.

Edited yesterday at 06:301 day by Robbie On Skates
Yeah wrong

48 minutes ago, Credit To Du Bois said:

Hey friends, I wrote about our new look for this week's edition of This Week In Football.

I've also developed a tool for displaying all kicks into F50 for the year, which you can find here: https://charting.football/i50/

Once you select the filters you want, you can hit the copy link button and it will copy a custom url to your clipboard that will pre-fill those settings, so if I wanted to show you all the kicks into 50 from Sunday targetting Checkers I could go: https://charting.football/i50/?matchName=2026%20R1%20-%20MEL%20v%20STK&target=Brody%20Mihocek

great work, glad this wasn't around during the long bomb era

On 17/03/2026 at 18:02, Pates said:

Roos first mark and goal was created by him putting the intelligent block on. We haven't had someone like him (except maybe Melk) in the forward line to help Roo in his development.

We've gone from bringing zero players in through trade of value in the previous 3-4 years (though Sharpe might come good under a new coach), to getting three in one hit.

There was also an “incident “ in the 3rd 1/4 when a free kick or a mark happened and Checkers was on the mark.

He kept looking around at the Pies player standing behind him - as well as the player with the ball.

Then the player behind made an attempt to run past him,get a hand pass and kick the ball.

It didn’t happen cause Checkers stopped him!And spoilt the handball.

Ball up.

On 18/03/2026 at 16:18, #11-TonyAnderson said:

It’s Sparrow not Swallow 😊

Yea but that lack of correct identification kinda sums him up.

Sounds rough but who?

Just doesn't get enough of the pill.

I think his best role would be as a sub in the fwd line for a couple of rolls. Either way he's too easy rolled for a bloke his size.

We really missed Bowser.

Apparently he is out for another 6 weeks.

He struggled to regain form after a very nasty shoulder injury. I think it knocked some confidence out if him. But he did bounce back. Had a tough run of injuries for a player his age. His shoulder one, was a reflection of his courage and commitment.

I've just checked our list and discovered Milkshake is still on it. Great to have someone like him who plays bigger than he is, to put pressure on players like Fritta to perform.

He's not on our injury list as far as I could ascertain. I'd love to see him back in. It's hard to make calls on players after just one game though, so I wouldn't know who to swap him for. Maybe Sparrow. It's not like for like but I just don't believe he offers that much . At 25 he should be at his peak so its a concern. If Jake is fit does anyone feel he should be in the team? Maybe even as a sub. Jake could be handy to come on in the last quarter and boot a couple.

I love his physicality and would prefer him playing further down the ground as a link to our fwd line than Roo. The latter apart from rucking should probably stay as close to the goals as possible and stay within 55m of them.

On 18/03/2026 at 22:00, 3KZ is Football said:

Seriously his Gameplan was done at the end of 2023, nothing changed after that for 2 Seasons. Tweaks were made apparently, but the same game was played.
King has made radical changes in 2 months...

Still a lot of work to do, but now we know what to expect

#Goodwin myths

17 hours ago, Dingo said:

There was also an “incident “ in the 3rd 1/4 when a free kick or a mark happened and Checkers was on the mark.

He kept looking around at the Pies player standing behind him - as well as the player with the ball.

Then the player behind made an attempt to run past him,get a hand pass and kick the ball.

It didn’t happen cause Checkers stopped him!And spoilt the handball.

Ball up.

What game was this?

41 minutes ago, Previously known as LITD. said:

I've just checked our list and discovered Milkshake is still on it. Great to have someone like him who plays bigger than he is, to put pressure on players like Fritta to perform.

You only just realised Melksham was still on the list?

34 minutes ago, binman said:

#Goodwin myths

Facts, actually...

37 minutes ago, binman said:

#Goodwin myths

Which parts of the quoted comment were myths?

