10 hours ago, Skuit said:

This creeping default position in arguments here is becoming annoying, especially with the inconsistency it's applied. It's time for a little push-back.

The collective wisdom of the posters here has been proven to have been correct many many times in the past.

IN: Wagner

OUT: Melksham

I think you've missed the point I was making.  Nobody in footy gets everything right but those who spend their entire life in footy at the highest level talking to other people who spend their life in footy at the highest level will get things right more often, I'd contend much more often, than those that don't.  They are at the top end because they get things right, those that fail to get things right at the top level won't be there long.  They also have much more information.  For example can you tell me how Bernies toe is?  They know, you're guessing.

My point is when you have an opinion that differs from those who are heavily involved in the game then rather than just saying they are wrong you should question your own position.  There are more absolutes. STMJ should ask himself why the two coaches at the last match thought Tyson was in the best 6 or 8 players of the 44 who played.

As for the collective wisdom of Demonland getting it correct many many times I agree.  I've also seen the collective wisdom of Demonland get it wrong many many times.

I'm not dismissing others views.  I'm inviting posters to entertain the views of others and give weighting to the experience of those offering the opinion.  I personally give more weight to coaches than posters.  You may differ.

25 minutes ago, Vogon Poetry said:

I personally give more weight to coaches than posters.  You may differ.

Of course we do. We are Melbourne supporters. An oft angry and disgruntled mob.

Edited May 3, 20178 yr by leave it to deever

Wagner, Kent, Trengove and Kennedy played well in the VFL, especially Wagner. I'd be surprised if Wagner was not in the AFL team this week. 

The AFLCA votes are the most authoritative assessment of who played well.

ESSENDON v MELBOURNE
6 Michael Hurley (Ess)
6 Clayton Oliver (Melb)
6 Jack Watts (Melb)
4 Tom McDonald (Melb)
4 Christian Petracca (Melb)
2 Dom Tyson (Melb)
2 Jack Viney (Melb)

Edited May 3, 20178 yr by Fifty-5

15 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

The AFLCA votes are the most authoritative assessment of who played well.

ESSENDON v MELBOURNE
6 Michael Hurley (Ess)
6 Clayton Oliver (Melb)
6 Jack Watts (Melb)
4 Tom McDonald (Melb)
4 Christian Petracca (Melb)
2 Dom Tyson (Melb)
2 Jack Viney (Melb)

interesting votes. given each coach gave a 5 vote it means two players got a 5 + 1 vote, given the highest score was 6

2 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

interesting votes. given each coach gave a 5 vote it means two players got a 5 + 1 vote, given the highest score was 6

Extremely interesting and one would suggest extremely rare to have such a variance

Lets assume Hurley and Oliver each got 5 votes from one coach, then they got one vote from the other coach.

This means Watts got 3 and 3 from the respective coaches.

TMac gets four from one coach and CP5 four from the other coach

Tyson two from one coach and Viney two from the other

Both coaches clearly saw the games best on ground different to each other

8 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

interesting votes. given each coach gave a 5 vote it means two players got a 5 + 1 vote, given the highest score was 6

Yes two players got 5+1 and one got 3+3 - some combo of Hurley, Watts, Oliver.

McDonald and Petracca both 4+0, Tyson and Viney both 2+0.

18 minutes ago, Fatman Blues said:

Extremely interesting and one would suggest extremely rare to have such a variance

Lets assume Hurley and Oliver each got 5 votes from one coach, then they got one vote from the other coach.

This means Watts got 3 and 3 from the respective coaches.

TMac gets four from one coach and CP5 four from the other coach

Tyson two from one coach and Viney two from the other

Both coaches clearly saw the games best on ground different to each other

How bow dah

1 hour ago, Vogon Poetry said:

I think you've missed the point I was making.  Nobody in footy gets everything right but those who spend their entire life in footy at the highest level talking to other people who spend their life in footy at the highest level will get things right more often, I'd contend much more often, than those that don't.  They are at the top end because they get things right, those that fail to get things right at the top level won't be there long.  They also have much more information.  For example can you tell me how Bernies toe is?  They know, you're guessing.

My point is when you have an opinion that differs from those who are heavily involved in the game then rather than just saying they are wrong you should question your own position.  There are more absolutes. STMJ should ask himself why the two coaches at the last match thought Tyson was in the best 6 or 8 players of the 44 who played.

As for the collective wisdom of Demonland getting it correct many many times I agree.  I've also seen the collective wisdom of Demonland get it wrong many many times.

I'm not dismissing others views.  I'm inviting posters to entertain the views of others and give weighting to the experience of those offering the opinion.  I personally give more weight to coaches than posters.  You may differ.

