Bonkers

Hope they've reviewed footage of last years GF to prepare. High pressure is how to beat the Crows.

I don't think it's damning. We've lost to 3 top sides (geel x 2 and Port) all by very close margins. It could easily have been 3 wins from 4 games against top 8 sides and we'd be sitting second on the ladder. I'd say it's frustrating that they aren't where we'd like them to be. Frustrating that they haven't taken the next step in the close games and evolved to be able to get the job done. The attitude is there just not the right application. They haven't matured to the level they need to, to be taken seriously as a finals contender yet. If they make finals from the position they're in at the moment, they will have earnt the right to be considered a threat. The next 5 games will tell us everything about this group. I hope that they make it because I don't know how many more chances players like Jones, Lewis and Vince will have left to give September a shake. Replacing them could be difficult and may take us a step backward.

We aren't mate and that's why it's such an infuriating loss. We have not learnt anything this year. How many times do we want to waste our midfield dominance and not put teams away? It's cost us twice against Geelong and also against Port. We are wasteful going inside 50 and wasteful on Goal. We had multiple opportunities to put Geelong away early in the last qtr as well as late. It's ok to make a mistake once but we keep making the same mistake over and over again. That's just [censored] stupidity or lack of ability, maybe it's both. To give up a 5 goal lead I think you'd have to say the occasion and pressure got to them in the last quarter. They literally shat themselves. I'd say there is a lot of things that they aren't doing in between the ears that is right. Goodwin again has a lot to answer for with regards to our defensive set up. Out coached again by Scott as hard as that is to say. This club never ceases to amaze me in all the wrong ways.

It's also partly an issue because by the looks of it we are letting them have a man loose in defence from the bounce. Just about every time we move the hall forward from a centre clearance we turn it over due to poor disposal or being out numbered. I'd like to see Goodwin back our mids and make Geelongs defenders accountable. We need to make more of our inside 50s yet again.

Geelong would back themselves to read Gawns tap work and potentially draw level in that part of the game. If that fails Scott could choose to concede the tap and then setup to pressure our first possession so it's a 50/50 at the tap or possible turn over on the next possession in defence. Even though we should have the advantage in the ruck it may not result in dominance on the scoreboard if Geelong set up to nullify our possession after the clearance which they have done in the past. A couple of years ago before they had Dangerfield sometimes they would concede a clearance and set up their offence from the next possession by working on winning the ball back via a turnover.

We have only scored below 90 points three times this season. If we defend well we have a very good chance of winning 3 of the remaining games.

If he can build his fitness up he'd be in contention for ANB, Garlett or Spargos spot I presume? He can kick the odd goal and adds a lot of forward pressure and ball winning. Great to see him back after 2 years, it would be a real bonus to our season at the right time for us if he can contend for a place in the side.

Salem, Brayshaw, Petracca and Oliver all had great games. Hopefully they will form the nucleus of a good side for years to come. Frost added much needed speed in the backline as well as height. Definitely stopped a few goals with his closing speed. Stretch did his job. Got enough of the ball and provided an option on the outside. He covered the ground defensively too. Hopefully he can continue to develop and the FD puts some trust in him over the next few weeks as we definitely need his run in the side. Spargo didn't have a massive impact but looked like he worked hard. Garlett wasn't a stand out either but he did lay tackles and give us a goal threat. The defensive side to our game looked to have improved. Quite a few times Freo had to stop their transition play. Not being at the ground it's hard to say whether it was because of how Freo set up or whether it was due to our accountable marking/zone. If we were to become more efficient with our forward set up and I50 delivery we'd be a top 4 side. Still a lot of long Bombs being dropped on top of a forwards head. I'd like to see the coaches do a lot of work on this part of our game. I don't think it's just the delivery, also the leading patterns and areas where players are being told where to run is having an impact.

To be fair he's just making a comment on what should be happening in this game. We should be up by 60-80 points. Shooting our selves in the foot repeatedly.

Dermie making comments on what should be a free kick for sniping. I've now heard it all.

Hard not to be frustrated by that half with the uncapitalised dominance. Probably should have been game over by 1/4 time. This game is almost a replica of the game against Gold Coast earlier in the year. We are on track for a record I50 count. I noticed Goodwin has moved smith forward in that qtr. Not sure why?

Stretch and Spargo are both players that have an extremely high work rate when they don't have the ball. This should provide us with more defensive cover in transition. Tyson and Hannan have been replaced by these two players so I'd assume that's some form of statement?

If he see's it as a reason for the loss why doesn't he address it in the structure of the team. It's hard to run 2 ways when you don't have the cattle capable of doing it. The teams full of plodders with no run and pace. It's been the main reason weve lost games against Geelong, Hawthorn, Collingwood and now St.kilda. This is both a list management shortcoming as well as a coaching error. I'm all for Goodwins attacking style and high scoring however he needs to realise when it doesn't come off we have no chance of winning the game. We are over committed to one style and most teams have now worked us out. I'd say there is no way a coach like Clarkson or the Scott brothers would be so committed to winning clearances and contested ball without considering having a defensive system that balances that out if things begin to go the wrong way on game day. You raise a good point stating that we haven't been two way runners since the Roos era. If this is the case what has the club been doing in this time? It's a cornerstone of any successful defensive team to cover the ground. It's non negotiable and just expected that it is done or you don't play. There is a clear deficiency in our list of players capable of covering the ground end to end. If the AFL decides to change the rules in order to open up the game more I have serious concerns about what this will mean for this group of players and the current coach.

