RD 20: CCM at home

[SF33]

1 hour ago, bumpyknuckles said:

I felt better going 1 nil down than having an early 2 goal lead.

 

You shouldn't have. Before yesterday, City had failed to earn even one stinking point from the six times that had happened so far this year.

[Defibrillator]

I've only just watched the replay now but one thing that stood out to me was how disciplined Malik was. We haven't had a 6 all year who's sat reliably to break up play and cover Kisnorbo's forays upfield like he did on the weekend. He sat in the hole in front of the back four which allowed Mooy and Retre to wander further - especially Mooy. I don't think he's match fit yet - he looked sluggish especially on some late tackles - but our midfield shape is so much better with him there. Paartalu certainly wasn't as disciplined, but get him fit and Caceras sorted and our midfield looks so much more potent. 

[Shahanga]

1 hour ago, Defibrillator said:

I've only just watched the replay now but one thing that stood out to me was how disciplined Malik was. We haven't had a 6 all year who's sat reliably to break up play and cover Kisnorbo's forays upfield like he did on the weekend. He sat in the hole in front of the back four which allowed Mooy and Retre to wander further - especially Mooy. I don't think he's match fit yet - he looked sluggish especially on some late tackles - but our midfield shape is so much better with him there. Paartalu certainly wasn't as disciplined, but get him fit and Caceras sorted and our midfield looks so much more potent. 

He had a decent game, but it's early days.

Let's see how he goes when the opposition striker and #10 have both finished high school.

[playmaker]

1 hour ago, Defibrillator said:

I've only just watched the replay now but one thing that stood out to me was how disciplined Malik was. We haven't had a 6 all year who's sat reliably to break up play and cover Kisnorbo's forays upfield like he did on the weekend. He sat in the hole in front of the back four which allowed Mooy and Retre to wander further - especially Mooy. I don't think he's match fit yet - he looked sluggish especially on some late tackles - but our midfield shape is so much better with him there. Paartalu certainly wasn't as disciplined, but get him fit and Caceras sorted and our midfield looks so much more potent. 

Agree, you look any top defence around the world with 4 back you will see that the CB and DM triangle is critical. With Paartalu it just wasn't there. Kisnorbo,Malik and Wilkinson together is a great move forward, and Malik knowing the CB position well enhances the understanding of the 3.

Also noted on Sunday how vocal the 3 of them are at organising the defence and seem to be really leading the team as a unit which I never really saw before.

All positive to see this happening and great for Kisnorbo as he can perform his role and rely on the 2 others to do theirs with confidence instead of him trying to cover everyone else's mistakes.

[JC22]

#stepoversfordays

The guys an idiot.

[patjennings]

Mariners supporter here. Just wanted to commend your players on their genuine concern shown to Storm and for the patience and class shown by your supporters. 

[HEARTinator]

1 minute ago, patjennings said:

Mariners supporter here. Just wanted to commend your players on their genuine concern shown to Storm and for the patience and class shown by your supporters. 

Yes, lucky you weren't playing the Tards. Cheers.

[Luke]

15 minutes ago, patjennings said:

Mariners supporter here. Just wanted to commend your players on their genuine concern shown to Storm and for the patience and class shown by your supporters. 

Weirdly it looked like there was more city players concerned then mariners players 

[Kinnibari]

2 hours ago, Luke said:

Weirdly it looked like there was more city players concerned then mariners players 

I think they were a bit overwhelmed by it, easier for City players who don't know him as well maybe.

[Nate]

9 hours ago, playmaker said:

Rather this injury than an p/acl or fractured lateral and medial malleolus

TBH I thought it was going to be a lot worse by the look of him on the day

no fucking way, I've done my ACL and I imagine a leg break of that calibre would be a million times more painful 

if you're talking about being a better injury with regards to long-term rehab, then maybe you've got a point but jeez it looked too excruciating to call it a lucky injury

[silva10]

18 hours ago, japiedog said:

we were awful in the first half, just shite

Did JVS find a hairdryer for his half time talk ???

it appeared as if a good old fashioned spray occurred, as we came out a different team

Bruno should have had a hatrick

we should have scored another 3 in the second half.

