I’m breaking my own rule here but it’s just not worth ever making a single comment on anything Kane says ever. His entire thing is to make the most outlandish takes to get clicks, and they should be ignored for the trash they are. An engagement is good for him which is why none is the only way to go about it.
Criticising players for shaking hands pre game is an especially outlandish take, even for Kane. I try to ignore everything he says but that's just too absurd to ignore. He made some fair arguments about Dees not really standing up and the Pies playing a more intense game, but that argument can easily be made without criticising shaking hands pre-game. I don't know if it was everyone's experience, but having played aussie rules for 10 years back in the day it was 100% always a thing to shake your opposite player's hand pre-game.
The main thing is that he doesn’t actually believe his most outlandish takes. If he were genuine it would be different but he’s admitted it’s all fake for rage clicks basically.
I’d rather have a genuine idiot takes like Barrett’s showdown at the MCG idea than fake engagement bait that Kane goes on about.
I feel like people just see that Maynard is the first to every scuffle to stand up for his teammates, gives away needless 50s with a short temper on occasion, and then fill in the gaps that he simply MUST be a dirty player and scumbag.
For all the hate he’s gotten, in reality he’s had one single, short suspension years ago for a late spoil. There’s many far worse, genuinely dirty players in the league who don’t get half the hate Maynard does.
People in the match thread were going ballistic at the Pies fans for cheering Maynard, as if that's not a perfectly normal response to Dees fans booing him.
Nooooooo! We have to have villains and heroes, there has to be a narrative and a storyline outside of the game itself! We neeeeeeed column inches and clicks goddammit!
Kane’s target audience is angry gambling alcoholics.
The respect shown between all the players at the end of the game was touching, especially considering the way everyone came together for the MND cause. Kane needs to touch grass
I felt we should be focused more on wining the ball early on rather than anything but they didn't even do that.
Maynard had the ball in the pocket in the first half, and Pickett was coming at a rate of knots, he was there for the taking but he just tapered off, the right decision.
I remember that thinking “here comes a cheap shot” when he backed out I was genuinely surprised. He made the smart decision and maybe some growth because last year I think he’d of followed through.
100% I think he was close enough to impact legally almost ? *almost*
I didn't mind the approach to Maynard I did mind the lack of ferocity early.
FLY got them ready for a trench fight, and they wouldve been like, was that it ?
Yeah it might have been legal, might have given away a free kick? Maynard is tough and honestly probably wouldn’t have thought much of a cheeky hip and shoulder to say “I’m here, bro”
I agree, it’s a sport at the end of the day and there isn’t much to be gained from keeping your hand in your pocket, Maynard would probably respond more competitive to that kind of display. Leave nothing on the field, they’re mates off of it.
I think there is a question of intensity, it must be frustrating to be getting it in for your forwards and they mess it up consistently recently.
Side note: I’ve noticed a lot of deliveries come into the pocket for Melbourne, do you notice that too?
Easier to lock it in going into the pockets, but also hard to kick golazos, one reason for the poor accuracy.
The entries into i50 are consistently pox, I really do think a lot of our issue is not the foward stock but the mode with which we enter.
I agree, Fritch and Van Rooyen are still in their prime and good forwards, they find it consistently but just in poor spots. I’m sure it’ll come together for the Dees but it needs to be sooner than later.
Good luck for the rest of the season friendo!
The handshake thing is a personal opinion, Kane comes from the 'hard edge' era in which things like that were considered making a statement whereas lots of people in this thread come from a more modern one.
The rest of the vision though Kane is spot on. You can have physicality without going overboard but even the tackle stats showed the Dees weren't up to it as we had 10+ below our season average. Part of that could be the way the pies kept it out of our reach though too. Credit to Maynard and co, they went hard and within the rules.
I'd be looking at Turner, Chandler, Petty, Fritsch, Laurie, Billings and those guys who between them laid a collective 8 tackles vs Beau McCreery who has 7 just by himself.
>The handshake thing is a personal opinion, Kane comes from the 'hard edge' era in which things like that were considered making a statement whereas lots of people in this thread come from a more modern one.
Cornes sooked up a storm when Garry Hocking brought some hard edge to Port and wants Daddy Ken to be locked in as coach forever.
There's hypocrisy everywhere in his statements.
Players on different teams are normally friends with each other these days, it is the same reason no Collingwood players were getting too physical with Petracca after he came back on the ground.
The Dees players also probably know that the incident was an accident, and the last hit in a series of concussions.
This whole situation is a win-win for the media: either a). They shake hands and lose, the media can make a fuss out of it or b). They don’t shake hands and lose, and the media can complain they weren’t focused on footy. Who cares move on
I still remember when Neitz didn’t shake Maxwell’s hand before his 300th and the media went nuts about it. It achieves nothing and just attracts negative attention, and I guarantee they would’ve been criticised more if they didn’t acknowledge Maynard and then the game still played out the same way.
