binman

8 minutes ago, DemonOX said:

Was the wind as bad as they were crapping on about on fox allmyteams?

Well i'm not sure what they were saying on fox as i was at the game but yes it was really windy, not super strong but it went straight down the ground on what was a suburban ground with zero structures to block the wind (the tiny stand was on a wing).

We did very, very well to score 3 goals against the wind and in some respects i reckon the coaches of both teams would be annoyed to have to pay a practice game in conditions they would never ply a game in. Made basic things like cross ing the ball or weighting passes very tricky. We were a monty to win once we kicked the first in the last as they couldn't get it forward. 

6 minutes ago, P-man said:

Dwayne commentating GC v WC and has credited Melbourne's second half to the greater number of rotations. You knew he'd be referencing it at some point. Just can't help himself when it comes to the MFC. The only reason he didn't bring it up ten times during the game itself was that he wasn't aware of it.

Vince Jones in for dees.

Not sure about about that selection. Good muso, not sure how good at footy he is.

I want to see trac in the side round one. He is a gun with a body ready for afl. He'll learn more in the afl than the vfl.

I find the knocks on Garland bemusing. I can see his limitations but he is very consistent, gells well with the other regular defenders (which is critical) and can cover both tallish and smaller types. A lock for best 22

8 hours ago, deespicable me said:

If the dogs play close to their best side I think we need to as well.

I can't see that Carlton achieved too much on the weekend, except a very unhappy bunch of supporters who will think twice before going again. I think Melbourne needs to practice winning and beating the bullies will be a tough task and any message to the playing group that we're going in soft will result in a "pantsing" by the dogs and back to square one. Saints are no easy beats either and if we lose both our remaining NAB games the win over Port will be a distant memory for everyone.

Some posters here are getting waaaay ahead of themselves, hopefully not the players. We need genuine momentum going into the season, not some false bravado that we can turn it on when we like. 

I agree with this.

I'd add that the club has made clear the plan is to play best side but use the extended bench and no interchange cap to manage load and injuries that might be fatigue related (eg gawn being off the ground for most of the last quarter - which BTW makes the win all the more meritorious).

 Changing this strategy now would impact on their planning too much.

 Besides I'm going and want to see our best players!

14 minutes ago, old dee said:

We are going to disagree on this binman. 

I watched Pedersen on Saturday he played every bit as good as Old Iron Hands and did you see his mark in I think the last quarter that stuck like araldite. It would have bounced off Dawes hands and Port would probably have cleared the ball. But the main problem in Dawes being best 22 is he is constantly injured.

IMO we cannot consider him as a possible regular player this season.  If you cannot get on the park you are the 41st best player not the best 22.

 

 

Fair enough. It is hard to see both Pederson and Dawes in the team and as you say Peders can clunk them. He is probably better as the second ruck as well.

26 minutes ago, Webber said:

There's always an increased risk of hamstring related issues, but in the case of high hamstring like Kent's, ironically less so. Max Gawn is way past any issues with his reconstructed ACL. If he did it again, it would be a circumstance that would rupture an original ACL, or as close to it as doesn't matter. You have to remember binman, that any injury suffered by any player makes that area less than perfect, and in theory more at risk. No player is immune, and mostly it's situations beyond control, substantially inherited (genes). Think Geelong's Menzel vs. Michael Tuck. 

Ta Webber. 

Inherited injury risks is an interesting one. I wonder how long it will be before professional football clubs (gridiron, AFL, soccer etc) start exploring using family injury history and even DNA testing as part of their recruiting tools. 

13 minutes ago, old dee said:

I agree with Ashley Brown.

Dawes is not best 22 anymore and will only play a few game around the middle of the year if any.

The Prince is a long way from playing in the seniors and by the time he gets to that level of fitness he will IMO have trouble getting a spot.

Petracca is a kid who has not played a game.

Then as you say the Drug Cheat is not on our playing list till 2017 

Looks fairly accurate to me.

As i said our senior coach said a few days ago Dawes is best 22.  It is a moot point how long it is before Lumumba or Melksham plays they are both in our best 22 .