Some positive signs there, but a few problems shrouded by the (in the end ) easy win

Malik did some good things , but there were some awful attempts at tackles at times, players just skipped past him

Mooy put on his playing boots again, dominating the midfield

thankfully we got the 3 points,

 

We weren't awful first half. We just played too slow at times. We still had chances to score.

As for people skipping past Malik, I didn't see that. Instead I saw Malik protect the defence which hasn't been happening all season. It's no coincidence that Sorenson didn't have a save to make. 

[playmaker]

7 hours ago, Nate said:

if you're talking about being a better injury with regards to long-term rehab

Yep

[japiedog]

5 hours ago, silva10 said:

We weren't awful first half. We just played too slow at times. We still had chances to score.

As for people skipping past Malik, I didn't see that. Instead I saw Malik protect the defence which hasn't been happening all season. It's no coincidence that Sorenson didn't have a save to make. 

You were at the ground ?

you didn't hear the chorus of boos for the lack lustre effort a half time ?

 

[SF33]

19 minutes ago, japiedog said:

You were at the ground ?

you didn't hear the chorus of boos for the lack lustre effort a half time ?

 

I think it was a chorus of boos for being down at half time against a rubbish team, rather than specifically being about effort.

[jw1739]

3 minutes ago, SF33 said:

I think it was a chorus of boos for being down at half time against a rubbish team, rather than specifically being about effort.

I thought it was both. But whatever it was for it was fully deserved IMO. We were appallingly slow to move the ball though midfield in the first half - we've always been slow but that was a very poor display. TBH I thought that a second Central Coast goal might have undone the whole season for us, but we got back on terms right after the restart and never looked back after that.

[Jovan]

7 minutes ago, SF33 said:

I think it was a chorus of boos for being down at half time against a rubbish team, rather than specifically being about effort.

But we were down basically because of what it looked to be low effort or intensity. 

I still shits me no end the level of intensity or effort varies so much from week to week and even from half to half.

Why can't the players put out the same levels regardless of circumstances  (opposition ,venue, temperature breaks between games etc).

I could handle maybe 1 or 2 players off but sometimes it seems like 6 or 7. It's just frustrating to see it so obvious and yet it continues.

[SF33]

3 minutes ago, jw1739 said:

I thought it was both. But whatever it was for it was fully deserved IMO. We were appallingly slow to move the ball though midfield in the first half - we've always been slow but that was a very poor display. TBH I thought that a second Central Coast goal might have undone the whole season for us, but we got back on terms right after the restart and never looked back after that.

Yep, credit to Kisnorbo for that. Seemed like a real example of a captain understanding the moment and how important a goal was for the team.

[SF33]

12 minutes ago, Jovan said:

But we were down basically because of what it looked to be low effort or intensity. 

I still shits me no end the level of intensity or effort varies so much from week to week and even from half to half.

Why can't the players put out the same levels regardless of circumstances  (opposition ,venue, temperature breaks between games etc).

I could handle maybe 1 or 2 players off but sometimes it seems like 6 or 7. It's just frustrating to see it so obvious and yet it continues.

I dunno, to me it looked like at half time we had them covered everywhere but on the scoreboard. I was definitely concerned, because of our inability this season to come from behind to get a result, but I think it was really just finishing that was killing us in the first 45. When you consider that Fornaroli let a few chances go begging, including two that he'd usually make in his sleep, I think it was clear which was the better side.

[Jovan]

21 minutes ago, SF33 said:

I dunno, to me it looked like at half time we had them covered everywhere but on the scoreboard. I was definitely concerned, because of our inability this season to come from behind to get a result, but I think it was really just finishing that was killing us in the first 45. When you consider that Fornaroli let a few chances go begging, including two that he'd usually make in his sleep, I think it was clear which was the better side.

