Carlton V Melbourne's defense

[whelan=legend]

I would be happy for Jamison to concede 4 goals to Medhurst everytime

Wow. I would hate to have my best defender conceding 4 goals to a player like Medhurst, but i guess Carlton supporters have come to embrace mediocrity over these past years. Melbournes - easily.

 

[mediumsizered]

Wow. I would hate to have my best defender conceding 4 goals to a player like Medhurst, but i guess Carlton supporters have come to embrace mediocrity over these past years. Melbournes - easily.

Given Medhurst kicked 4 goals in our Round 12 clash & we still won, it was not an issue for us. If the opposition's best forward kicks 4 goals or less, you are going to win most games. If Collingwood's defence had held Fev to 4 goals they might have just about beaten us.

 

[makethat2]

Wiggins played in the forward line during the 2008 season, hence him kicking 4 goals in his 100th game, against the Bulldogs. Saddington was given 2 games for the season as a farewell gesture from the club. But don't you let the facts get in the way of a good story.

How is this a fact?

 

[Rosstickle]

Given Medhurst kicked 4 goals in our Round 12 clash & we still won, it was not an issue for us. If the opposition's best forward kicks 4 goals or less, you are going to win most games. If Collingwood's defence had held Fev to 4 goals they might have just about beaten us.

Yes they would have because Carlton only have one forward.

Collingwood have Medhurst, Cloke, Rocca, Didak, etc.

The fact that Medhurst produced more goals on Jamison than he would on other defenders isn't a positve, regardless of the result.

What happens next time when he boots 4 but Cloke and Didak produce 3 or 4 goals each aswell?

This year and last year Geelong were constantly looking at things they did during games in an attempt to become even better. They didn't say "we're overposseing the ball but thats OK because we keep winning". They tryed to address the problem. Saying it's OK because we won is a very complaecent approach.