17 hours ago, DEE fence said:

Rapidly losing interest in any sport that is played in Saudi Arabia, talking two F1 races now. Hamdillah the Saudis can't get their hands (or have interest to tbf) on the AFL. 

I think our little backwater league is safe from them 

12 hours ago, Roost it far said:

Is a kick a kick when it’s done with zero force?

Attempted punches or kicks should all cop a game or two on the sideline. The grey areas of the game have to go as much as possible. Off ball niggle in general is unnecessary. 

10 hours ago, Moonshadow said:

Whoever takes Sicily, I hope they run him up the ground and put body pressure on him. Keep him away from two of BBB, JVR or Fritter, who remain deeper. Sicily likes to peel off and intercept, make him accountable physically, he hates it. And kick to where he ain't 

Then Frosty will panic and turn it over

Ahh Frosty.

The ex Mfc player that keeps giving.

1 hour ago, von said:

Attempted punches or kicks should all cop a game or two on the sideline. The grey areas of the game have to go as much as possible. Off ball niggle in general is unnecessary. 

I agree with this.

But the AFL has difficulty with the concept of "intent" preferring to judge on "outcome"*. For example, "kicking in danger" appears to be paid only if a player is actually kicked. It ought to be paid whether a player is physically kicked or not. Too many players are putting their hands and heads at serious risk because their opponents are allowed to kick the ball off the ground as long as they don't actually connect with the player. And we all know what will happen...the AFL will consider changing the rule only after someone is concussed after receiving a kick to the head or has badly broken bones in their hand.

*The exception is the "insufficient intent" rule. 

14 hours ago, Graeme Yeats' Mullet said:

Still think Tommo is massively stiff, gets to line up on swift Swans fwd line as our mids get swamped, and misses out on Dogs when our mids crushed a lot of their fwd entry

But couldn’t drop Tmac on that performance

Agree, but on historical evidence TMac at top form is a better player than Thommo at top form.

Still to be proven however if TMac is actually at top form and/or can remain there for some time. 

It could also be argued that Thommo was a better option in the slippery conditions at Sydney and TMac better on a dry deck in Melbourne? 

1 hour ago, Dee*ceiving said:

Agree, but on historical evidence TMac at top form is a better player than Thommo at top form.

Still to be proven however if TMac is actually at top form and/or can remain there for some time. 

It could also be argued that Thommo was a better option in the slippery conditions at Sydney and TMac better on a dry deck in Melbourne? 

There is no 'i' in 'team'.

Similarly, there is no 'h' in 'Tomlinson', ergo 'Tommo'.

No need to thank me.   

 

 

 

Could Tommo come in and go forward to nullify Sicily? Have we tried him forward in the last 2 years?

Probably one too many tall "plodders", but feel for him after his round 1 game.

Edited March 20, 20241 yr by HBDee

1 minute ago, HBDee said:

Could Tommo come in and go forward to nullify Sicily? Have we tried him forward in the last 2 years?

Probably one too many tall "plodders", but feel for him after his round 1 game.

I was thinking that if we are that keen to play Petty, I wonder if this week TMAC could go forward and Petty play back. TMAC purely to free up Fritta or JVR as Sicily will likely take the more agile Key forward. 

2 minutes ago, SPC said:

I was thinking that if we are that keen to play Petty, I wonder if this week TMAC could go forward and Petty play back. TMAC purely to free up Fritta or JVR as Sicily will likely take the more agile Key forward. 

So we earmark Petty as a forward, bring TMac in as the third tall defender and then we bring Petty in and he plays back and TMac goes forward. I’m sorry but that’s insanity 

3 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

I agree with this.

But the AFL has difficulty with the concept of "intent" preferring to judge on "outcome"*. For example, "kicking in danger" appears to be paid only if a player is actually kicked. It ought to be paid whether a player is physically kicked or not. Too many players are putting their hands and heads at serious risk because their opponents are allowed to kick the ball off the ground as long as they don't actually connect with the player. And we all know what will happen...the AFL will consider changing the rule only after someone is concussed after receiving a kick to the head or has badly broken bones in their hand.

