There are 3 potential ins.... Viney, Fritsch and Lever

Of those 3 Viney is the only definite with Fritsch potentially again as sub.

If Viney comes in you have to wonder who goes out. Sharp perhaps.

If Lever comes in Turner goes forward which probably means AJ out (who relieves Gawn) but it's even more complicated if Fritsch also comes in. Would not be adverse to AJ taking a lot of the ruck in the first half and then being subbed for Fritsch thus allowing a relatively fresh Gawn to be the sole ruck in the second half. Can AJ be trusted though as a primary ruck?

Other than Sharp I don't see anyone immediately pressing for Spargo's spot.

Assuming we have a mid season opening I can see Bonner joining the AFL list. At VFL level he's a connection machine. Not sure about his defensive work but he's deserving of a chance. We would then have Bonner, Spargo Sharp Woey and Brown pushing for one spot

Scoring via Melksham was smart and reminded me of how Collingwood score so often from ordinary forwards. It's all in the delivery.

Incredibly difficult selection week and if we're good enough to win the following week will be even harder

Edited Wednesday at 05:092 days by Diamond_Jim

I'd be a bit disappointed if Turner was squeezed out of the backline. I realise swingmen are valuable, but he looks like an out-and-out defender to me.

55 minutes ago, Demonstone said:

The SCG is 155m from goal line to goal line. The MCG is 160 metres. There's hardly any difference at all, but the myth persists.

Maybe not a myth...... I just measured the SCG using google maps and it gives 150m, not 155m.

An AI engine, Perplexity, says its 149m by 136m. (Another AI engine says 155m by 136m, and that the area 'varies', so who to believe.)

Perplexity says the MCG is 160m by 151m. (A bit hard to measure on google maps, but it seems around 162m long).

If the first of those SCG numbers (gmaps measured and Perplexity) is correct and the centre square is 50m, the the space between the square and a genuine 50m arc would be 0m. If the second is correct it would be 2.5m.

I'd tend to believe the measurement using google maps, but I'd love to hear other's views/measurements. I can't find a definitive afl source, but that's no surprise.

(I think Binman is right regardless of the exact numbers).

Main training was at Casey this morning. I wasn’t there but my friend was. She couldn’t see much from behind the fence but she did say that both Spargo and Windsor ran laps for a bit then went back to the rooms 🤷‍♀️

31 minutes ago, old dee said:

What is the reason he should be in other your desire to have him in? He played half a game after 2 months out injured which involved surgery. It is not a must final. I agree sharp isn't!

I'm somewhat cheating with my confidence, as Lever is fronting the media to discuss the game and his likely return.
The MFC wouldn't allow that, unless it's some strange bluff, but we've never done that previously.

I personally also rate him as a player and leader highly enough to come straight back in.

Sharp, I'm so disappointed by him. He's still young so maybe there's improvement to come.

11 minutes ago, kryton101 said:

Do we have anyone fast enough to actually run with Warner?

The key is not having someone fast enough to chase him.

The key Is frontal pressure and closing down the apace he has to run into.

By the by that is also the key for us generally.

40 minutes ago, jaydenh10 said:

at least one change with viney. iam hoping brown gets a game as well but goody has his favs and probably wont happen, also as others have said keep bailey the sub for a week or two more it really suited him well, he provided as much pressure in that last qtr then he has in his whole career

If Spargo stays then I suspect he'll be sub, it's the punishment role with an opportunity to prove yourself before dropped.

Agree about Brown, he'll get a chance but not this week. Maybe next week in Alice could suit.

8 minutes ago, Jjrogan said:

Actually, theyve both played in near identical winning percentages of around 65 percent. And both played in 5/6 winning years and 1 losing season. Their 'winning' environment is about the same but anyway.

I meant Spargo got to 100 playing so many games in a season. As a forward, he's about 100th in SI rankings. He might be an above average distributor but he doesnt do it enough clearly. Whether on him or goodwin dunno, he'saverage at best overall but out next best is well below average so he shouldnt get dropped. Tholstrup should be absolutley gunning for his spot but reports from last week were not encouraging

This I agree with. He needs to get 15+ possessions, if he can get up near 20, he'll be more damaging than Miers.

In - Viney

Out - Sharp

Sub - Fritta

Don't tinker too much with side that Q4 demonstrated that they knew what they were doing and started to deliver it.

