deelusions from afar

I reckon this is pretty on the money. How can any of us really know how well / poor Tim Lamb has done? I've definitely been disappointed with the output but it's hard to know where the blame lies. As you say many of the busts were low cost. I feel like some of the other things that have gone wrong are beyond Lamb's control: * trading out Harmes after Jordon left and then on the eve of the Season we lose Brayshaw. * getting Grundy and then the match committee not getting creative with the use of two rucks (one behind play and following the ball etc) as neither are reliable forward targets. Now which ruckman would want to come play with Max (who is the best in the game and can't play any other position)? * how much of the decisions are based on direction from others eg last few years (we need the best wing / half forward we can get for a bag of chips who is a good kick = Billings / Hunter) * what key forward has been available when we have had the salary cap and trading capital? If you were a key forward, would playing for melbourne be a great career move with our widely known issue of forward connection.

He looked great in his first year. He's young - we could get him at a (relative) bargain price... from memory we offered much of the Jackson comp for him?

I think Houston to the Saints makes less sense than in does to us. We remain a chance while the likes of May, Viney and Gawn are in the team (1-2 years) and having someone of Houston's quality will make a big difference particularly in ball movement. But it would be a short term play with what we would have to give up. The saints have some good young quality coming through. But I think by the time they really hit their straps Houston won't be at the same level and they will have given up 1-2 high draft picks in the process. They are better placed taking their two picks and adding to what they've been accumulating the last 3 or so years

I agree - I think outsiders would think there's a chance we might completely implode (which we might)

I hope that's the case and you may be right - it just struck me as a carefully worded statement where it gives him an out to go a different direction when / if he wants / can. That might be unfair... he's definitely been through a hell of an ordeal with the injury and since... but the whole point of a statement is to get the words exactly right as in a live interview a quote can easily be misconstrued (as our president found this week). The points I made in my last post about the statement clearly were not accidental and as a supporter of the dees (and our no.5), that makes me sad. So while I hope your take is correct, until there's more evidence to demonstrate that, I'll keep my take.

Do we know who the saints would be after? I wonder if we could convince them that's who were thinking of picking at 5 and then suggest an alternative of their 6 and 7 for our 5, F1 + ??

I'm relieved that Petracca has released a statement - if nothing else than it gets the club out of the bad media spotlight for a bit. However, I did find the statement both interesting and disappointing by what it didn't say. It has been very carefully crafted. For example: He says he loves his footy... but nowhere does he express his love for the club - where he has won a premierships and north smith with many of his closest mates. Usually this type of statement would have something like "I love my footy, I love this club - the players, the staff, the fans..." On his future he "remains committed to the red and blue" but it doesn't say for life or for his contract etc He also says "I voiced my concerns as a leader, wanting better for our club, playing group, and fans." Maybe this is accurate - maybe he was doing the hard thing and trying to generate the change needed. But from the snippets in the media, this seems more revisionist history being written and (until there's reason to think otherwise) the reference to wanting better for the fans seems disingenuous. i guess we'll have to wait to hear what he actually says when he's interviewed about it all.

An adelaide supporter made of mine was prety upset McAdam left the crows. Talking to him he said give him a full pre-season - he's clearly been down on fitness, form and confidence this season. At his best he is a difficult matchup like Fritsch, Melksham and maybe Turner in terms of his mobility and ability to win it in the air and on the ground. He deserves another season - but if it's similar this year it is going to look like a very ordinary decision to trade him in.

Yes given our current reputation, I can't see us attracting much. The drafting will be critical.

I'm not a Roffey fan, but I'm not sure what people are realistically expecting her to say. She's not going to fire people on the radio. She's not going to say how hurt / disappointed / angry they are with Trac. It seems a bit odd that she hasn't spoken with him. But given his apparent grievances, it makes sense that this is handled by the football department. Do people think everyone calling Trac now is going to help - it's probably more likely to push him away. She's not going to go on about any internal problems that are still either simmering away or being dealt with - as the media will spawn more articles on whatever she says. So she has to try to straight bat everything. She's certainly not going to advocate for a full externall review. It is really a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. Having said that, while all this stuff with the ex-Pres continues, it seems like its very hard for the likes of her and Pert to get on with the job and for the club to get any clear air. Gawn is trying to generate this - with the contract extension and talk of helping Clarry get back to AA form. As per the other thread re selflessness, this has to start at the top. What is the true selfless action for our leaders such as Roffey and Pert. I don't know the situation well enough but it could be stepping aside until all the legal challenges are done... equally it could be continuing on in fixing the club despite all the criticism. I think most of us really don't have an idea what is going on - judging people's effectiveness just from their media answers is probably unfair.