Great post Vogon Poetry. The problem with people accepting the opinions of others (experts) as having more validity than their own is very topical. As a society we are arguably less likely now - than ever - to accept the very notion of educated or experienced authority. We suffer from the misguided belief that we have access to 'all' the information that those experts do, so are just as qualified (or more so, when a certain narcissism comes to play) to make judgements about that information. It's the reason the leader of the free world can openly reject scientific, historical and commonplace facts in favour of his own reality. Factor that in with the average adult male's often impenetrable belief in his own wisdom, which when it comes to football is tied in with issues of cultural worth and meaning, and you've got the perfect storm of arrogant self-delusion. As it is for the world, so it is on Demonland. Gotta love it, though. 

1 hour ago, Fatman Blues said:

Extremely interesting and one would suggest extremely rare to have such a variance

Lets assume Hurley and Oliver each got 5 votes from one coach, then they got one vote from the other coach.

This means Watts got 3 and 3 from the respective coaches.

TMac gets four from one coach and CP5 four from the other coach

Tyson two from one coach and Viney two from the other

Both coaches clearly saw the games best on ground different to each other

Good breakdown FB ... although Hurley would be the most likely to be 3 & 3 you'd reckon.  

Worsfold 4 to T-Mac and Goodwin 4 to Petracca? 

Edited May 3, 20178 yr by Macca

30 minutes ago, Macca said:

Good breakdown FB ... although Hurley would be the most likely to be 3 & 3 you'd reckon.  

Worsfold 4 to T-Mac and Roos 4 to Petracca? 

Roos has a lot of influence from the Foxtel commentary box!

3 minutes ago, Radar Detector said:

Roos has a lot of influence from the Foxtel commentary box!

What can I say ... I'm just living in the past 

... races off to edit

54 minutes ago, Webber said:

Great post Vogon Poetry. The problem with people accepting the opinions of others (experts) as having more validity than their own is very topical. As a society we are arguably less likely now - than ever - to accept the very notion of educated or experienced authority. We suffer from the misguided belief that we have access to 'all' the information that those experts do, so are just as qualified (or more so, when a certain narcissism comes to play) to make judgements about that information. It's the reason the leader of the free world can openly reject scientific, historical and commonplace facts in favour of his own reality. Factor that in with the average adult male's often impenetrable belief in his own wisdom, which when it comes to football is tied in with issues of cultural worth and meaning, and you've got the perfect storm of arrogant self-delusion. As it is for the world, so it is on Demonland. Gotta love it, though. 

I agree with what you say to a degree 'Webber' ...but unfortunately there is now so much information out there and so many differing opinions from educated, experienced, qualified authorities.

Now there may be a lot of reasons for this including but not limited to the $'s, prestige, spin etc. etc involved.

Another is the changing science on a subject, which of course will happen as new information comes to hand.

17 hours ago, Wiseblood said:

Me too, OD.

He said he was happy with his pressure, not that he was happy with him not scoring goals.  He isn't going to publicly have a crack at someone like JKH who has worked his backside off to get back from injury.

Behind closed doors Goodwin may well be happy with his output, but to me that seems strange.  A small forward needs to hit the scoreboard and he just isn't doing that.  Not to mention the myriad of fumbles as well, but hopefully that improves over time with more confidence.

Goody had a crack at Watts pre season in public or is that different or doesn't suit your argument?

19 hours ago, old dee said:

My problem with both is I don't think either can . The solution might lie elsewhere.

Any thoughts as to who ?

Just now, beelzebub said:

Any thoughts as to who ?

Pretty sure he's thinking of Ben Kennedy

14 hours ago, Skuit said:

This creeping default position in arguments here is becoming annoying, especially with the inconsistency it's applied. It's time for a little push-back. 

There have been many many people who have made a living out of football in the past, who have been sacked, because they evidently got it wrong.

There are many many people who hold jobs that are not my profession who I am certain I and half the people here could still do better than.

There are many many very intelligent people with strong analytical attributes who have been attending football for many many years. These people often don't get the opportunity to be involved at the highest level of football for existing outside of the circle. 

AFL coaches are people, with prejudices and blind-spots, and while they have inner-access to information we are not privy to, they are also operating in a highly insular environment and with the usual work-place hierarchies. They are also more highly scrutinised, and this can also have an impact on decision-making.

The collective wisdom of the posters here has been proven to have been correct many many times in the past.

IN: Wagner

OUT: Melksham

Is that collective wisdom in hindsight or when something happens that a drovers dog could determine was going to occur, please

Do the job better?

My modern art analogy

"I could do better than that!"

