DeezNuts

2 minutes ago, Jaded said:

There is a lot to be said for being a fair and transparent club to deal with, it makes life a lot easier for us and encourages players to nominate us, as they know we can get a deal done. 
 

Good call, all part of the brand, well done MFC. This also potentially sends a message to future recruits (Sloane anyone?). Just hoping Viney Snr takes Sloane out for a beer with Bernie over the summer to touch base

We can now comfortably add a few extra inside 50s, rebounding 50s, intercept marks, kicks hitting targets and effective handballs - spread that out over a year and we're in the finals (hopefully)... - glad it's done!

Maybe if Watts goes to Collingwood he can still kindly dart the ball into Hogans chest on game day for us ?

(Aside, anyone else worried about Hogan not kicking for goal from outside 50? That is one thing that Watts does do well)

I AM A BE-LEVER!!!! ?

Will smash it next year, like Hibberd, like Pedo, will come of age

Let's hope this is resolved by the end of next week. Not happy with Collingwood throwing a spanner in, they were never truly into him, just forcing Melbournes hand...

Less of his mums pasta and more endurance training and none will be able to stop him! (I really loved this year how when he's in congested traffic, the opponents just get-out-of-his-way) bring on 2018!

Saw him walking a lap around the G in 2015, he wasn't too proud to stop and chat to my dad and I on his recovery. A lot to like about the lads character, contributions  and charisma. Good luck mate!

Ok, we've all seen the numbers this year on how many goals we've conceded. With all the trade talk of Lever plugging our backline etc, I was wondering what people's thoughts are on our defence.

Is it that we fail to gut run the zone back in support, by over committing forward? Is it that the numbers en mass and the handball game exposes the backline? Or is it the individual talent/development of the backline that is the problem? 

Most games I watched this year, OMAC who has been the subject of a lot of criticism, has always been pretty good at spoiling a mark. Same for TMAC. Frost probably is best at taking the game on. All of their other skills require work no doubt, but I don't think it's purely their individual skills that have consistently failed. With that in mind, does one person (Lever) fix the problem, or do other things also need to change?

I'd love to see some stats on how many spoils, intercept marks and turnovers the guys have achieved relative to inside 50's that have come their way. 

That might tell us if they're efficient defenders, or just over utilised due to structural issues/game style further up the ground. 

What are your thoughts?

On 31/08/2017 at 3:37 PM, binman said:

Look i'm over it Jnr. I couldn't really care less anymore. But honestly i don't understand how you can see things so black and white, no pun intended.

Yes the pies took 7 marks in their forward 50 and yes Cox and Grundy smashed us. But honestly, i don't mean to be rude but it just way to simplistic to simply blame the defenders for this.

They were poor as it turns out. Only jetta of the back six got close to a pass mark. The rest were average particularly Hibberd, Tmac and Hunt. Ironically enough despite this we still kept them to under 100 points (just) and once again couldn't muster a winning score.  

But for god's sake the midfield pressure was appalling in the first quarter, when all the damage was done. Woeful. We were down 10 contested possessions at quarter time. Ten!. We were at least that many tackles down. We didn't lay our first tackle until the 20 minute mark of the fist quarter. 20 minutes of AFL football without a single tackle! We only laid 3 for the whole first quarter. Unforgivable. 

Grundy smashed us? No wonder given Gawn barely could stay with him all day. Gawn's defensive pressure was appalling. His job is to ensure the opposition ruckman don't swan in their forward line and get easy marks.  Martin also toweled him up. I just hope injury is to blame. 

There is lot of love for lever on this site and i'm also keen to get him. But their defence gave up 100 points against a low scoring side and were dominated in the first half. Was that because they their defence as poor? No of course not. It was because as we could all see, like us against the pies, the crows simply did not apply anywhere near enough pressure all over the ground, but particularly through the mid field.  

Lever won't help a jot if we play like we did last Saturday. And if we don't bring the required pressure every game we also won't fully benefit from his real skill which is his intercept marking. Like Rance he is at his most dangerous when the opposition are forced to kick under pressure into their 50 like we were by Brisbane and the Pies. Such kicks rarely hit targets or go to a forwards advantage and are easy picking for players like Lever, Rance and dare i say it Howe.

