19 minutes ago, deanox said:

I can absolutely believe the framework of this,  but I always have a hard time believing the concept that:

"Goodwin thought that the MFC was best off having Harmes play down back this year, but because he complained Goodwin promised to change our entire onfield balance by shifting him back into the mid field." (Paraphrased obv)

Making that change as part of a larger coaching season review, I can believe. But not knee jerk based on one convo, walking out thinking to himself "Oh no, I just signed Viney for 5 years, and now I promised Harmes midfield time. What do I do?"

No mate, Harmes didn't go in and tell him he had to play in the midfield. He's not that type of personality. Goodwin was the one who instigated the role change for next year, Harmes didn't push for it. Sorry if I didn't make that clear enough.

As far as I heard, Harmes didn't complain once about being asked to play backline.

Edited November 7, 20204 yr by Lord Nev

if Harmes was being chased by the Roos then they should of just let him go. he was very disappointing this year after signing up on a decent contract. 

It’s an interesting point and probably reiterates the way the team plays from week to week.

I am sure plenty of teams have [censored] off guys running around each week, but the best teams are able to continue to perform around it.

It wouldn’t be the first time in history that a coach is chummy with a few guys and pretty nonchalant about the rest of the group. I’m sure anyone who has played a bit has experienced it first hand. You’d just expect better from a bloke at the highest level 

30 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

What's come out of that is Goody has told him he won't be traded and that next year he will go back to a run with role where he drifts forward.

Made it clear he wasn't happy with where the culture was at and that there was different rules for different players.

Using Harmes as run-with and drift forward is consistent with Pert's comments that coaches need to maximise the strengths and attributes of our existing players.  My translation:  stop playing them out of position.

I'm not surprised about the culture of 'different rules for 'different players'.  I've heard this several times from outside sources in recent years.  And it was something fairly obvious to many DL's especially when it came to team selections.

2 hours ago, Patches O’houlihan said:

I've said this before, if you're coming on a football fan forum and you're not taking every single thing you read with a grain of salt, you've only got yourself to blame. and if you're getting upset or annoyed at posters for getting it wrong, grow up. 

I almost never share the intel i get on the public forum anymore because it's genuinely not worth the BS that comes with it. 

 

I don't get upset when someone gets something wrong, I get annoyed with people saying I've got 100% guaranteed sources, when they do not, DR evil has no sources, he  hear about Smith then clams to be in the loop, hoping to get it right to make people think he is a insider.

I come from Darwin there was a old man who claimed to be Jeff case, I believe him, until I asked him how many games he played for the Dees, said 176 case played 123 games,  years later I got on Wikipedia to look for Geoff case and he was listed as 183 centimetres tall and this bloke wouldn't have been any more than 165, He even had story's about going to premiership reunions.

5 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

Using Harmes as run-with and drift forward is consistent with Pert's comments that coaches need to maximise the strengths and attributes of our existing players.  My translation:  stop playing them out of position.

I'm not surprised about the culture of 'different rules for 'different players'.  I've heard this several times from outside sources in recent years.  And it was something fairly obvious to many DL's especially when it came to team selections.

Agree Lucy and I am immediately reminded of something similar at Geelong years ago with Bomber Thompson. He was so close to getting the sack and post review had a different group around hime and greater support. It remains to be seen if Goody has it in hime to change but  it certainly worked for the Cats. Pert did say yesterday that one on one with the players Goody is very good. He baulked and rambled when asked about the other side of coaching. What this hints at to me is the club as a whole from coaches to players don't yet have the unified buy in that Richmond have. They have a system which everybody knows and adheres to. If an injury occurs a replacement fills the gap. I just don't see that at Melbourne....yet!

36 minutes ago, deanox said:

I can absolutely believe the framework of this,  but I always have a hard time believing the concept that:

"Goodwin thought that the MFC was best off having Harmes play down back this year, but because he complained Goodwin promised to change our entire onfield balance by shifting him back into the mid field." (Paraphrased obv)

Making that change as part of a larger coaching season review, I can believe. But not knee jerk based on one convo, walking out thinking to himself "Oh no, I just signed Viney for 5 years, and now I promised Harmes midfield time. What do I do?"

If we're looking to have Petracca play the Dustin Martin role of splitting his time between the midfield and forward line, Harmes could be the guy to interchange him with. Start each game with Harmes forward and trac in the middle. When they switch Harmes can then clamp down on an oppositions best midfielder at the time.

That allows us to then have Oliver, Brayshaw and Viney rotate amongst the other two midfield spots and potentially have short shifts in the forward line also.

14 minutes ago, don't make me angry said:

I don't get upset when someone gets something wrong, I get annoyed with people saying I've got 100% guaranteed sources, when they do not, DR evil has no sources, he  hear about Smith then clams to be in the loop, hoping to get it right to make people think he is a insider.

