Dawes did not work with the ruck group when it was separated and with Stafford, he had stitches in his face, so they were trying to avoid contact, the ruck group consisted of Jamar, King, Gawn, Spencer and Fitzy at the start, if he was with the rucks on some other occasion then I must have missed it coz I was photographing something else

It was around 11.15-11.30 and it was Chris Dawes or an identical imposter wearing no. 6.

I wasn't taking photos or chatting with players/staff or checking out guns, just watching training for the time I was there.

He also massacres the bail and can't kick set shot goals.

Mitchie at least is young enough to get better.

Bail has had his chance, I'd like to see another player get a go.

And going by VFL form, viv is in better form.

He also massacres the bail and can't kick set shot goals.

Mitchie at least is young enough to get better.

Bail has had his chance, I'd like to see another player get a go.

And going by VFL form, viv is in better form.

Disagree re Bail.. He had 25 touches kicked 3 goals which included a running goal from half back!

Did Garland train?

Distributor of the ball ............ what a wankfest . seriously

Do you prefer "clearance machine" or maybe "Greg Williams".

I may prefer "an inside mid doing a great job"!

It was around 11.15-11.30 and it was Chris Dawes or an identical imposter wearing no. 6.

I wasn't taking photos or chatting with players/staff or checking out guns, just watching training for the time I was there.

Oh that's ok, as long as you had time to check your watch, I must have missed it...the guns are passé now, moved on from that......that was pre season....the ruck division did their work with Stafford towards the end of the session, sans Dawes

Edited April 22, 201510 yr by The Devil Inside

Did Garland train?

Yes why? He was fine, did the whole session, well at least I think it was him in 20 in one of the photos I took

Garland has been excellent this year, the majority of us (including me) were wrong for doubting him.

Bail cant kick mate[/quote. Classic comment. Demonland gold best post all day.

Yes why? He was fine, did the whole session, well at least I think it was him in 20 in one of the photos I took

Hhhmmmm interesting.

Garland has been excellent this year, the majority of us (including me) were wrong for doubting him.

Hhhmmmm interesting.

Just a bit of humour Cards referencing RM, I said early on Garland took himself out of the Leadership Group so he could concentrate on getting back to where he was 2 years ago, think he is nearly there

Caught up with a mate this morning who said he saw a bit of training yesterday. Said that for the bit he saw a group of about 8 players were doing tackling training. The goal was for players to either avoid the tackle or be the tackler. He said the group included Jamar, JKH, Bail, McKenzie, Watts and three others. He said by far the best at the drill at both avoiding being tackled and then laying effective tackles was Jack Watts. JKH was good at the evasion bit, too (hardly surprising, I would have thought).

Killa Watts is ready to rumble!

Caught up with a mate this morning who said he saw a bit of training yesterday. Said that for the bit he saw a group of about 8 players were doing tackling training. The goal was for players to either avoid the tackle or be the tackler. He said the group included Jamar, JKH, Bail, McKenzie, Watts and three others. He said by far the best at the drill at both avoiding being tackled and then laying effective tackles was Jack Watts. JKH was good at the evasion bit, too (hardly surprising, I would have thought).

What's an "effective" tackle, though? Is this stat taken? Because you can "tackle" someone and get it added to your stat sheet, but if the player you're tackling is able to dump the ball off to an opponent with an effective possession, then the tackle isn't really "effective", is it?

Watts can make a tackle, they're just not very effective.

Oh that's ok, as long as you had time to check your watch, I must have missed it...the guns are passé now, moved on from that......that was pre season....the ruck division did their work with Stafford towards the end of the session, sans Dawes

Give it a rest, mate. You don't need to pick apart other people's training reports every single time someone else starts a training thread. I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish, but doing this discourages people from sharing what they saw at training. People, including myself, enjoy reading your reports and input, but when you carry on like this it makes you seem really petty.

What's an "effective" tackle, though? Is this stat taken? Because you can "tackle" someone and get it added to your stat sheet, but if the player you're tackling is able to dump the ball off to an opponent with an effective possession, then the tackle isn't really "effective", is it?

Watts can make a tackle, they're just not very effective.

Not sure if that stat exists, but I doubt it does because it's so subjective. Obviously tackles that cause a free kick for, or cause a stoppage would be 'effective', but there's plenty of grey area. How about a tackle where the tacklee does a 360, gets an arsey kick away that happens to dribble out in front of a teammate - effective tackle Y/N?