Sides putting more pressure on than us than we do on them mean that it is not just down back we get out marked. We got out marked all over the bloody ground for the last 9 games of thew season.

But sure Jnr blame the defenders, in particular the talls. And let yourself believe that lever will fix our problems. Knock yourself out.

For me i'd rather take a more nuanced, dare i say it modern approach to analysing what the problem is and therefore what the solution might be. As Goody will be no doubt.

I think a really good question is the one BB alludes to above. Is our zone system the right one? And the corollary does our game plan measure up?  Our game plan completely depends on manic pressure. As we have seen since the dogs game any drop off in that pressure exposes our zone defence, in part because as BB notes it allows teams to move the ball quickly through the corridor.

Lever will help no doubt as he will cut off some attacks but we saw in the crows wc game it still won't be enough if we don't apply sufficient all team pressure. 

The other problem with our game plan and aggressive zoning is that poor disposal and turnovers exposes us on the rebound, much more so than say the pies or teams with less aggressive zones. 

Buckley has been often been criticized for not being tactically savy or up with modern approaches. An example is he plays a much more traditional man on man defence. But the advantage of that approach is that it offers protection against quick ball movement and turnovers as defenders are better placed to avoid getting caught in no man's land. We saw this on Saturday when they were able to stymie us and not allow forward space even when we moved the ball quickly. Dunn thrives on this approach and played really well on Saturday. 

I really wonder if Goody's game plan is the right one. It is very taxing and depends on having players who do not tun the ball over a lot. But i also wonder if our wretched run with injuries should be factored in when assessing its effectiveness as should the fact that it is far from bedded down and is work in progress.

I hate to say it but Richmond are playing exactly the game we aspire too. Manic pressure all over the ground. Pressure that means sides dump kick into their forward half and often into the tigers hands. Intense forward pressure that traps the ball there. Aggressive zone defence. Unusual forward leading patterns. Cross the ball and hold it until there is an opening and then move the ball super fast and run in waves. Hard gut running, particularly defensive running. But they have a great run with injury and have by in large better users of the a ball. Still they are the template for us.  And i expect we will look to use that template.

But i'm out. I'm not going to comment any more on this topic. Let's agree to disagree and move on to trade rumours and who to draft. 

 

 

 

@Binman this is really good analysis/questions to ask mate. Just what the coaches need to being doing really! Goody certainly can 'switch players around' (and out of position I might add) but really, we need more tools in the bag to switch tactics. How that gets communicated in time on the field, well difficult to say.

One of my concerns with the high hand-pass keepings off game is that most hand passes seem to go to a static player. When we hand pass between running players, we cut teams apart. But static is just stupid... we get choked, pressured easily, and we make an error, and then it's a turnover. 

Clarry is the only exception (coz he's a freak) and can hand pass like no other...

I wonder what he'd be like in the F50, darting a pass from a pack to a free Garlett?

21 hours ago, beelzebub said:

Been an interesting read..Wise/Jnr discussion on the starts. As always theres something to learn and take away.

So just as an interesting exercise I thought  Id look at all our games and just suppose  we were equal after qtr time..  or iow...lets dismiss the 1st qtr and see how the season would pan out if we just looked at the last 3/4 throught the year

 

game  1   melb v saints   16.9  v 6.4  WIN    game 2   melb v carl   10.8 v 7.8  WIN   game 3  melb v geel  11.15 v 15.4  LOSS

game  4   melb v  fero    13.9  v  13.8  WIN   game 5   melb v  rich   8.5 v 9.15  LOSS   game 6  melb v  ess  15.6 v  8.12  WIN

game  7  melb v  haw   13.6 v  9.6   WIN  game  8   melb v  adel   15.3 v  8.8  WIN   game  9  melb v north    11.7 v  9.7 WIN

game 10  melb v suns    16.13  v 9.4  WIN   game 11  melb v coll 11.11 v  12.8  LOSS   game 12 melb v  foot  13.9 v 7.7 WIN

game 13  melb v  eagles 12.8 v  12.7 WIN  game 14   melb v  syd  3.8 v  10.11 LOSS   game 15  melb v carl 13.4 v  8.7  WIN

game 16     melb v  adel 9.7 v  10.12 LOSS  game  17  melb v  port  9.6 v  9.8 LOSS   game  18 melb v north  8.12 v  7.6 WIN