I come from Darwin there was a old man who claimed to be Jeff case, I believe him, until I asked him how many games he played for the Dees, said 176 case played 123 games,  years later I got on Wikipedia to look for Geoff case and he was listed as 183 centimetres tall and this bloke wouldn't have been any more than 165, He even had story's about going to premiership reunions.

I'll repeat. take everything you hear on Demonland or any other fan forum with a grain of salt. 

17 minutes ago, don't make me angry said:

I come from Darwin there was a old man who claimed to be Jeff case, I believe him, until I asked him how many games he played for the Dees, said 176 case played 123 games,  years later I got on Wikipedia to look for Geoff case and he was listed as 183 centimetres tall and this bloke wouldn't have been any more than 165, He even had story's about going to premiership reunions.

People are weird. 

1 hour ago, Lord Nev said:

No mate, Harmes didn't go in and tell him he had to play in the midfield. He's not that type of personality. Goodwin was the one who instigated the role change for next year, Harmes didn't push for it. Sorry if I didn't make that clear enough.

As far as I heard, Harmes didn't complain once about being asked to play backline.

Ah thanks for clearing that up.

Makes sense to me, I think we all saw the Harmes back experiment failed.

I do think we need another HBF though. May, Lever, Salem, Rivers, Hibberd, are backline locks with Hib near the end. Tomlinson will play a role, making 6. You need 7 in the 22, and preferably another couple. Lockhart doesnt have a contract yet. Unless we think Hore or Smith could adapt to whatever Harmes role was, we have a hole.

I actually think this is a bigger hole for us than the wing, because when Hib goes we've got 2 spots and no one pushing through, while a few players can push onto the wing defensively if needed. It may be a reason Neita has been persisted with: no game development but has a 21 year olds body, not an 18 year olds so may slot in quicker.

 

I always thought Harmes looked good on the HFF, with good hands overhead and an ability to find a bit of space. So the Harmes/Petracca swap @MadAsHell suggested sounds good.

 

7 minutes ago, deanox said:

Ah thanks for clearing that up.

Makes sense to me, I think we all saw the Harmes back experiment failed.

I do think we need another HBF though. May, Lever, Salem, Rivers, Hibberd, are backline locks with Hib near the end. Tomlinson will play a role, making 6. You need 7 in the 22, and preferably another couple. Lockhart doesnt have a contract yet. Unless we think Hore or Smith could adapt to whatever Harmes role was, we have a hole.

I actually think this is a bigger hole for us than the wing, because when Hib goes we've got 2 spots and no one pushing through, while a few players can push onto the wing defensively if needed. It may be a reason Neita has been persisted with: no game development but has a 21 year olds body, not an 18 year olds so may slot in quicker.

 

I always thought Harmes looked good on the HFF, with good hands overhead and an ability to find a bit of space. So the Harmes/Petracca swap @MadAsHell suggested sounds good.

 

Yes agree strongly. We appear at least one small-medium defender lacking.

May, Petty, Lever

I prefer Petty to other tall alternatives because he can go with a genuine KPF giving May and Lever more flexibility.

Salem, Hibberd, Rivers

We need one more small-medium. I can see why the FD like Smith because his athleticism means he can play tall or small but the doubt is on his footy smarts. Lockhart seems out of favour. Nev looks cooked.  Hore feels like depth.

If forced I'm trying Smith but without confidence. If he can make it though he will solve a lot of problems.

5 minutes ago, deanox said:

Ah thanks for clearing that up.

Makes sense to me, I think we all saw the Harmes back experiment failed.

I do think we need another HBF though. May, Lever, Salem, Rivers, Hibberd, are backline locks with Hib near the end. Tomlinson will play a role, making 6. You need 7 in the 22, and preferably another couple. Lockhart doesnt have a contract yet. Unless we think Hore or Smith could adapt to whatever Harmes role was, we have a hole.

I actually think this is a bigger hole for us than the wing, because when Hib goes we've got 2 spots and no one pushing through, while a few players can push onto the wing defensively if needed. It may be a reason Neita has been persisted with: no game development but has a 21 year olds body, not an 18 year olds so may slot in quicker.

 

I always thought Harmes looked good on the HFF, with good hands overhead and an ability to find a bit of space. So the Harmes/Petracca swap @MadAsHell suggested sounds good.

Yeah, definitely a need. I assume it's something we're looking at in the trade/draft period, but haven't heard anything specific. Jordon is another intriguing one for mine. Pretty sure he's still out of contract and I know a fair few here thought he could play off HB. I would guess the backline would be fairly settled on May, Lever, Tomlinson, Hibberd, Salem & Rivers, with Jetta, Lockhart, Smith, Hore and maybe Jordon and even Chandler (if they're still around) as options for that last role, pending form and matchups.