*The exception is the "insufficient intent" rule. 

I’ve always struggled to understand how the afl landed on outcome over intent. They just love leaning into the grey. They could make their life a lot easier going with intent but it wouldn’t create the same amount of click bait and ratings. 

23 minutes ago, SPC said:

I was thinking that if we are that keen to play Petty, I wonder if this week TMAC could go forward and Petty play back. TMAC purely to free up Fritta or JVR as Sicily will likely take the more agile Key forward. 

Is there any reason or need to rush Petty back?

We are just settling in with a new (using old stock) forward line up.  We win by over 7 goals.  Then we want to bring in another new (old) face in the hope that will work as well or better.

Unless BB's struggling to recover and needs managing then maybe.

Regardless, after hearing Mr Fence's report on his progress in the praccy, sounds like Petty is in need of a mini pre-season similar to what was asked of Salo last year.

Pretty sure that was around 6 - 7 weeks of reloading and building prior to his return game.

Ok so Petty isn't playing a HB running role and probably won't need as long to come up to speed.  Different injury as well.

But surely a bit premature to be attempting a return after a miserly 3/4 warm up in a Casey praccy where he apparently barely had a touch yes?

That's not to say it won't happen.  Anything's possible and we have to put our faith in the FD.

Just my take as an amature outsider looking in.

Can Petty, JVR and BBB all co-exist in the one forward line?

I'd expect Petty to return for the Port game next week and possibly give BBB a rest.

But could BBB return for the Adelaide game and share the forward line with Petty and JVR or is that too tall? 

2 hours ago, Demon Dynasty said:

Is there any reason or need to rush Petty back?

We are just settling in with a new (using old stock) forward line up.  We win by over 7 goals.  Then we want to bring in another new (old) face in the hope that will work as well or better.

Unless BB's struggling to recover and needs managing then maybe.

Regardless, after hearing Mr Fence's report on his progress in the praccy, sounds like Petty is in need of a mini pre-season similar to what was asked of Salo last year.

Pretty sure that was around 6 - 7 weeks of reloading and building prior to his return game.

Ok so Petty isn't playing a HB running role and probably won't need as long to come up to speed.  Different injury as well.

But surely a bit premature to be attempting a return after a miserly 3/4 warm up in a Casey praccy where he apparently barely had a touch yes?

That's not to say it won't happen.  Anything's possible and we have to put our faith in the FD.

Just my take as an amature outsider looking in.

I wouldn’t play Petty.. but what I am saying is that if the powers in charge want him in, he will pick up the game quicker in defence than as a forward. From all reports he looked lost at VFL, he will be a liability at AFL level and upset what structure we have. Tough gig being a forward, even tougher when still finding fitness and touch. 

2 hours ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Can Petty, JVR and BBB all co-exist in the one forward line?

I'd expect Petty to return for the Port game next week and possibly give BBB a rest.

But could BBB return for the Adelaide game and share the forward line with Petty and JVR or is that too tall? 

Given the travel and short break, might need a squad mentality for Adelaide. Rest one or two and rotate. Perfect for Petty.

Very impressed by BBB's ground coverage against the Dogs. Took some marks on HFF and I saw him competing on the defensive goal line.

Saturday is much cooler.

I was disappointed in Fritsch's game until I noticed that he was taking the number 1 defender. Wonder how the Hawks will approach the allocation of defenders

3 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Very impressed by BBB's ground coverage against the Dogs. Took some marks on HFF and I saw him competing on the defensive goal line.

Saturday is much cooler.

I was disappointed in Fritsch's game until I noticed that he was taking the number 1 defender. Wonder how the Hawks will approach the allocation of defenders

But Fritsch did produce the Handball of the season to set up Trac for the sealer. 

He has the odd very quiet game but could kick 6 this week

8 minutes ago, DubDee said:

But Fritsch did produce the Handball of the season to set up Trac for the sealer. 