I agree it is harder to argue the trac is in our best 22 which is why i said in my best 22.

In an otherwise good summary of the dees game by Ashley Browne i found this line interesting:

The Demons were missing only Nathan Jones and Bernie Vince from their best team and lost Angus Brayshaw to a knee injury in the opening 30 seconds, but on paper, Port appeared a class above.

I would have thought we at had at least 2 maybe 3 other missing from our best 22. Roos said just last week that Dawes is best 22, Lumumba is a lock to come back in when fit and despite not playing a game as yet i'd have Petracca is my best 22. And you'd also have to add Melksham even though he is out for the year. 

http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2016-02-29/after-the-siren-nab-challenge-week-2

Speaking of highlights this is brilliant. All our goals in full, including build up. No Port rubbish. 

22 minutes ago, mo64 said:

Watts played well and took a ripper contested mark on the wing. But I don't think that this game demonstrated any additional hardness at the contest.

I was disappointed with a couple of marking efforts  near the goal square, when he had the perfect sit to take the grab on each occasion. He misjudged the 1st which went over his head, and didn't attack the ball hard enough at the 2nd. Kicking a couple of goals would have capped off a good game, and we need Watts to be a goal kicker.

The first of those i think was the one Kennedy kicked to him.  If that's the case i think you're being a bit tough on Watts. I know he put his hand up seemingly to apologise but it was a crap kick that went too long, giving Watts no chance.

The second one he did have a nice sit and it would have been great if he had plucked it as it was in the goal square and would have given him a gimme goal. But if it's the one i'm thinking off he attacked it ok, just didn't take it. 

26 minutes ago, Webber said:

Unlikely to be more, but could be less. It's not an injury that comes with inherent risk to further damage, so will depend on how irritable and sore it is to running with lateral movement. Hopefully less. 

Obviously no injury is good but the upsides of this one is that there are no long term implications, i assume he will be able to do no weight bearing work to keep his fitness up and it came at the end of his pre season so he already has the miles in the leg. And we know he won't be hurt in a NAB game before round one so can just about lock him in for GWS.

By the by Webber whilst you're dealing with medical queries what's the go with a hamstring injury as bad as the one Kent got last year in terms of the likelihood of a recurrence (outside the normal chances of doing a hammy of course). I really think Kent is a key player for us and it worries me him getting re injured. The same goes for Gawn now that i think of it.

26 minutes ago, Petraccattack said:

 

 

Yes, agree 100%.  Used to look forward to this thread, now its just full of negativity and paranoia.

Sounds like your average descent into ice addiction

3 hours ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

Weitering looked very comfortable at VFL level.

I see what did you there.....

14 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

Typical Watts good game. Lots of positives - some really nice kicks to team mates. Some clever positioning. Underrated clean pick ups hitting the ball at speed. And a few decent marks as well. 

Mixed in with the usual negatives - the one late brain fade and a couple of other strange moments with the ball and at least a couple of marking attempts where he went up one handed and protected himself instead of winning the contest. 

I'm all for him being clever with tapping the ball to team mates etc but if it clearly doesn't come off then it's bad play to not back himself to stand under it. He's got to get the balance right and at this stage I'd say go up two handed and attacking the ball and once he's mastered that he can try fancier things.

I largely agree. His hands were good on the ground and he played the high half forward role well. In addition to some good kicks to teammates his handballs were spot on.

The template for his game is the goal he set up for Hogan in the first. Lead out, mark 60 metres out and quickly get it to Hogan. 

He had 17 possessions which in a shorter game with 8 on the bench is pretty good (i'd like to see hoim avergae 20 per game in the real thing). To put that number in perspective only Vandenburg (19) and Viney (27) had more. He also had 8 marks, more than any Port or dees players. These were mainly as result of leading up the ground, which seems to be the role he will play, but he did clunk a couple of pack marks.

He was really annoyed with himself when he coughed the ball up right at the end, which is a good sign. It came after a really nice mark. In fact as you say he took some good grabs, at last two of which were really gutsy efforts.

My negatives? Didn't stick a couple of tackles, in fact didn't record any tackles, missed a few targets with sloppy kicks and didn't score a goal.

