11 minutes ago, Jeremy said:

You know more than Cal Twomey? 

@JeremyI think you'll find @binman is sarcastically saying there is a misconception that Bedford was pushed out and had no contract offer.

1 hour ago, binman said:

#demon myths 

 

25 minutes ago, Fritta and Turner said:

Toby Bedford was drawn to the bright lights of Sydney

#demon moths

Toby crunched the numbers and decided it was a financially wise move to make.

#demon maths 

6 minutes ago, Deemented Are Go! said:

@JeremyI think you'll find @binman is sarcastically saying there is a misconception that Bedford was pushed out and had no contract offer.

Ok sorry then 

26 minutes ago, Jaded No More said:

I think GWS offered him a permanent starting 22 role, and that’s what he really wanted and couldn’t get at Melbourne. 

This ^

10 minutes ago, old55 said:

This ^

well, sort of

if he didn't play well, he wouldn't hold his spot

they offered him opportunity to cement it that we couldn't; chandler is a better player imo

 

Edited May 17, 20241 yr by whatwhat say what

1 minute ago, WalkingCivilWar said:

 

Toby crunched the numbers and decided it was a financially wise move to make.

#demon maths 

We're running out of vowels (which included the sneaky hybrid 'y') and I'm not going into Demon Meths - but maybe it could mean the method by which we do our good things. 

The way we strangle our opponents. 

#Demon Meth(od)s 

There you go, INS - McAdam, Salem and BBB

Pretty happy with that. 

Just now, Red But Mostly Blue said:

There you go, INS - McAdam, Salem and BBB

Pretty happy with that. 

petty or plugger mac will need to ruck as required, i guess?

2 minutes ago, whatwhat say what said:

petty or plugger mac will need to ruck as required, i guess?

and some BBB f50 rucking?

1 minute ago, roy11 said:

and some BBB f50 rucking?

Straight from the Tom Hawkins songbook.

16 minutes ago, Red But Mostly Blue said:

#Demon Meth(od)s 

Boys are returning to the promised land.

#Demon Methodists

Eagles may be seeking…

#ReDemontion

Just now, whatwhat say what said:

petty or plugger mac will need to ruck as required, i guess?

Yeah I reckon. Not ideal, but they should be able to hold their own sufficiently at either end. Maybe wrap Petty's foot in something, though! 

Had not noticed that Bowey was in last nights IC list so no room for Tholstrup as sub.

Woey to sub... again

4 hours ago, binman said:

As evidence Selwyn has the same philosophy, just this year alone we have had Tmac, BBB, Petty, Oliver and Bowey all coming back from injury (with the first four clearly being a little underdone) and being selected in the ones as opposed to coming though the magoos. 

Salem will make it six such examples this weekend. 

BBB & McAdam have just come in from stints at Casey Bin.

Very generous to have Petty in the 'a little underdone' list imo.

His first five matches were atrocious and he was a mile away from being anywhere near AFL ready in those first five games.

Has since played one decent match against the Cats in Rnd 8.

Averaging 0.3 goals a game and 0.3 tackles inside 50.  That's 2 goals and 2 tackles inside 50 in seven matches.

He's been netting 2 effective disposals (effective disposals less turnovers) per match.

Not blaming Petty either.  Brought back far too early imho.

Hopefully he can ramp things up from here.

Edited May 17, 20241 yr by Demon Dynasty

4 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Had not noticed that Bowey was in last nights IC list so no room for Tholstrup as sub.

Woey to sub... again

That's really unfortunate if it happens (likely) - he was good last week, and really needs/deserves a consistent crack for his development and confidence. 

2 minutes ago, Demon Dynasty said:

BBB & McAdam have just come in from stints at Casey Bin.

Very generous to have Petty in the 'a little underdone' list imo.

His first five matches were atrocious and he was a mile away from being anywhere near AFL ready in those first five games.

Has since played one decent match against the Cats in Rnd 8.

Averaging 0.3 goals a game and 0.3 tackles inside 50.  That's 2 goals and 2 tackles inside 50 in seven matches.

He's been netting 2 effective disposals (effective disposals less turnovers) per match.

Not blaming Petty either.  Brought back far too early imho.

Hopefully he can ramp things up from here.

Agree. 

It's a good game for him to find some form and confidence! 

If he doesn't stand up against the Eagles, there will be added pressure to question whether his spot is safe. 

I like him. Has good hands and is a good kick. But clearly not match fit, underdone and is obviously frustrated himself. 

Looking for a strong game from him.

11 minutes ago, Demon Dynasty said:

BBB & McAdam have just come in from stints at Casey Bin.

Very generous to have Petty in the 'a little underdone' list imo.

His first five matches were atrocious and he was a mile away from being anywhere near AFL ready in those first five games.

Has since played one decent match against the Cats in Rnd 8.

