Top of the table! Do we....

[mjp]

I think your inference is that Macrae is a selfish player, prioritising his own possessions over the team's result. Imo that is insulting. Suggest you look at the vision of Jack after he kicked a late goal in the GWS prelim during our premiership year.

Happy to look at whatever you like though pretty sure watching the way someone reacts after THEY kick a goal won't prove much about their willingness to lock on to an opponent and shut him down for 10 minutes.

As an aside, when talking about Jack I pretty clearly referenced the performances of the club in matches in which we were beaten (badly) that followed AFTER the premiership year...I'm talking ridiculous losses to Gold Coast, Carlton, North etc in 2017/18/19 and 20.

There was a day when Sammy Seaton had 25 touches at half-time as an example.

I am not saying Macrae isn't a "good player". He is an excellent ball-winning mid. Do I think he is "wired" to hunt the ball above EVERYTHING else? Yes. Yes I 100% do think that. If me saying that is 'insulting' to you, well, I'm pretty sure you're a big boy and can cope with it. I'm pretty sure it isn't insulting to Jack because he wont be reading it...and if he did and wanted to chat about it then he could reach out and do exactly that.

When I read things like "he doesn't need to tag Oliver, Oliver needs to tag him" it just drives me crazy. The players need to do whatever the coach determines they need to do in order to win the game. Whether that's play in the ruck, back pocket, midfield or in Clayton Oliver's back pocket, that's what they do. If they DON'T want to do that stuff, well, there's always tennis.

Anyway - can we just agree that I never suggested Macrae tag Oliver - I just commented on a thread suggesting him as a candidate that if he was asked too and EMBRACED it that it would represent a big step forward for our club. Can we also agree that both of us think Macrae is an excellent footballer though you believe he is as good at defending as attacking whereas I see him as primarily a ball winner with defensive limitations.

I feel like I have taken my own thread off-the-rails with a debate about whether or not Jack Macrae is a good player...the answer is of course he is.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Perhaps Jackson has been instructed to win the ball because he's a great accumulator and distributor. He's often first to the ball or the first option out of the pack giving it off to his teammates. His kicking has gone up a notch this year too which makes him even more of an effective distributor.

We've certainly had mids over the last few years who haven't at times wanted to do the selfless defensive work, but like Jeemak said, this has been all our mids and not just Jackson.

[bornadog]

There was a day when Sammy Seton had 25 touches at half-time as an example.

We learnt our lesson with that and next time we played Carlton, Macrae was asked to look after Cripps and kept him to 22 touches and accumulated 38 himself.

Anyway, listening to SEN this afternoon the suggestion was made Melbourne should tag Bont and Libba.

[Happy Days]

We learnt our lesson with that and next time we played Carlton, Macrae was asked to look after Cripps and kept him to 22 touches and accumulated 38 himself.

Anyway, listening to SEN this afternoon the suggestion was made Melbourne should tag Bont and Libba.

They will. They've had Jordon covering for their more offensive minded mids all year, and think he'll give Bont some attention.

Re Macrae - think that his "hurt factor" is being drastically undersold. He's literally first in the AFL for score involvements and we've all recognised how damaging he is with the ball either entering 50 or when it's already inside the arc.

But on the other hand, while it was pretty harsh to suggest he focuses more on his individual possessions than team performance, MJP is right in saying that "they should tag me" is some 2013 Matt Boyd nonsense. Everyone should be accountable to something.

Am I crazy in thinking that Macrae actually has done a defensive job before though? Against Geelong I think?

[chef]

I think Libbas untagable the way he plays.

[Mofra]

Am I crazy in thinking that Macrae actually has done a defensive job before though? Against Geelong I think?

Down there at KP where we were just hanging in until Cloke gave away a silly 50 and we then copped an injury.
Macrae's defensive side wasn't natural to him - I still remember him getting dropped after a ~20 possession game, performing at VFL level, then coming back to a 43 & 2 goal game against GCS

When it comes to centre square opposition mids it been a rare occurrence for Bevo to tag someone as a plan A. If one of their mids gets off the chain we can send someone to them as a back up (and Libba is an incredible shut down player) but right now we have enough role players in the side to shut down their dangerous types on the spread (Salem and Newnes just can't be allowed to run around in space) and back our midfielders in to win the head to head battle.

Plan B run with player.... Lachie Hunter. Footy IQ and running capacity off the charts

[hujsh]

They will. They've had Jordon covering for their more offensive minded mids all year, and think he'll give Bont some attention.