Also, do those hugs that have no impact on the tacklee at all actually count on the stats sheet as a tackle?

Not sure if that stat exists, but I doubt it does because it's so subjective. Obviously tackles that cause a free kick for, or cause a stoppage would be 'effective', but there's plenty of grey area. How about a tackle where the tacklee does a 360, gets an arsey kick away that happens to dribble out in front of a teammate - effective tackle Y/N?

Also, do those hugs that have no impact on the tacklee at all actually count on the stats sheet as a tackle?

I am pretty sure the two stats that the count in regards to tackles are tackles made & tackles missed. That makes the comparrison pretty clear, although players who lie on the pack do not get credited with a tackle.

Missed tackles is almost a more important stat than tackles, in my opinion, as it is pretty obvious the team that is continually missing tackles will be conceding much more posession to the opposition.

Not sure if that stat exists, but I doubt it does because it's so subjective. Obviously tackles that cause a free kick for, or cause a stoppage would be 'effective', but there's plenty of grey area. How about a tackle where the tacklee does a 360, gets an arsey kick away that happens to dribble out in front of a teammate - effective tackle Y/N?

Also, do those hugs that have no impact on the tacklee at all actually count on the stats sheet as a tackle?

A tackle that prevents the tackled player from disposing of the ball effectively maybe?

I'm a Watts supporter/apologist but one of my gripes is that he doesn't follow through on his tackles. Seems to drop off a bit easier and lose his feet, so its rarely effective. He needs to keep his head up, get low and drive his shoulder through by pumping his legs - you can tell I have a Rugby background. Reilly/Frost and good examples.

I am pretty sure the two stats that the count in regards to tackles are tackles made & tackles missed. That makes the comparrison pretty clear, although players who lie on the pack do not get credited with a tackle.

Missed tackles is almost a more important stat than tackles, in my opinion, as it is pretty obvious the team that is continually missing tackles will be conceding much more posession to the opposition.

And how is a missed tackle defined? Is it based on a grab that didn't stick? Or does it include bumps where tackling would have been a better option? Or is it if the player tackled still gets rid of the ball legally? I'm not really looking for answers - just pointing out that interpreting statistics is a fraught occupation.

Bail v Michie = garnish

I would prefer Mitchie,

I agree with the comments that Bail might have better instant impact if brought on in the last quarter , however who is to say that a player may need to be subbed out in the 1st quarter?

After OD informed me that my Eraserhead (John Nance) avatar was too disturbing for his liking :-)

I have the original soundtrack to "Eraserhead" on Vinyl

"Oh you really are ill...."

I am pretty sure the two stats that the count in regards to tackles are tackles made & tackles missed. That makes the comparrison pretty clear, although players who lie on the pack do not get credited with a tackle.

Missed tackles is almost a more important stat than tackles, in my opinion, as it is pretty obvious the team that is continually missing tackles will be conceding much more posession to the opposition.

Id like to know the tackles that result in a free kick. esp in the back tackles. We seem to give em but rarely get em. Could be a technical matter. ie too much rugby style.

Perhaps picket?? who gave us the complete Hogan kicking analysis piece may have some knowledge.

PS I hope someone from the club got given that excellent technical detail.

I have the original soundtrack to "Eraserhead" on Vinyl

"Oh you really are ill...."

I have two copies of the film... one is the DVD Eraserhead 2000 which came directly from DavidLynch.com and is the version that he personally remastered frame by frame. The other is in a David Lynch box set on blu ray and is more recent remastering, again by Lynch himself. I think I must be a masochist as that is probably the most disturbing film I have ever seen.

Edited April 23, 201510 yr by hardtack

Oh that's ok, as long as you had time to check your watch, I must have missed it...the guns are passé now, moved on from that......that was pre season....the ruck division did their work with Stafford towards the end of the session, sans Dawes

Just trying to help you out with a time frame. I'm not in the habit of making up shyte about what happens at training, so how about you back TH off with your insinuation.

I have two copies of the film... one is the DVD Eraserhead 2000 which came directly from DavidLynch.com and is the version that he personally remastered frame by frame. The other is in a David Lynch box set on blu ray and is more recent remastering, again by Lynch himself. I think I must be a masochist as that is probably the most disturbing film I have ever seen.

this explains why you are a demons supporter, hardtack