Search the Community

Video posted showing Gawny announcing Jordon’s debut. Good luck fella. Suggest for @WERRIDEEhe starts on the bench? Jordon to debut in round one

Why did we fail to make the finals last season? Many attribute it to the last round loss to Collingwood, and/or the poor performance against Brisbane the week prior. I also recall three narrow losses near the start of the season that were faulted at selection, such as the naming’s JKH and a premature Weideman. We’ve also argued the regular overuse of the handball, as well as single quarter fadeouts. I guess there’s no right or wrong answer and it’s in the past. However, it was clear we all wanted improvements in these areas, so the question is now, have they been made? Let’s start with selection. Many of us were gobsmacked with the naming’s of Wagner and Maynard over Brayshaw and Tyson. Additional, some of us questioned the omission of Frost when facing the well-built Hawkins and Taylor. Consequently, Wagner’s first half was atrocious, where on three separate occasions he made foolish errors, including a missed tackle, a failed pick-up, and arguably a failed spoil, which cost us goals. His second half was better, although, I still consider him a liability. Next were our tall backs. On too many occasions O.McDonald got man-handled by Hawkins. Granted, he and Lever did a good job curbing his influence, although, things may have been different if Taylor didn’t go off early. Thus, I still can’t fathom the omission of Frost. Additionally, did we or did we not target Lever for his innate ability to leave his man to spoil or intercept a mark for a defensive rebound (we saw very little of this yesterday)? If so, why is Lever playing as the second tall? At Adelaide he played as the third behind Talia and Keath/Hartigan so he could do what he does best. The coaching panel have and tendency to create non-beneficial miss-matches (before and during game day). I hope the basic concepts of opposition analysis and player selection improve by next week. Now the game plan. Time and time again we’re reminded we’re to play a contested brand of football. That’s great, but what about the other half of non-contested football and efficient transitions from one end of the ground to the other? Yesterday, we won the contested possession and tackling pressure counts, yet Geelong destroyed us on the spread where they continually hit one-another lace out on the chest. Conversely, we continually, instead of overusing the handball like last year, opted to flood an end or side and bomb it to a contest (out of fifty, down the wing, inside fifty). How do we expect to make a tilt for finals if we can’t spread and hit lead up targets by foot (this was also an issue last year)? We’ve got that very large MCG to call our own, and yet we don’t use it appropriately. Instead every goal is made difficult. If given the space we’ll see far more from the less contested players such as Hunt, Melksham, Hannan, and Garlett. Dare I say it will be interesting to watch Watts with more space at Port Adelaide. If what we saw yesterday was the game plan it is far too one-dimensional, far too inefficient and tiring, and needs to be supplemented. If not I expect more single quarter fadeouts and subsequent losses. What are your thoughts and arguments? For me these need to improve above all else as I genuinely believe we have a list that on its day can beat any other to a flag.

Drove past Goshes Paddock between appointments, and it looked like MFC were training (or about to train). Unfortunately, in the interests of staying employed, I couldn’t stop in. Anyone else attend, and can offer some insights? I wonder who looks like coming in?

Well, let's move on to this. I also think we are a sneaky show for this game. Out: Hogan, JKH, Trengove In: Jones, Pedersen, Vince

From The Age mid season report card: http://m.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-season-2016-melbourne-midseason-report-20160619-gpmull.html What coach Paul Roos says: "We're trying to set our team up to when we eventually play finals that the game style that we put in place is going to be successful in that environment. That's the focus because we're seeing some teams, without mentioning them, they set up a game style that probably gets you to between eighth to 10th but struggle to get above eighth or seventh, so we don't want to do that." I think this statement puts into context sooner of the dejection and game style issues we've been discussing. It isn't about winning games, it is about developing a winning game style and winning culture. We are still in a development phase and we aren't cutting that development short for the sake of winning an extra 2 games this year, when it really doesn't count. I'll back the football club on this one. We've spent money to put a plan and program in place, and I prefer that we see it out rather than crumble to pressure for short term game.

