Bonkers

Loving Clarry's work. Human wrecking ball at that centre bounce.

That's another aspect from yesterday that was frustrating. There seemed to be a lot of broken tackles which as you said lead to free players. If we had stuck some of those tackles it would have lead to goal scoring chances the other way. Perhaps cheating was the wrong word, but it's definitely a large gamble committing numbers well forward of the ball when you're not in possession.

Well if you're prepared to leave the contest & run towards your own goal without knowing the result of the contest I'd call it cheating out the back. I saw it happen numerous times. You can also call it backing your team mates to win a 50/50, if we had been good enough to win more of those contests it would have caused them problems back the other way. Will agree to disagree, cheers.

From my observations many times the Saints players were willing to gamble that they would win the ball in a 50/50 & would cheat out the back running into open space to receive the ball was it was won in the contest. There were other times were we didn't apply enough pressure in our forward line & they would then cut through our zone with again numbers out the back or simply switch the ball around the outer side of the ground. My conclusion on most occasions was that the Saints were willing to work harder than us. I'm not sure whether some of the players were tired or simply lazy but I there was definitely a lack or work rate throughout leading to numerous easy goals.

Pretty much the story of the game.

I agree, the amount of times they rebounded the ball from D50 to goal was criminal. At some stages it was 3 or 4 on one in our defensive 50 once the ball got out the back. I think our defensive pressure was well down & we werent able to run with the Saints for the whole game. Whilst the defending looked terrible at times our forward pressure was poor today & a big reason for the loss.

As a few have said already one week at a time. The saints next week is the type of game we need to win to make finals & start to be taken seriously as a finals contender. We then have the Gold Coast which is much like the Saints game. The encouraging thing is that at the moment our clearance based game should hold us in good stead against most teams. Where we may fall down is the turnovers. Against the better teams turnovers may cost us games, so it's something we need to improve on. The base is there in terms of clearances & inside 50's & so far we are the most accurate team in front of goal this year. The negative is if you have a look at the top 8 at the moment it is hard to see those sides slipping down the ladder based on current form. Gold Coast & GWS are the likely two that may struggle to keep up the pace with their young lists, but they are still both very talented sides.

Am I right in assuming that the VFL free to air games won't be shown until round 4? If so its pretty [censored] poor by channel 7. They were supposedly championing their promotion of the local game when purchasing the TV rights. I preferred the abc at least you knew a game would be broadcast every Saturday afternoon.

You could always sell the tickets on Ebay (not for profit) & get another set of tickets elsewhere in the Southern Stand behind the goals or in the pocket. You're lucky that there may be some demand for your existing tickets as its Anzac Eve.

He provided another option as a lead up target & is very athletic as we already know. We don't need him to be a world beater, just a chop out for Gawn & Hogan at times. Hopefully this is the start of good things to come. Glad the selectors kept the faith.

It wasn't, the Hafey game was a day game.

Out: Bugg, Vince In: Garlett, Brayshaw Brayshaw to play Vince's role across half back & through the middle. Move Vanders up the ground to play in Buggs role. Garlett to play forward rotating with VDB. I don't think Wagner did too much wrong in his first game so not sure why there's calls for him to be dropped. Admittedly I was surprised he was picked last week, but he aquitted himself well. We have no one else to play back up ruck so it's either frost or pedo. I'd give frost a continued run in the team, can't keep dropping guys after one game & then expect them to perform.

Pretty shattering to lose that game. Some big improvements on last week. That effort & intensity needs to be the standard going forward. Unfortunately we are blessed with players who butcher the ball & this is going to continually cost us games going forward. Petracca, Brayshaw, Trengove & Neal-Bullen to come into the side are all positives to look forward to. I'm hoping that the playing group can envision winning most games they go into now.

Pretty shattering to lose that game. Some big improvements on last week. That effort & intensity needs to be the standard going forward. Unfortunately we are blessed with players who butcher the ball & this is going to continually cost us games going forward. Petracca, Brayshaw, Trengove & Neal-Bullen to come into the side are all positives to look forward to. I'm hoping that the playing group can envision winning most games they go into now.

Another thing that has been lacking apart from maybe the first quarter & maybe last quarter last week is the forward line pressure. There may have been one period of play today where we locked the ball inside our forward 50 for extended periods of time, other than that it was coming out far too easy for the whole game.

