bing181

Gullible? This whole "they didn't know how much time was left" is just some spin cooked up to protect the players. Roos didn't even mention it in the press conference, even though he was specifically asked about the final moments. It's something that came out later on. It saves people asking why Nathan Jones wasn't in the centre for that last ballup, or why the leaders (cough cough) didn't organise the players to get behind the ball etc. etc. Roos (and the club) is just covering for his team - well, in public anyway, but the players know that they stuffed up. Everyone knew how much time was left, including the players on the field - it's partly why there was so much celebrating after Howe's goal - with under a minute to go, they thought they'd won it. Roos was screaming into the phone to get them back ... even if the runner wasn't around, the bench was close enough to communicate with the players onfield. Hard lesson, but the players won't let that happen again. Hopefully.

Then you never cared enough in the first place.

And you believe him? The players always know how much time is left, at least to the nearest minute or so. Grain of salt. Very big one.

Jimmy did the right thing in trying to tackle the St Kilda player who ran past with the ball, who then passed to Stevens. There's no single player at fault here, but Viney didn't cover himself in glory - first letting Stevens get the initial disposal out of the centre, then not following him down to stop his subsequent hand pass receive, and finally, letting Montagna run free past him. There were others involved - Viv Mitchie, who was trotting behind Stevens. etc. etc. Sure, everyone has a player that they're "on", but equally, they're trained to pick up opposing players if the designated player (who presumably would have been Toumpas) is otherwise engaged.

You referencing something that's not actually occurring is the biggest mistake you're making. But as you say, we are our thoughts. BTW, no credit for Jack Watts' game today Ben?

Didn't mind Stretch today, felt that it was his best game so far and he's starting to get used to it. Unless there's someone clearly better to come in, I'd leave him there. You'd surely have to give ANB another chance, even as a sub. Riley and Mitchie on the other hand ... sorry, but let's just play out the year with Matt Jones and Bail, knowing that they'll be moved on. Injuries hurting us, we just don't have the depth.

Spot on. Fear of failure runs deep amongst this lot, with fairly catastrophic results. It takes real guts to take the game on when a) you're losing and b) the last 10 times to take it on it resulted in a turnover. As Roos (and he's not the only one) commented, the players tend to go into their shells. Lack of leadership not helping, but even there, hard to blame the leaders, it's not as if Nat Jones has been playing under sterling leaders himself for the last few years.

Perhaps, but Fitzpatrick was withdrawn/unavailable due to an injury (described as a "niggle"). Frost would have been handy - or Garland. Or Salem down back. Injuries hurting us more than some are admitting, we just don't have the depth to cover +/- 25% of the players being unavailable. Garry Lyon article was spot on.

Check the vid: Toumpas goes to tackle Lonie as he runs pass and bandpasses to Stevens - which effectively frees up Montagna. Viney was running in behind, and should have realised what was going on, but let Montagna run straight past. They'll both learn. Of course, a) the ball should never have been down there in the first place, it should have been tied up in the centre square and b) the St Kilda forward line should have been so clogged up with Melbourne players, there should never have been space for Montagna or Stevens or whoever to run anywhere.

Sorry, but ridiculous post, ridiculous comments, and not even accurate. Though you're not Robinson Crusoe. We "got in front" with 40 seconds to go. Roos sent out the message, but that's not the point - he shouldn't even have to, the players should know what to do - and probably do. But as always with Melbourne, they don't do what they should do, and don't do what they're instructed to do. But as I posted on another thread, we should never have been defending a 4 point lead with 40 seconds to go - we had our chances, and we gave St Kilda plenty. The fault lies in poor decisions and poor execution when the decisions were correct. Mitchie and Riley in particular are liabilities in this regard. I'd love to see those "marks from opposition kicks" and "scores from turnovers" stats - we must be leading them across the AFL.

We did NOT lose because of the coaching. We should never have been in the position of having to defend a 4 point lead in the first place. The "blame Roos" argument is just lazy and superficial. Paul Roos is NOT why we're losing games we should and could win.

If we lose this, it'll be through poor kicks/disposals. Just giving it away too often. That Mitchie kick across ground to a 2 on 1 against us ... just one more poor decision. Will come over time with experience etc., but frustrating to watch. Missing two gettables from Hogan and Watts hasn't helped - though they've both had great games.

Jimmy Toumpas. Go for it son. Time to eat some crow by a few around here.

Stretch OK for mine. Looks more at home than in his earlier matches. ANB just not quite up to speed yet. Still a half to go ... Nev Jetta gradually getting his touch back.

My man, Jimmy Toumpas. Nice handball.

Is it not possible for people to look at the entirety of a player's game, and not just the fault/errors? 7 possessions, 2 tackles and a mark. There are a LOT of Melbourne players nowhere near that at quarter time.

At least he's getting his hands on the ball. FFS.

Right on cue ... must have been following this thread.

Like you promised to leave Demonland?

It's just a footy match. They come round every week. This one is no more or less important.

Perhaps you could show us the long line of blue chip midfielders queuing up to go to any club. About the only one last year was Beams to the Lions - for family reasons as much as anything. 2013 ... I don't know, correct me if I'm wrong, but there were no blue chip midfielders who changed clubs. etc. etc.

He already is. This is the best they can manage. (For the moment.)

Yes, not sure what's going on with Newton. Early in the season he seemed like a great pickup - last few matches, he hasn't really contributed much. Not sure what his contract situation is, perhaps give him another season, but for what he's currently offering, I'm just about ready to pass his guernsey to ANB. In terms of management and spots opening up, we're missing Trengove and Petracca. OK, maybe Trengove is done, but whatever their place in the order or things, it leaves us 2 mids down (as opposed to two forwards or whatever), which then pushes the Newtons and Matt Jones's forward a couple of places in the queue. Hope Viney is OK for next week. 6 day turnaround isn't going to help a bad corkie.

Thought Watts was decent - but only watching on TV, so as always, you miss what's going on off the ball. Jack is a receiver and distributor. If he can do that well, or very well, he'll be a real asset. He'll never be a pack-marking mongrel, or inside player, or tackling machine. So be it. I just hope he gets a bit of confidence back - when he's "on", there are few who can weight a football to advantage like our Jack.

Disappointed to have lost, but a decent response after the week before. Same old story though: indecision, turnovers, poor skills/execution - including from some of our better players. Seems like Viney gives away a goal a match with a miskick. But, slowly but surely, there's improvement in there. Let's not forget we only managed 3 goals in this round last year. At the moment though, we just don't have the depth to have players out: Salem, Tyson, maybe Dawes, have the ability to make a difference, but then throw in likely starters like Kent, JKH, Frost, etc., not to mention Petracca and Trengove. Feel that it's those last 4 or 5 players picked who are the difference between being more seriously competitive, and being frustratingly close. Not to mention, those bottom 4 or 5, really expose the 4 or 5 just above them, and then it just all falls in a heap.