14 hours ago, Ghostwriter said:

No thanks 🤮

 

But something I will look at, as should anyone who likes a smile put on their dial is this…

🥰

Congratulations to the happy couple.

1 hour ago, Ghostwriter said:

Not to put too fine a point on it but Fritta said Dusty was referring to Disco 🤷‍♀️ 

Perhaps he was referring to both. Whichever way it is it’s comforting to think I mightn’t have known. 😀

I think it makes sense and is something we’ve toyed with previously but I suggest it largely depends on other wing options as well so at very least it’s a good sign those options we all know of appear to be looking good!

26 minutes ago, Tolstoys Nudge said:

I think it makes sense and is something we’ve toyed with previously but I suggest it largely depends on other wing options as well so at very least it’s a good sign those options we all know of appear to be looking good!

And even if they were not looking good, as you say, I'm pleased that we at least seem to be trying various options rather than continuing with the "same old" plans.

ANB played an important role in recent years, particularly covering for Petracca in defensive transition. I would like to see Langdon play this role this year, which is a 50% mid and 50% high half forward role.

I don't really see the benefit of playing Langdon as a centre bounce midfielder. Gawn, Kossie and Petracca should be in most centre bounces IMO and that leaves only one spot for Viney, Oliver, Rivers, Langford and Sparrow.

Keen to see how it goes. 

Don't really care as long as Ed gets to run his 50km per game

No. This is Frawley as a forward-levels of stupid. Just play players where they're best suited. It's not hard.

8 hours ago, Chook said:

No. This is Frawley as a forward-levels of stupid. Just play players where they're best suited. It's not hard.

It's odd, not going to lie. 

You have a guy that hardly ever comes off the ground, unless he's still able to do this on the inside then I can't help but feel a key strength is taken away.

8 hours ago, Chook said:

No. This is Frawley as a forward-levels of stupid. Just play players where they're best suited. It's not hard.

Disagree. Ed can run all day. As a mid alongside Rivers he could well inject some serious run into a sometimes stagnant midfield. We also have Bowey, Spargo, Windsor, Billing’s, Sparrow, Laurie and Lindsay who can cover and possibly excel on his wing. Just because we’re exploring it and may experiment with it doesn’t mean we have to persist if it fails. 

1 hour ago, Roost it far said:

Disagree. Ed can run all day. As a mid alongside Rivers he could well inject some serious run into a sometimes stagnant midfield. We also have Bowey, Spargo, Windsor, Billing’s, Sparrow, Laurie and Lindsay who can cover and possibly excel on his wing. Just because we’re exploring it and may experiment with it doesn’t mean we have to persist if it fails. 

its part of the Churn tactic I have proposed for years. Hope the coaches have caught on. 

AND

really hope it works.

1 minute ago, dpositive said:

its part of the Churn tactic I have proposed for years. Hope the coaches have caught on. 

AND

really hope it works.

Are you saying that if Langdon’s proposed move doesn’t work it’s your fault?

2 minutes ago, Roost it far said:

Are you saying that if Langdon’s proposed move doesn’t work it’s your fault?

AUAUGH!!!!

Can I claim plausible deniability???????

3 hours ago, layzie said:

It's odd, not going to lie. 

You have a guy that hardly ever comes off the ground, unless he's still able to do this on the inside then I can't help but feel a key strength is taken away.

I think Langdon was far more effective playing 90% game time than 100%. Really felt like the cost outweighed the benefit on that one. He should still be able to play 90% in any combination of mid/wing/forward.

The other factor is our forwards should include Chandler (had a nice taste at the end of the year on the wing rotation), Sharp, Tracc, Pickett, Langford, hopefully Kolt. All guys who can take various roles on ball or the wing. 

Whether we go 3 talls and Fritsch or 2 talls we should be able to have enough rotations.

2 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

I think Langdon was far more effective playing 90% game time than 100%. Really felt like the cost outweighed the benefit on that one. He should still be able to play 90% in any combination of mid/wing/forward.

The other factor is our forwards should include Chandler (had a nice taste at the end of the year on the wing rotation), Sharp, Tracc, Pickett, Langford, hopefully Kolt. All guys who can take various roles on ball or the wing. 

Whether we go 3 talls and Fritsch or 2 talls we should be able to have enough rotations.

Really probably your best mid forward and second best forward liable to kick goals and you would waste him on a wing!! 

That’s  what I call stupid plus dumb plus match losing!!

Now really give Trac something to complain about !!! 

