old55

nice work!

Some heinous inclusions and omissions in their list but I'm happy enough with my back six - hell Steven May couldn't make it!

Will the close wins against Gold Coast and Brisbane assure us of a top 4 finish?

Have you got a job?

Tassie Johnson, Gary Hardeman, Sean Wight, Noel McMahen, Alan Johnson, Neville Jetta

1st is favoured to beat 4rh who then have a tough match up in the SF, win or lose, against 5th who likely beat 8th.

Happy to see the back of Smith, Cunnington and Cotchin. I won't miss them

I agree with all that - I think we're of the same mind on this - but I expect we're outliers.

I wonder if Mitch Lewis doesn't get up for the game whether the Hawks will go with two rucks and bring Meek in to partner Reeves? They have Lewis and Koschitzke forward recently so I think we need to go in with 3 tall defenders, I don't think we can go with May, Lever and Hibberd - we tried and dispensed with that set-up early in the year. I think we need Smith forward so that would mean Tomlinson back into the side - he has his well discussed good and bad points. As I've posted elsewhere I think we misused Grundy against Carlton and played him too much forward and not enough in the ruck. As @deelusions from afar pointed out in the Grundy thread, when he did go into the ruck in the 3rd and 4th quarters we turned the scoring around significantly. I'm probably Robinson Crusoe, but I'd stick with Grundy this week and have him and Max split the ruck and forward duties - 20-30% gametime forward each, covering when Smith or JVR are off on the bench. That would mean Tomlinson for a runner - JJ, we have been playing with an extra runner because we've traditionally gone with 2 tall forwards and 2 rucks, but recently we've gone with a total of 3 of these. This possibly means we need a runner as sub which pushes Hibberd out of the 23, unless we think that Rivers can go into the midfield when Hibberd comes on. I'm not enamoured with our running sub options: JJ, Harmes, Woewodin, Spargo, Laurie - for various reasons I don't have confidence any of them can have a major positive impact when they come on. So maybe we can go with Hibberd. In: Tomlinson Out: JJ B: May, Tomlinson, Lever, Salem, Rivers, McVee, Bowey M: Gawn, Grundy, Petracca, Oliver, Viney, Brayshaw, Sparrow, Langdon, Hunter F: JVR, Smith, Melksham, ANB, Kossie, Chandler S: Hibberd This is what I would do, but not necessarily what I think will happen.

I do. There's a bit of MFC 2021 about them. It's going to be very hard for them from 5th though if we can win one ofthe remaining two games.

CHF and CHB don't exist anymore.

Carlton are very good - better than I thought, but we can definitely beat them. JVR x 2, Chandler and Salem all missed chances they usually nail and then there was the Petracca goal call. One of those five instances goes our way and we win. It's ridiculous to say we can't beat them.

That was the week before vs North. Grundy wasn't playing.

From the Stats thread: I expected and think we should have rucked Grundy more and played Max forward more. For Grundy 24% of ruck contests and 29% of CBAs is very low. He played 60% gametime, if we take the 24% ruck contests to indicate gametime in the ruck that means he played 36% gametime forward (60% of his gametime), but that's even a big underestimation because a lot of those ruck contests would have been when he was forward. The message from the FD was "we want to play Grundy a bit more forward" but we played him predominantly forward. Max contested 73% or ruck duels vs Carlton. Last week vs North he contested 62% with JVR 38%. It just doesn't make sense to use Grundy so little in the ruck.

I expected and think we should have rucked Grundy more and played Max forward more. 24% of ruck contests and 29% of CBAs is very low. He played 60% gametime, if we take the 24% ruck contests to indicate gametime in the ruck that means he played 36% gametime forward (60% of his gametime), but that's even a big underestimation because a lot of those ruck contests would have been when he was forward. The message from the FD was "we want to play Grundy a bit more forward" but we played him predominantly forward. Max contested 73% or ruck duels vs Carlton. Last week vs North he contested 62% with JVR 38%. It just doesn't make sense to use Grundy so little in the ruck.

Let me guess the summary. We actually won except for cheating umpires, but we're rubbish anyway and can't win the flag. Amirite?

That's rubbish. I lived in San Franscisco for 3 years and the drug and homeless problem there is far, far worse than in Melbourne. There is nothing comparable to the Tenderloin in Melbourne.

YOU were the poster who said they had to 0-3 to miss top spot when it is in fact 1-2. I didn't see anyone say they will go 0-3.

The very point I was making. When thinking about the future success of the Tamanian team it's likely to be more relevant to consider the experience of WC, the Crows and Port - all teams who won flags within the career span of an AFL player, rather than GC or GWS.

You're right. I thought it was tomorrow. So maximum one out for sub is likely.

16 MFC listed players is good, although at least 2 will come out for the senior side for Sub and emergency.

"We've got a plan going in, but that may change in game" - Wait, what, surely not?

"In total, I’ve been involved at AFL club level for more than 25 years as a player, coach, and GM of Football for a decade at both Essendon and Melbourne. It has been a privilege and I look forward to what is next.” Sounds likely from that. Needs to get away from Dodoro too.

Michael Hibberd, on 195 games and turns 34 next January. He made it clear earlier in the year his goal is to get to 200 games. He'll be sub tomorrow which will help but there's not a lot of runway left this season to get there.

I asked West Coast, Adelaide and Port Adelaide and they all said it's possible.