The game day experience overall reminds me of the Carlton & Essendon games last year. For whatever reason whether it was being out coached or our players being not mentally prepared its not good enough. Whilst it is hard to gauge from pre season games it certainly appeared like our game style had changed to moving the ball quickly from half back or through the middle of the ground under Goodwin. I believe we scored or averaged 100 points for in each game? We have barely seen any quick ball movement & efficient switching of play since the NAB challenge/cup. Is it Paul Roos coaching style or is the opposition negating our style of play? One thing is clear is that nothing has changed since last year under Roos. David King must be lapping it up at the moment after making the point about Roos & Goodwin's coaching style during pre-season. I am really questioning whether Roos is the way forward from here after watching the last two weeks of footy & comparing it to how we were playing in the NAB challenge. This post isn't a post to just pot shot Paul Roos, however I'd like to encourage some debate from what we know about the two coaching styles of Roos & Goodwin. Perhaps it deserves it's own thread. Overall it was a very disappointing day to be a Melbourne supporter, maybe the less said the better.

Your stats are all fair enough, I'm sure they are legit. The statement on Dunn being a reliable defender for a decade is well off the mark. He was drafted as a forward and played forward at least 2-3 seasons & was in & out of the side. He was then also a tagger / utility for a season or two. The last four years he has been a serviceable defender.

Isn't he a WA boy? If not Arden St I'm sure Freo or WCE would try to do some sort of deal if they have any currency.

He's had less than one pre season & it was a 30 degree day. It's hardly a concern. I'd say it's a good sign he can get that much out of himself already when you take into account he's probably only trained for 12 weeks as a pro.

Hi Jaded, I'd watch it if I were you especially the second half. Noticeable changes to our play were how quickly & efficiently we moved the ball between the arcs. We also pressured Port into making many errors through forward line pressure. Two quite large changes to our previous style of play in my opinion. Some of the new recruits really added to our play & look to fit in. The other aspect of the play that was pleasing was the Ruck & clearance work, we completely dominated them in this area.

For those interested there is match coverage including an interview with Goodwin on the afl app. Goodwin believes that Brayshaw will be right to play round 1 & that's a very minor medial strain.

Nathan Jones is unlikely to play according to this article. http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-02-24/training-collision-leaves-demon-skipper-nathan-jones-an-unlikely-starter

My general observations of the game were that link play & movement of the ball forward seemed a lot more free flowing especially from the blue team in patches. There wasn't as much of the stop & start to kick down the line we are used to seeing. Players did seem to be running hard to get into space to receive a handpass from behind or ahead of the player with the ball. There seemed to be a deliberate attempt at kicking flatter or lower/harder to leading players. Areas of weakness that could be improved were skill errors such as short handballs going to ground as well as short kicks going to ground instead of hitting targets. This should be an area of the game the coaches really crack down upon as it can be the difference between a goal or a turnover/stoppage at times. Kicking at goal from set shots wasn't great, I think there were definitely more points scored than Goals. Forward 50 entries at times were a lot better than I have seen in the past, however I thought the leading patterns of the forwards could be a lot better. Again kicking into leading forwards could improve as well. Overall I think there has been improvement especially in the speed of ball movement, some of the passages of play were quite free flowing. Some of the link up play through the middle of the ground & wings was good to watch. There needs to be a bit more attention to detail on execution of skills & making sure the ball gets to where it is intended. Simple skill errors will be costly when it comes to the real stuff. It's good to see that the style of play has switched to be more attacking & I found the hit out positive/encouraging.

Grimes was quite good. He accumulated quite a few possessions & in general his ball use was good. From my observations he played on the wing predominantly but may have been setting up behind the stoppage later in the game for some reason.

Considering the amount of money spent on developing & training players throughout their careers I would personally expect that players have pretty limited sporting activities outside of training through out their career. I don't see any difference to prohibiting the amount of alcohol consumed after a game for example. If it impacts their health & potential performance then there is scope to control what they can & can't do. I suppose the question is where do you draw the line? Seems silly to me to have a company asset being risked in that environment, if you can control the risk why wouldn't you? Regarding risk of injury playing cricket, if you are a bowler there is fair chance of injury with your back, feet & muscles. Batting is a bit different & probably less of a risk. There is always a risk of injury whilst fielding dependent on where you are fielding.