"Yes, but you didn't "

 

 

2 hours ago, Fifty-5 said:

The AFLCA votes are the most authoritative assessment of who played well.

ESSENDON v MELBOURNE
6 Michael Hurley (Ess)
6 Clayton Oliver (Melb)
6 Jack Watts (Melb)
4 Tom McDonald (Melb)
4 Christian Petracca (Melb)
2 Dom Tyson (Melb)
2 Jack Viney (Melb)

 

3 hours ago, Rocky said:

t-mac was trash. just floating around going third man up doesn't take much skill. his foot skills and decision-making suck. hopefully we trade him for a reliable defender in next year or two. i'd hate to see a tight GF with him in the team. i included a '?' after white, as i couldn't think of another defender at the time. after reading the vfl report, perhaps wagner would be a better fit. 

Geez we need to get Rocky onto our coaching panel really quickly: obviously sees and knew far more that two senior AFL coaches. 

5 hours ago, jnrmac said:

My knock on wagner is that his disposal can be iffy and he hasn't got urgency or the fierce see ball get ball mentality. When he and Oscar play together its usually pretty bad. Now Wags might be taught to 'corral' players towards the boundary line etc rather than attack the man, so my interpretation may be way off but it seems to me that he needs to learn that quickly. 

As for Melksham, I am still undecided. Does some good things but does some equally poor things - I can see why the Ess fans didn't warm to him. And for someone that is into boxing he doesn't seem to do much physical contact stuff like tackling.... 

Wagner isn't fast so that explains they way he corrals to me. Not point rushing at someone if they'll burn past you. Agree he could be more desperate but I don't think he's any worse than Melksham in that regard. Same with his kicking, which is overall better than Melksham's. Much faster release time and ability to hit up targets, where Melksham can kick with good penetration but is even more hit and miss. 

Mainly I think he's less likely to make as many mistakes under pressure as Melksham does, who really goes to water several times per game. Getting mugged by Daniher was particularly poor on the weekend. He often chooses to bump rather than open himself up to lay a tackle and will run under or behind the ball when spoiling to avoid contact. Most of boxing isn't wearing punches - it's been able to see them coming and evading them. I think unfortunately Melksham can see trouble coming and doesn't want to wear it.

If Wagner is over his injuries and can produce the same work rate as Melksham then it's an easy swap for me.

Composure down back is vital this week because the one big area where the Hawks can still hurt teams is with forward pressure. Ideally I wouldn't play any of Vince, Melksham or Oscar McDonald down back against them.

Is the big fella gonna play on Sunday?

Or, has this little lamb lost his way and it's posted in another thread?

39 minutes ago, monoccular said:

 

Geez we need to get Rocky onto our coaching panel really quickly: obviously sees and knew far more that two senior AFL coaches. 

again.. fan forum. opinions. faaaaark me. he did good things, but his bad just aren't worth it, for ME. 

 

furthermore, if we'd beenplwyk g a half decent side, the 'style' T-Mac uses would've led to maaaaany goals

Edited May 3, 20178 yr by Rocky

1 hour ago, Fifty-5 said:

Pretty sure he's thinking of Ben Kennedy

Have actually been wondering if hed come back into contention.

Are we really in a need to rush back Hogan anyway? It's a serious question. He has not shaken his negative attitude and anyone who has played competitive sport knows how profound a negative team mate can have on the rest of the team.  His last 12 games of football he has averaged 0.75 goals a game. UNDER A GOAL A GAME. 

 

3 minutes ago, Freak said:

Are we really in a need to rush back Hogan anyway? It's a serious question. He has not shaken his negative attitude and anyone who has played competitive sport knows how profound a negative team mate can have on the rest of the team.  His last 12 games of football he has averaged 0.75 goals a game. UNDER A GOAL A GAME. 

 

 

He has kicked 17 goals in his last 12 games.  

 

9 minutes ago, Freak said:

Are we really in a need to rush back Hogan anyway? It's a serious question. He has not shaken his negative attitude and anyone who has played competitive sport knows how profound a negative team mate can have on the rest of the team.  His last 12 games of football he has averaged 0.75 goals a game. UNDER A GOAL A GAME.

I will assume you haven't heard the sad news of Jesse's father passing and what Jesse has been going thru for the past year.  (If you did know then that post is inapproriate and in poor taste). 

And, yes he is an enourmous part of our team.  His teammates love him. 

He has shown great stoicism in very trying circumstances.  He deserves our support, even if it is a fan forum. 

Jesse will come back when he is ready and I'm sure he will get a standing ovation. 

Edited May 3, 20178 yr by Lucifer's Hero