Bonkers

We got touched up in the clearances against the Dogs as well. Two weeks in a row we've been shown up. I'm more concerned about that area of our game than the defensive 6 players. I thought the defence did a reasonable job when the midfield allowed the ball in there so easily all day.

That's a good point. Brayshaw has been amongst our most important players out of the centre over the last month of footy. Disappointing that they would use one of our most influential players out of the middle in a negating role.

I don't believe they need to be a giant but they've obviously got to be able to hold their own in the air. Also they have to have the strength to go one on one or have the strength and power to impact and spoil in the air. If you are going to be played as the intercept defender you need footy IQ to choose the moments when or when not to run off your man or where you are protecting space. Personally I think that is where Frost has been pretty bad in the past and gets lost ball watching. You need to know when to go to a certain contest, when to drop deeper behind play, how to hold your position in the zone and not get lost by ball watching or following the play. If it was just about Frost being accountable and locking down one on one I'd assume he'd be capable, but it's not just one on one defending which I believe is the problem. Also I think the intercept defender needs to be a safe set of hands so to speak and Frost is far from safe with the ball in hand. Hibberd can probably play the role but it will take away from what he is good at in my opinion. His strength is his distribution and running off half back as well as winning the ball at ground level. I'm not sure he's our best option in the air and I don't know if he plays tall so to speak.

Lots of people advocating for Hibberd to fill Levers role. Personally I don't rate him as a one on one defender in the air. He has greater value to the side running off his opponent to provide rebound/drive and winning the ball in ground level contests. Take that away from our game and we have a lot less attacking drive moving the ball forward. We have no one to replace Hibberd adequately either, Hunt could be that player but right at this moment he isn't based on form. Frost as a lock down defender has value in One on one contests. The problem is he loses positioning too easily and gets sucked up the ground too often for mine. He also doesn't seem to have awareness, reliable foot skills or footy smarts / game sense. Based on that info it's everything that Lever has got but Frost doesn't. Lever has been able to act as the defensive general, I can't see Frost fulfilling those duties either. Frost could move to Oscars position, but based on his decision making I wouldn't like to see it happen. That would leave J.Smith, Keilty, Petty and then a big roll of the dice with someone like Weideman. I can't see Weideman playing there without playing that role in the ressies first. Petty is too inexperienced perhaps at this stage and needs more development. Then it's a coin toss of J.Smith and Keilty. I really haven't seen much of either Smith or Keilty. Smith was impressive last year before he was injured. He may be able to play Lever's role if he just focuses on keeping things simple, might have to leave the backline general role to Lewis though. Keilty is an interesting one, hasn't banged the door down for selection but has size and relatively dependable with skills and decision making?

It was pretty innocuous. Changing direction at relatively low speed. Hoping for the best.

Brayshaw playing in the midfield rather than off a flank has had a major impact. I think it was the saints game that we made that move. As you noted we have set up behind the ball better, this has helped us hold momentum. Obviously when you are hard to score against it has a multitude of different effects. Confidence and momentum being two that come to mind. Having TMac in the side has really stretched the opposition defence. This makes it easier for everyone else as there is most likely more room to move around in behind as someone has to go with him and Hogan up the ground. This can pull the structure of the opposition around makes it hard to settle. BeforeTMac came back in we were still winning the contested footy in each game however he has made us more potent and created match up headaches. This has resulted in us being able to capitalise on our midfield dominance I believe.

When was the last time the seniors and reserves sides both recorded 100 point plus wins in the same round of footy? That was an impressive total team performance that had been brewing for a few weeks. Today they hit the scoreboard and were rewarded for all their effort. Bring on the Cows next week, hopefully we can keep bringing the intensity and defensive pressure that's made us hard to play against. I don't think this team should fear any side with TMac and Viney back in the side.

I wasn't at the game but one of the Drongos on the radio gave him votes. I don't think that can hold much credibility. You'll have to wait for one of the more educated write ups here ??.