On that last point he took a mark just outside 50, played on quickly and looked to set it up for someone deep. I would have loved for him to instead taken a ping at goals (though perhaps Roos and Goodwin wouldn't want that). Also there was a couple of occasions where he made good position close to goals only to be let down by a teammates poor kick.

13 hours ago, DemonOX said:

No point worrying about shitz u can't control. 

 

Is McDonald going to the dogs?

1 minute ago, Clint Bizkit said:

He started off as his timid usual self but has been solid since then.

Took a terrific, gutsy mark on the hb under a tonne of pressure. 

4 minutes ago, praha said:

 

lol he's not leaving WA.

He may not have to. I'm sure WC would pay whatever it takes to get him and there is avery strong argument to say WC are much closer to a flag than Freo playing in a winning GF team is one of Fyfe's key motivations.

15 minutes ago, P-man said:

Those three latest interview are all terrific in their own right.

i especially like listening to Nibbler talk. I know some think he has a case of verbal diarrhoea but he's just very thoughtful about his responses and as a supporter I appreciate the fact he puts some thought into what he says. 

I agree. Really refreshing and i loved how positive they all were, particularity Harmes who seemed to be buzzing. 

I assume Neal Bullen is nibbler?

I liked his response to the question about where he wants to play: 'í'm an out and out midfielder' or words to that effect. No spin or stuff like happy to play where the coach wants me blah blah blah

1 minute ago, McQueen said:

Whether it's being a competitive or skilful player, not enough attention has been placed on the psychological aspect of player development in the past. This, is going to be the differentiator moving forward towards success. The club has invested heavily in the development dept and whilst I have no doubt they have strategically targeted 'harder' players who show the desire to get the ball at all costs, I believe these same players also have the capacity to be trained to become mentally tough. 

I really don't expect to see any heads drop this year when the going gets tough. This in itself will be very telling to our fortunes.

I agree with your points in the the first para McQueen and hope you're right with second one.

A key psychological element winning teams have is an expectation of winning. I've been fascinated to listen to the recent interviews on Dee tv with Neal Bullen, Kent and Harmes. All talk about the expectation of playing well this season and specifically this weekend against Port. They talk about winning this game and the other NAB games as an important energy to bring into the season. This reflects the very positive messages coming from Roos and Mahoney in the last week about us being successful this year.

A far cry from the 'one week at time, focus on on getting the process right and winning will take care of itself' nonsense espoused by Neeld but also a far different tone from Roos this year to last. They are priming the players and this gives me alot of confidence. As does how positively the players are about the vibe around the club. Terrific stuff.

The other interesting thing in term of psychology at the club - and one i've mentioned before - is how clear players seem to be about the role they will play and how open the club is about these roles. For example Kent talks about how much he is looking forward to playing forward with Hogan, Frost etc. 

3 hours ago, Roger Mellie said:

The night grand final is purely media driven. The TV ratings are higher at night. That's all there is too it. The rest of it is absolute rubbish. What a surprise that Ch 7 and Foxtel (also AFL Media and SEN) generate 'public' demand for a night grand final where there is none.

I might be wrong but i don't think ratings would be higher with the AFL GF already the highest rated event each year. I think the pay off for channel 7 is they charge significantly more for ad time after 6pm

Funny

http://titusoreily.com/melbourne-chat-to-jesse-hogans-manager/

The Trac for mine. I am as excited about what he might bring to the table as i was with Hogan.

Because he is not a KPP i don't think people have really considered how big an impact he might have, unlike Hogan who everybody thought would impact straight away (admittedly also because of his big year at Casey not just he was KPP). I really think, if he remains fir, he could be huge factor for us in rising up the ladder.

He will be a really difficult match up on the HF with his size and strength and us loading up on talls in the forward line will make the match up even trickier. And they will have to blanket him because he will damage sides if not. He also an X factor and all teams need one or two of those in the forward half. 

Kent is a close second, for much the same reasons actually and in particular because he also has an X factor. He also has a bit of a strut and a bit of mongrel about him.

Funnily enough the nab games are more meaningful now that there is no charade. Important practice matches. No more no less