Cheesy D. Pun

Apart from the obvious changes, or any matchup selections, give the same group a crack at redemption.

If anything, we need another Kozzy.

Minimal changes. Gawn for Pruess. Jones for Sparrow. We didn't lose the game at the selection table.

Our back half has been exceptional for most of the year. Our entire game plan is built on forward pressure - that's where we need to focus our attention. If we get that right, we're very hard to beat.

Yep - I tend to agree.

This is not meant as a defence of the coach, but I'm pretty sure any plan B, C or D is going to require the players to be producing ballistic defensive effort and a willingness to spread and run. At this level, if that doesn't come, there's really nowhere to go.

Good rational analysis. To some extent, I can live with us being beaten in the midfield. It's going to happen on occasion and we need to be able to win the game in a multitude of ways. It's the ease with which they exited our front half that was the most painful aspect. There was a point in the third, where I was genuinely thinking we need to stop kicking it inside 50 for the sake of our %. Had we been able to put decent pressure on them coming out of defence, I believe we would have won the game. The question is - is it structure or effort?

Tough game. This will give us a fair indication of where we're at. Don't underestimate English - he's probably travelling better than Grundy. Go Dees!

Was going to add this to my original post but decided I'd play Jerry Lewis, knowing full well that Dean Martin would arrive soon enough.

Makes complete sense.

I'm on Petracca with Dees to make to make the 8 @120/1. Need Neale to fall over at this stage - even then it's anyone's guess.

Why do people criticise Michael Christian? He's a bureaucrat with very little discretion. Putting a different person in that position wouldn't change anything, would it?

We have similar taste in players. It was always the Wiz for me and then Flash took that mantle. Maxy is an absolute gun but also comes across as a top shelf human being and would be my current fave as well. I remember choosing my team when I was about 7. My parents had other teams but weren't footy crazy, so I had free rein. The footy itself had nothing to do with my choice - it was all about who I thought were the coolest looking cats. At the time, there was a guy playing for Melbourne wearing the number 2 who looked like he could have been fronting the next big thing to come out of Seattle or catching waves down at Bell's. That was it, I'd found my team. So to sum up, this is all Stinga's fault.

Yep. That's an oversight on my part but I'd prefer that our long-term setup only has one medium/makeshift forward (Hannan/Fristch/Melky etc ) and more pressure/crumbing forwards.

Exactly. It's almost a case of the more the merrier. We've designed a game plan that relies heavily on genuine small forwards and yet we have very few on our list. I'd love to see us with two talls (Weid, Jacko/TMac), one mid-sized (Hannan/Fritsch) and the rest as smalls. I'd also love to see us target another 1-2 small forwards in the off-season.

I reckon if we were able to watch games live, the criticism of Lockhart wouldn't exist. Has shut down a small forward every week is courageous, never out of position and has leg speed. Apart from a couple of holding the ball calls against in his first game of the year, I'd say he's been pretty close to flawless.

Gawn and Preuss against a debutant is overkill, surely. Even if English is fit, I don't think the game is won and lost there, not to mention Max's history of performing better with a bigger workload. Also, we've got a functioning forward line. Throwing a big guy down there with some skill and strength but a low footy I.Q is a recipe for disaster, in my opinion. Despite his rough form, I'd take Tommy's superior positioning and game sense, every time.

I've seen a few of these and if my pain is anything to go by, it must be horrible for those who were born a little closer to our last premiership. It's for this reason I choose to make the most of the good footy when it comes around. The last three weeks have been really entertaining and enjoyable and if we can dish that up more often than not, I'll be a happy man.

There are some truly horrific comments on this thread. If this sentence makes you cringe a little, then perhaps it's time for a bit of a re-think: "Hi Nathan, please to meet you - gee, I hope you never play another game, you below average potato."

I generally agree with your perspective and it's quite possible you'll find a post from last year that says as much. This year is different. Every single team has had a game where they've not shown up and have been flogged. The only possible way to even begin getting a read on form is to avoid looking at the outliers.

While I agree that we need to beat a team that is not struggling to prove ourselves, if you take out the Port game, our form line is consistent and has been trending upward since round 1. We've lost a couple to top 4 sides by less than a goal. I'm not arguing that we're a top 4 side but we certainly haven't fallen apart against the better sides. Also, there is plenty to suggest that we've taken on some of the lessons from those earlier games, particularly around controlling the tempo of the game.

It's called tempting fate. There'll be plenty of us looking at the ladder, trying to work out all the possibilities but most of us have been conditioned by years of disappointment to keep our powder dry.

I'm not sure where you're coming from with this one. I don't think we have too many more courageous players in our side than Fritter. As a backman, he consistently showed a willingness to back into packs and has done similar when forward. Do you have any examples? I know he avoided having his leg broken by jumping out of the way of a sliding Collingwood player on the weekend, but I can't recall him shirking any contests.

After his game on Maynard, I think you're on the money and Melky will get the job on Daniel. On the Naughton/May matchup - May is superb at shutting down players on the lead.

Yep - good post and I suspect this is the way our coaching group view it. The problem is he's not causing enough damage offensively to negate the amount of times he becomes the weak link defensively. I think the Hill example is interesting. He's a runner and while he might not be playing physical defence, the fact that he has the tank to be filling space at one end then becoming an offensive threat at the other, means he's giving you something in both phases. Maybe this is the model for Bennell to aspire to? At the moment he too often ends up in a really important position on the outside of congestion where his contest is our last chance to negate the clearance. I'm certainly not writing him off but he needs to show intent when he's stationed around stoppages or contest areas because it's the type of thing that can cause other players to go off-script to cover and the domino effect could be disastrous. But as you say, getting him the ball should be a priority.