AFL mid-season review: winners and losers

You mentioned Mumford is in great form in the ruck. He missed from memory atleast 4 or 5 weeks with a back injury 2 weeks ago and hasn't played nowhere near as much time as he should spend in the ruck. Ted Richards and Josh Kennedy have been outstanding, but Ben McGlynn hasnt performed at his best and was nearly cut from the side a few times. On the other hand Shaw, Jack, O'keefe, JETTA!, McVeigh, Bolton, hannebury, roberts-thompson and smith to name a few have all been in outstanding form. Parker and Rohan were in brillant form before getting injured. Pike has been killing it in the ruck. When Reid can kick straight and goodes comes back in the team look out. Also Armstrong was in very good form against the bombers. Mitch Morton, Tommy Walsh and Jesse White have been kicking bags in the twos. mitch morton kicked 8 on the weekend. Also we have plenty of youngsters who can step-up at anytime, Brown, Cunningham, Lamb, Mitchell.

Winston - I think that momentum is more difficult to stop when teams have "swithced off." What I mean is, when a team thinks that the game is won, like the Swans and North have of late, and switches off thinking that they can coast to victory, it can be very difficult to reel the momentum back as not only do you have to stop the opposition, but you first need to switch yourselves back on. It probably took 3-5 goals from Essendon (or for Port against North) before the Swans seriously considered that Essendon were back in the match. They probably thought that, despite the late charge, there wasn't enough time left for Essendon to win. If the Essendon comeback had started at the same point but in the 3rd quater then the Swans probably would have taken the first few goals more seriously as there would have been an extra quarter to play and therefore heaps of time for an Essendon comeback. The North performance against the Hawks is a whole other issue! It's only a theory, and probably doesn't give enough credit to Essendon, or Port against North, but take from it what you will.

A lot more difficult to lock down with the sub rule these days, the game always breaks open late. Especially at Etihad.

Momentum certainly seems to be a real factor this year. But do you think it says more about the attack or defence? I have no doubt the Swans team of 2005 would have been able to shut down the whole game and reduce the 4th quarter to 70 stoppages and 1 goal if you're lucky. They simply couldn't stop the momentum. Nth Melb's insipid performance against the Hawks also. For goodness sake if Buddy has already kicked 7 goals on you it's about time to double or triple team the man, but no, they let him kick another 6 more instead. Bombers are good, Buddy is good, but are they that good or just teams not being able to cope with pressure?

Probably true about the margins. Momentum does seem to be playing a much bigger factor then in previous years and a team on a roll does seem to be able to kick 3-5 goals very quickly now. You only have to look back to Saturday night to see how quickly a team can rack up the score when they have their tails up, or the Port win over the Roos a few weeks ago.

Yeah you probably have a point re the margins but I would say in this day and age margins can be blown out pretty quickly and Carlon at Etihad while technically being home isn't much of an advantage if you look at results.

I agree that we should be looking at both situations rationally. As I said, injuries have had an impact on Carlton's last 4-6 weeks. My point (which i don't think I made very well at all in fairness) was that those fans specifically who were willing to ignore Collingwood's injuries back then because it suited them (not saying you, but the ones who did) don't really have the right to jump aboard the "injuries are crippling" us line now just because it suits. Then again you could say that about most fans of any team really. My point about the Port game was that the 22 that Carlton put out should never have lost to Port by the margin that they did. I could understand them losing given their injuries but the team that Carlton put out should was not 54 points worse than Carlton, just like the team they put out against Adelaide, despite injuries, was not 69 points worse, especialy at home. Injuries might excuse the losses, but not the margins.

You point seems to be that becuase some blues fans didn't have a losgical position or lost perspective in round 3 then everyone should do the same now. My point is that why don't we look at both situations rationally. I didn't see the Port Adelaide game and a lack of "effort" for want of a better word does seem to have played a part but if the blues had Murphy, Carrazzo, Laidler, Henderson, Duigan, Yarran, Waite & Kreuzer in that side do you think Port would still have mauled them? Look at that list for a second, 2 key forwards, 4 of the best 6 backmen and 2 of the best 3 on ballers, any team would put in a sub standard performance with that injury list.

True, it's always sweet beating Collingwood. Sadly, as a Swans fan, I haven't known that feeling for far too long! My point was more that many people (including numerous Blues fans) were happy to talk Carlton up as genuine contenders after beating an injury ravaged Magpie outfit (and rip into Buckley) so it's a bit rich to now cast so much blame injuries for the Blues run of form (though it definitely has had some impact.) Injuries certainly don't excuse the absolute mauling that Port gave them two rounds ago.

Carrazzo being out has hurt at least as much as Murphy. He was a bloke who was averaging 30 possessions agame, had shut down Cotchin, Pendlebury & Black, was getting about 9 clearances a game and was doing a lot of the blocking work for Judd and Murphy. So yes missing the reigning B&F winner has hurt but I think you could see from Friday's game that missing Henderson, Duigan and Yarran on top of Laidler had mad their defence brittle as well. Those three returning played a big part in an improved performance.

MAtt F - It was Collingwood!

Not saying that Dan but have a look at the injuries they have or have had, 2 of their best 3 midfielders, their best marking forward and at on stage it was 4 of their best 6 backmen. I don't think there are too many who have that sort of injury list. You can say that if the blues are to be premiership contrenders then they need to have better depth which I agree with but you cna't just manufacture depth, it takes time to create and when you look at the Carlton list back in 2007 they have had to spend the last 5 years building a quality 22, it is only now that they are starting to get into a position to work on 23-30. In fact the blessing of all these injuries is that Bootsam and Watson have had a chance to show they can play at an AFL level, McLean has had a consistent run of footy to show the game hasn't passed him by and David Ellard has shown he can play a significant role in the midfield. When the likes of Carrazzo, Murphy, Scotland and Laidler come back the team will be stronger for their absence. And the author of this article was trying to say that it was "No Murphy No Carlton" Clearly the issue is bigger than just one player.

While it's true that injuries are hurting Carlton badly right now, I do recall many Blues fans getting very excited when they beat an injury ravaged Collingwood in Round 3.....

To True Macca "GO BLUE"S"

Yep the Blues are unlucky being the only team in the AFL to have some injuries.

Your analysis of the blues is very limited, you say "no Murphy no carlton" but how about "No Murphy, Waite, Carrazzo, Laidler, Scotland, Henderson, Duigan, Yarran, No Carlton"