Cause, Treatment, and Consequence

[binman 43,135]

10 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

There's an overhead camera and two behind the goal cameras that are constantly on

In these days of streaming it's not too much to have those angles available on replay for anyone who wants to watch them.

The revenue model could be designed but I doubt that the cost would be more than six hours of techo time per match plus the platform app itself.

Dare I say the clubs could do it free for members this year in lieu of their wasted memberships.

The down the ground shot, ideally from high up in the stand, is the one they need to use more as it gives you the bets look at  where every one is ahead of the ball. It is why i sit in the Posnford stand at the g. 

[binman 43,135]

1 hour ago, tiers said:

Too many words. Too much thought.

 

 

Sums me up well

[DEE fence 5,028]

19 hours ago, John Demonic said:

Give the forum more credit!

Hmmmmm, let me think about that.....

NO

Very tongue in cheek, and a comment on the forum not the poster!

[Wrecker45 3,378]

1 hour ago, ding said:

List changes.

Sorry i thought i made that obvious Wrecker. You mentioned mini-rebuild when we had no more list changes than the median. 3 of or our additions had played senior footy before. I was pointing out that if 9 list changes was a mini-rebuild then 12 clubs had the same Mini-rebuild.

Unless your post was specifically related to the changes just for last weeks game i dont see how we were worse off than most of the league.

We had Jackson and Rivers debut.

Harley Bennell play half a game who hasn't played in years.

Tomlinson on a wing who has played 1 game for us previously and Langdon on the other wing likewise.

May and Lever had played 4 games together.

I don't think many other clubs were in that situation. If they were be more specific with the changes.

[ding 5,126]

14 minutes ago, Wrecker45 said:

We had Jackson and Rivers debut.

Harley Bennell play half a game who hasn't played in years.

Tomlinson on a wing who has played 1 game for us previously and Langdon on the other wing likewise.

May and Lever had played 4 games together.

I don't think many other clubs were in that situation. If they were be more specific with the changes.

Mini rebuild Wrecker. Rebuilds happen in the off season. We had no more changes than the median.

You said rebuild.

Now we seem to arguing about team changes from round 1. Team changes are just shuffling what we already have. Rebuilding is changing the list isnt it? Thats what i always thought it was anyway.

Its another matter entirely.

Still think you are clutching at straws, especially with the May/Lever thing. They are both experienced AFL players. As is Jones who was also one of the changes (Nearly 300 games).

We had 2 new kids and a bloke who hasnt played for 3 years.... they were the only "fresh" (As in "new") players.

 

 

[dworship 3,342]

3 hours ago, binman said:

Perhaps if you were 97% less obtuse people will understand what it is you are actually trying to say.

I think you will find being 97% less condescending might help too (i mean 'Sad really that it's taken till Dee Z to understand what the thread was about'- really?).

Take some ownership of that.

WHACK, I'll slink off with my tail between my legs now and with my self - righteousness in tatters.

The posts before Dee Z were less than inspiring in their analysis. That didn't mean other people didn't read and understand what the gist was, just that they didn't post a reply. As things transpired I thought the thread has ultimately evoked some great and and thoughtful analysis including yours ( I think I was the first to like your contribution). Some of that response has helped me modify some of my opinions and reconsider some of the underlying factors.

This is a great site but I always preferred "Ology in the early days as there were less posters but the content was more considered and there wasn't the egos that we have here. On here, I have a habit of throwing a metaphorical hand grenade in to see who throws themselves on it. All being keyboard users on here we don't get the feedback and nuance of face to face communication so it takes time to sort out those who have substance and opinions that are well thought out and articulated.

I know some people can find my style on here abrasive and condescending and I do take ownership of that. Unfortunately, I don't care much about a Muppet's feelings (and no I don't think you are a Muppet ). Now many people will take offence at that and I admit it is a character flaw that has become more obvious as I get older. I was told by a mentor many years ago to surround myself with people who have a positive mindset that you can learn from.

I realise I should probably infiltrate the Richmond and Collingwood forums and put my traits to better use but what the heck, it would be like shooting fish in a barrel.

If you want to take on the defense of others on here that is a matter for you.

[Kent 2,912]

19 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

"To do so he dropped a player back"  - But did he? How do we know that? It wasn't possible to see that on the TV broadcast and I don't recall any of the Fox commentators mentioning it. Was it mentioned on a radio broadcast or by the coaches in their press conferences later? I'd just like to find the empirical source of the claim that Carlton played with one behind the ball before accepting it as a given.

"Agree Jackson should have been moved into the ruck" - The problem here is that when Jackson went into the ruck for the first time towards the end of Q1 there was an immediate momentum shift towards Carlton. I suspect that's why Jackson did little work in the ruck during the game. It's quite possible that if he were given more time in the ruck, the results for us would have been worse. I accept, however, that if he's in the team, he would appear to be the best option to give Max assistance. Thankfully with 16 minute quarters Max should be able to ruck most of the day without assistance.

So why play Jackson 

Very little rucking and no marking

What was he doing in the team?

[Kent 2,912]

16 hours ago, binman said:

Could not agree more. Its not just the frustrating camera angles, though that is annoying. The lack of explanation about tactics, positioning etc etc is infuriating. I mean what are their so called special comments people paid to do?

Dermie always has plenty of advice! ?

[MyFavouriteMartian 572]

23 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

"Agree Jackson should have been moved into the ruck" - The problem here is that when Jackson went into the ruck for the first time towards the end of Q1 there was an immediate momentum shift towards Carlton. I suspect that's why Jackson did little work in the ruck during the game. It's quite possible that if he were given more time in the ruck, the results for us would have been worse. I

Your right,  'LDvC'.

I remember that now,  it was when we took the pressure off them,  giving them a sniff of encouragement.