from gratuitous violence - nearly always unsighted from behind - indicating essential cowardice. I'd expect a few more frees should be coming Max's way from improved attention by the umpires to what has been going on for several years.

Westhoff, no matter what the recent form, always does well against us and I think that this is because we do not have a mobile tall on him guarding his behaviours. He is a mobile tall, largely unchecked and can take a grab in a flurry 'to get in there'. His ability to 'float' into the play is effective - and deceptive. My choice of tempering Westhoff would be TMac. OMac won't keep up with him and May might not, either. The upside of all of this is that Westhoff is nearing a sunset period in terms of football and I'd suspect that his resilience and recovery are not as acute as these had been in the past. Lever, OMac, May can deal with the rest of the timber beanpoles at Port, surely? Even Rivers might do well against him, physically and in the hard yards. I'd suspect that Lever and May will have bigger fish to fry from the Port team, anyway.

It just seems stronger to me. Alternatives...

I'd like surprise Port - have some goodies I'd like to see .... TMac, Sparrow, Tomlinson, Smith, Rivers IN OMac, Jones, Jetta, Bennell, Harmes OUT TMac to CHB Sparrow to Bpocket and rotated through the midfield Tomlinson to Wing Smith to FFlk and rotated through midfield Rivers rotated HBF, utility in support of TMac, tag on smalls. Rotated midfielders may bring the likes of our consistent midfielders closer to goal for shots or passes - if they run hard enough. I am thinking of Clarrie and Gus, first in this regard.

Gus is quality but down at the moment. I'd reckon he could turn the corner surprisingly soon - maybe the Port match - but in the second half, he tends to get into very valuable positions ahead of the ball and his run and carry into space is something to behold.

Like this concept. Very sensible, but he should rotate fairly often to rest Max, and develop his craft/aptitudes in various parts of the ground.

The major downfall of the ruck duels normally earning possession are the holding of Demon midfield players, and the screening/blocking of the tap result - leaving one opposition midfielders free to play the ball. They don't win every tap but two or three out of five or six centre bounces are enough to tick over the scoreboard continuously. So if Port shark/rove to Gawn as the first measure, we need to have Max hit out further to an incoming flanker to sprint into the midfield from the edge of the square (if not both) employ our own screeners with Max quickly moving after the tap directly at the tap direction - and with as much pace as he can apply fake holding barriers to get a free - but it will be interesting if the umpires even care to notice such holding (against the Dees) Our flanking of the midfield area is usually good to great. 'In possession' from the 'tap' is usually all we need to get away. However, there is little protection when this is done; just a little more shielding/screening may well work to our benefit - and enable our midfielders to get further into the forward line - at a faster rate - to effect some greater penetration or even some longish shots at goal - enabling them to score. That penetration should be the signal for the true forwards to lead to space in all directions, providing options for passing, handballing and a second or two to line up a kick for goal that is closer to the sticks. It implies a 'pronged' attack that leads outwards for the oppo backmen to chase down, if they can. Meanwhile, the midfielders should be re-gathering in zone and the forwards, re-scramble the space plays. Should the opposition defenders gain possession in our fwd line, Max and the midfielders will be there to assault the repelling interests.

Yep, on reflection, this is probably the best solution to better play across the ground. I'd also like to drop OMac if TMac comes in, playing TMac a CHB and Lever free as a utility intercept across the backline. Tomlinson is a must, out there on the wing, so let's hope May sees him and makes the opportunity real.

When we are looking, at contract time, at the talents that we have assembled in recent years, we often say that such talent is not consistent in its highly positive mode. Players are not as good, in other words, as it was initially expected to be and neither was the subsequent development of their skills and attributes. My stance is a little skewed, another way, from this initial criticism. My thoughts tend to centre on the development team and the overarching coaching. Hence, I must remember when considering players at the 50-game mark that these fellas are largely the product of Goodwin and his limited strategies, deployments and game plans. I am almost convinced that another head coach would have been more likely to produce that kind of development that the fans and members expect; Bayley is one of these players, as are Clarrie, Petracca, Gus, et al.

Even when strictly observing social distancing, queues, seats and gateways, there is adequate space for careful and aware people to attend the game - possibly up to 3000-5000, without compromising the covid-19 recommendations. It is a shame that these days there are so many thoughtless 'wanna-be types' who spoil it for others. Gil's decision, in this world of the fancies, assures safety and thus, preserves the safety from hazards and absolute compromise of the innocent. Sad times, affects us all, and the MFC has no real 'say' in it all. The AFL has made the decision. The messenger is the MFC and the Port Club so, in the interests of public safety and health, do not shoot the messenger. It is difficult, it is largely unfair. As a substitute, the game is well televised and broadcast, at least, and should be a ripper confrontation. 'Carna Dees!

Good summary. It was negative all the way through - and that is how I felt the game was progressing from early in the First Qtr. It was a good, partial fightback in the last qtr but the negatives (largely those above) had taken their toll or continued to rock and roll to our greater disadvantage. A clearer plan for the MFC was demonstrated by the 'Brions' - and to our advantage, in every line, we have better players.

Deary, deary, deary; it only took one week to prove what the naysayers know. Slow, scared, hopeless in a crowd.

Some very brave efforts (on both teams) but particularly for the MFC. A couple of notable errors in selections and application, sadly. Max was belted from pillar to post, illegally held in most rucking contests, and set up for a body slam or three at full pace from behind - so often it was unsportsmanlike. Had Vanders been there.......a new benchmark in unsportsmanship would instantly be transferred into a caring, clearing role, play on, we understand.... Stiff luck at critical moments, though - poise and control. Liked the better use of space, when there was some, and the role of most of the newbies. Sunset for Jonesy and the very brave Jet. Five minutes to midnight for OMac. As for the umpires, I guess all is AFL-OK, they are not held to account for their errors, blatant errors, anticipated winners, ensuring favouritism for what is becoming a new 'glamour' team and their effects on the game itself, including inconsistencies galore for variations of rules applications and bent umpiring appreciations across the game. Nearly, but not quite, this time. A few scores to settle in the next meeting.

That is a fine statement, and a great memory of a recent time when the chips were down. We should win this one with careful application. Run, run, run and use the spaces intelligently.

Agree, Clint. I also think that the penny has dropped for the players ... realising that it is a competitive year despite its crazy interruption and format - and realising that the jumper doesn't and won't fit unless you have earned it. Game day is critical to pay-cheque continuation.

Jonesy is gonna kick a surprising 4 goals and assist with another 3 (Kozzie and the Weed). Hannan will get his three and the Melk will feed two or three more to others - most probably Fritta. Tracc, well ... he's going to rip Brisbane apart whilst landing a best-effort 5 goals - don't say it ain't going to happen, just sit back and watch it happen. Ours, this game, by a healthy margin.

All good suggestions, all part of the game as it is known now - and most likely, as it has always been known. Sarcasm was attempted and consequently, if it didn't please you, then I apologise. Transparency is the greatest mantra; instead of putting down my first impressions on this particular umpiring decision (as briefly as possible), I was indirectly supporting the comments of another contributor within the realm of widespread angst concerning the MFC and its less than favourable outcomes with umpires - particularly when we play the 'glamour' teams. Still, I appreciate your comments as sub-elements of the problem to which I indirectly referred.