Lucifers Hero

Jetta a late withdrawl - no reason given. ? He hasn't looked right all year so better to let him recover than risk whatever it is getting worse. Hore to replace him. https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/jetta-adds-to-melbourne-s-personnel-crisis-20190411-p51d8v.html Grateful that it is Hore not ANB to replace Jetts

So we go to Sydney without a crumber in the team... btw I'm not counting Lockhart. He did a nice job last week but is essentially a midfielder being tasked with a job he has not had time to develop in. Given that our talls are not excelling at i50 marks going in without a crumber, I can see the ball bouncing straight out again like it did vs Geelong when we went in without one. I get the need for fwds to exert pressure and keep the ball i50 but it would be handy to have someone who can make something happen when the ball falls free.

Not only did the team not step up for Max's 100th, they did not step up for Viney's 100th a week later. Very sad when a team can't step up for their vice-cap and co-cap (btw I don't necessarily mean to win but at least put in an honourable showing for 4 qtrs). So this team's track record is not good in teamate's milestones (or special events eg Roos' last game). Nonetheless, I hope they step up tonight and at the very least for Tom to get some mojo back. He has stuck with us thru thick and thin so would really like to see him have a memorable game.

https://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/2019-04-10/kolodjashnij-ruled-out-with-concussion

True but I would still rather Garlett over Spargo. He is a much better crumber and averages 2 goals a game. If Tom McD doesn't play we will have only 1 recognised goal kicker in the side: Melksham. Perhaps Jeff just needs to be backed in by the coaches to play a string of senior games to get his mojo back. Other players have been given that.

Can't believe Jeff was not on the plane! He is the only one with a bit of x factor and knows where the goals are. His defensive skills can't be any worse than anyone else in the team. He was out injured for just a few weeks so how many games at Casey does he need? Instead we take an undersized, underdeveloped kid who was dropped after one game and recovering from a broken jaw. Just don't understand our selection criteria anymore. Fear his card has been stamped.

Brayshaw said the same thing after the game, yet it is they, Oliver who had the blowtorch applied to them by 'senior players' in the honesty session. Now HS and The Age are also getting stuck into those kids (and to a lesser extent Viney). Seems our mids and our 'senior players' don't see it the same way.

Quote: "The blowtorch, if it is to be applied, is better directed towards a bunch of blue-collar mids who have begun to play the game like millionaires. Harsh and unfair. Since when are 23 yo 3rd in the Brownlow and 23 year old AA 'Blue collar'? I say hyperbole! Quote: "But if any Melbourne supporter thinks the co-captain is the cause of the team's poor start to the season they are misguided". More hyperbole! Ryan has been reading Demonland. No-one here is saying Jones is the cause of our poor start. The comments here are saying he isn't doing enough for the team and as a captain and leader. Quote: "Talented with the ball in hand and tough inside the contest, opponents have begun to realise that Clayton Oliver, Angus Brayshaw, James Harmes and Jack Viney don't seem to want to work as hard this season as they did at the end of last year to help out a defence that has begun to leak like a colander held under a waterfall". I can't agree with that. Sure the midfield is not getting back to help out the defence but those four players have made 28% of our 206 tackles this year! They can't do the inside work, the tackling and the running back and forth. Others need to get the blowtorch as well - Jones gets off scott free in that article.

Thank you. Hmmm, a blunt message from the senior players? To the few who have performed this year? Certainly all players need to run both ways but senior players (Viney, Jones and Gawn) have done far less in the middle than Oliver, Brayshaw and Salem. Going on Brayshaw's comments after the game that all players need to buy in (ie he doesn't think they are) is hard to reconcile with he, Oliver and Salem getting wrapped over the knuckles. One wonders if it Sunday was really a 'finger pointing session'. I hope the senior players game themselves a 'blunt message' or commit to the young guys how they are going to lift their game in the middle. Otherwise poor leadership. The kids can't do all the work. They need help.