Certainly did

JV should get around 70% game time today and hopefully be cherry ripe to come in next week to tear the blues apart.

I guess it all depends on the situation later on in the year. Port losing may have helped us with regards to our finals chances? I guess a lot has to play out first so it's all hypothetical at this stage.

I can't recall the last time Melbourne dominated a team in the way they did tonight from start to end in every aspect other than on the scoreboard. Eventually it showed on the scoreboard as well, but it really should have been close to a 100 point belting. Hard to complain after a win , but we've still got areas we can tidy up which will hopefully make us contenders rather than being also rans like we were last year.

Pretty epic final 5 minutes of footy over in Adelaide. I'm not sure to be happy that Adelaide lost or disappointed Port Picked up points to clog up the ladder.

Today is not a replacement game.

I think you are right to a certain extent. It's easier to defend on smaller grounds as there is less space to exploit. Our system seems to work at the MCG sporadically, it's a bigger ground & when our work rate drops off just a bit, then it all seems to fall apart. When we are pressing up high on the G it is going to take more sustained effort than it would at Etihad to keep the game on our terms. There is only so long in a game you can keep that high intensity press before your players get tired. I'm hoping the club addresses this or finds a plan B because at the moment plan A isn't working for 4 quarters. I find it hard to see it working on the G for 4 quarters without more running type players in the side. This is why players like ANB will keep getting a game in this system.

Garlett is a down hill skier. He goes missing too much and can't be relied upon. It's hard to build a reliable team around unreliable players. I hope to see the club address this in the off season among our other list needs.

Yeh that's right. They were able to get more forward entries into dangerous spots where they could capitalise. A lot of our forward entries weren't that dangerous due to our skill level or positioning of our small forwards and our players being outnumbered. They were able to get cheap goals because they got numbers to the fall of the ball when they moved it forward as well as the pressure they applied. They outnumbered us at opportune times and hit hard on the break into open space. It's not rocket science what they do really, it's simple footy that makes sense and is paying dividends for them. I think I counted at least 4 goals that came from balls that were crumbed from a contest, a couple were directly from a spoil or one of our players coughing the ball up due to pressure. The little things make a difference over a whole game of footy and it cost us big time last night.

Overall I was not upset about the effort last night, the effort was there from most of the players and we had periods in the game where we were well on top. If we'd converted those opportunities it would have been a much closer game on the scoredboard. Who knows maybe it would have given us the confidence to roll them. The problem is that we don't capitalise on our effort and when we are winning the contest. I've been saying it for a long time the ball movement and attacking set up is inefficient. The other main issue with our game plan is that scoring heavily/easily now in the AFL is predominantly about finding space. To find space you need players willing to run hard and fast on the counter attack and take the game on. We don't have those type of players so we pose little threat to teams when they set up defensively against us. We are very easy to defend against because we can't exploit teams on the spread or run to get the ball past a congested area / zone. Where as the opponents find it easy to exploit us in transition, this is a double edged sword. We have too many players of the same type and probably too many players outside of our top 12 players whose skill and running ability or willingness to work hard just does not seem to be there. Maybe that is an over exaggeration about willingness to work but we don't have enough speed or hard runners. I'm amazed at the ease at which other teams are able to transition the ball against us. It is tiring to watch when it happens repeatedly each week. Meanwhile we can barely manage to move the ball out of our back 50 and consistently choose to kick to a contest down the line over and over again. It's dumb footy. The club has assembled a list with a good spine. Admittedly I think I was wrong about OMac, he has come good. He still has brain farts occasionally but overall he is developing well. The other parts of the spine are looking good with Lever, Gawn, Hogan & TMac. We have developing talls in Weid and Petty who I have high hopes for. The starting midfield of Viney, Oliver and Petracca will serve us well for a decade. What I am concerned about is the lack of genuine hard running wingers and flankers on the list at the moment. This is what we are lacking. But I have hope that we can get this right. We have built the list around contested footy which I think is the right thing, from the contest out. So next in my opinion is for the club to focus on finding some genuine hard running skilled players who are hard workers and will complement our inside grunt. For mine the difference last night was Richmond had a couple of better distributors, more pace and run on the outside as well as more efficiency in attack. Their efficiency in attack was probably partly to do with having a tried and true method to move the ball forward and confidence in that method. Richmonds attacking players were also willing to run hard/contest and they weren't relying on anyone in particular. They all filled their role and capitalised on the loose balls when present to them, overall their forward players are faster more skilled and hard working than ours. In comparison our structure forward of the ball is a bit of a shambles at the moment and it seems we don't have the forward players to play the game style Goodwin is attempting at the moment.