We were the better side but tbf we were playing a fair few kids and being 1:0 down at the break and wasting some chances had all the makings of a heartlike special. To their credit they came out and looked a different side and at no stage in the second period did we look like losing. 

My point is that the first half performance wasn't anything new. At least half our games this season we have seen it. It's actually more common than not and I just don't see it changing.

 They need to play 90+ minutes every week at their highest possible level as a starting point. They just don't and that just shits me.

Edited February 22, 2016 by Jovan

[playmaker]

I was booing at the ref..... hopeless 

[Nate]

47 minutes ago, SF33 said:

Yep, credit to Kisnorbo for that. Seemed like a real example of a captain understanding the moment and how important a goal was for the team.

Kisnorbo is someone who's really flown under the radar for us, I think he's been outstanding particularly over the last couple of months (which is hard to say given how many goals we've leaked)

[hyperfuzz]

1 hour ago, SF33 said:

I think it was a chorus of boos for being down at half time against a rubbish team, rather than specifically being about effort.

i thought we were booing the ref re: penalty. we need some sort of jeer capo

[SF33]

2 hours ago, Jovan said:

We were the better side but tbf we were playing a fair few kids and being 1:0 down at the break and wasting some chances had all the makings of a heartlike special. To their credit they came out and looked a different side and at no stage in the second period did we look like losing. 

My point is that the first half performance wasn't anything new. At least half our games this season we have seen it. It's actually more common than not and I just don't see it changing.

 They need to play 90+ minutes every week at their highest possible level as a starting point. They just don't and that just shits me.

Fair points. It happens all the time. I guess for me it's just the first time that I've regularly watched professional football in person and I've come to expect that the ebbs and flows and momentum shifts are part of it, especially when you consider that - in theory - the teams should be more evenly matched than in other competitions (salary cap/restrictions on foreign players etc.). I don't think it was as bad as Newcastle, for example, where we were down and we thoroughly deserved to be down.

 

Edited February 23, 2016 by SF33

[SF33]

1 hour ago, hyperfuzz said:

i thought we were booing the ref re: penalty. we need some sort of jeer capo

Yep, could have been that too, now that I think about it.

[JC22]

[possiblygeorge]

On 2/21/2016 at 0:45 AM, Melburnian said:

Whatever the club is trying to do to increase numbers is simply not working.

Same people have been at the club for years and same problems occur.

During the week, hardly hear anything from the club on radio, tv or anywhere else. Have talents like Fornaroli and don't market him to the nines. Ditto Mooy. 

Can have all the money in the world, but if you don't change nothing changes. There is no connection of Melbourne City to Melbourne or Victoria at present.

A club this size with the way we are playing should be having more than 15k members and getting your 15-20k crowds every week.

If we were never bought out i'd be convinced we would've folded by now. Wouldn't even be mad to be honest, it's getting ridiculous. 

[playmaker]

This is the legacy of being 2nd team in a city especially with no previous silverware. The winds of change are upon us. We need to be better than the tards, win some silverware over the next few years, and keep our good players as a spectacle and for fans to identify with, and this discussion will be a distant memory.

Also to note is that this is the first year the tard supporters that I know are really concerned about the MCFC's uprising.... they can feel it too.

As soon as we become the Melbourne team to beat in the Aleague our supporter base will skyrocket and we will also get the crowds that just want to watch some football, at the moment they are still going to tards games.

 

 

[Jovan]

27 minutes ago, possiblygeorge said:

If we were never bought out i'd be convinced we would've folded by now. Wouldn't even be mad to be honest, it's getting ridiculous. 

Thats actually wrong. We were never in financial trouble. Problem was the previous owners were not willing to invest and therefore we were destined to mediocrity. 

Frustration now is the new owners operate on their time frame and as supporters we want it yesterday. 

It will come probably not this season but you never know. We actually performaned above expectations last final series.