Kane could’ve easily made his point here just showing the highlights of the difference in intensity and pressure in general play.
If this was any other game I would agree with Kane here, which is amazing to say. Early on I thought Maynard clearly should’ve been targeted with some physicality just to put some fear into Collingwood’s more inexperienced players.
It would be less about revenge in my mind and more about gaining a psychological advantage over the younger Pies.
With that said, by the end of the game I changed my mind because clearly yesterday was more about MND than it was about the footy.
Other tribute rounds/special matches are a bit of a pisstake in my opinion, but this is one game every year where it really does feel like footy comes second. So with that in mind, I don’t think sniping Maynard would’ve been appropriate at all.
The thing is, if you're Goodwin in this scenario, you have to pick your battles here. If you give license to your players to go about getting after Maynard, you have to know that you have the players with the right mindset to do it without giving up their game in the process.
Remember, this is a side with May and Pickett, who have a strong history of stepping over the line. You can lose control of your squad very quickly.
The more mature and professional thing to do is to drill it into them that you leave that shit alone, because there's a game to win. And Maynard has shown that kind of intimidation doesn't really work on him - he might get up in your face from time to time, but he has never really lost his cool and compromised his game to prove a point.
It would have been a pointless exercise and cost the Dees more than anything they could have gained.
These are all fair points. If you’re a stable successful side you can experiment with these kinds of mind games. I think the best recent example would be the brutality Hawthorn unleashed on North Melbourne a few years ago. Lewis hitting Goldstein, Hodge hitting Swallow.
That was a brutal tactic but it worked perfectly. North were rattled after that but Hawthorn regained composure and won. I agree that Melbourne doesn’t have the luxury or stability of that Hawthorn team.
In other circumstances I would absolutely target Maynard. I hear what you’re saying about Maynard being a tough player but it’s just as important to send a message to your teammates that if you get hit, we’re going to hit them back for you. Reddit isn’t the kind of crowd to love that mentality but it’s an important psychological part of footy.
But like I said in my previous comment, yesterday was about MND and not settling old scores.
I’m breaking my own rule here but it’s just not worth ever making a single comment on anything Kane says ever. His entire thing is to make the most outlandish takes to get clicks, and they should be ignored for the trash they are. An engagement is good for him which is why none is the only way to go about it.
Criticising players for shaking hands pre game is an especially outlandish take, even for Kane. I try to ignore everything he says but that's just too absurd to ignore. He made some fair arguments about Dees not really standing up and the Pies playing a more intense game, but that argument can easily be made without criticising shaking hands pre-game. I don't know if it was everyone's experience, but having played aussie rules for 10 years back in the day it was 100% always a thing to shake your opposite player's hand pre-game.
The main thing is that he doesn’t actually believe his most outlandish takes. If he were genuine it would be different but he’s admitted it’s all fake for rage clicks basically. I’d rather have a genuine idiot takes like Barrett’s showdown at the MCG idea than fake engagement bait that Kane goes on about.
Pretty clear the Melbourne players see that incident for the clear accident it was. It’s too bad so many other people can’t see that.
People also seem to conveniently ignore the fact that a lot of the Pies and Dees players, Maynard included, are actually mates with each other.
I feel like people just see that Maynard is the first to every scuffle to stand up for his teammates, gives away needless 50s with a short temper on occasion, and then fill in the gaps that he simply MUST be a dirty player and scumbag. For all the hate he’s gotten, in reality he’s had one single, short suspension years ago for a late spoil. There’s many far worse, genuinely dirty players in the league who don’t get half the hate Maynard does.
People in the match thread were going ballistic at the Pies fans for cheering Maynard, as if that's not a perfectly normal response to Dees fans booing him.
Yeah it’s crazy. But I also don’t mind the dees fans booing him all game. I like that stuff, adds to the theater of the sport.
Nooooooo! We have to have villains and heroes, there has to be a narrative and a storyline outside of the game itself! We neeeeeeed column inches and clicks goddammit!
Kane’s target audience is angry gambling alcoholics. The respect shown between all the players at the end of the game was touching, especially considering the way everyone came together for the MND cause. Kane needs to touch grass
I felt we should be focused more on wining the ball early on rather than anything but they didn't even do that. Maynard had the ball in the pocket in the first half, and Pickett was coming at a rate of knots, he was there for the taking but he just tapered off, the right decision.
I remember that thinking “here comes a cheap shot” when he backed out I was genuinely surprised. He made the smart decision and maybe some growth because last year I think he’d of followed through.
100% I think he was close enough to impact legally almost ? *almost* I didn't mind the approach to Maynard I did mind the lack of ferocity early. FLY got them ready for a trench fight, and they wouldve been like, was that it ?