Re Macrae - think that his "hurt factor" is being drastically undersold. He's literally first in the AFL for score involvements and we've all recognised how damaging he is with the ball either entering 50 or when it's already inside the arc.

But on the other hand, while it was pretty harsh to suggest he focuses more on his individual possessions than team performance, MJP is right in saying that "they should tag me" is some 2013 Matt Boyd nonsense. Everyone should be accountable to something.

Am I crazy in thinking that Macrae actually has done a defensive job before though? Against Geelong I think?

Him and Libba held Selwood and Danger for the first half in 2016 down there before both got injured

[1eyedog]

Settle down. Happy to debate with you on pretty much any point but if you are going to dismiss my opinion because I live in Perth and can’t go to the footy every week that’s bit of a joke...I doubt you saw too many games in 2020 but seemed to have an opinion on them all the same.

No ones saying Jack isn’t an excellent player. As per my comments pre season though - Prove It. We have a lost number ours games in the years following the premiership due to lack of effort and poor defending. We have started this season well but I am still not a true believer. Sorry if 9 good weeks doesn’t over write 4 years of inconsistency and poor results.

Jack has been getting a heap of the footy. Which is great. He gets a lot of it every week. Also great. Sometimes, opposition mids get a lot of it...not so great.

Running back to help the defenders is good...but mids play on other mids...and that requires a level of sacrifice. Sorry if I have not seen this from our group in the past 4 seasons...sorry if wanting to see it now is disrespectful.

Give me a break.

Fair enough I came across a little heavy handed in defence of Jack and I apologise for that. You being in Perth and not being able to watch most games live certainly does not make your assessment about Jack any less valid. On the contrary, your footballing background makes you probably better placed than anyone on this board to discuss what our players are doing right / could do better.

Obviously I mis-interpreted the metaphor for Jack's defensive (or lack thereof), ability.

[mjp]

On the contrary, your footballing background makes you probably better placed than anyone on this board to discuss what our players are doing right / could do better.

If you saw where my team was on the ladder right now I'm sure you'd change your opinion on this pretty quick smart...

I love Jack as a player and we are lucky to have him. I have no doubt my initial message about him valuing possessions more than winning came across poorly...whilst I meant it I wasn't trying to say he didn't want to win - just that to me his driving force is to get the ball - that's what he was put on the earth to do. Trying to set that aside and play a defensive role is something that is really (really) hard for him.

All of us are different and by extension all players are different.

[1eyedog]

If you saw where my team was on the ladder right now I'm sure you'd change your opinion on this pretty quick smart...

I love Jack as a player and we are lucky to have him. I have no doubt my initial message about him valuing possessions more than winning came across poorly...whilst I meant it I wasn't trying to say he didn't want to win - just that to me his driving force is to get the ball - that's what he was put on the earth to do. Trying to set that aside and play a defensive role is something that is really (really) hard for him.

All of us are different and by extension all players are different.

Ag mate I should have clarified with you first. I see your point and understand the premise behind the post. Thanks for following up.

[SquirrelGrip]

So against the Dees, their plan worked this time around. They played their one wood and didn't have to change it once they got out to an early lead and just kept it for the rest of the night.

Next time around, obviously things need to change from our end. We might get lucky and they get an early injury and be forced into their Plan B, but more realistically we need to mix it up. And it's not just for Melbourne, it's for when we play Richmond or Brisbane or Geelong if they get an early advantage.

As I see it, here are a few options:

1. Experience Returns

Put Dunkley, Treloar and Martin into the side and a few things change immediately - the opposition ruck doesn't get easy clearances, Dunkley can rotate in as a bigger bodied inside mid if Libba is struggling, and Treloar can break lines and provide different entry into (or over) our forward line.

2. Stop the Intercepts

Entry into the forward line has to be better than kicking straight to Lever/May or Bolta/Grimes/Astbury or Harris Andrews. The three headed monster English/Bruce/Naughton didn't stop the intercepts last week, so what will? Is it the addition of Hannan to play defensively up forward and prevent it (as Cordy did in '16)? Does Cordy himself come and do it? Is it two of the three monsters sacrificing to allow the other one to get off the leash (e.g. Bruce and Naughton clamp down on Lever & May so English is the target?). Is it Cody or Hannan who become our avenues to goal? Is it about getting the ball to the 50m+ kicks to just kick it over the intercepts for goal - Dale, Bont, Williams?