Seems like a F#%@wit.

I don't mind the ins. Fritsch is a bit stiff to be dropped or rested but in saying that he was just ok against the Hawks so for the sake of team balance I don't mind that change. Weideman is an interesting one, with Hogan playing well up the ground we lacked a target man last week against Hawthorn. We can't really afford to let Rance play unaccountable so I think if anything Weideman will be important to give Rance and Astbury a contest. With Vlastuin out that then puts a lot more pressure on their other players to distribute out of the backline.

You raise a good point. If we were mentally stronger we probably play finals last year, we wouldn't have dropped that Rd23 game. We couldn't go with the Hawks for the whole game today after having them on the rack early. To me that indicates we are capable of beating them. That fade out can't just be down to game plan, some of it has to be mental application and lack of belief after the Hawks gained momentum. It seems this team is yet to believe or they doubt when it gets tough at times.

We win enough of the ball and our structures were ok for 1.5 qtrs today. But we are inefficient moving the ball forward. We are getting more of the ball and more inside 50s most weeks yet fail to do anything with them. Some are saying we are a good team/ have good players but I beg to differ. We have some good players but a lot of our players skills under pressure are ordinary and or theyre getting coached to bomb the ball vs hitting up a target. Our spread / running was non existent today after the 1st qtr. Is that laziness I'm not sure? Defensively our structure has massive holes in it due to our running and positional set up. We get scored on too easily whilst at the other end we are fighting for every score. The game plan is inefficient and it relies on us winning the clearances. We aren't that good around the ground using space. Clarkson pulled our game plan apart in this area. For the latter part of the game it looked like they were feeding off Max Gawns taps as well. Most supporters can see it unfolding in front of us. If the coaches don't make changes I can't see us playing finals. Hopefully this is a lesson for Goodwin.

It was interesting to hear Dermies thoughts on this game (something you can't always say about Derm). He was pretty confident that the hawks can knock us off if their young backline holds up. I wasn't really aware they're that young as they have Frawley and Sicily who is relatively experienced. But if that is the case that they're young/inexperienced let's hope that's an area the coaching staff have reviewed and can try and exploit.

Sounds like a great day for Weideman and Balic. Two players who are a different type to who we have in the 1sts ar the moment and could develop into handy AFL players. They would add a lot to our team if they keep developing.

We rely on our contested ball/inside ball winning and pressure to keep the game in our favour. There are a lot of calls for Pederson or Weideman but I'd rather keep the small line up. I think part of the reason Pederson is out is due to his lack of speed which can leave us even more exposed in transition or when trying to lock the ball inside 50. He's been average in the Ruck and around the ground also. If Tom McDonald was available I'd probably change the opinion of bringing in another tall as I think he brings more to the team, but Weideman and Pederson don't bring enough for mine at the moment. Like you said our game is channelling the Tigers almost and there's nothing wrong with that. It's playing to our strength and as the Tigers showed in the GF it can nullify a more skilful and or quicker team when you get the game on your own terms. The problem is when a team like the Hawks who are very skilful and relatively quick can manage to match that intensity around the contest. Our inside mids will be really important next week.