I like Peter Ryan. He's a solid contributor. What are people's thoughts on the correlation between these stats and success? He mounts a good argument. There's no doubt that players gain confidence when they're continually selected to play at the highest level. As long as the feedback they are receiving each week is constructive, IMO it's only a matter of time before they respond. And that's usually a short amount of time. Exhibit A - Rohan Bail. http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-05-29/stability-breeds-success AFTER Melbourne lost to the Sydney Swans in round six, the heat was again being applied to Jack Watts after a performance where his efforts had been sub-standard and he'd been caught ball-watching. Although Watts had been a contributor in the early weeks of the season, form appeared to have deserted him. At Monday's media conference that week, Paul Roos was asked whether Watts might need to return to the VFL. The coach immediately knocked the prospect on the head. "I would think he would be playing this week. I'd be surprised if he wasn't," Roos said. Roos then made no change to the team that had lost to the Swans for the game against the Crows in Adelaide, the second time he’d picked an unchanged line-up. To the surprise of most, the settled Demons pulled off an upset win over the Crows after establishing a winning lead in a stunning first half. That Roos chose to back Watts rather than demoting him after an ordinary game comes as little surprise. Famously, while coaching the Sydney Swans, he made just one change after round 19 (Paul Bevan in for Luke Vogels) as the team made its way to the 2005 Grand Final, the settled line-up doing enough to win the club's first premiership for 71 years. He appears to be applying the same philosophy at Melbourne in his first year in the top job. Statistics from Champion Data reveal Melbourne averaged just 1.63 changes per week during the first eight rounds of 2014, making it the most settled team (alongside Gold Coast and the Sydney Swans) over that period. The only other teams to average fewer than two changes per week in that time were Port Adelaide and Geelong. Apart from Melbourne, those four teams currently make up the top five spots on the ladder with the other, Hawthorn – a club cruelled by injury – averaging 2.63 changes a week. Fourteen Melbourne players have played every game this season; only Gold Coast (15) have more. The numbers show Melbourne to be the biggest outliers on a table that generally reflects ladder position. Gold Coast's progress can be tracked through the declining number of changes it has made each week since 2011. The Suns have gone from 4.10 (2011), 3.43 (2012), 2.90 (2013) to 1.63 in the first eight rounds this season. Roos understands some players aren't developed enough to play well every week, but lessons can be learned. He also demands that players be picked only if they display consistent good form at a lower level. Expectations have stayed high behind closed doors, while much of the discussions about standards expected of players have been private, not public. And the Demons' players have responded. "There are a lot of different issues that go into [selection]," Roos said. "Obviously every team wants their best team on the field. Probably part of what we're trying to do is work out what our best team is. "The players have, for the majority of the time, done what we have asked the [players] to do and we have continued to improve. "Medically the team has been really good … the big part of football now is getting your best team on the ground." The Demons have still used 33 players, but the improvement is obvious when a comparison is made between the team that played in round one and the one that beat Richmond in round nine. Melbourne's team for the win over the Tigers included Jack Viney, Colin Garland, Mark Jamar, Chris Dawes, Max Gawn, Christian Salem and Aidan Riley for Shannon Byrnes, Jack Fitzpatrick, Alex Georgiou, Viv Michie, Jake Spencer, James Frawley and Jack Trengove. Trengove and Frawley would be the only automatic inclusions of those outs, while those included have either proved themselves at AFL level or are highly-rated youngsters. Of course there is more than one way to skin a cat, as Geelong showed in 2011 when it rested players and tried youngsters to average the second-most changes in the competition (3.67 per week) but still won the flag. But for a club that experienced so much upheaval in recent seasons, Melbourne is benefitting from the opportunity to go into battle each week with a familiar line-up. Average changes by club, rounds 1-8, 2014 Melbourne 1.63 Gold Coast 1.63 Sydney Swans 1.63 Port Adelaide 1.75 Geelong 1.88 Collingwood 2.00 North Melbourne 2.00 Adelaide 2.13 Fremantle 2.38 Essendon 2.50 Richmond 2.50 Hawthorn 2.63 St Kilda 2.63 WCE 3.00 Western Bulldogs 3.13 Brisbane Lions 3.25 Carlton 3.38 GWS 3.50