[possiblygeorge]

6 minutes ago, playmaker said:

This is the legacy of being 2nd team in a city especially with no previous silverware. The winds of change are upon us. We need to be better than the tards, win some silverware over the next few years, and keep our good players as a spectacle and for fans to identify with, and this discussion will be a distant memory.

Also to note is that this is the first year the tard supporters that I know are really concerned about the MCFC's uprising.... they can feel it too.

As soon as we become the Melbourne team to beat in the Aleague our supporter base will skyrocket and we will also get the crowds that just want to watch some football, at the moment they are still going to tards games.

 

 

It's a bit shit that we have to win matches, or silverware, in order for us to increase crowd numbers. Wouldn't those that just jump on us because we're good feel like it's a manufactured support? 

[jw1739]

10 minutes ago, Jovan said:

Thats actually wrong. We were never in financial trouble. Problem was the previous owners were not willing to invest and therefore we were destined to mediocrity. 

Frustration now is the new owners operate on their time frame and as supporters we want it yesterday. 

It will come probably not this season but you never know. We actually performed above expectations last final series.

That's absolutely true, and the previous Chairman (and now life member, as are all the members of the previous Board) is on record as stating that the Board of Heart at that time could have funded the club indefinitely.

8 minutes ago, possiblygeorge said:

It's a bit shit that we have to win matches, or silverware, in order for us to increase crowd numbers. Wouldn't those that just jump on us because we're good feel like it's a manufactured support? 

Why? Seems perfectly reasonable to me. Clubs have to earn their support, and we have not so far done that.

[cadete]

33 minutes ago, jw1739 said:

Why? Seems perfectly reasonable to me. Clubs have to earn their support, and we have not so far done that.

 

Well as much as I hate them: Things were made a lot easier for WSW by the fact that they represented something obviously different to the already available alternative, instead we got thrown some ideas about Yoof Development and promises of attacking Non-Merrickesque-Football as what MHFC was going to be about.

I think a lot of Heart's initial fans got on board due to either a dislike of MVFC or the fact that they had become more open to the game (probably more so local game) at around the same time the club was formed.

NOTE: Obviously it was not the club's fault that there is no real cultural geographical divides in Melbourne like they exist in Sydney.

[SF33]

1 hour ago, cadete said:

Well as much as I hate them: Things were made a lot easier for WSW by the fact that they represented something obviously different to the already available alternative, instead we got thrown some ideas about Yoof Development and promises of attacking Non-Merrickesque-Football as what MHFC was going to be about.

I think a lot of Heart's initial fans got on board due to either a dislike of MVFC or the fact that they had become more open to the game (probably more so local game) at around the same time the club was formed.

NOTE: Obviously it was not the club's fault that there is no real cultural geographical divides in Melbourne like they exist in Sydney.

I think that's spot on. People probably jumped on Heart to start with because of some arbitrary reason: they liked the colours, they like the underdog, they didn't warm to Victory when they were the only team in town, they decided to start seriously following the sport/the league when Heart was being established...none of those are really the sort of reasons that scream 'rusted on supporter'. We don't have a geographical divide, we don't have a religious/racial divide...what's really left, besides 'Muscat's a tosser'?

 

It's moments like Sorensen's heroics in the last derby win, Paartalu's header, 4-0 in Kewell's last hurrah, even D-Mac's winner (in my first game as a Heart member). That's what builds and retains a supporter base. There isn't the differential between Victory and City that there is between Wanderers and Sydney FC, so in these (relatively) early stages of the competition, we just need to win more than they do to reduce the gap. We don't need to be as big as them; as long as we're getting to a stage where we're regularly opening the upper seats at AAMI over the next five years, that would be massive. And I think we have an opportunity to do that as early as next year, if we have a successful end to this season.

Edited February 23, 2016 by SF33

[silva10]

11 hours ago, japiedog said:

You were at the ground ?

you didn't hear the chorus of boos for the lack lustre effort a half time ?

