Adam The God

Or... Petty debuts alongside Oscar. Particularly, with Port's talls. My gut tells me Harry will debut this week.

Demonland might become more interesting for it, but the club seems a little less tight lipped in the last week, than it has in the past. Or maybe I'm simply reading into it...

That would be the Federal Government you're thinking of. You know, the ones trying to privatise the ABC, having already handed Murdoch tax-payer-funded Telstra. That's a great organisation now isn't it? The more you privatise, the less customers get. It's all about cutting costs.

I'm not sure if I've got this, but I would hope there'd be a commercial element to the precinct we would own and could then exploit for profit. This is what we've always needed and in the MFC heartland. Fingers crossed. Another one for @Chook in Perth. Kudos again, mate. Wonder if the Sun went public after Chook's post yesterday. It wouldn't be the first time...

There is some grey, mate. To say Goodwin's job is under pressure would be ludicrous, but to say there's expectation would be closer to the mark.

Due respect? Not sure he's earned it... He's talking absolute rubbish as usual.

Or someone at AFL House said "settle down, Tom".

As I said to my old man, I'd be worried if Malthouse had endorsed Pert. I remember what happened the last time he endorsed someone that came to our club from Collingwood. The bloke is a doddering old gronk.

Fair enough.

That'd be consultation then...

Kent lost me in his second season with a string of lazy performances. He's a goal kicker (when he's kicking them straight), but hasn't improved on his work rate in all his time at the club. He's old Melbourne.

I'd be staggered if the AFL's man wasn't consulted on Pert's appointment. Staggered.

Spot on, mate.

I'm excited. PJ would not have endorsed a candidate that he didn't trust or think could do the job.

A better option than Tom Bugg, but that's not saying much. May make it in a new environment but have said for many years, he won't make it at Melbourne. Best for both parties if he moves on. A bit like Howe, Dunn and Watts. He's run his course here.

Pretty staggering, given the exists of all 4 teams to beat us on the G have been almost identical. That is, a short kick in to compress our press and then boom, over the top of our press. Since the early games we've placed our anchor a lot deeper but we haven't fixed up the front of the ground, where our forwards give easy exists to the opposition. Then maybe the common denominator here is games in which we refuse to work hard and choke a bit. Still, it'd be nice if we had another system that slowed the game down or was capable of soaking up pressure and then hitting on the counter. This system would close the flood gates and shut the game down if we're exposed to top 4, finals-like pressure.

I think it's important not to base your list management strategy on one game. A game in which we clearly didn't put our best foot forward. We matched Collingwood for clearances last year without Gawn. I think we have to be prepared to revert to more defensive/less aggressive set ups at stoppages if Gawn is being nullified or beaten. Peter Wright is a decent footballer, but I'd prefer we kept using Smith or Weideman as second ruck and kept Hogan and Tommy as midfielders or forwards.

I think we're a top 6 side fully fit. Add Gaff to that side and we're nearing top 4. Our biggest problem for mine is that despite what some say, our depth is really ordinary and our bottom 4 to 6 are a) too inconsistent at best or b) Not good enough to be playing in a top 8 side.

Yep, good call, mate. I'll cop to that. I disagreed. Humble pie unfortunately devoured. I hate the idea of Collingwood improving and was loving how meh they've been since Malthouse, but they seemed to have turned a corner. I'm not convinced they can sustain it and I'd also like to see us bring our A game against them before taking too much from today's result, but they're better than I gave them credit for. On your Phillips call, I reckon that's Harmes' job or even ANB's next time, although Harmes seemed to be minding (or trying to) the +1 off the back of the stoppage. But I reckon Gus, Viney and even Jones are too good at winning the ball to sacrifice them in order to stop a runner.

Having thought about it, I like this idea. Good post, mate. Ideally, Petty doesn't have to play yet, but he might be the best option back there and allow more foot speed off half back. I hope they try it and let Harry debut in SA.

I thought there'd be a Vince thread first, but I guess that's where my head is at. ?

I think it was both. We shot ourselves in the foot in four major ways today. 1) we didn't bring it to the midfield contest 2) we didn't bring the tackling pressure (across most of the field) 3) we failed to spread hard for each other to provide the switch and therefore open up easier kicks 4) we failed to look to move the ball quickly (mostly because of "3")

I disagree mate. His field kicking was on display when he hit Tommy on the chest early on. He's generally a beautiful field kick IMO. And I wouldn't say running is a weakness of his either. He's not quick, but he's not slow either. He brings others into the game and will most likely be AA. The only thing I would agree with you on is the little pressure comment. He needs to improve in this area. He doesn't lay enough tackles. If ever I agreed about the Plan B conversation, it's this. We need to learn that when Gawn isn't have a day out, sit him in the square and try and make him into a headache for the opposition. We actually did this today, but our midfield was so insipid that it didn't matter who rucked for us, we weren't going to shark enough of Cox or Grundy's hit outs to win.

And the only reason for that is knowing Tommy would give them a better than decent contest at the top of the square. I reckon it was pretty comparable to the Richmond game, mate and certainly the Hawthorn game. But each to their own. Even our backs refused to spread and look for the switch. I'd like to play Collingwood again in a fortnight's time. We have to be a lot more daring with our ball movement if we are going to win on the MCG. At least, I hope that's clear.

It may well have come down to the fact we were a game out from the bye and exhausted. Also, can we have that conversation about Bernie Vince again mate? If not, very soon. It's an interesting post this, because it is thought provoking to look at our list build. When we're flying, it's almost as if there are no weaknesses, but when we lose, our weaknesses are there for all to see. Teams beating us have done it off the back of pace. You think of Hawthorn and Richmond's zippy forwardlines and then Collingwood sit alongside them, with pace off half back and pace in their forward half. I think our list management are under no illusions as to the cake being cooked, but waiting for the icing. You can only do so much in one trade period. We've clearly targeted Gaff for this off season and in the meantime, recruited Baker (aptly named for your cake analogy) to see if he can develop over the course of 2018 and offer this outside run we lack. I'm sure we hoped Hunt would too. Let's hope he still does this year. I think we'll get there with list balance. Add a Gaff next year and another zippy midfield FA in the coming 2-3 years and we look very good.