For him to say that it's not ingrained in them is a disgrace. If this is true I have serious doubts in his ability as a coach. Under Roos he had the team playing defence first football. Since Goodwin has taken over our scoring has exploded to the point we are now the highest scoring team in the comp. Can't he see that it has consequences at the other end of the ground and we are unbalanced defensively? We have to tighten up behind the ball or this season is lost.

Goodwin and the brains trust need to have a good hard look at themselves. The same issues that have been costing us games all year still haven't been addressed. We are the easiest team to transition against in the AFL. I actually feel sorry for the likes of Petty, Oscar, Hibberd & Jetta today when the ball is coming in at the speed it does every game. The midfield is full of ball winners with not enough 2 way run. The defence is getting sliced up as they have barely any protection in front of them to slow the speed of ball coming into the D50. Whilst Petty may come good I think it's too early for him on today's evidence. Frost is most likely not the long term option but I think we have to lump him in the backline at the moment. We don't have much of a choice. Stretch, Spargo and Baker should all be considered for selection next week. I'm reluctant to say Vince but he would have been better than Tyson today.

From watching him play over the years my perception of him is that he is an extremely talented player. But I believe he doesn't really like to get his hands dirty and is a liability in terms of contested ball and tackling. I'd be interested to see his pressure stats but for a quick and agile player he doesn't seem to have enough tackles or pressure acts. If he is playing like that then all he is giving the team is uncontested possessions. From my understanding of the game that's not enough at this level of footy. If the game was less contested and congested we might be able to carry him. It will be interesting with the rule changes coming in at the end of year as there might be more space for him under those rules next year? I had him as a player that would be out of the team come this years end so personally I'm not surprised he's stinking it up at present. Hope he proves me wrong.

Hogan has been in all Australian form up to the game against Port. You'd support dropping him off one bad game ?

I think there has been improvements. The Hawthorn and Collingwood games were backward steps. However the losses to Geelong and Port should have been wins, we dominated both games however couldn't convert our dominance onto the scoreboard. Geelong and Port are both vying for that 4th spot and even though we have lost both games against those 2 we really should have won. If we can learn our lessons and convert our I50 dominance into scores we are a top 4 team. The margins between being a top 4 side and just outside the 8 are pretty tight at the moment. They have to take that next step as a team. Right now it hurts to have those losses, but last year Richmond were at the exact same stage as we are at now in terms of wins and losses. Unfortunately in terms of personnel Lever is injured whereas for Richmond Rance remained fit.

As an unrestricted free agent then sure why not. Wouldn't want to be paying a high wage. He's had his fair share of injury issues recently and is most likely just about cooked. If its low risk then it's probably worthwhile but for some reason I'm not overly enthused about it.

If he wants to come home and we don't have to give anything up for him but his wage (in balance with the rest of our list) it would be crazy not to sign him. If WCE match that offer and we have to trade for him then it's a different matter. I'm pretty sure the WCE would want a first rounder or a player we aren't willing to give up so it could end up being a bit of a stand off. We might have to give him a long contract and or front end his contract so that we can ward off WC. I'd say WC would be offering anywhere between 3-5 years, don't know about 6 or 7. Interesting times ahead, good to hear we are at least in the running/discussions for McGovern & Sloane too.

I don't know if we have a dormant supporter base or not, research and numbers alone seem to indicate that we don't. I think what we do agree on is that our supporter base is not big enough and something needs to be done about it.

I'm not so sure of this huge dormant supporter base that you speak of. Our club punches above its weight with supporter to membership conversion. However Roy Morgan research has the MFC as the lowest supported club outside of GC and GWS in the AFL. http://www.roymorgan.com/findings/7345-roy-morgan-afl-supporter-ladder-2017-201709210118

Currently the club is in a stable position, however the club has just made a big decision to give up a cash cow (pokies). Over the next couple of years the club is going to have to raise revenue significantly. The club might be purring like a well oiled machine now but it's going to take a good operator to replace the revenue we have chosen to relinquish. From what I can tell Pert has a good network in the media through TV and radio. I'm hopeful that he'd be able to leverage off that to raise the clubs profile and in the process drive revenue higher. Hopefully he can help negotiate a better fixture for more exposure through free to air games and then raise more through sponsors and the onflowing effects.

If Mahoney wants to be a CEO surely he should be willing to spend some time in the business side of the club rather than just the footy side which he currently operates. I know he has been to uni and has various degrees, but at the end of the day they are just bits of paper. Nothing prepares you to do the job other than being involved in doing the job. He's got no experience in business as far as I am aware other than being in the footy department. I'm all for promoting from within but appointing Mahoney ahead of a candidate like Pert would be close to stupidity in my opinion.

He has an outstanding record with Channel 9, Austereo Network, SEN and Collingwood. I find it hard to believe that there are rumours about his character or standing amongst his colleagues when he has been a successful operator in business for such a long time. On appearances he is an outstanding appointment and the rumours about why he left Collingwood is just noise at this stage. I believe the current board and PJ would do their thorough homework before pulling the trigger to hire him.