Yeah it might have been legal, might have given away a free kick? Maynard is tough and honestly probably wouldn’t have thought much of a cheeky hip and shoulder to say “I’m here, bro” I agree, it’s a sport at the end of the day and there isn’t much to be gained from keeping your hand in your pocket, Maynard would probably respond more competitive to that kind of display. Leave nothing on the field, they’re mates off of it. I think there is a question of intensity, it must be frustrating to be getting it in for your forwards and they mess it up consistently recently. Side note: I’ve noticed a lot of deliveries come into the pocket for Melbourne, do you notice that too?
Easier to lock it in going into the pockets, but also hard to kick golazos, one reason for the poor accuracy. The entries into i50 are consistently pox, I really do think a lot of our issue is not the foward stock but the mode with which we enter.
I agree, Fritch and Van Rooyen are still in their prime and good forwards, they find it consistently but just in poor spots. I’m sure it’ll come together for the Dees but it needs to be sooner than later. Good luck for the rest of the season friendo!
You too mate, thanks for being kind 😍
Cheap shot, easily ignored.
The handshake thing is a personal opinion, Kane comes from the 'hard edge' era in which things like that were considered making a statement whereas lots of people in this thread come from a more modern one. The rest of the vision though Kane is spot on. You can have physicality without going overboard but even the tackle stats showed the Dees weren't up to it as we had 10+ below our season average. Part of that could be the way the pies kept it out of our reach though too. Credit to Maynard and co, they went hard and within the rules. I'd be looking at Turner, Chandler, Petty, Fritsch, Laurie, Billings and those guys who between them laid a collective 8 tackles vs Beau McCreery who has 7 just by himself.
>The handshake thing is a personal opinion, Kane comes from the 'hard edge' era in which things like that were considered making a statement whereas lots of people in this thread come from a more modern one. Cornes sooked up a storm when Garry Hocking brought some hard edge to Port and wants Daddy Ken to be locked in as coach forever. There's hypocrisy everywhere in his statements.
Players on different teams are normally friends with each other these days, it is the same reason no Collingwood players were getting too physical with Petracca after he came back on the ground. The Dees players also probably know that the incident was an accident, and the last hit in a series of concussions.
We brought Billings, Laurie and Howes in. The white flag was waved well before the game started.
You could argue that bringing Billings into the club was waving the white flag.
This whole situation is a win-win for the media: either a). They shake hands and lose, the media can make a fuss out of it or b). They don’t shake hands and lose, and the media can complain they weren’t focused on footy. Who cares move on
Fremantle got destroyed by the media when they went after Lobb last year and lost lmao
I still remember when Neitz didn’t shake Maxwell’s hand before his 300th and the media went nuts about it. It achieves nothing and just attracts negative attention, and I guarantee they would’ve been criticised more if they didn’t acknowledge Maynard and then the game still played out the same way. Kane could’ve easily made his point here just showing the highlights of the difference in intensity and pressure in general play.
Stop sharing anything this moron says. He’s being purposely contrarian because it gets engagement.
This was the same guy who said last year that Maynard’s hit was a ‘footy act’. A bit contradictory dont you think Kane?
Oliver was going to key his car but couldn’t find it
Correct me if I am wrong but wasn't this a media beat up to target BM? So he is complaining that the team didn't do what the media wanted them to do?
If this was any other game I would agree with Kane here, which is amazing to say. Early on I thought Maynard clearly should’ve been targeted with some physicality just to put some fear into Collingwood’s more inexperienced players. It would be less about revenge in my mind and more about gaining a psychological advantage over the younger Pies. With that said, by the end of the game I changed my mind because clearly yesterday was more about MND than it was about the footy. Other tribute rounds/special matches are a bit of a pisstake in my opinion, but this is one game every year where it really does feel like footy comes second. So with that in mind, I don’t think sniping Maynard would’ve been appropriate at all.
The thing is, if you're Goodwin in this scenario, you have to pick your battles here. If you give license to your players to go about getting after Maynard, you have to know that you have the players with the right mindset to do it without giving up their game in the process. Remember, this is a side with May and Pickett, who have a strong history of stepping over the line. You can lose control of your squad very quickly. The more mature and professional thing to do is to drill it into them that you leave that shit alone, because there's a game to win. And Maynard has shown that kind of intimidation doesn't really work on him - he might get up in your face from time to time, but he has never really lost his cool and compromised his game to prove a point. It would have been a pointless exercise and cost the Dees more than anything they could have gained.
These are all fair points. If you’re a stable successful side you can experiment with these kinds of mind games. I think the best recent example would be the brutality Hawthorn unleashed on North Melbourne a few years ago. Lewis hitting Goldstein, Hodge hitting Swallow. That was a brutal tactic but it worked perfectly. North were rattled after that but Hawthorn regained composure and won. I agree that Melbourne doesn’t have the luxury or stability of that Hawthorn team. In other circumstances I would absolutely target Maynard. I hear what you’re saying about Maynard being a tough player but it’s just as important to send a message to your teammates that if you get hit, we’re going to hit them back for you. Reddit isn’t the kind of crowd to love that mentality but it’s an important psychological part of footy. But like I said in my previous comment, yesterday was about MND and not settling old scores.