45 minutes ago, binman said:

#Goodwin myths

i think goodwin tried but did not have the cattle to execute or perhaps he was not the right man to coach it (probably a bit of both)

anyways i'm not sure King could execute hie gameplan if viney, trac and clarry were hacking the ball into our forward line. change in personnel a big factor in the way we played last weekend i reckon

24 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Which parts of the quoted comment were myths?

'Seriously his Gameplan was done at the end of 2023, nothing changed after that for 2 Seasons. Tweaks were made apparently, but the same game was played'

The bolded bits are simply not true

Can't be bothered relitigating why, suffice to say there is a difference between trying to implement a new game plan, which Goody unquestionably tried to do in the first two thirds of 2024 and all of 2025, and successfully doing so

My intel suggests the struggle to implement the new transtion game the best teams were using was a signficant source of tension between the younger players and some senior players who struggled, or refused, to adapt.

The importantance of not rewriting history and amplyfying myths is, unlike say Mcrae at the Pies, King is not trying to implement a brand new game plan, one completely foreign to the team. He is building on an existing base of knowledge and practice.

For example a notable element of King's game plan is long forward handballs (a big factor in our 220 plus metres gained by handball against the Saints).

Goody tried to implement long handballs in 2024 and 2025. Meaning any current players who were on our list in 2024 and 2025 have spent considerable time already practising and training using long forward handballs.

Kings efforts to implement an effective transition and turnover game plan has also been supported by the decision to exit senior players in Tracc, May and Oliver who clearly were struggling to adapt to the transtion and turnover based game plan Goody was trying to implement.

Edited 8 hours ago8 hr by binman

24 minutes ago, binman said:

'Seriously his Gameplan was done at the end of 2023, nothing changed after that for 2 Seasons. Tweaks were made apparently, but the same game was played'

The bolded bits are simply not true

Can't be bothered relitigating why, suffice to say there is a difference between trying to implement a new game plan, which Goody unquestionably tried to do in the first two thirds of 2024 and all of 2025, and successfully doing so

Yes, Goodwin tried in 2024 but as we slid down the ladder he panicked and reverted back to the previous game plan. Later he admitted it was a mistake to revert back to the old 'territory, defence first' plan. So it is hard to say the 2024 attempt was successful.

Yes, he tried again in 2025 starting the season 0-5 and again we ended up 14th. While elements of a 'transition' game from d5o to f50 were introduced, it was still largely a 'territory, hug the boundary style, low risk, 'bombing' into a congested fwd line. It was patently obvious at the ground that players were confused about their roles and lacked confidence in what they were doing. Lots of reasons for that but we can't exonerate the coach. No, Goodwin's attempts in 2025 were not successful otherwise he would still have his job.

What he didn't change was our method for going i50. We stuck to the kick long bombs to a contest often hugging the boundary. That is what Petracca, Oliver, Viney etal were asked to do. That style resulted in numerous op marks i50 and fwds taking difficult shots from the boundary with the inevitable poor goal/point ratio.

We have a sample of only one game but lets list what King has changed.

• Fwd line has opened up with little congestion.

• Fwds are leading with speed at the kicker.

• Extremely high marks i50

• Mids are centering the ball i50 and risking a turnover back through the corridor vs Goodwin style of playing it safe by hugging the boundary. (I saw a chart which showed where our shots for goal were on Sunday but unfortunately I can't find it - it was eye opening compared to prior years).

• Greater goal/point accuracy: 18.12

So I agree with @3KZ is Football Goodwin made a few tweaks in 204/2025 (unsuccessfully) and King has found a way in a few months to enable us to move the ball more freely with the resulting high level connection with the forward line - something that Goodwin never came close to achieving.

Even if the players you mentioned were still with us King would have succeeded in achieving the results we saw on Sunday.

