Jump to content

deanox

Life Member
  • Content Count

    5,926
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

deanox last won the day on May 31 2013

deanox had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,091 Excellent

About deanox

  • Rank
    Red and Blue
  • Birthday February 14

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Melbourne

Recent Profile Visitors

9,380 profile views
  1. This isn't silly. Fine motor skills like kicking accuracy would improve with decreased heart rate etc. Low fitness therefore affects this.
  2. Could that be because the team hasn't other players around him aren't in positions to recieve the ball, or because his dismissal has been worse?
  3. For most of us, it's pretty clear we can and will play May, Lever and Frost in our backline. So if he leaves for opportunity, it will be positional (ie wants to be a no.1 or 2 defender or play on a wing etc.). I think it's more likely he would leave for money: we'd be paying Lever and May a lot. Salem would be getting good coin. I suspect other clubs may be dangling more cash than our first offer.
  4. I agree entirely. We are playing an entirely different structure, strategy and tactics to last year with different personnel available on the park. That it hasn't worked could be Goodwin, or it could be the combination of injuries, lack of fitness due to no preseason, lack of time to tweak/adjust tactics, or it could be all of it. Given his inventive nature in the past, I think he deserves the time to try and get it right over summer.
  5. This sums it up. He isn't displacing Oliver from on ball. Viney can't play elsewhere. Harmes is the starting run with player and can do a a bit of inside as well as finish. So his role for us is to rotate into the centre when someone else gets a rest. And he isn't clean enough to play on a flank/wing for 80% of the game. Last year, with Viney injured, he was able to play inside most of the season.
  6. Goody is too safe? The coach who: - experimented with a 4 man "diamond defense" and an 8 man back line with 4 runners into the square; - went after the best intercept defender in the comp as part of an attacking zone game plan; - was willing to trade out a troubled but star key forward for a gun lock down defender in response to 666 changes; - was willing to back in a young KPF and a rookie instead of sticking wih the safe journeyman; and - was willing to reinvent players in different positions such as Frost to the back line, TMac forward and Lewis forward; is too safe?
  7. I think this is probably right but completely justified. We were definitely in with a shot and came home like a steam train until we, well, ran out of steam in the prelim against eventual premiers. We knew things would be tough, but the struggle with recovery made it worse than expected. We collected injuries after Christmas and in early rounds (May, Jetta, Lewis, TMac, Melk, Smith, all happened close to our in season) instead of slowly getting healthier. We didn't get match tactic practice coming into the biggest rule changes in decades. May's injury in combination with the 666 change magnified our defensive issues, and 666 in combination with lack of opportunity for trial/practice, ruined our attack. The biggest issue is that a season this bad can be damaging for morale, belief and cohesion amongst a group.
  8. Assuming we finish 16th we have picks 3, 21, 39, 57, 75, 93. We may only want to use 4-5 of those but still have 11 out of contract, so need to re-sign or upgrade 6-7 players. Pretty much certain to be retained (assuming they agree to stay): Frost, Baker, ANB, J Smith. Seniors who could retire: Jones, Lewis. 2nd tier players who may be re-signed: JKH. T Smith and Lockhart are worthy of upgrades. That means it seems likely that the following will be moved on: Maynard, Stretch, Wagner, plus one or both of Lewis/ Jones. I think Keilty needs to be upgraded if he is to stay on the list, so may be gone too. There aren't many out of contract next year who we would want to delist, with Bedford, Jordan and Nietschke the only who aren't best 25 or close and young (Hore, Sparrow, Spargo), but even they are all only 20. So we may see a couple of players given an extra year so we have outlasting to delist next year too.
  9. Surely by winning a 1 on 1 contest you are stopping the other player from contesting? This it's a sensible rule that should only apply if a 3rd player stops a player from contesting or if you don't contest the ball yourself ie don't get the hit or don't try for it.
  10. Largely agree with this. I think Brayshaw is the most expendable because he is one of the few players we can move on without "robbing Peter to pay Paul". He is our 3rd inside mid, and despite being good at this role is actively contributing to our major weakness: disposal by foot and decision making. We really need some disposal class through the midfield. I'd only trade him if we had a player lined up who filled this need though.
  11. Oliver was fantastic today. His work in close was genius. It doesn't always come off, but the problem is typically the disposals after him, not him.
  12. Spot on post, every point. I'll raise May's field kicking again because it was fantastic. Regularly hit great targets from tight positions, which is very important. He also set us up beautifully after the Jones 50 m penalty, directing players to position, but Frost made a mess of it with a clumsy attempted spoil. The uncontested possession focus was clear from the first quarter as we kicked quick but to advantage, to leading players. Was great to watch.
  13. OMacs greatest strength was zone defending, where he could park in space and drop onto a contest. He's not Jake Lever but he isn't a hack playing this role, and it suits him physically as he gets to the contests and can use his reach to impact. He isn't a one on one defender, as he doesn't have the strength, the body on body awareness of where his player is nor the pace off the mark to stop the lead. I don't really understand why this place has been in meltdown this year when it was obvious that 666 was going to really test our gameplan which used runners behind the ball, numbers at the contest and a zone defense in the backline. Not only is that game plan but it's clear we had drafted/ recruited for that zone D50 play with OMac, Frost, Hibberd, Lever, and the use of Fritsch and Hunt down there. The spend on May was to try and balance this with a strong anchor down back, but his injury and our lack of preparation ruined any chance we had.
  14. I checked this further. It is the conversion rate against a team since at least the 50s. And the 59% against Brisbane is quite high too, with 55-57% being more like standard over the last 5 years. Mind boggling really because unlike our own conversion rate (which is the accuracy of just our players) conversion against is an average of all the clubs we play against and their should average out, unless we are doing something to influence it.
  15. Last year he was a promising coach with tactical ideas that were different than anything we'd seen in the AFL. This year the difference had been limited preseason, rule changes and injuries all of which make devising and introducing new tactics hard. Let's wait until next year to worry about this. That's what happens when you play the first half of the season with one of the youngest 22s in the comp, with an injury risked preseason that means you haven't been able to decide, train and teach tactics to address structural rule changes. The no runner rule affects younger inexperienced teams more than older, successful teams. Which of our players would you expect to be providing on field direction in our back 6 this year? Legiment issue and discussion from Goodwin.
×
×
  • Create New...