Could this be connected to Trac in some way I wonder? As in they were housemates and Trac went to visit Kozzie's home in the first documentary (I think last year). Maybe Team Petracca are using another tactic to blow up the club? Or maybe Kozzie is seeing ANB leave for family reasons and thinks he wants the same? Please don't go Kozzie!!

I feel like this sort of comment is a bit unfair. Most key forwards don't come close to hitting their straps until their early 20s at best. Caddy was always touted as someone ready to go year 1. Jefferson was always going to take extra years - he has a different frame and different style of game. The fact that he has come a long way in the VFL this year is an indication that he is going the right direction.

We needed a key forward in 22 and 23 and it might have helped this year. But this year has exposed other weaknesses greater than the tall forward stocks. I wouldn't say no to someone of his quality but he seems to have too much injury baggage.

Not sure if it is just because of the weekend's performance, but I think the talls in our forward line are looking ok (particularly with the development of Jefferson). In my view it has been getting better most of the season and it is more the midfield that has let us down this year (which makes sense given the personel). It really comes down to good ball movement and skills. If we could clone Windsor a few times, that is the sort of player we need more of - fast, good skills, good decision making and surprisingly good in the contest. I guess you could say McVee also has these qualities. I also think the Houston interest is about having more players in the back half that can open up the game on transition. We don't have too many players that open up the game with long accurate kicking. Melksham is one of the few that does it in our team every now and then when he roams further up the field. Given our athletic / mobile medium-tall forwards - particularly Disco, Fritsch, Melkshem and McAdam (haven't given up on him), having an extra player or two that can kick accurately over 50m would help us enormously. So while they'd be helpful and great gets, I'm not sure Waterman or Rachele are really going to get bang for buck

I think Pert said what he could. Clearly there are issues that need addressing and he can't go into all the details about that. It doesn't mean its being handled well or poorly but there's not a lot he could say. He can't say everything is fine with Petracca when they're still working through things and some of that might have to happen after the season is over. The more concerning part is his reference to the ongoing legal battles (which we can't talk about here for good reason) and other "distractions" that he has no control over. From the journalists perspective, we've heard similar statements from him before and then these distractions have got in the way. If I was a player being courted by Melbourne, I wouldn't be convinced that these distractions are not going to continue to plague the club.

I don't think we're that bad in this regard. We were playing with the most under 22 players most of the year and they're lacking in both experience and strength. Generally our wins in the second half of the year are because we were "too tough" and that included our tackling.

I find Roffey often comes across in the media as patronising and arrogant. Maybe its good for the club but would be painful for non-Melbourne people. I've heard a number of media commentators in the media go on about the sorts of things Roffey was saying to them about a Demon Dynasty on the eve of the 2022 season. It seemed to really rub them up the wrong way and I think put a bit of a target on our back (as these people in the media run the AFL news cycle). Obviously this wasn't isolated to Roffey but she was the one they went on about. I'm pretty happy for her not to come out making big media statements as I don't think that's her strength and don't see what it would add.

Anyone know Pittonet's situation? Carlton seem to prefer the one ruck and De Konig is on the rise whereas Max is in the twilight of his career. Surely more opportunities with us than them.

I had a look on the Port bigfooty board to see if they were treating this like us with Clarry (just clickbait with no substance) but they seem resigned to leaving him (though expecting significant comp). However they were more concerned about the rumors of Butters wanting to come back to Melbourne (the City). Apparently Hawthorn and Essendon are the front runners. I do remember we were VERY keen on Butters in his draft year and with Brayshaw's $ being somewhat freed up along with a number of other well paid players contracts finishing (BBB, TMac etc?) could we make an offer?

