Adam The God

Didn't you have a completely different attitude a fortnight ago?

This isn't 2017 though. Our younger talented group have anothet pre season under their belts. As @Dr. Gonzo said above, there's nothing stopping these guys from proving themselves matchwinners this year.

I'm not a fan of this argument, OD. In fact it's slightly absurd. Just because these guys didn't win us the game last week doesn't mean they're not match winners. Geelong don't win every week. By your logical Dangerfield and Selwood can't be match winners either then.

Just not a great kick of the football. Let's hope he kicks it properly on Saturday.

Oliver is a match winner, as is Gawn and it won't be long before Petracca completely turns a game. They're there. Take Oliver out of our midfield (and Viney) and I don't think we can compete against 12-14 midfielders in the competition.

Disagree with this, bb. We saw the emergence of a plan B and to me that's exciting and at least in coaching terms, clear progress from 2017 MFC. In the second half, we implemented a zone that was much deeper and less aggressive than 2017 and it resulted in a strangulation of the opposition and had we kicked straight (even with Menzel's misses), we win comfortably. With time to digest the frustration of Sunday, I can't wait to see what we dish up this weekend. I expect us to strangle Brisbane and come away with a solid win.

El oh el at Tyson's selection. Where's @stevethemanjordan? A pest is a muppet in a Melbourne jumper. A sniper is a pest in a non-Melbourne jumper.

Reckon we'll win by 5+ goals** by playing an aggressive press against a side who will be helped by the wet weather, but still unable to skillfully pick their way through the press. **I said we'd win last week too. ?

Pressure acts and tackles are all that matters for guys like Hannan, Melksham and Garlett IMO.

Yep, I said the same thing to my old man on Sunday. His one good game for the season. And dadsy said at least he's doing it. Unfortunately, none of our smalls had anything like his impact. Still, he's a muppet.

Spot on. We weren't laying bloody tackles inside 50 or even through the midfield for large portions of the second. But in reality, they waltzed out of our defence for most of the day. Those two cheap kicks we would give up nearly every time became like clockwork. Infuriating. I couldn't believe it wasn't addressed with our structures, but this revealed something to me about our plan A and plan B. One of these plans is for the lesser teams and another is for the stronger teams. We view Geelong highly and as a stronger team, so on Sunday we clearly wanted to play a slightly deeper and less aggressive press (even with a deeper anchor in Lewis), which meant that we allowed that first uncontested possession from the goal square. I suspect our aggressive, extremely high press (MFC circa 2017) may have been highlighted at the end of last season as a goal leaker and so instead of using this every time, we'll use it to strangle lesser teams, but play a more conservative press against stronger teams. This is a good move if true. Therefore, I wouldn't be surprised to see a more aggressive press against Brisbane, who may not have the skill to get out of our press. Think the first quarter against Richmond last year, where the ball pretty much stayed in our forward half and they could rarely unpick it. Our structures were terrific that night and we deserved the win (and would have if it weren't for injury). Having watched a bit of Brisbane during the JLT, their brunt at the coal face is decent, but their skills don't match ours. If I was Goodwin, I'd be setting our team up to play the aggressive press and then tinker, depending on how well Brisbane can unpick our press.

Indeed. He gives me the [censored] and I knew he'd have a good game against us, because he already had the wood over us from 2017 and that's often the way it goes.

I think we did change things up. We clearly tried to lower the eyes at times in the third term and worked the ball around the wings and half forwards more, but we also bombed it long too often. I do wonder if we're a bit too one dimensional too, but I think we did try to change the tempo and the ball movement in the third term. I feel our biggest problem with forward 50 entries against Geelong was poor decision making. This decision making may have been caused by uncertainty, due to the fact that our forwards rarely marked the ball (multiple times balls went through their hands). I suspect this uncertainty may have contributed (perhaps paradoxically) to a just bomb it long and hope attitude. I distinctly remember a moment where Fritsch did it in the fourth term, but I was more disappointed in Jones, who did it as well. So I put it down to pressure and not having the composure to make the right decision.

No, I don't think so. I think it'll work. He just needs a little more time to get used to the pace in there. At times on Sunday, as he did last season, he appeared a little fumbly in there. But he'll get there. I like the move. His field kicking is beautiful, so another big bodied player that can kick out of midfield is certainly welcome.

We re-tweaked at half time and saw the defensive results in the second half. Let's at least give it until half time against Brisbane before saying we haven't learnt how to shut teams down. Because clearly, we shut Geelong down in the 3rd and for large parts of the 4th too.

Given our forwards' inability to lay tackles, I wouldn't be adverse to giving him a go as a pressure forward. Once he gets a feel for it, we can send him back where hopefully he shows his run and dash again.

It completely swung the momentum as we had them on toast at the time. And you just knew it would swing the momentum too. We talk about maturity and game sense and he demonstrated a complete lack of either.

I think it was simply a decision based on team balance and looking to maximise the strengths of certain players (ie releasing Hunt and Hibberd further up the ground). The problem is, aside from Oliver, Petracca and Gawn (and arguably, but not to my mind, Jones), the majority of the team weren't willing to work hard enough. Now that is a coaching issue, but the players also have to take most of the responsibility there. The coaches can put the best plans in the world in place, but if the players don't work hard enough to execute it, the plan falls apart. I don't think anyone could say our forwards worked hard enough for even half of the day. And by early in the fourth term, our forwards were spent. Let's not look for conspiracies where there are none.

I just remembered the last time Nev played as poorly as he did today and it was against the same opposition in our 100 point spanking at the end of 2016. He was terrible that day too. I can't remember if he was playing on Menzel that day though, but that dill loves playing us.

Um, when? We barely laid a tackle inside 50 and this was one of the sole reasons we lost the game.

Great post. Agree with pretty much all of it.

Disagree. Ball use going inside 50 was a massive problem today. Richmond showed last year what you can do with one KPF and a group of small and a medium forwards that put on pressure. Our forwardline provided the antithesis of this today. Pedersen was run off all day. It'll be interesting to see how Tommy Mac goes in the defensive pressure stakes.

Yeah, my old man and I were talking about that. Can you imagine down at the Cattery, their ground playing a little package on Oliver or Petracca? Never in a million years. What an absolute joke.

Sorry, but when you let the opposition's two best mids gather 39 touches each, you're not making them "work for almost every kick". I lost count of how many cheapies Ablett got out the back or how many times Selwood was in space by himself or practically unmarked at a stoppage. It was inexcusable this loss. They were down a man (their only decent defender) from the midway mark of the first quarter. When teams are down a man, they invariably lose. The fact that Geelong didn't, tells me that we didn't work hard enough. I think we'll make finals and we'll win 13-15 games, but this wss one game we should definitely have won. Not good enough. And there's no need to excuse our performance. Call it what it was - pathetic. In a frustratingly positive respect, it means we've got a lot of improvement left in us.

It was as you say, mate, a disgraceful piece of undisciplined play from a bloke who has been brought to the club for the sole purpose of providing leadership. Whatever he did in the second half, he should have been doing anyway. It's a big black mark against his name for me and as soon as I'm back at my computer, he's out of A F's favourite players. His suspension against Carlton last year and his 50 this year. Let's just say that he owes us. What are you talking about? Which key forward mauled us today?