Adam The God

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.

I'm glad you changed your name back, HH... And agreed. What a forward gun he has turned into. If he keeps up this pace, he'll still win the Coleman.

Backline fell apart because our midfield and half forward line fell apart. I thought the defenders battled relatively well. Joel Smith struggled in the first half, but grew into the game. Great spoil in the last. His spoil and then follow up tackle early on was good too. The around the ground clearances were worse. 16-27! You don't win games of footy with our attacking press system, when you lose the clearances that badly. Wow. There's some stuff I agree with and then there's this... the bloke was second for the Coleman coming into this game, playing midfield and forward. He's a star. He had a down day, but he'll bounce back. You're suggesting Viney and Jones are too slow for the middle, but your replacement is Tyson? I think we might go Jeffy and Hunt next, as we need some outside run, but I wouldn't say Viney is slow. And given Port's slowish midfield, we might reset with the same midfield and not go Jeffy or Hunt at all. Rest is needed to reassess and then we go again in Port.

I did think a few times that I could picture Lever coming across and spoiling, third man up against Cox. So that would have helped. But we also allowed the Collingwood forward entries into Cox to be un-pressured. And when that happens, the ball should be kicked to the advantage of the forward. When that forward is Ted Cassidy, there aren't many ways to stop that, except pressure the kick into him. Needless to say, we didn't. Agree with Weideman over Pedersen too. And I also agree with the Vince conundrum. I don't want to see Harry come in just yet, so maybe it's Wagner. Kicking-wise, they're pretty comparable. Yes and no on this one, mate. We failed a big exam today, but we still have solid percentage and a game up our sleeve, which will at least keep us in the 8 over the bye. We might just be able to put this one down to tiring legs and exhaustion. Why Collingwood didn't suffer from this is the frustration for me. But there's plenty of time this season to make up for this weak and tepid performance. I just hate that we didn't bring it against an average football team, who played out of their skin. I don't think I've ever watched a Buckley-coached side play as well as we let them play today. Particularly, as it was very similar to how we lost against Geelong, Hawthorn and Richmond. Utilise the short chipping game to compress our press and then go quickly over it.

Except, the way I see it, the key reason we lost the game was we got smashed in around the ground clearances. So to say Gawn beat him around the ground, IMO, is completely wrong. I'm sure Max will bounce back, but today was his chance to really cement his AA credentials and Grundy snatched it from him.

Max gave more around the ground? Today? We must have been watching different games.

I should add a couple of other notes. Collingwood constantly manned up our anchor and usually with a quick player like Wells or Stephenson. This also meant our zone was constantly compressed and far too high, and like Hawthorn, they used their pace to continually exploit this. But they also had an extra man off the back of the stoppage (as most clubs do), but it was also someone with genuine pace (ie Cripps or Treloar). This helped them murder us around the ground in stoppages and because we failed to apply any real pressure at the contest for long enough, they repeatedly gave to players in space with plenty of time. We refused to work for the switch too, just as happened against Richmond and Hawthorn. This meant we kicked the ball to contests we rarely won, Collingwood would hold it up, reset and then win the around the ground clearance. It happened over and over again. We have banged on about building from the contest out and yet the last two weeks we've managed to get mauled at the coalface (Max, you handed that horse-looking muppet the AA jacket today too). The umpiring was terrible but often it follows that the team getting to the ball first get the better go from the umpires and we never looked like it today. Half way through the second, the scoring shots differential fluctuated between 7-8 more scoring shots and you could tell we'd lose by 7-8 goals and that was a fair result. We were as disappointing as we've been all year. It would have been a lot uglier if it weren't for Tommy's brilliant game. As with all games where we are comprehensively beaten, it's always our bottom 6 who are simply terrible. ANB, Harmes and Pedersen all offered very little and fumbled or let us down at crucial moments. Unfortunately, Charlie Spargo was shown up today with ball in hand and seemingly just overawed by the occasion and contest, however when the ball wasn't in his hands he was a lot better. His chasing and tackling was solid. I think it might be time for Petracca to have a spell in the twos. He's so ineffective, goes at marking contests with one hand, trails his opponents to contests and seems to completely lack concentration and a tank. And then there's Vince. I'm really not sure what he offers this team. I'm convinced he's getting games based on his experience and his occasional attacking kick into the corridor that comes off. I'm really hoping a break is all this team needs to get going again, because they weren't there today (apologies to Tom McDonald, our backline and the super consistent A grader, Clarry).

Gawn was absolutely embarrassed today. Our mids were comprehensively beaten and our half forwards barely laid any tackles. Tommy though is worth every cent. The other leader to show leadership. I hope this puts the Pedersen debate to sleep too. His inability to bring the ball to ground or compete, as well turning the ball over resulted in 3-4 first half goals. Let's see how we reset after the bye with a bit of rest. A thoroughly predictable Melbourne performance though. You knew as soon as Richmond lost and second spit was there for the taking that we'd capitulate.

It's funny. Petty was the guy I was most excited about from the off season last year. Perhaps, it's a hang over from having to invest hope into young kids for so many years, but he seems like a Lever clone to me and given I knew what Lever was capable of, I was more excited about Petty's recruitment than anyone elses. He reads the ball beautifully in the air, knows his strengths in terms of body positioning and is a nice kick. Give him 15-20 games in the VFL to iron out some decision making education and learn the game style, and then he'll be ready for the big time. I'm excited to see where the FD sees him slotting in. Can we play Lever, Oscar and Petty in the same side? Probably, but I wouldn't want to sacrifice Hibberd's run or even Hunt's back there. I know it's 12 months down the track, but maybe Harry plays Vince's role, alongside Lever, Oscar, Hibberd, Lewis, Hunt and Salem. It'll be fascinating and exciting to see it develop. Fingers crossed we don't have anymore injuries and Petty can come in when he's ready.

In tandem with good development and a good culture. If players aren't coached properly, they don't win games every week and they certainly don't win the ultimate prize. Humanity has a real issue with viewing everything as black and white (I am still guilty of this, but am trying to change). It is never that simple.

Yeah, except our list rebuild started at the end of 2013 and anyone with a half switched on brain could see that St Kilda were being carried by their older players week in, week out and their younger players weren't developing. They're in for pain for a lot longer than just this year or next. Their list build has been ordinary and they've gone after non combative half forwards, instead of midfield bulls like we have.

Wow. I pay a lot more than $10 a month.

Fox's coverage is terrible but at least they don't have ads during games. 7 is heinous. I don't see the AFL ever giving up distro rights. Too costly for clubs and these CBA deals are the only reason some cluvs are even running.

I don't. I watch it on FOX. But ever having to watch football on 7 is a crime.