Jump to content

deanox

Life Member
  • Content Count

    6,527
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

deanox last won the day on May 31 2013

deanox had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

4,483 Excellent

About deanox

  • Rank
    Red and Blue
  • Birthday February 14

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Melbourne

Recent Profile Visitors

10,096 profile views
  1. I thought there was one relatively insightful take away (well, insightful because it came internally not from us) when Gawn said something about "the midfield has another level to go, the defence is holding up to a high standard but we felt we lacked an A grader up forward, and now we've got one".
  2. My expectation is that there was a verbal agreement, and that it is in line with what the dogs were expecting. The reason it isn't written down is the same reason clubs get a week to finalise: there is normally a bit of an agreement window, say $50k, to allow clubs to balance their caps once they have the full picture. And I reckon the pies are reneging on the agreement, claiming porkies like "we didn't mean that for every year" and "that was the original discussion but we thought that changed when we agreed to the lower picks" even though those explicit conversations never happened.
  3. On Weid he has kicked reasonable amount of goals and his stats are ok vs his peers. I think his problem hasn't been taking the number 1 defender, its been taking all of the defenders, as the only forward (literally, or figuratively when TMac was playing). When this happens he struggles to get to the contests because he is being blocked and bumped etc. by the additional tall defenders. We don't seem to kick it "to him" very well, instead kicking it to the forward line and hoping he gets there.
  4. Dawes' abilities suited Malthouse's game plan perfectly. He could run and get to contest after contest. He could always halve those contests and where he couldn't mark it he was able to control it to create a stoppage i.e. throw in. This allowed Collingwood to play a stoppage game of kick long to the contest as a get out of defence, and also as a form of attack where the opposition zone had them covered i.e. instead of trying to beat the zone they were able to set up for a stoppage forward of centre. Need tried this style with us but the game was moving past it tactically and it was
  5. Well yes obviously, but it's about opportunity cost, and timing. This year we were able to get both a mature forward and still keep our second round pick. Wait till next year and we have a mature forward, and a mature ruck in the 2s, but no draftee. The question was "should we have kept him another year" and without a first round pick, the loss of a 2nd rounder itself may have not been a preferable situation.
  6. This will slow the game down though. Every stoppage we'll need to stop and have a few bloke's run 100 m to get back to position. Or we get penalties for being out of position. It just won't work.
  7. Agree with this except the timing was wrong for us to hold him. Press for a pick for Brown was a great opportunity vs the risk that his value wouldn't go up next year. Also, if we play Preuss we'd risk hindering the development of Jackolson, and also risk disenfranchising him with the go home WA factor looming.
  8. That seems like the appropriate outcome, but will the AFL have the guts to enforce something like that?
  9. He was in the UK and signed a contract to return to Melbourne. I'm not sure of the situation, but his wife and kids were with him during his time at Arsenal, so the divorce could have happened after he returned. Perhaps it happened while in the UK and his wife said "I'd like to go back to Aus" and the job at the MFC was an opportunity for them to all come back to Australia. Maybe there were no plans to live in separate states? Maybe there were plans to live in separate states. Melbourne would be a short flight from his kids. He could regularly do 2-3 days a week in Adelaide without a
  10. I enjoy good defence too. I'm a big rugby union fan, and great defence is amazing to watch. But in all sports we see scores trend down due to defence. It is easier to be solid and methodical in defence, back your system to prevent them scoring and hope they make a mistake that opens for you first. I can see AFL scores getting lower before they increase. I'll use another example: lets incentivise high scores with bonus points. Personally, I don't think this will work. Coaches will say "Who cares? I want the safe 4 points first, and I'll try for the bonus, only if I am in a safe position to
  11. Is there any club who may be interested in the points available from 28 and 50, the list spots to actually "take them into the draft" and a willingness to give away a 2021 second? Alternatively, same deal but 19 and 50 for a 2021 first? (Using 18 and 28, keeping a list spot open for mid season draft)
  12. Ok, re-read my post interchanging the word "stop" for "reduce"! The intent is the same, I understand there is no way to actually stop congestion. The point is that coaches love congestion. They'll do everything they can to create it. Why? Because congestion means it is easier to defend, there is less chance of an opposition fast break, etc. All the AFL thinking is about changing other things about the game that try to make it harder for coaches to create congestion (ie fatigue) or to create contrived situations where players can't truly compete (the man on the mark not being
  13. With 18, 19, 28, 50 but only 3 spaces, we may well look to upgrade our picks or swap into next year in the lead up to the draft. That being said, not using pick 50 isn't a big deal.
  14. I still think that relying on fatigue to stop congestion is a poor idea (for the reasons @titan_uranus mentioned), and that using positional restrictions goes against the grain of what makes AFL AFL. I think the only way to stop it is to remove the benefit of congestion itself. Pay holding the man quickly around contests to let the ball winner have a clear run. Remove ruck nominations, allow the third man up and throw the ball up immediately before teams can get numbers there and set up defensive stoppage positions. Pay holding the man immediately instead of theatrically. Pena
  15. I haven't quite got my head around the exact permutations, but if Sydney are risking damaging their first round pick next year, perhaps they'd be interested in: Sydney's 2021 first and third round for picks 19, 50 plus our 2021 second. Or similar. Yes, they lose their 2021 first, but it was going to be damaged anyway. So they get another clean 2nd rounder to go with theirs, plus some extra points this year.
×
×
  • Create New...