12 minutes ago, binman said:

The key is not having someone fast enough to chase him.

The key Is frontal pressure and closing down the apace he has to run into.

By the by that is also the key for us generally.

I think people forget that "corridor" football is a different game from boundary football which in turn is different from 45 degree football (Collingwood).

Of the three corridor is the easiest to defend but because it's also the easiest to score from you often see them winning.

I think corridor football (Adelaide) can get you into the final 8 but I doubt it takes you all the way.

If a team could play both boundary and corridor style ( the latter in the second half when the opponent tires) that might work

23 minutes ago, sue said:

Maybe not a myth...... I just measured the SCG using google maps and it gives 150m, not 155m.

An AI engine, Perplexity, says its 149m by 136m. (Another AI engine says 155m by 136m, and that the area 'varies', so who to believe.)

Perplexity says the MCG is 160m by 151m. (A bit hard to measure on google maps, but it seems around 162m long).

If the first of those SCG numbers (gmaps measured and Perplexity) is correct and the centre square is 50m, the the space between the square and a genuine 50m arc would be 0m. If the second is correct it would be 2.5m.

I'd tend to believe the measurement using google maps, but I'd love to hear other's views/measurements. I can't find a definitive afl source, but that's no surprise.

(I think Binman is right regardless of the exact numbers).

My understanding from some years back was that the playing surface of the SCG was 10m shy of the G. Many search results only suggest 5

That's not really much to me. It does seem to play shorter.

1 hour ago, Adam The God said:

In Charlie's first season (2018), he had 93 score involvements.

He had 110 score involvements in 2021, 101 score involvements in 2022 and 54 in 2023 where he played 14 games, so he didn't spend most of the year at Casey.

This season, he has 30 score involvements from 7 full games and 1 as a sub with 18% TOG (so effectively 7 games). He's effectively going at 4.2 score involvements per game. With 13 games remaining, if he plays all of them and averages this, he'll finish 2025 with 84 or 85 score involvements. He's right on his career average of 4.2.

What is a score involvement? Does that mean the full back has a score involvement if a kick in travels the length of the field?

Are we that excited about Spargo's score involvements if the ball is touched 3 more times before we score? Or if he jams his teammate in the pocket on an impossible angle?

Footywire lists him as contributing 1 goal 4 behinds and 4 goal assists in 8 games. How is that an acceptable return from a permanent small forward?

4 minutes ago, poita said:

What is a score involvement? Does that mean the full back has a score involvement if a kick in travels the length of the field?

Are we that excited about Spargo's score involvements if the ball is touched 3 more times before we score? Or if he jams his teammate in the pocket on an impossible angle?

Footywire lists him as contributing 1 goal 4 behinds and 4 goal assists in 8 games. How is that an acceptable return from a permanent small forward?

Spargo is being gifted games. That’s all we can say. Clearly below par in most measurements and not even contributing to any intangibles like smart knockons , shepherds, smothers etc. Compared to other small forwards he’s goal output is extremely underperforming. He’s never been a goalkicker but he know seems too scared to try to kick a goal. Definitely needs to go back to Casey.

1 hour ago, Adam The God said:

What do you mean purely on weight of games? He's got a career average of 4.2 score involvements per game. Miers has a career average of 5.6, in a side that has played consistently well for his entire career. You can't say the same for Charlie.

Miers has a win/loss percentage of 65%, Spargo has 64%.

He hasn’t known the old Melbourne.

13 minutes ago, poita said:

What is a score involvement? Does that mean the full back has a score involvement if a kick in travels the length of the field?

Are we that excited about Spargo's score involvements if the ball is touched 3 more times before we score? Or if he jams his teammate in the pocket on an impossible angle?

Footywire lists him as contributing 1 goal 4 behinds and 4 goal assists in 8 games. How is that an acceptable return from a permanent small forward?

Agree we need more goals from Spargs, but worth noting there's only 5 players at the club with more Goal Assists. So wouldn't crucify him for that one too much.
Chuck also 3rd highest tackles inside F50 for the Dees.
He's never going to light a match on fire, so the spot is his until someone comes along with better attributes. Uncertain if that is K.Brown or not.
Would like us to draft/trade another small forward who has more 'elite' stats than 'average'.

