2 hours ago, binman said:

Then why did rest kozzie?

I thought Kozzie was out injured with a bung ankle, not rested

8 hours ago, Nasher said:

Yes.

Ok, just had to check. Cheers. 

4 hours ago, Go the Biff said:

I thought Kozzie was out injured with a bung ankle, not rested

I think officially it was “ankle soreness” sounds like management so fingers crossed he’s good to go. 

6 hours ago, Rusty Nails said:

I said the same last week and ended up with egg on my face.  But... i still think he's worth a place if he's up to 75%ish game time.  Have to leave that up to the experts from here though.  Maybe he isn't just yet, hence the T-Mac fill in?

He Preuss only Had a first training run last week if u listen or read MST Egan on the website 

Doesn't seem guy enough fir a first ruck place in a crucial game 

Thought  like in 2017 we covered Gawny's absence well Both Jacko and Tommy bought their own skills  And were very competitive.

No doubt that our 3 on ballers were 1 2 and 3 on the ground helped.

13 hours ago, Engorged Onion said:

Fair enough @sue, I just assumed that all clubs, have all of champion data's intel on all clubs, easy accessible, relatively easily relatable to coach when the club itself would focus on what it can do, with minor tweaks (as its one player)..with the knowledge that roughly 7/8 days ago Gawn was going to miss.

• Tweak the need to shark Max's dominance
• Combat midfield as a consequence
• Kick Ins to Max
• Max dropping into the hole in defence.

 

But, I do love to simplify things.

The one disadvantage of a dominant player is how predictable it makes the team, and I guess over reliance too.

We’ve seen opposition much more effective with clearances due to this.

I’m sure every opponent has some contingencies planned as a dominant opposition player can always be a late withdrawal or in-game injury.

The advantage for Melbourne is Collingwood don’t know if it’s Preuss, Jackson, McDonald or even Weideman/Tomlinson they need to prepare for if it’s not Gawn.

AFL level players need 6+ hours a day of PlayStation. You can’t eat into that and expect them to memorise multiple “if this, then do that” plans and also be able to execute them well while dominating FIFA and tick-toking too.

If Grundy plays we should pummel into him off the ball non-stop, seems that's fine to do.

1 hour ago, Lampers said:

The one disadvantage of a dominant player is how predictable it makes the team, and I guess over reliance too.

We’ve seen opposition much more effective with clearances due to this.

I’m sure every opponent has some contingencies planned as a dominant opposition player can always be a late withdrawal or in-game injury.

The advantage for Melbourne is Collingwood don’t know if it’s Preuss, Jackson, McDonald or even Weideman/Tomlinson they need to prepare for if it’s not Gawn.

AFL level players need 6+ hours a day of PlayStation. You can’t eat into that and expect them to memorise multiple “if this, then do that” plans and also be able to execute them well while dominating FIFA and tick-toking too.

I couldn't select both 'thanks' and 'haha' emoticon! Nice one!

15 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Errr, yes.

Having the mindset of thinking you're guaranteed a win, is delusional. 

58 minutes ago, Ham said:

Having the mindset of thinking you're guaranteed a win, is delusional. 

Of course.

But even without the benefit of hindsight did you think that the selection of a not fully fit max gawn was going to be the difference between winning and losing the game against the crows?

Did you think so against a better team, with a much better ruckman, for the roos game? 

Edited August 12, 20205 yr by binman

10 hours ago, Go the Biff said:

I thought Kozzie was out injured with a bung ankle, not rested

Correct

10 hours ago, Go the Biff said:

I thought Kozzie was out injured with a bung ankle, not rested

Oh great.  Has this been confirmed?   

7 minutes ago, Pickett2Jackson said:

Oh great.  Has this been confirmed?   

It was the Adelaide game

2 minutes ago, drysdale demon said:

It was the Adelaide game

Oh geez.  Thought he was injured now and out vs Pies.      Crisis averted.

17 hours ago, Nasher said:

Burgess doesn’t know squat compared to the DBT (Demonland Brains Trust).

It would be fascinating to see the administration staff and organisational model of the DBT ??

Anyone want to have a stab?

13 hours ago, binman said:

Agree its not the same thing.

But surely we didn't really assess the selection of maxy as critical to a win versus the crows, particularly given we had almost a full list to choose from.

They had not won a game.

They had a percentage of 55.

They made 9 changes.

Their one star was out and spargo could have competed against their ruck.

The roos are as better team, with one of the best rucks in the AFL and we beat them by the same margin with no max

The risk reward ratio was all out of wack.

It was a pretty important game for the pies finals chances too. And they had four of their best out. And elected to rest arguably their most important player.

And I'm not being Harry hindsight. I said we should rest him prior to crows game.

I'm curious to know then, why you think he wasn't rested.

I already posed an admittedly-cynical question; that it was to shore-up as much of a guarantee as possible that we wouldn't go down to a club who are in an astonishing amount of disarray,  and go to unnecessary lengths to prevent the humiliation of our team and the future of our coach. 

Some here seemingly thought the question was preposterous and insulting to the integrity of our coach, which I find a tad oversensitive. We can't ask these kinds of questions? Goodwin is above criticism of his integrity?