3. Clamp down when their mids get on top

Versus the Dees, it was Gawn and Oliver who got the early clearances and challenged us. Bolton dominated the third quarter against the Tiges. If a big bodied ruck is getting clearances when Martin isn't playing, surely Bruce goes in the middle for a bit to throw his body around and create a physical contest. If it's Oliver, I know much of this thread is about Macrae sacrificing his game, but what other options do we have?

McLean shouldn't be far off and has been used in this role in the past with some success. Some have suggested it would be a great step for the development of Bailey Smith - I'm uncertain if he has it in him but I'd love to be proven wrong. Rhylee West or Garcia could work but I think they'd be physically beaten up by someone Oliver's size. For me, I'd have Caleb as an option - whilst small in stature, his tackling and defensive pressure is fierce, and I still remember his game against Sam Mitchell in his first year which really made me stand up and take notice of him. Also, Caleb offensively forward of centre helps our entry inside 50 to dice apart any defensive web and intercept markers.

4. Beat the defensive web

All teams now play the evolution of Hawthorn's original team defence (seemingly designed by Bevo at that time). We certainly do and Richmond have for a number of years. In my opinion, Melbourne's improvement is 90% due to the buy-in of this team defence, combined with the athleticism required to achieve it.

Our way to beat it had been to use elite kicking to slice and dice this full ground press apart, and by and large it has worked this year, being unafraid to take the risk and trust out footwork and teammates. Mentally, we were shot in the first quarter of the Melbourne game when some of our leaders and best ball users didn't execute as we expect. Confidence dropped, the perceived pressure of Melbourne grew, as did their confidence. It's incredible how much of footy is played above the shoulders.

What is important though in beating the defensive web is having the right players in the right position around the ground to beat it. We now have wonderful kicking through our back six with Caleb, Dale, Williams and Duryea, which ideally gets out to our runners like Hunter, Bont, Treloar or Smith to then push up forward. We want some of the elite targeted short passing up closer to the half forward line and first entry into 50 to help beat that web. Maybe at times we need to push one of those defensive four up the ground to provide that better kicking option.


These are just some initial thoughts, open for discussion of course, but we need some extra tactics and options when things get tough.

[bornadog]

Great post SG. Agree with most of what you have said. Not sure about the use of Caleb, but worth a try.

[Mofra]

I was very surprised we didn't bring one marking tall (e.g. English) up into the corridor.
Melbourne's plan was to defend the corridor with their life, and use one disciplined player (Brawshaw) to stop any easy switching to the fat side of the ground.
The easy switch wasn't working, so call them out - have 207cm English either drag their 'third' tall out to go with him, or make a contest exactly where Melbourne don't want us to put the ball.

If in doubt, sticking to "what don't the opposition want us to do" can often give you the best path forward.

Realistically, if we tidy up our disposal that game is a lot closer than it was. 6 goals to turnovers not long after quarter time is an enormous amount to give up.

[GVGjr]

Gee Squirrel it would could get some more contributions like that from you. Many thanks

[jazzadogs]

Great post SquirrelGrip. I really hope that we didn't play all of our cards last week.

I've definitely fallen into option 1 when chatting to friends, but I think we need to be careful relying on the return of injured players as the solution to our woes. Both of our losses have followed a similar path in my view - unrelenting pressure for 20-30 minutes, resulting in some poor decisions and skill execution which allow the opposition to score easy goals.

Our system is set up to prevent the opposition getting first use of the ball, which prevents our backline from being caught out 1v1 and reduces opposition scoring. Against poor teams, our midfield can be so dominant that we score quickly and efficiently - occasional rebound goals don't seem to bother us. But against the good teams who a) can apply consistent high-level pressure and b) set up well defensively, we don't seem to have any easily accessible back-up plans.

I really like the idea of having English up the corridor, but that also relies on our mids/half-backs/half-forwards/anyone getting to that contest so we are not outnumbered if it hits the ground. I felt like we were consistently outnumbered at ground-level contests against Melbourne, particularly across our half-forward line.

Re: midfield clamp down, it is definitely needed. Does it need to be one specific player in a lockdown role, or does it need to be wholesale attitude shift through our midfield group? It still felt like we set up at the stoppages to win the ball first, defend second - but I haven't watched a replay to confirm if that was just my in-game frustration.