I like the idea of moving Rivers or Salem further up the ground if we can find a good replacement in the backline, not sold on Baker as a wing option just yet.

1 hour ago, MadAsHell said:

If we're looking to have Petracca play the Dustin Martin role of splitting his time between the midfield and forward line, Harmes could be the guy to interchange him with. Start each game with Harmes forward and trac in the middle. When they switch Harmes can then clamp down on an oppositions best midfielder at the time.

That allows us to then have Oliver, Brayshaw and Viney rotate amongst the other two midfield spots and potentially have short shifts in the forward line also.

I think it'll help more with quarter lengths looking likely to at least increase by a few minutes, as well as a longer season to allow for more rotations through the midfield. I don't think we'll be seeing as much of the same 3-4 players dominating midfield minutes as they were this year so hopefully that allows Harmes and Brayshaw to push through at times and play their more natural roles. Harmes could even have the role of playing off the half forward flank and negating the oppositions best running half back whilst still offering some damage on the scoreboard as he's shown he's capable of. 

5 minutes ago, Pollyanna said:

Yes agree strongly. We appear at least one small-medium defender lacking.

May, Petty, Lever

I prefer Petty to other tall alternatives because he can go with a genuine KPF giving May and Lever more flexibility.

Salem, Hibberd, Rivers

We need one more small-medium. I can see why the FD like Smith because his athleticism means he can play tall or small but the doubt is on his footy smarts. Lockhart seems out of favour. Nev looks cooked.  Hore feels like depth.

If forced I'm trying Smith but without confidence. If he can make it though he will solve a lot of problems.

Petty is completely unknown it seems a lot of assumptions flying around maybe he will be great maybe he wont

3 minutes ago, Kent said:

Petty is completely unknown it seems a lot of assumptions flying around maybe he will be great maybe he wont

I've seen enough to know he'll make it.  He's a footballer, he's 198 and he's aggressive.

1 minute ago, Kent said:

Petty is completely unknown it seems a lot of assumptions flying around maybe he will be great maybe he wont

 

Just now, Pollyanna said:

I've seen enough to know he'll make it.  He's a footballer, he's 198 and he's aggressive.

In a limited sample size, he just seems to do things well. He marks well, he positions well, etc. I cant recall reading much from the club about him (ie big wraps), but might have just missed it.

3 minutes ago, Kent said:

Petty is completely unknown it seems a lot of assumptions flying around maybe he will be great maybe he wont

While i agree with your point. From the limited I've seen the kid looks good.

1 hour ago, Kent said:

If true tells me all i need to know about Goodwins mismanagement and people skills

I think this is a classic case of confirmation bias.  Here is what I think:

• we are short of small backs.  Jetts is cooked (sadly), Hibbo is very close to the end and beyond that we have Salem and Rivers who are AFL quality small backs and I suspect Rivers may well finish elsewhere.  Lockhart is a WIP and I'm struggling to think of other small backs.
• we have an abundance of mids.  Oliver, Viney, Brayshaw, Petracca are all ahead of Harmes for inside mid stuff so the FD decided that they should see how Harmes goes in the HB role.  That's not mismanagement.  He trained there all PS and appeared to do well.  We played him there for most of this season but most would agree it didn't work.
• If the info from LN is true the FD have recognized this and will move Harmes back to the role he plays best and they will no doubt look to fill the HB role with someone else.

I've read this forum for a long time and couldn't count the number of times I've seen posters suggest players play in different position.  The FD tried to utilize Harmes more effectively off a HBF and it didn't work.  So they change it back.  That's damning, not.

So where is this Goody's "mismanagement and people skills".  I accept that Harmes would probably prefer to play elsewhere but like the vast majority of players he'll willingly go where he's most valuable to the team.  So he didn't complain.  Goody recognized the experiment didn't work so he's changed it.

Good management in my book.

1 hour ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

I'm not surprised about the culture of 'different rules for 'different players'.  I've heard this several times from outside sources in recent years.  And it was something fairly obvious to many DL's especially when it came to team selections.

LF where have you heard "different rules for different players"?  My reading is Goody is pretty ruthless.  Hogan and Watts will testify to that.  Goodwin's job security relies on success so he is hardly going to play favourites at the expense of team success.

How often have I seen on DL "he needs to have five or six weeks to show what he's got" and yet when someone doesn't perform and continues to get a game it's "Goody's favourites".  I think the concept of "Goody's favourites" is rot, but it's just a view.

I like Goody and so I'll support him here.  I can't see he's done much wrong.  Mahoney too.  2021 is clearly critical to their futures as a disappointing year will probably mean the end for both but I'm fairly accepting of last year.  We just aren't as good as the top teams and we were consistent in our performances against the rest except for Swans and Freo where we were cooked and were dealt a terrible hand by the AFL.

