Bonkers

Petracca did his ACL. Hogan had a dodgy back.

I'd say that's all part of the decision. Jack came back after his best season in 2016 not in the condition expected of a professional. He was probably on thin ice then and who knows what has transpired throughout the year. On appearances he seems pretty happy with himself and if some of his teammates are saying it's not good enough there's a big problem. From my perspective you have to have desire to succeed that can't be coached or instilled in someone. If he's not preparing adequately and not taking pre season seriously then I'd question his desire to succeed and make a difference. I don't question his talent but you can see from his actions when he plays his desire to impact contests is questionable. If that's what the coaches and players think then I'd back them to trade him. Personally I'd be sad to see him leave as he seems like a good bloke and he has a story at the mfc. Unfortunately having a team of good blokes isn't going to be enough to win you a flag.

I'd suspect the decision to leave was probably made 3-6 months ago. I don't think the result will have any bearing on what happens after the GF.

Vandenberg has just re-signed according the MFC website so that would only leave King and Kennedy left according to LH's list?

It's been a long season and our style of play depends on high pressure and intensity. The longer the season has gone on the harder it's been to keep this up. Gawn being out of form is not helping, he's possibly playing injured. I'm not making excuses, just observing that we haven't been the team we were when we were firing at the start of the year and I think that's because we are cooked physically. The ball is transitioning into our defence way to easily and that's due to the lack of pressure up the ground. I'm not a fan of Oscar or Tmac generally but anyone would struggle to cope with the way the ball is coming into our backline at the moment. If we make finals hopefully we will freshen up. We can only hope to make it now.

Goodwins comments on Vineys injury are a bit of a worry. If it's bone related you'd think it's a hotspot. Hopefully this isn't or doesn't lead to a similar injury as Trenners last foot injury. Does anyone have a bit more of an educated opinion on what his injury is likely to be and whether he'll make it back for the first final (provided we make it)?

Apparently there is a ruck rule that states you can't fend off with an extended straight arm. The AFL in their wisdom chose to make this the one week it's ever been enforced.

There was a long line outside the membership tent 30minutes before the game so there must have been something similar happening.

The bye before the finals should help us. Having the premier ruckman fit & giving us first use in contested battles should also give us a huge advantage in hard fought finals games. Whilst it is hard to believe we can win the flag due to the club seemingly coming from nowhere. The reality is that but for a couple of injuries at the wrong moment we'd most likely be sitting 2nd on the ladder this year. Maybe that is how good we are? I'm starting to believe we can do it. I think it's important for the club to approach it with no ceiling or expectations on what they are capable of, they still have a lot of improvement in them & maybe this is our year where everything lines up. For now though I think I'll try to keep the lid on it & hope we make the 8 first.

Goodwin mentioned that Garlett had hamstring tightness but its not a strain. He may come up for next week depending on how he recovers. I'd say Salem is more of a worry. Watts was touch & go this week so he should be ok after being rested. You would think Viney would play as well, general consensus seems to be that an AC joint is a manageable injury.

At least we won't have to contend with going up against a dominant ruckman today. We should draw level or win the clearances. If we can do that we are a fair show.

All teams push their players up the ground to try & lock the ball inside forward 50 which in theory results in more scoring shots. The result is there is a huge amount of space at the other end for the opposing team to run into. If the team transitioning manages to break the zone quickly it often results in a scoring chance. It's been the trend for a couple of years now. We are often on the receiving end of it as well.

He's important in setting up structure behind the ball & provides almost an on field coach. It was noted last year by hawthorn supporters that he was slowing up & beginning to lose his feet quite often. He is clearly slowing up, but he was still good enough to come 2nd in Hawthorn's BnF last year. Calling time on his career after 1 borderline bad game is jumping the gun. He will get plenty of games this year & next year. How he goes in the 3rd year is an interesting question.

I'm more worried about Kent than Weideman. Weideman's work rate is there & you can see he is presenting to the ball, crashing packs where possible & also doing things at ground level. Kent has looked pretty poor today from watching on TV anyway. Can anyone at the ground comment on Kent's work rate off the ball?

Yes each to their own. I'm just really struggling to see his qualities as a footballer at the moment. Kicking & marking are two of the most basic skills but he continues to butcher them over & over again. Can that be rectified? I would have thought if you don't have the basics by his age then it's going to be hard to get much better than he is. He also takes an eternity to dispose of the ball or make a decision. Most of the time I'm pretty patient with younger key position players as they do take time. I can see the promise in Weideman as an example. Oscar obviously has some of the physical attributes & works to the team game plan when he doesn't have the ball. That's half of the game but it's when he has it that he is falling down. If Joel Smith wasn't injured we probably wouldn't be discussing it as Oscar more than likely would be developing where he should be in the 2's.