If we lost that game, there's a very, very good chance that talk of his removal would be no longer talk. Tell me I'm wrong.

So I don't think my asking of that question was out of line. Those who do, must have momentarily-forgotten that we are supporters of the most unsuccessful club in the AFL, and no question is too cynical.

Edited August 13, 20205 yr by Mel Bourne

16 hours ago, monoccular said:

Jackson, particularly, around the ground vs Grundy could be a fascinating contest.  

Given Grundy's current form - I'd expect Jackson to beat him on the ground by exploiting his welcome abilities to ground tap the ball and then run on to a clean pick-up. Jackson does this very well and it gives him three options: kick the ball to good effect or handball, or re-tap on to a teammate. He has done this a couple of times; it was interesting to see which one he chose in different circumstances; his success rate in this appeared to be about 60% against North. 

So Gawn is either fine to play, he’ll be rested one more week or out for 4-6. 

that clears it up!!

17 hours ago, John Griffin said:

Mel Bourne l think you are spot on.

Good on you, Griffo. Thanks for dropping in.

15 hours ago, P-man said:

It wasn’t just a matter of saving Godwin’s bacon. The Adelaide game was a must win. We lose that and the season is shot, not to mention the draining effect on the playing group and the club. Losing that game was not an option. The decision to play Max sits fine with me.

 

Exactly.  if he didnt play and we lost this forum would look like the apocalypse.

19 minutes ago, Pickett2Jackson said:

Exactly.  if he didnt play and we lost this forum would look like the apocalypse.

If he didn’t play and we lost, it would tell you that we are stupidly reliant on one player. 
 

Taking no chances and playing our best players - whether they needed a rest or not - to beat a club as pyss-poor as Adelaide are, tells you how little confidence we have at our club right now. 
 

Those saying words to the effect of “it was crucial we didn’t lose to Adelaide, and everybody had to step up”, man, how embarrassing for us to find ourselves in such a position. 
 

I think this next game is the most important game of our season, and winning it, our biggest challenge. The top six teams have had our way with us so far. We lose this and that’s the top seven, and any talk that we might be anything resembling serious contenders goes out the door for the season. 
 

For this reason it obviously would have been ideal to have Gawn in the team, but if we don’t it’s because we cooked him defending our honour against a basket-case team. That just sounds like poor player-management in the face of fear, to me. 

Edited August 13, 20205 yr by Mel Bourne

There's an irony in there somewhere that Max thought he needed to play in the Adelaide game, where he was convincingly beaten by an emerging ruckman. I reckon we would have been better without him in that game, but I get why he played.

For me, it was poor leadership, because I think you should realise when you are going to be an impediment on the team if you do play, and sit the game out if that's the case. Viney used to do it all the time and I didn't like it.

Anyway, I certainly don't wish injury upon Max and I love him as a player, but I'm far more confident we'll make finals if he's out for 6-8 weeks.

Edited August 13, 20205 yr by A F

Fitness Test for Max before the weekend is what i just heard

9 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Fitness Test for Max before the weekend is what i just heard

Good, means his injury cant be too bad.

Would be mad to play him you'd think.    But I trust Burgess all the way.

1 hour ago, Mel Bourne said:

I'm curious to know then, why you think he wasn't rested.

I already posed an admittedly-cynical question; that it was to shore-up as much of a guarantee as possible that we wouldn't go down to a club who are in an astonishing amount of disarray,  and go to unnecessary lengths to prevent the humiliation of our team and the future of our coach. 

Some here seemingly thought the question was preposterous and insulting to the integrity of our coach, which I find a tad oversensitive. We can't ask these kinds of questions? Goodwin is above criticism of his integrity?

If we lost that game, there's a very, very good chance that talk of his removal would be no longer talk. Tell me I'm wrong.

So I don't think my asking of that question was out of line. Those who do, must have momentarily-forgotten that we are supporters of the most unsuccessful club in the AFL, and no question is too cynical.

I'm totally with nasher about there no chance Goodwin selected max out of fears for his future should we lose.

My personal view is that it questioning his integrity is indeed very insulting. And again this is personal view, but i reckon it is not ok to question his integrity, but each to their own.

But i think it is ok to question his judgement and decision making, as i have done a bit of late.

On that front, why do i think he didn't rest Maxy?

Obviously i'm only guessing, but my guess would be that there may have been a number of factors he considered:

• he had publicly said his plan was, as far as possible, to play his best team right though this period, and playing Max was fully consistent with this plan
• maybe Tmac wasn't ready to play and he didn't want to expose jacko to a full game of rucking
• maxy was dead keen to play and wanted to fly the flag after bartlett's very public criticism of his teammates 
• the burgess and the doctors convinced him he was at no risk of making the lat injury worse so maxy was good to go 
• percentage might end up playing a critical role in making the finals and playing maxy would increase the likelihood we have a big, percentage boosting win

3 minutes ago, Pickett2Jackson said:

Good, means his injury cant be too bad.

Would be mad to play him you'd think.    But I trust Burgess all the way.

Every player will have some degree of injury going into games during this season. 
it depends how much it retards him, and he will be targetted 

Can we cover him against Filth inc.