deanox

I thought he'd go as a FA but I didn't think we'd just delist him due to our list position. We must have something planned.

If you ever cycle to work and cover around 21km in an hour, it's scary to realise you are only travelling at marathon world record pace.

It doesn't necessarily translate to 20m and bursts out of pack, but it translates extremely well to modern football between the arcs. Think ANB or Chandler doing repeat sprints and return sprints over 50-150 m up and down the ground. The ability to continually cover ground at a very high cruising pace and back it up again and again.

If this is what happens it seems to me that we have picks 5, 9 and 83 with 3 list spots left. And maybe 4 list spots if Tomlinson doesn't re-sign. I wouldn't be surprised to see us try something to get another pick. No idea what though.

Yeah the development of Gall and Campbell has been fantastic. They are young and tall, so I guess expect them to take a bit longer, but if they can stand up like that, when we add Harris and Pearce back in we'll be aerially very strong.

Yeah they slotted straight back in didn't they? Zanks found good form.

Saints only have 1 extra day break than us, and this will be their third game in ten days (our third in 11 days). So fatigue is definitely going to be a factor for both sides, and one might handle it more than others. We've brought back three key players - Zanker, Paxy and Purcell, and the three out (Colvin, D'Arcy and Johnson have been amongst our lowest TOG). My biggest concern is whether bringing these three in upsets the changes to structure and team balance that saw us with the last two games. Hopefully not.

Alyssa Bannan is gunning for most improved player, given how rapidly her physical game has changed.

The only upside is that the saints played yesterday, and their game before that was Friday 4/10, whereas ours was Thursday 3/10. So we have a 3 day break (between games) to their 4 day break, but they play 3 games in 10 days vs our 3 games in 11. Pretty horrible for all involved.

I just realised we play two games in round 7???

Bizaycomment for mine. Might have been low scoring but it was an enthralling battle around the contest that was only a kick away from a lead change the last 2 quarters. As a spectacle, it was hard to look away. Every moment, every contest counted.

We got the rub of the numbers, but there were still a lot that I thought were shocking. 50s not paid when colliding with a player taking a kick, and when holding the ball and arguing with the umps instead of giving it straight back. The "insufficient intent" against Fitzsimon was a shocker too. The overall standard of umpiring is very poor if this is the next best umpiring squad outside of the AFL umpiring squad.

I reckon we'll be asking for more than 25, but might be hard to get it. Suspect we'd be wanting a pick 17-20 to reflect value.

Oliver got 30 touches round 1, and 35 (and 3 Brownlow votes) in round 2. No one at VFL was going to outperform Oliver this year. Whether he had "served" his penalty is a different story, but on performance he may not have been the Oliver of old but he was better than any of our depth would have been.

Fantastic win tonight. Players really put the footy down and linked up well. Best we've played this year. 6 Hore - clearly best on, all over the ground 5 Hanks - back to her best in and around the cintest 4 Chaplin - another ripping game intercepting in defence 3 Fitzsimon - an absolute workhorse in the forward line and between the arcs. She covered a lot of ground and impacted with her tackling. 2 Heath - in everything as usual and seemed to play further up the ground too 1 Bannan - in and out of the game but impacted when she had the chance and her early play and goals were instrumental in the win even if she faded

Given that we don't have enough fit players to field a team and had to call in players from the Casey VFLW team this week, maybe not.

Contested mark from Banno! Love to see it, a string she needs to add to her bow.

I loved the idea, the thinking outside of the box. Had it worked everyone would have called our football department geniuses. If it worked, it had the potential to be devasting. It didn't work, sometimes the gambles don't work. It proved Max needs to be the number one guy. We found out that Max's forward exploits can't be turned into a consistent performance. But we did try it. Pretty strange for a coaching staff described as stubborn hey?

With the end of season changes and the injury list these results aren't surprising. Sherrif, West, Birch, Gay, Wilson traded out. Ivey and Johnson retired - not key contributors but depth. Lily Johnson the only player traded in. That's 4 best 21 players out. Add Mackin x2, Zanker, Pearce, Purcell, Harris and Beasley out,that's another 7. So we've lost about 10 of our starting team from last year, and alot of them would be in our best 10. This week I understand we didn't have enough fit players to name all emergencies - we had to name unlisted players from the VFLW. If Heath or McNamara miss,that list gets even tighter.

Do you think that maybe the journo has a source who has leaked these comments? And have you noticed that other clubs don't leak these comments often?

I still don't think this has been confirmed anywhere. The only news sources available that I can find state 2024. Sure there are some other unofficial sites that list him as 2025, but no primary or even secondary sources that I can find.

https://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/1653288/re-signed-quintet-of-talent Update indicates that AMW, K Brown, Verall, Sestan, Kentfield, have all been extended until the end of 2025. No clarity on whether that is rookie list or they'll be upgraded, I guess that'll come at draft time. Kentfield already listed here until the end of next year but I believe mid year rookies could be signed on 6 month contracts.

While it's reasonable to think he is in danger, I don't think there has been much public talk about his future and there was even a report he had one more season on contract.

My take on this (rightly or wrongly is): - the board is the ultimate authority, very hard to truly review them, however boards can appoint someone to assist with independent review and make changes. You need strong leadership for that change to be pushed through though. - the Board appoint a CEO to manage the business for them. - if the Board is under review, it isn't a good time to replace the CEO. It is probably better to review and refresh the Board then the new Board reviews the CEO - the CEO at a football club is responsible for the commercial/administration operations and the football operations. These might be two different departments but ultimately the CEO is responsible for both (via staff appointments) - So a football department review is in effect a review of the CEO. If there are lots of failings in the football department, the CEO is ultimately the person responsible for those failings - Ultimately we review/refresh the board, and then the new board will assess is Pert is still the right person going forward, and they will have the results of the recent football department review to help inform that decision.