 

Well living in the UK I obviously wasn't there, but watched it on TV. Unfortunately went straight for a shower at half time, so didn't get to hear boos or any half time comment.

What I saw was a team control the game, but move it too slow most times. I didn't see our defence stretched except for the breakaway goal from our corner. Paddy blocked one cross that inadvertently cannoned of Wilkinson that could have caused a problem. However, overall we had nothing to worry about. Once we upped our tempo second half we cruised home.

 

[Deeming]

Our first half was 'meh'.

We played okay, not bad, not good.

But if we want to be a title winning team 'okay' performances are not good enough. 

Second half was much different.

[Nate]

1 hour ago, Deeming said:

Our first half was 'meh'.

We played okay, not bad, not good.

But if we want to be a title winning team 'okay' performances are not good enough. 

Second half was much different.

funny thing is, this season okay performances probably are good enough since nobody's really making a strong claim for the title

we still scored 4 goals ahaha, if that's 'okay' then I think we're doing alright

[rass]

I would describe our first half as 'careful'. There was pressure on the team to win after 1 point in the last 3 games and they played like that was on their minds.

Going behind was probably a good thing as it finally gave us a kick in the arse to go for it. Hopefully it ignites our run home now. 

[hedaik]

17 hours ago, possiblygeorge said:

It's a bit shit that we have to win matches, or silverware, in order for us to increase crowd numbers. Wouldn't those that just jump on us because we're good feel like it's a manufactured support? 

Are you new to following sport teams?

[Deeming]

9 hours ago, Nate said:

funny thing is, this season okay performances probably are good enough since nobody's really making a strong claim for the title

we still scored 4 goals ahaha, if that's 'okay' then I think we're doing alright

Sorry wasn't clear enough. Our first half was 'okay' (not good, not bad) our second half was much different and we played well.

[MHFC-FAN]

First half we played like Melbourne Heart, creating plenty of opportunities and conceding a soft goal. Second half we played like Melbourne City and put away a poor team like we should! CCM may be our bogey team, but this season they were our bitch, finally had a clean sweep 3 from 3 with 12 goals for and only 3 against

Bring on the sheep shaggers bbaaahhhhhhh

[Murfy1]

Interesting discussion about intensity/slow movement.

 

I'd argue the main reason the team looked a bit slow in the first half was because of slow ball movement, rather than low intensity or effort. And I'd argue the ball movement not being super quick stemmed from the upheaval to the team--both with the tactics, we'd just switched back to 4-3-3 after more than a month with 3-5-2, and the players (defence with Zullo in, new midfield with Retre starting, new forward-line of Garuccio-Fornaroli-Fitzgerald). So a lot of change to the team, which makes it harder for a team to play at a really high tempo when players are still getting used to playing with each other (don't forget we also have 2 new players to the team starting in Malik [just 4 starts] and Wilkinson [just 2 apps] who would still be learning their teammates names).

Also, we were easily the best team in the first half: 6 shots, 3 on target, 4 inside the box compared with 3 shots, 1 on target, 1 inside the box. 9 times out of 10 we lead at halftime if we outshoot the Mariners like that.

 

By the second half the team was more settled, with the coaching staff also tweaking a few tactics/player positions at half time as well, and we moved the ball quicker and better and crushed the Mariners 4-0 in the second half. As the team continues to settle more I expect performances to more and more reflect our 4-0 smashing of the Mariners in the second half. 

 

Also I fully agree with the above point that we shouldn't underplay the significance of beating CCM 3 times in one season. Defensively stubborn teams, like CCM, can easily make better teams drop points, like Melbourne victory did when they dropped 2 points with a draw in a home match in Geelong against CCM earlier this season. And especially given that we have only beaten CCM 4 times in 18 games, with 3 of those wins coming this season, Melbourne City should get due positive acknowledgement for going against our playing history with CCM and getting good results (5-1, 3-1, 4-1) and 9 points out of 9.

Edited February 24, 2016 by Murfy1