On 31/07/2017 at 11:26 PM, Moonshadow said:

I think Hogan is genuinely better than those three. The problem is that, for various reasons, we are not seeing it and won't for some time. This year has been his annus horribilis. Will we ever see it again?

I am quite seriously worried about Jesse Hogan. I do hope you are right about him and this indeed has been a bad year for him . But this feeling from last year I had and  has carried on into this . I am thinking he has plateaued! I am honestly thinking he is not going to be what we want him to be. 

I am willing to bow to people who know more about  him and their expertise with coaching but my doubts remain ! 

He's a 22 year old kid, I hardly doubt that he's "plateaued". He has played what, 8 games this year?

Between his father dying, getting ball cancer and breaking his collarbone, I can hardly believe anyone can be critical of his performance this season.

Wait, this is Demonland, what am I saying...

Sorry! Ben Brown is 24 not 21. Mixed up with Lever.

Ben Brown doesnt only create a nightmare down forward for opposition. But he could be a great support for Gawn in the ruck also. I think Brown is capable of taking his game to another level. This guy has a tank and multiple efforts for the contest. With Brown in the forward line he can dominate stoppages allowing Gawn to play a kick behind the play when forward. We can create immense forward pressure on opposition with this scenario.

Ben Brown is a dead eye dick for goal too! Not many players with a conversion rate like his.

I would be getting on the front foot Melbourne... Make him an offer to good too refuse. 

HF  Petracca    Hogan     Hannan

F     Garlett        Brown     Watts/Weideman

Just too keep in mind. Hogan is always going to have the pull of returning to WA. Fremantle/West Coast are always going to be in his ear with nice offers.

1 hour ago, DeeWiz said:

He's a 22 year old kid, I hardly doubt that he's "plateaued". He has played what, 8 games this year?

Between his father dying, getting ball cancer and breaking his collarbone, I can hardly believe anyone can be critical of his performance this season.

Wait, this is Demonland, what am I saying...

Oh well , sorry I mentioned it. He certainly has had his issues this year in spades .

im not critical really , just merely concerned about his future with the Dees . 

On 31/07/2017 at 9:41 PM, Moonshadow said:

FMD

What a loony idea. 

We have Hogan, TMAC,  Watts and a developing Weid. Enough already

Lol @Watts as a tall forward. How many contested marks this year?

1 hour ago, billyblanks29 said:

Lol @Watts as a tall forward. How many contested marks this year?

Watts as 3rd tall forward.

Plenty aren't contested marking machines. Heard of Buddy Franklin? 

35 minutes ago, Moonshadow said:

Watts as 3rd tall forward.

Plenty aren't contested marking machines. Heard of Buddy Franklin? 

I prefer to call him Bradman.

His conversion rate was phenomenal.

50 minutes ago, Biffen said:

I prefer to call him Bradman.

His conversion rate was phenomenal.

Pffff.....Bradman choked with a duck in his last innings when he needed a mere 4 to get a 100.00 average.   Some Demonologists would no doubt be labeling him as a dud   ?

Edited August 2, 20178 yr by monoccular

1 hour ago, Biffen said:

I prefer to call him Bradman.

His conversion rate was phenomenal.

Are you talking about his 100 in 100 days bet (which he won) from his Hawthorn days?

Edited August 2, 20178 yr by Moonshadow

3 hours ago, monoccular said:

Pffff.....Bradman choked with a duck in his last innings when he needed a mere 4 to get a 100.00 average.   Some Demonologists would no doubt be labeling him as a dud   ?

I believe the correct term is in fact 'spud'

3 hours ago, monoccular said:

Pffff.....Bradman choked with a duck in his last innings when he needed a mere 4 to get a 100.00 average.   Some Demonologists would no doubt be labeling him as a dud   ?

Overrated

 

 

On Tuesday, August 01, 2017 at 6:24 AM, Biffen said:

No we won't get him.

Just a trifling issue but why does that ugly big [censored] get to wear a black headband and Hunt gets forced to wear the AFL lisenced product.

If they are going to be pathetic and petulant they should do so uniformly or not at alll.

This is the AFL you are talking abut Biff.  Do you really expect consistency and reason?  (Just look at the 'clash' jumper debacle).

Would love to see a fit and firing gawn up there.

Hopefully mitch king can develop

Weideman to replace pedo eventually

On 8/2/2017 at 5:26 AM, Stretchyourself said:

I'd love to have Brown alongside Hogan. That would be amazing. Hogan missed so much footy this year and was already looking dangerous. I think we can forget just how good this guy is. Look what he did in his first year. He's a bloosy star our Jesse!

