6 hours ago, DeeMee said:

Your thoughts on this as a potential forward line going into the future:

JvR because he is a developing champion

Petty because Goodie has made it clear that’s where he wants him, pre knee Tomo may be back and gives us two solid talls up front

Fritsch because he is a goal machine

Kossie because he’s Kossie

Now it gets harder:

I love Chandler and think he is an intelligent player. I love Spargo’s delivery inside but given Smith can play fast and small as well as tall, one of them out for him.

So I see it as possibly JVR, Petty, Fritsch, Smith, Kossie, Chandler. Spargo as first drop.

Alternatively Smith could be permanent sub given his flexibility.

Thoughts?

 

5 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

If Smith plays it will be as a tall, not alongside 2 talls, a ruck and a Fritsch.

As well as he moves for a tall he doesn’t have the skills, the anticipation, the contest to contest work rate or the creativity of a small. 

 

Great game on Monday - more than enough has been said about the abysmal conversion from set shots in particular.  Surely this will revert to at least the norm.  Q for track watchers - is Mark Williams still doing his set shot work at training?? If not, why not??

IF Smith can maintain the form he showed on KB, and maintain his fitness, he could be a key to better forward pressure and retention.  Sure he can play as a tall but his athleticism IMO gives us an option to replace a small, especially as our current crop of 'smalls' don't seem to be playing as classical crumbing forwards.  I could certainly see JVR, Petty, Smith, Fritta, and a couple of smalls - 2 of Kozzie, Chandler, Spargo - without the need for the ruckman to 'rest' regularly deep forward.   Both Smith and Fritta play as hybrids, which adds versatility and creates nightmare matchups.

Tomlinson hasn't been given enough recognition for his two recent games.  Those who judge players by their own and their opponents' stats may not see just what an integrating role he has played.  Lever and May are able to be themselves again.   Similarly JVR's contribution does not all show up on the classic stats sheets.  

Interesting structural dilemmas for the rest of the season.   Both TMcD and BB will have their work cut out to break back into the team when or if they recover from their degenerative conditions.

With Oliver a certainty,  and Bowey pressing for return, it is hard to see the likes of Woewoden, Howes and Laurie getting a look in.  Even JJ, good and reliable as he is, struggles to get a regular gig.    Depth is starting to show again, which is great for team success but hard for future list management and player retention.

GO DEES ❤️💙❤️❤️

 

Stoked with one of the best wins since our flag year. So many positives! 

But for the sake of discussion. 

1./ Is there a better way to use kozzy to get him more involved? He no longer takes centre square bounces I see. Curious about your thoughts. 

2./ The  Brayshaw dilemma. His mistakes are becoming alarming. I believe He was manning Daicos in the last minute when he got free at the stoppage . same in the first qtr… can’t remember who it was that waltzed out of the stoppage to goal  w Brayshaw no where to be seen. He miskicked badly to cough up our first goal as well. I’m a fan of his at heart  … he’s tough and fit and did plenty of good things throughout. BUT onball he can be a liability . So…where to play him now with McVee nailing a spot down back and Hunter on the wing. 

1 hour ago, binman said:

Pressure

Q1: 176 - 180
Q2: 174 - 172
Q3: 201 - 206
Q4: 186 - 177
Tot: 183 - 186

 

 

 

Interesting - I thought our pressure ratings would have been higher than that, particularly surprised they were higher than us in the third quarter.

Andy did our dismantling of the Pies gameplan send your MFCSS into remission? Or did the fact they almost pinched it at the end only exacerbate the symptoms?

6 hours ago, Red and Bluebeard said:

Love the podcast, excellent work all. One topic that has barely been mentioned is May's kickout with 1.44 remaining. Why kick long to a contest? Presumably we were confident of winning by then, but I would have though the only thing to do would be to chip it around, short and safe, for at least 90 seconds. Going long to a contest gave the Pies a sniff, and that was all they needed to almost pinch the win. Thoughts?

Especially considering we'd gonna short from kick outs most of the day! It was baffling.

17 minutes ago, Nairobi_Demon said:

Interesting - I thought our pressure ratings would have been higher than that, particularly surprised they were higher than us in the third quarter.

Yeah agree. I thought they were really intersting too.

A query I have about the pressure ratings is how well it captures the pressure from having all options for a kick blocked.

Sometimes the kicker was not under heaps of pressure, looked in board and/or for the switch and couldn't pull the trigger because we had players covering it.

With this structural and discipline  pressure we constantly forced them to go down the line

But i don't the above scenario would generate pressure points. But pressure is being applied by taking away the corridor and forcing them to kick to a contest.