 

And finally on Dr Evil.  I've got close contacts at the Club and hear things from time to time.  I heard Smith was 100% ours.  I think he was until Chris Scott clearly gave him a better offer and Smith changed his mind.  It happens.  BTW, if I hear something I'm not sharing it on a footy forum.  If I do the information I get will dry up and my view is we all find out in the end.  I mean really, what does a week matter? We'll know by next Friday what's happened.

Having said that I enjoy the rumours and treat all of them as rumours regardless of the "certainty" of the poster.

 

Edit: much of what I've said has been posted as I typed.  Apologies for not referencing those before me.

Edited November 7, 20204 yr by Baghdad Bob

2 hours ago, Lord Nev said:

Ok, so getting back to footy...

This is second hand info, passed onto me by someone who has spoken to family of players.

Harmes has been chased by North this trade period. Roosy has been making a few calls to him trying to entice him over with his preferred role of being a run with/inside mid. Don't know how much he considered it, wasn't told, but Harmes had been pretty disappointed with Goodwin during the year for not communicating.

He had a meeting with Goodwin yesterday and apparently put it all on the table a bit. Made it clear he wasn't happy with where the culture was at and that there was different rules for different players. Goody didn't agree with all of it but at least heard him out and it was apparently a pretty productive meeting.

What's come out of that is Goody has told him he won't be traded and that next year he will go back to a run with role where he drifts forward. The feeling from the family member was that it was an improvement from what they've seen with Goody's listening and they put it down to mostly Richo's influence and possibly a bit of Yze's.

Not exactly earth shattering news, but thought I'd pass on to try and get us back on track a bit.

That is a very good report, thanks. Good on Goody for changing his ways and good on Harmes for telling it like he sees it. It explains a lot of the, in some ways exaggeted talk that Goody lost the players. He clearly had lot a few. I think it highlights what a few here have said and been critized for that Goody has had a limited life experience background, but if he is learning and listening we have hope. Harmes is too gooda player  and investment to not be happy at the Dees. 

I totally understand the move of Harmes to half back, it just hasn't worked out. and you're kind of robbing peter to pay paul by giving up one of the only mids with actual leg speed to try and cover the lack of leg speed down back.

Speaking of Lockhart, anyone with inside information on where the hell he disappeared too?

Few people on here got upset with him laughing within games - maybe the FD wanted to make him a scapegoat?

 

4 minutes ago, Baghdad Bob said:

I like Goody and so I'll support him here.  I can't see he's done much wrong.

Very good post Bob and I agree with a lot of it.

You say Goodwin hasn't done much wrong. Do you mind elaborating because it's not obvious what he is doing well. I'm not trying to be smart. Genuine question.

24 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Yeah, definitely a need. I assume it's something we're looking at in the trade/draft period, but haven't heard anything specific. Jordon is another intriguing one for mine. Pretty sure he's still out of contract and I know a fair few here thought he could play off HB. I would guess the backline would be fairly settled on May, Lever, Tomlinson, Hibberd, Salem & Rivers, with Jetta, Lockhart, Smith, Hore and maybe Jordon and even Chandler (if they're still around) as options for that last role, pending form and matchups.

I like the idea of moving Rivers or Salem further up the ground if we can find a good replacement in the backline, not sold on Baker as a wing option just yet.

I like Baker or like the idea of him improving. We really need to be able to develop players like him if we are to improve. 

I wouldn't be surprised if Angus Brayshaw requests a trade, or has already. the frustrations of a group of players at the club as @Lord Nev and others have mentioned is a very real thing. 

Gus could easily walk into another side, play his actual position every week and become the footballer we all know he should be. 

1 minute ago, Better days ahead said:

Very good post Bob and I agree with a lot of it.

You say Goodwin hasn't done much wrong. Do you mind elaborating because it's not obvious what he is doing well. I'm not trying to be smart. Genuine question.

There's a thousand page thread on Goody (which I haven't read) so I don't want to derail this one.  But I'm "big picture".  Goody has shot two Bambi's - Watts and Hogan.  Both were excellent calls and both took a lot of guts from a young coach.  And we've attracted so many good people - Burgess, Richardson, May, Lever, Langdon and others who all had opportunities to go elsewhere.  They woundn't have come if they didn't have faith in Goodwin and the rest of the Club.

And apart from 2019 our performances have reflected or exceeded our ability.  2019 was understandable if you take the view that players are humans who when injured or unfit or lack match practice won't perform at their peak.  Some don't accept this.  And this year, while disappointing, was understandable when our draw and travel was compared to others. His performance in 2018 was exceptional and coaches don't get worse with age.

And I've met him briefly and he's impressive.