I can't remember which player said it in an interview in the last week or so (maybe Melksham or Rivers or ANB?) - but they said the bye allowed us to make some tweaks to the game plan that has made a difference. Obviously it's a lot more than that - the agression we started v Brisbane and WCE with that we had for much of the bombers game seemed so different from what we'd seen in recent times... and that seemed more effort based than system / game plan.

Now normally I don't pay too much attention to Chris Scott - partly because I hate Geelong with a passion and partly because of the way the football media fawn over him - BUT I did happen to catch a bit of his interview on 360 where he was asked about the rebuilding on the run / throwing the magnets around. I found it interesting when applying what he said to our team eg Building a forwardline is all about cohesion - more than any other part of the ground. It's all about knowing your team mates / intuition. This can't be coached - it takes time. Building a backline is different - it is more role / system based and so it allows you to slot in new people into a particular role much easier. Through injury / personel etc we haven't had cohesion in the forward half for a very long time. Despite Petty rarely reaching the highs he is capable of this year, the stability of playing him, JVR and Turner forward almost every week the last 3 months might be starting to come off. Goodwin has talked endlessly about the stability / cohesion in the forward half so it was interesting to hear another coach saying similar things. Other than Melksham, most of the players in our forward half are quite young so there is reason to suggest they will continue to grow and get better collectively if they can stick together.

Agree with that - which is why Verral, BBB and Gawn in the one team makes me nervous. BBB can't play ruck and Verral can't (as far as I know) play forward (curently). The idea of Gawn and BBB in the same forward line will make it easy for any defence to rebound / switch the ball. So essentially we will need one of the 3 on the bench at all times.

Fair enough. Given BBB doesn't ruck and I haven't seen Verral being touted as a forward option at this stage you're probably right. However, if all players were uninjured (including not coming back from injury) then I suspect McAdam (who's a medium) might have come in for Turner. I'm not convinced they would operate a forwardline (including bench space) of Petty, JVR, Turner, Fritsch and McAdam - i don't think we'd have enough forward pressure (noting that McAdam can kind of do it all). So if that's the case, then we wouldn't necessarily bring in like for like. I think it'll be a Verral debut and a likely BBB recall. If not BBB potentially they could look to throw Max forward more for a rest and if Petracca also goes forward then Tholstrup or more likely Laurie may get some midfield minutes.

I wonder whether Tholstrup will be given another go this week. He's a WA boy and had a tough debut (not his fault) against a rampaging Brisbane when we were flat / off. I wonder what his focus is for the VFL - ie what he has been told to work on to make it back into the team.

Whether Goody is or isn't a clever coach isn't really my point - there are enough threads on that already. My point was more that we saw some different moves that worked: Trac is an obvious one that has been used before (but robs the midfield). But the use of ANB was a big change. If you listen to Sam Mitchell speak on Melbourne he seems ANB as our most important player in terms of link up play / score involvements. I wonder if it is also due to his ability to cover trac running forward? Maybe releasing ANB into the midfield can't really happen unless trac is forward? Langdon was used differently last night (seemed to be more forward) Use of extra man behind play (I think) was put away when we needed to score - I wonder if we could tinker with that during game and not just when we're trying to run a team down at the end. My main point is, the coaches (it's not just Goody after all) are experimenting more than usual (admittedly being down by 7 goals gives them no other option) and it is working. Which I suspect gives them reason and confidence to continue to tinker and experiment in future. I hope anyway. You make some interesting points. I don't agree on TMac - he's been very good and is prone to make the occasional error / howler. His fitness is his strength - I don't think starting him as the sub makes the difference in terms of the errors. Our defence was under a lot of pressure! And I certainly don't think he has the agility to play forward anymore. I think if we wanted more run they could put Petty / Turner back and sub T Mac as you say but I think they knew that he wasn't going that bad - our midfield were getting done at centre clearance and that's how they were scoring. Clearly Petty was well beaten last night and so arguably a change should have been made. Having said that he did take a big pack mark in the last. If he had of kicked that straight (was a pretty easy one) we would have won the game. So we weren't far off. I get the sense they know Petty 'has it'. They just have to continue to play him and he'll get there.