Edited 8 hours ago8 hr by Lucifers Hero

1 hour ago, binman said:

'Seriously his Gameplan was done at the end of 2023, nothing changed after that for 2 Seasons. Tweaks were made apparently, but the same game was played'

The bolded bits are simply not true

Can't be bothered relitigating why, suffice to say there is a difference between trying to implement a new game plan, which Goody unquestionably tried to do in the first two thirds of 2024 and all of 2025, and successfully doing so

My intel suggests the struggle to implement the new transtion game the best teams were using was a signficant source of tension between the younger players and some senior players who struggled, or refused, to adapt.

The importantance of not rewriting history and amplyfying myths is, unlike say Mcrae at the Pies, King is not trying to implement a brand new game plan, one completely foreign to the team. He is building on an existing base of knowledge and practice.

For example a notable element of King's game plan is long forward handballs (a big factor in our 220 plus metres gained by handball against the Saints).

Goody tried to implement long handballs in 2024 and 2025. Meaning any current players who were on our list in 2024 and 2025 have spent considerable time already practising and training using long forward handballs.

Kings efforts to implement an effective transition and turnover game plan has also been supported by the decision to exit senior players in Tracc, May and Oliver who clearly were struggling to adapt to the transtion and turnover based game plan Goody was trying to implement.

Goodwin tried to implement a new Gameplan and Failed miserably

2 hours ago, Fritta and Turner said:

What game was this?

Last Sunday - game1

You can change as much as you want up the ground, but the long dump kick entries meant it was all for nothing. The problem I have understanding still stands: everyone and their dog new our forward line issues weren’t helped by rubbish entries. It was picked apart TO DEATH. Did Goodwin allow the usual culprits to continuously do it? He either was ok with it, or he wasn’t, but he allowed the same players to continually do it because he didn’t want to upset them?

Changes were made but not the last piece of the puzzle.

2 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

Yes, Goodwin tried in 2024 but as we slid down the ladder he panicked and reverted back to the previous game plan. Later he admitted it was a mistake to revert back to the old 'territory, defence first' plan. So it is hard to say the 2024 attempt was successful.

Yes, he tried again in 2025 starting the season 0-5 and again we ended up 14th. While elements of a 'transition' game from d5o to f50 were introduced, it was still largely a 'territory, hug the boundary style, low risk, kicking into a congested fwd line. It was patently obvious at the ground that players were confused about their roles and lacked confidence in what they were doing. Lots of reasons for that but we can't exonerate the coach. No, Goodwin's attempts in 2025 were not successful otherwise he would still have his job.

What he didn't change was our method for going i50. We stuck to the kick long to a contest often hugging the boundary. That is what Petracca, Oliver, Viney etal were asked to do. That style resulted in numerous op marks i50 and fwds taking difficult shots from the boundary with the inevitable poor goal/point ratio.

We have a sample of only one game but lets list what King has changed.

• Fwd line has opened up with little congestion.

• Fwds are leading with speed at the kicker.

• Extremely high marks i50

• Mids are centering the ball i50 and risking a turnover back through the corridor vs Goodwin style of playing it safe by hugging the boundary. (I saw a chart which showed where our shots for goal were on Sunday but unfortunately I can't find it - it was eye opening compared to prior years).

• Greater goal/point accuracy: 18.12

So I agree with @3KZ is Football Goodwin made a few tweaks in 204/2025 (unsuccessfully) and King has found a way in a few months to enable us to move the ball more freely with the resulting high level connection with the forward line - something that Goodwin never came close to achieving.

Even if the players you mentioned were still with us King would have succeeded in achieving the results we saw on Sunday.

As I suggested, I agree Goody, despite his best efforts, didn't successfully implement the transition, turnover game.

Agree one of the biggest issues was the way we entered 50, though the method was exacerbated by having three of our starting mids being some of the worst kicks inside 50 in terms retention rate in the AFL (tracc was the worst in the AFL I think).

Disagree completely his efforts to implement a new style of playing were 'tweaks'.

No better evidence of that than Goody's last game of his tenure at the dees where we demolished the Eagles on transition and turnover and scored 139 points, our highest score of the season. That game looked diametrically different to the one that won us a flag.