 

But i think we need Lever more than Brown. Love the idea of getting Smith and Hopper as well. 

Brown along side Hogan in the forward line, kicking for goal? Conjures up having night mares about a hop, step and jump marathon

More consistent  than watts and more reliable to make it than weid

Get Ben Brown...... a decent haircut.

I have a thing against ugly people so I'd prefer he stayed at Norf.

Edited August 4, 20178 yr by Ethan Tremblay

5 hours ago, dino rover said:

More consistent  than watts and more reliable to make it than weid

Not apples with apples.

Watts plays a different role and Weid is a 2nd year key forward with only a handful of games under his belt.

6 hours ago, dino rover said:

More consistent  than watts and more reliable to make it than weid

?

do you mean more reliable (at this stage), or more likely to make it (which Brown has already)?

 

The latter

A bird in the hand

1 hour ago, Moonshadow said:

Not apples with apples.

Watts plays a different role and Weid is a 2nd year key forward with only a handful of games under his belt.

Apples - forwards who kick goals

AFL Rule 15.2.1 In Possession of the Football
A Player is in possession of the football if, in the opinion of the
field Umpire ... (a) the Player is holding or otherwise has control of
the football.

There is nothing in the Rules that says a player kicking for goal is not "in possession".

AFL Rule 15.2.2 Remaining in Possession and Bouncing the Football
... (b) Where a Player is moving whilst in possession of the
football, he or she must bounce or touch the football on
the ground at least once every 15 metres, irrespective
of whether such Player is running in a straight line or
otherwise.

I've counted Ben Brown's run-up to kick as around 23 paces. Give the rule, why isn't he required to bounce the ball once during his run-up? Or, alternatively, why is he permitted to have such a long run-up at all?

9 minutes ago, mauriesy said:

AFL Rule 15.2.1 In Possession of the Football
A Player is in possession of the football if, in the opinion of the
field Umpire ... (a) the Player is holding or otherwise has control of
the football.

There is nothing in the Rules that says a player kicking for goal is not "in possession".

AFL Rule 15.2.2 Remaining in Possession and Bouncing the Football
... (b) Where a Player is moving whilst in possession of the
football, he or she must bounce or touch the football on
the ground at least once every 15 metres, irrespective
of whether such Player is running in a straight line or
otherwise.

I've counted Ben Brown's run-up to kick as around 23 paces. Give the rule, why isn't he required to bounce the ball once during his run-up? Or, alternatively, why is he permitted to have such a long run-up at all?

Because until the umpire says play on, SSBrown can walk in as far as he likes.  And since there seems to be no rule about how much time a player can take once he has started walking in, the umpire has no way to call play on.   He can walk as slowly as he likes. And the game clock is running from the moment he starts walking in.

Furthermore if you take a mark with say 60 seconds to go and want to waste time, I suggest you run as fast as you can away from your goal in the 30 seconds before you have to start walking in.  100m should do it.  Then if you walk in you can easily use up most of the 60 seconds before you kick the ball.  And you can't even get it wrong by walking from too far away or too slowly because if the siren goes, you get even more time to kick at goal.

Wait until this happens in a final to skew the result and watch the sparks fly.

I'm happy to be corrected on this. In fact I beg to be since that would give me a glimmer of hope that the rules are not a complete shambles.

23 minutes ago, sue said:

Because until the umpire says play on, SSBrown can walk in as far as he likes.  And since there seems to be no rule about how much time a player can take once he has started walking in, the umpire has no way to call play on.   He can walk as slowly as he likes. And the game clock is running from the moment he starts walking in.

Furthermore if you take a mark with say 60 seconds to go and want to waste time, I suggest you run as fast as you can away from your goal in the 30 seconds before you have to start walking in.  100m should do it.  Then if you walk in you can easily use up most of the 60 seconds before you kick the ball.  And you can't even get it wrong by walking from too far away or too slowly because if the siren goes, you get even more time to kick at goal.

Wait until this happens in a final to skew the result and watch the sparks fly.

I'm happy to be corrected on this. In fact I beg to be since that would give me a glimmer of hope that the rules are not a complete shambles.

don't forget there is still a deliberate time wasting rule. if the umpire deems you are deliberately time wasting he can call play on

Clown Head in a Demons jumper!!

FM double dead!! And FM triple dead!

I'd  sever something very personal if that happened.

I'm going to have very bad dreams tonight!