Just watching the replay and that hit on hoskin elliot by hunter in the first quarter was magnificent. You can see the moment the air gushed out of his body💙❤️

8 minutes ago, binman said:

Yeah agree. I thought they were really intersting too.

A query I have about the pressure ratings is how well it captures the pressure from having all options for a kick blocked.

Sometimes the kicker was not under heaps of pressure, looked in board and/or for the switch and couldn't pull the trigger because we had players covering it.

With this structural and discipline  pressure we constantly forced them to go down the line

But i don't the above scenario would generate pressure points. But pressure is being applied by taking away the corridor and forcing them to kick to a contest.

That was critical.  I thought the other strategy we deployed was to really pressure everyone around the ball carrier. And I mean everyone.   I assume that only pressure acts directed at the ball carrier count towards the pressure rating so this might not show up in the stats. But the pressure to surrounding players really stifled their game and may have made it feel higher intensity than the ratings suggest.

4 hours ago, A F said:

Do we think we'll allow +1 at contest against Geelong? In the Collingwood game, we evened this up in the final quarter.

@Lucifers Hero has pointed out before the +1 that we allowed last time against Geelong. 

Do we allow it for 3 quarters or even most of the match and tweak it if necessary?

3 hours ago, binman said:

Di you mean we brought one more player to stoppages and had an even number with the pies?

 

3 hours ago, A F said:

Sorry. Evened up the stoppages. In the last quarter, we started manning up the Collingwood spare off the back of the contest. Not sure I noticed it before the last quarter.

Not sure if what I'm about to say is covered in subsequent posts.

I thought we did more than even up the stoppage numbers. 

Coll (and Geelong and Sydney) have always beaten us at stoppages and especially at CB by winning the clearance or post clearance possession then getting it to their wingman and running it straight to goal.  We completely stopped this.  Having Sidebottom out helped as that linking is a primary role.  It completely stifled their ball movement on which their system is so reliant  Game over!  Much later than it should have been because of all the points we kicked.

Also we were better at staying goal side of them at fwd stoppages except that ridiculously late goal by Daicos.

Geelong whould be afraid!!

Edited June 13, 20232 yr by Lucifers Hero

3 hours ago, binman said:

That's interesting. Good pick up. I didn't notice and it wasn't mentioned on the replay.

I had the feeling we were strong in the second half, but not covering the ground all that well (nor were Collingwood for that matter).

Which would jibe with kev martin's fascinating observation from training last week (Tuesday?) that they did more running than he had seen any session all - and that Selwyn was really pushing them.

We don't bring an extra up to stoppages very often.

I wonder if it was to mitigate the impact of fatigue a bit because playing one mid down is hard yakka. 

I think our focus on defence, structure and sytem in the last two games may be part of the same strategy. Don't allow the game to become a running contest.

Without Clarry, it's pretty dangerous to go -1 every week for four quarters. We needed a huge game from Trac last week and a huge game from Viney this week.

3 hours ago, Roostwo said:

Please make this episode 3 hours long.  That win- it does ant get any better.  I just want to luxuriate in your analysis !!!!! 

Good chance with all the questions we’re getting. Lucky we’re not doing a preview of the Cats game. 

In rd 13 2022 the 10-2 demons played the 7-5 pies who ran over the top of us. @binman analysis of that fixture is that was to be expected as we were loading and more heavily than Collingwood due to our 10-0 start and so therefore it was predictable that would happen. 

Do you therefore think that we should temper our excitement over this win? Do you think it is more of a routine win than a statement win given Collingwood are probably loading more heavily than us around the bye given our 7-4 start vs their 11-1. Was plenty of talk from Goody and others inside the walls that we were targetting this match and probably more so than Collingwood?

Or is the lid off and should i be booking flights back from London for the Granny?

How did you think McRae will combat our midfield zone next time we meet? What do you think Goodwin has to do to prepare for this and how could we potentially counter it?

Edited June 13, 20232 yr by Dr. Gonzo

13 hours ago, binman said:

Pressure

Q1: 176 - 180
Q2: 174 - 172
Q3: 201 - 206
Q4: 186 - 177
Tot: 183 - 186

 

 

 

Was going to ask about the pressure in the third quarter. It was one of the best quarters of footy I have seen in a while. Both teams going really hard, every possession earned, and it was also the quarter we got on top in general play.

I would have thought it would have been higher than 201-206.

