praha

I'd gobble up Petracca with some fava beans and a glass of chardonnay.

Disgusting 50 penalty.

Bang. We smash them for 1.5 quarters, they go forward three times and get three goals.

Our defense has single-handedly brought them back into the game. Disappointing.

Argh. 3 goals from players Oscar is playing on.

We are. The Eagles are soft and we're pummeling them. The problem is that they're a transitioning team and we hand the ball back to them. Roos' coaching now comes into play. We need a defensive structure that keeps the ball forward of center for us. Beat them at their own game. Three or four handballs in a circle to kick it forward when a single kick would have the same result is undermining our workrate to maintain the ball forward of centre, which we're doing. Still think WC will go on a 5-6 goal run and then shut it down. I can't see it going any other way atm. We are just unable to match fast transitioning teams.

Dawes is astonishing.

We are an average team trying to play like millionaires. Get the ball forward, keep it in there, and run both ways. Our forwards are allowing the transition.

They are killing themselves.

We're overusing it.

I think we're 18th in the league for goals from intercept marks.

[censored] by Jones. Center it.

Everyone's dropping marks. Give it a rest.

2 or 3 too many handballs.

Pitiful free kick. Took out Tyson's legs.

Darling having a poor month, kicked 0.5 last week. He'll kick 5.0 today.

I agree but the reality is that games like this no matter how well you play the home team has a greater margin of error and you need to be exceptional and well above your best to win. Keeping it close regardless of a win or loss would be a positive. No Melbourne team has gotten within 10 goals of the Eagles in Perth for, what, 10, 15 years? Wouldn't it be great if the youngest team in the comp and probably the club's history managed to keep up with a team that has pushed us around for a decade? If we play as we last week, it's a 100 point loss. If we play as we did against Hawthorn, we might win. I was far more disappointed after losing to the Saints by 30 than I was after losing to the Hawks by 18. I'd be filthy if they lost, but "it is what it is". If we get smashed *again* I'll be just as annoyed as you. We're not Hawthorn. We're a club that is trying to transition into a winning club, and sometimes that means making the opposition actually work to beat you. We have let Saints, Eagles beat us up for a decade. Taking it to them and making them work for it rather than push us down like always, I'd take pleasure in that.

Of course. But at the same time, as Roos has said, there is zero margin for error. When you look at the team, the inexperience, and the uncanny ability to drop from good to absolutely deplorable after one quarter break, the odds are as stacked against us as they have been in every game we've played there the past decade and a bit. I'm actually confident we can keep it to a 4-5 goal loss, which would be a "win" imo. I think that if it's more than that, it'll be a blowout.

Won't get close. We just don't win these games. Even when we are going well we don't win them.

If we can stay within 4-5 goals I'd actually take it as a win. If they play as they did against the Saints, it will be a 100-point loss. Regardless of form, it is hard to win there for any team. A good team performance that attacks and transitions well is all I ask. Our inability to play Etihad shouldn't translate to Domain. We *should* play the ground well.

Well the problem is that we are actually at near full strength, and have been all year. Few injuries and plenty of talent knocking down the door from the VFL, but it makes little difference when we come up against teams that sit directly above us on the ladder (Port, Saints, Eagles this week). The likes of Richmond, Collingwood and North if you consider them a bottom 10 side have played better football for longer periods than we have. We notch up one win and then get absolutely smacked the following. Somehow, Carlton notched up 4 or 5 wins in a row and could very well finish above us on the ladder. Maybe it's just me but I can't remember a team in the modern era (1990-now) ever having such a major gap in performances in such short periods of time. Sure, Carlton and the Saints have been smacked a few times this year, but they've also gone through long periods where they have played at a really high standard and beaten some good teams. We switch on and off at a really concerning rate and to me I just can't quite understand it. I don't think it's a speed or pressure or hardness issue...well, it is, but I think what's driving that deficiency is 100% between the ears. We played Neeld-era football on Sunday. It was a 10-goal loss had the Saints been switched on in the first (they weren't: go and watch the replay). Our leaders missed easy goals and stopped running IN THE SECOND QUARTER! "It is what it is." What it is, is astonishing. I'm filthy after Sunday's loss. I really just want to go up to guys like TMac, N Jones, Watts, shake them as hard as I can and say, "AREN'T YOU SICK OF LOSING LIKE THIS!?" Too many individuals who go into a shell. We play shocking team football atm. That's the stigma that infects a player's mind when they pull on a Melbourne jumper. It's not a "team" worth dying for. We're going to lose again this week. We're going to get run over, spread, mutilated. Because we're not a team that wins in Perth. It's just not what we do.

efa

Wines > Toumpas

I really hate when Burgs refers to players as "ex-team". "Former Magpie Ben Kennedy" last week. "Ex-Power played Newton" this week. It's not the first game of the pre-season ffs. They're DEMONS.

It's a [censored] quote, really. He's just saying it to cover his arse, because the whole "go home" factor is emasculating and is frowned upon more now than it was 10-15 years. A guy like him, he'd never admit to wanting to go home. He'll play it as wanting to be in a competitive club.