Nasher

I agree that it's his job to kick goals, and missing goals that were so important in the context of the game definitely take his rating down. But if he'd kicked 4.0 instead of 1.3 we'd have all had him at 6 votes and licking the mud off his boots, such was his dominance. I don't think missing goals, in a game where bloody everyone missed goals, scales his performance down as far as a scrape over the line, give him a vote by default type of effort. As they say though, opinions are like arseholes, and this week mine seems to stink. That's how it goes isn't it?

6. Jetta 5. McDonald T 4. McDonald O 3. Hunt 2. Hogan 1. Tyson

Needed a 15th mark to omit the "I guess", P?

I decided to immediately occupy myself with my family after the game instead of hanging on here. It definitely took the edge off. Given the roller coaster this season has been, it seemed a fitting way for it to die: a bitterly disappointing performance against a garbage team and crushing our dreams one last time, for old times sake. It just sums up 2016 so perfectly. It had all the hallmarks our usual woeful performances this year have had: Tyson getting caught holding the ball, Kent being utterly horrible from start to finish (how about that kick in to nobody deep forward? That was the point I officially gave up), and our young mids barely touching the ball. The only thing missing was McDonald brothers terrible errors; for the record I thought both where among our better players today. Despite the fact that by the end I was actually counting on Hogan missing his shots, I thought he otherwise looked much better. For the first time since his injury he looked - and was - a marking threat. Please Jesse and MFC, hire the best goal kicking coach money can buy this off season, and treat it as if you're learning from scratch. We need you to be better than you currently are in this aspect. It was a disappointing way to snuff out the dream, and pretty embarrassing with most of the footy world paying attention. What a month of footy this has been. A disappointing way to finish (Geelong to come of course), but I already can't wait for 2017. Bring it on!

When selection costs Melbourne *and* Casey a win. (I don't really believe that - was just an amusing thought.)

No change to my previously stated view: harsh to blame him for a kick that went over his head.

Pretty tough to blame Weideman for that. The kick went way over his head. Super frustrating game. Got on top in that quarter but just couldn't score. We're still right in it, but fair to say the first half has been disappointing.

Get a kick Matt Jones. Only 27 touches to half time, the hack.

While I wouldn't have closed the thread, I'm genuinely surprised people wanted to retain two threads simultaneously discussing the same event. Ah well.

If it's that easy, perhaps you should consider a career in recruiting. Yeah, thought not.

I think what makes me feel it is that it all seems to be in his head. As a junior, clean use of the ball was apparently a feature. It's not often I agree with the idea of a player being "Melbourned" but I reckon he was one. The demolition job done on his confidence seems to be irreversible.

Ahhh, Toump! You're breaking my heart lad.

Not going for Port and I couldn't give a rats about them, but they're still making me groan and swear with some of the errors, e.g. the Westhoff spilt mark, Trengove kicking it to nobody.

Goal to Toumpas. Good young player that guy.

It's all good mate. I agree entirely - or at least would, if we were the players. The players absolutely must adhere to what you've said. Just reckon we fans can say and do whatever and it makes no difference.

Hard to believe this is the same Port we played last week. Looking really on the ball tonight.

Yep. I think it's just their talent at getting completely and utterly belted when they lose that has done that. Must be a frustrating side to watch.

Right. I replied to an instruction, not an opinion.

?

All good. P.S. how good is being able to reply to locked threads. :-)

Well if I'd known you were going to do that, I'd have just closed the 'Hurley and Hibberd' thread instead of merging it with the existing 'Hibberd' thread. Booooo.

We have no influence on the outcome. We can get as far ahead of ourselves as we want.

At what stage did Bradshaw "hardly get a game"? He played a minimum of 16 games in all but his first and last season and kicked over 50 goals in a season 4 times. He was a bonefide full forward who people underrate because he spent most of his career next to Jono Brown. Pedersen record for goals in a season is 18. Again excluding Bradshaw's first season (3 games for zero goals), the least he ever kicked was 19. He kicked 28 in his last year for Sydney when he was clearly finished. I get the point you were trying to make, but you do your argument no favours with such an outrageous comparison.

Yes - it's a proportion of total score, hence 'percentage'. Nice illustration - makes the point very clear. Also nice to know that it's really only the first three of those outcomes, and possibly the fourth, that are really plausible, and they all make a good dent in the percentage diff between us and North. So much at stake in this game that it's ridiculous. So glad that we're still in the hunt, it would have been a real let down if the Swans had failed today. We play twice now before North play their game against GWS, so the ball is well and truly in our court.

Because there was two concurrent threads going on the same topic. Not sure how the software picked the title, but the OP is P_Man's post from the original "Michael Hibberd" thread. I don't see "Michael Hibberd and Michael Hurley" a massive difference to "Michael Hibberd", especially when everyone had all but stopped talking about Hurley.