He has the odd very quiet game but could kick 6 this week

Much better handball than what Max did aha.

Fritta was quiet but still probably should have kicked 2 goals though 

41 minutes ago, DubDee said:

But Fritsch did produce the Handball of the season to set up Trac for the sealer. 

The amount of factors that needed to go right for that handball to be executed like it was is very high indeed.

The right forward and lateral trajectory to hit #5 at that pace; the right loft to clear the marking defender; the right head to see the play in the first place; the right connection between players to look for it and make the running play. Then of course #5 had to nail it - and the rest is history. It was an absolute peach of a handball. 

4 hours ago, Roost it far said:

So we earmark Petty as a forward, bring TMac in as the third tall defender and then we bring Petty in and he plays back and TMac goes forward. I’m sorry but that’s insanity 

Best post you have done Roost it.

Some people will not let Harry have a decent go as a forward and simultaneously want to end Tmacs defender reboot back to defence. 

We are now getting our KPosition players back. Let’s try them out as Goody has trained them ALL summer. 

Tmac’s form was of no surprise to me. He is a big unit and uses his body well. His disposal was definitely previously a tad off but he is much more experienced now. And if absolutely necessary we can send him forward in a cameo role. Shores up our backline beautifully. 

Just now, 58er said:

Best post you have done Roost it.

Some people will not let Harry have a decent go as a forward and simultaneously want to end Tmacs defender reboot back to defence. 

We are now getting our KPosition players back. Let’s try them out as Goody has trained them ALL summer. 

Tmac’s form was of no surprise to me. He is a big unit and uses his body well. His disposal was definitely previously a tad off but he is much more experienced now. And if absolutely necessary we can send him forward in a cameo role. Shores up our backline beautifully. 

Sorry back to the forward line.!! 

4 hours ago, Bring-Back-Powell said:

Can Petty, JVR and BBB all co-exist in the one forward line?

I'd expect Petty to return for the Port game next week and possibly give BBB a rest.

But could BBB return for the Adelaide game and share the forward line with Petty and JVR or is that too tall? 

All 3 can play together, just as Jackson, Brown, T Mc did in 2021.

But it needs the right conditions and roles. JVR (in the Jackson role) probably rucks a little more and Max has a fraction more rest. 

Petty has to be very fit so he can pressure and lead high up the ground in the T Mc 2021 role.

BBB has to be healthy.

And they have to make the right choice out of Billings/Chandler/Sparrow to go out of the 22 and have confidence in Tracc and Clarry’s midfield minutes. Fritsch takes a different role. And Pickett has to be forward to pressure and capitalise on 3 talls.

That’s a long way of saying I doubt we see it this week because Petty isn’t close to 100%.

And using the South Aussie games as squad opportunities, rest one tall in each for the quick back up would be smart to me. Maybe they play 3 against Port then add fresh midfield legs for the Crows, but the extra small and swap the talls is what I’d do.

 

 

Edited March 20, 20241 yr by DeeSpencer

According to Ticketek there is nothing available from M31-M36 in Ponsford stand for seating against the Hawks. Cheer squad is usually in Ponsford when we are the away team against  Hawks. M30 is the only bay available to upgrade a ticket.

Can anyone share some info pls? 

Edited March 20, 20241 yr by Dee Zephyr

Sicily is in the wrong industry

32 minutes ago, Dee Zephyr said:

According to Ticketek there is nothing available from M31-M36 in Ponsford stand for seating against the Hawks. Cheer squad is usually in Ponsford when we are the away team against  Hawks. M30 is the only bay available to upgrade a ticket.

Can anyone share some info pls? 

Surely not. I have a H&A membership and usually just turn up and sit to the right of our cheer squad. Never had an issue. 

10 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

Surely not. I have a H&A membership and usually just turn up and sit to the right of our cheer squad. Never had an issue. 

According to WCW, those bays aren’t available yet because Hawthorn haven’t released them yet or haven’t decided what they’re doing with them. That answers my question lol

Edited March 20, 20241 yr by Dee Zephyr