Disagree, the game plan was still largely a 'territory, hug the boundary style, low risk, kicking into a congested fwd line' style. It just wasn't

The eyes and data tell the story.

For example, despite the myth we continued to be a long bomb team in 2025 we were in fact mid table for metres gained from kicks - Freo and the Hawks, two teams playing fast transition footy were well above us for metres gained from kicks, with the suns comfortably number one.

Ironically, King has repeatedly emphasised we will play a territory game. And I suspect under King we will in fact be more a long bomb team than we were in 2025 and be in top 5 for metres gained per kick.

There is a bunch of other data points that evidence us not being a territory, hug the boundary style taking on low risks - eg our woefully high number of turnovers and scores from turnover (because we were taking on more high risk kicks), the increased number of both kicks and handballs (a manifestation of our change style, ie less territory first footy), the kick out patterns (we almost completely stopped kicking long to a contest, instead usually kicking short to a free player in the pocket) and the massive drop in the number of times we kicked long to Maxy, or any contest for that matter.

Agree many players were confused about their roles.

Agree King has done a good job of implementing a method that has meant we are moving the ball freely and have a good connection with the forward line.

And to be clear, I'm not defending Goody, or suggesting we erred in going another direction. I could not be more impressed with King and on the evidence thus far think the club has made an excellent decision.

Disagree that even claz, may and tracc were still with us King would have succeeded in achieving the results we saw on Sunday. I mean for starters, he got rid of them in large part because they don't have the skills we need to implement his game plan, namely leg speed and ability to hit targets.

And they were also part of a group of senior players who clearly struggled to adapt to the transtion game plan Goody tried to implement

All that said, agree to disagree.

Edited 6 hours ago6 hr by binman

3 hours ago, Greg Schneider said:

You only just realised Melksham was still on the list?

Yep and I'm stoked.

12 minutes ago, binman said:

As I suggested, I agree Goody, despite his best efforts, didn't successfully implement the transition, turnover game.

Agree one of the biggest issues was the way we entered 50, though the method was exacerbated by having three of our starting mids being some of the worst kicks inside 50 in terms retention rate in the AFL (tracc was the worst in the AFL I think).

Disagree completely his efforts to implement a new style of playing were 'tweaks'.

No better evidence of that than Goody's last game of his tenure at the dees where we demolished the Eagles on transition and turnover and scored 139 points, our highest score of the season. That game looked diametrically different to the one that won us a flag.

Disagree, the game plan was still largely a 'territory, hug the boundary style, low risk, kicking into a congested fwd line' style. It just wasn't

The eyes and data tell the story.

For example, despite the myth we continued to be a long bomb team in 2025 we were in fact mid table for metres gained from kicks - Freo and the Hawks, two teams playing fast transition footy were well above us for metres gained from kicks, with the suns comfortably number one.

Ironically, King has repeatedly emphasised we will play a territory game. And I suspect under King we will in fact be more a long bomb team than we were in 2025 and be in top 5 for metres gained per kick.

There is a bunch of other data points that evidence us not being a territory, hug the boundary style taking on low risks - eg our woefully high number of turnovers and scores from turnover (because we were taking on more high risk kicks), the increased number of both kicks and handballs (a manifestation of our change style, ie less territory first footy), the kick out patterns (we almost completely stopped kicking long to a contest, instead usually kicking short to a free player in a cricket) and the massive drop in the number of times we kicked long to Maxy, or any contest for that matter.

Agree many players were confused about their roles.

Agree King has done a good job of implementing a method that has meant we are moving the ball freely and have a good connection with the forward line.

And to be clear, I'm not defending Goody, or suggesting we erred in going another direction. I could not be more impressed with King and on the evidence thus far think the club has made an excellent decision.