Harmes: “We’re pretty one-on-one and it’s hard for the backs to take aggressive position if the mids aren’t getting back to support and if the forwards aren’t doing their job...Everyone needs to work together in defence – it’s not a one-on-one style that we play.” We can turn it around I think he is saying we have been playing one-on-one (could have fooled me) which is not what we want. No wonder our defence looks confused without cohesion. Players don't understand which system they are supposed to be playing.

There is an article on HS website titled 'The stats which damn melbourne's midfield' which is about two-way running. I only saw a glimpse of it as it is behind a paywall. I think it says that at the meeting Oliver and Brayshaw were told by senior players they had to work harder. Can anyone get behind the paywall to check what it says, please.

The Dusty hearing is under way and the Tribunal members are similar to those in the May case. Given that the grounds are identical: optics, medical report, player reaction, potential to damage, hopefully we the Tribunal upholds the MRO decision. It will not be pleasant for the MRO if every time a 'big' club goes to the Tribunal that his decision is overturned ie Cox last week (with a totally different Tribunal).

The value of honesty sessions is often who facilitates them and who attends. Ideally, it would be an external facilitator (are we still using Leading Teams?) who is experienced in setting the right tone so everyone feels comfortable in participating and can manage the dynamics. Sometimes without coaches, players can give honest feedbackabout game plan, role, demands etc to an external person if they can't say tehm directly to a coach. Doesn't need to be a sinister reason, could be opportunity, experience etc. Player only meetings have another benefit - they take ownership of the issues and commit to each other a course of action/behaviours. Remember after our first final Lewis took only the players aside to say 'well done but we've done nothing yet'. They went out the following week and knocked off the Hawks. AFL 360 with Lewis might make interesting viewing tonight.

Fwd flank? Jones doesn't chase, tackle or do the 1%. We have enough problems with lack of forward pressure to keep the ball i50 and his lack of defensiveness would make it worse. In the middle he doesn't run both ways or apply mid-field pressure. Its a case of where does he do least damage to see out the year...tough choice for coaches. I thought it significant that yesterday Ben Guthrie wrote that Jones' position this week could be under review. He wouldn't make up stuff like that about a much loved player and co-captain. Maybe Goodwin will get ruthless sooner rather than later and tbh Goodwin has a duty to put the team and the club first. Nonetheless, can't see Jones' being dropped but expect his defensive game to lift.

Not sure why folks think SCG is a 'small ground': 155m L x 136m W. As a reminder: Round 2, 2019 @ gmha: 170m L x 115m W. We lost by 80 points. It is the wider grounds that trouble us because opp spread wide and stretch our defences on the outside. SCG has more room for this play than gmha had. If we can't win on a ground that is 115m wide I can't see it happening on one that is 20m wider.

For the last three weeks we have been crying out for that but it hasn't happened. Would desperately love to see it but its not how he rolls. Just yesterday Viney said it will be good to get Lewis' leadership back on the field. Not sure he noticed the elephant(s) in the room implied in that statement...

On the plus side: Much loved champion of our club. Loyal, a demon forever. Sets off-field standards Works hard Plays tough football On the negative side: Can't or won't run both ways. Does not chase opponent, instead goes ball chasing or 'hands-over' his opp to a team mate who has to leave his man to cover Jones' opp, leaving a free player or sometimes two if he doesn't cover Jones' opp in time. Defensive skills are now limited: stats this year for tackles and 1% are woeful. When attacking into fwd 50 he rarely hits a target. Poor reader of the state of game so is limited in effectiveness as an on field general. I see someone who is aging, who is showing more 'individual' rather than 'team-first' behaviours. He may be preserving himself (purely speculation) or he may just be physically worn out from almost single handed carrying our club. Do the negatives outweigh the positives? In the past a resounding 'No'. For the future I fear they do. We need senior players and especially captains to set an example for expected on-field behaviours and to engender confidence in their charges that if we get into a hole during a game the captains know how to digs us out of it. I can't see Jones overcoming the negatives so I feel it is time to hang up the boots. When? End of this year. It means he ends his wonderful career about 15 games short of 300 and without a flag. Sadly, just like a former #2. He will always be an immortal at mfc. I imagine Jones will have to be dragged kicking and screaming into retirement but I trust Goodwin to have the hard conversations, like Clarkson has.