20 hours ago, DeeMee said:

Your thoughts on this as a potential forward line going into the future:

JvR because he is a developing champion

Petty because Goodie has made it clear that’s where he wants him, pre knee Tomo may be back and gives us two solid talls up front

Fritsch because he is a goal machine

Kossie because he’s Kossie

Now it gets harder:

I love Chandler and think he is an intelligent player. I love Spargo’s delivery inside but given Smith can play fast and small as well as tall, one of them out for him.

So I see it as possibly JVR, Petty, Fritsch, Smith, Kossie, Chandler. Spargo as first drop.

Alternatively Smith could be permanent sub given his flexibility.

Thoughts?

Just putting together my notes for tonights show and I reckon this is a great talking point for next week's Mid Season Review show. Do you mind reposting this in next week's thread?

1 hour ago, Clintosaurus said:

Was going to ask about the pressure in the third quarter. It was one of the best quarters of footy I have seen in a while. Both teams going really hard, every possession earned, and it was also the quarter we got on top in general play.

I would have thought it would have been higher than 201-206.

A rating of 200 is considered elite, so 201-206 is pretty high. 

Round of applause for Judd McVee for his game this week (and last week, in fact for his whole season). He is fast becoming one of my favourite players. The kid never looks flustered even on the big stage in front of 85,000 people. He's skillful, balanced & poised. He is a great judge of the play and knows when to leave his man. This was best highlighted when he left his man and forced the turnover that ended with the Hunter bump (great highlight too) that ended with Grundy having a shot for goal. Can't believe he hasn't received a rising star nomination yet but I'm positive he'll have one by season's end.

In line with some other comments/questions here I feel experimenting with Smith in what has been a traditionally 'smalls' role might be worthwhile. 

Could Joel Smith play in Charlie's role v Geelong?  

I love all the questions we get from the listeners but I'm cutting it off here for this week. My notes for this week are almost double what they usually are. We have a lot to get through and we're not even doing a Casey, Training, Changes (with the exception of Tommo/Smith/Petty talk) or Cats Preview.

It will be a long show tonight so strap yourselves in.

@binman will be doing a lap of honour to kick off the show apparently. 😜

Have a think about what questions you want answered or comments you want for our Mid Season Review podcast next week which will include Changes and Cats Preview.

I'll probably post a thread tomorrow about it once I've spoken to the guys about the format.

 

Thoughts on Trent Rivers? Feels like he's grown into a senior head this year and his game has gone up levels. I always felt in the premiership year he was such a brave and desperate defender and epitomized our hunger and desire that year. This year he's got that back but he's added damage to his game. 

Not a question, more a prediction. I reckon this podcast will be the most listened to you’ve yet done. And deserved. Actually, turns out I do have a question. Can you determine the download/streaming numbers of individual podcasts?

22 minutes ago, Webber said:

Not a question, more a prediction. I reckon this podcast will be the most listened to you’ve yet done. And deserved. Actually, turns out I do have a question. Can you determine the download/streaming numbers of individual podcasts?

It's very difficult to gauge. You can see how many times the file is accessed but it's not a proper indication of how many listeners because the file might be automatically downloaded by the podcasting app but not listened to or someone might listen for the whole 1hr and 45mins (or over 2 hours possibly 3 tonight) or they might listen to 1 minute.

We also have the live listeners and that can range between 30 to 100 on a particular night (usually somewhere in between) and people can be coming and going and who knows if they then download and listen to the show later.

A good indication that listenership is growing is that we're getting more questions (and voicemails - 4 tonight) and engagement on social media.

And 5 Star Reviews on Apple Podcast.

So please leave us a 5 Star Review and a comment there. We love the feedback and it helps more listeners find the show.

18 minutes ago, Demonland said:

You can see how many times the file is accessed but it's not a proper indication of how many listeners because the file might be automatically downloaded by the podcasting app but not listened to or someone might listen for the whole 1hr and 45mins (or over 2 hours possibly 3 tonight) or

If you count the automatic downloads and ANY amount of listening time, then the live listeners (regardless of time spent or double-dipping afterwards), there is a number? 

Just now, Webber said:

If you count the automatic downloads and ANY amount of listening time, then the live listeners (regardless of time spent or double-dipping afterwards), there is a number? 

There is but it's not an accurate reflection of actual listeners. And then there are the bots that scour the internet and who know how many of those there are possibly inflating numbers.

3 hours ago, Demonland said:

There is but it's not an accurate reflection of actual listeners. And then there are the bots that scour the internet and who know how many of those there are possibly inflating numbers.

When’s podcast up? Still not showing in iTunes.. cmon bit slack Andy 😆