1 hour ago, The Taciturn Demon said:

I'd be a bit disappointed if Turner was squeezed out of the backline. I realise swingmen are valuable, but he looks like an out-and-out defender to me.

Agreed. I think we are in a critical moment for Turner. Watching the replay he was sensational down back spoiling in the air and agility on the ground, showing genuine speed to burn smaller opponents. A few more games like that and he will have gone to another level. what a conundrum with Lever coming back.

Edited Wednesday at 07:082 days by Bay Riffin

21 hours ago, Pates said:

I mean if Kalani comes to the Dees next season, why doesn't Jeff come on board as a ruck/midfield coach?

As a qualified teacher whose unable to tutor my own son without it turning into a fight, I'd suggest that that may not be the best option!

45 minutes ago, roy11 said:

Agree we need more goals from Spargs, but worth noting there's only 5 players at the club with more Goal Assists. So wouldn't crucify him for that one too much.
Chuck also 3rd highest tackles inside F50 for the Dees.
He's never going to light a match on fire, so the spot is his until someone comes along with better attributes. Uncertain if that is K.Brown or not.
Would like us to draft/trade another small forward who has more 'elite' stats than 'average'.

I doubt Goody will cut Spargo.

1 hour ago, rpfc said:

Miers has a win/loss percentage of 65%, Spargo has 64%.

He hasn’t known the old Melbourne.

I guess he missed it last year, but he was definitely in the team in 2019, which was pretty bloody ordinary.

2 hours ago, The Taciturn Demon said:

I'd be a bit disappointed if Turner was squeezed out of the backline. I realise swingmen are valuable, but he looks like an out-and-out defender to me.

Lever is always going to come back in so either tmac or tuner goes out, you can’t play may, lever tmac and tuner down back. Tuner could go fwd at the expense of aj but not sure that works since we then have no backup ruck. So out of tmac and tuner my guess is turner goes out

3 hours ago, Diamond_Jim said:

There are 3 potential ins.... Viney, Fritsch and Lever

Of those 3 Viney is the only definite with Fritsch potentially again as sub.

If Viney comes in you have to wonder who goes out. Sharp perhaps.

If Lever comes in Turner goes forward which probably means AJ out (who relieves Gawn) but it's even more complicated if Fritsch also comes in. Would not be adverse to AJ taking a lot of the ruck in the first half and then being subbed for Fritsch thus allowing a relatively fresh Gawn to be the sole ruck in the second half. Can AJ be trusted though as a primary ruck?

Other than Sharp I don't see anyone immediately pressing for Spargo's spot.

Assuming we have a mid season opening I can see Bonner joining the AFL list. At VFL level he's a connection machine. Not sure about his defensive work but he's deserving of a chance. We would then have Bonner, Spargo Sharp Woey and Brown pushing for one spot

Scoring via Melksham was smart and reminded me of how Collingwood score so often from ordinary forwards. It's all in the delivery.

Incredibly difficult selection week and if we're good enough to win the following week will be even harder

Think AJ has to stay in for backup ruck, tuner or tmac out for lever, if it’s turner I don’t think we have a spot for him up fwd, we simply won’t bring enough run and pressure with the extra tall and none of our talls including turner will give enough goal wise to make that trade worth it. The only way he gets a spot fwd is in pace of Petty. Agree Viney will come in for sharp or spargo, I’d be keeping fritsch as sub as that worked well.

Do they go with Lever for TMac and Viney for Sharp? Fritta stays sub.

Harsh on TMac, but I think our defensive half will lack balance if we play May, TMac, Turner and Lever.

Unless... Turner goes forward or TMac goes forward.

1 hour ago, Garbo said:

Lever is always going to come back in so either tmac or tuner goes out, you can’t play may, lever tmac and tuner down back. Tuner could go fwd at the expense of aj but not sure that works since we then have no backup ruck. So out of tmac and tuner my guess is turner goes out

No way Turner gets dropped.

1 minute ago, ANG13 said:

No way Turner gets dropped.

if turner gets dropped we riot, was in our best 3 on sunday

2 hours ago, Bay Riffin said:

Agreed. I think we are in a critical moment for Turner. Watching the replay he was sensational down back spoiling in the air and agility on the ground, showing genuine speed to burn smaller opponents. A few more games like that and he will have gone to another level. what a conundrum with Lever coming back.

Yep. Turner played a cracking game in Defence

There is no way i would move him from that role