Jesse is yet to play 22 games in a season and has played up the ground at times. He has been very consistent averaging a little over 2 goals per game in each year. ie 45 goals a season if played every game. I don't know if he will ever become the champion forward he could be but to think he can't/won't exceed 50 if played as a forward is a bit off the mark.

Great post. That is exactly what Dew is doing at GCS. It is perfect for a young and inexperienced team. I watched the last qtr of GCS game and when the opp had the ball and going forward, GCS players stuck to their man like glue. They are shaping up to be a good side. Coaches often say they build a game plan to suit the team available. We seem to be doing the opposite and make the players play a zone and team defence even if they aren't capable of doing so effectively, be that for experience, understanding, attitude or fitness reasons. So indecision and confusion reigns then the system breaks down. Not sure it is realistic to expect junior players in the system for 5 minutes or just a couple of years to learn the subtleties of zone defence and the required decision making to make it work. It is especially hard when senior players aren't doing their part to make it work. As you say, keep it simple. We are a relatively young team so 'back to defence basics' would be a good theme in the coming weeks.

The post I originally responded stated our 2018 pick #16 was used for Mc Henry. It wasn't. It was #19 traded/swapped to Carlton. That is simply fact. It is a trade we could have done had we kept it. People look at trade value differently. Some look at trade points. I can't be bothered doing that to fully value the lever trade. Not sure the value of pick #19' is simply a foregone right in 2018. imv we won't know the full value of the Lever trade until this year's trade period. But it isn't as simple as considering just the 'pure picks traded'. btw, no hyperbole was intended. I've edited my original post to indicate Adelaide traded their 2019 1st pick back to Carlton.

A good observation by Ben Guthrie in this article Round 3 Observations that our back 6 are all at sea. " ...forwards are not doing a good enough job of containing the ball inside 50 ...too many {defence} players are getting caught in no-man's land, unsure whether to "smash the ball" (press the ball carrier) or fold back and contain opposition numbers forward of the ball. To play in the manner Melbourne expects, players must have total trust in their teammates to make the right decision in whether to leave their man or not and it's clear over the first three rounds of the season that that understanding and confidence is not there at the moment." 5 of the current back 6 played our finals. The other is Lewis. I find it staggering that he is the difference between a cohesive backline and a group all at sea. Hibberd and Jetta are experienced enough and knowledgeable enough of the game plan to marshall the troops in Lewis' absence. Alas, it is not so. I see the backs talk to each other after an opp goal. Maybe Hibberd and Jetta need to also talk to Jones and Viney to get them to sort out the mid-field.

I know but I had to draw the line somewhere re the permutations. My point was that by leaving out the trade of our 2018 first round pick for Carlton's 2019 first round pick the Lever trade is not being correctly valued.

Firstly to clarify: #16 for McHenry was from Carlton in the McGovern trade. It started life as Sydney's first round pick (#13) and slid to #16 because of matching bids beforehand. Our 2018 first round pick (slid to #19) Adelaide traded to Carlton during the live trade period for Carlton's 2019 first round pick, likely to be in the top 5. Effectively, Lever cost us a top 5 pick (2019) and a top 10 pick (2017). So, imv he is looking very expensive! So, as it stands I don't see our recruiting looking so great. Edit: Adelaide gave Carlton their 2019 first round pick in return for its first. Even so, Lever still looks expensive.

Good feedback, thanks. Would be interested in your thoughts why do they do a jekyll and hyde from training to game day? Also have you noticed changes in set-ups at training for the new rules?

There is no shortage of clubs looking for a KPH: Hawks need to replace Roughead. Reported over the weekend they are looking at Patton, despite his injury as they have proven to have great medical staff (O'Meara, Scully, Burgoyne). Geelong need to replace Hawkins. A poster here late last year reported their very keen interest in Sam which he was considering. Pies have only Cox as a tall forward. They would love the Weideman name back on their list. Essendon have only Daniher, sometimes. So let's not get to cocky - we must sign him and his management know it. All parties know the interest in Sam from other clubs. If we don't contract him sooner than later and our poor form continues he may ask for a trade! Then where will be be?