 

game 19  melb v  gws 7.2 v  6.7   WIN  game 20  melb v  saints 8.9 v  9.11 LOSS   game 21 melb v  bris 13.5 v  12.4  WIN

game 22  melb v  coll 11.8 v  8.10 WIN  

 

Now I know this isnt a true picture  but it's an interesting picture.  If we look through the result I think theres only  1 or 2 games we'd now lose   on basis of the latter 3/4 effort ( having actually won it ) 

overall WINS 15  LOSSES 7

Well ladies and gentlemen doesn't this paint a story !!!

Don't turn up to play, take too long to get going..throw season away.

All of the above was epitomised for all of us who watched that last game...it summed it up all too accurately.

Those that put up with my dribble over the course may recognise a constant suggestion: That for me there's only ONE Statistic that matters, the Scoreboard. Well that Scoreboard can tell you a lot if you look  and as the above 'look' suggests  we are probably an OK side despite all of our glaring faults ( and we know them in the main ) .

HOWEVER  our starts cost us EVERYTHING

Had we not cocked them up we'd probably be sitting on TOP of the ladder !!

but where are we????

 

 

 

 

 

It's almost as good as Mark Webber was in the Grand Prix... couldn't kick off a good start no matter what his starting position was... nice analysis btw

I'm wondering if we overstepped the commitment to the 'fast pace' model that the bulldogs used last year? The conventional contested mark and a controlled entry into 50 doesn't seem to be something we're good at achieving. 

Haha! Tough crowd, but understandable given the circumstances...

Seriously though - Vanders is a jet when he's fit and free from injury, and is a far stronger competitive-presence in the back half against big bodied forwards than OMAC - we bled far too many goals this year. As for Kent, when he's able to play freely on the wing, his F50 daggers hit the chest every time. Pencil, well, who else did we have to back up Gawn without shuffling players from their natural positions? And as for 'sensitised reconscilliation' that was a dig at the AFL and the media for over-reacting to some of Melbournes obvious infringements in what appeared to be systematic approach. Look what subsequently happened to Gawn for questioning those decisions in the centre -  someone in AFL land hates us... but if you prefer that I use 50 words instead of 2, then no problems ? 

(Totally unrelated, but does anyone know the 'key stats' that Goody kept referring to - and didn't declare - that he measured our development with when compared to top 4 teams?)

Hope it wasn't handballs and turnovers...

Ok, by now we've come to realise that 2017 just wasn't our year. The well documented losses of suitable matchups such as Vanders, Kent, Pencil due to injury, the highly sensitised reconciliation of playing on the edge and the associated suspensions of Bince, Lewis, Hogan and Bugg, and let's not forget the timing and impact of injuries to Gawn, Watts, Viney others at cruicial moments - have played their part in our results this season.

This is football - we make no excuses about it. 

What we do expect though... is a clear and deliberate demonstration of MFC resilience for 2018. 

That is to say, let's be the team that embraces the lessons learned from the implementation of a frenetic pace to our game plan, revise it, refine it come back firing hard over the pre-season. Let's be the ones to accept that to sustain such an exciting and at times, ruthless approach, requires the application of sublime skills and stamina. Let's recognise that we need to build and recruit depth of match-ups, that allow our team to have the structural integrity to match a broader composition of opponents. And finally, let's continue to instil the culture of zero acceptance for lack of intent and drive our beloved team to greater heights next season. 

The definition of resilience is to identify your strengths and weaknesses, recognise the threats and opportunities and ultimately learn.

Go Dees!!!

What I'd like to see:

-bring in Pencil to free up Max to mark on the wing also allows TMAC to float between back/fwd with Hogan/Pedo in support

-bring in Salem to kick out and frees up Vince to tag Treloar

-drop Stretch and maybe Garlett

The stress that Buckley is under with a potential lawsuit for his treatment of Heritier and of course the cloud of doubt over his performance ?

