Webber

The problem is that St. Kilda at their best seem to be as competitive and as able as us to win games. Our seasons are remarkably even so far. The big problem for us is Etihad. They know it, more problematically we know it. I see them as less psychologically brittle than us in general, and Etihad is a big part of our recent historical burden. I'm trying to imagine us winning on Sunday, and it's just not adding up for me. It's a funny old season though!

The Etihad factor will be worth a 50c differential I reckon. Definitely a home ground advantage for them.

Unless of course it's true. Paul Roos has never been shy at accepting responsibility where it is due, so to assume he's unfairly making the players accountable is ......... dumb.

Funny isn't it that I saw less of the deer in headlights moments yesterday, and a few elite level decisions and disposals. The kind of possessions that open the game up to an attack on goal. Not many players have that level of vision, and the fact that Jimmy Toumpas does makes him worth persisting with despite his failings. Yesterday being his best game, a high pressure game at that, makes the likelihood of him improving with games under his belt very high. How long did it take Nathan Jones to really minimise his flaws? 3 to 4 years or more I'd say.

There were some really good signs from yesterday..... Toumpas best game by some margin. Yes, he still gets the heebeejeebies, but there was more elite level decision making and ball use than not. Dropping him when he's on an upward trajectory would be mindless. It was Watts most physically assured game for the club. He was great in traffic, and for the first time started using his size and body. Turning point? What did Fitz do wrong other than the tunnel ball? If I wasn't a Melb supporter it would be pretty funny. The football world also saw Angus Brayshaw yesterday. He is a double sided, one touch, 18 year old one, 10 game superstar with no fear and a huge tank. Excited much? Out: Vanders (inj.) In: Tyson.

It's interesting that this thread has is its origin in the actions of a spokesman for Australia's indigenous population, which by world standards is an extreme minority (< 2% of Australia's population). The very happy irony here is that at the highest level of the sport we love, Indigenous Australians are over represented currently by something like 800%. They have a serious and spectacular talent for our 'indigenous' game, and undoubtedly provide a defining quality of Australian football. That it gives them a platform to promote their importance to Australian culture and identity is no surprise, and if Adam Goodes chooses to dance on that platform then more power to him. Even those on here who reject his gestures have to admit the significance of them. Our game is arguably the most publicly visible arena this country has for indigenous exposure. Goodes knows it, the AFL knows it, and as the haters fall away (and they will) history will treat him and the game as powerfully progressive in achieving recognition and respect for Indigenous Australians.

Not for a while! Moving on is healthy I think, though I did give a thought to talking climate change or islamophobia. Can be fun to bait the bear.

So the condescension and sarcasm that you just practised is more valuable? If you look back, my post was specifically directed towards i'va. It was an opinion based on the discussion labelling no names. You can claim a heated polarity in the argument, and you may be right. To my logic, one side is misguided. Yours may tell you different. Live and let live, but bullying as an attack on the kind of logic i'va was presenting deserves to be called for what it is. In my opinion. And yes, I get that you don't care for it.

Was thinking the same thing dieter. The elusive 'momentum' factor seems to be bigger this year than ever. It's very odd, and defies explanation to a large degree. Collective psychology maybe? If someone told me that it was due to a team's legal stimulants (eg caffeine) kicking in en masse, I wouldn't laugh like I might have previously. Weird!

The LAST thing Saturday's loss was due to was the umpiring.

I've read the last few pages of this thread iv'a, and if there's anything to be learnt from it, it's that the 'insular conservatives' to borrow your too kind label are beyond any challenge to their worldview. As it is fuelled by and predicated on fear of more than just change, any evidentially based attack on their position makes them resort to reflex denial. It's the irrational defence from a cornered intellect. At heart it's a fundamentalism borne of an unquestioning and selfish habit. So good luck trying to push your case. It makes me laugh when they try to paint the current youth as the 'ME' generation.

Accepted.

HYPERBOLE, Nasher. Or does 17 goals to 2 not qualify as a rout?

Taking the emotion, disappointment and ugly idiotic player hate out of it, that was a fascinating example of confidence as a defining team quality. It was a game of two Port's. The Port of the last 3 weeks, which we were beating, and would have beaten if they had kept on like that. The Port of last year and that outrageous first quarter against Hawthorn earlier this year then arrived. It was literally like the self belief switch was turned on. After that point, they were always going to expose the difference in standard like Hawthorn did two weeks ago. It was horrifying in its predictability. So it wasn't just about us, it was much more about them. We know where we are, and it was never going to come near a Port at their best. To those of you who use your anger and frustration to make personal attacks on ANY of our players, just for a moment imagine you were them reading your comments. Particularly because you have NO insight into them as people.

Still watching, Nasher? And yes, you should reply.

We'll see.

The problem is that Port were playing cautious low confidence footy. We gave them a sniff, and now their confidence is back. We can reset all we like, but it's out of our hands now, a rout is on its way, and in the space of 8 minutes, Port are back in the season.

Yep. This is what makes us the hardest team to watch in the AFL. Had a horrible feeling we'd play them back into form, and that's exactly what's happened. I'd tip a 10 goal victory to Port now, or more. Just unimaginably brittle.

Post of the week for me, binman. Nailed it like a hammer.

I thought I made it clear. He's played more good games than Pedersen. Simple.

I was thinking of his MFC output. I don't watch Collingwood.

Pedersen has played two good games. He's hardly cemented his spot. Good on him and may it continue, but his default service for this club does not make him best 22. You're only as good as your last game, so on that basis he's an automatic selection for this week. Despite Dawes recent scratchy output, which his calf has not been helping, when fit he has way more runs on the board than Pedersen.

I'm confident that the club are in a position to pay Howe what he is worth, which I suspect is less than he and his manager think. He's still a highlight reel, not a consistent competitive footballer. With a functioning forward line like yesterday he can get some space and freedom up forward, but it's VERY inconsistent, cos he does not like the physical body work. At all. Goes missing.

I was expecting Matthews to retract after that......waited......waited......nada.

Bob Murphy had the least influence in a game against us that I can remember. Matt Jones did the kind of job on him that will have drawn a lot of kudos from the coaches. He will stay of concussion not an issue. Bail will go, as he just doesn't have the head or skills for AFL footy. No knock on his effort and intent though. Tyson, Viney and Jetta being fit make it tricky. Max Gawn is pushing very hard from Casey too. Nice how a win in both the ones and twos creates selection dilemmas, despite injuries.