Averaging 0.3 goals a game and 0.3 tackles inside 50.  That's 2 goals and 2 tackles inside 50 in seven matches.

He's been netting 2 effective disposals (effective disposals less turnovers) per match.

Not blaming Petty either.  Brought back far too early imho.

Hopefully he can ramp things up from here.

I meant at the start of the season dd about bb. I didn't mention McAdam.

On Petty I meant underdone in terms of his physical readiness no form.

Which makes my point. They obviously felt it was better for Petty to fine full fitness playing AFL football not playing at VFL level. An approach consistent with my point about Selwyn's philosophy.

 

27 minutes ago, whatwhat say what said:

petty or plugger mac will need to ruck as required, i guess?

Neither are capable in the ruck and its a risky proposition for Petty to ruck playing off a lisfranc recovery.

T-Mac won't ruck imho so that just leaves Petty up forward with Max taking the bulk of the load in all other facets.

Or Max will be required to ruck almost the entire match which seems fanciful given his age.

Poor decision to not bring Fullo in to cover off JVR's role, even as a one off, especially against a bottom 4 opponent where there's some leeway for experimenting.  Doesn't get any better than this week aside from North and the Tigers.

Silly stuff from the SC this week in this regard.

1 hour ago, WalkingCivilWar said:

 

Toby crunched the numbers and decided it was a financially wise move to make.

#demon maths 

There muth be something I can add, but I can’t think of it right now.

@demon muth

15 minutes ago, binman said:

I meant at the start of the season dd about bb. I didn't mention McAdam.

On Petty I meant underdone in terms of his physical readiness no form.

Which makes my point. They obviously felt it was better for Petty to fine full fitness playing AFL football not playing at VFL level. An approach consistent with my point about Selwyn's philosophy.

 

Yes i see where your coming from Bin.

There's def a reluctance by the coaches / FD to utilise the Casey option for middle rung to top end talent and understandably so.

The preference is no doubt to bring them to a certain level under training / match sims and hope said player can make up the rest in the next few live matches.

Probably works about 95% of the time where a player is only in need of a couple of weeks at AFL level as a 'top up' to all the prior track work.

In the case of Petty i believe they got the timing (expecation of how far away he was physically?) horribly wrong.  Whether that meant time via Casey or an extra 3 to 5 weeks mini pre-season.  He was blowing up after a quarter or two in the early matches.

Also some on here would have everyone believe that we rarely (and/or never) utilise Casey for players coming back, which is not always the case.

Edited May 17, 20241 yr by Demon Dynasty

9 minutes ago, Demon Dynasty said:

Neither are capable in the ruck and its a risky proposition for Petty to ruck playing off a lisfranc recovery.

T-Mac won't ruck imho so that just leaves Petty up forward with Max taking the bulk of the load in all other facets.

Or Max will be required to ruck almost the entire match which seems fanciful given his age.

Poor decision to not bring Fullo in to cover off JVR's role, even as a one off, especially against a bottom 4 opponent where there's some leeway for experimenting.  Doesn't get any better than this week aside from North and the Tigers.

Silly stuff from the SC this week in this regard.

Max thrives on being the big dog, no other ruckman can keep up with him, we tried with Grundy looked what happened.

He will get a few little chop outs during the game

Looking likely to being a 7xAA ruckman this year 

10 minutes ago, Billy said:

Max thrives on being the big dog, no other ruckman can keep up with him, we tried with Grundy looked what happened.

He will get a few little chop outs during the game

Looking likely to being a 7xAA ruckman this year 

Absolutely Billy but why thrash him against a bottom 4 side?

Need to play the long game with Max and have him as fresh as possible for when we do play the big dogs and for later in the season when you sometimes have the odd 'must win' or '8 point' match against certain opponents vying for the same spot in the top 4.

Playing less time (on ground) also reduces his chance of any sort injury, especially soft tissue injuries.

Edited May 17, 20241 yr by Demon Dynasty

Who do you think plays on Langdons wing? Does Woewodin start on the wing? If he does who goes to the sub role?

I guess billings is the other option, personally I'd love to see Woewodin start there and get a full run at it

Edited May 17, 20241 yr by Neitas bump

15 minutes ago, Neitas bump said:

Who do you think plays on Langdons wing? Does Woewodin start on the wing? If he does who goes to the sub role?

I guess billings is the other option, personally I'd love to see Woewodin start there and get a full run at it

Ditto ... again this match is ideal for trialling a few alternative options.

Start with Woey and tactical sub Billings if required during the match.

4 hours ago, Jeremy said:

We didn’t move Bedford on, offered him a 3 year deal 

Yes. Play someone as a sub for 11 games in a season … then offer a contract.  Jordon and Bedford weren’t given the opportunity and saw better chances elsewhere.  That’s the uncomfortable truth of it.