Disagree that even claz, may and tracc were still with us King would have succeeded in achieving the results we saw on Sunday. I mean for starters, he got rid of them in large part because they don't have the skills we need to implement his game plan, namely leg speed and ability to hit targets.

And they were also part of a group of senior players who clearly struggled to adapt to the transtion game plan Goody tried to implement

All that said, agree to disagree.

If I had to guess your mother was a statistician and yourvfathwr an actuarist

14 minutes ago, binman said:

As I suggested, I agree Goody, despite his best efforts, didn't successfully implement the transition, turnover game.

Agree one of the biggest issues was the way we entered 50, though the method was exacerbated by having three of our starting mids being some of the worst kicks inside 50 in terms retention rate in the AFL (tracc was the worst in the AFL I think).

Disagree completely his efforts to implement a new style of playing were 'tweaks'.

No better evidence of that than Goody's last game of his tenure at the dees where we demolished the Eagles on transition and turnover and scored 139 points, our highest score of the season. That game looked diametrically different to the one that won us a flag.

Disagree, the game plan was still largely a 'territory, hug the boundary style, low risk, kicking into a congested fwd line' style. It just wasn't

The eyes and data tell the story.

For example, despite the myth we continued to be a long bomb team in 2025 we were in fact mid table for metres gained from kicks - Freo and the Hawks, two teams playing fast transition footy were well above us for metres gained from kicks, with the suns comfortably number one.

Ironically, King has repeatedly emphasised we will play a territory game. And I suspect under King we will in fact be more a long bomb team than we were in 2025 and be in top 5 for metres gained per kick.

There is a bunch of other data points that evidence us not being a territory, hug the boundary style taking on low risks - eg our woefully high number of turnovers and scores from turnover (because we were taking on more high risk kicks), the increased number of both kicks and handballs (a manifestation of our change style, ie less territory first footy), the kick out patterns (we almost completely stopped kicking long to a contest, instead usually kicking short to a free player in a cricket) and the massive drop in the number of times we kicked long to Maxy, or any contest for that matter.

Agree many players were confused about their roles.

Agree King has done a good job of implementing a method that has meant we are moving the ball freely and have a good connection with the forward line.

And to be clear, I'm not defending Goody, or suggesting we erred in going another direction. I could not be more impressed with King and on the evidence thus far think the club has made an excellent decision.

Disagree that even claz, may and tracc were still with us King would have succeeded in achieving the results we saw on Sunday. I mean for starters, he got rid of them in large part because they don't have the skills we need to implement his game plan, namely leg speed and ability to hit targets.

And they were also part of a group of senior players who clearly struggled to adapt to the transtion game plan Goody tried to implement

All that said, agree to disagree.

If I had to guess, your mother was a statistician and your father an actuary.

13 minutes ago, Previously known as LITD. said:

If I had to guess your mother was a statistician and yourvfathwr an actuarist

If I had to guess, your mother was a statistician and your father an actuary.

I'll take that as a compliment.

On 18/03/2026 at 17:11, Bring-Back-Powell said:

James Hird mentioned on today's edition of Footy Furnace (channel 9 streaming show) the following:

"Melbourne internally are quietly confident they're a top 8 team this year"

Make of that what you will.

It’s early days, no need to have a priapism just yet.

1 hour ago, binman said:

And to be clear, I'm not defending Goody

It sure sounded like you were.

8 minutes ago, Lucifers Hero said:

It sure sounded like you were.

Not sure how.

45 minutes ago, TRIGON said:

It’s early days, no need to have a priapism just yet.

Id forgotten this! What was it, 48 hours or something? 😂😂😂😂 but they weren't doing anything illegal 😂😂😂

1 minute ago, binman said:

Not sure how.

It may be in jest but whenever you play the #Goodwinmyths card it seems shorthand to discredit what a poster is saying ipso facto defending Goodwin.

In this case most of the response to my first post seemed defensive of him or to exonerate him.

Edited 5 hours ago5 hr by Lucifers Hero