On 10/02/2025 at 10:56, greenwaves said:

He'll play wing.  He might go inside occasionally but that's about it.  

I don't read replies or reactions 

I don’t read your posts

- er, except this one.

 

On 10/02/2025 at 19:21, Demonstone said:

Dusty was referring to Disco Turner wasn't he?

 

On 11/02/2025 at 08:09, Ghostwriter said:

Not to put too fine a point on it but Fritta said Dusty was referring to Disco 🤷‍♀️ 

I thought he was referring to George Gawn

16 hours ago, Chook said:

No. This is Frawley as a forward-levels of stupid. Just play players where they're best suited. It's not hard.

But how do we know where he's best suited if we don't try this? Imagine if he's best suited to being a true midfielder and we've missed out on this for years!

We have a lot of players with serious running power now. Ed played well as a HF last year, the only problem was that we had to rely on someone NQR like Sparrow to take the wing role in his place. Now we have good winger options to free up Ed. I'm here for it. 

The run, pressure, link and work rate will be very handy. 

31 minutes ago, MrFreeze said:

We have a lot of players with serious running power now. Ed played well as a HF last year, the only problem was that we had to rely on someone NQR like Sparrow to take the wing role in his place. Now we have good winger options to free up Ed. I'm here for it. 

The run, pressure, link and work rate will be very handy. 

I'm not sure Billings, Lindsay, Woey and Sharp are good wing options. If 2 of them can get close to league average that will be a good result. We're just going to be prepared with being just ok on the wing to be better in other spots.

4 hours ago, 58er said:

Really probably your best mid forward and second best forward liable to kick goals and you would waste him on a wing!! 

That’s  what I call stupid plus dumb plus match losing!!

Now really give Trac something to complain about !!! 

"All guys who can take various roles on ball or the wing."

4 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

I'm not sure Billings, Lindsay, Woey and Sharp are good wing options. If 2 of them can get close to league average that will be a good result. We're just going to be prepared with being just ok on the wing to be better in other spots.

What's your metric ?

What's the league ''average'' ?

On 10/02/2025 at 16:03, roy11 said:

adds an additional layer of flexibility too if players can play (and know what to do) in multiple roles. 

 

Agreed. I would maybe throw langdon on ball when everyone else is getting tired say the last 5 minutes of the 3rd and 4th quarters or periods of play of free flowing end to end football . 

16 minutes ago, Gator said:

What's your metric ?

What's the league ''average'' ?

I really mean get a game each week and play a role.

If you want a numbers metric then not many midfielders played week in/week out for decent sides and had an AFL rating <8 (or Windsor's 7.94). Some of that is because they're often the sub but even adjusting for that it's probably true. Windsor was the 105th best mid in the comp last year, or just better than 6th best per side. 2 wingers establishing themselves in the side and achieving a rating >8 would be a good result. Anyone going better than 7.5 would probably do the job and let us leave Windsor and Langdon to different roles.

https://www.wheeloratings.com/afl_stats.html?comp=afl&season=2024

He has different traits but Lindsay will do very well to match Windsor's output given a slower start to his preseason. I'm not convinced by Woey. Sharp has a little bit of something but I like him better at half forward. I'm not willing to buy the Billings hype, although he's kind of the perfect candidate to hold down a spot at an acceptable level.

2 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

I really mean get a game each week and play a role.

If you want a numbers metric then not many midfielders played week in/week out for decent sides and had an AFL rating <8 (or Windsor's 7.94). Some of that is because they're often the sub but even adjusting for that it's probably true. Windsor was the 105th best mid in the comp last year, or just better than 6th best per side. 2 wingers establishing themselves in the side and achieving a rating >8 would be a good result. Anyone going better than 7.5 would probably do the job and let us leave Windsor and Langdon to different roles.

https://www.wheeloratings.com/afl_stats.html?comp=afl&season=2024

He has different traits but Lindsay will do very well to match Windsor's output given a slower start to his preseason. I'm not convinced by Woey. Sharp has a little bit of something but I like him better at half forward. I'm not willing to buy the Billings hype, although he's kind of the perfect candidate to hold down a spot at an acceptable level.

I was hoping you'd have ''league average'' wing statistics to make the declaration you did, but seemingly not.

12 hours ago, DeeSpencer said:

"All guys who can take various roles on ball or the wing."

That’s what I am saying why the wing for Trac. Don’t write a statement that is open if you don’t wish to be questioned?

Say except for Trac if you mean it. 

What a waste of a player in any case I agree with the others but not Trac.!!