At the moment he's just a very bad player. He dropped marks where he was under no pressure that then lead to goals. His disposal is a major liability that also leads to unforgivable turnovers & goals. I struggle to find how any amount of development is going to change him into a reliable player as the basics just aren't there. He's getting gifted games when it should be a privilege to play for the club. If he turns this around all credit to him & the club but I can't see it happening.

At first he said it was the best performance in the last 10 years. Then when Gerard & Robbo began analysing later on Robbo revised that to be the best performance of the season by any team or something very similar. That's how I recall it anyway.

Last nights win was largely about mental application. I'm not sure who first said football is played 90% above your shoulders, but they were definitely on to something. If we approach every game with that mindset from last night I have no doubt we'll win more games than we will lose and in the process make finals. The challenge for the coaches & club in general is for the standard to be set & for that application to become the norm. If we play like demons 4 quarters this side will go somewhere, it's up to them how much they really want it. We could be the next bulldogs story who knows.

Interesting points. The only way we win the game is to control the midfield. The crows have the firepower up forward & across half back to tear us a new one. If it's possible we need to focus on slowing Adelaide down in transition as well as their exits from stoppages. We don't have the marking power down forward so there's no point dumping the ball or bombing long, we will have to possess the ball to score. I'm not sure we are up to it, in patches maybe but not for the whole game. The one area we can exploit them is around the contest, our inside mids are collectively better so maybe we can turn this into a stoppage type game & get numbers around the ball to control it that way.

From memory he had a hip or groin operation during the summer & didn't start pre season until half way through? I would have thought that was part of the reason he has started slow. What I don't get is how people have been so quick to judge him after the season he had last year. I still remember his first game for the club where he was pretty much carrying the team on his back. If there is anyone on our list you can put your faith in with regards to effort & dedication it would be Jack. Not to mention not ever taking a backward step in any circumstance.

Aliir Aliir has been withdrawn from the Swans line up due to missing a training session yesterday. Looks like there are reasons other than form for why he hasn't been getting a game this year if you read a bit more into it.

I think you are getting a bit carried away with your knowledge of what has & hasn't happened. Unless you are in a position within the club you really aren't in a position to talk about facts when it comes to the decisions the club has made regarding list management, who is or isn't available & who we have chased. I'm going to ignore the Watts vs Boyd debate, I think it's pretty clear what I am saying & I think we are in partial agreement. Regarding the Ruck forward there is always an option. We could have gone after a stop gap solution like Petrie as an example as a short term cheap solution. It would have at least provided us with some insurance. I'm not necessarily saying I would have done a deal like that I'm just saying that in terms of list management we could have looked at filling the role of a forward ruck, whether the club did or not I am not in a position to say. I just see it as a glaring weakness on our list. Happy to leave it there. Cheers.

Yes that is Watts current role & I'm saying it shouldn't be. There was an obvious need for a forward ruck, we didn't go for that player for whatever reason. Of course their role can change over time, I'm saying in this instance it shouldn't. If I was coach or list manager I wouldn't be playing Watts there, I would have tried to find a similar player like a David Hale to provide some flexibility. Whether a player like that was available is a whole different story.

In one of your original posts you mentioned that the list managers couldn't have done more to get our ruck stocks right. In my opinoin this is clearly not correct as they could have addressed a need for a ruck/forward in last years draft. Instead we have gone with Watts in this role. This is essentially where I am disagreeing with you. If I'm list manager of the Dogs I am ok with Boyd pinch hitting as his body/frame is suitable for this role. If I'm list manager of Melbourne I wouldn't have Watts in this role, I'd be looking for someone with more height & a stronger body. Regarding ruck stocks we have four specialist rucks, what we don't have is someone capable of playing forward ruck. This is why I have stated that I disagree with you as Boyd in my opinion can play this role, whereas Watts whilst he is currently in this position really shouldn't be. It suits the Dogs more to play Boyd there, it doesn't really suit the MFC. List management wise what I am saying is that we could have drafted for a KPF who also is capable of playing ruck.

You said we have a Boyd type when in fact we don't. Boyd is more suited to that role Watts isn't. I read your post & don't agree with it. It's irrelevant why they were drafted. They are currently playing a similar role in the ruck, one is suited to it & one isn't which is the point I made. We don't have someone like a Boyd to play that role so they are playing Watts which is not benefiting the team. You also mentioned about their intention in terms of list spot. Do you think Watts is on the list to play 2nd ruck or do you think he is a 2nd or 3rd tall forward? I personally think Boyd is on their list to play key position forward & relief ruck which is not the same list spot as Watts.