List came in, Hogan is in - so let's get behind them! Having said that, my concern with Hogan was that he doesn't appear to have adopted the 'everyone gets a lick of the ice cream' concept fully just yet. He will in time, amazing that he was able to come back so quickly!!! Go Dees!!!

That element of 'playing on the edge' and the subsequent 5x suspensions this year has been a double-edged sword. In one instance, we've suffered with the absences of some of our better players. But on the other hand, we've instantly lost the old tag of being a soft team. Given that we do have depth with our list, I'm comfortable for the occasional Weekend at Bernies as long as he roughs up a Danger or Sloane as he has in recent times. Same goes for Bugg, and he just might give Trac the rest that he needs. Hope Bugg gets the nod.

10 hours ago, old dee said:

He is a VFL player forget him.

I can deal with an ex-crow, an-ex bomber and an ex-norf player, I just can't deal with an-ex pie....

5 hours ago, sue said:

To fumble the ball is not incorrect disposal in itself otherwise we'd have 200 frees a game.  Seems to me that if you fumble it badly enough to not be deemed in posession of it when you are tackled, then it is a free to you for being tackled when not in posession.  Of course there will be a grey area (as usual) when the player has not done a perfect bounce and needs a couple of grabs to regain posession.

AKA Eddie Betts who then smashed Oliver afterwards, got the free somehow...?

Seriously, ok... we all saw Toby's foot in the face of Dahlhaus. Shocking, unfortunate, but possibly a fact of the game. 

But where is the line for Gawny, who was merely defending himself in a fac-plant contest. 

Both players allegedly 'defending themselves' one gets a free (Bonger) the other gives a free (Greene)... 

There's some very clear inconsistencies here, only able to be understood or judged in a public and transparent post game review of decisions (or indecisions as others have correctly pointed out).

Like others, I've always accepted umpiring decisions, but this recent (2017) policy of awarding frees in order to 'balance' the game, for what many suppose may be linked directly (or indirectly) to the broadcast sponsors and/or betting agencies, is the biggest joke...   

Gilly needs to recognise that the only gap in our elite game now is the lack of 100% fully committed professional umpires. Those that are paid full time, and awarded and ranked on their performance after post match reviews.

Pay them more, the AFL has the money, but make them accountable!

7 hours ago, Skuit said:

Absolutely killed us last time with 'release-valve' contested marks between the flanks and wing... We need numbers and organisation at these aerial contests, so as not to get outworked and blocked and allow them to get free jump at it. 

Spot on mate, besides limited inside 50's discipline, this is our other really weak area. The game against the Crows we got tunnelled aerially with the pushing up from behind and edging us under the ball. Happened time and time again...

Hi team! (First let me say how happy I am that I've found this site!)

I flew to Melb last week to watch this crucial game, suffice to say, it was a great weekend. As for selection next week, a few things come to mind. Our Structure: How do 'we' want to play on an oval with a +5 goal breeze? Their Structure: Who are they likely to field? Advantage: how can we expose them? 

Im confident that in the engine room we'll win the clearances with or without Jones, I think the game will be decided on our inside 50's discipline, and our defensive spoil and rebound 50's capacity (against what is a tall fwd line). Against the wind the run and carry will be critical, as will holding possession and chipping our way forward with accuracy. With the wind, our transitions should be key. Watts and Garlett should fire this week if Hoges drags them up to half forward to create a paddock for our boys to exploit. 

Oscar(his spoils and positioning are good), Frost, Jetta, Hibbo and Hunt should do the job again in the backline. Whilst Trenners was accurate, he was visibly slow, and JKH was very quick, something we could use to exploit North. Trenners will probably gain a few more touches this week, we need to use his accurate ball use for those inside 50's. So I'd drift him on high half forward to relieve from time to time from the bench.

Overall, last weeks team is a better matchup for this week IMO. No change for mine - but if Jonesy is in - naturally Trenners will have to be rested.

BTW: Who else is loving watching ANB dash into the centre from the square to outnumber them? Simple but genius.